Dunlavy vs Coincident


I own a set of Dunlavy 4s which I have in a 18x26x8 room. I like what I hear, but would like to possibly upgrade. I am planning on moving into a smaller room 14x19x9 in a couple of months and was thinking that might be a good time to audition some new speakers. I was thinking of the Coincident super or total eclipse. Has anyone out there compared Dunlavy 4 or 4a to either of these Coincident models. I am thinking the Coincident speakers might work a little better in a smaller room. My amps are BAT VK150SE and a Wadia 860x CD player.
128x128ejlif

Showing 2 responses by sean

One of my buddies had SC IV's and had nothing but problems with them. While his room might not have been big enough for them to operate at their best, i know that Dunlavy DID make changes to the IV shortly after he started bombarding them with phone calls. As it turns out, Dunlavy was crossing the midrange driver BELOW the point of resonance, causing it to sound much poorer than it should have. Whether or not his phone calls and feedback to them had anything to do with their production change is up to debate. For the record, he was also using Dunlavy speaker cable.

He went from the IV's to some Maggie 3.5's, from the Maggie's to some Innersound Eros' and from the Eros' to some Eclipse's that were upgraded to Super Eclipse's. He is now running what would be an very expensive custom built horn array with multiple subs. As such, his opinion of the "mass produced" speakers were that the Coincident's KILLED all of the other speakers that he's used. His overall opinion of the Dunlavy's is VERY low compared to the others.

Once again, i'm simply relaying his opinions, so please don't take it personal. Other than the changes that Dunlavy has made to the midrange driver / crossover points, i think that his room dimensions were not up to getting the best out of the "oversized" Dunlavy's. Sean
>
I tried emailing Israel a couple of times with no response. Even though i did my best to reassure him that i was NOT a competitor or manufacturer of any type, he probably thought that giving such information as to specific make and model of the drivers he uses is "proprietary information". As such, the drivers are still sitting in the boxes. One of these days, i'll throw them on my puter with the driver testing equipment and come up with the T / S parameters. Once i've got that and a frequency response chart, then i can do something with them.

As such, the only thing that i can tell you about them now is that they were the mids in a set of Eclipse's. From what i can remember the original owner telling me, they only had one crossover component hooked up to them and they were not running in a band-pass configuration. Israel is obviously a believer in the "simple crossover" school of thought. While this can be done with great results, you obviously have to select your drivers and driver placement VERY carefully. While i doubt that the new models use the same drivers due to differences in sensitivity, i can measure the DCR of these and get back to you. Sean
>