2. speakers
  3. 1245566858

Miss my Dunlavy Speakers, Were to go...

I had a pair of Dunlavy SC-1 speakers several years ago, and I miss them. They were so accurate, detailed (but never bright), and totally Disappeared into a room with hardwood floors and wood paneling that was only 10x10. I loved those speakers and miss them.

Short of finding a pair used were should I turn? My room is a little better, but not much. I listen fairly close. I have found Dynaudio just a bit dry for me. They have had most of what the Dunlavys offered, but just a little lean. I found Totem's Arro, Mite, and DC to be great, but not quit as accurate. They sing like the dickens and almost disappear, but they lacked a bit of the precision.

I have some Ohm that are still breaking in, but I'm having trouble getting used to their presentation. They sound a little laid back to me, and while I love the boxless sound they produce, it comes at the price of accuracy.

Anyway, these are just my MHO of these speakers and I know every person, room and system is different. I'm not trying to bash any of the above speakers. They all are really nice. I'm just to express where I stand, and trying to get a little guidance from some Dunlavy lovers out there.

Aside from any suggestions I may be moving onto Gallo 3.1s next.

Cheers,
mailman199

Showing 1 response by prof

prof
3,434 posts
 

@mailman199

I have found Dynaudio just a bit dry for me.


I’ve always found the same with Dynaudio. I was for a while quite interested in Dynaudio speakers but never could get past that bit of "reserved" buttoned up dryness to the sound.

I always enjoyed Dunlavy speakers and almost bought the Aletha or Athena.

I’d bet you may be very happily impressed if you can find a pair of Thiel 3.7 or 2.7 speakers. As you probably know they are time/phase coherent like the Dunlavy, but those last Thiel models are incredibly coherent and one of the least fussy speakers I’ve owned to set up, and posess a wide sweet spot where the tone changes very little with position. (Whereas the Dunlavy were by design much more directional and closer to head-in-a-vise design).


More to discover