How do Dunlavys compared to new stuff?


I attended a Stereophile show in the 90s and the Dunlavy SC-IV was my favorite. I'm considering new speakers (thanks for the help on previous threads) and wondering if in 15 years newer designs have left them behind. How would these compare to similar designs/cost speakers of today?

There are some IIIs for sale, how do they compare to the IV? How much would IVs cost do you think?

Thanks,
Jim
river251
Pryso, the Bel Canto SET40 is exactly the amp that I am using with my Dunlavy SCIV's. It does an excellent job of reproducing the lowest octaves of an acoustic double bass and the wallop of kettle and bass drums in a symphony. For me, that is all I can ask as I do not listen to rock, rap, or synthesized music. To my ears, in my room, I feel it is a great match.
John Dunlavy was a fan of switching amps. His future plans included speakers with active digital cross-overs, independent switching amps for each driver, different cabinets and baffles than his previous designs.
No_regrets, I saw your earlier post where you identified your amp. My comment implied that I only remembered that Dunlavy used a Bel Canto amp at the CES but I was unsure of the model. And my comment about lack of full bass extension was directed more to the SC-III than the amp. While the mids and highs may be very similar to his larger models, I don't think anyone would expect the bass from the SC-III as from the SC-IV or larger speakers. But I agree quality is quality, even when it misses greater quantity.

Unsound, you may be questioning some of the parts selection with the DAL models, I'm not sure. But my Duntech speakers had Dynaudio and ScanSpeak drivers which I don't believe can be criticized from a quality standpoint. My personal feeling was the Duntech speakers offered slightly better performance than the comparable DAL models. This was in part due to better, more expensive drivers plus a more sophisticated cabinet design. So perhaps we are saying the same thing in a slightly different way?

Lastly, I'm not surprised to hear about Dunlavy's consideration of switching amps. One year at the CES he brought a prototype speaker that was tri-amped internally. It was suggested that Adcom power modules were used but I couldn't confirm that. I just know the idea of an active speaker system appealed to John.
Pryso, the point I was trying to make was, that many other speakers with more expensive parts didn't seem to work out as well as Dunlavy's with less expensive parts. FWIW, I slightly prefered the Dunlavys to the Duntechs. YMMV.