or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Ultra Hi-End HT Gear ($20,000+) › Legacy Whisper Dunlavy SC V opinions
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Legacy Whisper Dunlavy SC V opinions - Page 2

post #31 of 614
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Bogg View Post

Widescreen Review's "reference holosonic" theatre uses a 6 pack of Dunlavy V speakers and a pair of the TSW15 subs - I guess they got the other pair made! They are advocates of running each speaker full range. I'd love to hear their room and setup.
In my own room, it was a bit problematic running each speaker full range but I don't have as big of a space as the WR one.



I was able to hear it a few years ago along with other HTF members when Gary first opened it that Saturday morning. Pretty impressive. The subs would blow off the grills on the "low impact notes"!
post #32 of 614
Thread Starter 
Great feedback so far. One point of clarification, as mentioned, I will most likely be using these speakers for analog audio, not HT. At least that is my plan. I will keep my current speaker set up for HT, Vandersteens and an MFW-15 subs. Will I experiment with using them as mains? Certainly. So if it makes sense I may move the Vandersteens's out. So the dialog on HT applications is welcome. But I would welcome some thoughts from those of you using either speaker for two channel analog audio.
post #33 of 614
Actually WSR uses a pair of TSW-V subs. I've heard their room four years ago. It is quite the setup, but I think the room lacks a bit of natural reflection. It's extremely quiet and any ambience in the music/movie will have to come from the source itself...so...it really is a judgement on the recording itself...if the recording is not lively...the music sounds dead. I guess my pleasure does come from a bit of natural reflection. But...at the same time, I'm not really enjoying my room at all right now because there is too much reflection and I don't want to invest in any money in the room (it would be a waste because I'm moving). I can't wait to get out of this place... uuugghh!

That's cool if I have 1 pair of only two pairs made...but...I find it odd that the numbers are so low for the TSW-V... my serial numbers are (I think) 163A/B ...how do you know only two pair were made? Apparently there were a few TSW-IV pairs made...I wonder who's enjoying them...?

The first time I heard Dunlavy was in 2000. The father of a friend of mine had a pair of SC-IV/a mixed with Krell monoblocks and Sonic Frontiers CD and Preamp. I fell in love. Became obsessed to find that sound again...only to find I couldn't find it with anything else. I'm hanging on to these for as long as I can as I get so much pure enjoyment out of them... It would be nice if Dunlavy's legacy could be continued in current products. I don't ever want to imagine the day when these speakers get too old and I'll have to replace them...(noooooo!)
post #34 of 614
atdamico

Actually, I use my Dunlavys for 2-ch first and HT second. I use an Ayre K-1xep preamp with two Theta Dreadnaughts (used as monoblocks for 2-ch application) and a Meridian 508.24...all balanced. I'm extremely happy with the sound. The equipment is very revealing and the Dunlavys are not forgiving. But...the system is far from analytical sounding and does have "emotion" in playback.
post #35 of 614
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Osadciw View Post

Actually WSR uses a pair of TSW-V subs.

Oops, that's what I meant.

Whatever they are called, I would love to hear them in action with the Dunlavys Vs all around.
post #36 of 614
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Osadciw View Post

I don't ever want to imagine the day when these speakers get too old and I'll have to replace them...(noooooo!)

If they are in cool, dry conditions away from the sunlight they should last for a long time. I dread blowing a driver as it will be impossible to properly replace with something matched. I drive these with a 400W amp and they do occassionally take a beating but so far so good. For HT use having a subwoofer helps to take some of the load off the mains, although I don't filter the fronts you don't need the same volume levels to get high SPL with a sub.

On the weekend I will play with location of the speakers to see if I can improve the room bass response. As I use a HTPC I'll post the REW (room response software) charts.
post #37 of 614
He made only 2 or so pair of the Tower VI's (with the 15 inch drivers). He made 3 to 5 pair of the Tower V (12 inch drivers). WSR had the first pair and I had the second. I have no clue how many Tower IV's (10 inch drivers) he may have built.

I suspect that the reason the WSR room is so dry is because he primarily uses it for HT.

While I am using Dunlavy's all around for HT, my primary use of the room is two channel and of course do not use subs for that (not even close to necessary).
post #38 of 614
Quote:
Originally Posted by audioguy View Post

He made only 2 or so pair of the Tower VI's (with the 15 inch drivers). He made 3 to 5 pair of the Tower V (12 inch drivers). WSR had the first pair and I had the second. I have no clue how many Tower IV's (10 inch drivers) he may have built.

I suspect that the reason the WSR room is so dry is because he primarily uses it for HT.

While I am using Dunlavy's all around for HT, my primary use of the room is two channel and of course do not use subs for that (not even close to necessary).


My personal opinion was the room was very quiet. I believe that was his goal for the room. He only played a couple of sections of music. From what I can remember besides being literally blown away by the Dunlavy it was the entrance door that weighed close to 300lbs that impressed me with it's sealing capabilities.

That session eventually led me to sell my Martin Logans and buy dynamic cones again.
post #39 of 614
I guess to analyse the soundtrack to such a precise method, the room would have to be dead. Any reflection of sound is not a part of the original signal and therefore may blur subtleties in the soundtrack. But then, have film soundtracks ever really had such precision in soundtrack presentation? Not really...they are still designed for impact rather than realism. I still have loads of fun regardless!

(Re: my TSW-VI pair - I guess I have a rare piece of Dunlavy history!)
post #40 of 614
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Osadciw View Post

(Re: my TSW-VI pair - I guess I have a rare piece of Dunlavy history!)

You do indeed. Are they up and running? I can't even imagine what they must sound like if you have them EQ'd correctly. Eight (8) 15 inch drivers in sealed cabinets!!!

You are the man!!
post #41 of 614
no they aren't up and running yet. the reason is because I'm moving...and I just not willing to damage the narrow oak staircase to take them down 12 steps at 530lbs each, and then have to carry them back up in a few months. I picked them up in March from a gentleman who was using them in his large home theater. The room was very big...some three stories high with a 25 foot screen and I can't even remember how deep. It had theater seating for over 50 people. Anyways...they didn't make enough bass for him in that room so he upgraded to two smaller-sized powered subs that had 18" drivers in them...but apparently made more bass.

You don't know how eager I am to get these things going. I'm surviving on Paradigm PW-2200s at the moment - which isn't bad as I like the subs (I took one from the rear channel and put it on LFE).
post #42 of 614
Quote:
Originally Posted by audioguy View Post

I suspect that the reason the WSR room is so dry is because he primarily uses it for HT.

Sorry for the slightly OT post:
Anyone have comments about the bass quantity/quality in the WSR room since they don't use bass management? It seems like the general consensus is to bass manage because it's very difficult to get "proper" bass from the speakers positioned for surround sound, but WSR advocate for fullrange sound from all speakers.
post #43 of 614
Just a heads up that there's a pair of Dunlavy Athena / Aletha / Corinthian speakers on eBay right now!
post #44 of 614
Now there's a pair of Duntech Sovereign 2001 speakers on eBay. http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...MESE:IT&ih=003 Those were the predecessor to the Dunlavy SC-V's.
post #45 of 614
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shocked One View Post

Those were the predecessor to the Dunlavy SC-V's.

Outstanding speaker but not in the same league sonically as the SC-V.
post #46 of 614
Quote:
Originally Posted by audioguy View Post

Outstanding speaker but not in the same league sonically as the SC-V.

Although I hardly ever join in, I've been reading the various forums out there for about 7 years now and have never really seen a detailed (intelligently written) head to head comparison between the Duntech Sovereign 2001's and the Dunlavy SC-V's.

As a current, simultaneous owner of both (as well as several other Duntech and Dunlavy speakers, subs and active crossovers), I have switched the two out many, many times over the years and can tell you that they're much more similar than they are different. Yes, they're not the same speakers, and yes, they sound different; but "not in the same league"??? With all due respect, I think that one-sentence summation is a bit irresponsible, especially coming from someone who's owned and played with as many toys as you have, and seems to be highly regarded on the forum.

To clarify, (in my opinion) the SC-V is a brighter speaker with slightly deeper bass extention, and seems to be a bit more sensitive. Likewise, the 2001's are slighly warmer and do demand more out of a power amp. I've actually always thought that the female voice sounds slightly more realistic and less grainy on the Duntech's! But that's just my opinion!

Now, I'm not making any of these statements based on what other people have written (or said) or because I read it in some spec sheet somewhere; they're based on actual critical listening sessions over the past 7 years that I've owned the SC-V's and the past 14 years that I've owned the 2001's.

I'm also not claiming to be any type of expert or anything like that! I'm just an average Joe with an average pair of ears who happens to love music; I don't really care about specs once that power goes on! I've gone out of my way many times over the past 30 to 35 years to go hear the latest and greatest speakers, only to have been disappointed after finally listening. And I do realize that rooms have been a factor. But my feeling is that if a manufacturer or retailer can't go out of their way to choose and set up their display rooms properly, they will not be getting my hard earned dollars either!

As someone who often calls himself a cheap bastard, I have to factor in price whenever making judgements on expensive items. As far as I'm concerned, the Duntech's and the Dunlavy's are not only in the same league, they are pretty much the only players in that league!!
post #47 of 614
Good post shocked one. It's too easy to get sucked into the "newer, bigger, costs more" trap. There are still fabulous speakers out there from the last millenium!
post #48 of 614
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shocked One View Post

Yes, they're not the same speakers, and yes, they sound different; but "not in the same league"??? With all due respect, I think that one-sentence summation is a bit irresponsible, especially coming from someone who's owned and played with as many toys as you have, and seems to be highly regarded on the forum.

I more than played with the Dunlavy's and other speakers. I was a Dunlavy Dealer for over 5 years (until he sold his company). That said, "not in the same league" may, indeed, be a bit of an overstatement. But the differences you described, if those were applied to an amplifier, would indeed be "not in the same league". So I will just state, that in my opinion, the SC _V was a much improved speaker over the 2001 (in the same way the SC-IVA was better than the SC-IV.).

(I would today still take the 2001 over MANY speakers that sell today for well about a fancy sports car).

And I'm not sure I would call my self "highly regarded". I mean I have less than 4000 posts!!
post #49 of 614
I heard the Dunlavy II in Atlanta when I was doing residency. Loved the sound. If I was actually practising at that time and owned a home, I would have bought them on the spot. No other speaker I've heard(except for my Salk V3) has made such an impression on me. It is too bad that they don't make speakers any more. The speakers were good but the marketing may have been lacking.
post #50 of 614
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Bogg View Post

Good post shocked one. It's too easy to get sucked into the "newer, bigger, costs more" trap. There are still fabulous speakers out there from the last millenium!

Thank you, The Bogg.

Like I said I don't usually participate in these type of forums, even though I do enjoy reading what others have taken the time to actually write. John Dunlavy was one of the most realistic, grounded, audio geniuses I've ever had the pleasure of meeting. He didn't believe in all the "fluff" that many of the so called "experts" swear by, and my personal opinions on such things as room design, speaker cables and power amplifiers pretty much mirror what he often preached.

I do, however, often find myself being amusing by reading some of the idiotic statements that people have written about in forums like these. (And no, I'm not including Audio Guy in this category; I generally consider him to be a knowledgeable contributor!) I'm talking about the guys who only regurgitate what others have written about in an effort to appear to know what they're talking about!

I've heard the $100,000+ "modern-day, computer designed" YG Acoustics Anat Ref II Professional speakers and they didn't sound any better than either of the Dunlavy designs I've been talking about! Different yes, but better; no way! And I don't mean to pick on them either. I read somewhere that today's speakers are so much better than the designs of even 10 years ago. Nonsense!!! I read the reviews. I go to the audio shows. I listen to the trends of the day. In the end, no speaker company has succeeded in prying any cash from my clenched hands.

To my ears, the best speakers of the day have not evolved at anywhere near the pace that electronics and other technologies have over the past 50 or 60 years. And I'm so sick of people buying into the B.S. that just because something is newer or costs more, it's better. Or just because someone or something tells them it sounds better, that we should all just jump on the bandwagon and believe it. I don't buy that and I never will.

God gave me a pair of ears and a brain that seem to possess a pretty good synergy. I think I'll continue to trust them until someone comes up with a version 2.0!
post #51 of 614
Since this thread specifically started as a thread on the Sound of the Legacy Whispers and the Dunlavy SC-V's, I want to make a few comments about the former.

About 8 or 9 years ago, I was in the market for an additional pair of speakers. I already owned the awesome Duntech Sovereign 2001's so I knew what I could expect for $20,000 and under. I drove out to St. Louis all the way from Denver just to go spend a few hours at an owner's house listening to his pair of Whispers.

I thought they sounded great, but there was something about their bass I didn't really like. I know some of that was his room setup; but still! I would have expected a heavier slam in the bass region. I left somewhat disappointed.

A few months later, that same owner stopped in Denver on an extended layover to take me up on my invitation to return the favor. We only had a little over an hour once we got to my house, but within a minute or so (I'm not exagerating here!), he could hear an immediate difference. Keep in mind that I'm talking about the Sovereign 2001's here, and not the SC-V's! He said he couldn't believe that mine would have sounded that much better. His amazement quickly turned to frustration as he had actually considered a pair earlier, but was turned off by their size and weight.

On the drive back to the airport, he already had someone in mind back in St. Louis that wanted to buy his Whispers and he also talked about trying to plan a layover in Colorado Springs next time to visit the Dunlavy factory and order his own!

That was the reaction (as best I can remember) of an actual Whisper owner. I don't know what ever happened with him; I don't know if he ever bought the Dunlavy's! But I do know that his excitement and enthusiasm were not an act and he wasn't just being polite. He was extremely animated from the moment he first heard the Duntech's and later looked somewhat bummed out, to be totally honest.

That's all I wanted to share... Hope it doesn't offend any Whisper owners...
post #52 of 614
What started as a simple head's up that "there's a pair of Duntech 2001's for sale on eBay" has turned into alot of time spent voicing my opinions on this thread. It's been kind of interesting, but I think I'll go back to simply reading again.

Good luck everyone, and stop taking yourselves too seriously; it's all about the music!
post #53 of 614
When Duntech introduced the Sovereigns at CES, the place was buzzing about their "slam" and power. They were playing the DMP CD Flim & the BB's TriCycle in their demo. They did sound impressive in what was admittedly an acoustically compromised space.

Lee
post #54 of 614
I was very underwhelmed by the Legacy Whispers given their size and $$$.
Even the Legacy Focus severely outperformed them in all respects except, maybe, for microdynamics.
post #55 of 614
This thread makes me want to cry.

I used to own a pair of the SC-Vs. Had to sell them for financial reasons. One of the great regrets in my life.
To this day I havent found a speaker, regardless of price, that I enjoy more. Thats not to say there arent speakers I enjoy. Just none that I have found to seriously surpass my old Dunlavy's. And I've heard them all. (seriously, just about.)

I dont supose anyone owning a pair of the SC-Vs would be willing to pop out the Xover and take a few high rez pics for me??
I had some of my own for archival reasons but lost them due to hard drive failure.
I do still have some really cool (and rediculously accurate) 3D CAD files that I created before parting with my units that I could trade. Anyone??
post #56 of 614
For what it's worth, John Dunlavy believed the SC-V was the best and most accurate speaker he ever built, INCLUDING THE SC -VI!! I preferred the VI primarily due to the extra weight on the very bottom end, which, of course was only evident on some music.

In the right room, the SC-IV's sound virtually identical!!
post #57 of 614
audioguy...it's been a while since I've heard the SC-Vs. I'm using IV/A in the front for HT and my music...so, if I put a bit of effort in the room, I should get these close to V performance? Reading interviews with Dunlavy, he does praise his Vs...but also claims that the IVs do sound quite similar, only that the Vs have the extra bottom end...

I think I'm gonna go listen for a while. I don't sit down and appreciate them enough.
post #58 of 614
The guy I sold my VI's to has heard my IV-A's in my new room and he can't hear any real difference. When I attended CES and Dunlavy was showing, he would have all of his tower speakers lined up and you could never tell which one was playing. The all sounded virtually identical. you have GREAT speakers and the steal in all of high end audio (IMO)
post #59 of 614
I've owned a pair of Whispers for a few years now, and know the guys at Legacy pretty well. A past VP and engineer are very good friends. These are fantastic speakers for the money, and I encourage anyone to read the reviews in StereoTimes, Bound for Sound, The Absolu!e Sound and Stereophile for what I think are very fair accountings of the Whispers.

My nutshell opinion of the Whispers is that if you agree with the design philosophies and trade-offs that go into the speakers, then they could be an excellent choice. I will address a couple of points brought up. No, they are not the absolute bottom end, slam kind of presentation, which is why they got a "Class A - restricted low frequency" rating in Stereophile. But the trade-off is very clean, low distortion-type of bass. A subwoofer makes the final presentation very complete for me; others find a sub to be unnecessary. I also own a pair of Legacy Focus, which became my surround speakers after I bought the Whispers. The only area in which the Focus outperform the Whispers is in the lowest bass frequencies, and more so in bass impact that clarity.

Finally, the choice of driver materials is based on practical considerations, performance paramaters and realiability, less than just the use of exotic materials. Over about ten years, I've owned or presently own about two dozen Legacy speakers, including centers and subs, and have never had a driver fail. I'm embarrased to admit the strain I put on these things with classic rock decibals and home theater soundtracks. FWIW, I do use clean power with Levinson amps. Bill Dudleston cares first and foremost about measured accuracy and low distortion in a real environment. Multiple drivers move more air as a matter of physics, and I think his company approaches its goals in a straighforward, technical manner. I think Bill is a very talented innovator and not afraid to challenge some traditional methods.

None of this post is meant to cast aspersions on any other speaker brands. I'm not a shill or fan-boy for Legacy, maybe a fan-middle-aged man, sort of. In fact, over several years, I auditioned many what would be considered "high-end" brands, and believe several speaker companies do a great job. Actually, I had narrowed my final choices to Legacy, Dunlavy and Dynaudio. I thought the Dunlavy IVs were really good for what I was looking for, but went with the Legacies for a myriad of reasons.

I don't think anyone could go wrong with a John Dunlavy designed speaker. His white papers, including the one on cables, are must readings. He is truly an iconic figure in the industry. You might be able to easily access some articles by Dunlavy on his speakers through the archives in Widescreen Review.

If anyone wants me to elaborate any further, please don't hesitate to send me a PM.
post #60 of 614
There's been a pair of SC-V's up for sale on Audiogon for the last week, and they've been marked as "sale pending" since the first time I saw the ad, so I'm wondering if that's fallen through or possibly erroneous. Just FYI for the OP in case he's still considering a pair.

I'd also agree with Michael and audioguy - I'm amazed at how my I's, II's, III's, and IV's all sound identical excepting their bass response. jonnyozero3 was interested in a pair of I's that I replaced with a set of II's, and when he auditioned them my Sunfire signature sub was hooked up as well (and EQ'ed for the I's), and I was shocked at how the I's sounded almost identical to my IV's when I'd listen to 2ch material on those with the Sunfire. Whenever I listen to my Dunlavys I'm always amazed at the sound quality, especially when you consider what you can pick them up for these days! Even new they were an exceptional value.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ultra Hi-End HT Gear ($20,000+)
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Ultra Hi-End HT Gear ($20,000+) › Legacy Whisper Dunlavy SC V opinions