Quote:
Originally Posted by Champ04 
YES! THIS is precisely my point. And you are correct, it is the drivers that are the limiting factor. To be more precise, it's mostly the tweeter.
And herein is the one flaw in Dunlavy's methods. Note: I did NOT say designs.
John was well known as being a very nice gentleman, but he was also stubborn as all get out.
His reason for using the Vifa D26TG and later the D27TG was PRICE. Yes, it did measure very very well for what he was looking for, but so did several of the Dynaudio tweeters. (And their various offshoots from Morel.) The difference then, was simply price since the D27TG was under $25 and the rest were all approaching or surpassing $100 and even $200.
This, in fact, is a direct quote. "Why pay extra for something that measures the same?"
The downfall was that they DID measure the same in ONLY the ways that John measured them.
Years after building an entire company around the Vifa D27TG/P13WG (tweet/mid) combination, other people found that above a certain sound pressure level the apex of the dome on the Dunlavy tweeter would start breaking up severely. And there is the fundamental reason why you can only go so loud with a Dunlavy. It's also one of the reasons they were known for frying tweeters.
The Vifa P13WG midrange driver has an issue of it's own. It doesn't break up enough to cause an irritating sound. But it does absorb and blur some micro detail.
Anyway, the point is, both of these drivers do measure very well UP TO the SPL that Dunlavy was testing them. Beyond that and things aren't so good.
Back on page 9 of this thread I posted some pictures of the original Dunlavy Audio Labs prototype speakers that I managed to acquire. In them you will see that they use the same P13WG midrange driver. But the tweeter is one of Morel's offshoots of the famed Dynaudio Esotar.
Initially I mentioned that this pair did sound better. Notably clearer and more dynamic. But what I've noticed more since is that they do not have the SPL limitations of the Dunlavy line.
Working from what I've learned from this pair I've been able to successfully replace the crappy Vifa tweeter in a pair of SC-I with a Dynaudio Esotar2 tweeter. The Esotar2 is flat out beyond 40kHz and has incredible power handling abilities, without breaking up. It also has the best measured impulse response that I've ever seen.
The result is a speaker that has outstanding dynamic capabilities. And I'm not being conservative here. I use bombastic full scale orchestra pieces such as Stravinsky's Firebird suite or Right of Spring, Holst's Mars, Mahler's 5th and what not for testing. Anything with huge dynamic contrast or continuous loud and difficult passages. Take your pick, I'm playing them at concert levels and noticing no compression or breakup.
In fact, these modified SC-1, combined with a very good pair of subs, flat out embarrass a pair of Wilson Audio Maxx2 on these same musical pieces.
Anyway, all of that was to stress the point that, as awesome as they are, there are a few limitations of the Dunlavys and it all focuses on driver selection. THIS is why I got really excited about checking out Evolution Acoustics. And not just because they use exotic materials but because they ALSO claim to be able to pass a decent square wave. And if this is the case then you can assume that they are both very flat in the frequency domain and relatively coherent in the time domain. The two primary things that make a Dunlavy so awesome.
P.S. I'm not too up to speed on ceramic drivers. But I do know that some of the more modern carbonfiber sandwich designs have both the rigidity and freedom from ringing that Dunlavy desired so highly in a midrange.....But he would still likely not ever have used them.....because of price.
YES! THIS is precisely my point. And you are correct, it is the drivers that are the limiting factor. To be more precise, it's mostly the tweeter.
And herein is the one flaw in Dunlavy's methods. Note: I did NOT say designs.
John was well known as being a very nice gentleman, but he was also stubborn as all get out.
His reason for using the Vifa D26TG and later the D27TG was PRICE. Yes, it did measure very very well for what he was looking for, but so did several of the Dynaudio tweeters. (And their various offshoots from Morel.) The difference then, was simply price since the D27TG was under $25 and the rest were all approaching or surpassing $100 and even $200.
This, in fact, is a direct quote. "Why pay extra for something that measures the same?"
The downfall was that they DID measure the same in ONLY the ways that John measured them.
Years after building an entire company around the Vifa D27TG/P13WG (tweet/mid) combination, other people found that above a certain sound pressure level the apex of the dome on the Dunlavy tweeter would start breaking up severely. And there is the fundamental reason why you can only go so loud with a Dunlavy. It's also one of the reasons they were known for frying tweeters.
The Vifa P13WG midrange driver has an issue of it's own. It doesn't break up enough to cause an irritating sound. But it does absorb and blur some micro detail.
Anyway, the point is, both of these drivers do measure very well UP TO the SPL that Dunlavy was testing them. Beyond that and things aren't so good.
Back on page 9 of this thread I posted some pictures of the original Dunlavy Audio Labs prototype speakers that I managed to acquire. In them you will see that they use the same P13WG midrange driver. But the tweeter is one of Morel's offshoots of the famed Dynaudio Esotar.
Initially I mentioned that this pair did sound better. Notably clearer and more dynamic. But what I've noticed more since is that they do not have the SPL limitations of the Dunlavy line.
Working from what I've learned from this pair I've been able to successfully replace the crappy Vifa tweeter in a pair of SC-I with a Dynaudio Esotar2 tweeter. The Esotar2 is flat out beyond 40kHz and has incredible power handling abilities, without breaking up. It also has the best measured impulse response that I've ever seen.
The result is a speaker that has outstanding dynamic capabilities. And I'm not being conservative here. I use bombastic full scale orchestra pieces such as Stravinsky's Firebird suite or Right of Spring, Holst's Mars, Mahler's 5th and what not for testing. Anything with huge dynamic contrast or continuous loud and difficult passages. Take your pick, I'm playing them at concert levels and noticing no compression or breakup.
In fact, these modified SC-1, combined with a very good pair of subs, flat out embarrass a pair of Wilson Audio Maxx2 on these same musical pieces.
Anyway, all of that was to stress the point that, as awesome as they are, there are a few limitations of the Dunlavys and it all focuses on driver selection. THIS is why I got really excited about checking out Evolution Acoustics. And not just because they use exotic materials but because they ALSO claim to be able to pass a decent square wave. And if this is the case then you can assume that they are both very flat in the frequency domain and relatively coherent in the time domain. The two primary things that make a Dunlavy so awesome.
P.S. I'm not too up to speed on ceramic drivers. But I do know that some of the more modern carbonfiber sandwich designs have both the rigidity and freedom from ringing that Dunlavy desired so highly in a midrange.....But he would still likely not ever have used them.....because of price.
It was very interesting reading throughout the thread. Tweeter replacement exicted me especially. It was the very first idea came to mind when I got my SC-V's delivered to Russia and installed. Highs certainly needed an improvement. This is not that huge issue now when I replaced my preamp. But I am still open to anything what can improve sound.
Champ,
how exactly did you replace Vifa with Dynaudio tweeters? All Dynaudio's I know 8Ohm while Vifa D27TG-35 is 6Ohm. It does not seem that simple replacement will work. Did you re-work crossover?
