What drivers are used in Dunlavy speakers?
robert_...@my-deja.com
Since Dunlavy has done so much testing to determine what are the best
drivers, I would like to know what they are. Can someone tell me what
Dunlavy uses, make and model number?
Does you agree or disagree with Dunlavy's choices?
Bob Stanton
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
mrbiggl...@my-deja.com
Dunlavy certainly has done a lot of testing of drivers, but the kind he
uses are not the "best" available. Dunlavy primarily uses Vifa drivers
for the midbass and tweeter units, which are absolutely fantastic
drivers for the money, but by no means the finest. However, he very
well may use exclusive variants OEMed for DAL by Vifa (as Vifa has done
for Vandersteen, etc.), in which case he could be getting a superior
driver compared to what is available to the hobbyist. For DAL systems
with 8" woofs or larger, I believe he was using Morel for the 8" drivers
and American OEMs for larger units (hard to tell who makes them... could
be Eminence, or any number of driver cottage industries in the US). He
may exclusively use American OEMs for all his woofers these days.
Dunlavy will probably argue that more expensive drivers with kevlar or
other exotic cone materials do not yield superior results. Generally
speaking, I agree with him, but only because the increase in performance
is usually only negligible with the more spendy drivers out there (and a
lot of them tend to be less "well behaved" [read: harder to design a
loudspeaker around]). In my opinion, while the Vifas are astonishing
good for what they are, drivers such as the P13 with their mineral
filled poly cone, pvc voice coil cap, and aluminum voice coil former do
not equal the performance of something like Audax aerogels, kevlar
Etons, kevlar and composite Focals, Scan Speak, Dynaudio, Scanning, and
a host of other expensive exotics. In particular, drivers with
curve-linear cones constructed of doped paper, or some composite
sandwich that is both stiff and well damped (like the Audax aerogel
units), with a kapton former and a phase plug will measure better and
have a subjectively more resolute sound. Drivers with aluminum formers
have eddy current distortion issues that are hard to solve, and poly
cones can have hysteresis problems be cause their cones can be too
lossey.
The tweeters DAL uses are the Vifa D27 and variants of it. The mid-bass
drivers are Vifa P13, M or W models. I agree with Dunlavy in his
current driver choice because for his needs (make killer speakers that
are affordable and reliable), you can't beat Vifa. Incredible quality,
reliability, consistency and price. He probably doesn't even have to
match them... Vifa's drivers are that tight.
IMHO, Dynaudio makes the finest tweeters for direct radiator designs,
Audax, Focal, Eton, and Dynaudio make the finest midranges and small
woofers, and JBL makes the finest big woofers (15" and 18"). Of course,
there are numerous others that are also superb.
Personally, I believe Dunlavy's older designs, such as the Duntech
Sovereign and Princess (but not the current ones that Duntech is making
- I think the designs have been compromised since Dunlavy left) were
superior precisely because they used better drivers (Dynaudio and Scan
Speak). I think the Sovereign measures as good or better than the DAL
SC-VI, and I personally think it sounds better - more resolute with
better dynamic contrast, and the legendary imaging and harmonic
correctness his designs are famous for.
Mind you, Dunlavy designed the Sovereign back in 1986, I think!!
If you are going to build a pair of speakers on a budget, it would be
very hard to do better than Vifas. They are what I have often chosen.
Happy Listening...
Biggleswurth
robert_...@my-deja.com
mrbiggl...@my-deja.com wrote:
> If you are going to build a pair of speakers on a budget, it would be
> very hard to do better than Vifas. They are what I have often chosen.
>
> Happy Listening...
>
> Biggleswurth
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
>
Hi:
Thank you very much! That was very interesting and useful.
Regards,
Patrick Scully
news:7vl8mh$rel$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...> >snip<<
>
> Dunlavy certainly has done a lot of testing of drivers, but the kind he
> uses are not the "best" available.
A search on www.deja.com will show that he claims that they are >the best
available, regardless of price, etc.< which, he states, is why he uses them.
> Dunlavy will probably argue that more expensive drivers with kevlar or
> other exotic cone materials do not yield superior results.
He does!!!
> In my opinion, while the Vifas are astonishing
> good for what they are, drivers such as the P13 with their mineral
> filled poly cone, pvc voice coil cap, and aluminum voice coil former do
> not equal the performance of something like Audax aerogels, kevlar
> Etons, kevlar and composite Focals, Scan Speak, Dynaudio, Scanning, and
> a host of other expensive exotics. In particular, drivers with
> curve-linear cones constructed of doped paper,
According to his posts, the P13 units that DAL use are made from composite
(paper +) materials, not polypropylene!
--
regards
Patric Scully
The Sound Man
mrbiggl...@my-deja.com
I didn't know they were making the W (woofer) version of their P13 in
paper as well, although they have been making the M (midrange version)
in doped paper.
As good as the P13 is, even a doped paper cone version, it certainly is
not as good as Audax's aerogel 5.25" driver. In my opionion, the Eton
units are definitely superior too, although they don't have phase plugs,
which is not optimal.
I've also experienced substantial sensitivity to ambiant temperature
with P13s. I believe it's due to their smallish, rather firm/stiff
outer rubber suspension roll.
The fact remains that it is technically possible to produce a better
driver than the Vifa P13, and there is a host of cadidates that are
better despite what Dunlavy says. For instance: ferro-fluid cooled;
phase plug loaded; advanced composite cone material; kapton former;
neodymium motor; copper short out rings for motor pole - a driver with
these technologies can be quite superior to the Vifa.
Happy listening...
DALJHD
price or appearance. This is because appearance and price do not correlate with
performance.
Indeed, almost all of the expensive, high-tech looking drivers with hi-tech
cones, etc., exhibit performance (especially impulse, step, ampl/freq., etc., )
that does not approach what we achieve with Vifa or Scan Speak drivers and a
good (but complex) compensated, first-order crossover. (Yes, "compensated"
because even the best drivers do not yield an amplitude vs freq. response
better than about plus/minus 5 dB.) Likewise, what are often referred to as
"paper cones" are not paper but a complex, proprietary blend of "pulp, binders,
carbon fibers, etc.".
And no! The speakers I designed in Australia did not exhibit the level of
accuracy of our present designs because I had neither a decent, large anechoic
chamber or the measurement capabilities available with the MLSSA system,
time-domain spectrometry, and other gear we presently use.
And, considering the vague definition of "accuracy" being used by many of
today's magazine writers, etc., is it any wonder that most audiophiles are
confused? Indeed, it seems that "accuracy" is being treated as if was merely a
matter of "taste, personal opinion, etc.". But is there not a "real" accuracy
that can be "measured" and confirmed by "real-time comparisons with live music
and voices"?
Does not true objective accuracy of reproduction depend upon how accurately the
original complex musical waveforms are reproduced by the entire audio system -
including the loudspeakers? If we ask that high quality amps, DVD players, etc.
be able to accurately reproduce squarewaves, impulses and other complex
waveforms (like a lot of musical waveforms), why not require the same from
loudspeakers? I believe the answer is an obvious "yes", for loudspeakers,
being one component of a "series system" should exhibit the same levels of
accuracy we demand from all other components of our system.
Just because most loudspeakers cannot reproduce squarewaves, impulses, etc.
with even a cursory level of accuracy, is no reason not to ask more designers
to improve their "act".
John D.