Stereophile's Products of 1994 Joint Loudspeakers of 1994

Joint Loudspeakers of 1994:

B&W John Bowers Silver Signature ($8000/pair; reviewed by John Atkinson, Vol.17 No.6, June 1994 Review)
Dunlavy Audio Labs SC-IV ($4995/pair–$5495/pair; reviewed by Robert Deutsch, Vol.17 No.4, April 1994 Review)

This was a very strong group of contenders, all the speakers having received rave reviews in the magazine. All sound very different from one another; all excel in some areas of reproduction but are bettered in others by another. The voting was very close and, in fact, ended in a tie between B&W's Silver Signature and Dunlavy Audio Labs' SC-IV, both speakers sharing that essential attribute for a world-class loudspeaker: the listener doesn't have to force him- or herself to like their sound. (I've observed this happening more often than you might think!) Both loudspeakers represent the state of the art of moving-coil loudspeaker engineering, with essentially flat on-axis responses. Otherwise, they're very different.

The stand-mounted B&W is a two-way design featuring a reflex-loaded, Kevlar-cone woofer and a metal-dome tweeter, both manufactured by B&W. Though the "bullet tweeter" is set back on top of the cabinet, the high-order crossover means that its output is not particularly time-coherent. However, as its name suggests, it features the use of silver for almost every metal part: the crossover inductors and capacitors are wound from silver, as are the drive-unit voice-coils; and all the wiring, from the amplifier terminals onward, is solid-core silver. Whether due to this use of noble metal or not, the Silver Signature's sound is superbly transparent, yet without detail being thrust forward at the listener in the manner of a "monitor" speaker.

While its upper bass sounds just a little too fat for reality, it has superb control in this region; in small-to-medium–sized rooms, it will effectively produce bass frequencies down to the mid-30s without strain. (Visitors new to my room and the B&Ws invariably look for a nonexistent subwoofer!)

But oh, that treble! Many audiophiles criticize metal-dome tweeters for sounding bright. (Invariably, in my experience, they are actually talking about problems much lower down in frequency, at the top of the woofer passband, that are unmasked by the quality of the tweeter.) There is no brightness to the B&W Silver Signature's high frequencies; instead, there are just the clean, overhang-free, natural-sounding highs typical of live sound. Some find its sound too polite, but that's something I can live with. After the review was published, I bought the review samples to serve as my long-term loudspeaker reference. Six months later, the B&Ws are still bringing new listening pleasure with every new LP or CD I buy.

The floorstanding Dunlavy SC-IV is a very different animal. A three-way design, it uses a vertical array of five drive-units: the two woofers are on the outside, with then the two midrange units flanking a central soft-dome tweeter. By recessing the tweeter and midrange units to bring their acoustic centers into time alignment with the woofers, and implementing the crossover with first-order filters, designer John Dunlavy has arranged for all the drive-unit outputs to add in-phase on the listening axis at listening distances between 8' and 25'.

As well as a flat amplitude response, the results include a degree of imaging precision and soundstage palpability that takes the breath away. At Hi-Fi '94, Stereophile's Miami High-End Show, a pair of Dunlavy SC-IVs was being demonstrated with an Audio Research CD transport/digital processor and Exposure amplification. Though the hotel room was barely adequate, when I sat in the one seat where everything was just right, the walls of the room dissolved and I was enveloped in the recorded acoustic with every voice and instrument solid and stable. Goosebump time!

And the Dunlavys, with their big cabinet and twin 10" woofers, have real low frequencies: bass that plays loud and clean. I'll leave it to Bob Deutsch to have the last word, taken from his review: "There are singers who have great beauty of tone and vocal agility, but not much power—much like the best minimonitors of the loudspeaker world. It takes a rare singer—eg, a Joan Sutherland—to offer tonal beauty, range, agility, and power. It's just as rare to find a wide-ranging loudspeaker that well communicates rhythm/pace, and can play loud...This is a fabulous speaker! I'm buying the review pair."

Finalists (in alphabetical order):
Apogee Mini-Grand ($5595/system; reviewed by Thomas J. Norton, Vol.17 No.3, March 1994 Review)
NHT 3.3 ($4200/pair; reviewed by Thomas J. Norton & Corey Greenberg, Vol.16 No.12, December 1993, & Vol.17 No.3, March 1994 Review)
Thiel CS1.5 ($1990/pair; reviewed by Sam Tellig, Vol.17 No.8, August 1994 Review)

COMMENTS
Bogolu Haranath's picture

Hip hip hooray ....... The links are working :-) .........

JRT's picture

Nicely done.

Bogolu Haranath's picture

Looks like we finally have a new technical editor who knows what he is doing ....... May be he is a new member of the Stereophile staff? :-) .........

JRT's picture

I think that the Sennheiser HD580 headphones could have been a good choice, now a true classic and still desirable, and the Grandmother of the HD580 Jubilee, HD600, HD650, and some more recent additions from Sennheiser and MassDrop.

https://www.stereophile.com/headphones/1294senn/index.html

Bogolu Haranath's picture

Look at the measurements of Sennheiser HD-580 on Inner/Fidelity website ........ Not that great in bass frequency below 100 Hz :-) .........

JRT's picture

I would not judge them in retrospect against modern alternatives. Headphones have gotten better. A family of headphones that started with the HD580 remains very popular, and seems to have seen a new resurgence in popularity at MassDrop.

There were other headphones available in 1994. Some had better bass, but that came in combination with a different set of shortcomings. With the Sennheiser HD580, to me the errors seemed to be errors of omission, and those errors seemed to be more easily overlooked with the music I prefer. So I bought a pair in mid/late 1990s, very much enjoyed thousands of hours of listening through them, and my opinion is likely biased by that positive experience.

I would suggest that if somebody wants to listen to music heavy with synthetic bass, various genres spanning from 1970's disco music though the various follow-on genres that over-utilized subwoofers, then they should probably look elsewhere. I prefer other music.

For jazz and classical and blues, for most of the music recorded before disco, and for a lot of music that has been recorded since, I think that the original HD580 was a fine choice, and the original HD580 Jubilee Edition and HD600 might be better choices.

John Atkinson's picture
JRT wrote:
I think he should have chosen the Sennheiser HD580 headphones. https://www.stereophile.com/headphones/1294senn/index.html

The Sennheisers weren't reviewed until December 1994 so weren't eligible for the 1994 awards. As it says in the foreword, "To be a contender, a product had to have been reported on in Stereophile between the November 1993 and October 1994 issues."

John Atkinson
Technical Editor, Stereophile

Bogolu Haranath's picture

I would have chosen the Dunlavy SC-IV as the Editor's choice ........ Excellent engineering :-) .........

JRT's picture

John Dunlavy extracted some very good performance from the set of inexpensive Vifa drivers that he used in the SC-IV. He upgraded the woofers to ScanSpeak in a later variant. His crossovers were well developed and were far from being over-simplified.

tonykaz's picture

Your Dunlavys might have been good but the little Monitors are still in Production and still outstanding.

What ever happened to Dunlavy ?

Tony in Venice

ps. these guys were reviewing with Krell Amplification, doesn't Krell make everything sound wonderful ?

Bogolu Haranath's picture

AFAIK, Dunlavy designed the Duntech Sovereign loud speakers ....... Duntech still lists them as in production on their website ........ I don't know what happened to Dunlavy :-) .......

John Atkinson's picture
Bogolu Haranath wrote:
I don't know what happened to Dunlavy

John Dunlavy passed away in 2007 at the age of 78. In poor health, he had sold the Dunlavy company at the end of 2001 to pro-lighting company Wybron. I interviewed John in 1996: see www.stereophile.com/interviews/163/index.html.

The new owners of Dunlavy loudspeakers shut it down in November 2002: see www.stereophile.com/news/11492/index.html.

John Atkinson
Technical Editor, Stereophile

Bogolu Haranath's picture

May be Stereophile could review one of the new Duntech speaker models ....... Sovereign may be too big ....... Duntech Marquis seems to be the right size :-) ........

John Atkinson's picture
Bogolu Haranath wrote:
May be Stereophile could review one of the new Duntech speaker models ...

That would be up to Jim Austin, but as far as I am aware, Duntech loudspeakers are not currently distributed in the USA, though some mastering studios use them.

John Atkinson
Technical Editor, Stereophile

Bogolu Haranath's picture

Can we bribe Jim Austin with a bottle of Tennessee Honey? ........ Just kidding :-) ........

tonykaz's picture

Pose or ponder something

then... Poof,

The accurate background informs us !!!

Mr.JA1 is a Wikipedia or Audiopedia or even a Stereophedia to our Canadian friends.

Tony in Venice

ps. I just gotta say that our beloved Steve G the Audiophiliac is interviewing Rachel from Grant Fidelity, a Chinese Lady explaining the complex China Marketplace.

tonykaz's picture

Steve G pointed me at this Headphone back in 2011, long after it's being discontinued. It remains a better transducer than any "ANY" Loudspeaker Transducer system I've ever heard. ( of course, I haven't heard em all but I've certainly owned any dam loudspeaker I wanted. )

Still, did we have Superb Asgard 2 type headphone amplification in 1994 ?

In 1994, I probably would've nominated the LP12 & LS3/5a. Both are enduring greats !!!

Tony in Venice

ps. maybe even a pair of Linn Kans and matching stands , MIT 750 Music Hose & any Koetsu .

Staxguy's picture

It would be interesting to compare the top loudspeaker of this period, or say, the Dunlavy V.I. with the Wilson Chronosonic of today.

Allen Fant's picture

I trip back in time! J.A.

I still have this issue and had celebrated my 1st year as a subscriber (1993 to Present Date).

Robin Landseadel's picture

"The Vendetta is the odd man out, no longer being in production since the Berkeley fire destroyed designer John Curl's stock of parts and boards. (John Curl is offering Type C and D (diode) upgrades to present owners for $500 and $250, respectively.) It was available for nomination because it keeps on popping up its head in reviews as Stereophile's reference phono preamplifier."

I remember when it happened. I was making marble paper in the backyard, looked over my shoulder, saw this huge plume of smoke coming out of the hills.

Ortofan's picture

... how many buyers decided that the $1800 Arcam Delta 100 cassette deck (with its Denon sourced mechanism) was a better choice than the similarly priced Nakamichi CR-7A?
Or, if you simply had to have Dolby S, then either the significantly less expensive TEAC V-8000S or the Sony TC-K909ES.

Bogolu Haranath's picture

May be those buyers played 'Guardians of the Galaxy' mix-tape and decided that Arcam cassette deck sounded the best :-) ........

jimtavegia's picture

I have been playing around with my old Denon deck and it always surprises me when I do. I recorded a Helene Grimaud stream concert last week on both my Tascam DR-2d at 2496 and on the Denon and enjoyed them both as I doubt the stream was a high bit rate, but enjoyed it. I sure enjoy Ms. Grimaud's playing and the Phildelphia Orchestra is great. Miss the days the FM taping.

X