I enjoy reading the reviews that Stereophile has done over the years. I'm surprised that I can't find any speakers that have measured better than the Dunlavy SC-VIs. I mean it sure seems that technology has advanced, manufacturing methods have improved, and surely the equipment & drivers from china have improved dramatically since they've been building the iPhone. So why no better speakers by now?
Mr. Atkinson seems very thorough in his process of testing and evaluation and consistent over the years. We seem to have more adjectives than ever to describe the sound, but I trust measurements more than my ears.
Here are his comments from the 1996 review: "The SC-VI's on-axis frequency response, taken at the recommended minimum microphone distance of 10', is shown in fig.2. Astonishingly flat, it meets ±1dB limits from 200Hz to 20kHz." "It can be seen that the SC-VI is basically flat to 30Hz, with a somewhat overdamped nature, rolling of to -5dB at 20Hz. This particular sample hadn't had many hours on it; it would be expected that the 15" woofer suspensions would loosen up with continued play, giving a still well-damped response but with a little more extension." "The step response on the SC-VI's tweeter axis (fig.4), calculated from the impulse response, is about the best I have ever seen. The initial rise is almost vertical, confirming that the individual sounds from the seven drive-units reach the microphone at the same time, with then a very smooth relaxation of the curve back to the time axis, broken only by some slight ripples and the reflection seen in fig.3. This is a very time-coherent speaker. In fact, although I haven't shown it here, the SC-VI on its tweeter axis is one of the very few loudspeakers to produced well-shaped acoustic square waves."
Read more at https://www.stereophile.com/content/dunlavy-audio-labs-signature-sc-vi-loudspeaker-measurements-part-2#7PTcekZAZmsFyV9P.99
I enjoy reading the reviews that Stereophile has done over the years. I'm surprised that I can't find any speakers that have measured better than the Dunlavy SC-VIs. I mean it sure seems that technology has advanced, manufacturing methods have improved, and surely the equipment & drivers from china have improved dramatically since they've been building the iPhone. So why no better speakers by now?
Mr. Atkinson seems very thorough in his process of testing and evaluation and consistent over the years. We seem to have more adjectives than ever to describe the sound, but I trust measurements more than my ears.
Here are his comments from the 1996 review: "The SC-VI's on-axis frequency response, taken at the recommended minimum microphone distance of 10', is shown in fig.2. Astonishingly flat, it meets ±1dB limits from 200Hz to 20kHz." "It can be seen that the SC-VI is basically flat to 30Hz, with a somewhat overdamped nature, rolling of to -5dB at 20Hz. This particular sample hadn't had many hours on it; it would be expected that the 15" woofer suspensions would loosen up with continued play, giving a still well-damped response but with a little more extension." "The step response on the SC-VI's tweeter axis (fig.4), calculated from the impulse response, is about the best I have ever seen. The initial rise is almost vertical, confirming that the individual sounds from the seven drive-units reach the microphone at the same time, with then a very smooth relaxation of the curve back to the time axis, broken only by some slight ripples and the reflection seen in fig.3. This is a very time-coherent speaker. In fact, although I haven't shown it here, the SC-VI on its tweeter axis is one of the very few loudspeakers to produced well-shaped acoustic square waves."
Read more at https://www.stereophile.com/content/dunlavy-audio-labs-signature-sc-vi-loudspeaker-measurements-part-2#7PTcekZAZmsFyV9P.99