Dunlavy SC4 Speakers

Got my SC-IV's in 1995. I had been using a sub with the predecessor spkr (Quad ESL-63), but reading the reviews and auditioning the SC-IV's a few times, the need was borderline. Around the same time period Carver released his Sunfire amp, offering the option for bi-wiring - drive the woofer with the 'zero' impedance "voltage" output, and the mid/high crossover circuit from the "current" output, which apparently has a 1-ohm output impedance. The effect is to boost the lows a bit (2 dB or so).

I have used this combination since '95, no sub, and pulled into the room a bit, away from rear wall reflections. At that price, hard to go wrong! Good luck.

Thanks for all the feedback. Anyone has any input on the AR9 speakers. It is my understanding that they are one of the few speakers that truly don't require a sub. I also see that these have stood the test of time like the Dunlavy's My only concern with the Dunlavy's is having to use a sub the same issue I have with my Vandy's love the speakers and how they perform just no bottom end. While the Dunlavy's are a great deal I am on a budget so if i go with them and need a sub ill be out of luck funds wise.

2channel, suggest start another thread for AR9 speakers to get more and responses on those speakers...

Perhaps it's just me, but I wouldn't describe the Vandy 2's as having "...just no bottom end.".

Unsound what's your thoughts on the Vandersteen 2ci speakers? Maybe it's just me but they have bottom end just not a lot but what bottom end they have is accurate and nice. I don't think they would fair well in the bottom end without a sub or 2 I hope the Dunlavy SCIV have more bottom end than the Vandersteen 2ci while maintaining accuracy and being musical