Dunlavy SCIV - What amp are you using?

No_regrets, I see what you mean about easy load - what I fine odd is that anyone would choose to use a powerful SS amp when a low powered tube amp (40 watts seems enough)or low powered Class A (not Classe)SS amp (60 watts?) would do the trick. I do wonder what a Music Reference RM10 (35 watts) or Atma-sphere M60s might sound like with the Dunlavys - they are superb on my equally easy to drive Merlins.

Pubul57, On the surface your point seems well taken. Still I can't over emphasize what a positive (with an already positive start) change it was going from 2 X 200 Watts per channel to 4 X 200 Watts per channel. If I recall correctly John Dunlavy recommended 40-150 Watts per channel. The Dunlavy's do drop below 4 Ohms. I've been seriously considering going to SCIVA's should good pair shows up locally. Considering everything, I don't think I would power them with much less than 150 Watts per channel of ss amplification.

No Regrets, well said about Dunlavy's performance and its 'timeless' performance parameters. Agree with you completely!

In keeping with thread's topic, I used Jadis Orchestra Ref (40 watts using KT90'S)for couple of years in my bedroom set up (smallish room)and it worked really well not wanting any more oomph. Currently the IVs are in storage sittting idle. but still looking gorgeous (i had custom black piano finish done)

My main system has the sig Vs and I have used Classe CA400's, then MBL 9011 and now relatively small wattage Zanden 9600 monoblocks (60 watts nom, 90 watt max/ch) and performance is without any complaints. Tubes give best overall performance compared to the SSs. Best performance is being had at 2 ohm tap, 4 ohm still okay (probably optimal)and 8 ohm will simply not work coherently. Hope this helps.

Hello Pubul57,

I've never heard the Atma-spheres with the Dunlavys. I might be wrong, but I always thought the Atma-sphere amps liked to see high impedance loads, something that the Dunlavys certainly are not. Ralph would be able to answer that much better than I.

As for the Music Reference RM10......all I can say is WOW. 35 watts from a pair of EL84's per channel is something else. Usually you get about 12-15 watts from a pair. With that being said, I love the sound of EL84's! I've got three EL84 amps driving three different sets of speakers....that's how much I love them! My custom EL84 amp has a very beefy supply to it and is very well built. Very low dcr and is incredibly dynamic, fast transient attachs, with great body and harmonic resolution. It is using some fantastic vintage Pilot Corp output transformers that sound great, although rolled off on the bottom end.....but very tight until they hit the rolloff point. They put out a very "powerful 15 watts" and yes, I have used them on my Dunlavys. Great in a smaller room, but not enough juice for larger rooms. I'd have to believe the 35watt RM10 would be powerful enough. I have read a lot of people do love that amp, so I wouldn't hesitate trying it. I'd love to hear it actually. I'm not sure where you are located, but I'm in Wisconsin and would be willing to have you come by for a listen.

Hello Nilthepill,

I am jealous. I have heard and lusted over the sig V's for many years. As much as I love the IV's the V's are so much better providing you have an accomodation music room for them. Unfortunately, I didn't think I had a large enough room to do them justice and therefore thought that the IV's would serve me better "in my room". I agree with you too. I love what a good tube amp does with these speakers especially with the types of music that I listen to. I had spent some time with a solid state Forte (model 4a if I remember correctly) that put out 50 class A watts into 8ohms....can't remember if it doubled into 4ohms. It reseasonably well, but honestly my custom EL84 amp with 15 tube watts with tubed rectifier sounded more dynamic and really seemed to put the flesh on the performers, so to speak. With the 845 single ended triodes....it is pure heaven.