Efficient speakers v. less efficient speakers

gregm3,252 posts01-18-2006 10:47amThe most obvious differences are technical and practical -- not theoretical.
In theory, all you need is twice the energy for every 3db difference. In practise however your 90db spl/1m/2,83V will need 1000W energy to reach 120db spl and will have disintegrated long before those watts reach them!
That's assuming you have 1000Watts available to you, of course.

So, higher sensitivity allows dynamic headroom with reasonable requirements -- say 50-100 watts amplification. Indeed, if you have REALLY sensitive speakers, you can get away with less than 50 watts energy -- much easier to find than 1000

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Yep, 
That pretty much sums it up. 
Low efficient speakers all hundreds of them, have major issues. 
And suck the life blood out of the amp's ability to voice beautiful music, 
I have no idea whoever started these xover designs. But I sure wish they had not.
WE should have stayed with the 1929 Field Coil Full Rannge concept ONLY and no others.
Xovers are nothing more than a marketing scheme. And we all took the bait, Hooked.
WEll I bit the line.
There is not 1 xover design that even slightly interests me. 
Even if FREE.
No thanks. Donate the Wilsons to charity, I don't want them. 

audiokinesis2,577 posts01-19-2006 3:15pmI agree with the posts pointing out that a high efficiency system usually has better dynamic contrast than a low efficiency system.

Let me try to explain why. It's a nasty little secret almost nobody talks about.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
No doubt about it
This is the most dirty secret, *Best Kept Secret* in all audio land.
The fact that xover/low efficient speakers have serious issues, 
And labs /designers, well knowing that  its cheap to make low efficient drivers and put them in boxes and make HUGE PROFITS. 

The amount of money poured into xover box designs,  past 50 yrs, 
WE've all contributed Billions, If not Trillions to these scams called speakers. 
We've been *Had** and Most have not a clue as to whats really going down. 

aball1,998 posts01-18-2006 2:24pmYes, a big difference. High efficiency means lots of detail and resolution. Just try hooking up a noisy amp to a 100dB sensitive speaker and see what I mean. Inefficient speakers lose lots of musical information in the process.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
BAMMMM
SmackDown,
Of course most audiophiles  can not understand, nor believe what you are saying here. 
The Industry has them deaf to high sensitivity speaker designs. 
They can not hear what you are saying. 
Your words are falling on deaf ears.

shadorne7,467 posts01-20-2006 11:08amRlew,

I am only concerned that someone reading this thread will think that a high sensitivity speaker is necessarily better than a low sensitivity speaker.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
back in your day, 2006, this way so true.
Low efficient speakers is pretty much all we had. Horns were too big, heavy and expensive.
Wide bands from Fostex, Lowther were OK, and were indeed far superior to most xover desifgns,. 
But with rolls offs on boths fq ends, Folks were not so interested. 
But since 2010, wide bands have come into all new high technology and blast any/every xover design away in a  shootout.
So your statement was kind of true in your 2006 post, but now in 2021, It is true
Higher sens wide bands are fundamentally superior to xover designs. 
I am blowing the Ram's Horn, but only a few will  hear the horn (pun intended)

shadorne7,467 posts01-20-2006 11:08amRlew,

I am only concerned that someone reading this thread will think that a high sensitivity speaker is necessarily better than a low sensitivity speaker.

Unlike the general rule about a bigger box having better bandwidth and therefore being a better speaker.....there is no simple rule of thumb for efficiency.

There are indeed advantages in high sensitiivity speakers, as myself and others have pointed out, such as a better dynamic range (less compression), however speaker design requires a balance of compromises and high sensitivity is not always better.

In very general terms, ultra-efficient speakers should be avoided just as ultra-inefficient speakers should be avoided. Both will have strengths but extremes are generally achieved with large compromises in other areas instead of an overall balance in performance.

Let me give a couple of examples of how a manufacturer can achieve high efficiency at the expense of distortion;

Long coil operating in short magnetic gap gives a low cost and highly efficient driver but it increases harmonic distortion as the voice coil operates outside the linear area of the short magnet gap. Also the heat dissapation is poor in these designs....so while they are highly sensitive they do not dissipate heat as well as a shorter coil in a longer magnet gap.

Very light rigid cone diaphragms made from hard/stiff materials (magnesium,ceramic,polymers). These efficient rigid low mass cones have low internal damping and tend to have high Q resonances. This efficient choice of cone leads to higher harmonic distortion than more critically damped designs.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
There is a lot of Meat and Potatoes here and just skimming over some of your incredible tech knowledge, It finally dawned on me why Voxativ uses extremely light Papyrus paper cone materials, Super thin, super light weight. 
and a super complex super power Neo magnet design..
Got it. 
Super high tech Neo meets super light weight papyrus paper and
EXPLOSION of colors, dynamics, soundstage, presence, no fatigue, just  the pureist highest fidelity.
Got it.