Must speakers have certain volume to sound convincing ?


Panels have no volume, yet some like them a lot. Horns are, well, horns. Small dynamic speakers never impress me, that's for sure. 
What do you think?
inna
I have Quad ESLs and they are plenty loud. Quality not quantity. (Okay... I do have another rig for the loud stuff!)
I am neither a musician nor consider myself an expert in the field of acoustics but regardless, I think the question asked by the OP is completely pointless and his (or hers) views are narrow and being expressed just to start a more pointless argument. I personally don't care how many times s/he's posted on this site but his responses on this particular topic are troll-like.
asvjerry
142 posts
10-03-2016 12:09am
geoffkait, Absolutely. And then it was subject to the space it was in, how it was set within it, the materials within that space, the equipment combination....were there others in the room (audio show ’extravaganzas’), what was being played, any predispositions you may or not have held at that given time....
inna’s ’processing of perceptions’ seems rather apt to moi’. I’m sure we as a group could essentially agree when a ’system’ behind a curtain sounds like pounded poop. It’s when we reach the ’extremes’ of our selection of equipment and the above variables I’ve noted that we launch into our perceptions of what we’re hearing....this ’n that nuance, shortfalls, strident, ’forward’, ’restrained’...we begin to parse ourselves into our subjective perceptions of what and how is happening to our ears, inside our heads. And 2psyop is right in that respect....we listen with our brains, or what’s left of them, given modern uncivilization and the daily dose of it. We’ll agree on some aspects, argue endlessly on others of what we ’hear’."

IMHO you can forget about all of that as I’m talking about the sound of the system. All those things you mention are simply variables. Each person judges the sound of any system by comparing it to the best sound HE has heard, whatever the variables happen to be. Sound quality is not absolute, it’s relative. You don't even have to have a degree in neuroscience or analysis how we hear or how the brain works


cheers

Post removed 
The OP poses a very good question that simply defines my struggle over 20 years of owning Thiel CS5i loudspeakers. Until very recently, I was increasingly compelled to listen at very high volumes to achieve an elusive "volume of auditory satisfaction", moving through several more-and-more powerful amps to drive the Thiels to perfection at higher-and-higher volumes.

I often call upon my golden-eared wife to evaluate changes in componentry/cabling/VTA adjustment, etc. She demands a listening level so faint that I can hardly believe it, yet ALWAYS perfectly nails the sonic differences, both good and bad, at this "ridiculously low volume", and often instantly. This leads me to believe that the elusive "volume of auditory satisfaction" is definitely brain and not ear-related and qualitative, not quantitative.

Very recently, two equipment changes have fundamentally changed my listening experience in this regard. The first is replacing the incredibly powerful Krell amp with a vintage Classe’ Audio DR-9. Avoiding the usual audiophile adjectives, I will summarize the change as one that draws me into the sound of individual instrument timbres and micro-dynamics (qualitative) vs my prior insatiable need for ultimate macro-dynamics (quantitative), although the latter quality is still there in spades, should I choose to use it, with the DR-9. The DR-9 brings a beauty to the sound that is immensely satisfying. I would attribute this contrast to critical "sins of omission" by the more powerful, yet musically inferior amp.

The second change was even more dramatic: addition of a SR Powercell 10 UEF with the FEQ reclocking unit between my dedicated 30 amp lines and my componentry. The effect of lowering the noise floor several notches and whatever else this thing does to refine the sound is revelatory. The music just comes through with astonishing clarity and finesse at any volume. This has changed my whole listening approach, now consistently preferring lower volumes, not because of a hit to the sound quality at high volume, but because of the more "mind-pleasing" musical effect at lower, "VENUE AND CONTENT ACCURATE" volumes compared to before. This second contrast I attribute to critical "sins of commission" by my AC quality sans the Powercell.

I now strive to reproduce what I perceive to be the "venue and content accurate" listening level for each recording and find myself appreciating the importance of it.

In closing, I would submit that, if your system fails to provide you with ultimate musical satisfaction at "venue and content accurate" volume levels, it is due to sins of omission and commission in your AC/equipment chain that must be weeded out and my experience tells me that the pursuit of "more volume" is, over the long term, fools folly.