Is the most efficient speaker the best speaker?

Comparing a planar to a horn is like comparing a slingshot to a rifle.

When was the last time you attended a concert or a sporting event in a stadium or arena where planar speakers were used for sound reinforcement?

If your answer is "never", then maybe you were listening to horns. And maybe horns were used because the deluded engineers are horn zealots. Maybe if they had the sense of a weseixas they would have used panels instead.

Or, maybe horns were used because they project sound better and convey dynamics better.

The arguments above comparing 200 watts on a planar to 2 watts in a horn are silly. If you want intimate presentation in a confined space, then SET might be your best choice. But if you are looking for the Power and the Glory, then put your 200 watts on the horns and forget that planars exist because you won't be able to hear them.

I own a Prius and I love it - but I'm not going to get in a pissing contest with truck owners over towing capability. Planars are nice in the drawing room - they allow for polite conversation.

Anything scientific to add macrojack?....thought so, this is not about horns vs the world , so no need for your insecurities to fly !!!

We are discussing sensitivity more over i'm trying to point out it is not as simple as comparing the published numbers, but what we really need is to determine what is low/med/high sensitivity.

Eg: is it ,

low ... Below 86db/w/m
Med..... Below 96 db/w/m
high ... below 106 db/w/m

Then we will now have to determine, direct radiator, waveguide,planer/linesource, conical horn/hybrid, full conical horn system.. et al ...

Then there is application .. easy as most if not all are discussing domestic listening environment, so your auditorium straw argument wont fly and is not necessary.

Then there is impedance magnitude and phase, critical in determining how we are going to drive the beast..

Fact is most planer/linesource will easily exceed 100db in most listrening environment as will some of the larger direct radiators, so there is no shortfall in the domestic environement when it comes to dynamics, regarless of weapon choosen, of course amplfication for the application will have to be correctly choosen, that's academic.

So IMO sensitivity numbers by themselves does not a better speaker make ..

regards

Note:

OP had used the word efficiency, but it was obvious he mean't sensitivity..

regards,

Grannying,
Thanks for the kind comments, I have equal admiration for your system(Dude and Sound Labs, nice). The bass performance in my system is very good although a 300b SET is`nt the final solution for bass freaks of rock and electronica,hip-hop etc.The Frankenstein amps do acoustic jazz bass and classical bass/cello in a very gratifying manner with much speed,articulation and texture. There`s natural bloom and warmth without crossing the line into fat,bloated and sloppy characteristics.Of course my speaker`s 94 db efficiency and 14 ohm load make for a good match with 8 watts of power.

06-26-11: Weseixas
Hello Al,
Per meter = doubling of measured reference distance..

So therefore in your example, when you said ...

06-26-11: Weseixas
@ 15 feet the 100db/w/m horn would have an out put of 76 db/w ... To achive 94 db@5M the SET.horn combination in my eg would require 64 watts from it's 20 watter

... the 76db/w figure should be 86db/w (as I indicated in my previous post), and the power requirement would be only 6.4 watts, not 64 watts.

Best regards,
-- Al