Is the most efficient speaker the best speaker?

Magfan, I have one slight beef also. If one were to take away the bias, one could often reverse the positions, and perhaps to better effect.

Unsound, is this the comment you want me to prove?:

Now the Power Paradigm offers that possibility of being that much closer to the music. The idea is that the technology is totally committed to the rules of human hearing, which I think all of us can agree is the foundation of audio; without our ears we would not play with audio gear at all.

OTOH the Voltage Paradigm is all about looking good on paper (IOW pays little attention to human hearing rules), which our ears could give a damn about.

So going to higher efficiency is clearly an access to transformation in sound quality. Of course its better!

The first paragraph seems to require little in the way of proof; I can guarantee that if we did not have ears we would not play with audio equipment. That part is simple enough.

Paragraph two is simply taking on the idea that the main issue of the Voltage Paradigm is that it produces good numbers without those numbers having much to do with hearing rules. The proof is one that I know you already have seem me expound on in the past: The Voltage Paradigm looks for constant voltage response out of the amp. Another part of its platform is distortion as low as possible. In 99 44/100ths of cases, this requires loop negative feedback in the amp.

Designers have known since the 1950s (see Norman Crowhurst- I'm not going to dig this up for you since it appears you need the history) that loop negative feedback increases odd ordered harmonic content. That violates the most important hearing rule- the one of how we detect sound pressure, which is done by listening and measuring the the amount of odd ordered harmonics. Obviously if these harmonics have been enhanced (distorted) even slightly, we can hear it and it will the difference between what we call 'good sound' and what we call music. The paragraph closes with the simple fact that our ears don't listen to numbers on paper. Your eyes are better suited to that task.

The closing paragraph simply points out that the higher efficiency drivers are better suited to Power Paradigm technology, which from the previous paragraphs we saw pays closer attention to the effects of distortion upon the ear. That is why I used the word 'access' and 'transformation' as when this approach is used the results are instantly audible to anyone- it takes no golden ear to hear.

Did we have the conversation about what Chaos Theory has to say about amplifiers with negative feedback?

Atmasphere, thank you for your thoughtful response. It's a bit late at night now, but I thought you deserved a speedy reply.

You have not offered any proof that: "Now the Power Paradigm offers the possibility of being that much closer to the music."
Or that: "OTOH the Voltage Paradigm is all about looking good on paper (IOW pays little attention to human hearing rules), which are ears could give a damn about."
or that: "So going to higher effciency is clearly an access to transformation in sound quality. Of course its better!"

I'm confident that some of us can quite easily hear some of the results of those measurements that you choose to discard. It would be just as easy (if not easier) to make a speaker with a lower impedance ( and hence probably less efficient, at least for amplifiers that might typically be classified as power paradigm amplifiers) to have a narrow impedance swing. In fact many such speakers already exist. The use or non use of negative feed back is not the exclusive province of any of the popular audio amplifiers technologies.

At exactly what levels do we find odd harmonic content objectionable? It has been suggested for example that some people prefer 3rd order harmonic distortions to 2nd order harmonic distortions. I would suggest to you that it's quite possible that some of the objectionable artifacts you describe could easily be swamped by other greater objectionable artifacts that the alternatives replace them with.
We might not listen with our eyes, but we can certainly put measurements in proper scale and use them to confirm and compare. Without such tools, we're only left with opinions.
What is efficient use for one tool, might be inefficient use for another tool. Though I'm not convinced that it's the most important consideration, so called less efficient speakers can and do comply with the power Paradigm. Fortunately, the amplifiers best suited for those speakers are also capable of adjusting when necessary, without stumbling to the inevitable peaks and valleys that real world speaker loads present.

You have previously posted here about Chaos Theory and amplification. With all due respect, a loose connection to a theory doesn't provide proof.

As always, I enjoy our conversations here, I've already begun to look at some of the items you've referenced. Thanks for the leads.

Un,
I'm not familiar with the rest of the conversation about Chaos......But will say that a proper theory allows predictions which can be verified.

The answer to this question will be based on your personal set of preferences. There is a clear differnce between SET's, higher power SS amps, horn and cone speakers.

Personally, I have rarely heard a higher output Class A/B, SS amp I could live with. The only exception is an amp I could'nt afford, the Dartzeel integrated. In general, I find the set of choices implicit in a higher powered design, produces a sound I dislike. I like tubes and SET's in particular. On the other hand, I have'nt found a Horn speaker I have enjoyed, which means I am not going to find a speaker with 100+ DB sensitivity.

My choices then, tend to be limited to conventional cone speakers of higher sensitivity, with higher output SET or other Class A Amp. I am willing to accept the loss of base extention you tend to find in cone speakers about 92 to 96DBs, as I am a classical, Singer Songwriter, Jazz kind of listener. So, I am using 96db sensitivity Daedalus DA_RMA's with both a 20watt Ayon Spark SET and 50watt Class A hybrid, Pathos Inpol. This combination is ideal for me, it won't be for others with different priorities. It also means there is'nt an ideal combination, just as others have mentioned, a particular set of compromises in Speaker and Amp design, that suits your needs. Vive La difference