No free lunch

Miller: the "no free lunch" side of things is introduced in the comments section by Mr. Chris Brunhaver of PS Audio, to counter the views of Sean Casey of Zu on his take on (the advantage of) higher sensitivity speakers. Not meant as a comment on high vs. low sensitivity from my side here, but just to point out the "missing link"..

Did we all watch the same video?

The video is 2 minute long....

The engineering deep problems related to these trade-off are over my head anyway...

My post was clearly refering to the article under the video...

The only thing that i know is engineering by definition is an art of trade-off between different aspects of physical laws....

No free lunch means that NO DESIGN could be without his own perspective and design costs... Which is an evidence....

I was refering to the article under it.... 😊

The video is the subject. Paying attention to all the whacky irrelevant comments below it is like reading all the whacky irrelevant comments that flow on endlessly from, well stuff like this thread. If you want to direct my attention to some particular comment, by all means be my guest. All you did here is highlight what we already know, that audiophiles can run on and on, endlessly going off on tangents never getting anywhere.

In contrast to the video, which did actually go somewhere. They showed high sensitivity speakers are both lower distortion and play louder with low distortion even when driven by sufficiently powerful amps.

But that is a subject this crowd studiously avoids. Why? Now that is a very interesting subject. Why is it being avoided?

Okay, people whined so I read the post. Now again I ask, are we even talking about the same thing? Because, still:

1. Nothing about a free lunch!
2. Nothing about impedance!
3. Nothing about tradeoffs!

Just more armchair audiophool blather that does exactly what I said, studiously avoids the fact that high efficiency speakers play louder and sound better with less distortion!

The video talks about how they sound. Everyone else is blathering about all their made up reasons why that might be.

Furthermore, this clown isn’t even trying to do that! The whole point of his rant is to discredit the guys in the video!

Well, hearing Sean talk about this doesn’t inspire much confidence about him knowing the “why” or being able to discuss the positives and negatives.

That’s a direct quote. The first sentence. Makes clear his whole point is to discredit- to prove why he doesn’t have much confidence.

Furthermore, he's not discussing the positives and negatives. He's explaining why! Dude is so determined to make his predetermined point he doesn't even have time to listen. It really is all narrative, all the time!

This thread so far is a great example of why I don’t have much confidence about people here knowing what they’re talking about. Sorry. But it really is all narrative, all the time!  Can’t watch a video, can’t even make any sense- where’s the free lunch? Impedance? Tradeoffs?