@ieales --
"If high efficiency speakers are so darned good, why did the industry move away from them? So electronics makers could sell more expensive Power? Methinks not."
Actually more power got less expensive with the advent of the transistor, at which point Edgar Villchur also made his entry with his "acoustic-suspension" AR-1’s as a much smaller and much less efficient speaker package - a package that needed the extra power, of course.
It was and largely still is about (size-)convenience and the introduction of a mass domestic market, albeit at the time (and reiterated today by the likes of John Atkinson) it was sold off with the marketing bling as offering the same extension from a fraction of a size with less distortion. What’s not to like?
Well, Mr. Atkinson was (and likely still is) an avid supporter of MQA, so let that seep for a while like a good Earl Grey.
In the context of this thread it’s about thermal compression/distortion/modulation, and there’s no escaping physics here with regard to overall size requirement of a speaker system that naturally accommodates high efficiency, and thus is much more impervious to thermal issues.
The question though also seems to be: does it matter, or how much does it matter in a domestic environment with typically moderately sized listening rooms? Here’s a quote from yet another fine article supplied by poster @ditusa on the subject of efficiency:
"In all fairness, this limitation in dynamic range [with a small, inefficient speaker system] is of little interest to many listeners. At "average" loudness, neither type of system is apt to be momentarily overloaded. But the difference can be easily demonstrated under the right conditions. The man who wants to hear the smash of cymbals, the "bite" of a Steinway grand, a full concert intensity, will not be able to duplicate these sounds readily with a bookshelf-type loudspeaker system.
"This is all very interesting, no doubt," says the prospective costumer, "but you still haven’t told me which type of system is better."
The answer is that if all other considerations can be ignored, a good big system is almost always better than a good small system."
http://www.lansingheritage.org/images/jbl/reference/technical/efficiency/page03.jpg