What is your take on high efficient speakers vs. low efficient speakers?

SET amplifiers are about as silly as cable elevators.

SET amplifiers are about as silly as cable elevators.

Silly statement. 
Fortunately the easy solution is to avoid them if that’s how you feel. We can respectfully disagree with one another and just leave it at that.

Charles

SET amps are silly if you use them in the wrong system, or, if you get cheaply built crap that stint on the quality of the output transformer and other critical components (because they are simple in design, some mistakenly think they can spend less on SET amps and still get reasonable quality).  That said, I am not particularly wedded to any type of tube amp design.  My all-time favorite amp is an OTL design, my next favorite is a push pull triode amp, and the favorite among the amps I own is a push pull pentode amp; my next favorite is a parallel SET.

@mijostyn wrote:

horns are a very alluring proposition. They are efficient and there is no question they can play louder than any other type of system with low levels of distortion. You can also control the radiation pattern to limit room interaction, another big plus.

Indeed. More though than the ability to play loud with low levels of distortion is their sound at more average SPL’s with even lower distortion and the sense of aliveness in music intact (which may otherwise require higher SPL’s), the ease of reproduction this offers and the prodigious dynamic headroom that allows uninhibited transient peaks and full dynamic swings. The ability to play loud well isn’t really about stretching this envelope to the max., not to me at least, but (to stay in the car analogy) to feel that the engine has power in reserve for any occasion readily at your disposal (i.e.: sense of effortlessness), as well as - and not least - a sensation of inherent power lurking beneath. The sense of power in sound reproduction (all tied into the above) is vastly underrated, if you ask me.

Unfortunately they fall short for a number of reasons. There is no such thing as a full range horn. You are forced into having a crossover somewhere in the midrange or upper bass. Many horn systems run a dynamic woofer well into the midrange, so much for low distortion. It would be a complicated mess trying to make a line source horn system.

True, the wretched cross-over(s) and where to place them. ESL’s no doubt have a big advantage here. Trying to emulate a line source is not necessarily the goal though; within the limitations given here my effort has been to reduce the number of cross-over points down to a single one in the main speakers, and focus on maintaining dispersion characteristics at this chosen point from the dual woofers up through the horn. Being that the sound emanates from this +6 ft. radiation surface is not wholly unlike that of a large panel speaker - in its overall presentation at least. With steep filters (6th order) via a DSP and a HP on the woofers at 83Hz and a LP at just over 600Hz, distortion subjectively is very low. They move zilch even at bonkers SPL’s.

Line Source systems are the only way to get into the first 10 rows. ESLs can cover 100 to 18 kHz no problem, no crossover. They maintain the lowest distortion levels throughout that range. Crossing to a sub at 100 Hz is much less of a problem especially if done with steep digital filters.

Absolutely - ESL’s are widebanders in ways dynamic loudspeakers can’t equal. You can however effectively emulate a single source merging several drivers in a single horn as Danley’s Synergy Horns, and as far as distortion levels go - depending on where we look for them - they can be vanishing low via horn speakers as well. I have an 111dB sensitivity horn/comp. driver combo looking directly into a class-A amp with no passive filter components in between, using only factions of a watt with normal playback. That’s way low distortion levels.

The only disadvantage ESLs have relative to horns is that they are much less efficient. The fact that they won’t play as loud is not a problem because they will do 105 dB and anything louder than 100 dB is certainly damaging your hearing.

The occasional peak levels of +100dB’s found in live acoustic performances or non-compressed recording playback isn’t a problem, it’s blasting away at continuous loud levels with compressed material that will take its toll on the ears. Oh and of course instantaneous mega loud blasts like explosions or other can also be severely damaging on ones hearing.

And to reiterate: to do 105dB's peak cleanly at the listening position you need way more SPL capability than that - at least if you want to know what effortless playback really is. 

I am a huge proponent of actively driving loudspeakers. This does not mean that all the wizardry has to be within the loudspeaker. You can actively drive any loudspeaker with outboard components. I have been doing it for 20 or so years.

Fully agree, it’s what I do myself with outboard components (though not for 20 years - kudos).

There is no other way to get the absolute most out of any system and this is not IMHO. I have seen, heard and measured enough to know this is a fact. If there are any downsides to this they are far outweighed by the benefits. Trying to maintain a totally analog system is like owning a vintage Corvette. If you are a track junkie you will go a lot faster in a C8. I’m not into owning antiques. I like driving fast.

Won’t argue with that either, but I certainly respect and acknowledge that very good sound can be had in passively filtrated speakers.

@mijostyn wrote:

SET amplifiers are about as silly as cable elevators.

Don’t agree with this however - that is, regarding the SET's.