What is your take on high efficient speakers vs. low efficient speakers?
Consider both designs are done right and your other equipment is well matched with the speakers. Do you have any preference when it comes to sound quality? Is it matter of economic decision when it comes to price? - power amps can become very expensive when power goes up, on the other hand large, efficient speakers are expensive as well. Is your decision based on room size? I'd love to hear from you on the subject.
Hi @mijostyn , My SET amp plays down to 7Hz -3dB. And plays bass much more in real, natural way compared to any other amplifier I had before. Experience DIYer can built SET amplifier that sounds better than most of amplifiers available on the market. It wouldn't be cheap but such amplifier can't be bought by any money and it will be tweaked and tuned to special speakers and person. Regards, Alex. |
@bache Cool down!? You’re the one using derogative names and I’m suppose to cool down. What is wrong with you? Stop deflecting and projecting your arrogant attitude to others and stop waisting my time, please. No mater what I do or say, you’d never believe it, but I bet you’d not have any problem believing in QAnon conspiracies. I know your type of personality very well. |
As an owner of Tannoy Berkeley's I would tend to prefer high efficiency speakers. In fact all of my previous speakers have tended to have been of reasonable high efficiency (>89dB). All except the Quad 57s which I could not get the best out of, but that may have been an impedance issue.
However, there must be a trade off between efficiency and accuracy, or else why would anyone bother with crossovers? Then there's also the question of damping. Heavier cone materials tend to be better damped than lighter ones, but it's arguable whether they are more accurate, especially if they are dynamically challenged in comparison. Newer materials like carbon fibre seem to promise both better efficiency and damping but not everyone is convinced. Then there's stuff like graphene which may yet be better than any we have seen so far, but there's little sign of true graphene coned drivers yet.
As ever, it's a question of trade-offs and preferences. Just which kind of accuracy would sir prefer? |
It’s about the implementation and physics. Sure you can have, say, 97dB sensitivity and honest 20-25Hz extension - that’s from a tapped horn at 20cf. volume with a high-ish fs (35Hz) pro 15," proper motor strength, not too low mms (i.e.: +150 grams) and overall complementary parameters for its specific use. The horn does the heavy lifting and fills out the extension and amplitude gap the driver normally couldn’t handle. Way smart. I would be cautious pairing high eff. main speakers with low eff. subs - it doesn’t really gel. You want high eff. and extension to boot you go the distance with size to follow and high eff. all the way; it pays off sonically and certainly is realistic - where there is a will to let size (and the required design) have it’s say. Run it all actively with high-passed mains and treat it as one speaker system pr. channel incl. subs with carefully implemented delay settings and overall filter parameters via a capable DSP - not just with the latter patched on where the (passively configured) mains roll off naturally. Just my $0.02.. |
After reading (and re-reading) all of "bache" posts, I think I understand what he's saying- "High sensitivity loudspeakers roll off rather high in the bass department". Forgive me but Isn't this captain obvious? Are there many folks that listen to high sensitivity speakers without a sub or two? My mains (104db) start to drop like a stone at around 80Hz. Sure theres still some output at 40Hz. but its very light in the a#$. I use dual subs to fill in those bottom two octaves.It also helps smooth room modes.. So after going through the trouble to blend them into the system, I would never go back to
|
