Why are high efficiency speakers preferred for low volume listening?

High efficiency plus some type of loudness contour is the ticket if you want to listen @ really low SPL's.

I've used the loudness contour in a few Quad SS preamps (33/34) and in a few Yamaha SS integrated amps with JBL S99's and Altec VOTTS.

At slightly higher SPL's, but still in the mid 70's, an odd  TDS Passive Audiophile "mystery box" did the trick though aside from being "passive" it added noticeable gain (1-3 dB).

 

DeKay

@audiokinesis wrote:

A significant contributor to high efficiency is a high motor-strength-to-moving-mass ratio, and it just so happens that a high motor-strength-to-moving-mass ratio is also a contributor to good articulation at low SPLs, making it easier to hear the details without needing to crank the volume up. 

High efficiency in and of itself is not a requirement for good articulation at low SPLs, as electrostats (with their incredibly lightweight diaphragms) tend to excel at delivering the details at low levels despite their typically modest efficiency. 

I'm thinking whether a large air radiation area may also be a co-contributor here, having to move less for a given SPL which also leads to less inertia built-up/less smear, and thereby sharper or cleaner transient "edges"? Maybe what you're saying is essentially the same. 

On Sale!

I love a bargain, part of the enjoyment of anything I have is remembering the ’find’, trade, great deal each and every time I see/use a thing, but

A bargain price is not the way to make a selection in an audio chain, especially speakers. Determine a short list of what is best/desired for that space, then search for the patience to wait for a bargain for something on that short list.

Speakers: if you want to hear them each time you awake or arrive home, walk thru the room, done,

Blue Nile

but your inquiry indicates that ain’t happening with those KEFs.

(substitute ______ for KEF above, any speaker, especially rear ported ones)

Cones (no advantageous directivity) and Two rear ports, technically different, are producing a beloved but ungodly mix of primary, secondary, .... sound reflections. Parts are working too hard to attempt what they really cannot do.

Designed/tested/measured in a Phone Booth/Foam Room, shipped like a blind sailor hither and thither, where am I??????????

Small space:

fit/appearance/performance must come together, it really has nothing to do with volume. If, like me, you want tubes in a small space, the short list needs to be efficient to minimize heat.

In any case, I advocate NEVER listening to inefficient speakers, never, make a short list of efficient speakers for each space you are dealing with, avoid the devil.

LOW Volume:

As a matter of fact, the Fletcher Munson Loudness Compensation equalization should have been the 1st thing mentioned. Our ears are LESS sensitive to low bass and highs AT LOW VOLUMEs, thus ANY speaker, any design, any efficiency will not sound best at low volume in ANY space, unless carefully placed, aimed, adjusted.

Frequencies relative to Volume, fletcher Munson

Stupidly named ’Loudness’, perhaps ’Low Volume’ would have been smarter, and poorly implemented/understood still..

Controlled Directivity (horns have an advantage over cones).

I was writing about the clarity, smooth frequency response when there is a higher percentage of direct primary sound waves (actually received, at the listening position), as opposed to too many secondary .... reflected sound waves. arriving too soon.

Horn Tweeters important because high frequencies are the narrowest,

but horn mid-range is far more important.

Toe-In Alternates, 1 or 2 listeners

....................................

Other than that, I’ve been mistaken for someone who has an opinion on the matter.

 

 

@james633 Wrote:

The negatives of horns are reduced sound stage depth (it is more or all in front of the speakers)

Not all horns are created equal, these horns have great depth of image, when the recording calls for it see here. It's been my experience in audio, that high efficiency and high power handling are two attributes that make for wide dynamic range in speakers.

Mike

@audiokinesis  , thank you for oversimplifying.  That helps.  

@james633  , thank you for the feedback on this.  I think I am getting the picture.  High efficiency doesn't take as much power to move and at lower levels not as much power is being provided to the speaker as at higher levels.  

@elliottbnewcombjr  , I am actually not the one with the KEFs, that was @zlone  .  I am trying out a pair of Revel M126Be's.  I like them so far, but after reading posts here in the speaker forum, I am questioning myself as to whether a higher sensitivity speaker would have been a better coice in the small room I listen in.  My amp does not seem (to me) to be straining in 50 wpc.  I know your opinion of triode versus ultralinear, and today I put another 5.5+ hours on them, and for the last couple of hours I went to 100 wpc ultralinear and I felt that female vocals took on a bit of an edge in that mode.  I guess the final proof (or close to final) will come in about 20 more listening hours when I follow @soix  's advice and hook up my old speakers and see how I feel about the difference.  As always, I appreciate your feedback.  It is always welcome.