Speaker ratings, how to interpret?


Can someone clue me in on how to interpret the impedence side of speaker ratings? The sensitivity in dB is pretty straightforward but the impedence ratings are less intuitive (for me anyway). So when a speaker is said to be nominally 6 ohms, minumum 4 ohms, what is this conveying? Especially in relation to choosing suitable amplification.

My confusion centers around the link (or lack of) between the dB and ohms ratings. Example, speakers having the same 91dB rating but one being nominally 4 ohms, the other 8 ohms. What will be the practical difference when choosing an amp?

Is there a layman's reference (book, internet, etc) for these sorts of questions?

TIA,

Thomas
tmitchell
In many cases(i will try to bring my point) the low efficiency speaker can be successfully driven with low-wattage amp with almost no compromise meaning "2 tone speaker with 1 tone amp" and also the other way arround: some of the efficient speakers realy need a helluvapower to drive them?...

As far as I know that's where the load plays the biggest role in the speaker. Despite all efficiency ratings tests, different freequencies will create a different load to the speaker. The speaker impedance has mainly inductive nature which has the relation X=wL where X is inductive reactance and w is natural freequency and L is inductance respectively. So on the higher freequencies the impedance is higher and respectively on the lower freequencies the driver(s) are pasing higher current i.e. create a heavier load to the amp.

To my opinion, the dB efficiency of the speaker isn't realy important parameter. Does anyone listens music higher than 100dB in their homes? I believe that there are only a few.
If you're not one of them than on the simple calculations to bring 86dB efficient speaker to the level of 100dB you will just need 35Watts.

It is possible and many of us know that it's possible to successfully build up a front end using inefficient speaker and low-powered amp(Not sometimes helpful advices such as "just listen and decide for yourself") if the speaker load is relatively stable and has only <=2Ohms load difference.
I've been experimenting with my 86dB/W/m rated Totem Forests driving them with 35W/ch Pathos towers which are 15Watts bellow the recommended power -- simply no compromise!

The different case comes when you need to "pump" a large or huge room(still I wouldn't pay attention to the dB).

BTW the main advantage of low-efficient speakers is load stability or at least a higher possibility for the load stability.

And finally I dare to agree with Bomarc about the 2 dimensions that you can trust about the speaker.
Marakanetz: Actually, Boyk said it about ALL spec sheets. The only way to know if a particular amp has enough oomph to drive a particular speaker is to put both in your listening room, and crank up the volume (slowly!).
Bomarc, With all due respect, the only dimensions that matter are not if it will fit on your shelf and whether the shelf will hold it. Specs can't tell the whole story but they have a lot of important things to say and some basic mistakes can be avoided by paying attention to them. Listening is not the whole story. I agree that ultimately the ear has final say but the ear cannot tell if the speaker is bad or if the amp is underpowered or if the room is acoustically poor or if there is some other design problem involved. You need to use and respect both. You cannot rely on specs in the marketing material.

Sincerely, I remain
Clueless, First, we need to distinguish between measurements and specs. Specs ARE marketing material, and I've yet to see a spec sheet that really told me anything I would trust.

Now, the right kinds of measurements can tell you plenty about the performance of a speaker, but those measurements are represented by 2- and even 3-dimensional graphs, not numbers. And very few manufacturers publish such graphs.

As for underpowered amps, leaving aside the extreme cases (5-watt SETs driving huge sealed boxes), the best test is to listen for clipping distortion.
Bomarc: Well, as usual, it's hard to say clearly all you mean in these short posts and, when you make the distinction between "specs" and "measurements", I tend to agree with you. Sometimes I think some folks around here are measurement adverse and so I periodically go off the deep end.

Sincerely, I remain