Amplifier stability with very low impedance, high efficiency mid/tweeter section???


I've been looking for this information everywhere but can't seem to find a clear cut answer.  I understand that a very low minimum impedance like 2Ohms is a very difficult task for most amplifiers to drive and may even damage it.  But it's also my understanding that this is a current, not a voltage problem.  In other words, say we had an MTM speaker that was used ONLY as a midrange from 200hz up, so it wouldn't have to play bass where most current is required.  And say it also has a very high efficiency of 97db but also a very low impedance of 2 ohms.  Would this be a problem for most amps?  Could it damage the speakers? I'm thinking no since the amplifier wouldn't have to put out much voltage or current to output sufficient SPL.  But what's the actual answer????

poseidon1500

Showing 1 response by waldenpond

Ralph (atmasphere)- Thank you for all you clear and concise info. 

Question: What about the potential use of autoformers to improve impedance matching? ,,. e.g., Paul Speltz' autoformers:, quoted here (not a recommendation, I I have no connection or financial interest, just an example):: 

It is well understood the importance of getting a well matched amplifier for your speakers, or vice versa; getting the proper speakers for your amplifier. Now you can make virtually any amp/speaker combination work well together with the ZEROs.

The ZEROs are the simplest type of transformer called an auto transformer or autoformer. They are used to multiply the impedance of any speaker so that it "feels" like the optimum load for the amplifier being used. They are very helpful in matching speakers to amplifiers. By adjusting the speaker's impedance, both the damping factor and the maximum power transfer of the amp/speaker can be tailored for best sound. Almost all amplifiers sound better when driving a higher impedance speaker, simply because amplifiers produce less distortion when driving less current." 

 

Of course, more wires & connectors, etc.

Thoughts? 

Thanks, 

Ken