I've not bought any power yet. Thanks for the replies. I understand the technical trade offs better, now. If one had the bass covered by a subwoofer, it seems there’s no positive, specifiable, aesthetic reason to prefer low sensitivity speakers. I think that captured every remark so far, no?
Low-sensitivity speakers — What's special about them?
I'm building a system for a smaller room (need smaller bookshelves), and I did a bunch of research and some listening. I am attracted both to the Dynaudio Evoke 10's (heard locally) and the Salk Wow1 speakers (ordered and I'm waiting on them for a trial). I have a Rel 328 sub.
Here's the thing — both of those speakers are 84db sensitivity. Several people on this forum and my local dealer have remarked, "You should get a speaker that's easier to drive so you have a wider choice of power and can spend less, too."
That advice — get a more efficient speaker — makes sense to me, but before I just twist with every opinion I come across (I'm a newbie, so I'm pathetically suggestible), I'd like to hear the other side. Viz.,
QUESTION: What is the value in low sensitivity speakers? What do they do for your system or listening experience which make them worth the cost and effort to drive them? Has anyone run the gamut from high to low and wound up with low for a reason?
Your answers to this can help me decide if I should divorce my earlier predilections to low-sensitivity speakers (in other words, throw the Salks and Dyns overboard) and move to a more reasonable partner for a larger variety of amps. Thanks.
Here's the thing — both of those speakers are 84db sensitivity. Several people on this forum and my local dealer have remarked, "You should get a speaker that's easier to drive so you have a wider choice of power and can spend less, too."
That advice — get a more efficient speaker — makes sense to me, but before I just twist with every opinion I come across (I'm a newbie, so I'm pathetically suggestible), I'd like to hear the other side. Viz.,
QUESTION: What is the value in low sensitivity speakers? What do they do for your system or listening experience which make them worth the cost and effort to drive them? Has anyone run the gamut from high to low and wound up with low for a reason?
Your answers to this can help me decide if I should divorce my earlier predilections to low-sensitivity speakers (in other words, throw the Salks and Dyns overboard) and move to a more reasonable partner for a larger variety of amps. Thanks.
Showing 12 responses by hilde45
@andrew -- I looked long and hard at Ascend Acoustics. They have great deals and what seems like amazing speakers. @melvinjames The goal for me would be to avoid exactly what you describe by buying enough power. My understanding was that if there’s enough "headroom" then one does *not* have to crank things up to get the response needed for engaging sound. Perhaps I had that wrong, but that’s what I thought I learned in this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=th8CxTk22pY |
The advice to get speakers that I enjoy and then find the amps to match is how I was initially going forward. It was the warning that I might be boxing myself in that caused me to reconsider the speakers that I had heard and enjoyed. But there are more speakers out there and some of them might be higher efficiency...so there’s no harm in just doing more listening! Of course if some delightful and expensive tube amplifiers really make a big difference to the sound, well, then, it might not hurt to consider that as a potential orienting factor for the speakers! You see how I get turned around and around! Still, it makes sense to start with the speakers. |
@aewarren Can't argue with your logic. For me, the key factor is the most revealing order-of-discovery, if you will. I get a better sense of speakers by swapping them in and out and keeping the amp constant. I am not sure if the experienced change would be nearly as great if I kept the speakers constant and swapped out the amps. This latter factor is difficult because I am not sure which speakers to get yet! I need to choose them first. Then, I'll choose among a few amps for the best component fit/match. Down the road, I can upgrade/change speakers as long as I have enough power or a fairly flexible kind of power. |
Thanks, unsound. That helps me make a bit more sense of the measurement which the page for the speakers I ordered list. I bought them for the reputation and reviews --and the notion they'd be sized well for my listening room, which was confirmed by the maker. It was only later on that I realized the sensitivity was low. Here are the stats/landing page for that speaker. http://www.salksound.com/model.php?model=WOW1 |
@lonemountain Your answer is so simple and logical. I suppose if some of the good stand mount speakers out there didn't try to do it all, they would be easier to drive and more easy to match with a variety of amps. It would be hard, though, for a speaker manufacturer to tell the consumer to get a sub with it if they want full bass. |
@lonemountain Thank you so much for your informative post. It's been a while since I started this thread, but your answer is probably the best one so far. Especially important is your statement: Low sensitivity is not a by product of reducing cost. A manufacturer could decide to build a cheap system with low or high sensitivity. A high quality company, like the one I work for (ATC), chooses lower sensitivity to improve bass response in a smaller speaker. Most high end companies with lower sensitivity speaker systems do it for the same "better performance" reason. Sensitivity is simply a measure of how efficient the complete system is, which is dictated by a whole series of choices like drivers, box, porting, etc. Jim Salk makes high quality, beautiful, and well-reviewed speakers, and I started this post because some that I ordered were 83 db. He is a very good example of why the claim you've just rebutted is wrong. |