Speaker sensitivity vs SQ
also, as an ESL owner, I think about the sonic impact of transformers and edge clamping distortion as well as energy storage in the panel....ain’t no free lunch Don't forget flexing and subtle mechanical movement of the panel :-). Good post tomic601. Lots of hand waving but at the end of the day you are either having accurate, low distortion movement, no matter the efficiency and amp, or you are not. |
This "signal to noise" ratio thing has implications for the sense of envelopment as well: The further down in level we can still detect the reverberation tails on the recording, the stronger the perception of the recording venue's hall ambience. (This isn't the only thing that matters for "envelopment" to take place, but imo it's one of them.) Hence why I will harp incessantly w.r.t. acoustics and take with a grain of salt many audiophile claims, especially after seeing listening rooms. Totally laughable when they then make claims about other people's systems not being resolving enough. But I digress. Duke, I am not sure your friend has discovered something new, so much as documented what has previously been discovered, but not documented in the real world very much. This paper is a bit of an oldy, but still a goody. It's from 1992. Okay, it just seems old: https://pearl-hifi.com/06_Lit_Archive/15_Mfrs_Publications/Harman_Int%27l/AES-Other_Publications/LS_... There is a good discussion on driver structure as it relates to heat transfer. Interesting that relatively old Alnico, which is relatively inexpensive, but still more expensive than ceramic, has great thermal properties. We audiophiles are to blame (well some of us are). Take one poor measurement to sound correlation (70s/80s and distortion), throw in another weak one (CDs), and as opposed to screaming for better measurements from manufacturers, we let them use it as an excuse to no longer provide measurements as opposed to providing better measurements. If your friend can measure it, then speaker manufacturers can, but they don't because measurements can't possibly tell you how something will sound ..... Oh well, reap what you sew. |
@tomic601 , that makes no sense at all. If you go into an actual natural environment, short of being in a cave, or very close to a cliff, or in front of a large tree, the only source of reflection is the ground, and normally that is dirt and somewhat soft (absorptive) ground cover. Trees by virtue of being somewhat round, make excellent diffusers. That negates your whole argument right there. Also negating your argument is your room is not the recording studio, or the concert hall, or the church. For the most part you want to negate the impact of the room so that the acoustical cues in the recording are clearly communicated to the ears/brain and you hear what was recorded. Removing early/loud reflections via speaker placement, broad band absorbers, and diffusion absolutely will do this. Close late reflections are bad too. I expect few people have actually heard stereo speakers in an anechoic chamber. Contrary to popular opinion, it is not bad at all, with pin point natural imaging. There is a big difference between audio reproduction and a new sound created in a room. Voices sound weird in an anechoic chamber because there is none of the expected echo. Recorded music sounds predominantly natural because the echos are already built into the recording. Your eyes and brain may be at odds though. That nature you mentioned? Predominantly it behaves more like an anechoic chamber w.r.t. music reproduction than it does the average listening room. |
@audiokinesis , @erik_squires , Trying to dig it up, it's around here somewhere, but I had a good paper or two on electronic (DSP) correction of thermal compression both copper and magnetic. It is yet another reason why active speakers will rule the high end roost eventually. Passive will never be able to accomplish what active will be able to. For subs, active position feedback already can correct for this. |
Mahgister, This will be my last reply to you because you continue to demonstrate no ability to understand or from where I am standing even attempt to understand. You just get your self all in a huff and go nay nay nay about stuff you are grossly and woefully lacking knowledge on. You embarrass yourself. It is a fact verified by science that speech recognition is greatly improved with some early reflections... Which one and the timing with late reflections is an acoustical complex problem not to be solved by dogmatical ignorance... Clearly you don’t understand the discussion, but feel free to clog the thread with ramblings. Reproduction of sound/music, is NOT the same as creation of sound/music. Most music is mixed near field in setups that tend to have little in the way of early reflections. I am sorry that you cannot understand the difference between recording speech in an anechoic chamber and playing back speech recorded in a regular room and then played back on stereo speakers in an anechoic chamber. Have you never used headphones? Floyd Toole specifically talks about using reflections to gain a sense of space. That is a taste thing. Gain space, loose imaging. You will note in my comment about imaging of stereo speakers in an anechoic chamber being laser focused. Want to guess why that is? Try to think more, and contradict me without adequate information less. You may learn something. «I expect few people have actually heard stereo speakers in an anechoic chamber. Contrary to popular opinion, it is not bad at all, with pin point natural imaging.»Complete non sense... Again, you clearly do not understand, even though I repeated it, several times, that creation of sounds/music is much much different from reproducing it. I don’t know what else I can say except spend more time reading (listening) and understanding and less time reacting. You will be farther ahead. The rest of your diatribe / attempted attack on what I wrote is just more of the same so wasting my time pointing out what you wrote that is wrong (probably all of it, I got bored reading it) would waste my time and clog the thread. I will leave you with a little tidbit. Do you know what a lot of enterprising hobbyists do who can’t afford anechoic chambers, and need better measurements do when building speakers? .... They take them outside. Why? -- no reflections (again! except the ground as noted). Have a nice life Mahgister. p.s. "Sound in an anechoic chamber sound a bit like headphone, said Floyd Toole, the sound is in our head" ..... this is not remotely true. Not at all. I am not sure why Floyd Toole said it, and several, including me, who have heard stereo playback in an anechoic chamber called him on out on it. Usually (almost always) people only have 1 speaker in an anechoic chamber, so it is quite possible he never actually heard stereo playback in an anechoic chamber even with all his experience and was talking off the cuff. I was doing contract research on some advanced signal processing and had multiple speakers in the chamber. IF, and it is a big IF, you actually thought this through, in an anechoic chamber, with stereo speakers, all the social clues are there for angular position, depth, and some simulated height potentially from frequency shaping. None of that changes in an anechoic chamber. In fact, absent reflections, these items are all clearer. |
alexberger330 posts You don't have to have a highly efficient speaker to overcome dynamic compression in normal usage. As the article points out, there are methods of voice coil design, speaker design, material choices, etc. that can all mitigate these problems, hence probably why there are 100's if not 1000+ speaker designers, but very few professional driver manufacturers, and why top speaker companies design their own drivers. It is also a reason why active speakers will be necessary for the absolute in sound recreation. |
Realworldaudio, While I agree with some of what you wrote, ie that high eff speakers will reveal more amp issues, I can't agree with much else. They won't reveal any more of the signal chain than the amp. I find other statements mainly conjecture based on implementation and nothing about hi/low eff. Low efficiency speakers are not more dynamic and their bass is not more natural. If you are running SE tube, good chance you have some frequency anomalies you like and those anomalies can be conducive to low level listening. |
