Speaker sensitivity vs SQ


My first thread at AG.

Millercarbon continues to bleat on about the benefits of high sensitivity speakers in not requiring big amplifier watts.
After all, it's true big amplifiers cost big money.  If there were no other factors, he would of course be quite right.

So there must be other factors.  Why don't all speaker manufacturers build exclusively high sensitivity speakers?
In a simple world it ought to be a no-brainer for them to maximise their sales revenue by appealing to a wider market.

But many don't.  And in their specs most are prepared to over-estimate the sensitivity of their speakers, by up to 3-4dB in many cases, in order to encourage purchasers.  Why do they do it?

There must be a problem.  The one that comes to mind is sound quality.  It may be that high sensitivity speakers have inherently poorer sound quality than low sensitivity speakers.  It may be they are more difficult to engineer for high SQ.  There may be aspects of SQ they don't do well.

So what is it please?

128x128clearthinker

Showing 2 responses by ctsooner

I don't know how to quote posts, but in reading this, I hope all have read what Tomic601 has posted above.  It answers a lot of why some top designers have lower sensitivity speakers, but are still very easy to drive, even with lower powered tube amps.  

Vandersteen and Theil are time and phase correct and due to what Tomic said about pistonic drivers, speakers like Vandersteen's will be lower sensitivity.  
Guys, it's simply not true to make a statement that a higher sensitivity speaker is more costly to make.  Drivers, cabinet material, R&D, spikes, connectors, wire, glues, finishes.... and of course how many points dealers get to sell them if selling through conventional means will determine costs, not sensitivity.