Watts are cheap, high powered SS amps with medium efficiency full range speakers can produce impressive dynamics.
High efficiency speakers will raise the noise floor, same with cheap tube equipment.
Without a very large enclosure, high efficiency speakers will lack low end due to Hoffman's Iron Law.
Bookshelf or limited LF speakers lack the necessary low end impact needed. |
Yes, Unsound, your last post doesn't make alot of sense to me, either. High efficiency speakers, especially horns but also other types, are well known for very high quality at the very softest dynamics. This is one huge reason why so many professionals prefer them. I have never found noise floor to be higher in high efficiency speakers, quite the opposite in fact. |
One of the fundamental advantages of high efficiency is it allows low level detail and microdynamic ebb and flow to be appreciated at low and modest listening levels.
There is less need to"crank it up" in order for the sound to come "alive".
This is why the higher the efficieny becomes the need for a quiet well built amp with a very low noise floor is required. These types of speaker will reveal any noise, even at quite low sound levels. The advantage is uncovering more of music`s nuance and subtle -micro inflections. |
Hi Face,
My believe as always been do what works best for you and meets your objectives,Having had much experience and exposure to both approaches, personally the high efficient speaker with lower power amplifier has been much more realistic and satisfying(not really close).
But that`s me, your experiences are different and I can certainly appreciate that. What ever road gets you there, follow it.
Best Regards, |
Having tried a few different speakers of different efficiencies in my rig over the last few days, I don't believe speaker efficiency has a direct correlation with perceived dynamics.
The two pairs of monitors I tried are a few dB more efficient than my reference towers and they appeared to lack in dynamics, I believe the lack of LF extension is directly responsible for this, although driver size could also be a factor. The towers are tuned to 20hz, meanwhile the monitors are tuned to 40hz and 55hz. The speakers contained a 10" woofer, 2 6.5" woofers, and a 5.25" woofer respectively. |
Face, Whats say your monitors are 4ohm and your floorstanders 8ohm the monitor is 92db 1 watt your floorstander is 89db 1 watt. There will be little difference in volume levels.Also one manufacturer could have estimated specs or rounded up or down etc. Now if your floorstanders are 89db 8 ohm and you compare to a 110db 16 ohm horn think you will find your increased dynamic range. |
Comparing a small monitor to larger box floor standing speakers misses the point entirely.
Charls |
So as is typical on such posts, the answer is everything and nothing. |
Tbg,
That's because the answer is all of it. Each part in the chain
contributes to the sound. Or in this case the dynamics.
It is a silly question that's why so many silly answers/non answers. |
Chad,
Actually many posts do agree that all components matter. If someone was putting together a new system, high efficiency speakers would just be a very good and logical place to start, that`s all. This would avoid the mandatory need for a huge mega watt amplifier as a prerequisite to obtain dynamics.
Best Regards, |
Charles1dad, It would appear to me that high efficiency speakers are often more huge in comparison to low efficiency speakers, than mega watt amplifiers are huge in comparison to low watt amplifiers.
It appears as though, very often high efficiency speakers cost more and offer less extended frequency response than comparably priced low efficiency speakers. Furthermore, it appears to me that many systems that use high efficiency speakers use amplifiers that have lower watt output, but those amplifiers often actually cost more at purchase and there after. All in all, IMHO, high efficiency speaker systems appear to offer less value. As such, I disagree with your assertion that "...high efficiency speakers would be a very good and logical place to start,...). |
Hi,
Unsound that`s perfectly fine. We`re clearly on opposite ends of the spectrum and won`t agree on this issue. I`ve found an apporoach that works better for me. You have also found what suits you best.
We`re both quite pleased with our systems and that`s all that matters.
Take Care,
Charles |
I couldn't agree more!:-) |
They all contribute to different extents case by case. It depends on the specific system.
The component used with the worst dynamic range is teh bottleneck and is responsible for whatever dynamics you hear or not. Improve that piece with one that does dynamics better and your dynamics should improve the most.
In most cases, it might be either speaker, amp, pre-amp or source that is the bottleneck. With digital sources, nowadays I think most decent digital sources are less likely than the others to be the bottleneck. I think the same is true in general regarding ICs and speaker wires. With most decent ones, these are less likely to be the bottleneck in most cases.
Also, its not just the individual pieces but how they interface together in terms of impedance that also matters for best dynamics. Higher ratios of device input impedance to output impedance of the device feeding it will help assure that dynamics are retained at each step in the component chain.
A common mistake that often results in bad dynamics is using a high output impedance tube pre-amp with a lwoer input impedance SS amp not designed to work well with a tube pre-amp. or similarly, a tube output source device like a DAC used with a pre-amp with lower input impedance. Both together would be a double whammy in terms of dynamics. However, a combo like this might sound very good in other ways, ie not fatiguing, smooth, involving, etc.
Another is having small or underbuilt speakers that cannot handle dynamics sufficiently,
A third is having an amp that is underpowered or not capable of driving a good pair of speakers properly to to their maximum potential. |
charlesdad1,
I understand.
If we are going down this road & i am forced to say something then high sensitivity speakers, probably horn loaded (over 100db/w), with the appropriate amp. Probably a 0 feedback amp with low damping factor is the easiest way & probably the answer the OP is after.
Massive power amps with low sensitivity speakers is a massive no no. I tried it for years...Won't end up with open free dynamics that way. |
Chadeffect, with a lower sensitivity speaker you will end up with less noise at lower volume levels, and a much better chance at having a true time and phase coherent sound. I am still waiting for a high sensitivity speaker that can demonstrate the ability to pass anything resembling a square wave. The only thing a high sensitivity speaker does better is providing more ultimate volume in larger spaces with less power. Not something that most residential users tend to need concern themselves with. |
Hi unsound,
You must have listened to some really old crap if you feel noise is an issue with high sensitivity.
I have tried numerous bits of kit on my 110db speakers & I have never heard a modern amp or whatever create any noise.
Funny you should mention phase as I am experimenting with something shortly. But I have had phase coherent speakers it's not that big a deal compared to the other gains IMHO.
If you really think horns are just some kind of PA used for filling large spaces, I guess some are & some are not. Mine can go loud but they have crushed everything else for inner detail, transparecy, involvement, dynamic freedom etc. No coloration & über speed. Electrostatic like but on steroids.
I have used just about every type of speaker design type & loved a few. But when I found spherical horns I was done. It had the best compromise.
Square wave is bogus & doesn't exist in music. But if it matters to you we can discuss it in another thread. |
Hi all ! IMHO the speakers for sure , I just went from a 90db speaker with 160 wpc to a 98 db speaker with 4 wpc . The 4 wpc setup blows away the 160 wpc setup as far as dynamics go . Also , we talk about efficiency...what about sensitivity ? (not the same thing ) And no , the noise floor did not increase ...quite the contrary . |
Chadeffect, square waves aren't the end all, but certainly are an insight into fidelity. We wouldn't accept the inability of an amplifier to produce a square wave, why would it be any different for a speaker. Some traditional dynamic, electrostatic and even true Walsh omnis speakers can do it, but I've yet hear of a high efficiency speaker that's capable of it. Seems to me that in the effort to gain high efficiency, sacrifices have been made.
I think we sometimes have different priorities, which explains the different audio systems. I would choose correct time, waveform fidelity and lack of coloration over the ability to produce volume levels well over 100 DB for my home. To each his own. |
Hi unsound,
You seem to be fixated on volume & square wave. I have had many an electrostat & planar. Quads,Apogees,ML, Magnepans & I loved them.
I can assure you that either you have been very unlucky with the horns you have heard, or you are sensitive to something I am less sensitive to. (I had your speaker some years ago too)
I would be glad to play my AG horns for you. The points you mention above I am sure will evaporate away. All you will have is a profound sense of life size, solid musicians playing in front of you, and the most powerful of emotional reactions caused by an organic musical event. I have yet to find another way of reproducing that.
I have come close in few systems over the years, with planars & powerful monoblock amps, but they were monochrome by comparison. The ML CLS2z driven by ARC ref monos was up there, as was a modded MG 3.6r on the same amps, but the Trio has layerng & purity beyond them(partly due to flea power amps). The word is palpable. The stuff you seemed concerned with as a whole are meaningless IMHO or maybe dealt with somehow. Having said all that I have also heard the AG Trio sound terrible too! System & set up are everything... |
Bradluke0, interesting comments. The 89dB/160 watt combo has a significantly greater max acoustic output than the other combo, but if you listen below 99dB it won't enter into the equation. |
Bradluke0,
What you describe in your post(Onemug also in an earlier post) is exactly my experience.
I once only had audio systems that were based on higher power amps and moderate efficiency speakers Once introduced to low power amps(high quality) and higher efficient speakers, wow! lower noise floor, much better dynamics(micro and macro) superior inner detail and nuance preservation.
The bigger realization however was the increase in realism and overall naturalness(less hifi character).
It was quite an eye opener I`ll tell you.But as unsound says, to each their own.
Best Regards, |
|
Hiefficiency speakers and flea power tube amp is one way to skin the
cat, but far from the only one.
Listening volume should be a concern. I've read regular listening above
80 db or so causes hearing loss. Hi effspeakers can be like a weapon,
and so be careful. And yes setup is everything especially with hi eff horns
which can be like listening under a microscope.
Noise floor might be more of a real issue with older analog sources than
modern digital. |
Unsound Which designs couldn't produce the square wave? And why do you feel all horns to be colored or that horn designs can not produce wave fidelity? Can you produce anything to back your claims? Please in detail explain how your measuring, what brand loudspeakers and with what equipment. And again maybe a list of hi efficiency designs you've had real experiences with. You do like to give your opinion on them so sure you must have vast experiences and technical skills. |
Who said there`s 'only' one way to skin a cat? Folks are just stating what`s worked best for them personally,what ever that may be. There`re no absolutes. |
|
Johnk,
I know you've designed with the SEAS Exotic W8 woofer. Have you tried the SEAS Exotic T35 midrange/tweeter? What did you think of its sound? FWIW, I'll be using it above a Jantzen JA-8008 driver (OEM by SEAS) as a midrange with a PHL 5011 (updated version of the 5010 driver used by Nelson Pass as woofer in his original "Rushmore" loudspeaker) on bottom. Only a moderately high efficiency loudspeaker, but a true 92-93dB that'll move lots of air. |
JohnK, is English your primary language? |
Only "sure" rather than "surely" would seem wrong. Why do you ask, Unsound? |
Hey guys, its that time of year?
Ho ho ho, Merry Xmas, Peace on Earth, and all that?
Dynamics rule! |
Jb0194 t35 has good sound but to me still needs to be used with a tweeter its also easy to damage thus why I don't offer them. I did use with SEAS woofer and in a TL with fostex woofer lcy k100 super tweeter. |
Thanks, Johnk. Nearing age 60 I don't hear much at all above 10-11 kHz, so I'm hoping I'll not miss anything without a supplemental tweeter/supertweeter! I'll keep in mind that the T35 is easy to damage. |
Mechanical grounding is the main component, basis and foundation for dynamic expression. Material choice and geometry dictate the collection speed and termination of all things that are in motion...which is everything. Most audio devices are over damped because mechanical grounding methods are miss understood and miss applied or dismissed totally. Without proper mechanical coupling and grounding termination, dynamics are lost before anything else has started. Tom |
Tbg, because he seems to constantly misread my posts. |
Whats to miss read? Posts about horns without any real experiences with them. Info he presents is mostly all bias conjecture here say. The guy mentions listening to square waves..... If you ask him to explain or provide more information to back his claims he resorts to insults. Seems a bit unsound to me. Hope he gets well soon. |
Thank you for proving my point. |
Hi all ! Onhwy61: Dont think I listen much above moderate or slightly higher levels , not sure of the SPL. I dont think the 4wpc setup gets louder than the 160wpc setup , it just seems to be more dynamic and quicker sounding . Also , since I changed to the low power hi-eff route I listen to my system much , much more . And yes , there is more than one way to skin a cat...depending on the flavor you like . |
The OP needs to restate the question as "what component(s)" since it is multifactorial. People have harped on the expected variables. I too believe mechanical grounding is important along with room construction and these things are often an afterthought. Also, source material plays a role, and is something we cannot control. There is no way to fix compressed Redbook.... |
Saki70, in my experience virtually everything can impact dynamics. I have enhanced dynamic with dacs, amps, ac filters, vibration controls, cables, and even wall outlets. So, I agree largely with Agear. |
Wow , I had forgotten about this post !
How does this sound in answering my question here ?
This is an excerp from a post asking for feedback on Reference 3a speakers :
03-29-13: Martykl
I had deCapos for quite a while. I think they employ a very specific set of trade-offs to achieve a specific result.
They combine better bass extension than most stand mounted monitors with a truly neutral octave to octave tonal balance. That's unusual IME because the lack of true bottom end energy (true of this and basically all other small box speakers) requires limiting the output thru the presence and treble region to maintain the octave to octave neutrality. Most manufacturers seem to maintain more output in the upper octaves so that the speaker sounds more dynamic. The result - to my ear - is that the vast majority of stand mounted monitors tend toward a bright voicing that would benefit from the addition of a subwoofer.
The real world result of the Ref 3a approach is a monitor that sounds really neutral. It doesn't really invite the use of a subwoofer - it would sound bottom heavy if you added one. OTOH, it definitely struck me as polite sounding and limited in dynamics.
To my ear, maintaining neutral balance at the expense of dynamic "jump factor" is a wise trade. However, IMO, that is the price that was paid in this design.
This could explain the lack of dynamics in my system .
Any comments on this explaination ?
Thank you |
I still say find Grand Veenas or at least Murata super tweeters. I haven't seen |
Unless one is using very dynamic speakers, which as you describe, you are not, different speakers are the way to increase dynamics. Amps, preamps, phono stages, cartridges can vary brand to brand and model to model in dynamics, so you can enhance dynamics without changing speakers. But, again, for sure, speakers are the way to get major improvements. |
amplifier is the main component responsible for dynamics, install a 400 watter Krell with crap CD player and crap (full range) speaker and you will still gets tons of dynamics.. it may sound like crap but still dynamics
the notion to get a higher sensitivity speaker is so that your amp can drive it properly |
Kiddman, are you saying that the Grand Veenas aren't dynamic? |
Simple question, simple answer. Speakers |
Tbg ;
I have not heard any of the Referance 3a floorstanders and
don't know if the design aspects , described by Martyk1 above , apply to them or just to the standmount versions .
Can anyone enlighten me about that ?
Thank you |
There are two ways the term 'dynamics' is used by audiophiles.
In the vast majority of cases, the word 'distortion' can be safely substituted in the conversation without changing its meaning.
This is because the human ear uses odd ordered harmonics to sort out how loud a sound is. If the system adds odd ordered harmonic distortion during playback, it will sound louder to the ear than it will show on a sound pressure meter. I can offer plenty of examples.
For this reason I am careful to not use the word 'dynamics' when referring to actual changes in volume level. Instead I use the word 'impact'.
So- substituting 'distortion' for 'dynamics' above, its likely the amplifier that many will suggest and they would very likely be correct. If you want to improve the dynamic range of the system, the best way IMO/IME is to work with speakers that do not have compression at high output levels. This usually means going to a more efficient loudspeaker.
My speakers at home are about 98 db 1 watt/1 meter. But I often use amps of 140 watts; in such conditions its pretty well impossible to clip the amps in my listening room, and the speakers don't compress until I get into the threshold of pain.
However I don't normally listen very loud- this results in the system being so effortless that it has no sense of loudness at all- you can't tell how loud the system is playing unless you try to talk to someone standing next to you. This to me is the sign of a good system- one that does not sound loud even when it is. Such systems tend to have more 'impact' as well. The two qualities go hand in hand, even though it might seem counterintuitive. |
"However I don't normally listen very loud- this results in the system being so effortless that it has no sense of loudness at all- you can't tell how loud the system is playing unless you try to talk to someone standing next to you. This to me is the sign of a good system- one that does not sound loud even when it is. Such systems tend to have more 'impact' as well. The two qualities go hand in hand, even though it might seem counterintuitive. "
Agreed. |
OF course, being hard of hearing could be another explanation for the system not sounding as loud as it is. :^)
I've heard the effect Ralph describes on some amps but not others in recent years. Mostly with tube and Class D type amps. |
