What component is responsible for dynamics ?

Great response Atmosphere. You've hit it right on the head.

Impact is a good term .
What I am refering to is the 'aspect' of a system that makes you want to tap your foot , bob your head , play air guitar , conduct the orchestra or get up and boogy !
I have another set of cheapy speakers that offer some of these characteristics . Now granted they don't have the extension , detail or clarity of my other speakers but they are exciting . If I could find something that combines these two speakers together that would be nice .

Atmasphere, I don't think the human ear judges loudness in audio. Certainly we can sense loudness outside our listening room and there it isn't distortion. I would entirely agree that more efficient speakers tend to be more dynamic, however. I once had all compression drivers in horns except for the deep bass with flyweight 1.56 watt amps. The impact on you of a snare drum would just about knock you backwards.

I really think dynamics are about the leading edge but it about low impedance ac power. Also with my recent experiences with High Fidelity Cables with the "magnetic conduction" technology, I think metals have different effects on leading edge and dynamic. These cables are substantially more dynamic than any others I have heard.

I would agree that some speakers don't sound loud when they really are. Also I am consistently playing my system at a louder volume setting and sound pressure setting than with other cables. And my wife down stairs has not once complained.

Ralph, my experience is exactly as you describe but interestingly, much more so when the Acoustat amps I'm speaking of are in bridged mode. Far more dynamic(or distorted). In either case, very life-like. In stereo it is much more source dependent.

Charles, could you please explain the difference between 'realistic' and 'Hi-Fi' sound? I've seen this comparison before but no explanation.

I don't think the human ear judges loudness in audio. Certainly we can sense loudness outside our listening room and there it isn't distortion.

Tbg, sorry to be a buzz kill, but what you think above isn't really the way it is.

*Of course* our ear/brain system 'judges loudness in audio'.

And of course, we detect differences in sound level all the time :) All I was pointing to is part of the mechanism of how our ears do it (detect the odd orders in a sound) and the fact that there is a correlation to audio.

Csontos, if I may, HiFi is good but with electronics artifacts that let you know its a stereo. 'Realistic' is where the system sounds so real that voices are scary, because you think someone is there when its really just the stereo playing.

Csontos,
Ralph answered your question the same as I have offered before in other threads.
Hifi=the ever present awareness that I'm listening to a stereo system. There's nothing that leads me to believe that the sound is from living people playing instruments, increasing the volume doesn't change this perception(it just becomes louder hifi). In other words, it sounds canned and simply re manufactured.
Realistic=A natural/organic awareness that live musicians are present and this is quite believable and one is able to convincingly established and maintain a emotional connection(thoroughly engaged and drawn into the musical performance). The sense of music from stereo system is much diminished. As Ralph said, it seems other people are in your room, it's very tactile and provokes startle reactions.
Regards,

Oh. I thought Hi-Fi was the highest rating. Thank you.

Hi Csontos,
You asked for my definition and I gave it.You certainty don't have to agree and may have your own interpretation which is fine.I just expressed how I categorize components based on what I hear and the resulting effect and reaction they provoke.
Regards,

In that case I would have to rate my system as 'Hi-Fi' since I am not fooled by it. However having said that, I can't help referring to a statement I made on another thread about a Charles Mingus true direct to disc vinyl recording I have that 'will' fool you. So where is the dividing line between source and gear? It seems potentials are at the center of this issue, no?

Last two posts are not in order. Charles, I truly did think that. I concur with your definition. It's just vernacular.

Actually, I thought Hi-Fi sums up all other hi-end terminology.

To this "hi-fi" vs. "realistic" discussion. I agree that that is how most audiophiles use the terms. However, we should not equate "realistic" with "real" in this conversation. Much as I appreciate the very best high-end audio can do, it cannot and will not ever be mistaken for a live performance, even in a world class system set up correctly in a world class space - one could tell the difference instantly.

Learsfool, It has always been my use of the question of whether or not you can tell a piano heard through a wall is real or a recording. Perhaps I'm not quite there yet with the High Fidelity Cables, but I am much closer than I ever imagined was possible.

When I use the term realistic it's relative and assumed that it isn't identical to live, just closer to that preferred natural sound than hifi's unaturalness.

My experience after playing with various audiophile components since the 80's is that the playback source is the most critical and efficiency of speakers is irrelevant in the typical home environment. You cannot get natural dynamics from the rest of the chain unless the source is clean... not jitter muddled as cheaper transports are for both analog and digital playback.
The amp has to control the speaker.. an amp with lots of watts but poor design for handling speaker impedance differences across the audio spectrum will smear the sound causing perceived poor dynamics. And components in the amp can round transients. A less efficient speaker will cause you to clip on the loudest passages if you lack the watts, but that's restriction on how loud you can play, not dynamics.

Davide256, I find nothing that you say to be true in my experience.

Active loudspeakers.

Much as I appreciate the very best high-end audio can do, it cannot and will not ever be mistaken for a live performance, even in a world class system set up correctly in a world class space - one could tell the difference instantly.

Learsfool, context plays a huge role here. If you are at home, you know already that there is not a symphony orchestra in the room. So you won't be fooled no matter how good it sounds. But what if you are at a recording studio? In this case it is reasonable to expect live musicians playing instruments live. In such a context, a good system can fool you easily!

Imo, even that premise is relative. I have no doubt there are recordings that if they can't fool you just because you know they are, you will still conclude it sounds real. I happen to have one.

I will add that this ability is far more dependent on the recording than the gear.

I would have to agree with Csontos, Atmasphere. Even in the recording studio, it is very easy to tell the difference assuming we are listening to particularly wind instruments or the human voice. Even stringed instruments and some of the percussion should be fairly easy, assuming no amplification. Now if you get into electronically produced sounds, then yes, I agree in a studio you could be fooled.