Why are high efficiency speakers preferred for low volume listening?


I am sure that this is a very basic principle, but as I peruse the speaker section I frequently see high efficiency speakers suggested for those who listen at "low levels." And is this another area that actually is "how easy the speaker is to drive (as related to its nominal impedance)" that is more important than the actual sensitivity number?

And for an example of what I am asking with that last sentence, I seem to remember when I was window shopping for speakers, seeing some Harbeth speakers at TMR with a sensitivity rated below 87 (I think they were rated at 86 or 85) but being referred to as "an easy load to drive." So would that mean that the Harbeth speakers would be good for low volume listening?

immatthewj

Showing 4 responses by elliottbnewcombjr

On Sale!

I love a bargain, part of the enjoyment of anything I have is remembering the ’find’, trade, great deal each and every time I see/use a thing, but

A bargain price is not the way to make a selection in an audio chain, especially speakers. Determine a short list of what is best/desired for that space, then search for the patience to wait for a bargain for something on that short list.

Speakers: if you want to hear them each time you awake or arrive home, walk thru the room, done,

Blue Nile

but your inquiry indicates that ain’t happening with those KEFs.

(substitute ______ for KEF above, any speaker, especially rear ported ones)

Cones (no advantageous directivity) and Two rear ports, technically different, are producing a beloved but ungodly mix of primary, secondary, .... sound reflections. Parts are working too hard to attempt what they really cannot do.

Designed/tested/measured in a Phone Booth/Foam Room, shipped like a blind sailor hither and thither, where am I??????????

Small space:

fit/appearance/performance must come together, it really has nothing to do with volume. If, like me, you want tubes in a small space, the short list needs to be efficient to minimize heat.

In any case, I advocate NEVER listening to inefficient speakers, never, make a short list of efficient speakers for each space you are dealing with, avoid the devil.

LOW Volume:

As a matter of fact, the Fletcher Munson Loudness Compensation equalization should have been the 1st thing mentioned. Our ears are LESS sensitive to low bass and highs AT LOW VOLUMEs, thus ANY speaker, any design, any efficiency will not sound best at low volume in ANY space, unless carefully placed, aimed, adjusted.

Frequencies relative to Volume, fletcher Munson

Stupidly named ’Loudness’, perhaps ’Low Volume’ would have been smarter, and poorly implemented/understood still..

Controlled Directivity (horns have an advantage over cones).

I was writing about the clarity, smooth frequency response when there is a higher percentage of direct primary sound waves (actually received, at the listening position), as opposed to too many secondary .... reflected sound waves. arriving too soon.

Horn Tweeters important because high frequencies are the narrowest,

but horn mid-range is far more important.

Toe-In Alternates, 1 or 2 listeners

....................................

Other than that, I’ve been mistaken for someone who has an opinion on the matter.

 

 

You cannot generalize, but consider that highly efficient speakers are likely to involve horns,

the throat/directivity of horns give dispersion control cones do not.

i.e. smooth ’received’ frequency response curve at the listening position (not just 1 meter away), the different relationship of direct primary and reflected sound waves

the perception of any frequency, and clarity of instantaneous peaks is/are enhanced when less reflected sound waves are involved.

dispersion, not volume

low volume is a separate issue

and there is no getting around the established facts that at the least low bass needs to be boosted at low volumes, ideally 'progressively boosted' as volume lowers.

Where's Wally? Where's Ray?

Play some Jazz, Ray Brown with others or his trio. Lower the volume, ... lower some more, where's Ray? For me, it is maintaining the Bass Player in Jazz that maintains involvement when listening at low volume. Otherwise it quickly becomes un-involving background music.

No matter how much we want to avoid the truth regarding 'loudness compensation'' (because so much modern equipment lacks solutions for it), success depends on both understanding and being equipped to solve the requirement.

you youngsters: get thee vintage features:

"Amplifiers often feature a "loudness" button, known technically as loudness compensation, that boosts low and high-frequency components of the sound. These are intended to offset the apparent loudness fall-off at those frequencies, especially at lower volume levels. Boosting these frequencies produces a flatter equal-loudness contour that appears to be louder even at low volume, preventing the perceived sound from being dominated by the mid-frequencies where the ear is most sensitive."

"Loudness compensation boosts low and high frequencies when listening at low levels so that the ear perceives an overall flatter (substitute accurate for flatter here) sound pressure level. This helps quiet sounds be easier to hear, and prevents loud sounds from overwhelming the listener."

 

OP,

thanks for catching my memory lapse and I really am referring to port/no port, omni-directional, controlled directivity.

here a KEF, there a Revel, any where you go ...

you wrote

"so I was thinking that if one was low level listening with an adequate amp, the sensitivity wouldn’t be that critical."

I absolutely agree, in theory, assuming no mis-match of equipment/space/placement/frequency distribution ’received’ at listening position. which is: an impossible assumption/comparison.

my friend’s little KEF Reference 1’s needed some serious juice (spl 81, sealed, no ports), made a great 1st impression. His mono block beasts burnt out after a while. Bass only down to 90 hz admitted to in those days. He built a table with an enormous down firing sub to that system after a while, I’m afraid to remember 30".

KEF Reference 1, sealed, no port, spl 81db

Add a port (other KEF, Revel, .....), sensitivity goes up a bit, all the way up to 86db hah, and bass performance goes lower a bit, however, now you have a much higher amount of indirect secondary ..... sound waves.

you also quoted:

"they are not finicky as far as placement." (about the ported Revels).

I think, when a port is involved, any/all locations already involve so much reflected sound ....., whereas, no port, front emanation, the placement(s) make a more discernable/measurable difference, so .... ported is less finicky isn’t necessarily a good thing.

..........................................

this becomes academic, a choice has to be made for a small room, many small ported speakers sound very enjoyable with or without a sub.