My 604's at home when run on some decent power. 35-50w???? plays louder than I could ever listen, and the character doesn't change at higher SPL's like a lower efficiency speaker might. Again there are exceptions, but not many.
I usually listen to less than a watt.
Chris
p.s. the only thing I don't like about them is the dispersion pattern which is (I think) largely dictated by the horn implemented.
I usually listen to less than a watt.
Chris
p.s. the only thing I don't like about them is the dispersion pattern which is (I think) largely dictated by the horn implemented.
Chris ,
I think you are describing your amplifiers limitations more than the speakers. High eff speakers do not have more dynamics than a low efficiency speaker defining high (90+) Low ( 84db) but with the limited wattage you are running with i can understand your conclusion.
Contrary also is that high efficiency speakers tend to sound loud , but they never get soft , hence my subjective and objective observation ( measured) is that they have less dynamics ...
My neighbor has a new set of horn speakers that are 105 db 1w/m and when he listens to my current ribbon hybrids (83db) he is astonished by the dynamics and power , more than a match for his setup in the dynamic range..
Of course 35 watts would only warm the cables .......
I think you are describing your amplifiers limitations more than the speakers. High eff speakers do not have more dynamics than a low efficiency speaker defining high (90+) Low ( 84db) but with the limited wattage you are running with i can understand your conclusion.
Contrary also is that high efficiency speakers tend to sound loud , but they never get soft , hence my subjective and objective observation ( measured) is that they have less dynamics ...
My neighbor has a new set of horn speakers that are 105 db 1w/m and when he listens to my current ribbon hybrids (83db) he is astonished by the dynamics and power , more than a match for his setup in the dynamic range..
Of course 35 watts would only warm the cables .......
Chris ,
I think you are describing your amplifiers limitations more than the speakers. High eff speakers do not have more dynamics than a low efficiency speaker defining high (90+) Low ( 84db) but with the limited wattage you are running with i can understand your conclusion.
Contrary also is that high efficiency speakers tend to sound loud , but they never get soft , hence my subjective and objective observation ( measured) is that they have less dynamics ...
My neighbor has a new set of horn speakers that are 105 db 1w/m and when he listens to my current ribbon hybrids (83db) he is astonished by the dynamics and power , more than a match for his setup in the dynamic range..
Of course 35 watts would only warm the cables .......
Nope. You misunderstand completely. (not trying to start a fight or make anyone feel bad either)
I mention the low power required for nearly unlimited SPL's in my small domestic setting (16'x14').
All you have to do is consider the max spl of the average 2 or 3 way with 84-88db danish drive units, their inherent power limitations, and the average listening SPL in a domestic setting. There is more headroom for the efficient speaker than the less efficient speaker.
The 604 is a great example. It can't take power like a modern pro driver (which is generally ~500w), but the max SPL is still ~116-118db which is really, really loud inside of a house. While I could buy a pile of Scan Speak or Accuton to do the same thing ($!), a matching tweeter from said manufacturer will pull the max spl quite a bit lower.
You misunderstand completely.
I thought we were discussing absolute, you are correct in the analogy you have given , but we were never discussing any specific driver, type or application.
If the desired DB level is 105 db in your listening environment and the speaker is designed for such a specific goal it doesn't matter if it is 83 db or 11O db , it will not affect the dynamics IMO, just what you drive it.
My original comment was based on Lynn saying he was surprised the dynaudios had such good dynamics, because of it's low efficiency ! I'm saying the 2 is not mutually exclusive, as proven by dynaudio...
I thought we were discussing absolute, you are correct in the analogy you have given , but we were never discussing any specific driver, type or application.
If the desired DB level is 105 db in your listening environment and the speaker is designed for such a specific goal it doesn't matter if it is 83 db or 11O db , it will not affect the dynamics IMO, just what you drive it.
My original comment was based on Lynn saying he was surprised the dynaudios had such good dynamics, because of it's low efficiency ! I'm saying the 2 is not mutually exclusive, as proven by dynaudio...
Last edited:
You misunderstand completely.
I thought we were discussing absolute, you are correct in the analogy you have given , but we were never discussing any specific driver, type or application.
If the desired DB level is 105 db in your listening environment and the speaker is designed for such a specific goal it doesn't matter if it is 83 db or 11O db , it will not affect the dynamics IMO, just what you drive it.
My original comment was based on Lynn saying he was surprised the dynaudios had such good dynamics, because of it's low efficiency ! I'm saying the 2 is not mutually exclusive, as proven by dynaudio...
Not really. If I listen to symphonic music at 85db in my Living Room and the recording has 20db or more of dynamic range, audible compression will set in with the lower efficiency loudspeaker and will not the higher efficiency loudspeaker. That's dynamic range.
Now a Metallica recording with 3db of dynamic range is another story entirely...
Robh,
I have never said it had less dynamic capability !
Are you saying high efficiency speakers typically have higher power handling, How so ? the overall design ( type) has more to do with the power handling than the efficiency.
Tracking your volume control is not what is meant by being soft, but thanks for making my point on that .....
I have never said it had less dynamic capability !
Are you saying high efficiency speakers typically have higher power handling, How so ? the overall design ( type) has more to do with the power handling than the efficiency.
Tracking your volume control is not what is meant by being soft, but thanks for making my point on that .....
How so ....... You must be listening to some very poorly designed low efficiency speakers or using only 35 watts ...
Robh,
I have never said it had less dynamic capability !
Are you saying high efficiency speakers typically have higher power handling, How so ? the overall design ( type) has more to do with the power handling than the efficiency.
Tracking your volume control is not what is meant by being soft, but thanks for making my point on that .....
Ah, so you like low Qms speakers that are dull sounding and soft at low volume, got it
Less power in means less potential flux modulation, less heat to dissipate, and high efficiency usually includes a high Qms so less suspension related artifacts.
Chris ,
How is playing a 105db speaker with 35 watts , superior or better than a 84 db speaker with 500 watts . I don't get this big high efficiency logic with 1 watt and 5 watts, being superior
It appear to me , that you guys are describing poorly designed speakers that happen to be low efficiency, guess what , there are a lot of poorly designed speakers that happen to be high efficiency and sound like crap 2 .
Again back to lynn's original statement about the Dynaudio's ......
Cheers ..
How is playing a 105db speaker with 35 watts , superior or better than a 84 db speaker with 500 watts . I don't get this big high efficiency logic with 1 watt and 5 watts, being superior
It appear to me , that you guys are describing poorly designed speakers that happen to be low efficiency, guess what , there are a lot of poorly designed speakers that happen to be high efficiency and sound like crap 2 .
Again back to lynn's original statement about the Dynaudio's ......
Cheers ..
Last edited:
Ah, so you like low Qms speakers that are dull sounding and soft at low volume, got it
Less power in means less potential flux modulation, less heat to dissipate, and high efficiency usually includes a high Qms so less suspension related artifacts.
Never had one of those and you are generalizing to suit ......
Let me travel the road for you ..
Soft sounding is when you have very quite passages in the recording, the system get 's soft, quite but with detail ( none of that hash usually associated with high eff horns) then on crescendos , it get's big ... Si ! ...
Nothing to do with turning down the volume , the horn systems i have heard do get big , they do not get small and while they will rise to the occasion , there louder DB lacks energy so guess what , no realism .
All Horn speakers i have ever heard exhibited such, not necessarily other high efficiency speakers .....................
Back on topic, gentlemen. No more trolling. Yellow cards given.
If a low Qms loudspeaker is driven with an amplifier with a very low output impedance then it is possible that it becomes heavily overdamped & sound as described. On the other hand if you use a loudspeaker (system) with Qm of 0.7>1.0 you have a system ideal for use with a current amplifier.
Remember that a loudspeaker cannot be considered independent of the amplifier driving it.
dave
I would say that it can if the output impedance of the amp is very low. But if there is any significant output impedance then what you say is true. Most SS amps these days have very low output impedances.
Regarding the topic of dynamics - consider this. A low eficiency loudspeaker likely has a smaller voice coil - it comes with the territory. Now the smaller voice coil has less copper so its temperature changes much more quickly than the larger VC with more copper for a given amount of current. But not only that, the lessor copper coil requires more current for the same SPL. This situation is a hands down win for High Efficiency because its voice coil temperature changes for a given SPL will be a fraction of that for the low efficiency design. And this is completely independent of the amplifier power OR the speakers power handling capacity, it depends only on efficiency and SPL. These are "dynamic" thermal/resistance changes not to be confused with "power compression" which is another thing altogether.
BOX SPEAKERS. Is there a great non-horn design with high enough efficiency for Lynn's tube amps?
My boxed speaker sketches these days look like a BIG B&W 801. Two Lambda TD15S covering 20-80Hz at 96db/watt after BSC. A 10" midbass covering the 80-1,500Hz "vocal_range", and a dome or RAAL type ribbon tweeter. The main goals are 94-96 db/watt efficiency from large cone areas, and putting the vocal_range on just one speaker. Personally, a cone midrange puts the correct level of energy into my room better than a compression driver on a horn.
Today there are good dome tweeters with 94db@2.83v, and it seems possible that NdFeB motors can increase this to 96db@2.83v before a 25-28mm dome cannot move enough air to provide a 110-115db SPL. The RAAL ribbon provides 95db@2.83V. A 10" vocal_range speaker in a sealed 2 cu ft volume can provide 95db/watt over 80-1,500 before high IMD(dopler) or noticable beaming. Two Lambda TD15S in a 16 ft3 fiberglass filled ported box can provide 25Hz 96db/watt after BSC. Passive radiators cannot increase efficiency like a second woofer motor.
My boxed speaker sketches these days look like a BIG B&W 801. Two Lambda TD15S covering 20-80Hz at 96db/watt after BSC. A 10" midbass covering the 80-1,500Hz "vocal_range", and a dome or RAAL type ribbon tweeter. The main goals are 94-96 db/watt efficiency from large cone areas, and putting the vocal_range on just one speaker. Personally, a cone midrange puts the correct level of energy into my room better than a compression driver on a horn.
Today there are good dome tweeters with 94db@2.83v, and it seems possible that NdFeB motors can increase this to 96db@2.83v before a 25-28mm dome cannot move enough air to provide a 110-115db SPL. The RAAL ribbon provides 95db@2.83V. A 10" vocal_range speaker in a sealed 2 cu ft volume can provide 95db/watt over 80-1,500 before high IMD(dopler) or noticable beaming. Two Lambda TD15S in a 16 ft3 fiberglass filled ported box can provide 25Hz 96db/watt after BSC. Passive radiators cannot increase efficiency like a second woofer motor.
Attachments
This is true if we are discussing low efficiency drivers vs high efficiency drivers, not a given if we are discussing speaker systems.
In order to continue we all should first define this arbitrary speakers System
What is high efficiency ?
What is low efficiency ?
What is the design purpose or goal ( SPL, domestic environment )
For domestic hi-fi purposes it is very rare you will get into temperature deficiencies in an home environment, unless you are using very crappy drivers to begin with, X-over topology will play a bigger role in defining this efficiency and dynamics as well as the drivers. If one is to build a truly dynamic and balanced multi -driver speaker with full bandwidth you will have to give up some efficiency even with efficient drive units.
While high efficiency and power handling drive units ( mid/high freq) might not suffer from power compression as you describe they can and do suffer from acoustic compression due to their small diaphragms ( relative) and small rear chambers .
A well designed full bandwidth multi-driver system exhibiting low efficiency (84db for eg) will not lack dynamics, because of it's lower efficiency , it will do so because of it's poor design and x-over implementation.
Not necessarily true and I guess that you did not understand my post. At ANY SPL the High Efficiency will have less thermal modulation than the low efficiency.
Not true
Any thermal distortion - for a given SPL - in speakers relate to
a) efficiency
b) thermal properties of coil / motor design
This already has been discussed in any detail back then...
*If* one is able to improve on motor design more than loosing on efficiency the net result is less thermal distortion for a given SPL.
Lynn was wrong (or at least "not completely right") to connect dynamics with efficiency on a mere technically level (not sure he even really meant it that way !) - though he is certainly right that it may *usually* be the case - hence his surprise ...
Those guys at Dynaudio have had a feeling on this subject a looooong time ago and I'm glad to hear this continues to our times
Michael
Last edited:
To be possibly more precise :
Form the outcome = our perception, there are several different "departments of thermal distortion", depending on the time span we look at - but form a mere technical viewpoint its all the same.
For any further reading, I set up a page on the topic and also there is one from John Kreskovsky
Michael
Last edited: