or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Speakers › HT: Has anyone ever moved from high sensitivity speakers BACK to low sensitivity?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

HT: Has anyone ever moved from high sensitivity speakers BACK to low sensitivity? - Page 2

post #31 of 675
Quote:
Originally Posted by omegaslast View Post

After receiving my QSC K12 and comparing them to my old monitor audio RS6 i cant believe what ive been missing out on... having a speaker that can hit peaks of 120-125db in my room is a totally different movie experience.

My room is 19x13' sealed.

The question is if anyone has ever gone back to low sensitivity speakers in their theater after hearing high sensitivity? and why?

Im going to go out on a limb and say that the only people with low sensitivity speakers in their theater have never heard high sensitivity speakers or require high WAF. or maybe their room is 12x12

Yeah. I tried some 135dB-rated dual 15" Yamaha cab pro speakers that cost $1500/pr and they sounded like crap compared to my $300/pr Infinity P362. So yeah, I returned those "high efficient" speakers back to the store. Sure they played loud in my 18" x 20" room that is very open to 3 sides. But so what? Who cares if they don't even sound as accurate as my $300 P362?
post #32 of 675
Quote:
Originally Posted by coytee View Post

Touché

There, fixed it for you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by coytee View Post


or, was that Viola?


post #33 of 675
Quote:
Originally Posted by coytee View Post

I did. I was over all underwhelmed at the dynamics I was listening to however, the big room with the surround sound electrostatic type system sounded good for what it delivered.

Did you pass thru my room (513)? Don't recall anyone from AVS being there.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AcuDefTechGuy View Post

Yeah. I tried some 135dB-rated dual 15" Yamaha cab pro speakers that cost $1500/pr and they sounded like crap compared to my $300/pr Infinity P362. So yeah, I returned those "high efficient" speakers back to the store. Sure they played loud in my 18" x 20" room that is very open to 3 sides. But so what? Who cares if they don't even sound as accurate as my $300 P362?

The QSC K series is a whole 'nother kettle of fish there sport. As are Gedlee products, Audikinesis, etc, etc, etc. Like the majority here, you have no exposure to hi efficiency high performance designs...and the resulting fidelity to reality unobtainable with the lo-eff "hifi" type designs, due to dynamic compressions not present in real life. Come up to CapFest. I'll show you what 97 & 101db/watt can sound like . I'm sure others will be there too.

cheers,

AJ
post #34 of 675
Quote:
Originally Posted by AJinFLA View Post


The QSC K series is a whole 'nother kettle of fish there sport. As are Gedlee products, Audikinesis, etc, etc, etc. Like the majority here, you have no exposure to hi efficiency high performance designs...and the resulting fidelity to reality unobtainable with the lo-eff "hifi" type designs, due to dynamic compressions not present in real life. Come up to CapFest. I'll show you what 97 & 101db/watt can sound like . I'm sure others will be there too.

cheers,

AJ

Well, he said nut'n about "High Performance"......only high "Efficient".

So these QSC K12 speakers actually sound better than the Yamaha S215?

What is the best sounding high efficient speaker for around the same price? QSC K12?
post #35 of 675
Quote:
Originally Posted by AcuDefTechGuy View Post

Well, he said nut'n about "High Performance"......only high "Efficient".

So these QSC K12 speakers actually sound better than the Yamaha S215?

What is the best sounding high efficient speaker for around the same price? QSC K12?

3 Pi with B&C tweeter. Cost a little more, but certainly "hifi"

http://www.pispeakers.com/catalog/pr...products_id/97

post #36 of 675
Quote:
Originally Posted by AcuDefTechGuy View Post

Well, he said nut'n about "High Performance"......only high "Efficient".

So these QSC K12 speakers actually sound better than the Yamaha S215?

What is the best sounding high efficient speaker for around the same price? QSC K12?

Looks like you could use a couple more speakers. You can start stacking them.
post #37 of 675
Quote:
Originally Posted by RMK! View Post

Looks like you could use a couple more speakers. You can start stacking them.

Well, my family room (kids running around ) actually only has one pair of cheap speakers (P362).

So several years ago, I bought 2 Yamaha S215V from Guitar Center. Only problem was, they did not sound very good at all compared to the P362.

So I guess I should gave tried the QSC K12 instead.

I chose..............poorly.
post #38 of 675
I went from high sensitivity speakers back to lower sensitivity speakers due to my preference for great two channel music performance. My high sensitivity speakers were great for movie watching but did not deliver the magic in stereo music listening their replacements do. It is not even close. I also realized that my lower sensitivity speakers get uncomfortably loud in my room anyway so I wasn't missing much for movie watching.
post #39 of 675
Quote:
Originally Posted by AcuDefTechGuy View Post

Yeah. I tried some 135dB-rated dual 15" Yamaha cab pro speakers that cost $1500/pr and they sounded like crap compared to my $300/pr Infinity P362.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AcuDefTechGuy View Post

Well, he said nut'n about "High Performance"......only high "Efficient".

So these QSC K12 speakers actually sound better than the Yamaha S215?

Ah, those look to be $1200 a pair without negotiating, with 42Hz -16KHz frequency response at -10 dB and carpet finish. I don't expect Yamaha makes them with high fidelity in mind. For $1000 you could have tried a pair of used Klipsch La Scala as a better example of high sensitivity and fidelity speakers.
post #40 of 675
Quote:
Originally Posted by psgcdn View Post

Ah, those look to be $1200 a pair without negotiating, with 42Hz -16KHz frequency response at -10 dB and carpet finish. I don't expect Yamaha makes them with high fidelity in mind. For $1000 you could have tried a pair of used Klipsch La Scala as a better example of high sensitivity and fidelity speakers.

Oh, I have auditioned a few big Klipsch models. I did not like the sound of any of them. I thought the cheap P362 sounded better than Klipsch La Scala too.
post #41 of 675
Quote:
Originally Posted by AcuDefTechGuy View Post

Oh, I have auditioned a few big Klipsch models. I did not like the sound of any of them. I thought the cheap P362 sounded better than Klipsch La Escalate too.

Listen to some Klipsch KG series speakers. I find them to be very efficient and smoother than the Infinity. They will not compress at higher volumes.
post #42 of 675
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrlittlejeans View Post

I went from high sensitivity speakers back to lower sensitivity speakers due to my preference for great two channel music performance. My high sensitivity speakers were great for movie watching but did not deliver the magic in stereo music listening their replacements do. It is not even close. I also realized that my lower sensitivity speakers get uncomfortably loud in my room anyway so I wasn't missing much for movie watching.

High sensitivity and two channel enjoyment are not mutually exclusive.
post #43 of 675
Just like every cone and dome speaker is not hi-fi, not every hi-eff speaker is hi-fi.

FWIW my horns were a pretty major improvement (in fidelity) over the B&W Matrix 801's they replaced.
post #44 of 675
Quote:
Originally Posted by AcuDefTechGuy View Post

Oh, I have auditioned a few big Klipsch models. I did not like the sound of any of them. I thought the cheap P362 sounded better than Klipsch La Scala too.

That's funny.
post #45 of 675
Quote:
Originally Posted by psgcdn View Post

That's funny.

It's really funny when the word "high fidelity" and "Klipsch" are used in the same sentence.

Even the $20K Klipsch Palladium has terrible measurements on Stereophile.

The cheap P362 has better on-axis and off-axis than the $20K Palladium. That is funny.

http://www.stereophile.com/content/k...r-measurements
post #46 of 675
So you say, still think it's funny.
post #47 of 675
Quote:
Originally Posted by AcuDefTechGuy View Post

Well, he said nut'n about "High Performance"......only high "Efficient".

He inferred it. They are definitely not mutually exclusive. Unfortunately, as you can see, many's exposure to "hi eff" is synonymous with Klipsch et al. Ouch. Not what I'm talking about at all. Far more advanced low diffraction horns aka waveguides exist. Geddes, AK...and yes, the K12s. Not harsh at all, much like your "hifi" speakers, but with uncompressed dynamics - far more "real life". Maybe not with Bieber, but with Firebird Suite, etc. quite different.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AcuDefTechGuy View Post

So these QSC K12 speakers actually sound better than the Yamaha S215?

No idea, never done a direct comparison and even then, would only be my subjective opinion. I would very much suspect so based on my knowledge of their technologies.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AcuDefTechGuy View Post

What is the best sounding high efficient speaker for around the same price? QSC K12?

No idea. "Best" is rather illusive and subjective.

cheers,

AJ
post #48 of 675
As long as you've got the power, sensitivity shouldn't matter all that much. At least, as long as you're not running something with a ridiculously low sensitivity.
post #49 of 675
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrEastSide View Post

As long as you've got the power, sensitivity shouldn't matter all that much. At least, as long as you're not running something with a ridiculously low sensitivity.

Not true at all

88db 6.5" woofer in all sorts of speakers that people often recommend on avs
1 watt = 88db
4 meters away from that speaker = rule of thumb 12db drop (6db at 2m, then another 6db at 4m) = 76db!

Ouch.

Lets throw some watts at this "home theater" speaker

Watt | Listening position spl
1 watt = 76db
2 = 79
4 = 82
8 = 85
16 = 88
32 = 91
64 = 94
128 = 97
256 = 100
512 = 103
1024 = doesnt matter, no 6.5" woofer can take 1024watts, most will probably fry with 512 watts. Theyre wimpy little drivers.

So at your listening position you max out at 103db peaks, which is pathetic.
post #50 of 675
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrEastSide View Post

As long as you've got the power, sensitivity shouldn't matter all that much. At least, as long as you're not running something with a ridiculously low sensitivity.

That is not really true when it comes to dynamics. During short musical peaks when using low sensitivity speakers, it wouldn't be that unusual for short-term 50-100 watt bursts during very dynamic pieces. With most speakers, you will start to have signs of dynamic compression taking place even at those moderate power levels. That crescendo will not be quite as dramatic as it should be. This is exactly one of things that separates a live performance versus the playback of the performance in most folk's homes. Most low sensitivity speakers will not have the sufficient dynamic capabilties to pull it off realistically even with unlimited power on hand.
post #51 of 675
^^^^ On the technical side, you make valid points. But, in real world applications, I think you'd be hard pressed to find an average listener with a modest home theater setup saying his 88db speakers don't play loud enough. I've had 89db speakers and 91db speakers. I couldn't discern much of a difference.
post #52 of 675
Quote:
Originally Posted by AcuDefTechGuy View Post


Oh, I have auditioned a few big Klipsch models. I did not like the sound of any of them. I thought the cheap P362 sounded better than Klipsch La Scala too.

+1

I've heard Klipsch more than most other commercial speakers, it seems many of my friends are fans. I wouldn't trade my old Infinity Interludes for any of them either.
post #53 of 675
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrEastSide View Post

^^^^ On the technical side, you make valid points. But, in real world applications, I think you'd be hard pressed to find an average listener with a modest home theater setup saying his 88db speakers don't play loud enough. I've had 89db speakers and 91db speakers. I couldn't discern much of a difference.

This isn't necessarily about higher average playback levels. It's about dynamics. You can be sitting back in your seat 12 ft from the speakers listening at a tame 85db when some musical peak calls for a couple of hundred watts and tries to give you 100db for a brief moment. Many of the low sensitivity speakers we're talking about can't do this without compressing the dynamics.

The average listener will not care. The fact that we are here even discussing this means that we are not average listeners.
post #54 of 675
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrEastSide View Post

^^^^ On the technical side, you make valid points. But, in real world applications, I think you'd be hard pressed to find an average listener with a modest home theater setup saying his 88db speakers don't play loud enough. I've had 89db speakers and 91db speakers. I couldn't discern much of a difference.

Actually what most people believe is "loud" is just their speaker distorting to high hell and making awful noises. Its like when some guy thinks his sub in his trunk is playing super loud when instead its just making farting noises and producing 50% distortion.

Also your 89db and 91db (if thats their real sensitivity) are definitely too close to tell a difference.. so i dont know what im supposed to take away from that comment.

Try listening to 98db vs 89db speaker and tell me its even remotely close. Unless your room is super tiny it wont even be a fair comparison because the 89db speaker will make the movie sound absolutely lifeless in a big room.

As i said before, i think the only reason people own low sensitivity speakers is because they either have to account for WAF, or theyre ignorant and dont understand the numbers and performance behind real home theater speakers.

I know i was part of the ignorant crowd, and used to recommend people dynaudio and stuff like that, when those speakers are basically a waste of money. They cost more than high sensitivity speakers from JBL or elemental design or JTR or QSC, and they perform a lot worse. They look really nice, and sound good if listening to music at low levels, but for movies theyre pretty rubbish. 99% of audio companies have led people to believe that you can get the ultimate home theater experience out of speakers like revel ultimas or wilsons, when in reality you cant, those speakers would have to defy the laws of physics, and obviously they arent. Theres a whole lot of misinformation out there that relies entirely on "our speakers are expensive therefore its really good!", when EXTREMELY simple math disproves all of that.
post #55 of 675
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrEastSide View Post

I've had 89db speakers and 91db speakers. I couldn't discern much of a difference.

Measured, or is that a manufacturer spec? 2 dB isn't much of a spread at any rate. Not like 86 db vs. 96 dB ratings at all. EDIT: omegaslast just posted the same thing.

I can't imagine in what world less efficient mains would be desirable. One reason for lowering efficiency would be to gain low frequencies, but that is what subwoofers and high/low pass XO's are for.
post #56 of 675
Quote:
Originally Posted by AJinFLA View Post

Did you pass thru my room (513)? Don't recall anyone from AVS being there.

I just meandered through the rooms on what I think was the last day. I didn't introduce myself since I didn't know who anyone was. (nor did I really think anyone would be interested in who I was )

Here's some pictures & comments of what I said after it happened. I have no idea if your room is in the group or not.


http://forums.klipsch.com/forums/p/1...3.aspx#1706183
post #57 of 675
Well, I stand corrected. I must be ignorant of true, quality sound, cause I've heard a lot of different speakers of a variety of efficiencies and I've never really thought any of them lacked in dynamics or sound output. I'm not talking super-cheap speakers either, but mid-range speakers. Maybe I need my hearing checked.
post #58 of 675
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nethawk View Post

+1

I've heard Klipsch more than most other commercial speakers, it seems many of my friends are fans. I wouldn't trade my old Infinity Interludes for any of them either.

No worries with me, I won't be harassing you to trade.
After all, I heard $100 Infinity speakers at Walmart and wasn't impressed, so, generalizing based on brand name, your Interludes must sound the same too.
post #59 of 675
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrEastSide View Post

cause I've heard a lot of different speakers of a variety of efficiencies and I've never really thought any of them lacked in dynamics or sound output.

Can you clarify "variety of efficiencies"?

You stated earlier 89 vs 91db and thats not at all what we are talking about
post #60 of 675
Quote:
Originally Posted by omegaslast View Post

Can you clarify "variety of efficiencies"?

You stated earlier 89 vs 91db and thats not at all what we are talking about

Well, anywhere from 88db to 98db. When I say high efficiency, I'm talking about the likes of Klipsch. Unless, Klipsch really aren't that sensitive and it's just an inflated number. I've compared some high-end Klipsch to other speakers with lower sensitivity and I wasn't blown away by the Klipsch or hearing details/dynamics that I'd never heard in the less efficient speaker. All I heard in the Klipsch was harder/sharper treble that almost seemed to hurt my ears after extended listening. I don't know...

EDIT: And Furthermore, a ton of companies produce speakers in the 88db to 92db range. If they suck so much and are such terrible speakers, why would so many speaker companies choose this sensitivity range? I don't get it.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Speakers
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Speakers › HT: Has anyone ever moved from high sensitivity speakers BACK to low sensitivity?