HT: Has anyone ever moved from high sensitivity speakers BACK to low sensitivity? - Page 16

I once heard a line array at a friends house. I don't recall the brand but they were pretty tall as I recall.

He said it was pretty amazing that you could go to the sweet spot on the couch and sit down. As you'd sit down the focus of the sound would come into amazing detail.

If you did somethign as simple as stand up or perhaps lay down (to watch a DVD concert with your sweetie next to you?) the sound would change again.

It was literally like having your head in a vice.

Personally, I did not like it at all. I guess I move around too much to have a location in 3-D space where my head had to be located.

I'm not saying all are like that, I've only heard this pair as best I know.

For me, it wasn't a good experience however, when my head WAS in the vice, I must admit it sounded nice.

I just dont' like my head in a vice.

Well, with your Klipsch Jubilee's, you need not worry about that:)

I will tell you a story you might get a kick out of ? Back in 1982, I lived out in Seattle, and attended the Winter CES in Vegas, I walked by a room, and swore I heard a Clarinet playing, live!
It was the Plasmatronics room.
They had an Ivie Spectrum Analyzer on a tripod, and you could see it's display.
They put on some different music, and I watched the Ivie. I was shocked at how Little information there was above 4 k!

Not all arrays behave the same so you really cannot form a good opinion without hearing some different designs. There's more room for error as well and some issues can be a result of driver choices / combinations, crossovers, etc.

Hello Rick, this line array seems to offer a lot of bang for the buck.
How did you get around the horizontal comb filtering in this design ?
Or, do you agree with Roger Russell that comb filtering is measurable, but not as audible as once thought ?

I like your webpage, because you say right in the speaker description how much the Dam Things cost!

The best way to avoid the comb filtering is with a CBT design and smaller drivers. With a straight array the sound is more confined to a seated position.

Well, I try my best not to listen standing up
Speak plain English please Rick, what is a CBT Design ?

Here's a link to the information on CBT's. http://audioartistry.com/products_CBT.htm

My Son, who is 32, saw the CBT that you wrote in the thread, and asked if YOU were Gay Rick.
I told him I didn't know, and asked him why it would matter, if you are.
He said "Dad, CBT stands for CocKK and Ball Torture"

Now that I see you have connected CBT to Don Keele, I remember it now.
My Electro Voice Sentry III's were designed by Ray Newman and Don Keele, when he was at Electro Voice.

Don Keele also used B&W Matrix 801's for years, that means he can hear! I also had B&W Matrix 801's for years, they are truly an excellent speaker.

But Don Keele and Roger Russell of McIntosh differ Rick, about comb filtering, and it's audibility.
If one is right, the other is wrong.

Tomorrow, I am going to Roger Russell's home near Orlando, 75 miles away (I live in Tampa)
I bought Roger's old Line Source Prototypes that use all those Pioneer Full Range Drivers, and some equalization. I am picking them up tomorrow!
I will also have the chance to hear the IDS 25 Speakers he makes.
So, I will have the chance to hear them for myself.

Nope, happily married to a woman for over 21 years

The full range drivers beam too much for me in the top octaves.EQ won't help with that.

Yeah, it will be a change for me too, coming from the E V Sentry III's with textbook perfect dispersion from 600 hz up.
My Old Acoustat Electrostats were directional, with a one man sweet spot, but in that one sweet spot, they imaged amazingly.
From what I have heard, all things being equal, I think a speaker with more narrow dispersion images better then a wide dispersion speaker.
This is why some like full range drivers so much, many of them image like champs.

Speaking only for me, when I listen, I listen alone. I am not trying to please a room full of people, only myself.
I automatically sit in the center of my speakers, wide dispersion or not.

This is definately a fun read. Having Rocket RS850s, Klipsch, paradigm, def tech, Pro10s, JBL 8340a and 3677, and a few DIY designs I can say I definately like higher sensitivity.

The only thing I didn't see mentioned was the most important part IMO of a dedicated theater room. "ROOM TREATMEMTS". With out them I don't see how any reference level material is comfortable as getting several copies of the orignal source hit your ears out of sequence only sounds worse as the db level increases (total audible chaos). So for many who say they don't like higher sensitivity speakers, but didnt' have them in a treated room you didn't really hear what they're capable of, nor have they heard what a 92db speaker is capable of.

I've spend too much money and time on this hobby but I love it. The $300 bucks I spent on building room treatments transformed my room like no other upgrade or speaker can come close to acheiving. The increased detail, clarity and dynamics were jaw dropping.

For those that believe horns take away the need for treatments..... remember the average human voice is 1000hz....most horns cross much higher than that, normally around 1.6k and above (unless it's a large expensive 2" horn that can go lower some down to 800hz). This means all the precious voclas are primarily produced by the woofer. This means you need treatments just as much as anyone.

Treat those first/early refelctions and hear what your system is capable of. Just my 2 cents:)

Are there any papers that show the transient peaks (that may be too short in duration to register on our < $300 meters) that appear in real life? Even my Galaxy meter shows surprising peaks when clanking dishes together in the kitchen, or tossing something into a trash can. 

 

I wonder if even the 20dB peaks over average level in home theater are enough to capture much of the "stuff" we hear in every day life (bombs and gunshots and such notwithstanding, since we know those peaks are dangerously high)?

 

I think it'd be edifying to see what sort of microdetail transients exist. Or even on the recorded soundtrack. I haven't seen waterfall charts for the main channels for anything other than bass. What do the peaks look like for the center channel for some popular movies? 

Bob Carver once demonstrated at an Audio Society Meeting how much power it really takes to reproduce the sound of scissors! It sure was an eye opening experience.
But, to carry this one step further, if high sensitivity was as important as some make it out to be, we would all own Klipschorns, or nothing BUT high sensitivity speakers.
I appreciate high sensitivity speakers with high power handling.
But this thread has far too much of the high sensitivity lovers pointing out the dynamic limitations of conventional speakers. It often sounds like "Your 2 seat Mercedes 500 Sports Car will not carry 6 passengers"
So freaking what ? My Mercedes 500 has 480 horsepower, and will not only out accelerate your 6 seat SUV, but it will out handle it too!
I sure hope that owners of lower sensitivity speakers are not stupid enough to get caught up in this crock of ****, and made to feel like second class citizens, just because their speakers will not reproduce a bomb blast at realistic levels. There are FAR more important things for a speaker to do then reproduce Bomb Blasts at hearing damaging levels!

I own 9 sets of speakers. None of them are high efficiency speakers. The B&W 802D and TAD 2201 are probably my highest efficiency with a sensitivity around 90dB/2.83V/m.

I will probably never own a high efficiency speaker. Why? Because I will never listen to anything above 105dB dynamic peak, which includes includes the loud bass coming from my dual Funk 18.0 subs (HT room).

Heck, my two small ATC SCM7 monitors + four Velodyne subs can do 105dB peak in my 18' x 20' x 12' family room open on 3 sides. No problem at all.

There are plenty of papers showing transient peaks but I am too lazy to find them, and most of the ones I know were AES and I am no longer a member. An SPL meter is a pretty slow device by design; an oscilloscope or special peak-reading test equipment are used to catch fast peaks. The usual debate is not if there are fast transients but how long they need to be to be audible, and the impact if say a sub-100 ms peak is clipped. DBT ages ago showed me and many others that the need for massive power was overblown. When 25 - 50 W receivers were the average and 85 dB speakers, maybe so, but less so now with most AVRs delivering 100 - 150 W and many mid-range speakers averaging maybe 90 dB or more. When I rememebr the whole power craze starting, a 100 W amp was considered large, and 500 W extreme. Now, I have a 140 W/ch AVR and inexpensive 500 W/ch amp that is by many accounts on the lower end of the audiophile scale.

I have never been a fan of Klipsch speakers, though I met Paul several times and he was a great guy (if cantankerous at times). I never felt the horn and other drivers blended real well (except for the Klipschorns) and they always sounded a little bright and harsh to me compared to some other speakers. That said, I was pleasantly surprised during my brief listen to the newer Reference lines.

I had set up my reasonably-efficient Infinity Alphas (or Betas, forget) before pulling my old Magnepans out of storage, I much prefer the sound of Magnepans and other planer speakers (electrostats, ribbons) over most conventional speakers, despite their low efficiency. There are a lot of speaker parameters and efficiency is just one. My Maggies play louder than I can stand so I am not worried about low efficiency. Their radiating characteristics offset the efficiency somewhat, as well as reduce room interactions, and I prefer their sound. I do not listen terribly loud, though as loud as my boys prefer and louder than my wife. I certainly do not feel I am missing anything by not having highly-efficient speakers, and I have heard so many other speakers through the years (from cheap to extremely expensive) that I am immune to the "you've just never heard XYZ" argument.

Besides, I need my ears...

never looked at efficiency stat when buying speakers. this is not likely to change...

Interesting. That's usually the first stat I look at. How can you possible know if you have enough amp power without knowing the efficiency?

Whats funny is that some think because the speaker is high sensitivity, that it lacks musicality in some way. Couldn't be farther from the truth. A well designed speaker is a well designed speaker, makes no difference how sensitive it is.

So funny. I would have thought the analogy to a minivan (made safe for mom and kids ) would be the low efficiency speaker and the race care more like a high efficiency speaker. Obviously personal tastes and lsitening habits will weigh heavily into the preference and efficiency is only one parameter. I do think a lot of progress has been made by certain designers of high efficiency speakers. I haven't heard them all but from what I have read and what I have heard with my own ears it has made me a fan of the high efficiency as one of the things I look for in a speaker. Not for everyone, but it's like the Yamaha R1 I used to own. Once you can go 0-60 in under 3 seconds nothing else seems as fun. Now that I don't have the motorcycle anymore so I replaced it with high efficiency speakers. To each his own.

To stretch the analogy further... If only needs to drive 80 mph, Two cars' top speeds don't matter much; 105 or 170. Only when pushed will that particular difference come into play. Likewise max SPL, power handling, amp rms or peak Watts.

My high-sensitivity (JTR) speakers not only sound great, but there are things about them that I can count on. It is unlikely I will ever not have enough output for however loud I should desire to crank them. They will not be likely to ever audibly distort. My moderately powerful amp will probably never clip. It is very unlikely that I will ever blow the speakers. These are comforting thoughts.

I don't *want* an accurate SPL for a gunshot or jet engine or breaking dishes at close range.

They hurt my head and damage my hearing.

I want to *feel* that the gunshot is loud, without needing to put in earplugs while simultaneously being able to hear the dialog.

I'm normally all about realism; but there's gotta be a line.

After a certain point, the louder it gets, the less the ear can discern sound quality.

However, high volume combined with an increase of distortion and compression is more unpleasant than clean output with similar average volume.

Nobody should literally want accurate reproduction of gunshots or jet engines. We would be talking about 120 to 140 db! Many of us o, however, want to be able to achieve 105 db peaks without audible distortion, clipping, compression, or risk of speaker damage. These are similar levels that you would experience at a good movie theater.

Of course, but what is "hi volume"?

For me, SQ trumps everything else. Don't get me wrong, I don't hate high sensitivity speakers, or love low sensitivity ones. Just never care to check them.

Incidentally my B&W 802Diamonds are fairly sensitive and fairly underrated as well. E.g. on their website, the 802D2 and 803D2 are both rated the same at 90dB spl (2.83V, 1m), but at the B&W showroom using the same Pre+power amps (Classe cp800+classe ca2300) and swaping them, the 802d2 had to be turn down 3db to sound the same level as the 803d2.

Goes to show how accurate the specs are anyways. and with a recommended amp power of 50w-500w basically almost any amp 'should' work lol...

I initially drove the 802D2 with an integrated Linn Majik DSM with is 45wpc at 8ohm. had this setup for 2months until my current amp. It sounded fantastic!!!

Now I use Mcintosh MC452 amps. these beasts can drive any speakers so sensitivity shouldn't be any issue ever lol...

the only spec i look at when buying speakers is the freq response. If I like the sound of the speakers, my ears will judge whether my amps can drive the speakers or not, not the sensitivity. if the amps fall short, they will be changed

The difference is that in a theater, the speakers are (much farther)farfield when compared to a home theater. I know for Dolby Digital there are/were different mixing levels for DVD vs Theatrical which have different dialnorm settings.

This thread has a post from Tomlinson Holman (THX) about it.

http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/all-things-audio/102523-mixing-levels-dolby-digital-dvd-vs-theatrical.html

High volume is kind of a subjective term, but just for the sake of picking an arbitrary number, lets say reference levels (105 db at the seats). While medium and low sensitivity speakers may be able to be driven at those levels given enough wattage, there is likely also increased levels of distortion and dynamic compression artifacts which make the sound unpleasant and less realistic.

For those folks who always listen at a max of 85 or 90db or so, this will make no real difference. In that case, sensitivity is
nearly irrelevant.

I could not agree more. One does not have to compromise for music or HT, there are great loudspeakers that excel at both.