HT: Has anyone ever moved from high sensitivity speakers BACK to low sensitivity? - Page 4

I am laughing at most of this stuff, why, because do you guys even know what frequency response you are hearing? You listen to speakers in a room and say it sounds good or bad and then listen to another set in the same room(or not) and then compare. Do you even know what the response is that you like? How do you know it is flat at your listening postion? I really don't care what the response is outside because once you put it indoors all bets are off. Have you even tried comparing the speakers in the same location and get the response at the seats the same? Once you get the response flat at the seats you will be surprised how much power one uses for reference levels and the more sensitive speaker will still sound more dynamic. A 91 dB speaker can play reference because it only needs about 100 watts at the LP from 7 feet. If the speaker can only handle 150 watts or 200 watts it only has 3 dBs of headroom so it may not be distorting but it will be compressing. If it can handle 400-500 watts than it will handle compression better while at reference at 7 feet.

Also, how many times I see friends look at speakers and say which one sounds better because of looks, drivers, name or whatever. They already made their decision without ever hearing them. This is why I run blind tests all the time and get honest feedback. The funny thing is I have had $3500 per speaker to $250 per speaker(DIY) and from listening everyone always chose the $3500 speaker when sighted. Once I put them behind the screen the DIY speaker all of a sudden was the best, go figure. Actually one person still picked the $3500 speaker but that speaker was a very good speaker and high sensitivity(2nd best for movies)

Most affordable PA speakers are built for SPL in the middle of the frequency band. For instance, the aforementioned JBL JRX125s operate between 45hz and 12khz at 100dB per watt. From that spec alone, one can make some assumptions about the design priorities of this speaker. It's a cheap way for guitars, singers, and drums to be heard clearly at the back of a room filled with 700 people. The trade offs in response are too great for high fidelity full(er) range playback. I think the brands you mentioned make greater effort to measure flatter for greater range.

The JBL Project Array is a good counterpoint to high sensitivity compromising frequency response. It has compromised sensitivity for nearly full range response with two compression drivers. It's almost like they've negated the benefits of the driver choices they've made for extended response.

But we have subwoofers for below 80Hz, and many of us cannot even hear above 12kHz.

A not unknown consequence from taking ED medication.

Also, I would love to hear some of these so called fullrange speakers attempt to play 40hz at 105 dB's from 10 feet away. If someone says 105 dBs is too loud we are in a HT thread, not background music listening.

Less Than 2% incidence of hearing lost, cardiac arrest, heart failure, arrhythmia, heart attack, eye hemorrhage, brain hemorrhage, brain clot, seizure, and 20+ other "reported" adverse reactions. No big deal.

Flat response is moot, because the flattest speaker in the world is only as flat as the room it's in, and unless that room is an anechoic chamber it's not flat. One can only achieve flat in-room response via DSP. Pro-sound guys woke and smelled the coffee on DSP twenty years ago, and it's now standard issue. Pro-sound manufacturers don't jump through hoops to get ruler flat response because it just doesn't matter. Consumer grade is well down the DSP road as well.

We're talking about the off-axis response, not just the on-axis response. And no DSP or EQ in the world can save a speaker with a bad off-axis response.

I guess, I have just never heard a good, quality speaker, ever. And judging from a speaker's sensitivity, 95% of speakers on this site are junk that compress and hide the good parts of audio. With that, I shall take my leave.

This may be true, but so is the statement that the trade offs in response are too great for high fidelity full(er) range playback. Very few people will trade wider bandwidth for 131dB SPL in the context of this conversation.

I think most people don't listen to 110dB music/movies, and most people can't hear above 12kHz, and most of the sound recorded in movies/music is below 12kHz.

So for most people, it doesn't matter if a speaker can play flat from 12kHz-30kHz and it doesn't matter if a speaker can play 125dB.

A great 125dB speaker will work fine for any applications. But for most us, we really don't need it.

Advanced apology, I'm going to pick some nits now.


Does not compute.


References? Define "most," as in "most people." 20Hz-20kHz is the generally agreed upon reference for human hearing threshold. I understand that on the whole humans are somewhere in between those numbers and we don't have flat perception response. I challenge the assertion that most people can't hear above 12kHz. More importantly, high fidelity playback demands a system capable of reproducing what was recorded with as much accuracy as possible. This isn't so much about whether or not some sample of people can or can not hear above a certain frequency. It's about accurate sound reproduction.


source


See Fig. 7[PDF]


We're not talking about most people, and we're not talking about extension to 30kHz. Again, high fidelity demands that a system be capable of reproducing the recording.


Define great. I'm unconvinced that the JRX is a great speaker. I have no doubt it gets the job done as a PA speaker, but it's a one trick pony.

What about the OP's QSC K12?

Barely. You won't find many who claim it to be a great speaker. It's more or less OK for the price, but even JBL devotees admit it's entry level.

So which one is great?

I'm part of the PA world as well and I'm sorry, the JBL JRX speakers are just junk. They aren't liked very much by the pro audio crowd, and I'm sure they won't be liked by the audiophile crowd either. Like mentioned before, it's a cheap way for bands, DJ's etc to get the SPL's they want/need on a tight budget. Nothing more.

Not knocking JBL. I actually love JBL and own their PRX600 powered PA speakers. You gotta take a listen to their SRX line of speakers. They sound VERY very good.

So would you say the SRX715 is a great speaker that could hang with any "hi-fi" speaker?

In my cursory search for data at QSC's site, they haven't published charts and what they have published, -6dB across the pass band, isn't really enough information. Based on lack of information, I'd look elsewhere for my high sensitivity fix. Specifically, the JBL LSR6332 even if it doesn't reach the stratosphere.

Dynamics are a great aspect when watching movies, or listening to classical/jazz music, without doubt. But, there's much more to it than dynamics, and I think it just depends on where people place their priority.

If I had the room, I'd probably look into K-horns with a single-triode tube amp....using active crossovers, with a solid SS amp on the cones. Since I don't, I am using Dynaudio Contours in my music room with a fairly powerful SS amp. My room will serve as an HT once I get a PJ, but for now, it's music.

For me (I used to own Klipsch's) I found music to be much more important than movies, and dynamics in movies became less important once my daughter was born. So for me, I gave up dynamics for, what I feel, is a much better music environment. I've found the tonal balance of my speakers are better and the "sweet spot" is definitely wider.

However, even though I don't agree with the OP that Dyns are garbage, I love the sound they produce...the imaging/soundstage/tonal characteristics far outweigh dynamics...for me.

One other thing about high efficiency speakers.......you better spend money on a QUALITY amp....especially one with a very, very low noise floor....or the lovely "hiss" will always be there.

In a perfect world, I'd have 2 setups....1 for theater and one for music. Since I can't, I chose the best compromise for me.

Dynamics is important to music if you wish to present a reasonable facsimile of live music in your home. One of the important things that separates live music from reproduced music is dynamic range.

Dont get your grippies in a wad! This is an excellent convo and I would ask everyone to keep an open mind here. With that said, do 95% of speakers on this site that people discuss compress at reference? yea probably. Do 95% of their listeners listen at reference? not a chance, so they are more than likely pleased as punch with their speakers. I know I like to have 105db peaks with close to 125 db peaks in the bass region when listening to movies (that would be reference +10 in the LFE category). After blowing through two pairs of lower sensitivity speakers listening at levels that I PERSONALLY require to enjoy the movie experience, I decided to go high effficiency with the JTR t12's. AT THESE PLAYBACK LEVELS THERE IS NO COMPROMISE, and furthermore, a high amount of speakers discussed in the speakers section are not capable of playback at those levels without compression. This is purely the mathematics of it. To be 100% truthful some folks actually prefer compressed sound and distortion without even knowing that that is what they like. Bottom line is not once in this thread has the consideration of the room (other than size) been taken into account. Are the rooms properly treated? treated at all or poorly treated? how are the speaker placements? These are all just as important as the speakers themselves. Omega has stated several times that he is commenting on an APPLES TO APPLES basis where the only thing changed was the speaker, same room, same electronics, etc. the same speaker in two different rooms is not going to have the same characteristics.

I have to agree with MK that this conversation is steering in biases that should and could easily be de-bunked with a proper frequency response reading. many folks once again dont prefer a flat freq. response, rather a house curve, or even a reverse bell-curve type response they may be used to hearing in their car on their daily commute. to be perfectly honest, I was one of those guys. I HATED a flat freq reponse at first but after getting used to it, and really watching and listening, it truly brings music and movies out of their shell, and you hear things you never did before.

Eastside, im sure you heard your fair share of good speakers and bad speakers, but try to just understand the science in all this, because it is there.


I dont think 131 peaks is at all what this is talking about, I think realistic playback at reference definitely IS what this is talking about, and yes, many speakers out there begin compressing and distorting before reference, and beyond that, your in the red zone. all the while people in many cases are running them off of AVR power that is not up to the task to get them to reference in the first place. Ill use 32 watts per channel on my denon to get my 101 db sensitive JTR's to as loud as I want, and my denon wont even break a sweat, but i still run them on external amp power, just to have extra power on tap. asking an 89 or 88 db sens speaker to do the same for an extended period of time? get your fire extinguisher out.

And just to state, I didnt trade a wider bandwidth for higher spl, in fact, i probably have more than most

But you did. The T12 goes nuts beyond 10k.

source

Of course that is subjective, but the SRX715 can certainly hang with hi-fi speakers much better then the JRX can. If you look at the specs you can see that too. They made very slight compromises for higher fidelity, like in efficiency. They handle gobs of power, and NEED gobs of power to really shine. They are very impressive to say the least.

For home use, I want as much high fidelity along with SPL and effortless dynamics as possible, with as little compromise as possible on either end as possible. That's why I dropped some serious coin on the Seaton Catalyst 12Cs.

To me, TRUE accurate sound reproduction should include dynamics and SPL as well as transparency and the ability to convey micro-details as accurately as possible. I want to hear the sounds/music coming through my speakers as close sounding to the real thing as possible. I want the micro-details and accuracy, AS WELL AS appropriate SPLs. Live music is loud, no way around it. At a live concert, whether it be classical music with brass instruments, violins etc, the dynamic peaks can be pretty staggering. I want those dynamics WITH the fidelity. THAT to me, is accurate sound. I don't want fidelity without the appropriate SPL and dynamics and I don't want high SPL and great dynamics without high fidelity/accuracy.

Thanks for this. Very interesting.

I understand the science is there. I'm not disputing that. I just wasn't understanding how I've heard scores of speakers anywhere from from 88db to 93db and the ones of quality have sounded great. It seemed to me that the OP was scoffing at the notion of low sensitivity speakers sounding good at high levels and I've heard plenty that I think sounded great. But, then again, as I said, maybe my hearing is that bad.

It isn't that your hearing is bad or that the speakers you have heard and like "suck".

You point of reference is skewed towards conventional speakers. Time to broaden your horizons.

The 6db loss for every doubling of distance is only 100% accurate outdoors or in an anechoic chamber. It does not hold true for the majority of people in a "typical" room. Some with large, dead rooms will come closer, but still will likely not see the 6db loss. One simply has to measure at 1/2/4M to see what they're actually losing in their room.

Your numbers don't take into account room gain, any gain from having two (or more) speakers playing simultaneously or the fact that with the speakers crossed over at THX recommended 80hz the sensitivity will likely rise slightly.

You act like people don't understand the basic relationships between power and SPL and distance. I'm glad you've figured it out but you should show some respect for others in the forum if you expect anybody to respect you.

Never heard that one before. Can you explain how a speakers sensitivity rises slightly due to a 80hz XO?

cheers,

AJ