There are alternatives to horn drivers in high efficiency speakers. I agree with Steve. High efficiency speakers can usually (not always) convey a certain delicacy during quiet musical passages and then have the ability to accelerate at the blink of an eye to play highly dynamic music LOUD. I auditioned two highly efficient speakers in my home; Klipsch Forte III’s and Tekton Design Double Impact speakers. I wound up choosing the Double Impact over the Forte III. I’m not going to go into why here, but my listening space was large enough to support the very large DI’s. One observation I’ve made over the years is that, all things being equal (like bass response), highly efficient speakers are physically larger than than their lesser efficient counterparts. Cheers.
Bravo! The most important line in your post: A TEN DB DIFFERENCE IN SENSITIVITY MEANS IT TAKES TEN TIME MORE POWER TO GET THE SAME LOUDNESS. This can be very hard to get your head around. But it is true. It means that you might be able to use a 50-100 watt per channel amp or receiver to fill your room -- with a lot of headroom for the fortissimo stuff. It might mean you don't need that PS Audio 400(?) watt behemoth amp to hear a symphony orchestra at near concert volume. And the headroom left over means the tutti crescendo doesn't have to go "wong-crash-crinkle-crinkle-gasp." And you might not need to fret and worry about loading up the AC power line -- or the amp's limited power supply -- to hear all that. The efficiency factor you talk about reminds me of MY days as a theater projectionist (at a student job). We had your remembered Altec Lansing Voice of the Theater horn behind the screen driven by a 35-watt-rated tube amp. It filled the 600 seat theater -- and the amp was loafing. The output tubes lasted years. I have an ancient pair of Advent (sealed box) speakers in the bedroom. My "100 watt" old Teac A-B receiver starts to clip at just reasonably loud levels. I think I'll replace them with a pair of Klipsch 600s. In the bargain, I expect to be able to keep the old Teac. No new amp. No new preamp. No blue meters. But a lot less than 10 watts per channel (clean, not busting buckles) should suffice. Do not take anything I say here against sealed box speakers. The old Advents are still wonderful (with twice reconed woofers), with tight bass and no boom that I can hear. But, they take a half ton of power to drive them to effortless sound. So, a $1500 amp, $500 preamp -- or, $550 for the Klipsch pair? Choices. And effortless sound can be a wonderful thing. Your wallet keeps some padding, too.
You can pick any 2 of these options: 1. Good bass 2. Small cabinet 3. High sensitivity This is an immutable law of physics. Since many people want the first 2 due to decorating and other domestic considerations, the 3rd is the one that gets left behind, and since watts are relatively cheap, it's not a problem. High sensitivity speakers have their own virtues, but nothing will ever change the above law.
Your journey into high efficiency speakers has been enlightening. I am a fan of and own both Zu and Klipsch speakers. You should try and listen to some Speakerlab Super 7s made in Seattle by old hippies in the 1970s. They have horn tweeters and mid-ranges with dual woofers in a sealed box, Speakerlabs can be bought cheap, and challenge both Zu and Klipsch. I believe that speakers can’t be judged solely on their specifications, but must judged as part of a system. My systems are primarily tube based. Tubes and horns are a delightful combination. On the other hand, high power amplification can make horns sound shrill and distorted. Those powerful amplifiers sound best with low efficiency speakers. One must also consider the room in analyzing the “best” system. Small spaces work well with low power and high efficiency. Finally, a listener’s type of listening is perhaps most important. I listen at comparatively low levels. This allows me to thoroughly enjoy Cornwalls in a small space (referring to your recent post about big speakers in a small space). Thanks for all you enlightening posts. You have enhanced my obsession with sound and gear. I encourage others to support you through Patreon.
You nailed it with "On the other hand, high power amplification can make horns sound shrill and distorted." I picked up Forte III's based on all the reviews, and sensitivity. I couldn't listen past :30 minutes before fatigue set in, high power solid state amps. Amp-Rolled: Parasound, Technics R1, Marantz Vintage, Emotiva, all FAILS for me with Forte's in my space.
My current DIY main speakers have a pair of SpeakerLab horn mids and tweeters. Bought back in the '70s and used with woofers ranging from 15" to 6.5" in various configurations.
Dan are the JBL 4429 speakers with the horns that SG talked about sensitive enough to work with a low watt amp like Leak Stereo 20 (10wpc) or would a speaker like that be better matched with a solid state 100+ wpc amp? Also but off topic although it’s to do to with sound and I can’t get an answer, does matching the impedance between a cartridge and phono stage matter much?
When they are done well, high efficiency speakers are extremely engaging. I was listening to my KEFs today at a higher than usual volume, and the dynamics left me unimpressed (but I love them otherwise). High sensitivity also translates to lower driver distortion, which is a huge bonus. I'm looking forward to auditioning the Klipsch RP-8000F. I had a pair of Forte IIs for a while and did not like the aggressive upper bass, so I'll be listening closely for that. The response graph on audioholics looks extremely good, so maybe that's not an issue this time.
I've been DIYing speakers for 40+ years, using midrange and tweeter horns for 30+ of those years. Direct radiator woofer vs midrange, two separate issues. Small acoustic susp woofer has the size advantage as stated in the video, but here are disadvantages. Small cone area leads to increased excursion and higher distortion (AM and FM). Low sensitivity leads to more voice coil heating which can reduce dynamic range and shift speaker parameters due to voice coil resistance increase. Horns got a bad rep in the '50s and '60s due to some bad designs and poor crossovers. Horns need a steep high-pass to minimize signals below the low freq cutoff of the horn. I use 18db/oct. Below the cutoff frequency the frequency response and transient response become poor (due to low frequency waves reflecting at the horn mouth back into the horn). Besides raising sensitivity, the efficient coupling from diaphragm to horn throat reduces diaphragm movement and thus distortion. The high sound pressure in the throat reduces the effect of internal static friction of the diaphragm and its suspension. This allows for more clarity and detail in low volume sounds.
Kinda late here but im really curious. If I ever get enough money to do it it seems i'd like to buy a pair of Celestion TF1225e and put the in a sealed enclosure that I havent simulated size yet. Get a pair of Dayton Audio RS52AN-8 and put them in a horn. Then get a pair of Fountek RD1.0 and also put those in a horn. ... Wonder if this sounds like an overkill setup for a home stereo system.
Also, horns since around the eighties or so have become much shorter to avoid throat resonances. The availability of increased amplifier power probably made this possible, but one thing is certain about the newer horn geometries: they don't honk like old horns at all. I wish more compression driver / horn speakers existed for home use. Dynamic range is just so cool!
I got into Klipsch through their headphones. The Klipsch X4i was the first BA headphone I've ever had, and it totally transformed how I listened to music. Since then I've gotten into great DACs and got a pair of Klipsch Sixes. While I love the timing and dynamics, the mid scoop, while not insane (I think about -3-4dB across 300-1500 Hz or so), is at this point often annoying to me, and makes practicing bass and drums with my stereo painful due to high mid and treble crowding at high volumes. I've added some used Bose 201 which have been really good in filling out the mids without much redundancy. I've always wanted tower speakers, but now I'm hesitant to stay with Klipsch and may want to look more seriously at non-horn speakers. But all in good time. I've grown to love much flatter frequency response over time. I'm especially annoyed with high mids 1.5-2.5 kHz, and if I wanted anything boosted, maybe it would be high bass to low mids 180-360 Hz about. I'm not sure Klipsch can take me there. They all seem to be a bit scooped from what I've seen. My fave headphones now are Sony's IER-M7s, which I currently listen to with an iFi Go blu mainly wired-so basically I need to keep ant components a few hundred below $1K to be justifiable.
I much prefer the sound of my KEF R Series over the comparable Klipsh as an example. They were too bright and harsh. People say the hard dome of the KEF can be fatiguing but I find it well in the middle of the spectrum between horns and soft shell dome tweeters. Really well balanced but they do need a little more power to come to life.
I've been having fun with high-sensitivity full range drivers in back-loaded horns. No crossover unless you have a peak you need to kill - a very direct way of listening. Still not as fun as my older JBLs, but there is something really magical about them.
what I love with low sensitivity speakers is indeed deeper bass but also the fact they are often non fatiguing, that’s certainly the case of my Wilson Sophia Serie 1 (with way too powerful Bryston monoblocs to power them)
With adequate bass horns or bass walls your will get high sensitive bass. And it will blow your mind. And last but not least good adjusted high sensitivity speaker are not exhausting for your ears.
Great Explanation. Agree with a lot of the comments but did not read them all . Don't know if anyone pointed out that every time you said "Klipsch" the captioning said clips.
High Sensitivity for me. Long ago, I built a pair of Dallas II speakers designed by Ron Clarke. It's a back-loaded folded horn design using the Fostex FE 206 E driver. A very light cone and a huge magnet really take control of voice coil movement and I think that lets the voice coil follow the electric signal more accurately. The cone has very small xMax travel as the mid bass is generated in the horn. Also, this single driver needs no crossover; less affect on the signal. Great dynamic range and fast bass. The trade offs are a bit ragged frequency response, no bass below 40Hz and the physical size. 11W x 18D x 48H
I paired Hales Revelation 3s with a Pass Labs X amp and I have to say, I have still never heard anything like I have from a set of Cornwalls. Life is just more dynamic than is simply revealed in a response curve.
Low sounds better, I think. High is good for PA My Elac FS 507 end Elac CC 507 have quite low sensitivity but they have great dynamic anyway so even if your speakers don't have high sensitivity you can still have a dynamic sound......if you don't have a "lazy" amp.
I love the sound of the Avant Garde speakers. They have their own sound but still pretty nice. Zu on the other hand sounds very nice initially but after a while it’s kinda dry and gets a bit tiring. I was always wondering why the high sensitivity speakers have a certain kind of sound. Now I see that they got more dynamics and lose out on bass. Thanks!
Have Elac AS61 Adante: Sensitivity: 85dB at 2.83 v/1m Previously had Maggie MMG but the local dealer in Singapore would only give 2 years Gtee as Humidity could affect the Panels, so I went for the Adantes and wow once placed correctly sand loaded and well wired the sound is magnificent but I have also added a REL 9i and a Denafrips terminator. Glorious sound have had Martin logan, and even B&W DM70 Electrostatics yes Electrostatics. love your Audiophiliac show
Steve you are bang on here regarding horn speakers and I remember the first time I heard a Klipschorn and thought wow. There is so much magic that you can get from a horn speaker that you can't get from any other speaker and that midrange, wow. High efficiency speakers are great with low output tube amplifiers and give you massive volume output without stressing the amp. I remember AR and they were a great company and I had a some of their products including their rca cables. I think if I had the room, I would have a pair of planars, horns, and a pair of electrostatics. You then get an opportunity to hear a little of everything as well as the compromises, but I would still keep my Vandersteens and move up to the mighty Model 7s.
I don't know about low sensitivity speakers having a more complex crossover. My KEF Reference 104/2 floor standing speakers are 92dB, 200W (max) and have a pretty flat response, with a 4 Ohm resistive load. These speakers have a very complex crossover network. I know, because I have restored several pair of these speakers, rebuilding the crossovers with matched capacitors,e tc.. (both bi-wire and non bi-wire versions.) These are still some of my favorite speakers, although on a low-sensitivity front, another pair of favorites for me are Martin Logan Electrostatics, like the Prodigy, or Ascent. The KEFs use a ported chamber for the woofers. Ported enclosures are more efficient, and thus louder with a given input wattage at or near the tuned frequency of the port compared to a sealed box, but they give up some things, like a flat response, and transient delay times compared to sealed as well as dropping off like a brick wall below the tuned frequency for a ported box, whereas a sealed box's roll-off tends to be more dependant on things like room accoustics and transfer point. Granted most of my experience was in the mobile audio world (MECP Gold installer 20+ years) but I do love home audio as well.
I’ve had both and gone from high to low and now you’ve got me thinking about going back. The thing I like about low sensitivity is they are more controlled. Any artifacts in the signal are practically ignored. The depth of detail can be found still with massive amplification. …but then your power supply better be clean and if it’s clean you may as well use high sensitivity. LoL I don’t think it matters either way. I just want linear detailed reproduction of the source.
I spent around 20 years with 96db sensitivity speakers and moved to a 85db pair about 5 years ago. It was an upgrade in quality so everything sounds way better. I run a 800W poweramp (Michi S5) so power is just not an issue at all but to be honest, it doesn't really feel like I have to turn up the volume much more to get the same level of db.
I have the pleasure of two different systems. The "downstairs" system has Dynaco A25's (around 88 db) which are kind of between closed and open. I've updated the tweeters to Morel MDT20's (silk dome) for much better high frequency response. The amp is an NAD 3155 which can pump some current. The upstairs system is all DIY. Speakers are big box with JBL 15" woofers, around 99 db. Amps are DIY Push Pull KT88's with limited feedback and running in UL (about 40 watts). Both systems sound great, but yes, the big guys upstairs with B&C compression driver has a much better jump factor and much better nuance for things like hearing the venue. Last night I took Diana Krall to both rooms and I have to say, we had a better time upstairs. FYI, I really like her Christmas album.
I always thought high sensitivity meant better. My first two sets of speakers when I got into audio in my teens were the Klipsch KG 5.2 (96db) and the Infinity SM 102 (94db). Also they were both 8 ohms. Then I moved into B&W and Magnepan speakers which were 4 ohms and had sensitivities from 86 - 89 db. What I noticed with the lower sensitivity and 4 4 ohm speakers - deepness and richness. No fatigue. I had a chance to re-listen to a set of Klipsch KG 5.2 years later. Now they sound thin and much too forward. I’m not against high sensitivity speakers. In my journey as an audiophile, I have learned that bigger / better numbers don’t really mean much. PS. I plan to buy very high sensitivity speakers from Zhu Audio to satisfy my curiosity of ultra high efficiency including high ohm.
You can pick any 2 of these 3 options: 1. Good bass 2. Small cabinet 3. High sensitivity This is an immutable law of physics. Since many people want the first 2 due to decorating and other domestic considerations, the 3rd is the one that gets left behind, and since watts are relatively cheap, it is not a problem. High sensitivity speakers have their own virtues, but nothing will ever change the above law.
The only drawback to low sensitivity is power required to drive them. Not just raw wattage, but how good a high powered amp can sound doing so. Low sensitivity also is misleading, because the sensitivity must be defined relative to a need for current delivery, or high voltage delivery to the speaker. While mathematically that amount of power isn't "different" (P=IV), driving an inefficient Apogee ribbon that needs current, versus a Martin Logan Statement that needed to convert current to voltage (using a transformer) is different in power demand. A tube amp itself uses a power transformer, tubes amplify voltage. That transformer converts voltage to current. Some electrostats had built in tube amplifiers driving them without transformers. Some tube amps removed the transformer and used higher current electron deflection tubes (Futterman, Prodigy, Atmasphere)... I think you just can't isolate a single parameter like speaker input sensitivity, it's important, but a speaker's type drivers and therefore complexity of power demand is the part of the equation that always should be included. in the discussion. Factor in that some amplifiers simply sound better driven to a higher percentage of their rated output power, and worse at very low idle power output. - AND vice versa.. two of my favorite speakers were the MBL 101e and the Apogee Diva, both huge power demand hogs. But I also like the low demand Sonus Faber small monitor types, and the Avalon Acoustics speakers.
Great topic Steve. Is there ever a clear winner in audio? After many years happily using inefficient speakers (Magnepan, Ohm, Mark & Daniel) paired with an appropriate amp (Odyssey, PS Audio, Marantz) curiosity got the best of me and I went in the complete opposite direction. Efficient single-driver loudspeakers (Omega) and a 2 wpc SET amp (Decware) changed my perspective. The pairing is sublime. However, I missed the bass impact and added an Omega sub after a time. I couldn't be happier. Could I go back? If I had to, yes, but I would surely miss the sound quality SET/single-driver speakers bring to the table. As Mr. Deckert is fond of saying "If the 1st watt sucks why continue?".
An interesting exercise is to use a very low power 3W single ended tube amp and drive something like an Altec-Lansing Voice of the Theater or a Klipschorn. These speakers present an un-complex load and 3W in most home environments can push them over 100db. I've had the experience several times and it's a lot of fun. Acoustic Suspension designs ( sealed box ) typically have complex crossovers and present complex loads therefore need high power, low damping factor power amps.
In the 70s, we had ALTEC A500 VOTs in our rented flat overlooking Scripps' Park in La Jolla - $90/mo. for a two bedroom! Are you kidding me? We didn't need 'substances' to get high with CC or the Doors coming out of the ALTECs at 100 db and 30 pairs of feet doing disco! Those WERE the days. I sold my A-Rs, my KLH 6s and my Boise 901 and stuck with horns to this day and am a happy, but older, audiofoolerarounder!
As a former Klipsch La Scalla owner I LOVE high efficiency (HE) speakers! I had to sell due to space limitations. If I were just starting out, I'd go the HE route because it allows so many options in amplification. You can use 1 watt to 1000 watt amplifiers with great results. As far as the Klipsch, I was disappointed with the tweeter performance of this old-school design (LOVED the mid-range, however). Klipsch will have a world beater if they ever put beryllium diaphragms in a Forte III (and maybe a field-coil bass driver?).
It all depends on the sound! I loved my inefficient AR-3 for many years, driven by Dynaco Stereo 120 amp (60 wpc)! Now my KEF LS-50 are very much loved, together with my recent (lower performing) Klipsch RP-600M. Domestic listening rooms seem to obtain top quality sound reproduction from both efficient/inefficient speakers!
Hey Steve, I was just wanting to say thank you for putting Klipsch on my radar. Up until a week or so ago I hadn't even considered them, as basically everything I read about them pointed to them being more of a Bose-esque home theater speaker, unsuitable for music. I recently bought the RP-160M (the previous version of the 600M) to upgrade my ELAC B6s, and have been utterly floored by them. I never got that big speakers sound out of the B6s that I heard was untouchable by headphones, so I figured people must be overstating speakers' greatness. (I've always been a headphone guy. Rocking the Koss ESP-950s and Beyer DT1770 Pros!) Those 160Ms though, they hit me from a completely different angle. Suddenly music had a sense of height, depth, there was more precise placement of instruments and sounds within the soundstage. Sounds even get thrown behind me which just about cause me to spin out of my chair. The mids are sweeter than the B6, they have infinitely more fine detail, they're actually approaching headphone levels in that regard. Even bass on them is perfectly respectable, if slightly down in level compared to the B6. I'm a little sour I fell for the hype of the B6s, but the joy I feel for falling for the Klipsch hype outweighs that. At just over $300 I feel like I stole the RP-160Ms. Hah.
I own a high sensitivity pair of speakers, if you have low sensitivity speakers and you hear a high sensitivity speaker for the first time you can go wow! That sound's amazing but can you listen to them for extended periods? If you have the right gear behind them you can if not listener fatigue will set in quickly.I have owned both types and like both with the right gear.
The thing about horns is they don't sound like they're trying to get loud - like you can feed a bit of power into them and easily drown a less efficient speaker that's buzzing and vibrating from being pushed. I find in general that low sensitivity speakers tend to sound a bit softer/smoother in the midrange until you try to get them very loud, where it helps to have the tweeter be high sensitivity otherwise it will sound a bit "mushier" than a horn. At lower listening levels it doesn't really matter but something like a drum kit tends to have sounds that are louder than you'd think for brief instances in the snare and kick peaks that sound compressed on a less efficient speaker unless it can take a lot of linear power. I think in the bass end of things, the high efficiency horn designs also sound the tightest in the transients (though by far the biggest factor with sloppy boomy bass I think is the room reverberation). I'm also quite a big fan of ported with large PA woofers. The only compromise is the enclosure sizes tend to get rather huge in order to run bass with minimal power requirements. If you have a wife who doesn't want your subwoofer to look like a giant refrigerator in the sitting room, then a high excursion sealed 12" in a couple of cubic feet with a kilowatt amp should service you quite well, though I'll always be curious about what the horn can do.
I am glad you brought up this subject. I've always wondered what some people have to say about pros and cons of speakers with hi and low sensitivities. There is also the technical difference between sensitivity and efficiency. I hear sensitivity is the more accurate terms? My knee jerk reasoning was that small bookshelf type speakers were low sens and large floor standers with 15" woofers and all that were hi (er) sens. Throw in a horn driver and that clinches the deal. Plus, needless to say, what we "hear" is from moving air vibrations. A small bookshelf speaker just cannot move enough air to give a perceived loudness, or SPL's that can be produced by a much larger speaker system, right? If I'm dead wrong, correct me. A nice compact bookshelf speaker say with a 6" woofer and nice dome tweeter can sound wonderful, full and natural I'm sure, but concert level SPL's? Not so sure. I was reading specs on a budget brand "car" midrange cone driver that said it had a sensitivity of 100db @ 1 watt/mtr. Really? Is that possible? Ya, it had a huge ferrous ring magnet that was like 3 pounds, but still.....I'd figure 92db max IMO. Again, anyone thinks otherwise? Thanks, Steve for your opinions and input on the topic of Hi-Fi. Glad you appreciate horn loaded systems too! I still love my 60 year old University Classics!
Heard the Harbeth 30.2 today. I was glad to come home to my Zu. Anna Thorvaldsdottir's performances absolutely fell apart with the Harbeth. Some of her pieces have a bass percussionist rub their hands over the drum head -as a delicate texture so vital to the melody. I could NOT hear that texture with the Harbeths like i can with the Zu. Seriously, i thought i was listening to a different recording/performance of the piece -In the Light of Air. Sure, with less demanding material, acoustic guitar/singer for example, the Harbet was fine. However, just not the same. Just to add, I'm coming from a Sonus Faber Olympica III speaker, which also made Anna's work sound 2 dimensional, luscious, but 2-D. I think you get the idea. It almost reminded me of the responses i've had when I hear a jazz guitar player using a high watt amp versus the incredible sound of a Tweed amplifier. You can hear a pick scrape across the string with a Tweed and a nice guitar. I know the sound i want now, low watt Class A tube/efficiency.
R M ... Harbeths with their vocal centric design is great for music that is not busy. They are awesome when listening to instrumental pieces with vocals. Concerto and chamber music. 5 piece jazz etc. With busy music, it can get lost. Guess the focus on the mids causes the loss of instrument separation as it does not focus so much on the highs. I may be wrong but that’s my assumption. 😬
Complex crossovers eat details imho ,amplifiers are uneasy with capacitif loads.....thats why kef reference conjugate load matching crossover giving a resistif easy load are much more easy with lots of amplifiers ....
Own a pair of ADS L1230 speakers rated at 94db sensitivity. Love the sound, agree with the comments around the need for a fussy setup. Ultimately, pairing them with a First Watt J2 provided me the necessary, low noise, amplification that made them sound great... I think that pairing your amp and speaker on the basis of sensitivity is of the utmost importance. Not sure if there are clear winners but I know that a beautiful First Watt Amp likely would not sound nearly as capable on a set of low sensitivity speakers.
It's a tradeoff. We go with our preferences. I do enjoy the wider dynamic swing of a horn/higher sensitivity speaker, but I prefer my Gallo Reference 3.1 speakers which excel at soundstage and inner detail, while not devoid of dynamic jump.
Most high sensitivity speakers don't go very low and have higher intermodulation distortion levels. They usually have a funky frequency response and alot of directivity. Also, if it is using a horn you will have resonances that can be ugly. Good for P.A. systems, bad for home audio.
The one thing Paul Klipsch was very aware of, as a graduate Electrical Engineer, is that IM distortion is the most critical and consequently his Heritage speakers are very low in this.And FM, too. Few speakers can go toe-to-toe with Klipsch designs in this, while providing the wide dynamic range of a live source. That's why they've been around for 74 years and counting.
I'm in the high efficiency camp with my Kilpsch La Scalas that weight in @ 104 dB/Watt meter. I drive them with a Berning MicroZOTL that's rated at a whopping 1 Watt per channel. My other speakers are Fostex FE206 @ 98 dB/Watt meter. Had Maggies, Quad ESLs, acoustic suspension, Helmholz resonators, etc., but horns are what rock my world. One word - Dynamics.
You can always supplement the lack of bass with a quality sub. If a high sensitivity speaker provides better clarity and dynamics, then it makes sense to go that way and add a sub.
@@SteveGuttenbergAudiophiliac Hi Steve great tips and reviews. I'm trying to decide if I should get the CXN v2 along with the CXC CD transport and keep my Vintage Yamaha intergraded Amp or just get a CXA60 amp to go with the CXC. Do you think playing my CD's will sound just as good with the CXN and a vintage Amp or the the CXC along with CXA60 will be better. (I presently have a Yamaha CA410 mk1 with ELAC B6 v1)
@@Chapterrifik As someone who has recently purchased the CXN, I would say yes, if you're gonna use it as strictly a streaming device. But with a CD player only, no. I'm not crazy about the DAC in it. The sound is a tad harsh. There are better options.
@@vectorvinnie thanks for the reply but the CXC has no DAC it serves only as a transporter, if I would go with the CXN v2 it would serve as a DAC and a streamer but with my Vintage Yamaha CA410
@@Chapterrifik I know. I own both the CXC and CXN. If you're gonna use the CXC with the CXN, there are better DACS/Preamps than the CXN. The NAD M51, for example, is much better sounding. You can get one used for about the same price as the CXN. Unless you're planning on in the future to fully go streaming, then yes, the CXN would be worth it.
I never really connected Sound Quality and Sensitivity. However, certain technologies tend to be more/less sensitivity. As you mention, horns tend to be on more sensitive speakers.
I have Q Acoustic 3030i speakers and a Cambridge Minx sub, but I have no idea whether they're hi or lo-sensitivity. They sound pretty good nonetheless.
JBL65 speakers since 1978. Sensitivity 105 dB/W/m. Don't listen very loud stuff. Crystal super tweeters. Paper 5" mids and 12" woofers. Klipsch stereo surround. And a sealed Infinity speaker surround that also has a 12 in sub.
Unless you are willing to upgrade (spend more money) on a better amp. Then high efficiency speakers are the way to go. If you have excellent resources and a large room, then low efficiency at a higher volume is best. Just an opinion
usually measured at only 1 khz,,, right....also,,, high sens speakers seem to be more agile,,, faster,, and love to reveal tiny details,,, true or not,,,
One problem I came across with high sensitivity speakers was that, as well as hearing every detail in a recording, you can also hear any noises (surface in the case of vinyl), as well as the slightest hum that comes from loops in cabling or phono stages, or even the slightest 60hz hum from the mains. Same noise(s) don't seem to be a problem with lower sensitivity speakers.
I think that sensity is not the reason for hum. There are many other things that can cause 60Hz noise, like ground loops, poorly designed amps, poorly shielded cables whatnot. Try using an isolation transformer to break up ground loops. Shields in interconnect can benefit from having shield connected only in one end, to ground/common, assuming the cable has a twisted pair. Ground is more of a concept than a reality.
@@Piccodon Thanks Cqwet Ddbtee, I understand all that, noise and hum is caused by any or all these things you're mentioning. The point I was making though is that this noise can be more audible with high sensitivity speakers while, medium to low sensitivity ones seem not to suffer as much on the same volume setting. At least to my experience.
@@m.9243 If your high efficiency speaker is one of those 104dB/1w/1m units, you just replaced with a not atypical 84dB/1W/1m piece then your volume knob needs to be turned back 20dB. 20dB is 100 times more efficient, thats why you could drive it with 1W and get tinnitus :-). 1W =100W with those. That is also why a 500W monster amplifier hooked up to a 104dB speaker makes little sense, like strapping a get engine on a baby-stroller.
That's true. When I take a portrait of a beautiful woman, I make sure I don't use my sharpest lens. Everything on this planet has some wrinkles. It's us to you to find an iron.
I live with the pioneer sp-ebs73 (85 dba @ 4 ohms) for 4 years now and love them. I tried a pair of the Klipsch RP-280F (98 dba @ 8 ohms) and loved the punch factor, but I got rid of them, mostly due to the mid range and imaging. I agree with AJ that the best 2 way is a 3 way, and I am now a true believer in concentric drivers. I hope you circle back to the Adante Steve! That may be my next speaker.
Heya - I've had some 86db and some 99db (Forte iiis) and have to say that the 86db definitely had more bass, but to the detriment of everything else. The excursion on the bass driver was insane and was really fun to watch moving about. But, the quickness and sharpness was not there where ass the size of the forte's just makes up for it in sheer volume of air movement. The bass isn't as much in terms of quantity, but it seems to fill the room better and has much more texture to it.
I purchased a pair of Klipsch R-15M last year when they went on sale. I have always wanted a pair of Klipsch for their efficiency. I have to say, I absolutely love them. For me, they have plenty of bass and they sound amazing.
I have two systems. Ls50 in one which is I guess is low..er sensitivity and klipsch la scala 104-106 db which is the most I have seen in a speaker. Ls50 is a fantastic speaker. La scalas are in a diffrent league ...they are alive and dynamically beat anything and everything I have heard...
I've not heard La Scalas. Are they best placed some distance from the walls? The proportion of their dimensions appear very intriguing to me. I'll bet they offer a world possibilities in terms of amplification.
@@dalefriesen7812 they require a large room. I have placed them close to a back wall because they are in my living room. They are big boxes! My wife calls them washing maschines. Initially I was offended but turns out they are exactly the size of a washing maschine but 1.5 times the hight. Often people place them in corners of a room to enhance the low end. Originally la scallas were designed as a center chanel for a theather where Klipshorns are the main speakers and Heressys are used as sateite speakers.
No kidding! I have happily owned Hereseys for decades. You have inspired me now, to aspire to a pair of La Scalas. To my eyes their dimensions are visually exceptionally beautiful. I have no doubt they perform impressively with tube amplification. I'm dying to hear a pair. I believe there may be a local shop that deals in Klipsch. @@ivayloipetkov
I find this video interesting and made me to think two things: given an unknown speaker, how to test to find its sensitivity and impedance? Would be highly appreciated anseers, thanks...
I’ve been running on my Zu Omen’s for a while now and just recently ordered a set of 1.7i Maggie’s. I also have two amps - a small single ended triode Decware with 6 watts per channel and a set of PS Audio M700s that are 700 Watts into 4ohm per channel. With this I can mix and match based on what I’m listening too and my mood. I’ve also got a Zu Undertone to fill in the bottom octave. It’s the best of both worlds.
I also at one time owned 1.7i's. They work very well with tubes! I must say the sound stage is very very different. I seriously can't explain it. I've now done a 180 and went with klipsch horns that are front ported. So it makes no difference when they are against the wall.
Ross Smith I have a small room and front ported is the ONLY option for me for a ported speaker. I’m sorely tempted by the Triangle Gaia II - they are FAST and I’ve heard them driven by my Zen - really nice. I’d look into Klipsch Forte or Cornwall, but both are too big and too much for the room.
ZU Audio Omens being ran off of a solid state NuForce STA-200 at 80watts per channel. Love the sound. I do plan on getting a Musical Paradise 5watt per channel tube amp soon just to see how it pairs with the ZU’s but I am all in on high efficiency speakers. Not that low sensitivity is bad, it just limits amplifier choices and if you want good tube and high watts you have to spend a ton of money.
I like my Klipsch R-51M and R-120SW combo so much that bought some R-820F towers on sale. They sound pretty good and have 97dB sensitivity. I decided to finally give Tidal a try and I can't tell you how happy I am. My 1991 Pioneer VSX-D1S is powering them until I save enough for an amp or receiver.
Pretty good? :/ Do the 820's "lose" something/anything that the R-51's have? I have the 51's and was considering "going for more of That". I don't want to lose ANY of whatever I'm luvin' in exchange for higher volume.
It's a matter of complimentary mating. The problem with the current state of amp design is that they require a large number of MATCHED active components that overlay perfectly the transfer curves. Or the discordant effects could cause distortion. So, for many people they hear the accuracy of simple amps that by default must have high efficiency speakers. For most , save on the electric bill.
@Sheniquahhh Smith -- Nobody who think Bose represents high fidelity and superior value has any business telling *anybody* to "do more research on the subject, okay?" Bose "research" is all about audio gimmickry and marketing psychology, not faithful reproduction of music, which is what high fidelity means.
Enjoyed the video (also enjoyed the many comments). I have to agree with the sentiment of some responders that efficiency is just one aspect of speaker design (albeit an important one that can also affect other driver/speaker parameters). In earlier years I seemed to be drawn to low sensitivity air suspension designs. When I started trying to design and build my own speakers I started to explore the mid efficiency offered by ported enclosures. Eventually I gravitated to transmission line designs. Although there is no denying that personal taste is a factor I believe listener fatigue is also an important consideration. To me you can force drivers to behave a certain way with equalization and/or various active and passive crossovers or you can choose well designed and matched drivers and gently persuade them to behave with minimal passive cross over circuits. To me forcing drivers to do things they don’t want to do invites rebellion. This rebellion takes the form of unwanted distortions. The second gentler approach seems to more naturally enhance the drivers qualities. I believe the more the drivers are forced the less natural they sound and this invites listener fatigue.
Preferring Low Sensitivity spkrs. for 50+ years, your Apologetics of High Sensitivity speakers is fascinating. The largest caveat applying in my case is s-i-z-e. Fuller-range HS spkrs tend to be b-i-g, occupy a lot of space, and might require extra-careful positioning for bass balance. Am tempted to experiment.
My favorite low sensitivity speakers were Totem Mani-2, 85 dB, isobaric design, with a good powerful amp, it can sound glorious. I have not owned anything above 86 dB speakers, but someday I would like to try Devore Orangutan speakers.
I love my Klipsch La Scalas at 104dB with 1 watt, however they are a bit of a problem to match with home theater surround speakers since I just can't afford that sensitivity in my 7.1 system.
Somewhat dependant on amp of choice. I run Avantgarde Duo's, with 8- 22w SET's. I also have some JM Labs Alcor..they like a couple hundred watts on tap. The SET might work with the Alcors(medium sensitivity) but probably not going to get the best from them. With the Duo's you get it all(dynamics and fantastic low end), due to the powered sub.
I guess it is because if you have a passive speaker, you will lose less details when trying to send the signals through the crossover. But active speakers can be an alternative if you want high detail.
@Watt a Flac 200 dollar studio monitors is something of the most detailed speakers I have heard. You don't need to spend a fortune to get revealing speakers
I recently started listening to some 50s or 60s Peerless speakers, and even though they're not very accurate at all, I find them so much more enjoyable to listen to than my inefficient Quadral bookshelf speakers. (actually they're rear channel speakers but I'm using them on my desk) I'm now actually considering Replacing those little (5" drivers) speakers with these old Peerless speakers even though they would take up so much more room on my desk, they're 8" drivers.
By going with high sensitivity speakers, does that mean one can buy more modestly powered amplification and therefore save some money? Which can be used to buy more music ;-)
In a sense, yes, BUT ... GOOD low powered amplification can be as expensive as not-as-good higher power amplification. I’m running a 2-watt tube amp of very high quality into speakers that have 92dB sensitivity in a small room. The sound is very good, but the amp cost > $1K. That’s NOT a lot by tube amp standards, but it may seem expensive to some. I could have gone up in price, but have wanted to have this amp for about 20 years. In this case the savings does translate into more records as well as money for other component upgrades.
I don't think so. Low sensitivity speakers work best with lower powered tube or Class A amps which often cost more than the conventional 100-200 watt amps. I think low sensitivity are less amp intolerant. High sensitivity needs better power. Some 8-15 watt tube integrateds cost $5K and up to $20K. Don't play a 97 db speaker with a cheap 200 watt amp . You will regret it with listener fatigue and you won't be able to turn the volume more that one or two notches before you get too loud.
Joseph Franceski My 2 watt Zen amp easily drives my 92db Time Window 1A speakers and sound very good. The DCMs are not perfect by any means and I may replace them. The amp cost about $1.1K
Full horn loading is best have WE 15A Community Leviathans Giant front Conicals Pairs of RCA MI Shearer horns Altecs RCA Victor front horns As well as modern monitors from Morel SEAS RAAL. And the front horns are by far the best for overall performance at high or low SPL levels in small or large rooms. The monitors sound fine and since small thats cool and all but not close to the front horns. AR were interesting but if you look at what people want today its not the old AR but the loudspeakers it suposedly obsoleted.
Acoustic suspension has huge roll-off of sound pressure levels in the bass, which is a form of distortion often overlooked. I wish I had all of the money spent on A-R, KLH and Boise . I finally figured out that Bell Labs' findings were valid and scientific and that audiologists have discovered how the human ear works long ago. Small speakers with direct radiators do not couple with the air as efficiently as large radiators with compression horn drivers. Dynamics are compressed with sealed boxes full of sound-damping material. Although speakers cannot exactly duplicate live instruments, they approach their dynamic range and that's where the realism begins...and the pleasure. Don't blame me. I wish small and cheap were better.
I am leaning more and more to get a pair of Klipsch Cornwall IV. I bought a pair of Cerwin Vega HED 504 R on an auction just for fun. ANd Yes, it's not as near good sounding as my other speakers. But what a fun, but I need little better sound quality in the end. So..Klipsch...Here I come....
So just a quick fun fact about comparing sensitivity among similar sized speakers: there are parameters that you can easily track with regard to driver displacement, box size and sensitivity. If two different speakers have similar size, driver displacement and low frequency ability.....but one claims much higher sensitivity....someone is doing a lie.
Thanks Steve for being a champion for HE (High Energy!) speakers. You are literally kick-starting a movement and have me convinced that I need to investigate them ASAP. I am coming from a set of Harbeth speakers and really enjoy the refined yet detailed sound. I do believe there are compromises with HE designs and am concerned that dynamics and energy may not be enough to overcome their lack of refinement. Would a person who values refinement be better off with a much more powerful amplifier (or bi-amp) to jump start their LE speakers?
I have a pair of ProAc D80R (91dB, 4 Ohm) and I recently bought Avantgarde DUO G2 Omega (107 dB 18 Ohm). OK, there's a big difference in price, but.... wow...the Avantgarde sound so much better! More detailed, fast, alive, refined, precise, outstanding image, really great speakers! I almost can't listen to the ProAc anymore... they seem broken in comparison. So my preference goes definitely to high efficiency speakers. Amplification is The Gryphon.
Did you get a chance to try any of the floor standing speakers Klipsch RP lineup? I like horn loaded tweeters but I worry that a bookshelf won't have quite enough low end for me.
Southfloridelphia thank you for asking this, i am looking at the RP-280f. It’s a bit frustrating since they’re so new and there’s hardly any reviews out there for them from reputable sources.
To me the question wanting answer is which type of speaker maintains the better definition even at lower volumes or sound pressure levels? I want full range listening, my spouse wants peace and quiet.
One other thing. I would never consider a 3-way speaker lacking horns on midrange and tweeter. It may be surprising that I don't consider horn loading critical to bass. This might cause you to write me off as an ignoramus. For so many of us, the Klipschorn is the crown of creation, and the folded horn really is an historic achievement. Let me put it this way: I'd rather have the Klipschorn than not. Given the budget I would already have a pair in the perfect room we happen to have. But likely I'll always be constrained by budget. So equally likely I'll never have a pair. The expense of the folded horn will go elsewhere in the system. For bass I already have monster drivers that can make your trouser legs flutter if you care to turn up the volume just a bit. I mean I can feel the bass, not just hear it, and that's what I'm after. It is sublime, many thanks due, no doubt, to a superb crossover, and a massively powerful vintage Pioneer integrated amp. Considering the very high sensitivity of the drivers I use, 100 watts per channel RMS is beyond ridiculous. In my system 10 watts is overpowered. In fact I could probably summon the police using just 5 watts for any length of time. And the bass would be perfectly lovely, distortion free at deafening volume. No horn is required for this kind of quality bass reproduction. I can't achieve that response from mids or highs, though, without the use of horns.
2 systems: Low efficiency Kef ls50s spkrs with 250wpc ss monoblocs. High efficiency Rega Naos with 35wpc tube amp. Both sound great. Wouldn't dream of swapping amps
I currently have a pair of aad 2001 monitors which are 87db and ported interestingly. They sound superb but do need big power to really make them sing . I 1st them with a 5m21 luxman @ 110/ch rms , they needed more. Ended up with a nelson pass design 200/side and they sing . I have owned klipsh kg3.5 and klf 10s which were good sounding speakers but were more of an issue with listener fatigue. I did drive the klf's with a 70/side vintage luxman and they sounded sweet , bright but sweet as early lux ss products were very musical and articulate. I recently purchased a vintage lux piece and would like a set of small Klipsch to add to the mix for more dynamics and better theater performance for movies . Any ideas which newer monitors would be a good choice. I want a smooth but articulate high end and would like something that has deep lows but not boomy mid bass.
Question: You speak of low sensitivity speakers as 85db and High sensitivity as 96, 97, 98db and you say they both have their advantages. Which makes sense. But what about 90db? At 90db are we getting the best of both worlds or not getting the best of either?
Ls3/5a's are very low sensitivity 82 db/w ,but short listening in bbc truck its unbeaten .....but in a movie theatre its lost....there you need long throw projection of waves.....its more difficult to make this flat ...but with todays digital tools its possible
I like high sensitivity speakers. Just built a full range set and won't go back. One problem I had was it made my minor issues more apparent, ie my phone stage. Solved that and I'm one happy camper. They may be no Forte but I can now listen for hours
As a Jbl fanboy I’ve always immersed myself in high sensitivity speakers. The best part is that when you use an active xo you can have a tiny tube amp taking care of the highs and use a d class monster on the lows. I should try something different but old habits die hard.
@TMac473 . Me too man! This old heart always goes out to U.S. made JBL. Do you think those 4429’s SG showcased will work with a 10wpc p/p vac valve amp? Living where I do there won’t be a chance to hear the two before buying😅
I am in the middle of it all, I like to listen to something between the two ranges. My two speakers have an SPL of 90DdB. I've seen from spec sheets, and advertisements that most are 91Db, and above. I've heard 87 or 86DB speakers at hi fi stores; but as you've explained such loudspeakers need plenty of power from an amplifier.
I prefer the most efficient I can get within reason. I can't think of any audio reason not to. I will argue that a lower impedance speaker will change the output of the amp where the efficiency has no effect. ( other than being louder per watt ) For most normal quality amps, 8 ohms is the way to go. If you find 4 ohm speakers you will need a higher quality amp to drive them as the impedance is liable to fluctuate from 1-4 ohms and most
You are missing out on a treat. Replace CWII crossovers with Bob Crites' and have tech put new capacitors, etc. in the Pioneer. This system will beat most of the newer set-ups that are affordable. I've done it and wish I went there sooner.
My audio journey began 20 years ago with an old pair of Magnepan SMGas. They were affordable but needed (i thought) 250+ watts before they really opened up. Loved the speakers couldn't find an amp. Find an amp I love wouldn't drive my speakers. Get rid of the maggies live with something else for a year, want the maggies back. The only system I ever had that made me consider box speakers was a pair of Klipsch Heresy's with a Jolida 102b 20w integrated and an old Denon turntable. It was the most delicate, nuanced sound I ever had in my living room, but it was bass shy. My dream would be a pair of modded 1.6 maggies that could be driven by a Prima Luna integrated (30W). Openness and delicacy that is unrivaled, but still with weight and authority. Will one day take the autoformer leap.
Take alisten before you buy , horn speakers are great but not for everybody, use your own amp to test them, some solid state amps may sound harsh on the majority of the horns.
Watching Steve is like having a good friend stop by...albeit one with 1000 different shirts!
There are alternatives to horn drivers in high efficiency speakers. I agree with Steve. High efficiency speakers can usually (not always) convey a certain delicacy during quiet musical passages and then have the ability to accelerate at the blink of an eye to play highly dynamic music LOUD. I auditioned two highly efficient speakers in my home; Klipsch Forte III’s and Tekton Design Double Impact speakers. I wound up choosing the Double Impact over the Forte III. I’m not going to go into why here, but my listening space was large enough to support the very large DI’s. One observation I’ve made over the years is that, all things being equal (like bass response), highly efficient speakers are physically larger than than their lesser efficient counterparts. Cheers.
Bravo! The most important line in your post:
A TEN DB DIFFERENCE IN SENSITIVITY MEANS IT TAKES TEN TIME MORE POWER TO GET THE SAME LOUDNESS. This can be very hard to get your head around. But it is true.
It means that you might be able to use a 50-100 watt per channel amp or receiver to fill your room -- with a lot of headroom for the fortissimo stuff. It might mean you don't need that PS Audio 400(?) watt behemoth amp to hear a symphony orchestra at near concert volume. And the headroom left over means the tutti crescendo doesn't have to go "wong-crash-crinkle-crinkle-gasp." And you might not need to fret and worry about loading up the AC power line -- or the amp's limited power supply -- to hear all that.
The efficiency factor you talk about reminds me of MY days as a theater projectionist (at a student job). We had your remembered Altec Lansing Voice of the Theater horn behind the screen driven by a 35-watt-rated tube amp. It filled the 600 seat theater -- and the amp was loafing. The output tubes lasted years.
I have an ancient pair of Advent (sealed box) speakers in the bedroom. My "100 watt" old Teac A-B receiver starts to clip at just reasonably loud levels. I think I'll replace them with a pair of Klipsch 600s. In the bargain, I expect to be able to keep the old Teac. No new amp. No new preamp. No blue meters. But a lot less than 10 watts per channel (clean, not busting buckles) should suffice.
Do not take anything I say here against sealed box speakers. The old Advents are still wonderful (with twice reconed woofers), with tight bass and no boom that I can hear. But, they take a half ton of power to drive them to effortless sound. So, a $1500 amp, $500 preamp -- or, $550 for the Klipsch pair? Choices.
And effortless sound can be a wonderful thing. Your wallet keeps some padding, too.
You can pick any 2 of these options:
1. Good bass
2. Small cabinet
3. High sensitivity
This is an immutable law of physics. Since many people want the first 2 due to decorating and other domestic considerations, the 3rd is the one that gets left behind, and since watts are relatively cheap, it's not a problem. High sensitivity speakers have their own virtues, but nothing will ever change the above law.
@@thegoat164 More anecdotal than "immutable." ;)
@@thegoat164 Ah, the Harvard MBA's "Iron Triangle" makes a channeled appearance. The 'iron' is too often chewing gum....
@@jimshaw899
Enjoy your midfi loud and obnoxious ear bleeders Klipsch.
@@jimshaw899
WHAT ARE REALISTIC VOLUME LEVELS?
www.audiodrom.net/en/as-we-see-it-tips-thoughts/74-realistic-volume-levels
Your journey into high efficiency speakers has been enlightening. I am a fan of and own both Zu and Klipsch speakers. You should try and listen to some Speakerlab Super 7s made in Seattle by old hippies in the 1970s. They have horn tweeters and mid-ranges with dual woofers in a sealed box, Speakerlabs can be bought cheap, and challenge both Zu and Klipsch.
I believe that speakers can’t be judged solely on their specifications, but must judged as part of a system. My systems are primarily tube based. Tubes and horns are a delightful combination. On the other hand, high power amplification can make horns sound shrill and distorted. Those powerful amplifiers sound best with low efficiency speakers. One must also consider the room in analyzing the “best” system. Small spaces work well with low power and high efficiency. Finally, a listener’s type of listening is perhaps most important. I listen at comparatively low levels. This allows me to thoroughly enjoy Cornwalls in a small space (referring to your recent post about big speakers in a small space).
Thanks for all you enlightening posts. You have enhanced my obsession with sound and gear. I encourage others to support you through Patreon.
You nailed it with "On the other hand, high power amplification can make horns sound shrill and distorted." I picked up Forte III's based on all the reviews, and sensitivity. I couldn't listen past :30 minutes before fatigue set in, high power solid state amps. Amp-Rolled: Parasound, Technics R1, Marantz Vintage, Emotiva, all FAILS for me with Forte's in my space.
Horns love Tubes, they just come alive.
My current DIY main speakers have a pair of SpeakerLab horn mids and tweeters.
Bought back in the '70s and used with woofers ranging from 15" to 6.5" in various configurations.
Well spoken!
The voice of experience. Thank you for your post.
Dan are the JBL 4429 speakers with the horns that SG talked about sensitive enough to work with a low watt amp like Leak Stereo 20 (10wpc) or would a speaker like that be better matched with a solid state 100+ wpc amp?
Also but off topic although it’s to do to with sound and I can’t get an answer, does matching the impedance between a cartridge and phono stage matter much?
When they are done well, high efficiency speakers are extremely engaging. I was listening to my KEFs today at a higher than usual volume, and the dynamics left me unimpressed (but I love them otherwise). High sensitivity also translates to lower driver distortion, which is a huge bonus. I'm looking forward to auditioning the Klipsch RP-8000F. I had a pair of Forte IIs for a while and did not like the aggressive upper bass, so I'll be listening closely for that. The response graph on audioholics looks extremely good, so maybe that's not an issue this time.
Love the channel Steve. Very informative for a newbie 20 y/o with bose 901’s
I've been DIYing speakers for 40+ years, using midrange and tweeter horns for 30+ of those years.
Direct radiator woofer vs midrange, two separate issues.
Small acoustic susp woofer has the size advantage as stated in the video, but here are disadvantages.
Small cone area leads to increased excursion and higher distortion (AM and FM).
Low sensitivity leads to more voice coil heating which can reduce dynamic range and shift speaker parameters due to voice coil resistance increase.
Horns got a bad rep in the '50s and '60s due to some bad designs and poor crossovers.
Horns need a steep high-pass to minimize signals below the low freq cutoff of the horn. I use 18db/oct.
Below the cutoff frequency the frequency response and transient response become poor (due to low frequency waves reflecting at the horn mouth back into the horn).
Besides raising sensitivity, the efficient coupling from diaphragm to horn throat reduces diaphragm movement and thus distortion.
The high sound pressure in the throat reduces the effect of internal static friction of the diaphragm and its suspension.
This allows for more clarity and detail in low volume sounds.
Kinda late here but im really curious.
If I ever get enough money to do it it seems i'd like to buy a pair of Celestion TF1225e and put the in a sealed enclosure that I havent simulated size yet. Get a pair of Dayton Audio RS52AN-8 and put them in a horn. Then get a pair of Fountek RD1.0 and also put those in a horn.
... Wonder if this sounds like an overkill setup for a home stereo system.
Also, horns since around the eighties or so have become much shorter to avoid throat resonances. The availability of increased amplifier power probably made this possible, but one thing is certain about the newer horn geometries: they don't honk like old horns at all. I wish more compression driver / horn speakers existed for home use. Dynamic range is just so cool!
I got into Klipsch through their headphones. The Klipsch X4i was the first BA headphone I've ever had, and it totally transformed how I listened to music. Since then I've gotten into great DACs and got a pair of Klipsch Sixes. While I love the timing and dynamics, the mid scoop, while not insane (I think about -3-4dB across 300-1500 Hz or so), is at this point often annoying to me, and makes practicing bass and drums with my stereo painful due to high mid and treble crowding at high volumes. I've added some used Bose 201 which have been really good in filling out the mids without much redundancy. I've always wanted tower speakers, but now I'm hesitant to stay with Klipsch and may want to look more seriously at non-horn speakers. But all in good time.
I've grown to love much flatter frequency response over time. I'm especially annoyed with high mids 1.5-2.5 kHz, and if I wanted anything boosted, maybe it would be high bass to low mids 180-360 Hz about. I'm not sure Klipsch can take me there. They all seem to be a bit scooped from what I've seen.
My fave headphones now are Sony's IER-M7s, which I currently listen to with an iFi Go blu mainly wired-so basically I need to keep ant components a few hundred below $1K to be justifiable.
I much prefer the sound of my KEF R Series over the comparable Klipsh as an example. They were too bright and harsh. People say the hard dome of the KEF can be fatiguing but I find it well in the middle of the spectrum between horns and soft shell dome tweeters. Really well balanced but they do need a little more power to come to life.
I have magnepan Tympani speakers, low sensitivity, not sure if I see it as a issue. With ample amplification, never had a real issue driving them.
Man I love my 600Ms I bought them on your review, here in Australia I am loving them to bits and they have bought me back to listening to music.
Nice!!
@@SteveGuttenbergAudiophiliac Hi Steve, I also brought the RP-600m after your review, here in Canada. I really like them. Thanks!
I've been having fun with high-sensitivity full range drivers in back-loaded horns. No crossover unless you have a peak you need to kill - a very direct way of listening. Still not as fun as my older JBLs, but there is something really magical about them.
what I love with low sensitivity speakers is indeed deeper bass but also the fact they are often non fatiguing, that’s certainly the case of my Wilson Sophia Serie 1 (with way too powerful Bryston monoblocs to power them)
With adequate bass horns or bass walls your will get high sensitive bass. And it will blow your mind. And last but not least good adjusted high sensitivity speaker are not exhausting for your ears.
I bought 600 m's after your review, paired them with my onkyo tx-8255 sounds really good! Thnx for the input.
Great Explanation. Agree with a lot of the comments but did not read them all . Don't know if anyone pointed out that every time you said "Klipsch" the captioning said clips.
My low sensitivity speakers sound "sophisticated"... my high sensitivity speakers sound "fun"
High Sensitivity for me. Long ago, I built a pair of Dallas II speakers designed by Ron Clarke. It's a back-loaded folded horn design using the Fostex FE 206 E driver. A very light cone and a huge magnet really take control of voice coil movement and I think that lets the voice coil follow the electric signal more accurately. The cone has very small xMax travel as the mid bass is generated in the horn. Also, this single driver needs no crossover; less affect on the signal. Great dynamic range and fast bass. The trade offs are a bit ragged frequency response, no bass below 40Hz and the physical size. 11W x 18D x 48H
I paired Hales Revelation 3s with a Pass Labs X amp and I have to say, I have still never heard anything like I have from a set of Cornwalls. Life is just more dynamic than is simply revealed in a response curve.
Low sounds better, I think.
High is good for PA
My Elac FS 507 end Elac CC 507 have quite low sensitivity but they have great dynamic anyway so even if your speakers don't have high sensitivity you can still have a dynamic sound......if you don't have a "lazy" amp.
I love the sound of the Avant Garde speakers. They have their own sound but still pretty nice. Zu on the other hand sounds very nice initially but after a while it’s kinda dry and gets a bit tiring.
I was always wondering why the high sensitivity speakers have a certain kind of sound. Now I see that they got more dynamics and lose out on bass.
Thanks!
Have Elac AS61 Adante: Sensitivity: 85dB at 2.83 v/1m
Previously had Maggie MMG but the local dealer in Singapore would only give 2 years Gtee as Humidity could affect the Panels, so I went for the Adantes and wow once placed correctly sand loaded and well wired the sound is magnificent but I have also added a REL 9i and a Denafrips terminator. Glorious sound have had Martin logan, and even B&W DM70 Electrostatics yes Electrostatics. love your Audiophiliac show
Steve you are bang on here regarding horn speakers and I remember the first time I heard a Klipschorn and thought wow. There is so much magic that you can get from a horn speaker that you can't get from any other speaker and that midrange, wow. High efficiency speakers are great with low output tube amplifiers and give you massive volume output without stressing the amp. I remember AR and they were a great company and I had a some of their products including their rca cables. I think if I had the room, I would have a pair of planars, horns, and a pair of electrostatics. You then get an opportunity to hear a little of everything as well as the compromises, but I would still keep my Vandersteens and move up to the mighty Model 7s.
I don't know about low sensitivity speakers having a more complex crossover. My KEF Reference 104/2 floor standing speakers are 92dB, 200W (max) and have a pretty flat response, with a 4 Ohm resistive load. These speakers have a very complex crossover network. I know, because I have restored several pair of these speakers, rebuilding the crossovers with matched capacitors,e tc.. (both bi-wire and non bi-wire versions.) These are still some of my favorite speakers, although on a low-sensitivity front, another pair of favorites for me are Martin Logan Electrostatics, like the Prodigy, or Ascent. The KEFs use a ported chamber for the woofers. Ported enclosures are more efficient, and thus louder with a given input wattage at or near the tuned frequency of the port compared to a sealed box, but they give up some things, like a flat response, and transient delay times compared to sealed as well as dropping off like a brick wall below the tuned frequency for a ported box, whereas a sealed box's roll-off tends to be more dependant on things like room accoustics and transfer point. Granted most of my experience was in the mobile audio world (MECP Gold installer 20+ years) but I do love home audio as well.
I’ve had both and gone from high to low and now you’ve got me thinking about going back. The thing I like about low sensitivity is they are more controlled. Any artifacts in the signal are practically ignored. The depth of detail can be found still with massive amplification. …but then your power supply better be clean and if it’s clean you may as well use high sensitivity. LoL I don’t think it matters either way. I just want linear detailed reproduction of the source.
I spent around 20 years with 96db sensitivity speakers and moved to a 85db pair about 5 years ago. It was an upgrade in quality so everything sounds way better. I run a 800W poweramp (Michi S5) so power is just not an issue at all but to be honest, it doesn't really feel like I have to turn up the volume much more to get the same level of db.
I have the pleasure of two different systems. The "downstairs" system has Dynaco A25's (around 88 db) which are kind of between closed and open. I've updated the tweeters to Morel MDT20's (silk dome) for much better high frequency response. The amp is an NAD 3155 which can pump some current. The upstairs system is all DIY. Speakers are big box with JBL 15" woofers, around 99 db. Amps are DIY Push Pull KT88's with limited feedback and running in UL (about 40 watts). Both systems sound great, but yes, the big guys upstairs with B&C compression driver has a much better jump factor and much better nuance for things like hearing the venue. Last night I took Diana Krall to both rooms and I have to say, we had a better time upstairs. FYI, I really like her Christmas album.
I like you way with words!
I always thought high sensitivity meant better. My first two sets of speakers when I got into audio in my teens were the Klipsch KG 5.2 (96db) and the Infinity SM 102 (94db). Also they were both 8 ohms.
Then I moved into B&W and Magnepan speakers which were 4 ohms and had sensitivities from 86 - 89 db.
What I noticed with the lower sensitivity and 4 4 ohm speakers - deepness and richness. No fatigue.
I had a chance to re-listen to a set of Klipsch KG 5.2 years later. Now they sound thin and much too forward.
I’m not against high sensitivity speakers. In my journey as an audiophile, I have learned that bigger / better numbers don’t really mean much.
PS. I plan to buy very high sensitivity speakers from Zhu Audio to satisfy my curiosity of ultra high efficiency including high ohm.
You can pick any 2 of these 3 options:
1. Good bass
2. Small cabinet
3. High sensitivity
This is an immutable law of physics. Since many people want the first 2 due to decorating and other domestic considerations, the 3rd is the one that gets left behind, and since watts are relatively cheap, it is not a problem. High sensitivity speakers have their own virtues, but nothing will ever change the above law.
The only drawback to low sensitivity is power required to drive them. Not just raw wattage, but how good a high powered amp can sound doing so. Low sensitivity also is misleading, because the sensitivity must be defined relative to a need for current delivery, or high voltage delivery to the speaker. While mathematically that amount of power isn't "different" (P=IV), driving an inefficient Apogee ribbon that needs current, versus a Martin Logan Statement that needed to convert current to voltage (using a transformer) is different in power demand. A tube amp itself uses a power transformer, tubes amplify voltage. That transformer converts voltage to current. Some electrostats had built in tube amplifiers driving them without transformers. Some tube amps removed the transformer and used higher current electron deflection tubes (Futterman, Prodigy, Atmasphere)...
I think you just can't isolate a single parameter like speaker input sensitivity, it's important, but a speaker's type drivers and therefore complexity of power demand is the part of the equation that always should be included. in the discussion. Factor in that some amplifiers simply sound better driven to a higher percentage of their rated output power, and worse at very low idle power output. - AND vice versa..
two of my favorite speakers were the MBL 101e and the Apogee Diva, both huge power demand hogs. But I also like the low demand Sonus Faber small monitor types, and the Avalon Acoustics speakers.
Great topic Steve. Is there ever a clear winner in audio? After many years happily using inefficient speakers (Magnepan, Ohm, Mark & Daniel) paired with an appropriate amp (Odyssey, PS Audio, Marantz) curiosity got the best of me and I went in the complete opposite direction. Efficient single-driver loudspeakers (Omega) and a 2 wpc SET amp (Decware) changed my perspective. The pairing is sublime. However, I missed the bass impact and added an Omega sub after a time. I couldn't be happier. Could I go back? If I had to, yes, but I would surely miss the sound quality SET/single-driver speakers bring to the table. As Mr. Deckert is fond of saying "If the 1st watt sucks why continue?".
An interesting exercise is to use a very low power 3W single ended tube amp and drive something like an Altec-Lansing Voice of the Theater or a Klipschorn. These speakers present an un-complex load and 3W in most home environments can push them over 100db. I've had the experience several times and it's a lot of fun. Acoustic Suspension designs ( sealed box ) typically have complex crossovers and present complex loads therefore need high power, low damping factor power amps.
In the 70s, we had ALTEC A500 VOTs in our rented flat overlooking Scripps' Park in La Jolla - $90/mo. for a two bedroom! Are you kidding me? We didn't need 'substances' to get high with CC or the Doors coming out of the ALTECs at 100 db and 30 pairs of feet doing disco! Those WERE the days. I sold my A-Rs, my KLH 6s and my Boise 901 and stuck with horns to this day and am a happy, but older, audiofoolerarounder!
As a former Klipsch La Scalla owner I LOVE high efficiency (HE) speakers! I had to sell due to space limitations. If I were just starting out, I'd go the HE route because it allows so many options in amplification. You can use 1 watt to 1000 watt amplifiers with great results. As far as the Klipsch, I was disappointed with the tweeter performance of this old-school design (LOVED the mid-range, however). Klipsch will have a world beater if they ever put beryllium diaphragms in a Forte III (and maybe a field-coil bass driver?).
Why is that , I dont think so .
What they need to do is start transitioning to ribbon horns
Whick are the obvious future.
It all depends on the sound! I loved my inefficient AR-3 for many years, driven by Dynaco Stereo 120 amp (60 wpc)! Now my KEF LS-50 are very much loved, together with my recent (lower performing) Klipsch RP-600M. Domestic listening rooms seem to obtain top quality sound reproduction from both efficient/inefficient speakers!
Hey Steve, I was just wanting to say thank you for putting Klipsch on my radar. Up until a week or so ago I hadn't even considered them, as basically everything I read about them pointed to them being more of a Bose-esque home theater speaker, unsuitable for music. I recently bought the RP-160M (the previous version of the 600M) to upgrade my ELAC B6s, and have been utterly floored by them. I never got that big speakers sound out of the B6s that I heard was untouchable by headphones, so I figured people must be overstating speakers' greatness. (I've always been a headphone guy. Rocking the Koss ESP-950s and Beyer DT1770 Pros!) Those 160Ms though, they hit me from a completely different angle. Suddenly music had a sense of height, depth, there was more precise placement of instruments and sounds within the soundstage. Sounds even get thrown behind me which just about cause me to spin out of my chair. The mids are sweeter than the B6, they have infinitely more fine detail, they're actually approaching headphone levels in that regard. Even bass on them is perfectly respectable, if slightly down in level compared to the B6.
I'm a little sour I fell for the hype of the B6s, but the joy I feel for falling for the Klipsch hype outweighs that. At just over $300 I feel like I stole the RP-160Ms. Hah.
Klipsch is nothing but an overrated party speaker.
Found amazing deal on Cornwall fours so I’m about to order those.
Very excited
I own a high sensitivity pair of speakers, if you have low sensitivity speakers and you hear a high sensitivity speaker for the first time you can go wow! That sound's amazing but can you listen to them for extended periods? If you have the right gear behind them you can if not listener fatigue will set in quickly.I have owned both types and like both with the right gear.
The thing about horns is they don't sound like they're trying to get loud - like you can feed a bit of power into them and easily drown a less efficient speaker that's buzzing and vibrating from being pushed. I find in general that low sensitivity speakers tend to sound a bit softer/smoother in the midrange until you try to get them very loud, where it helps to have the tweeter be high sensitivity otherwise it will sound a bit "mushier" than a horn. At lower listening levels it doesn't really matter but something like a drum kit tends to have sounds that are louder than you'd think for brief instances in the snare and kick peaks that sound compressed on a less efficient speaker unless it can take a lot of linear power.
I think in the bass end of things, the high efficiency horn designs also sound the tightest in the transients (though by far the biggest factor with sloppy boomy bass I think is the room reverberation). I'm also quite a big fan of ported with large PA woofers. The only compromise is the enclosure sizes tend to get rather huge in order to run bass with minimal power requirements. If you have a wife who doesn't want your subwoofer to look like a giant refrigerator in the sitting room, then a high excursion sealed 12" in a couple of cubic feet with a kilowatt amp should service you quite well, though I'll always be curious about what the horn can do.
I am glad you brought up this subject. I've always wondered what some people have to say about pros and cons of speakers with hi and low sensitivities. There is also the technical difference between sensitivity and efficiency. I hear sensitivity is the more accurate terms? My knee jerk reasoning was that small bookshelf type speakers were low sens and large floor standers with 15" woofers and all that were hi (er) sens. Throw in a horn driver and that clinches the deal. Plus, needless to say, what we "hear" is from moving air vibrations. A small bookshelf speaker just cannot move enough air to give a perceived loudness, or SPL's that can be produced by a much larger speaker system, right? If I'm dead wrong, correct me. A nice compact bookshelf speaker say with a 6" woofer and nice dome tweeter can sound wonderful, full and natural I'm sure, but concert level SPL's? Not so sure. I was reading specs on a budget brand "car" midrange cone driver that said it had a sensitivity of 100db @ 1 watt/mtr. Really? Is that possible? Ya, it had a huge ferrous ring magnet that was like 3 pounds, but still.....I'd figure 92db max IMO. Again, anyone thinks otherwise? Thanks, Steve for your opinions and input on the topic of Hi-Fi. Glad you appreciate horn loaded systems too! I still love my 60 year old University Classics!
Heard the Harbeth 30.2 today. I was glad to come home to my Zu. Anna Thorvaldsdottir's performances absolutely fell apart with the Harbeth. Some of her pieces have a bass percussionist rub their hands over the drum head -as a delicate texture so vital to the melody. I could NOT hear that texture with the Harbeths like i can with the Zu. Seriously, i thought i was listening to a different recording/performance of the piece -In the Light of Air. Sure, with less demanding material, acoustic guitar/singer for example, the Harbet was fine. However, just not the same. Just to add, I'm coming from a Sonus Faber Olympica III speaker, which also made Anna's work sound 2 dimensional, luscious, but 2-D. I think you get the idea.
It almost reminded me of the responses i've had when I hear a jazz guitar player using a high watt amp versus the incredible sound of a Tweed amplifier. You can hear a pick scrape across the string with a Tweed and a nice guitar. I know the sound i want now, low watt Class A tube/efficiency.
R M ... Harbeths with their vocal centric design is great for music that is not busy.
They are awesome when listening to instrumental pieces with vocals. Concerto and chamber music. 5 piece jazz etc.
With busy music, it can get lost. Guess the focus on the mids causes the loss of instrument separation as it does not focus so much on the highs. I may be wrong but that’s my assumption. 😬
Complex crossovers eat details imho ,amplifiers are uneasy with capacitif loads.....thats why kef reference conjugate load matching crossover giving a resistif easy load are much more easy with lots of amplifiers ....
Own a pair of ADS L1230 speakers rated at 94db sensitivity. Love the sound, agree with the comments around the need for a fussy setup. Ultimately, pairing them with a First Watt J2 provided me the necessary, low noise, amplification that made them sound great... I think that pairing your amp and speaker on the basis of sensitivity is of the utmost importance.
Not sure if there are clear winners but I know that a beautiful First Watt Amp likely would not sound nearly as capable on a set of low sensitivity speakers.
It's a tradeoff. We go with our preferences. I do enjoy the wider dynamic swing of a horn/higher sensitivity speaker, but I prefer my Gallo Reference 3.1 speakers which excel at soundstage and inner detail, while not devoid of dynamic jump.
So informative and always a cracking shirt to look at too. I just received my Reisong a10 to hook up to my Klipsch Forte II 's Very excited.
Most high sensitivity speakers don't go very low and have higher intermodulation distortion levels. They usually have a funky frequency response and alot of directivity. Also, if it is using a horn you will have resonances that can be ugly. Good for P.A. systems, bad for home audio.
The one thing Paul Klipsch was very aware of, as a graduate Electrical Engineer, is that IM distortion is the most critical and consequently his Heritage speakers are very low in this.And FM, too. Few speakers can go toe-to-toe with Klipsch designs in this, while providing the wide dynamic range of a live source. That's why they've been around for 74 years and counting.
@@roberte.andrews4621 that may be, but I don't like the sound of them compared to many other speakers. Alot of people love Klipsch speakers.
I'm in the high efficiency camp with my Kilpsch La Scalas that weight in @ 104 dB/Watt meter. I drive them with a Berning MicroZOTL that's rated at a whopping 1 Watt per channel. My other speakers are Fostex FE206 @ 98 dB/Watt meter. Had Maggies, Quad ESLs, acoustic suspension, Helmholz resonators, etc., but horns are what rock my world. One word - Dynamics.
I'll pick sound quality over sound quantity any day.
I remember the acoustic research bookshelf , my uncle had a pair . Nice sound for the small size.
You can always supplement the lack of bass with a quality sub. If a high sensitivity speaker provides better clarity and dynamics, then it makes sense to go that way and add a sub.
Hi Steve, first commenter on this video so I thought I’d take the opportunity to say how much I enjoy your videos. Keep up the good work. Many thanks!
Thanks!
@@SteveGuttenbergAudiophiliac Hi Steve great tips and reviews.
I'm trying to decide if I should get the CXN v2 along with the CXC CD transport and keep my Vintage Yamaha intergraded Amp or just get a CXA60 amp to go with the CXC. Do you think playing my CD's will sound just as good with the CXN and a vintage Amp or the the CXC along with CXA60 will be better. (I presently have a Yamaha CA410 mk1 with ELAC B6 v1)
@@Chapterrifik As someone who has recently purchased the CXN, I would say yes, if you're gonna use it as strictly a streaming device. But with a CD player only, no. I'm not crazy about the DAC in it. The sound is a tad harsh. There are better options.
@@vectorvinnie thanks for the reply but the CXC has no DAC it serves only as a transporter, if I would go with the CXN v2 it would serve as a DAC and a streamer but with my Vintage Yamaha CA410
@@Chapterrifik I know. I own both the CXC and CXN. If you're gonna use the CXC with the CXN, there are better DACS/Preamps than the CXN. The NAD M51, for example, is much better sounding. You can get one used for about the same price as the CXN. Unless you're planning on in the future to fully go streaming, then yes, the CXN would be worth it.
High sensitivity speakers don`t have to be horn or horn loaded, my diy openbaffle speakers have a 98 spl amd produce a room filling sound.
I never really connected Sound Quality and Sensitivity. However, certain technologies tend to be more/less sensitivity. As you mention, horns tend to be on more sensitive speakers.
I have Q Acoustic 3030i speakers and a Cambridge Minx sub, but I have no idea whether they're hi or lo-sensitivity. They sound pretty good nonetheless.
JBL65 speakers since 1978. Sensitivity 105 dB/W/m. Don't listen very loud stuff. Crystal super tweeters. Paper 5" mids and 12" woofers. Klipsch stereo surround. And a sealed Infinity speaker surround that also has a 12 in sub.
Unless you are willing to upgrade (spend more money) on a better amp. Then high efficiency speakers are the way to go. If you have excellent resources and a large room, then low efficiency at a higher volume is best. Just an opinion
usually measured at only 1 khz,,, right....also,,, high sens speakers seem to be more agile,,, faster,, and love to reveal tiny details,,, true or not,,,
One problem I came across with high sensitivity speakers was that, as well as hearing every detail in a recording, you can also hear any noises (surface in the case of vinyl), as well as the slightest hum that comes from loops in cabling or phono stages, or even the slightest 60hz hum from the mains.
Same noise(s) don't seem to be a problem with lower sensitivity speakers.
I think that sensity is not the reason for hum. There are many other things that can cause 60Hz noise, like ground loops, poorly designed amps, poorly shielded cables whatnot. Try using an isolation transformer to break up ground loops. Shields in interconnect can benefit from having shield connected only in one end,
to ground/common, assuming the cable has a twisted pair.
Ground is more of a concept than a reality.
@@Piccodon
Thanks Cqwet Ddbtee,
I understand all that, noise and hum is caused by any or all these things you're mentioning.
The point I was making though is that this noise can be more audible with high sensitivity speakers while, medium to low sensitivity ones seem not to suffer as much on the same volume setting.
At least to my experience.
@@m.9243 If your high efficiency speaker is one of those 104dB/1w/1m units, you just replaced with a not atypical 84dB/1W/1m piece then your volume knob needs to be turned back 20dB.
20dB is 100 times more efficient, thats why you could drive it with 1W and get tinnitus :-). 1W =100W with those.
That is also why a 500W monster amplifier hooked up to a 104dB speaker makes little sense, like strapping a get engine on a baby-stroller.
That's true. When I take a portrait of a beautiful woman, I make sure I don't use my sharpest lens. Everything on this planet has some wrinkles. It's us to you to find an iron.
I live with the pioneer sp-ebs73 (85 dba @ 4 ohms) for 4 years now and love them. I tried a pair of the Klipsch RP-280F (98 dba @ 8 ohms) and loved the punch factor, but I got rid of them, mostly due to the mid range and imaging. I agree with AJ that the best 2 way is a 3 way, and I am now a true believer in concentric drivers. I hope you circle back to the Adante Steve! That may be my next speaker.
My dream set of speakers for my personal use four years has been either a set of altec voice of the theaters or a pair of Klipsch lascala
Heya - I've had some 86db and some 99db (Forte iiis) and have to say that the 86db definitely had more bass, but to the detriment of everything else. The excursion on the bass driver was insane and was really fun to watch moving about. But, the quickness and sharpness was not there where ass the size of the forte's just makes up for it in sheer volume of air movement. The bass isn't as much in terms of quantity, but it seems to fill the room better and has much more texture to it.
p.s. running only 20w pc with the forte's, and rarely go over 9 or 10 o'clock!
I purchased a pair of Klipsch R-15M last year when they went on sale. I have always wanted a pair of Klipsch for their efficiency. I have to say, I absolutely love them. For me, they have plenty of bass and they sound amazing.
I have two systems. Ls50 in one which is I guess is low..er sensitivity and klipsch la scala 104-106 db which is the most I have seen in a speaker. Ls50 is a fantastic speaker. La scalas are in a diffrent league ...they are alive and dynamically beat anything and everything I have heard...
Oh yeah!
I've not heard La Scalas. Are they best placed some distance from the walls? The proportion of their dimensions appear very intriguing to me. I'll bet they offer a world possibilities in terms of amplification.
@@dalefriesen7812 they require a large room. I have placed them close to a back wall because they are in my living room. They are big boxes! My wife calls them washing maschines. Initially I was offended but turns out they are exactly the size of a washing maschine but 1.5 times the hight. Often people place them in corners of a room to enhance the low end. Originally la scallas were designed as a center chanel for a theather where Klipshorns are the main speakers and Heressys are used as sateite speakers.
@@dalefriesen7812 oh and I drive them of a 2A3 based tube amp. All heritage speakers from klipsch love a tube amp.... well thats my oppinion at least
No kidding! I have happily owned Hereseys for decades. You have inspired me now, to aspire to a pair of La Scalas. To my eyes their dimensions are visually exceptionally beautiful. I have no doubt they perform impressively with tube amplification. I'm dying to hear a pair. I believe there may be a local shop that deals in Klipsch. @@ivayloipetkov
I find this video interesting and made me to think two things:
given an unknown speaker, how to test to find its sensitivity and impedance? Would be highly appreciated anseers, thanks...
I’ve been running on my Zu Omen’s for a while now and just recently ordered a set of 1.7i Maggie’s. I also have two amps - a small single ended triode Decware with 6 watts per channel and a set of PS Audio M700s that are 700 Watts into 4ohm per channel. With this I can mix and match based on what I’m listening too and my mood. I’ve also got a Zu Undertone to fill in the bottom octave. It’s the best of both worlds.
Tim Bathras I have the DECware SE84UFO running into Time Window 1A speakers. I’m still tweaking, but it’s very nice even at 2 watts :)
I also at one time owned 1.7i's. They work very well with tubes!
I must say the sound stage is very very different. I seriously can't explain it. I've now done a 180 and went with klipsch horns that are front ported. So it makes no difference when they are against the wall.
Ross Smith I have a small room and front ported is the ONLY option for me for a ported speaker. I’m sorely tempted by the Triangle Gaia II - they are FAST and I’ve heard them driven by my Zen - really nice. I’d look into Klipsch Forte or Cornwall, but both are too big and too much for the room.
ZU Audio Omens being ran off of a solid state NuForce STA-200 at 80watts per channel. Love the sound. I do plan on getting a Musical Paradise 5watt per channel tube amp soon just to see how it pairs with the ZU’s but I am all in on high efficiency speakers. Not that low sensitivity is bad, it just limits amplifier choices and if you want good tube and high watts you have to spend a ton of money.
I like my Klipsch R-51M and R-120SW combo so much that bought some R-820F towers on sale. They sound pretty good and have 97dB sensitivity. I decided to finally give Tidal a try and I can't tell you how happy I am. My 1991 Pioneer VSX-D1S is powering them until I save enough for an amp or receiver.
Pretty good? :/ Do the 820's "lose" something/anything that the R-51's have? I have the 51's and was considering "going for more of That". I don't want to lose ANY of whatever I'm luvin' in exchange for higher volume.
It's a matter of complimentary mating. The problem with the current state of amp design is that they require a large number of MATCHED active components that overlay perfectly the transfer curves. Or the discordant effects could cause distortion. So, for many people they hear the accuracy of simple amps that by default must have high efficiency speakers. For most , save on the electric bill.
@Sheniquahhh Smith -- Nobody who think Bose represents high fidelity and superior value has any business telling *anybody* to "do more research on the subject, okay?" Bose "research" is all about audio gimmickry and marketing psychology, not faithful reproduction of music, which is what high fidelity means.
I might be crazy but Im loving 94db sensitive speakers with a 12 inch sub.
Enjoyed the video (also enjoyed the many comments). I have to agree with the sentiment of some responders that efficiency is just one aspect of speaker design (albeit an important one that can also affect other driver/speaker parameters). In earlier years I seemed to be drawn to low sensitivity air suspension designs. When I started trying to design and build my own speakers I started to explore the mid efficiency offered by ported enclosures. Eventually I gravitated to transmission line designs. Although there is no denying that personal taste is a factor I believe listener fatigue is also an important consideration. To me you can force drivers to behave a certain way with equalization and/or various active and passive crossovers or you can choose well designed and matched drivers and gently persuade them to behave with minimal passive cross over circuits. To me forcing drivers to do things they don’t want to do invites rebellion. This rebellion takes the form of unwanted distortions. The second gentler approach seems to more naturally enhance the drivers qualities. I believe the more the drivers are forced the less natural they sound and this invites listener fatigue.
This was awesome man!
Skip to 8:45 if you would like to hear his answer!
Preferring Low Sensitivity spkrs. for 50+ years, your Apologetics of High Sensitivity speakers is fascinating. The largest caveat applying in my case is s-i-z-e. Fuller-range HS spkrs tend to be b-i-g, occupy a lot of space, and might require extra-careful positioning for bass balance. Am tempted to experiment.
My favorite low sensitivity speakers were Totem Mani-2, 85 dB, isobaric design, with a good powerful amp, it can sound glorious. I have not owned anything above 86 dB speakers, but someday I would like to try Devore Orangutan speakers.
Waitaminutesilly I just bought a pair of Mani-2's.
They sound great.
I love my Klipsch La Scalas at 104dB with 1 watt, however they are a bit of a problem to match with home theater surround speakers since I just can't afford that sensitivity in my 7.1 system.
Somewhat dependant on amp of choice. I run Avantgarde Duo's, with 8- 22w SET's. I also have some JM Labs Alcor..they like a couple hundred watts on tap. The SET might work with the Alcors(medium sensitivity) but probably not going to get the best from them.
With the Duo's you get it all(dynamics and fantastic low end), due to the powered sub.
I guess it is because if you have a passive speaker, you will lose less details when trying to send the signals through the crossover. But active speakers can be an alternative if you want high detail.
@Watt a Flac 200 dollar studio monitors is something of the most detailed speakers I have heard. You don't need to spend a fortune to get revealing speakers
@Watt a Flac Most studio monitors have active crossover and one amplifier per driver. I did get your point. I guess.
@Watt a Flac mackie.com/products/sp260 You can buy new ones too. For even a cheaper price.
I recently started listening to some 50s or 60s Peerless speakers, and even though they're not very accurate at all, I find them so much more enjoyable to listen to than my inefficient Quadral bookshelf speakers. (actually they're rear channel speakers but I'm using them on my desk)
I'm now actually considering Replacing those little (5" drivers) speakers with these old Peerless speakers even though they would take up so much more room on my desk, they're 8" drivers.
Well i'm currently using an 8wt per side tube amp soooo high sensitivity.
I went from proac response 1sc for 22 years to klipsch Cornwall iv. I can’t get my jaw off the floor.
By going with high sensitivity speakers, does that mean one can buy more modestly powered amplification and therefore save some money? Which can be used to buy more music ;-)
In a sense, yes, BUT ... GOOD low powered amplification can be as expensive as not-as-good higher power amplification. I’m running a 2-watt tube amp of very high quality into speakers that have 92dB sensitivity in a small room. The sound is very good, but the amp cost > $1K. That’s NOT a lot by tube amp standards, but it may seem expensive to some. I could have gone up in price, but have wanted to have this amp for about 20 years. In this case the savings does translate into more records as well as money for other component upgrades.
@@PanAmStyle Are you using a DECWARE SET 2 WATT TUBE AMP by chance? Thanks!
john matson Yes! I got it in September, around the time the 25th anniversary started shipping.
I don't think so. Low sensitivity speakers work best with lower powered tube or Class A amps which often cost more than the conventional 100-200 watt amps. I think low sensitivity are less amp intolerant. High sensitivity needs better power. Some 8-15 watt tube integrateds cost $5K and up to $20K. Don't play a 97 db speaker with a cheap 200 watt amp . You will regret it with listener fatigue and you won't be able to turn the volume more that one or two notches before you get too loud.
Joseph Franceski My 2 watt Zen amp easily drives my 92db Time Window 1A speakers and sound very good. The DCMs are not perfect by any means and I may replace them. The amp cost about $1.1K
Full horn loading is best have WE 15A Community Leviathans Giant front Conicals Pairs of RCA MI Shearer horns Altecs RCA Victor front horns As well as modern monitors from Morel SEAS RAAL. And the front horns are by far the best for overall performance at high or low SPL levels in small or large rooms. The monitors sound fine and since small thats cool and all but not close to the front horns. AR were interesting but if you look at what people want today its not the old AR but the loudspeakers it suposedly obsoleted.
Acoustic suspension has huge roll-off of sound pressure levels in the bass, which is a form of distortion often overlooked. I wish I had all of the money spent on A-R, KLH and Boise . I finally figured out that Bell Labs' findings were valid and scientific and that audiologists have discovered how the human ear works long ago. Small speakers with direct radiators do not couple with the air as efficiently as large radiators with compression horn drivers. Dynamics are compressed with sealed boxes full of sound-damping material. Although speakers cannot exactly duplicate live instruments, they approach their dynamic range and that's where the realism begins...and the pleasure. Don't blame me. I wish small and cheap were better.
I am leaning more and more to get a pair of Klipsch Cornwall IV. I bought a pair of Cerwin Vega HED 504 R on an auction just for fun. ANd Yes, it's not as near good sounding as my other speakers. But what a fun, but I need little better sound quality in the end. So..Klipsch...Here I come....
What? You're going to trust 74 years' of research and development over the latest in snake oil savvy?
sensible need quality power source and also electronic in order to avoid noises
my speakers are 88db-8ohm and closed box; they sound great with my 65watt amp
So just a quick fun fact about comparing sensitivity among similar sized speakers: there are parameters that you can easily track with regard to driver displacement, box size and sensitivity. If two different speakers have similar size, driver displacement and low frequency ability.....but one claims much higher sensitivity....someone is doing a lie.
Thanks Steve for being a champion for HE (High Energy!) speakers. You are literally kick-starting a movement and have me convinced that I need to investigate them ASAP.
I am coming from a set of Harbeth speakers and really enjoy the refined yet detailed sound. I do believe there are compromises with HE designs and am concerned that dynamics and energy may not be enough to overcome their lack of refinement.
Would a person who values refinement be better off with a much more powerful amplifier (or bi-amp) to jump start their LE speakers?
I have a pair of ProAc D80R (91dB, 4 Ohm) and I recently bought Avantgarde DUO G2 Omega (107 dB 18 Ohm). OK, there's a big difference in price, but.... wow...the Avantgarde sound so much better! More detailed, fast, alive, refined, precise, outstanding image, really great speakers! I almost can't listen to the ProAc anymore... they seem broken in comparison. So my preference goes definitely to high efficiency speakers. Amplification is The Gryphon.
Did you get a chance to try any of the floor standing speakers Klipsch RP lineup? I like horn loaded tweeters but I worry that a bookshelf won't have quite enough low end for me.
Southfloridelphia thank you for asking this, i am looking at the RP-280f.
It’s a bit frustrating since they’re so new and there’s hardly any reviews out there for them from reputable sources.
Okay, But what about hard to drive headphones vs easy to drive?
To me the question wanting answer is which type of speaker maintains the better definition even at lower volumes or sound pressure levels? I want full range listening, my spouse wants peace and quiet.
One other thing. I would never consider a 3-way speaker lacking horns on midrange and tweeter. It may be surprising that I don't consider horn loading critical to bass. This might cause you to write me off as an ignoramus. For so many of us, the Klipschorn is the crown of creation, and the folded horn really is an historic achievement. Let me put it this way: I'd rather have the Klipschorn than not. Given the budget I would already have a pair in the perfect room we happen to have.
But likely I'll always be constrained by budget. So equally likely I'll never have a pair. The expense of the folded horn will go elsewhere in the system. For bass I already have monster drivers that can make your trouser legs flutter if you care to turn up the volume just a bit. I mean I can feel the bass, not just hear it, and that's what I'm after. It is sublime, many thanks due, no doubt, to a superb crossover, and a massively powerful vintage Pioneer integrated amp. Considering the very high sensitivity of the drivers I use, 100 watts per channel RMS is beyond ridiculous. In my system 10 watts is overpowered. In fact I could probably summon the police using just 5 watts for any length of time.
And the bass would be perfectly lovely, distortion free at deafening volume. No horn is required for this kind of quality bass reproduction. I can't achieve that response from mids or highs, though, without the use of horns.
2 systems:
Low efficiency Kef ls50s spkrs with 250wpc ss monoblocs.
High efficiency Rega Naos with 35wpc tube amp.
Both sound great.
Wouldn't dream of swapping amps
I love my JBL cs3115 and never have any problem with them when it comes to good sounding bass
I currently have a pair of aad 2001 monitors which are 87db and ported interestingly. They sound superb but do need big power to really make them sing . I 1st them with a 5m21 luxman @ 110/ch rms , they needed more. Ended up with a nelson pass design 200/side and they sing . I have owned klipsh kg3.5 and klf 10s which were good sounding speakers but were more of an issue with listener fatigue. I did drive the klf's with a 70/side vintage luxman and they sounded sweet , bright but sweet as early lux ss products were very musical and articulate. I recently purchased a vintage lux piece and would like a set of small Klipsch to add to the mix for more dynamics and better theater performance for movies . Any ideas which newer monitors would be a good choice. I want a smooth but articulate high end and would like something that has deep lows but not boomy mid bass.
Question: You speak of low sensitivity speakers as 85db and High sensitivity as 96, 97, 98db and you say they both have their advantages. Which makes sense. But what about 90db? At 90db are we getting the best of both worlds or not getting the best of either?
Tannoy! Why no love? I'd like to see a review of the Legacy series, the Eaton, Cheviot and Arden.
Possibly because no one can find a dealer to buy them (in US). One of the speakers I'm interested in auditioning, but not easy to find.
@@Scottlp2 Not easy to audition but they are easy to find online. I found a retailer that offered money back returns if I didn't like the speaker.
Ls3/5a's are very low sensitivity 82 db/w ,but short listening in bbc truck its unbeaten .....but in a movie theatre its lost....there you need long throw projection of waves.....its more difficult to make this flat ...but with todays digital tools its possible
I like high sensitivity speakers. Just built a full range set and won't go back. One problem I had was it made my minor issues more apparent, ie my phone stage. Solved that and I'm one happy camper. They may be no Forte but I can now listen for hours
As a Jbl fanboy I’ve always immersed myself in high sensitivity speakers. The best part is that when you use an active xo you can have a tiny tube amp taking care of the highs and use a d class monster on the lows. I should try something different but old habits die hard.
@Sheniquahhh Smith
Just take your trollish, no-fi, Bose lovin' ears, and GO AWAY!!
@TMac473 . Me too man! This old heart always goes out to U.S. made JBL. Do you think those 4429’s SG showcased will work with a 10wpc p/p vac valve amp? Living where I do there won’t be a chance to hear the two before buying😅
I am in the middle of it all, I like to listen to something between the two ranges. My two speakers have an SPL of 90DdB. I've seen from spec sheets, and advertisements that most are 91Db, and above. I've heard 87 or 86DB speakers at hi fi stores; but as you've explained such loudspeakers need plenty of power from an amplifier.
Guttenberg is full of it!
I prefer the most efficient I can get within reason. I can't think of any audio reason not to. I will argue that a lower impedance speaker will change the output of the amp where the efficiency has no effect. ( other than being louder per watt ) For most normal quality amps, 8 ohms is the way to go. If you find 4 ohm speakers you will need a higher quality amp to drive them as the impedance is liable to fluctuate from 1-4 ohms and most
I have a pair of klipsch Cornwall II that I have not used in several years. I have a pioneer school 828 what should I do to bring them to operation
You are missing out on a treat. Replace CWII crossovers with Bob Crites' and have tech put new capacitors, etc. in the Pioneer. This system will beat most of the newer set-ups that are affordable. I've done it and wish I went there sooner.
My audio journey began 20 years ago with an old pair of Magnepan SMGas. They were affordable but needed (i thought) 250+ watts before they really opened up. Loved the speakers couldn't find an amp. Find an amp I love wouldn't drive my speakers. Get rid of the maggies live with something else for a year, want the maggies back. The only system I ever had that made me consider box speakers was a pair of Klipsch Heresy's with a Jolida 102b 20w integrated and an old Denon turntable. It was the most delicate, nuanced sound I ever had in my living room, but it was bass shy. My dream would be a pair of modded 1.6 maggies that could be driven by a Prima Luna integrated (30W). Openness and delicacy that is unrivaled, but still with weight and authority. Will one day take the autoformer leap.
Now I am really considering a pair of horn speakers my next stereo system upgrade.
Take alisten before you buy , horn speakers are great but not for everybody, use your own amp to test them, some solid state amps may sound harsh on the majority of the horns.
HASHEAVEN, my experience as well. Perhaps horn speakers are best paired with tube amplification or “softer” solid state.
@@HASHEAVEN thank you for an advise, I'll definitely use it.
@Sheniquahhh Smith
And you: What a troll!
NOW GO AWAY!!
Sheniquahhh Smith wtf is your problem you fucking douche troll?