Thanks for stopping by! If you’d like to support my channel here are a few ways: Patreon: www.patreon.com/erinsaudiocorner Contribute via PayPal: www.paypal.com/donate?hosted_button_id=CLHSW4L9SBSLY Generic Affiliate Links to use while shopping: Amazon: amzn.to/3v6i6ov Audio Advice: www.audioadvice.com/?referral=erins-audio-corner&b=3 Crutchfield: shop-links.co/cgZmmT81jmh Monoprice: bit.ly/3yAY6NH Parts Express: bit.ly/3AqfWo3 ^ any purchases you make using these helps earn me a small commission at no additional cost to you. These commissions help me keep this channel going through paying for new gear to test or miscellaneous hardware needed for reviews.
Hi Erin, do you have that graph of delta's at the end up anywhere? I looked on your website but there is no search, poked around but didn't see it. Thanks Mark
Klipsch has always been sleazy that way for 2 decades or more, they're the Walmart-class snake oil brand that target a very specific group of customers. lol
Thanks Erin. I bought the revel 226be based on your review and a short listen at a dealer. I couldn’t be happier. You are by far the best speaker reviewer on UA-cam.
@@ErinsAudioCorner we need fair minded data driven guys like you. Something about Amir at audio science review rubs me the wrong way. Testing then listening as he seems to do seems disingenuous and smacks of confirmation bias. His attacks on other reviewers seems mean spirited also.
I remember when I first started designing speakers as a hobbyist, I kept despairing because I couldn't figure out why my designs weren't producing the same types of sensitivity numbers as other brands. I started looking at more objective reviews such as yours and realized that the real reason I couldn't get similar results was because other companies were full of crap! 😂😂😂
Same experience! When we actually start to really hammer down the response peaks and correct for baffle step, the real-world sensitivity of most speakers tends to be much lower than expected. To actually hit 90dB@1W1M, which many speakers "claim" to be able to do, tends to require pro-sound driver sensitivity. Coincidentally, my home theater speakers use the Celestion TF0818 as the midbass driver crossed at about 1500hz to the popular DX25. After "smashing" the baffle step loss down these speakers would qualify as having a "true" 90dB@1W1M sensitivity rating from ~80hz-20Khz. It's an actual high-EBP design intended for pairing with subs.
@@mdocod Yes, the only design I've ever produced that exceeds 90 decibels sensitivity is a large 3-way tower speaker that utilizes a pair of 8-in pro drivers wired in parallel to drive the bottom frequencies. It is 94-95 dB/2.83V/1m anechoic. Case in point, I currently have a little 50 watt chip amp driving it, and it tends to make people's ears bleed and the walls shake with the volume around 15% 😂 I have to explain to people that in order to get a typical pair of bookshelf speakers to play as loud as my towers, they have to put literally 10 times as much power into them, and that's only if the bookshelves will handle the power without compressing or distorting.
I can imagine manufacturers 'hesitate' to advertise their real numbers in order to stay competitive with brands that provide very optimistic numbers. I've seen many topics where people prefer and advice certain speakers just because of this high sensitivity. Cheers to Erin (and other critical sites) for bringin' the truth and unmasking some sketchy business. 👌
This is their real numbers, the problem is users incorrectly assume they use the same standard to measure. That's not the manufacturers' intent, that's only the users' intent. So apples-oranges.
I see a speaker with a 6 inch woofer in a bass reflex cabinet claiming + or - 3db from 40Hz to 20 Khz and a sensitivity of 95 db. I know that has to be a lie I could not see how that would work without horn loading. I am Glad to see your video and learn that I was right. Thank you.
I'm using a set of 3-way speakers with a 6-inch woofer that is only 84db @1w, but they really sing when you give them 100 watts. The bass is very tight and focused, in my (limited) experience.
You mean manufacturers exaggerate their specs to better market their products? I am appalled! Look at my hand clutching these pearls! 😄Great video, man.
Standardization of measurements is what makes comparisons possible. At least Klipsch tells you how they're not standardized. In all events, excellent work and much needed work once again!
Hi Erin, If you think you have trouble with manufactures specs on speakers, have some sympathy for me and my channel! I deal mostly with amplifiers. How about this rating? Manufactures spec 300 watts my tested results 65 watts. An over simplification I know but you get the point!
Your words are pure truth, and I as a person who has been in business for many years, I know very well that almost all manufacturers consider the sale of their goods to be the main goal, and therefore they resort to tricks and deceit, this is normal for them, unfortunately...
Yup, this has always been one of the most confusing specs whenever I go comparing speakers between different manufacturers, to the point that it almost feels meaningless. There’s just no consistency between the manufacturers at all. There really needs to be a (de facto) standard set in the industry.
I will probably never look at sensitivity in my entire life, and I haven't paid attention to that as a specification, ever. Have you ever screwed in a modern light bulb and needed to know how many volts or watts or amps were going into it per lumen? For speakers and light bulbs and basically everything else in this day and age, power is cheap and easy... Or in many cases totally irrelevant like with active monitors. Manufacturers should publish SPL and distortion data I think, but sensitivity doesn't seem to affect sound quality so limiting a system by that spec seems odd when amps are cheaper than ever.
I largely agree with you to a certain extent. However, if you have a large room and like to listen at high levels (which will permanently damage your ears in short time) or have a speaker that is hard to drive and dips very low in impedance with a troublesome phase angle along with it, you may run out of power and clip your amp, which can destroy your tweeters pretty easily.
@@stevenswall Yes, but even if you have unlimited watts, you can't put unlimited watts into a speaker without blowing it up. That's why sensitivity combined with maximum RMS power handling is important.
Thank you Erin for getting this information together. I bought a pair of the Klipsch RP600M's about 3 years ago. There was a lot of hype about these speakers and a friend recommended them to me. I had heard that Klipsch over rates their speaker sensitivity but didn't think it was that far off. BTW, Jamo is pronounced Ya-Mo, not Jam-O.
It is good to have the real numbers, especially if you are using them to figure out how much power you need to hit reference levels. With Klipsch, you will be off by at least 4x power wise. Yikes! The other thing to keep in mind if you are trying to do the calculation, is the 2.83v = 1 watt in to 8 ohm speakers, it takes 4v to = 1 watt in to 4 ohm speakers. So you can pretty much knock down the sensitivity rating a bit more on 6 ohm and lower rated speakers. At least the range you use is generally out of the high impedance range resulting from box tuning. Thank God for small favors 🙂
@@shipsahoy1793 You are correct, my brain was not totally engaged, but the point I made was correct. 2.83V in to a 4 ohm load is a 2 watt input, so you have to knock down the sensitivity that Erin reports by 3db to get the 1 watt sensitivity of that speaker. From there you can figure out the DBw required from an amp to reach the desired output ( and figure out whether the speaker is rated to handle it) To get the best real estimate of sensitivity of a tested speaker, you could estimate the average impedance from 300 to 3000 ( assuming no wild swings in the curve in that range due to the crossover that will likely be in that range on most 2 and 3 way speakers) and then use Ohms law and Watts law to get to the 1 watt sensitivity for that range.
@@jgsabato no problem I knew what you were talking about I’m a retired RF engineer and before that audio, so I can tell you from those experiences that the reason why you’d make a silly mistake like that is because you’re overthinking this thing; it’s really not worth thinking about it on that level .. we didn’t even go down the road of perceived loudness at different frequencies. Erin probably could have narrowed up that 300-3kHz BW a bit. (Less data points😉). 👨🏻 Edit: let me qualify that by saying “on a speaker with a well-behaved impedance over the target frequency range.” I don’t want you to write me another book because I’m not gonna read it. 🤣👨🏻
@@shipsahoy1793 Retired engineer here too, EE by education, but spent 45 years doing Mechanical, Manufacturing, Qualty engineering and learned enough Materials engineering to be dangerous 😛. Such is life when manufacturing Jet Engines. Consulted for a few years after that. The overthinking now comes from stripped gears in the brain not engaging. 😁 Audio has been a 50+ year hobby, as good a vice as any to have.
I'm glad this topic was brought up and explained, so everyone can be aware that the numbers most/some manufacturers supply to the public is either outright wrong or misleading.Measured by peaks/ low-points and not on average..or they only give us numbers at a specific frequency..well I don't listen to just one frequency lol. It friggin irritates me..and it's not just speakers. It's all very misleading and we the consumer have to find out the hard way after we've spent our hard earned dollars. This is why 2nd and 3rd party testing is so important to us...real numbers in real world applications. How these numbers were determined I think Erin said, at least this should be added when giving us the specs from the manufacturer.
Yea you nailed it and I appreciate you and your honesty and speaker measurements I have not bought a set of speakers that didn’t require power. I have a set of speakers that are vintage speakers and I am so pleased with them and I have a set of vintage speakers that cost 3 times the price but I need 1000 watts to wake them up and I have cheap Polk Audio I would rather use , but I have a couple sets of DCM from the original speakers and I will have to say that I like them a lot and they told me that they are only 88db and no more but they sound great.
Kudos to Erin's Audio Corner for posting this and naming names of some of the culprits. This has become an issue in the industry, for example, John Devore of Devore Fidelity has decried the industry's lack of standards for speaker efficiency and the dubious nature of some manufacturer's claims. This is a prime example of why person's claiming measurements don't tell us anything about how a speaker will perform are full of crap; that would be you, Steve Guttenberg.
Thanks for covering this when no one else has. One normally purchases an amp based on speaker sensitivity, so if a speaker is out by 3db, amp might end up being the wrong choice. Magico suck with their sensitivity claims and one wonders about other stuff
And sometimes, the frequency response is too wacky to match properly, so it has to be ballpark. Then you get the "sounds good on one thing, not on the other and vice versa" . It's difficult to pick sometimes
7:32 very important question, not cynical at all imo. If you really check, you will more often than you expect find that what you assumed true / correct is in fact not. Your method is thorough - props. I would also strongly suggest adding the voltmeter used to determine the usual 2 / 2,83V into the equation, especially if it indeed measures Vrms, or Vavg.
This reminds me of the old days when some unscrupulous manufacturers rated amplifiers in ridiculous myriad ways, like "music power", some of them into absurd impedance loads and totally ignoring distortion, sometimes combining multiple channels. It was only after consumers complained that we got a standard of RMS power per channel at, say, 1% THD. So some manufacturers used to rate eg. a 40W RMS per channel amp at like 1000W "music power" (and they didn't tell you that's at 10% THD into 2 ohms, combining 2 or 4 channels, for 1 ms).
Indeed but you may not be happy to know that the current CTA specification which dictates measuring the speaker sensitivity at 2.83V which Erin follows rather than at 1W does a similar thing penalising high ohm speakers vs low ohm and difficult to drive speakers. See my other comments for more detail.
Some say that 2.83V is a misleading ref, you should use 1watt, as this accounts for impedance differences rather than assuming constant 8 ohms. So the 2.83V figure is usually a couple of db higher than the 1 watt figure.
Erin, have you seen "Torque Test Channel" here on youtube? They have come up with a clever ranking chart design to rate tools. Part of it is rating actual performance vs rated performance, and actual performance vs price. It would be interesting to see something like that with speakers.
Happy to see my trusted ELAC rating very consistently ~2db higher. Clearly they're just using a little bit of a different metric, but not that far off and most importantly consistent from speaker to speaker.
I own a pair of Sansui SP1200 from 1973 and even back then the company provided an on-axis measurement on the brochure along with distortion measurements, this is way before computers became a thing. If a company does not at the very least provide these two then you should take your money elsewhere. It’s literally the bare minimum.
Talk about lack of info. I thoroughly enjoy my Emotiva speakers, but I have to wonder why they do not print the impedance of the speaker on the speaker. It wouldn't hurt to have all of the factory specs printed on the speaker. Maybe Emotiva is just that high on the Audiophile ladder. But, hey I can always the "as tested" specs on a speaker from Erin. Thank you Erin!
Honestly, impedance isn’t anything I’ve ever been too concerned with because I use separate power amps. But you are correct. Some of these single number specs are also useless. Might be worth making a video on that.
@@ErinsAudioCorner Thanks. I hope to get a "big boy" separates rig someday. At this very minute I'm running my Emotiva T-Zero set on "large" in my AVR and the 4ohm rating doesn't bother the Onkyo at all. I must say the bass is impressive. I got up and checked to see that my sub was off. Dang - I like it!! 👍😁👍 Numbers do matter, but right now I'm just enjoying the music 🎶. Ahhh. Thanks so much for all you do Erin.
Well said Erin, the despite the fantastic progress that manufactures have made during the 50 years that I have been interested in the world of HiFi, I find it disturbing that they struggle to be clear about their claims, seemingly embracing the megaphone of marketing and the obscuration and folk law proliferated by forums pushing and amplifying their message whilst branding those who seek the truth to be the lost souls. I cringe when I hear the expression "I don't need measurements, I trust my ears".
a on axis frequency response at one meter 2.83 volt(and the ohm graph is usually overlaid right on there), says a lot and are less confusing than a lot single numbers. you get sensitivity out of it or at least sense of loudness. you see the bass extension, you see the ohm load, and more just from one graph. the only thing those marking specs get right are: price, weight, dimensions, color, and you get my point.
@@WendellSexson i do not mind even 1 watt measurement, as long as we get the ohm load graph. its all about consistency and a good standard. if amps did 1 watt efficiency as standard spec it would be a game changer
You have def earned a "sorry not sorry" attitude with regards to this. Epic transparency and honesty, you own a fucking klipple for crying out loud. These manufactures must know they cant keep getting away with this shit. Cheers bud!
Erin!! On the topic, even though you haven't measured yet, have you heard the PSA MT-110s? They seem to check a lot of the right boxes for home theater. I'm looking for sealed, high sensitivity, not insane prices (I'd get the JTR monitors if I could afford them)
I totally buy that Klipsch is bumping their numbers significantly. That's odd coming from a company that says their motto is "No Bull Shit." With that being said, at Audio Advice Live, their demo of the Cornwalls on a Teac 70wx2 amp was one of the best demos of the show, IMHO. I was so impressed I think that's my next buy, amp and all.
My Paradigm 95F's are rated at 94/91dB room/anechoic per their own tech specs, which I appreciated seeing prior to purchase. And they sound fantastic! I'd love to see a 3rd party number like yours for them... Thanks!
I checked out how PSB advertises their sensitivity and they do it the letter. PSB uses anechoic (1W (2.83v)@1m IEC filtered Pink Noise, C-weighted) They then provide a typical room sensitivity which is 2db higher which makes sense.
Amazing subject, thank you so much! In room responses is just not honest from a manufacture in my opinion, I didn't even consider that option in the beginning looking at Klipsch, and was trying to understand how they where able to dodge Hofmanns iron law and in general physics.
With regards to horn speakers measuring 2pi sensitivity is correct because that is the point of horns to direct the sound at the listener,not the walls.😮
My Martin Logan 60XTs have the following: Sensitivity: 94dB/2.83 volts/meter (91dB/1W/meter. Home Theater Review comes in at 90.6db/1W which seems on what you're saying seems to acceptable if I understand what you are saying in your video.
Yea, if their spec is within a couple dB I think that's reasonable. Ideally it would be closer but different measurement methods and calculating the SPL may yield different results. But this is why having the frequency response helps.
That chart is awesome!, but with the labels at an angle it is hard to see what bars line up with what labels. So if you post this table I'd suggest helping me line it up with a dotted line or change the orientation.
In fairness to Klipsch, the corner horn really must be measured in room since it uses the walls. One can see them continuing to do this with the Heresy and Cornwall. No real excuse for them to do this with their discount line though.
Amir at Audio Science Review doesn't allow links to videos with Amazon affiliate links because he wants no advertising on or connected to the site. Erin needs that to generate money for his channel and doesn't like that decision and that much of his content at ASR was penalized. I can see both sides, but wish they were great friends and had a better solution. Both should be feeding each other audience members since they cover different speakers in the same primarily objective way.
@@stevenswall Amir is a narcissist whose ego was threatened by Erin's knowledge and people who followed Erin. Amir used the whole " I don't accept money b.s." to denigrate Erin under the guise of being an "impartial " reviewer. Amir accepts plenty of "anonymous" donations. Until he discloses whom donates to his site he should cease trying to ride on his high horse. He also runs an AV business that isn't disclosed on his website. Amir also doesn't disclose he is a multi-millionaire who made some awful audio products while working at Microsoft. Of course he doesn't need the donations but gladly accepts them. That doesn't sound suspect at all😅🤣😭. Amir's knowledge is better than amateurs but not close to Erin's level of knowledge. Period. But no member of his ASR cult will call him out on all the mistakes he has made measuring gear. Whomever does call him out gets immediately banned from his site. Amir's ego is more fragile than the table lamp from A Christmas Story.
In my experience, the vast majority of speakers of similar design have roughly equal sensitivity in practice. Horns are a bit more efficient, bass reflex next, acoustic suspension, open baffle, planar and then electrostatic. The most sensitive I’ve owned were Tekton Lores at about 90dB. The least were Magnepans, which were power sponges and never seemed to be “loud”, no matter how much I fed them, and I fed them a lot. A 200w amp would go into thermal shutdown at 90dB. You do the math. I currently own Wharfedale Lintons and there is no way that they are 90dB. The Buchardt S300s (rated at 86dB) are louder. I did once have double Advents (sealed) and they got really loud, but add 86dB and 86dB and you have, what, a real 92dB!
Doesn't measuring at 2.83V result in an unfair advantage for lower impedance speakers when one is looking for amplifier power required? 2.83V is 1W for an 8Ohm speaker but 2W for an 4Ohm speaker. Wouldn't be better if the sensitivity was quoted at 1W rather than 2.83V?
@@ErinsAudioCorner Indeed but you have not answered my question. Most consumers need to check the sensitivity to select an amp not in order to know the sensitivity at a constant voltage. Consumers do not care about output voltage. Two 89db speakers at 2.83V and at 1m will have different power requirements for the same output level. You will need to deduct 3db from the rating of a 4Ohm speaker to make it comparable to an 8Ohm one with regards to their power requirements. Furthermore, since true speaker impedance is not constant throughout the frequency range, disregarding the impedance in the rating makes the rating even more worthless. Quite a few manufacturers quote sensitivity at 1W.
@@ErinsAudioCorner Maybe you are still not getting what I am saying. Yes, they are constant voltage devices but they need more power for that voltage when load decreases, I'm sure you know that. Consumers DO NOT understand neither do they CARE about voltage. They need to have an idea about how many watts their speakers will require. In a nutshell they care about speaker EFFICIENCY not sensitivity the way CTA and you measure it. John DeVore of DeVore fidelity discusses this exact same thing in a video in his channel named: 'John DeVore goes on a rant about the High End Audio lie that inspired him to start his company'. If you don't care about what I'm saying maybe you care about what he is saying.. He is also discussing about why the CTA standard changed at some point from 1W to 2.83V. Maybe you would want to watch and comment on that video. I personally feel the same as John. Measuring sensitivity at 2.83V is legal cheating that helps manufacturers of lower efficiency speakers. If you don't agree then why don't you tell us why?
@Douglas Blake I have discussed this too much in here and I am not going to discuss this further. YOU can go back and read carefully what I had to say in this and other posts or watch the nice video by John DeVore that I have mentioned. I will only repeat that speaker electrical sensitivity as currently measured in terms of voltage and not power is useless to the consumer. What does a voltage of 2.83V mean to you as a consumer? At which power level does your amp produce 2.83V? You may be surprised to knowthat this depends on the speaker impedance and thus a speaker rated at 89db maybe much much harder to drive than another speaker rated at 89db thus requiring much more power and a much more beefy amplifier. Enough from me on this topic.
Klipshe ratings on Pro Audio setups (ex: any of those massive horn loaded home audio systems) are absolute when it comes to SPL @ 1m/1w. You can also read the spectrum. Thats speakers from the $2500 to $15k.
A few commenters, myself being the most vocal, commented and offered their objections to Erin's insistence that sensitivity should be quoted at constant 2.83V rather than 1W as used to be the case for all manufacturers until the CTA changed its standard. The AES hasn't though, according to a Pro commenter, and in the Pro world 1W is commonly used as well as by many respected high-end manufacturers most of them British. I believe this is a topic that should be discussed in a future video because there are pros and cons to each approach and the audience should be made aware about the difference because it affects their buying decisions. Erin should not be hiding behind a standard or behind what appears more scientific and should consider the repercussions of such a standard with regards to the buying public. After all we are talking about consumer product specs not about a scientific diatribe. I am sure Erin cares about the buying public, hence his channel, so I believe he should consider this issue in a more broad manner. I feel strongly about this since it is the only point which leaves something to be desired out of this fine video.
You have made the statement numerous times in other comments. I have addressed your concern already and given the reason that I choose not to provide the metric that you are requesting. If all speakers were exactly 8ohms all the time then that would make perfect sense. But they are not and, again, I have discussed this in another of your comments. Please do not insinuate that I do not care about the matter simply because I disagree with what you propose. Amplifiers are constant voltage sources. It seems silly to me to try to calculate a single nominal resistance to base 1 watt on. For that matter, I provide impedance phase and magnitude with all of my data sets so you can easily calculate the sensitivity at 1w/1m if you so desire.
@@ErinsAudioCorner I never suggested what you should do with your measurements. I have been discussing about how the manufacturers should quote their measurements and what the repercussions of not doing this means because YOU raised this subject in this video. After all the manufacturers just provide a nominal impedance value fwiw and you have no issue with that, they might as well provide a nominal sensitivity value at 1W, which will make their products more comparable to one another and do away with what is in effect perceptual cheating favouring low impedance difficult to drive speakers. But you are still not getting the gist of what I am saying, not in the technical sense of course, this was never a technical discussion but from the point of view of the average consumer who is your audience. Never mind, good work you are doing nevertheless.
@@Douglas_Blake How thick headed can you be? How hard is for you to understand that quoting at 2.83V and offering that as a metric to buying public, which considers it wrongly to be a measurement of efficiency not understanding the difference between sensitivity and efficiency, skews buying decisions in favour of hard to drive (rather than easier to drive) low impedance speakers? It is not nuclear physics, mate, it is primary school arithmetic. Not getting that means you either have problems in comprehension or are a troll yourself or are invested in the part of the industry which has pushed for such a change in the quoted metrics. It is a good thing that many manufacturers, including all of the pro world, understand this and go the right way. Thankfully, there have been quite a few people in this thread you get this. You don't and neither does Erin, but that's ok. Btw you have not offered any arguments if I recall and Erin seems stuck to the 'that's the CTA standard' excuse.
This is so insightful & valuable. Thank you for sharing your data and explanations on this stuff. any experience with Tekton's speakers? I'm looking at them to pair with low-ish tube amps. Would be curious if they are shining us in Klipsch-like fashion...
Well, I'm glad Stereo Integrity is giving correct measurements for their drivers based on your review of the M3 Carbons. Hopefully you will measure their new 8" driver when it comes out. The 8" drivers you reviewed so far are just meh 😕 for what I'm looking for.
There are some speaker that are made with the Sensitivity or Efficiency not written in dB but written only like 1.8 Watt or 2.5 Watt. What does that mean , what is their sensitivity in dB then ?
I kind of attribute good dynamics, albeit anecdotally, to a high QMS, and to linear BL and KMS curves up to some target SPL for general listening, action movies, whatever, and the used x-over settings for the drivers, so basically high xmax in short. Can they get high linearity in the motor and suspension AND get high sensitivity and mechanical efficiency? I've had good success with higher QMS for stuff that's more effortless and transparent, but it's no guarantee at all. Some say that stuff doesn't matter and that motor strength WAY out paces mechanical efficiency. The other factor I've generally found is cone material can play a somewhat moderate role in the bite/level of detail it can do. For example poly cones are always soft in detail. Some play with a thicker foam sandwich type of construction to bring up rigidity in a poly setup, but detail tends to follow the aluminum cones and the composite cones most specifically. It's not specifically dynamics, but it is level of detail, edge of note, bite, articulation, whatever you want to call it which will give you a little more amplitude and bite to the notes. But I've also used aluminum cone subs that were as thick as mud and a foam poly cone with good detail. Subs are one thing, but higher frequency drivers are far more sensitive to cone material choice. A fiber tweeter will never sound like a metal tweeter. Personally, I've never really cared much about sensitivity of a driver. The only time I care is when I'm trying to pair a 2-way or 3-way together and want to stay with a simple off the shelf x-over for ease. I want very close sensitivity and a LOT of linear frequency overlap across the x-over range. Power is cheap, as the old saying goes. However, low sensitivity does require high thermal handling. If you do want to play with a low sensitivity driver, it better have a pretty high wattage rating. Double the wattage only gets you 3dB, so it quickly gets really, really hard to catch up to a sensitive driver when the other driver is way out of sync. An example is Vifa's little 3.5" TG9 mids. They're a great little speaker, but their sensitivity is terrible and power handling low. They take so much attenuation just to pair with any average tweeter or midbass. The SPL graph doesn't represent reality well on them, and they're so quiet. I ran this for a while in an active setup with dedicated amps and level controls and had to get rid of it because it was so limiting. I bumped up in size too, not as good for off axis but better for pairing with an 8" midbass. I'm now using Peerless' Tymphany 5.25" NE149W instead in my passive home setup, and it's such an upgrade and far easier to pair. The SPL graphs show similar SPL too, but they're wildly different in reality. At some point you just can't give a low sensitivity driver enough power to compensate or risk burning them up.
Thank you for your work! Always doubted the data from Klipsch:) So... seems like it's always better to purchase more powerful amp that can be OK with 82-85db speakers? But can you recommend what power should be enough for regular room in regular flat? for example 20sq.m. wit 2.70m ceiling?
1:02 hey, that's great - let's save money not damping enclosure resonances, take the peak of the worst resonance as our sensitivity value, and we have an ultra loud ultra cheap speaker! It's magic, I tells you!
I love high sensitivity and no less than 8 Ohm speakers. And for me, this has always been another reason that I only consider speakers stated by the manufacturer to be 95 dB+ and 8 Ohm because I know that manufacturers inflate their numbers.
It looks like some manufacturers use the sensitivity of their drivers in box WITHOUT CROSSOVER to "lie" without lying because the components indeed have claimed sensitivity. A bit like Gross and Net Horsepower at the wheels in cars.
Sorry I should have left this on the older video, but I just remembered I had this question now. I noticed in the Linton and Model 5 vid, for the MD relative to the fundemental, they had different values. Like the linton was graphed at 1.22, 3.3, and 8.95; and the model 5 was graphed at 1.53, 4.16, and 11.26. Is there any reason for that? does that mean they can't be compared apples to apples? Regarding sensitivity, yeah I never take the manufacturers numbers that serious.
MD is how much distortion there is relative to the fundamental, correct. But they are tested the same way (4 spl: 70/78/86/96dB at 1m). So, you can compare them directly. The differences will just be how much distortion there is at each voltage.
@@ErinsAudioCorner yes, and doesn't that give a benefit to lower impedance speakers? If I somehow made a very very low impedance speaker couldn't I have crazy high sensitivity by your measurement because i'd have nearly infinite power? Not my fault your amp can't handle a .0000001ohm speaker. Couldn't I even put some sort of transformer (??) in there to simulate a very low impedance and then change that to drive a normal-load speakers with however many watts I wanted? Vs a 1 watt test cannot be cheated.
@@zachansen8293 You are quite right. Since consumers tend to equate sensitivity to efficiency for buying decision purposes quoting sensitivity at 1W rather than at constant voltage would make much more sense. Erin disagrees since he is somehow stuck to the science of it and does not seem to understand the repercussions with regards to consumer understanding. See the discussions under my posts in this video for more info. John DeVore of DeVore fidelity has argued about this in one of his videos too. Many manufacturers, mostly British, continue using 1W as a reference and kudos to them imho.
@Douglas Blake but is that the goal? I thought the goal was to figure out how much amplifier you'd need. Otherwise just take speaker max power handling and get a db reading if we're assuming all amplifiers are free, right? Given infinite power, then all I care about is how loud the speaker can get before it begins to seriously increase distortion...or break.
Very useful and direct video; it’s a shame that it is necessary. Would not have thought that a well-known company like Klipsch would be guilty of such overstatement.
Jeremiah, thank you for watching and I’m glad this helped. As Douglas said, Klipsch does tell how they rate their speakers but it’s so abnormal that it can be viewed as deceitful *if* one doesn’t know how they are rated. And the real issue is that retailers don’t tell us. I think that’s due to them not understanding the significance or manner, either.
Klipsch has used "fuzzy" specs for some time. Between producing some really fatiguing speakers and fudging their spec data (for the most part), I have them scratched off my speaker manufacturer list.
Kanto doesn't seem to offer much information. But I like their overall package and components. Maybe that's the risk I'm willing to take. But definitely concerned.
I was planing on buying a set of pure audio project trio 15s that are stated @96db - you think thats a true statement. I wonder has anyone tested them? Do you know of any speakers that could work well with a 45 tube amp?
At least for your average dynamic driver bookshelf speaker there are a couple of rules of thumb. You see a ported speaker rated at more than 85db you know the manufacturer is probably exaggerating. For sealed speakers the number drops to about 82-83db.
same driver in a sealed or ported cabinet has same sensitivity, only the bass is different. if you have some kind of sealed box optimized driver for example subwoofer then the moving mass might be higher and you get lower sensitivity by a few db across the range if they did not added more power magnet.
@@sudd3660 Not true. Read up about the differences in principle between sealed and ported speakers. Back pressure in sealed speakers results in the driver needing more power to move. So, the difference is in the box operating principle not the drivers.
Love your videos. I have begun the rabbit hole of sound quality for auto and home theater about a year ago. Your videos have helped tremendously. This video really hit home as I begin looking for an improvement for my home theater left, right, and center. Do you have a list of speakers that you recommend me looking into? I would love to see speaker lists for this situation, but also other speaker lists for people who have different needs and budgets for audio. When I scroll the speaker reviews, it is overwhelming since I don't know which speakers are lowered priced and which speakers can sound good without external amplification. I am using a Yamaha RX-V679 receiver. No pre outs. No external amplifiers. I measured the left speaker to be at 21 vrms before clipping, which is around 75 watts for 6ohm. I have a large living room and sit 14 feet from the speakers. I currently have the Sony sscs3 tower for left and right. I have the matching center and surrounds. I have come to realize they just don't sound good compared to the upgrade I completed in my car this year. The Yahama receiver does have pEQ, but it is preset frequencies, so I cannot fine tune. This did help the sony speakers tremendously, but I'm still not satisfied with overall sound. I do have the BIC 12" sub, which I purchased before I saw your review. I used a minidsp with the sub, and that made a tremendous difference in response, impact, and integration with the sonys. Your video on sub placement was a big help. I also watched your center channel video, and I saw the same dips in the Mid range as you showed when I tested over the weekend. I would like to get a three way center as you mentioned, and left and right that are similar in sound. Thanks for all your work.
Kudos to you, Erin. I also am so tired of all these audio equipment manufacturers hiding product truths from consumers who actually care how they are spending their money! Someone needs to kick these guys in the a$$. Thank you, my friend! 👏👨🏻
What about amplification topography ? How does that affect sensitivity? I would think that Class A amplifiers may provide higher levels at various frequencies. Am I wrong?
Erin - I have a question - how do I set the volume level to be at 2.83V? And doesn't the speaker impedance have a large effect on the output? Because the sensitivity *used* to be 1 watt; and now it is 2.83V.
@Douglas Blake Okay, good to know. The voltage seems a little arbitrary though, since speakers are obviously varied impedance. At least 1 watt takes the speaker impedance into account. But figuring the 1 watt seems like it would be even tougher? Erin's method seems reasonable, to do a average between 80Hz and 3kHz. So, determining the voltage is key.
Thanks for the video. Can you tell the difference between the Emotiva T2+ and B1+ in your measurements and the manufacturer's specs? Thanks in advance :) Great video as usual.
If you measure from 300hz that will include most speakers baffle step, which is generally not fully compensated for an anechoic environment (with good reason). That could pull the average down a bit. I'd probably look at 1khz-5khz or in that range.
@@ErinsAudioCorner Do you mean full compensation (+6dB)? If so, that is not how I design a passive speaker - I would compensate accounting for a bit of room gain. In an active speaker of course there is good case for full free apace compensation because its easy to add an adjustment control.
@@ErinsAudioCorner Sorry I should have thought more before commenting. My point only makes sense if the manufacturer specified an in-room SPL - if not specified I would certainly assume anechoic.
![Lp. Сердце Вселенной #60 РОЖДЕНИЕ ЛОЛОЛОШКИ [Финал] • Майнкрафт](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/YoR0pAV9FVQ/mqdefault.jpg)
Thanks for stopping by! If you’d like to support my channel here are a few ways:
Patreon: www.patreon.com/erinsaudiocorner
Contribute via PayPal: www.paypal.com/donate?hosted_button_id=CLHSW4L9SBSLY
Generic Affiliate Links to use while shopping:
Amazon: amzn.to/3v6i6ov
Audio Advice: www.audioadvice.com/?referral=erins-audio-corner&b=3
Crutchfield: shop-links.co/cgZmmT81jmh
Monoprice: bit.ly/3yAY6NH
Parts Express: bit.ly/3AqfWo3
^ any purchases you make using these helps earn me a small commission at no additional cost to you. These commissions help me keep this channel going through paying for new gear to test or miscellaneous hardware needed for reviews.
Hi Erin, do you have that graph of delta's at the end up anywhere? I looked on your website but there is no search, poked around but didn't see it. Thanks Mark
As soon as I saw the title, I knew this was going to point out Klipsch as crazy ratings
Klipsch has always been sleazy that way for 2 decades or more, they're the Walmart-class snake oil brand that target a very specific group of customers. lol
Thanks Erin. I bought the revel 226be based on your review and a short listen at a dealer. I couldn’t be happier. You are by far the best speaker reviewer on UA-cam.
I really, really like that speaker.
@@ErinsAudioCorner we need fair minded data driven guys like you. Something about Amir at audio science review rubs me the wrong way. Testing then listening as he seems to do seems disingenuous and smacks of confirmation bias. His attacks on other reviewers seems mean spirited also.
I remember when I first started designing speakers as a hobbyist, I kept despairing because I couldn't figure out why my designs weren't producing the same types of sensitivity numbers as other brands.
I started looking at more objective reviews such as yours and realized that the real reason I couldn't get similar results was because other companies were full of crap! 😂😂😂
Same experience! When we actually start to really hammer down the response peaks and correct for baffle step, the real-world sensitivity of most speakers tends to be much lower than expected. To actually hit 90dB@1W1M, which many speakers "claim" to be able to do, tends to require pro-sound driver sensitivity.
Coincidentally, my home theater speakers use the Celestion TF0818 as the midbass driver crossed at about 1500hz to the popular DX25. After "smashing" the baffle step loss down these speakers would qualify as having a "true" 90dB@1W1M sensitivity rating from ~80hz-20Khz. It's an actual high-EBP design intended for pairing with subs.
@@mdocod Yes, the only design I've ever produced that exceeds 90 decibels sensitivity is a large 3-way tower speaker that utilizes a pair of 8-in pro drivers wired in parallel to drive the bottom frequencies. It is 94-95 dB/2.83V/1m anechoic. Case in point, I currently have a little 50 watt chip amp driving it, and it tends to make people's ears bleed and the walls shake with the volume around 15% 😂 I have to explain to people that in order to get a typical pair of bookshelf speakers to play as loud as my towers, they have to put literally 10 times as much power into them, and that's only if the bookshelves will handle the power without compressing or distorting.
This man should be in the top 10 audio channels
He is
I agree!
I can imagine manufacturers 'hesitate' to advertise their real numbers in order to stay competitive with brands that provide very optimistic numbers. I've seen many topics where people prefer and advice certain speakers just because of this high sensitivity.
Cheers to Erin (and other critical sites) for bringin' the truth and unmasking some sketchy business. 👌
This is their real numbers, the problem is users incorrectly assume they use the same standard to measure. That's not the manufacturers' intent, that's only the users' intent. So apples-oranges.
Thanks for bringing the truth, Erin. Manufacturers do the same thing with F3 and F10 numbers.
Indeed. Almost talked about it in this video but decided to save it for its own.
YES! F3 and F10 numbers are all over the place!
Right on...
It's all good you just need those $2 2" drivers that can play 20Hz -20kHz. And yes, technically they can do that lol
I see a speaker with a 6 inch woofer in a bass reflex cabinet claiming + or - 3db
from 40Hz to 20 Khz and a sensitivity of 95 db. I know that has to be a lie
I could not see how that would work without horn loading. I am Glad to see
your video and learn that I was right. Thank you.
I'm using a set of 3-way speakers with a 6-inch woofer that is only 84db @1w, but they really sing when you give them 100 watts. The bass is very tight and focused, in my (limited) experience.
You mean manufacturers exaggerate their specs to better market their products? I am appalled! Look at my hand clutching these pearls! 😄Great video, man.
This is a NECESSARY COMMUNITY SERVICE!!! 👏 Thanks, Erin!!
No problem!!
Standardization of measurements is what makes comparisons possible. At least Klipsch tells you how they're not standardized. In all events, excellent work and much needed work once again!
Top drawer no bullshit video. Erin delivers again. Thankyou. Keep up the great work.
Thanks Erin. I had no idea that there wasn't a standard that sensitivity was measured by across manufacturers. Great info for the masses!
Thanks!
Hi Erin, If you think you have trouble with manufactures specs on speakers, have some sympathy for me and my channel! I deal mostly with amplifiers. How about this rating? Manufactures spec 300 watts my tested results 65 watts. An over simplification I know but you get the point!
Wow. That's terrible. Are they using a very different THD limit for that rating or something?
You give us graphs and talk about what you are seeing. You are straight with us if the speaker is good or bad
Your words are pure truth, and I as a person who has been in business for many years, I know very well that almost all manufacturers consider the sale of their goods to be the main goal, and therefore they resort to tricks and deceit, this is normal for them, unfortunately...
Yup, this has always been one of the most confusing specs whenever I go comparing speakers between different manufacturers, to the point that it almost feels meaningless. There’s just no consistency between the manufacturers at all. There really needs to be a (de facto) standard set in the industry.
I will probably never look at sensitivity in my entire life, and I haven't paid attention to that as a specification, ever.
Have you ever screwed in a modern light bulb and needed to know how many volts or watts or amps were going into it per lumen?
For speakers and light bulbs and basically everything else in this day and age, power is cheap and easy... Or in many cases totally irrelevant like with active monitors.
Manufacturers should publish SPL and distortion data I think, but sensitivity doesn't seem to affect sound quality so limiting a system by that spec seems odd when amps are cheaper than ever.
I largely agree with you to a certain extent. However, if you have a large room and like to listen at high levels (which will permanently damage your ears in short time) or have a speaker that is hard to drive and dips very low in impedance with a troublesome phase angle along with it, you may run out of power and clip your amp, which can destroy your tweeters pretty easily.
@@stevenswall Yes, but even if you have unlimited watts, you can't put unlimited watts into a speaker without blowing it up. That's why sensitivity combined with maximum RMS power handling is important.
@@scotth6814 I think you need SPL in there.
@@stevenswall Sensitivity is measured in SPL.
Thank you Erin for getting this information together. I bought a pair of the Klipsch RP600M's about 3 years ago. There was a lot of hype about these speakers and a friend recommended them to me. I had heard that Klipsch over rates their speaker sensitivity but didn't think it was that far off. BTW, Jamo is pronounced Ya-Mo, not Jam-O.
I simply love this channel.
It is good to have the real numbers, especially if you are using them to figure out how much power you need to hit reference levels. With Klipsch, you will be off by at least 4x power wise. Yikes!
The other thing to keep in mind if you are trying to do the calculation, is the 2.83v = 1 watt in to 8 ohm speakers, it takes 4v to = 1 watt in to 4 ohm speakers. So you can pretty much knock down the sensitivity rating a bit more on 6 ohm and lower rated speakers. At least the range you use is generally out of the high impedance range resulting from box tuning. Thank God for small favors 🙂
Ohm’s Law says 2V, not 4V, provided you’re talking about a resistive load (you can’t undermine George Simon…
@@shipsahoy1793
You are correct, my brain was not totally engaged, but the point I made was correct.
2.83V in to a 4 ohm load is a 2 watt input, so you have to knock down the sensitivity that Erin reports by 3db to get the 1 watt sensitivity of that speaker.
From there you can figure out the DBw required from an amp to reach the desired output ( and figure out whether the speaker is rated to handle it)
To get the best real estimate of sensitivity of a tested speaker, you could estimate the average impedance from 300 to 3000 ( assuming no wild swings in the curve in that range due to the crossover that will likely be in that range on most 2 and 3 way speakers) and then use Ohms law and Watts law to get to the 1 watt sensitivity for that range.
@@jgsabato no problem I knew what you were talking about I’m a retired RF engineer and before that audio, so I can tell you from those experiences that the reason why you’d make a silly mistake like that is because you’re overthinking this thing; it’s really not worth thinking about it on that level .. we didn’t even go down the road of perceived loudness at different frequencies.
Erin probably could have narrowed up that 300-3kHz BW a bit. (Less data points😉). 👨🏻
Edit: let me qualify that by saying “on a speaker with a well-behaved impedance over the target frequency range.” I don’t want you to write me another book because I’m not gonna read it. 🤣👨🏻
@@shipsahoy1793 Retired engineer here too, EE by education, but spent 45 years doing Mechanical, Manufacturing, Qualty engineering and learned enough Materials engineering to be dangerous 😛. Such is life when manufacturing Jet Engines. Consulted for a few years after that. The overthinking now comes from stripped gears in the brain not engaging. 😁
Audio has been a 50+ year hobby, as good a vice as any to have.
I'm glad this topic was brought up and explained, so everyone can be aware that the numbers most/some manufacturers supply to the public is either outright wrong or misleading.Measured by peaks/ low-points and not on average..or they only give us numbers at a specific frequency..well I don't listen to just one frequency lol. It friggin irritates me..and it's not just speakers. It's all very misleading and we the consumer have to find out the hard way after we've spent our hard earned dollars. This is why 2nd and 3rd party testing is so important to us...real numbers in real world applications.
How these numbers were determined I think Erin said, at least this should be added when giving us the specs from the manufacturer.
Yea you nailed it and I appreciate you and your honesty and speaker measurements I have not bought a set of speakers that didn’t require power. I have a set of speakers that are vintage speakers and I am so pleased with them and I have a set of vintage speakers that cost 3 times the price but I need 1000 watts to wake them up and I have cheap Polk Audio I would rather use , but I have a couple sets of DCM from the original speakers and I will have to say that I like them a lot and they told me that they are only 88db and no more but they sound great.
I was going to post Klipsch is known for this but that mountain in the middle on you graph said it all
Erin is going the lord's work.
Kudos to Erin's Audio Corner for posting this and naming names of some of the culprits. This has become an issue in the industry, for example, John Devore of Devore Fidelity has decried the industry's lack of standards for speaker efficiency and the dubious nature of some manufacturer's claims. This is a prime example of why person's claiming measurements don't tell us anything about how a speaker will perform are full of crap; that would be you, Steve Guttenberg.
Great insight! I love the fact you present data and especially comparisons not available elsewhere.
Boom! Well done Erin! Maybe you can tackle the inconsistencies in F3 and F10 measurements next!
In the works. Thanks!
Good job Erin. Appreciated.
Thanks for watching!
Thanks for covering this when no one else has. One normally purchases an amp based on speaker sensitivity, so if a speaker is out by 3db, amp might end up being the wrong choice. Magico suck with their sensitivity claims and one wonders about other stuff
Great video Erin, thank you!
Another way to look at it:
If you are testing 2 pairs of speakers at home, don't forget to volume match them! 🤘😎
And sometimes, the frequency response is too wacky to match properly, so it has to be ballpark. Then you get the "sounds good on one thing, not on the other and vice versa" . It's difficult to pick sometimes
That thumbnail 😅😭🤣. " It was determined that was a lie". Best thumbnail ever 😭🤣😅
bro you're doing the lord work for the audiophile community!
Thanks for your information, Erin I Concur. In a way that's like Car Companies, with their Gas Mileage Range Rating's. ⛽
7:32 very important question, not cynical at all imo. If you really check, you will more often than you expect find that what you assumed true / correct is in fact not. Your method is thorough - props. I would also strongly suggest adding the voltmeter used to determine the usual 2 / 2,83V into the equation, especially if it indeed measures Vrms, or Vavg.
This reminds me of the old days when some unscrupulous manufacturers rated amplifiers in ridiculous myriad ways, like "music power", some of them into absurd impedance loads and totally ignoring distortion, sometimes combining multiple channels. It was only after consumers complained that we got a standard of RMS power per channel at, say, 1% THD. So some manufacturers used to rate eg. a 40W RMS per channel amp at like 1000W "music power" (and they didn't tell you that's at 10% THD into 2 ohms, combining 2 or 4 channels, for 1 ms).
Indeed but you may not be happy to know that the current CTA specification which dictates measuring the speaker sensitivity at 2.83V which Erin follows rather than at 1W does a similar thing penalising high ohm speakers vs low ohm and difficult to drive speakers. See my other comments for more detail.
music power thats hilarious
Some say that 2.83V is a misleading ref, you should use 1watt, as this accounts for impedance differences rather than assuming constant 8 ohms. So the 2.83V figure is usually a couple of db higher than the 1 watt figure.
This is a very informative video. It clears up some things for me. Thanks Erin !!
Erin, have you seen "Torque Test Channel" here on youtube? They have come up with a clever ranking chart design to rate tools. Part of it is rating actual performance vs rated performance, and actual performance vs price. It would be interesting to see something like that with speakers.
I haven't. I'll check it out. :). Thanks.
Happy to see my trusted ELAC rating very consistently ~2db higher. Clearly they're just using a little bit of a different metric, but not that far off and most importantly consistent from speaker to speaker.
Really helpful information, thanks.
I own a pair of Sansui SP1200 from 1973 and even back then the company provided an on-axis measurement on the brochure along with distortion measurements, this is way before computers became a thing.
If a company does not at the very least provide these two then you should take your money elsewhere. It’s literally the bare minimum.
Hi,
how do we measure sensitivity of a speaker driver that has no enclosure? do we need to play it free air? or we have to make a box for it?
Talk about lack of info. I thoroughly enjoy my Emotiva speakers, but I have to wonder why they do not print the impedance of the speaker on the speaker. It wouldn't hurt to have all of the factory specs printed on the speaker. Maybe Emotiva is just that high on the Audiophile ladder.
But, hey I can always the "as tested" specs on a speaker from Erin.
Thank you Erin!
Honestly, impedance isn’t anything I’ve ever been too concerned with because I use separate power amps. But you are correct. Some of these single number specs are also useless. Might be worth making a video on that.
@@ErinsAudioCorner Thanks. I hope to get a "big boy" separates rig someday. At this very minute I'm running my Emotiva T-Zero set on "large" in my AVR and the 4ohm rating doesn't bother the Onkyo at all. I must say the bass is impressive. I got up and checked to see that my sub was off. Dang - I like it!! 👍😁👍
Numbers do matter, but right now I'm just enjoying the music 🎶.
Ahhh.
Thanks so much for all you do Erin.
Well said Erin, the despite the fantastic progress that manufactures have made during the 50 years that I have been interested in the world of HiFi, I find it disturbing that they struggle to be clear about their claims, seemingly embracing the megaphone of marketing and the obscuration and folk law proliferated by forums pushing and amplifying their message whilst branding those who seek the truth to be the lost souls.
I cringe when I hear the expression "I don't need measurements, I trust my ears".
Surprised how little standardization there is in this industry, its very sad.
a on axis frequency response at one meter 2.83 volt(and the ohm graph is usually overlaid right on there), says a lot and are less confusing than a lot single numbers. you get sensitivity out of it or at least sense of loudness. you see the bass extension, you see the ohm load, and more just from one graph.
the only thing those marking specs get right are: price, weight, dimensions, color, and you get my point.
I don't like the square root of eight voltage standard but at least if you use it consistently it is honest
@@WendellSexson i do not mind even 1 watt measurement, as long as we get the ohm load graph.
its all about consistency and a good standard.
if amps did 1 watt efficiency as standard spec it would be a game changer
Luckily for me, I am male and instinctively overcompensate for everything from hrspwrs to watts
😭😅🤣❤❤
LOL
You have def earned a "sorry not sorry" attitude with regards to this. Epic transparency and honesty, you own a fucking klipple for crying out loud. These manufactures must know they cant keep getting away with this shit. Cheers bud!
Erin!! On the topic, even though you haven't measured yet, have you heard the PSA MT-110s? They seem to check a lot of the right boxes for home theater. I'm looking for sealed, high sensitivity, not insane prices (I'd get the JTR monitors if I could afford them)
I've not heard those. Yet.
@@ErinsAudioCorner please do!!! Would love to hear your opinion and review on PSA products. I have a 7.2 all PSA
I totally buy that Klipsch is bumping their numbers significantly. That's odd coming from a company that says their motto is "No Bull Shit." With that being said, at Audio Advice Live, their demo of the Cornwalls on a Teac 70wx2 amp was one of the best demos of the show, IMHO. I was so impressed I think that's my next buy, amp and all.
My Paradigm 95F's are rated at 94/91dB room/anechoic per their own tech specs, which I appreciated seeing prior to purchase. And they sound fantastic! I'd love to see a 3rd party number like yours for them... Thanks!
I checked out how PSB advertises their sensitivity and they do it the letter. PSB uses anechoic (1W (2.83v)@1m IEC filtered Pink Noise, C-weighted) They then provide a typical room sensitivity which is 2db higher which makes sense.
Great channel here. Thanks for your test and review efforts.
Thank you.
Great vid, thanks. Please keep up efforts to bring some honesty into how audio products are measured and promoted.
Always!
In the '70ies and 80'ies most cimpanies gave exact efficiency figures : kef , rogers, tannoy, jbl, focal, cabasse, philips, isophon, grundig, altec, onken, goto, beyma, rcf, fane...etc....
Amazing subject, thank you so much! In room responses is just not honest from a manufacture in my opinion, I didn't even consider that option in the beginning looking at Klipsch, and was trying to understand how they where able to dodge Hofmanns iron law and in general physics.
Well said.
With regards to horn speakers measuring 2pi sensitivity is correct because that is the point of horns to direct the sound at the listener,not the walls.😮
Great video! Have you considered posting a running list of your measured speaker sensitivities so we can see them all in one place?
Great idea. Would be super helpful so we could get an idea of which brands are making Pinocchio speakers😅🤣
That table shown in the video would be great.
My Martin Logan 60XTs have the following: Sensitivity: 94dB/2.83 volts/meter (91dB/1W/meter. Home Theater Review comes in at 90.6db/1W which seems on what you're saying seems to acceptable if I understand what you are saying in your video.
Yea, if their spec is within a couple dB I think that's reasonable. Ideally it would be closer but different measurement methods and calculating the SPL may yield different results. But this is why having the frequency response helps.
That chart is awesome!, but with the labels at an angle it is hard to see what bars line up with what labels. So if you post this table I'd suggest helping me line it up with a dotted line or change the orientation.
Agreed. It was only meant to show overall trends. I’ll clean it up and make the link public sometime this week.
In fairness to Klipsch, the corner horn really must be measured in room since it uses the walls.
One can see them continuing to do this with the Heresy and Cornwall.
No real excuse for them to do this with their discount line though.
Very informative post Erin.. Excellent.
Glad it was helpful!
Trust no one....but me ... And a few select others.
Sad that this is where the industry has gone.
It must have been so hard to include ASR in that list. Much respect for doing so.
What do you mean by 'hard'?
@@rhalfik challenging and/or difficult
Amir at Audio Science Review doesn't allow links to videos with Amazon affiliate links because he wants no advertising on or connected to the site.
Erin needs that to generate money for his channel and doesn't like that decision and that much of his content at ASR was penalized.
I can see both sides, but wish they were great friends and had a better solution. Both should be feeding each other audience members since they cover different speakers in the same primarily objective way.
@@stevenswall Amir is a narcissist whose ego was threatened by Erin's knowledge and people who followed Erin. Amir used the whole " I don't accept money b.s." to denigrate Erin under the guise of being an "impartial " reviewer. Amir accepts plenty of "anonymous" donations. Until he discloses whom donates to his site he should cease trying to ride on his high horse. He also runs an AV business that isn't disclosed on his website. Amir also doesn't disclose he is a multi-millionaire who made some awful audio products while working at Microsoft. Of course he doesn't need the donations but gladly accepts them. That doesn't sound suspect at all😅🤣😭. Amir's knowledge is better than amateurs but not close to Erin's level of knowledge. Period. But no member of his ASR cult will call him out on all the mistakes he has made measuring gear. Whomever does call him out gets immediately banned from his site. Amir's ego is more fragile than the table lamp from A Christmas Story.
I smiled when he mentioned them...but he is right to do so
In my experience, the vast majority of speakers of similar design have roughly equal sensitivity in practice. Horns are a bit more efficient, bass reflex next, acoustic suspension, open baffle, planar and then electrostatic. The most sensitive I’ve owned were Tekton Lores at about 90dB. The least were Magnepans, which were power sponges and never seemed to be “loud”, no matter how much I fed them, and I fed them a lot. A 200w amp would go into thermal shutdown at 90dB. You do the math.
I currently own Wharfedale Lintons and there is no way that they are 90dB. The Buchardt S300s (rated at 86dB) are louder.
I did once have double Advents (sealed) and they got really loud, but add 86dB and 86dB and you have, what, a real 92dB!
Wouldn't that be 89dB? Or am I thinking of impedance 8 vs 4 ohm paralleling ?
Doesn't measuring at 2.83V result in an unfair advantage for lower impedance speakers when one is looking for amplifier power required? 2.83V is 1W for an 8Ohm speaker but 2W for an 4Ohm speaker. Wouldn't be better if the sensitivity was quoted at 1W rather than 2.83V?
The CTA standard uses 2.83 V.
@@ErinsAudioCorner Indeed but you have not answered my question. Most consumers need to check the sensitivity to select an amp not in order to know the sensitivity at a constant voltage. Consumers do not care about output voltage. Two 89db speakers at 2.83V and at 1m will have different power requirements for the same output level. You will need to deduct 3db from the rating of a 4Ohm speaker to make it comparable to an 8Ohm one with regards to their power requirements. Furthermore, since true speaker impedance is not constant throughout the frequency range, disregarding the impedance in the rating makes the rating even more worthless. Quite a few manufacturers quote sensitivity at 1W.
@@razisn (nearly all) amplifiers are constant voltage devices.
@@ErinsAudioCorner Maybe you are still not getting what I am saying. Yes, they are constant voltage devices but they need more power for that voltage when load decreases, I'm sure you know that. Consumers DO NOT understand neither do they CARE about voltage. They need to have an idea about how many watts their speakers will require. In a nutshell they care about speaker EFFICIENCY not sensitivity the way CTA and you measure it. John DeVore of DeVore fidelity discusses this exact same thing in a video in his channel named: 'John DeVore goes on a rant about the High End Audio lie that inspired him to start his company'. If you don't care about what I'm saying maybe you care about what he is saying.. He is also discussing about why the CTA standard changed at some point from 1W to 2.83V. Maybe you would want to watch and comment on that video. I personally feel the same as John. Measuring sensitivity at 2.83V is legal cheating that helps manufacturers of lower efficiency speakers. If you don't agree then why don't you tell us why?
@Douglas Blake I have discussed this too much in here and I am not going to discuss this further. YOU can go back and read carefully what I had to say in this and other posts or watch the nice video by John DeVore that I have mentioned. I will only repeat that speaker electrical sensitivity as currently measured in terms of voltage and not power is useless to the consumer. What does a voltage of 2.83V mean to you as a consumer? At which power level does your amp produce 2.83V? You may be surprised to knowthat this depends on the speaker impedance and thus a speaker rated at 89db maybe much much harder to drive than another speaker rated at 89db thus requiring much more power and a much more beefy amplifier. Enough from me on this topic.
Klipshe ratings on Pro Audio setups (ex: any of those massive horn loaded home audio systems) are absolute when it comes to SPL @ 1m/1w. You can also read the spectrum. Thats speakers from the $2500 to $15k.
A few commenters, myself being the most vocal, commented and offered their objections to Erin's insistence that sensitivity should be quoted at constant 2.83V rather than 1W as used to be the case for all manufacturers until the CTA changed its standard. The AES hasn't though, according to a Pro commenter, and in the Pro world 1W is commonly used as well as by many respected high-end manufacturers most of them British. I believe this is a topic that should be discussed in a future video because there are pros and cons to each approach and the audience should be made aware about the difference because it affects their buying decisions. Erin should not be hiding behind a standard or behind what appears more scientific and should consider the repercussions of such a standard with regards to the buying public. After all we are talking about consumer product specs not about a scientific diatribe. I am sure Erin cares about the buying public, hence his channel, so I believe he should consider this issue in a more broad manner. I feel strongly about this since it is the only point which leaves something to be desired out of this fine video.
You have made the statement numerous times in other comments. I have addressed your concern already and given the reason that I choose not to provide the metric that you are requesting. If all speakers were exactly 8ohms all the time then that would make perfect sense. But they are not and, again, I have discussed this in another of your comments. Please do not insinuate that I do not care about the matter simply because I disagree with what you propose. Amplifiers are constant voltage sources. It seems silly to me to try to calculate a single nominal resistance to base 1 watt on. For that matter, I provide impedance phase and magnitude with all of my data sets so you can easily calculate the sensitivity at 1w/1m if you so desire.
@@ErinsAudioCorner I never suggested what you should do with your measurements. I have been discussing about how the manufacturers should quote their measurements and what the repercussions of not doing this means because YOU raised this subject in this video. After all the manufacturers just provide a nominal impedance value fwiw and you have no issue with that, they might as well provide a nominal sensitivity value at 1W, which will make their products more comparable to one another and do away with what is in effect perceptual cheating favouring low impedance difficult to drive speakers. But you are still not getting the gist of what I am saying, not in the technical sense of course, this was never a technical discussion but from the point of view of the average consumer who is your audience. Never mind, good work you are doing nevertheless.
@@Douglas_Blake How thick headed can you be? How hard is for you to understand that quoting at 2.83V and offering that as a metric to buying public, which considers it wrongly to be a measurement of efficiency not understanding the difference between sensitivity and efficiency, skews buying decisions in favour of hard to drive (rather than easier to drive) low impedance speakers? It is not nuclear physics, mate, it is primary school arithmetic. Not getting that means you either have problems in comprehension or are a troll yourself or are invested in the part of the industry which has pushed for such a change in the quoted metrics. It is a good thing that many manufacturers, including all of the pro world, understand this and go the right way. Thankfully, there have been quite a few people in this thread you get this. You don't and neither does Erin, but that's ok. Btw you have not offered any arguments if I recall and Erin seems stuck to the 'that's the CTA standard' excuse.
This is so insightful & valuable. Thank you for sharing your data and explanations on this stuff. any experience with Tekton's speakers? I'm looking at them to pair with low-ish tube amps. Would be curious if they are shining us in Klipsch-like fashion...
can you provide all of us that chart of rated v. actual sensitivity?
Sure. I’ll need to format it so it’s easier to read but I’ll provide the link once I get the time to do that.
Well, I'm glad Stereo Integrity is giving correct measurements for their drivers based on your review of the M3 Carbons. Hopefully you will measure their new 8" driver when it comes out. The 8" drivers you reviewed so far are just meh 😕 for what I'm looking for.
There are some speaker that are made with the Sensitivity or Efficiency not written in dB but written only like 1.8 Watt or 2.5 Watt. What does that mean , what is their sensitivity in dB then ?
I kind of attribute good dynamics, albeit anecdotally, to a high QMS, and to linear BL and KMS curves up to some target SPL for general listening, action movies, whatever, and the used x-over settings for the drivers, so basically high xmax in short. Can they get high linearity in the motor and suspension AND get high sensitivity and mechanical efficiency? I've had good success with higher QMS for stuff that's more effortless and transparent, but it's no guarantee at all. Some say that stuff doesn't matter and that motor strength WAY out paces mechanical efficiency. The other factor I've generally found is cone material can play a somewhat moderate role in the bite/level of detail it can do. For example poly cones are always soft in detail. Some play with a thicker foam sandwich type of construction to bring up rigidity in a poly setup, but detail tends to follow the aluminum cones and the composite cones most specifically. It's not specifically dynamics, but it is level of detail, edge of note, bite, articulation, whatever you want to call it which will give you a little more amplitude and bite to the notes. But I've also used aluminum cone subs that were as thick as mud and a foam poly cone with good detail. Subs are one thing, but higher frequency drivers are far more sensitive to cone material choice. A fiber tweeter will never sound like a metal tweeter.
Personally, I've never really cared much about sensitivity of a driver. The only time I care is when I'm trying to pair a 2-way or 3-way together and want to stay with a simple off the shelf x-over for ease. I want very close sensitivity and a LOT of linear frequency overlap across the x-over range. Power is cheap, as the old saying goes. However, low sensitivity does require high thermal handling. If you do want to play with a low sensitivity driver, it better have a pretty high wattage rating. Double the wattage only gets you 3dB, so it quickly gets really, really hard to catch up to a sensitive driver when the other driver is way out of sync. An example is Vifa's little 3.5" TG9 mids. They're a great little speaker, but their sensitivity is terrible and power handling low. They take so much attenuation just to pair with any average tweeter or midbass. The SPL graph doesn't represent reality well on them, and they're so quiet. I ran this for a while in an active setup with dedicated amps and level controls and had to get rid of it because it was so limiting. I bumped up in size too, not as good for off axis but better for pairing with an 8" midbass. I'm now using Peerless' Tymphany 5.25" NE149W instead in my passive home setup, and it's such an upgrade and far easier to pair. The SPL graphs show similar SPL too, but they're wildly different in reality. At some point you just can't give a low sensitivity driver enough power to compensate or risk burning them up.
Thank you for your work! Always doubted the data from Klipsch:) So... seems like it's always better to purchase more powerful amp that can be OK with 82-85db speakers? But can you recommend what power should be enough for regular room in regular flat? for example 20sq.m. wit 2.70m ceiling?
1:02 hey, that's great - let's save money not damping enclosure resonances, take the peak of the worst resonance as our sensitivity value, and we have an ultra loud ultra cheap speaker! It's magic, I tells you!
Great information!
I love high sensitivity and no less than 8 Ohm speakers. And for me, this has always been another reason that I only consider speakers stated by the manufacturer to be 95 dB+ and 8 Ohm because I know that manufacturers inflate their numbers.
It looks like some manufacturers use the sensitivity of their drivers in box WITHOUT CROSSOVER to "lie" without lying because the components indeed have claimed sensitivity. A bit like Gross and Net Horsepower at the wheels in cars.
Sorry I should have left this on the older video, but I just remembered I had this question now. I noticed in the Linton and Model 5 vid, for the MD relative to the fundemental, they had different values. Like the linton was graphed at 1.22, 3.3, and 8.95; and the model 5 was graphed at 1.53, 4.16, and 11.26. Is there any reason for that? does that mean they can't be compared apples to apples?
Regarding sensitivity, yeah I never take the manufacturers numbers that serious.
MD is how much distortion there is relative to the fundamental, correct. But they are tested the same way (4 spl: 70/78/86/96dB at 1m). So, you can compare them directly. The differences will just be how much distortion there is at each voltage.
why use volts and not watts? Doesn't that give more power to lower impedance speakers?
(nearly all) Amplifiers are constant voltage devices. Watts is what you get when you add resistance to voltage.
@@ErinsAudioCorner yes, and doesn't that give a benefit to lower impedance speakers? If I somehow made a very very low impedance speaker couldn't I have crazy high sensitivity by your measurement because i'd have nearly infinite power? Not my fault your amp can't handle a .0000001ohm speaker. Couldn't I even put some sort of transformer (??) in there to simulate a very low impedance and then change that to drive a normal-load speakers with however many watts I wanted? Vs a 1 watt test cannot be cheated.
@@zachansen8293 You are quite right. Since consumers tend to equate sensitivity to efficiency for buying decision purposes quoting sensitivity at 1W rather than at constant voltage would make much more sense. Erin disagrees since he is somehow stuck to the science of it and does not seem to understand the repercussions with regards to consumer understanding. See the discussions under my posts in this video for more info. John DeVore of DeVore fidelity has argued about this in one of his videos too. Many manufacturers, mostly British, continue using 1W as a reference and kudos to them imho.
@Douglas Blake but is that the goal? I thought the goal was to figure out how much amplifier you'd need. Otherwise just take speaker max power handling and get a db reading if we're assuming all amplifiers are free, right? Given infinite power, then all I care about is how loud the speaker can get before it begins to seriously increase distortion...or break.
@Douglas Blake So you're saying I should trust the speaker manufacturer specs... ??
Great video, how do you feel about the NHT super zero's? Im guessing I have the original a-450's?
Is there, on your web page, this Sensitivity graph?
Dynamics - Take so many things to get right in the car - It took me like 10 years to get there
Ever tested a Ciare HW321 driver? 93db@1w/1m, would love to know how accurate it is
Very useful and direct video; it’s a shame that it is necessary. Would not have thought that a well-known company like Klipsch would be guilty of such overstatement.
Jeremiah, thank you for watching and I’m glad this helped.
As Douglas said, Klipsch does tell how they rate their speakers but it’s so abnormal that it can be viewed as deceitful *if* one doesn’t know how they are rated. And the real issue is that retailers don’t tell us. I think that’s due to them not understanding the significance or manner, either.
Klipsch has used "fuzzy" specs for some time. Between producing some really fatiguing speakers and fudging their spec data (for the most part), I have them scratched off my speaker manufacturer list.
Would love to see a review of the NHT C LCR Center Channel, seems like it might be a contender for a decent sub $500 center speaker.
Actually, that’s coming in the next few months.
Kanto doesn't seem to offer much information. But I like their overall package and components. Maybe that's the risk I'm willing to take. But definitely concerned.
What specs and design factors impact speakers that sound good at lower listening (60-75dB)?
hi what sensitvity is elac dbr62 thanks
I was planing on buying a set of pure audio project trio 15s that are stated @96db - you think thats a true statement. I wonder has anyone tested them? Do you know of any speakers that could work well with a 45 tube amp?
What you got there in the background? 😜 something good hopefully!
At least for your average dynamic driver bookshelf speaker there are a couple of rules of thumb. You see a ported speaker rated at more than 85db you know the manufacturer is probably exaggerating. For sealed speakers the number drops to about 82-83db.
same driver in a sealed or ported cabinet has same sensitivity, only the bass is different.
if you have some kind of sealed box optimized driver for example subwoofer then the moving mass might be higher and you get lower sensitivity by a few db across the range if they did not added more power magnet.
@@sudd3660 Not true. Read up about the differences in principle between sealed and ported speakers. Back pressure in sealed speakers results in the driver needing more power to move. So, the difference is in the box operating principle not the drivers.
@@razisn surely this effect is at high excursion, otherwise it can not have any effect.
@@sudd3660 Yeah whatever. Read up. A sealed is less sensitive than a ported speaker all other things being equal.
@@razisn just try it yourself, 1 khz tone and plug the port, then you tell me if there was a difference in output.
2.83V @1m @ what frequency?? Voltage reading might be different at different frequencies which can be taken advantage of.
That’s what I’m saying.
Love your videos. I have begun the rabbit hole of sound quality for auto and home theater about a year ago. Your videos have helped tremendously. This video really hit home as I begin looking for an improvement for my home theater left, right, and center.
Do you have a list of speakers that you recommend me looking into?
I would love to see speaker lists for this situation, but also other speaker lists for people who have different needs and budgets for audio. When I scroll the speaker reviews, it is overwhelming since I don't know which speakers are lowered priced and which speakers can sound good without external amplification.
I am using a Yamaha RX-V679 receiver. No pre outs. No external amplifiers. I measured the left speaker to be at 21 vrms before clipping, which is around 75 watts for 6ohm.
I have a large living room and sit 14 feet from the speakers.
I currently have the Sony sscs3 tower for left and right. I have the matching center and surrounds. I have come to realize they just don't sound good compared to the upgrade I completed in my car this year.
The Yahama receiver does have pEQ, but it is preset frequencies, so I cannot fine tune. This did help the sony speakers tremendously, but I'm still not satisfied with overall sound.
I do have the BIC 12" sub, which I purchased before I saw your review. I used a minidsp with the sub, and that made a tremendous difference in response, impact, and integration with the sonys. Your video on sub placement was a big help.
I also watched your center channel video, and I saw the same dips in the Mid range as you showed when I tested over the weekend.
I would like to get a three way center as you mentioned, and left and right that are similar in sound.
Thanks for all your work.
Kudos to you, Erin. I also am so tired of all these audio equipment manufacturers hiding product truths from consumers who actually care how they are spending their money! Someone needs to kick these guys in the a$$.
Thank you, my friend!
👏👨🏻
Glad it was helpful!
What about amplification topography ? How does that affect sensitivity? I would think that Class A amplifiers may provide higher levels at various frequencies. Am I wrong?
No. Speaker sensitivity is related to the speaker only. The amplifier doesn’t alter the sensitivity rating.
Erin - I have a question - how do I set the volume level to be at 2.83V? And doesn't the speaker impedance have a large effect on the output? Because the sensitivity *used* to be 1 watt; and now it is 2.83V.
@Douglas Blake Okay, good to know. The voltage seems a little arbitrary though, since speakers are obviously varied impedance. At least 1 watt takes the speaker impedance into account. But figuring the 1 watt seems like it would be even tougher?
Erin's method seems reasonable, to do a average between 80Hz and 3kHz. So, determining the voltage is key.
@Douglas Blake That's what I was wondering. I will try this on my MLTL-6 speakers, and see where I come out.
Thanks for the video. Can you tell the difference between the Emotiva T2+ and B1+ in your measurements and the manufacturer's specs? Thanks in advance :) Great video as usual.
If you measure from 300hz that will include most speakers baffle step, which is generally not fully compensated for an anechoic environment (with good reason). That could pull the average down a bit.
I'd probably look at 1khz-5khz or in that range.
Baffle step should be neutral. In which case, it won’t impact the sensitivity.
@@ErinsAudioCorner Do you mean full compensation (+6dB)? If so, that is not how I design a passive speaker - I would compensate accounting for a bit of room gain.
In an active speaker of course there is good case for full free apace compensation because its easy to add an adjustment control.
@@ErinsAudioCorner I'm not saying your way is wrong BTW, just commenting with my thoughts.
@@Audio_Simon understood.
@@ErinsAudioCorner Sorry I should have thought more before commenting. My point only makes sense if the manufacturer specified an in-room SPL - if not specified I would certainly assume anechoic.