For a speaker the dynamic range is equivalent to the max SPL in dB, which you can calculate from the sensitivity adding 3dB per doubling of Watts until you hit the max Watts for the speakers. For example, if your speakers output 87dB at 1 Watt and can handle up to 130 Watts of power, that represents additional 7 times a doubling of power (to 128) and +3dB times 7 equals +21dB added to 87dB and yields 108dB SPL.
It’s not that black-and-white speakers maximum volume given watts of input heavily depends on what frequency those watts are amplifying. 130 watts at 25 Hz is not going to be as loud as 130 watts at 5000 Hz.
@@peterw2714 Yes, this is true and speakers will compress (=distortion) when playing too loud differently at different frequencies. So typically for a speaker, you will have more dynamic range at 1kHz than at, for example, 25Hz. And max power is also frequency dependent. You can’t put 130 Watts into the tweeter or smoke will come out. So realistically my above calculation is on the optimistic side and actual measurements can better express how max SPL performance is at a given max THD.
Ar they're using a more dynamic range on digital masters when the average loudness of, say, the song Angry by the Stones is about -5 db? The producers are ruining music these days. If you want any dynamic i think of Van Morrison and Neil Young and that's it.
@@CHSSI could be wrong, but to me it seems like compression is the norm these days. It's exhausting. IMHO that is where a lot of this "analogue is better" comes from--better engineering. Plus, analogue doesn't clip if u go above 0db--which is not a bug, really, just less forgiving.
I mean like I really don't understand this debate. Until relatively recently, I thought people collected records just because they liked them. I sure understand that. But these tortured arguments that vinyl is "better"; I just don't understand it. No, it isn't. It just isn't. And if u are gonna go in that direction, tape wins anyway.
"Could potentially damage your ears" ... Too late, that happened decades ago when I just turned 21. Attending a Johnny Winter concert at a bar, and sitting to close to the Marshall stack. I can still hear Johnny playing slide on that '64 Gibson Firebird performing, 'Highway 61'
Think of speaker sensitivity in relationship to a volume control. For a given volume of the original source material, increasing the volume control makes the same sounds louder. Think of the markings on the volume control as speaker sensitivity in reverse order. If you go from volume setting A to a 3db lower volume setting B the sound SPL you hear is cut in half. If you keep the volume control at A but put in speakers with 3db less sensitivity, you will also hear half the SPL. If you put in 3db less sensitive speakers but increase the volume control by 3db you will hear the same SPL. So dynamic range does not change as long as you stay out of the noise floor and clipping. It's just how much power is needed peak and how low is the noise floor. Some speakers, typically those with higher sensitivity, have a reputation for "reproducing dynamics better". Some idea that with for those speakers the mastering engineer created a different mix which held back an extra 3db-6db of headroom from the very beginning of the record so it was available for that horn blast or guitar solo in the middle? No, the engineer has been riding zero peaks the whole time. Just bringing up the level on whom ever is getting that peak at the time. So most of the time when someone says brand J or brand K or... are high sensitivity and reproduce dynamics better than low sensitivity speakers, it did not exist in the source material.
Dynamic range ...😏 The industry has done so much to improve dynamic range with the CD player and later with SACD and lossless formats for streaming. And then stupid producers come in and turn compressors and limiters way up to squash every note and sound in a recording within 15dB range, or less 🤦🏼♂️ Lots of recordings are making you feel exhausted when you listen to it. 🥴
Hi Paul, I have a question: I spend most of the day working at home at my desk and that’s the place where I listen to music the most. I have a pair of good speakers(KEF LS50 Meta - coaxial uniq) suitable I would say for nearfield listening. Also an Arcam SA20 integrated amp to drive them. They sound very good but I’m afraid I might miss out on the experience in this setup. How can I achieve the best experience - soundstage and such - in this kind of setup. Thanks a lot. Voicu from Belgium.
Online sound quality alone, in theory, should get you 96dB headroom like a CD, subtract some loss. Still way loud enough for your living room, unless you like to blow up your ears.
For a given magnet size, voice coil and suspension compliance, a light cone will be more sensitive than a heavy one and therefore have a bigger dynamic range.
it is actually the opposite, lower sensitivity drivers have heavier and more solid cone and larger coils, so the take a lot more power, they can play louder and that is dynamic range.
Often the more sensitive speaker is bigger etc. and therefore can go louder, although could be more primitive. However, watch out for unusually high sensitivity ratings as they often come with reduced bandwidth -- the really hard to produce frequencies aren't any louder.
Where does headroom come into this topic re dynamic range vs sensitivity? I would have thought dynamic range would be something under the "production" topic, sensitivity under the "speakers and amps" topic. Just thinking aloud.
For a speaker the dynamic range is equivalent to the max SPL in dB, which you can calculate from the sensitivity adding 3dB per doubling of Watts until you hit the max Watts for the speakers. For example, if your speakers output 87dB at 1 Watt and can handle up to 130 Watts of power, that represents additional 7 times a doubling of power (to 128) and +3dB times 7 equals +21dB added to 87dB and yields 108dB SPL.
It’s not that black-and-white speakers maximum volume given watts of input heavily depends on what frequency those watts are amplifying. 130 watts at 25 Hz is not going to be as loud as 130 watts at 5000 Hz.
@@peterw2714 Yes, this is true and speakers will compress (=distortion) when playing too loud differently at different frequencies. So typically for a speaker, you will have more dynamic range at 1kHz than at, for example, 25Hz. And max power is also frequency dependent. You can’t put 130 Watts into the tweeter or smoke will come out. So realistically my above calculation is on the optimistic side and actual measurements can better express how max SPL performance is at a given max THD.
loudspeaker sensitivity and dynamic range of the high quality hand phones are really very amazing .
Thanks, very much, for your kind reply!
Vinyl records with 70 dB of dynamic range? Damm few of them!
Getting more than 50 dB into the master disc is a tough job.
Yes, the downside of vinyl
Ar they're using a more dynamic range on digital masters when the average loudness of, say, the song Angry by the Stones is about -5 db? The producers are ruining music these days. If you want any dynamic i think of Van Morrison and Neil Young and that's it.
@@cuoresportivo155Yes, and it’s a big one.
@@CHSSI could be wrong, but to me it seems like compression is the norm these days. It's exhausting. IMHO that is where a lot of this "analogue is better" comes from--better engineering. Plus, analogue doesn't clip if u go above 0db--which is not a bug, really, just less forgiving.
I mean like I really don't understand this debate. Until relatively recently, I thought people collected records just because they liked them. I sure understand that. But these tortured arguments that vinyl is "better"; I just don't understand it. No, it isn't. It just isn't. And if u are gonna go in that direction, tape wins anyway.
"Could potentially damage your ears" ...
Too late, that happened decades ago when I just turned 21. Attending a Johnny Winter concert at a bar, and sitting to close to the Marshall stack. I can still hear Johnny playing slide on that '64 Gibson Firebird performing,
'Highway 61'
Think of speaker sensitivity in relationship to a volume control. For a given volume of the original source material, increasing the volume control makes the same sounds louder. Think of the markings on the volume control as speaker sensitivity in reverse order. If you go from volume setting A to a 3db lower volume setting B the sound SPL you hear is cut in half. If you keep the volume control at A but put in speakers with 3db less sensitivity, you will also hear half the SPL. If you put in 3db less sensitive speakers but increase the volume control by 3db you will hear the same SPL.
So dynamic range does not change as long as you stay out of the noise floor and clipping. It's just how much power is needed peak and how low is the noise floor.
Some speakers, typically those with higher sensitivity, have a reputation for "reproducing dynamics better". Some idea that with for those speakers the mastering engineer created a different mix which held back an extra 3db-6db of headroom from the very beginning of the record so it was available for that horn blast or guitar solo in the middle? No, the engineer has been riding zero peaks the whole time. Just bringing up the level on whom ever is getting that peak at the time. So most of the time when someone says brand J or brand K or... are high sensitivity and reproduce dynamics better than low sensitivity speakers, it did not exist in the source material.
Dynamic range ...😏 The industry has done so much to improve dynamic range with the CD player and later with SACD and lossless formats for streaming. And then stupid producers come in and turn compressors and limiters way up to squash every note and sound in a recording within 15dB range, or less 🤦🏼♂️
Lots of recordings are making you feel exhausted when you listen to it. 🥴
Andrew Watt. 🙉🙉🙉
thanks Paul
Great question
Hi Paul, I have a question: I spend most of the day working at home at my desk and that’s the place where I listen to music the most. I have a pair of good speakers(KEF LS50 Meta - coaxial uniq) suitable I would say for nearfield listening. Also an Arcam SA20 integrated amp to drive them. They sound very good but I’m afraid I might miss out on the experience in this setup. How can I achieve the best experience - soundstage and such - in this kind of setup. Thanks a lot. Voicu from Belgium.
👌👍
🔊❤️
Online sound quality alone, in theory, should get you 96dB headroom like a CD, subtract some loss.
Still way loud enough for your living room, unless you like to blow up your ears.
For a given magnet size, voice coil and suspension compliance, a light cone will be more sensitive than a heavy one and therefore have a bigger dynamic range.
it is actually the opposite, lower sensitivity drivers have heavier and more solid cone and larger coils, so the take a lot more power, they can play louder and that is dynamic range.
Some also say more sensitive speakers tend to be a bit more "forward" sounding than their less sensitive counterparts.
probably because sensitive speaker tend towards higher midrange output, so not a linear response.
Often the more sensitive speaker is bigger etc. and therefore can go louder, although could be more primitive. However, watch out for unusually high sensitivity ratings as they often come with reduced bandwidth -- the really hard to produce frequencies aren't any louder.
Where does headroom come into this topic re dynamic range vs sensitivity? I would have thought dynamic range would be something under the "production" topic, sensitivity under the "speakers and amps" topic. Just thinking aloud.
Headroom would be what's left on top of it all, before the drivers and/or amplifier start to reach a point of distortion due to limitations.
Hey, remember when Paul was hugging and holding hands with a man because his sound system sounded really, really amazing, like chimps.
"Bu-Hob"
If a speaker has more sensitivity, it has more dynamic. That is all you have to know. Take a modern amp (class D) and a good PA with horns……