• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Do high-efficiency speakers really have better 'dynamics'?

tuga

Major Contributor
Joined
Feb 5, 2020
Messages
3,984
Likes
4,285
Location
Oxford, England
And this - radiation pattern - is of course the loudspeaker part of those room reflections I keep repeating and boring you with. A narrow pattern will reduce very early reflections, but really do not reduce decay slope - exactly what we want.

But speaker position and room acoustics and room size also affect this.

Look at these 2 decay profiles, both at 470Hz, left is speaker with full-range pattern control placed close to room boundaries in a small properly treated room, right is a trad speaker placed far from boundaries in a larger virtually nontreated room - we see pattern control and proper acoustics makes a huuuuge difference:
View attachment 149017

Thanks for the measurements.

I believe that some people stick to small standmount speakers because due to their limited low frequency extension they excite room modes less and consequently sound perceptually “faster”.
There’s logic in this idea that the room also affects “clarity” above Schroeder.

Another aspect that I would like to see researched is low-level signal distortion in loudspeakers which affects spatial reconstruction and decay, and with orchestral music also the resolution in soft passages. Most of my orchestral CDs have a Leq dynamic range of around 60dB
 

mhardy6647

Grand Contributor
Joined
Dec 12, 2019
Messages
11,372
Likes
24,577
Are you time-aligning the drivers with DSP? I found this to make an audible difference when I played with a similar topology (compression tweeter, compression mid, woofer in bass bin).
Not yet ;)
It's on the TTD (or at least the things to try) list... Any ;) current alignment is physical and completely empirical: the treble driver is roughly time-aligned, but the 'super' tweeter obviously is not. The crossovers are also all first order.
As a somewhat inebriated but rather garrulous and also surprisingly insightful fellow once said to me on a bus in Bermuda:
The largest room in the world is the room for improvement.

Words to live by.
:)
 

tuga

Major Contributor
Joined
Feb 5, 2020
Messages
3,984
Likes
4,285
Location
Oxford, England
Not yet ;)
It's on the TTD (or at least the things to try) list... Any ;) current alignment is physical and completely empirical: the treble driver is roughly time-aligned, but the 'super' tweeter obviously is not. The crossovers are also all first order.
As a somewhat inebriated but rather garrulous and also surprisingly insightful fellow once said to me on a bus in Bermuda:


Words to live by.
:)

I got as far as a prototype which physically aligned the three drivers but ended up selling the speakers. I living a gipsy life at the moment but hope to own horns in the future...


3154234852_0bef4853f0.jpg
 

Duke

Major Contributor
Audio Company
Forum Donor
Joined
Apr 22, 2016
Messages
1,555
Likes
3,860
Location
Princeton, Texas
I got as far as a prototype which physically aligned the three drivers but ended up selling the speakers. I living a gipsy life at the moment but hope to own horns in the future...


3154234852_0bef4853f0.jpg

What is the big round horn, if you don't mind me asking?
 

Kvalsvoll

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Audio Company
Joined
Apr 25, 2019
Messages
888
Likes
1,653
Location
Norway
acoustic treatment especially at the speaker position area. It just gives more silence in the quiet parts and faster decay of transient events. There is an sense of decreased loudness and need for more amplifier power.

Yes - broadband absorption - important. And also not to kill the room completely - at higher frequencies, some amount of reflections are necessary to give a balanced sound and also increases dynamics - clap your hand in a large, open files outdoor compared to in a small bathroom - the outdoor clap is just a dead, dry click, while the bathroom is like a loud, powerful crash.
 

Kvalsvoll

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Audio Company
Joined
Apr 25, 2019
Messages
888
Likes
1,653
Location
Norway
Thanks for the measurements.

I believe that some people stick to small standmount speakers because due to their limited low frequency extension they excite room modes less and consequently sound perceptually “faster”.
There’s logic in this idea that the room also affects “clarity” above Schroeder.

Plenty of measurements available, the problem is to find something relevant to show.

I just mentioned the importance of keeping some reflection level at higher frequencies, but a too high level/too long decay will certainly affect clarity. Clarity is directly related to reflections, as the decaying sound masks detail.
 
Last edited:

tuga

Major Contributor
Joined
Feb 5, 2020
Messages
3,984
Likes
4,285
Location
Oxford, England
What is the big round horn, if you don't mind me asking?
It’s a 600Hz tractrix profile made of ABS, I think that the manufacturer was called Stereolab
 

Tom Danley

Active Member
Technical Expert
Audio Company
Joined
May 6, 2021
Messages
125
Likes
581
That is where I am as well. I wish we could make progress on objective side, or prove that the subjective experience is wrong. We are in a bit of limbo here.

For me, I listened to low wattage tube amplifier driving horns at CES in a massive room which I cannot replicate with my Salon 2 speakers and massive amplification. This was the system and demo:


More recent experience has been no less than three JBL speakers that left me with that impression as well.

Hi Amirm

I think there is a mechanism that could explain this conclusion / impression.
How relates top how we hear and the signal.


We are used to thinking about "level" like a VU-meter or a Sound Level Meter.


Both of these integrate the signal over some time period, with the VU meter in the days of analogue circuitry and recording tape the time integration made sense because if you went past 0dB, the level continued to increase but was only increasingly distorted. Going past 0 dB a little on peaks then was kinda ok because you can't hear even gross distortion on peaks if it is short enough.



That inability to hear "short" issues is also why you can't hear clipping if short enough.
In the old days there was a tool called an oscilloscope which would show the wave shape of a signal. This can easily reveal a problem like this.


In the early 2000's an amplifier company (QSC) went around to people in the sound business and carried an ABX switcher where you could compare amplifiers, your to theirs (which were typically lighter).
First you put in a sine wave to adjust the levels to be exactly the same and then you chose a couple tracks to listen to.

We listened on some speakers we sold and i was familiar with and my threshold stasis sounded VERY similar to the pro amps as in maybe a tiny tiny difference on a few places in only some music BUT as we turned it up a bit more there was a difference.
The Threshold still sounded essentially the same EXCEPT it sounded a bit less dynamic when going back and forth quickly with the switcher.



That seemed odd the Threshold VU indicators showed peaks of -20dB and at home I know they hit -12 occasionally on peaks.


I (eventually) grabbed an oscilloscope and looked at the amp output and I was stunned, with the tracks that were less dynamic, there was instantaneous clipping and I don't mean the terrible sound of sustained clipping, only being one or a few cycles long it was inaudible and all this did was remove some of the dynamic .


So lets say you had a speaker that had 85dB 1w1m sensitivity and you sat at 4 meters (-12dB from 1m).

Lets say you had a 50W traditional SS amplifier (in other words not class D with a magic power supply) that clips at 55 Watts. 55 Watts is +17dB over 1Watt.

So you have a maximum peak unclipped level at the chair of 85dB - 12dB (distance) and +17dB (peak of 55 Watts) or about 90 dB SPL.

If you were playing normal hifi type music say 20dB p/a at the maximum unclipped level, then with a sound level meter on slow would read about 70dB.
You can raise the measure SPL farther but the instantaneous peaks cannot exceed 70dB


This kind of underscores what the late Dick Heyser said "what we need for music is a clean 10W amplifier that can put of peaks of 1000W" (that is a p/a of 20dB).


So lets take a high efficiency horn speaker which might have a sensitivity of say 105 dB 1W1M And let say you had big triodes like those in the picture and lets pretend they are 10 Watt amplifiers. Tubes operated like that, especially if without -fb have to be run in a linear region and that means they also usually had output headroom they might be able to produce +3dB or more albeit distorted.


So the maximum peak SPL at the chair would be about 105dB 1w1m -12dB distance +13 dB peak over 1W = 106dB.

With 36 dB being about 4000 times more energy, that would be detectable even at a trade show.


The point is, unless you look with an oscilloscope you don't know if you have instantaneous clipping and if your feeling the dynamics are limited consider getting / borrowing an oscilloscope and looking at the amp output*. That point will show not only if the amp is clipping instantaneously but also anything else is in the signal path
*assuming you don't have a class d Bridged amp in which case read up on this.


The "other thing" that can create this impression is lets say you switch to a horn system that is say +10dB more sensitive than your previous speakers. With the same amplifier, you maximum unclipped level is now 10 dB greater.

If you had instantaneous clipping before, it may well be gone now and seem and actually be more dynamic as your amp is putting out 1/10 the average power to produce the same avg spl.
All this assumed there are no other non-linearity and while power compression is a longer term heat related thing, it is normally not an issue with these real short peak signals
Best Regards
Tom Danley
 

Duke

Major Contributor
Audio Company
Forum Donor
Joined
Apr 22, 2016
Messages
1,555
Likes
3,860
Location
Princeton, Texas
So you have a maximum peak unclipped level at the chair of 85dB - 12dB (distance) and +17dB (peak of 55 Watts) or about 90 dB SPL.

If you were playing normal hifi type music say 20dB p/a at the maximum unclipped level, then with a sound level meter on slow would read about 70dB.
You can raise the measure SPL farther but the instantaneous peaks cannot exceed 70dB

This kind of underscores what the late Dick Heyser said "what we need for music is a clean 10W amplifier that can put of peaks of 1000W" (that is a p/a of 20dB).

So lets take a high efficiency horn speaker which might have a sensitivity of say 105 dB 1W1M And let say you had big triodes like those in the picture and lets pretend they are 10 Watt amplifiers. Tubes operated like that, especially if without -fb have to be run in a linear region and that means they also usually had output headroom they might be able to produce +3dB or more albeit distorted.

So the maximum peak SPL at the chair would be about 105dB 1w1m -12dB distance +13 dB peak over 1W = 106dB.

With 36 dB being about 4000 times more energy, that would be detectable even at a trade show.


I DO NOT disagree with the point you're making, and I REALLY suck at math, but...

85 dB speaker w/55 watt amp @ 4 meters minus 20 dB peak-to-average ratio = 70 dB; and

105 dB speaker w/10 watt amp + 3 dB soft clipping @ 4 meters = 106 dB.

Did you forget to subtract the 20 dB for peak-to-average ratio from the 105 dB speaker? If so, I think the difference would be 16 dB, or 40 times more energy. Or did I miss something?
 
Last edited:

Tom Danley

Active Member
Technical Expert
Audio Company
Joined
May 6, 2021
Messages
125
Likes
581
I DO NOT disagree with the point you're making, and I REALLY suck at math, but...

85 dB speaker w/55 watt amp @ 4 meters minus 20 dB peak-to-average ratio = 70 dB; and

105 dB speaker w/10 watt amp + 3 dB soft clipping @ 4 meters = 106 dB.

Did you forget to subtract the 20 dB for peak-to-average ratio from the 105 dB speaker? If so, I think the difference would be 16 dB, or 40 times more energy. Or did I miss something?

Hi Duke
Nope you didn't miss anything, I did, don't work on two posts at the same time haha.
It would be 105+13-12 = max un-clipped level at the chair 106dB
For the low efficiency system the max un-clipped level at the chair is 90dB or 1/40th the peak power
So the AVG level at the point of peak limiting if measured with a sound level meter on slow with music that had a 20dB p/a would be -20dB from that.
Best
Tom
Good catch!
 

soundintubes

Member
Audio Company
Joined
Jul 4, 2021
Messages
11
Likes
18
Location
UK
This is also my subjective experience, that higher efficiency has better perceived dynamics, "clarity" and "resolution".

There are many things going on here.
Most forms of loudspeaker distortion are correlated with diaphragm displacement, especially motor distortions and IMD.
The more efficient a loudspeaker, the lower the diaphragm displacement for a given SPL, and the lower the distortion.
Additionally, amplifiers are naturally going to perform better at lower power levels, rather than dumping and soaking up tens of amperes.
 

puppet

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 23, 2020
Messages
446
Likes
284
Sensitivity aside, (2) woofers with the same cone displacement require identical excursion (displacement) to achieve a given SPL.
The woofer with a mechanical limit (Xmax) would destruct if asked to produce more SPL. The woofer with higher sensitivity needs less power to achieve the required SPL but if mechanically limited by Xmax, will suffer the same fate.
 

DrCWO

Active Member
Audio Company
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 14, 2020
Messages
260
Likes
366
I like to add a citation from Mr Timmermans a German speaker specialist and publisher of the German Hobby HiFi magazine to the discussion. The citation comes from here (http://www.hobby-hifi.de/100_HOBBY_HiFi/100_hobby_hifi.html) and I translate it for the community:

„Well, one or the other facet of loudspeaker knowledge seems to be forgotten, keyword historical sound transducers. But I also give HOBBY HiFi credit for that: neither to silence nor glorify such things, but to get to the bottom of them. So I am pleased to have recognized why these strange old broadband sound converters from tube radios and cinema loudspeakers, despite their imperfection, also have a property that modern sound converters can no longer offer in this quality: extremely low mechanical losses in the chassis mechanics. This parameter, namely the extent of the mechanical losses in the loudspeaker chassis, is one of the most important and most reliable evaluation criteria for sound quality.“

I for myself run these high efficiency speakers https://the-final.eu/ and can admit that there is less distortion, and much more detail as with any boxed low efficiency speaker I ever listened to. It is the magic of „being there“ in comparison to „listening to music“. I also use Acourate DRC to flatten out the frequency response ;-)

Maybe it is worth to deeper investigate the mechanical losses in the loudspeaker chassis. Maybe that's the magic TS parameter for evaluating loudspeakers in terms of dynamics and micro-detail.
 

Roland68

Major Contributor
Joined
Jan 31, 2020
Messages
1,449
Likes
1,271
Location
Cologne, Germany
From years of experience I cannot say that highly efficient loudspeakers really have better “dynamics”.
For me that seems to be more of a pairing with the right amplifier. Anyone who has ever heard a Celestion sl600 (83dB) or a Dynaudio Audience 52 (SE) (86dB) on an old Cyres Two amplifier (better with an additional PSU) knows what I mean.
Since then I have seldom heard such a "dynamic" presentation of the title Passion and Pride by Friedemann, regardless of the price range.
The Dynaudio Audience series from 2001 received the reputation of being boring snore boxes, especially through various high-priced and powerful "high-end" amplifiers, completely wrongly.
 

ctrl

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 24, 2020
Messages
1,632
Likes
6,232
Location
.de, DE, DEU
"...despite their imperfection, also have a property that modern sound converters can no longer offer in this quality: extremely low mechanical losses in the chassis mechanics. This parameter, namely the extent of the mechanical losses in the loudspeaker chassis, is one of the most important and most reliable evaluation criteria for sound quality."

It should be mentioned, however, that the statement that low RMS values in drivers are a prerequisite for the reproduction of "micro details" in recordings is controversial in the audio community.

Timmermann himself admits that when using conductive voice coil former (which manufacturers continue to use) the RMS value is significantly affected by eddy current losses and is therefore no longer a parameter for the reproduction of "micro details" in recordings.

And, as is unfortunately often the case with such topics, Timmermann presents no evidence for his theory.
 

ctrl

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 24, 2020
Messages
1,632
Likes
6,232
Location
.de, DE, DEU
Do high-efficiency speakers really have better 'dynamics'?
A driver can no longer reproduce a music signal in the full dynamic range at the latest when the linear excursion of the driver is reached, i.e. the input voltage is no longer proportional to the cone excursion - I think everyone agrees on that.

For quite a few drivers, however, this limit is already reached well before the theoretically calculated Xmax, regardless of whether a high-efficiency driver is used. This would be an important indicator for me whether a driver has a "good" dynamic range or not, especially in the bass and lower midrange.
 

DrCWO

Active Member
Audio Company
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 14, 2020
Messages
260
Likes
366
In my eyes there is no doubt that there are speakers that deliver microdetail and exceptional dynamics and others that don't. There are a lot of posts here in the thread that seem to confirm this.
As far as I have understood the approach of audiosciencereview, one would like to get to the bottom of things here. For my part, I would like to see a reliable measure that can be used to objectively measure exactly what many have confirmed here. I am not saying that it is the mechanical losses, but how else can you measure what folks believe to hear? Figuring that out is the challenge!
 

Kvalsvoll

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Audio Company
Joined
Apr 25, 2019
Messages
888
Likes
1,653
Location
Norway
Rms causing loss of low-level detail is a hypothesis that can be originated from the idea that the mechanical resistance to movement sort of jams the movement of the cone, like stiction friction - needs a certain amount of force to make it move at all.

If this was the case, it would show up in distortion measurements. Distortion would show a massive increase at low spl levels - which, at least I have never seen on any driver, regardless of what Rms they claim to have seen from the specifications.

Low-level or low-spl detail and resolution is determined by linear properties, like frequency response, including resonances and radiation pattern. Speakers that sound good on very loud volume tend to sound better at low volume as well, simply because the radiation pattern of those speakers gives better attenuation of early reflections.
 

pogo

Major Contributor
Joined
Sep 4, 2020
Messages
1,284
Likes
417
In my eyes there is no doubt that there are speakers that deliver microdetail and exceptional dynamics and others that don't. For my part, I would like to see a reliable measure that can be used to objectively measure exactly what many have confirmed here.
Here are some of them:
sound_quality_algorithms
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom