Speaker impedance quality

[Mart68]

Sensitivity vs what to be specific

Sensitivity vs voltage, yes.

Nothing to do with efficiency.

Speaker impedance is a number that depends on physical construction. The best demonstration is probably a dual-voicecoil speaker which can be either 2ohm or 8ohm depending on whether you wire it up in series or parallel. Apart from the voltage/current ratio from the amp, everything else in the speaker is identical.

You're right my use of the word 'efficient' is incorrect. I'll edit.

 

[mhardy6647]

So just go ahead and insult ESLDude. ESLs are low sensitivity. And impedance rating on ESLs is always a joke. Rated 4 or 8 ohms, they'll really be like between 30+ ohms at low frequencies and 1 ohm at 20 khz acting like a capacitor more than a speaker.

Yes, saying a speaker is better because it is 4 ohm rather than 8 ohm indicates someone who doesn't know what they are talking about. Now with some amps one might be better than the other though only in cases where an AVR won't handle 4 ohms in which case the 8 ohm is the better speaker.

Good point, as that was NOT my my intent. I strictly meant to insult the great unwashed masses of me-too loudspeaker designers! note that I own, and love a pair of Quad ESL-57, definitely sadistic to poorly-designed amplifiers! transformer coupled amps are fine with 'em, though.

 

[sergeauckland]

How and when did we get to 4 Ohms speakers is what I would like to know. I remember in the early 80s 8 Ohm was common and 4 Ohms was not as common. Some amps where 4 Ohms capable but the majority where not going from memory.

Those of us of a certain age, will remember when loudspeakers were either 3 ohms or 15 ohms. Amplifiers had output transformer taps for 3/4 or 15/16 ohms. This new fangled 8 ohms stuff was a modern European innovation. 15 ohms was slightly preferred, as it involved less current and a lower turns ratio on the output transformer. Then along came transistors which spoiled the party. 3 ohms involved too much current and 15 ohms involved too much voltage for the sensitive flowers that transistors were then, so 8 ohms became a compromise that was more or less acceptable to all...except those with valve amplifiers that only had 3 or 15 ohm taps...

S.

 

[Old_School_Brad]

Those of us of a certain age, will remember when loudspeakers were either 3 ohms or 15 ohms. Amplifiers had output transformer taps for 3/4 or 15/16 ohms. This new fangled 8 ohms stuff was a modern European innovation. 15 ohms was slightly preferred, as it involved less current and a lower turns ratio on the output transformer. Then along came transistors which spoiled the party. 3 ohms involved too much current and 15 ohms involved too much voltage for the sensitive flowers that transistors were then, so 8 ohms became a compromise that was more or less acceptable to all...except those with valve amplifiers that only had 3 or 15 ohm taps...

S.

Then along came this monstrosity..

 

[levimax]

This is another reason multi-amped active speakers make so much sense. One optimized / matched amp per driver eliminates all impeadance issues.

 

[Mart68]

This is another reason multi-amped active speakers make so much sense. One optimized / matched amp per driver eliminates all impeadance issues.

Or just get a Krell.

 

[valerianf]

@Old_School_Brad
What is this speaker that goes close to 0 Ohm around 38 Hz?

 

[Old_School_Brad]

@Old_School_Brad
What is this speaker that goes close to 0 Ohm around 38 Hz?

Infinity Kappa 9.

 

[TonyJZX]

impedance like age, its just a number (i kid)

there's good cars that have 30mpg , there's good cars with 25mpg - its the same thing concept isnt it?

amir said that most speakers these days should be 4 ohm

given most quality amps should do 4 ohms 20-20

i feel like most convention speakers tend to be 4-6 ohms -- 8 ohms seems to be a rarity these days

 

[ESLDude]

So just go ahead and insult ESLDude. ESLs are low sensitivity. And impedance rating on ESLs is always a joke. Rated 4 or 8 ohms, they'll really be like between 30+ ohms at low frequencies and 1 ohm at 20 khz acting like a capacitor more than a speaker.

Yes, saying a speaker is better because it is 4 ohm rather than 8 ohm indicates someone who doesn't know what they are talking about. Now with some amps one might be better than the other though only in cases where an AVR won't handle 4 ohms in which case the 8 ohm is the better speaker.

I did not perceive the response as an "insult" However it may have pointed out the point I was trying to make was unclear, To clarify - the suggestion that speaker quality is related to speaker impedance seems to me a fallacy, I was suggesting this is a marketing technique with little merit, there are so many other parameters that define a loudspeakers sonic abilities and in my opinion impedance is one of the least important parameters in terms of sound. I would also agree with the comment that ESLs don't necessarily follow the Ohms rating, As one who has actually built ESLs they were always considered a capacitive load and I have blown up a few power amps to reenforce this principle ,My point was simply 4 and 8 ohm ratings have minimal value in the sonic properties of a loudspeaker (although they may be critical for the amp you drive them with}
They are not a marker of speaker quality (which is dependent on so many other factors} I simply felt reducing speaker quality to such a minimally important parameter might be misleading to many who might be less informed. I have and love many speakers = ESLs, Planar Magnetics, Closed box, bass reflex- theses for me are great speakers but it is not impedance that makes them so.

 

[Blumlein 88]

I did not perceive the response as an "insult" However it may have pointed out the point I was trying to make was unclear, To clarify - the suggestion that speaker quality is related to speaker impedance seems to me a fallacy, I was suggesting this is a marketing technique with little merit, there are so many other parameters that define a loudspeakers sonic abilities and in my opinion impedance is one of the least important parameters in terms of sound. I would also agree with the comment that ESLs don't necessarily follow the Ohms rating, As one who has actually built ESLs they were always considered a capacitive load and I have blown up a few power amps to reenforce this principle ,My point was simply 4 and 8 ohm ratings have minimal value in the sonic properties of a loudspeaker (although they may be critical for the amp you drive them with}
They are not a marker of speaker quality (which is dependent on so many other factors} I simply felt reducing speaker quality to such a minimally important parameter might be misleading to many who might be less informed. I have and love many speakers = ESLs, Planar Magnetics, Closed box, bass reflex- theses for me are great speakers but it is not impedance that makes them so.

It is all good. I was joking anyway about the insult. The person I replied to is mhardy6447 who knew this I am pretty sure. I agree with your points.

BTW, I used your username for many years on several other audio forums. Decided to change it up when I joined this one.

 

[garyrc]

My attention was drawn to this the other day:



That most modern speakers offer a tough load for the amp, and that many amplifiers are not really up to the challenge is Hi-fi's big secret and rarely if ever mentioned on most forums or in the literature.

1. Reminds me of the old, old JBLs that were called James B. Lansing Signature speakers [even before that, (1954) the JBLs commissioned by Ampex, commissioned by the Magna theater corporation, commissioned by Todd-AO for their revolutionary 70mm houses, were labeled "Jim Lansing"].
2. Well, with these Johnny come lately Signature speakers, 88 dB/1 Watt/1meter would provide about 84 dB ("moderate level") at 13 feet in my approx. 4,257 cu. ft. room with that watt. For the level of a large symphony orchestra and pipe organ for Signature's "nice and loud," or maybe, "pretty loud" might use 2,048 watts at ~~117 dB for very short periods (as Paul W. Klipsch once said, "Better have a fire extinguisher ready"). Therefore: