Efficency- Low vs. Hi?



Im trying to figure out the point in speakers with very low efficency, for example my speakers which are 4ohm and 86db. As far as im concerned they have no benefit besides being able to spend much more on an amp to get them to move. Right now they sound shut in, boring and thin with my Cambrdige Integrated amp, which is rated at 65 watts 4 0hm. I do not really have the budget to spend hundreds MORE on a power amp just to get these speakers to sound as good as a high efficent design on a lower powered amp, such as my current cambridge. So what are the benefits to having power hungry speakers? Why should i have to spend tons of money just because my speakers are designed with poor efficency?
dave123456a1b3

Showing 3 responses by dave123456a1b3

Audiokinesis- THanks for the reply, I wasnt aware of the bass being able to go deeper with a less eff. design, and no , I wouldnt be bothered with a larager box. A larger box design would most likely what id look at it if i ended up selling these speakers,as they seem to have a bigger warmer sound than smaller monitors.

Mahandave- Yeah, I kind of wasn't thinking when i made this amp/speaker match. I had originally planned on using this amp with a pair of Ascend Acoustics CBM-170 , which actually made a great match, but in the end i wasnt satisfied enough with the speakers so i sold them and bought the mini's. I bought the mini's unheard( i know i know) because of how impressed i was with my old pair of PSB IMage 2b's, so i figured that id like the mini's as well, and this was true to an extent. Shortly after buying the mini's i came across money troubles and wasnt able to buy a sub like i had planned, or a more powerful amp which is needed to drive these speakers.

Jeffreybehr- Ahhh, that helps me in understanding why anybody would build a non efficient speakers, thanks. And, i bought the mini's based on how much i liked the PSB sound from past experiances, thinking that low efficiency just meant I had to crank the volume more . Now i know better.

Brainwater- yes, Duke is an inspiration to us all and a hero to millions.

Mechans- Synergy. This was also something i wasnt aware of untill AFTER poor mismatching proved to be disastrous. And im guessing that the impendance dips is mostly the problem here, not just the low sensitivity. From what i remember my speakers have a pretty low dip in the lower midrange.

Jeff_jones- Are you recommending tubes ?

Elgordo- Actually, ive had some problems with resonance from the standmounts in the image series ( image 2b) that caused me to stop listening and take them in for a refund. I cant imagine how bad the alpha series would be in this regard *shrugs*. I appreciate your recommendation, though. And its not about playing loud, hell i cant stand turning my cambridge up 1/4 of the way because of how bad it sounds. I just want a full sound at low levels, high spl's are of little concern. But i do agree with u that a more efficient speaker would let me get more out of my amp, instead of spending more on the amp itself.

Satch- Well, 65 watts into 4 ohm, which is pretty low considering how hungry these speakers are. Or maybe its the current thats low? hmmm...

Nkturner920- Im not going to argue with you on that one, the minis seem very hungry for power. The bad thing though, is that right now im switching my system between two different rooms, one being a 9'11" x10'6" bedroom, and the other being a 20x20 living room, and when listening to the mini's in the small room i have to listen very carefully to hear all the details. I want a speaker that will sound good in both rooms. I was also considering the Bryston... untill i saw how much they cost used. too expensive IMO to pay that much just because my speakers have low effiency.

c123666- So far, IME i agree with you. If i had the money, then buying a big juicy power amp wouldnt be that big of a deal, but for me its more logical to just get more efficient speaker design, and not worry about my amp. As far as speaker with more sensitivity go, what would be a good choice to look at? Ive always like the way my Polk computer speakers sound, so maybe looking at some of the older,more high end models would be a good idea?

I forgot to mention that my musical tastes include Iron Maiden ( probabaly my favorite band), Metallica, Green Day, No Doubt, 80's New Wave, SOME Rap, even some classical and jazz every now and then. AS you can see my musical preference is very wide, so please keep them in mind if you want to give me recommendations, thanks.

Danner,

The midrange is actually MUCH too forward, anything with distorted guitar and/or yelling vocals is utterly unlistenable. Much too grainy ,harsh fatiguing whatever you wanna call it. This type of music takes up about 90% of my music collection. Its not the room either because i tried my system in two different rooms, one being large and one being small, and in both rooms the sound was almost identicle. However, what i meant by "shut it" was that the soundstage, imaging and detail sound restrained, almost "lazy". The bass is also very lean and weak sounding, even in a small bedroom. Im really confused on what the problem might be. Thanks for your response.