+1 @phusis
The snarky misguided jukebox reference adds nothing to what is a good and informative thread. Different opinion and perspective can be contributed without condescension for sure.
Charles
+1 @phusis The snarky misguided jukebox reference adds nothing to what is a good and informative thread. Different opinion and perspective can be contributed without condescension for sure. Charles |
I appreciate this informative discussion. @audiokinesis your detailed explanation for the inherent advantages of a higher efficiency/sensitivity speaker I find more compelling and logical compared with the counter position for the lower efficiency speaker expressed thus far in this thread. What you have described/explained does seem to correlate to the actual listening experiences of what others here have reported. Charles |
In the vast majority of cases these very low distortion figures are achieved by judicious application of NFB which can often result in other sonic compromises. I agree that some listeners may strongly prefer the 1% (Or higher) distortion (2nd order predominantly) amplifier with little or no utilization of NFB. I believe that we can agree it’s purely a matter of what type of sound quality and presentation a listener seeks and desires. Choices abound for either direction. Which in my opinion is a good occurrence. Charles |
+1, very logical. Yet lower-moderate sensitivity speakers dominate the marketplace. These speaker manufacturers know that with the proliferation of affordable transistor wattage/power, an amplifier is readily available for the typical 85-87 db sensitivity 4 ohm impedance speaker. It seems the path of less resistance. Thus the default choice. 200-300 tube watts gets expensive relatively speaking. I get the sense that good quality high sensitivity and easy to drive speakers may be more involved/complex and harder to get right. However when executed properly they can be quite the special product. Charles |