Low power- transparency, dimension, dynamics and bass, or...


I've built several mature and immature systems over the years. That’s part of the fun for me. I’m exploring the possibility of getting the three dimensional sound of a monitor, with the tectonic plate shifting bass of a high quality sub. Can anyone speak to an integration point of say 50-80hz where it made more sense to focus on a high quality smaller speaker (in a medium sized room) vs a "full range" (35hz) speaker? In my experience the full range speaker can have more slam but not necessarily the imaging or quality of drivers. The monitor can struggle with dynamics. This also has me considering smaller horns or dual concentric drivers, but would they be difficult to integrate with a traditional sub or two? I’ve always been a fan of class a and tubes presentation but open to ideas.
I recently had a pair of O/93’s with great dynamics and bass to 30hz but disliked the dimensionality and upper mids of that speaker. I value dimension, image, dynamic ease, transparency, warm side of neutral. Trying to keep this speaker adventure under $6-8k used. I’ve talked to a few people that have said forget low power, increase speaker budget and go for Treo’s or a set of bigger Tannoys. Speakers would be 9 feet apart could be 2’ out 2’ from corners/open floor plan to larger space.

Some ideas- would like to hear bigger Harbeths with subs
Try the Soul Supreme with subs?
Arden, or Autograph mini with dual subs never heard Tannoy
Treo- owned older Model 5, 12 years ago for a limited time- tech seems to have really improved.
Horns but feel like the integration of technologies will be a challenge.
Single driver same issue as horns right?

bjesien

Showing 2 responses by phusis

@bjesien --

...  perhaps I am after that beauty over accuracy- but so be it, I am the only one in my listening space to enjoy the illusion. Or is that delusion?
 
https://jeffsplace.positive-feedback.com/my-audio-system-sucks-what-should-i-do/?fbclid=IwAR09BqcSy8...
Have heard great sounding combinations of low powered SET’s and high sensitivity speakers (make that horns; all-horns or horn hybrids), not in the least lacking transparency, dynamics, "ignition," tonality and what have you - on the contrary. To me they’re usually much more alive sounding vs. low efficiency, direct radiating speakers coupled to SS amps in the many hundreds of watts, a combo of which that can sound downright dull and bottleneck-ey by comparison. This, it seems, mostly comes down to the speakers being the weaker link here; very high sensitivity horn speakers can do with 1 watt what a low sensitivity speaker would need more than 100 watts to achieve, and then a 5-10 watt SET is suddenly transformed into a beast with large form-follows-function horn speakers (often fitted with pro drivers) in the receiving end to whom thermal compression is practically irrelevant.

Conversely: at the other end of the wattage scale it’s interesting to see how watts in abundance are sometimes scoffed at, maybe because the amps delivery that much power are either insanely expensive (and absurdly heavy), derived from the pro sector, or that much power is simply regarded as ludicrous excess. In my own case the power amp actively driving the 100dB sensitivity dual 15" woofers per channel of my EV main speakers, the Lab.Gruppen FP6400, can shell out 2.3kW into the 4 ohm load they present, while a 30 watt pure Class A power amp is actively driving the 110dB sensitivity MF/HF horn section above. A 500 watt power amp drives a pair of subs (97dB sensitivity), actively as well, so about 2.8kW in total per channel. Too much? What does that even mean? It’s utterly effortless at any SPL one desires, sounds great, and you don’t think of wattage per se; just uninhibited, full, low distortion and clean sound.

Needless to say, context is very important.