Low-sensitivity speakers — What's special about them?


I'm building a system for a smaller room (need smaller bookshelves), and I did a bunch of research and some listening. I am attracted both to the Dynaudio Evoke 10's (heard locally) and the Salk Wow1 speakers (ordered and I'm waiting on them for a trial). I have a Rel 328 sub.

Here's the thing — both of those speakers are 84db sensitivity. Several people on this forum and my local dealer have remarked, "You should get a speaker that's easier to drive so you have a wider choice of power and can spend less, too."

That advice — get a more efficient speaker — makes sense to me, but before I just twist with every opinion I come across (I'm a newbie, so I'm pathetically suggestible), I'd like to hear the other side. Viz.,

QUESTION: What is the value in low sensitivity speakers? What do they do for your system or listening experience which make them worth the cost and effort to drive them? Has anyone run the gamut from high to low and wound up with low for a reason?

Your answers to this can help me decide if I should divorce my earlier predilections to low-sensitivity speakers (in other words, throw the Salks and Dyns overboard) and move to a more reasonable partner for a larger variety of amps. Thanks.
128x128hilde45
I’ve always gravitated to lower sensitivity speakers mainly because they were the speakers I enjoyed the most. Pluses and minuses either way I suppose. Dynaudio makes excellent speakers if you buy the Evokes I bet you would be quite happy. Down the road you could consider the opposite and drive a highly sensitive speaker with a low wattage tube amp, that is what makes this hobby fun.
Right now I am enjoying Magnepan LRS speakers that are quite different from box speakers. Could I go back to Dynaudio or Totem someday - probably. Anyway my point is buy what sounds good to you, no matter what you buy you’ll have to match it up with proper amps / stands / Dac anyway so don’t sweat it. 
The advice to get speakers that I enjoy and then find the amps to match is how I was initially going forward.  It was the warning that I might be boxing myself in that caused me to reconsider the speakers that I had heard and enjoyed. But there are more speakers out there and some of them might be higher efficiency...so there’s no harm in just doing more listening! Of course if some delightful and expensive tube amplifiers really make a big difference to the sound, well, then, it might not hurt to consider that as a potential orienting factor for the speakers! You see how I get turned around and around! Still, it makes sense to start with the speakers. 
I have a bedroom system w Sierra2ex 89db sensitivity. I run a pair of 80w class a monoblocks and a pair of REL t-zero. I can rock the entire house from that little system. I was worried about the same thing, but I gambled on this and won. 
For the past couple of years I’ve been happy running a SET/high-efficiency system but previous systems were all of the higher-power/low-efficiency type. Obviously, there are compelling reasons for setting up a system either way. One thing about the low-efficiency approach I don’t care for is the need to crank the volume for the speakers to come alive. Low level listening just sounds anemic otherwise. Of course, some people get around this using EQ or headphones. Something to consider nonetheless.
@andrew -- I looked long and hard at Ascend Acoustics. They have great deals and what seems like amazing speakers.

@melvinjames The goal for me would be to avoid exactly what you describe by buying enough power. My understanding was that if there’s enough "headroom" then one does *not* have to crank things up to get the response needed for engaging sound. Perhaps I had that wrong, but that’s what I thought I learned in this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=th8CxTk22pY