When someone tells you it's a $40,000 amp, does it sound better?

@larrykell

+1 👍 😊

This weekend I heard PBN reference amps…. The system was awesome and in some way very expensive other way’s priceless. 
 

The cost of something should never be confused with the value of something. 
 

There are many audio equipment options fat a variety of prices.  And what you choose is a bit like the pursuit of life liberty and happiness. Go for it. 

@jumia wrote:

It can get terribly confusing and I just wish your phraseology could've done a better job communicating what you're probably thinking.

Apologies for not being able to bring about my views more clearly. I'll try and expand on them in a hopefully more concise (but not necessarily more compressed) manner below.  

I think I have A real interest in what you're trying to say. I believe you're trying to distinguish between efficient and less efficient speakers.

Speaker efficiency is only part of and indeed my secondary issue here, but it certainly is an important parameter in making more effective use of the amplifier power at hand. More on that later. 

Whereas higher power amps are used to drive…… and this is where I run into a problem with what I'm trying to read here.  I guess with the higher powered amps maybe they should be less powerful because if speakers were designed better you won't need all these additional watts which are now being used to push the delicate analog signal through all the filters.

My primary concern is how passive filters, complex ones in particular, become a "bottleneck" between the amplifier and speakers. Negatively affecting the control over the combined set of drivers it has a given amp putting some effort into handling the full-range frequency spectrum via the passive filter/driver combo it looks into, and depending on the amp this can severely limit its power envelope and overall performance; you could have a, say, 200W class D amp struggling with a heavy filter load, or a 30W class A ditto handling the same with relative ease. Wattages only tell you so much, but in any case both amps can't "see" and control the drivers directly, and thus only so much of their potential is utilized - as well as each individual driver's ability to "mimic" more closely the output signal coming from amp. One amp scenario would definitely be preferable over the other, though.  

It follows that with passive speakers, the multi-way ones with complex/heavy load filters in particular, overall amp sturdiness and load resilience is paramount to harness the potential of the speakers, and to achieve this with power headroom to spare - in addition to unimpeded, great sound quality - one could wind up shelling out serious dough for such amplifiers. Conversely, actively configured speakers with dedicated amp channels seeing directly into their respective driver (or driver segments), sans any intervening passive cross-over parts, will make much more effective use of their amplifiers both with regard to power capacity (i.e.: actively you'd need less power to equate a passive scenario) and sound quality. Not only would a cheaper amp actively be potentially comparable to a much more expensive ditto passively, it might very well surpass it as such being given superior load conditions, and this is where the context of this discussion matters. 

Designing more powerful amplifiers with the complexities involved here, pragmatics would dictate it's not as much about gaining sound quality than it is trying to merely maintain the fundamentals of it in the midst of the challenges posed. This being so I'd claim the overall advantage found with the sound of large, very powerful and more expensive amplifiers coupled to floor-standing, multi-way, lower efficiency and passively configured high-end speakers is mostly due to the power reserve and resilience to load presented here, than any "added" excellence of the core design. On the other hand, with an easier speaker load sans passive cross-overs, not least with speakers more efficient, you have a much better outset with less power needed to accommodate topologically more simple and cheaper amps, while maintaining the same (or more) headroom/SPL envelope. To me at least, that's the better hand to be dealt, while saving you a lot of money. 

Speaker efficiency - that is, the higher it is - is definitely a boon here, but with it typically also comes changes in design principle and size that makes the "all things being equal"-stance a more difficult one to go by. I myself adhere to the more efficient (and larger) segment of speakers, and driven fully actively provide a range of benefits that are immensely worthwhile to me, but it also means "buying into" another range of speakers that - and I believe this mostly comes down to aesthetics, size issues and conjecture - many may not be willing to accept. 

Crickey, that went on for long :/ Did it make you any wiser?

On the other hand, with an easier speaker load sans passive cross-overs, not least with speakers more efficient, you have a much better outset with less power needed to accommodate topologically more simple and cheaper amps, while maintaining the same (or more) headroom/SPL envelope. To me at least, that's the better hand to be dealt, while saving you a lot of money. 

The other advantage of easier to drive speakers is the amplifier, regardless of technology, will make less distortion. That will result in a smoother and more transparent presentation, since a lot of that added distortion will be higher ordered harmonics to which the ear is keenly sensitive, and otherwise distortion tends to obscure detail.

@atmasphere wrote:

The other advantage of easier to drive speakers is the amplifier, regardless of technology, will make less distortion. That will result in a smoother and more transparent presentation, since a lot of that added distortion will be higher ordered harmonics to which the ear is keenly sensitive, and otherwise distortion tends to obscure detail.

Absolutely, that's a very important aspect I failed to mention - thank you. And sadly very few speakers made today are 16-ohm load, which it seems is another means to lower amp distortion. Not least also having an amplifier only cover a limited frequency span actively, like freeing it from the lower midrange on down, is a liberating measure to lower distortion.