Frequency Response (Hz) VS. Sensitivity (dB)

[SideWinder]

I have a problem.

Sensitivity (dB): 90.5
Frequency response (Hz): 36 - 22,000

Versus

Sensitivity (dB): 92
Frequency response (Hz): 44 - 20,000

2 different floor standing speakers. Which would be better as i have got myself royally confused? One is the M34i and the other is the Aegis Evo 3.

I know that the higher the sensitiivty, the easier it is to drive the speakers but frequency response is surely important the the one with the lower sensitivty has a higher range so...hmm.

 

[squiffy]

Speaker 1 has lower sensitvity (which means slightly lower volume compared to #2 from the same output from the amplifier) but lower bass response.

Although those specs have ZERO relevance on sound quality.

I suggest you go and listen to a few speakers, and not be swayed by numbers.

 

[Corasik]

Sensitivity doesnt tell the whole story either in terms of how big a load the speaker is, You need an impedance V frequency plot, to see how the speaker reacts at different frequencys.

So a speaker could be 92dB sensitivity, but if it has a tendancy to drop to say 2 ohms, at a critical frequency it could be a hard load on the amplifier, as it could need many amps to drive it well.

 

[Dr.EM]

Either of those should easily be driven to high enough levels with common solid state amplifiers (many tube ones are much lower output though). As suggested, try to hear them if you can

 

[daz]

The frequency response doesn't really mean anything without a graph accompanying it. 44-20000 Hz means nothing. You need a frequency and a sound pressure level measurement... ideally in graph form so you can see the bass roll-off etc. You should also consider that in general (obviously you have exceptions etc) highly sensitive speakers tend to have lower power handling, whilst the converse is true of lower sensitivity speakers. You'll generally need highly sensitive speakers when using a valve amp, for example. It's just swings and roundabouts, and you should really just go for whatever model sounds best to you.

So a speaker could be 92dB sensitivity, but if it has a tendancy to drop to say 2 ohms, at a critical frequency it could be a hard load on the amplifier, as it could need many amps to drive it well.

Sorry to be a pedant, but a lower impedance load is easier for an amplifier to drive. So easy, in fact, it tries to draw too much power for the load through it's underspecced power supply.

 

[Corasik]

Sorry to be a pedant, but a lower impedance load is easier for an amplifier to drive. So easy, in fact, it tries to draw too much power for the load through it's underspecced power supply.

Well its a matter of perspective isnt it, if a speaker demands more power than the amp can handle, then its not an easy load for the amp.

 

[Mr_Sukebe]

Ignore the specs and go have a listen to see which one you prefer.
Talking about just specs is like trying to say expensive cables make no difference, simply because you haven't worked out how to measure the difference that affects sound quality.

 

[daz]

Well its a matter of perspective isnt it, if a speaker demands more power than the amp can handle, then its not an easy load for the amp.

But if the power supply can handle it, a lower impedance load is easier. Serious Class D amps and the like can often handle <1 ohm loads quite stably, and are usually designed to produce the most power around this. I.e. the amp will produce 250W RMS into 1 channel at 4 Ohms, 500W RMS into 2 Ohms and 1000W into 1 Ohm.

 

[SideWinder]

Just remembered this thread and some of it has gone way over my head...if it makes any difference, i'm talking about deciding between Acoustic Energy Aegis 3 Evo (Speaker 1) and Mission M34i (Speaker 2) with a NAD C320BEE.

Speaker 1 has lower sensitvity (which means slightly lower volume compared to #2 from the same output from the amplifier) but lower bass response.

Although those specs have ZERO relevance on sound quality.

That has helped me quite a bit in simple terms and corrected a few of my thoughts about what affects sound quality. I have read a few reviews about the Missions and it speaks about Ohms and dropping below a certain level and i am veering towards the Acoustic Energy speakers.

 

[9designs2]

Ok...... I'm going to have to bite.... and it's aimed at any poster or reader that it matches..... THROW ALL SPECS AWAY, most are meaningless and more so to people who haven't a clue what they mean !!!.... the slight difference in spec's people get hung up is all complete BS..... So many posts lately from people worried if this will work with that....and as yet I've not seen one, nor do I think I ever will, that actually raises the slightest concern !!!

When will people get it through their bonce, after countless posting by the more informed members here... GO LISTEN TO THE KIT..... the best spec on paper can sound utter rubbish.... and often does !!!!
Really fretting over such drivel is pointless........if YOU like how it SOUNDS ... then BUY IT....PLUG IT and ENJOY IT.

Speakers are such a personal taste item.... and their sound and character are not represented in spec sheets.....

Three things should be mind when choosing kit..... 1. use your local dealers to listen, 2. Do I like the way it sounds... 3. Can I afford it ..... when you get three yeses... job done!


Ok rant over.... not that it will make any difference

 

[DRZ]

rant

I agree with you

I had to laugh about people that dont know what the numbers mean getting extra hung up about the numbers! Some of the conversations I have had have been priceless - im sure at the end of my career I will have a few gems!

Its my nature to get hung up on the numbers (after all, I deal in the mathematics of what sound is actually doing on a daily basis. Maths *is* the whole world and everything in it...) but when it comes to my hifi, I bought based solely on two categories:

1. What I could afford
2. What sounded good

There is a point every budget where you get the very best for your money, whether it be a £200 budget or a £20,000 budget.

Im pretty sure I am at that point for my budget and I am confident that a few people in here are at that point too (although in some cases for rather more in the way of budget!).

Ultimately you can argue until you are blue in the face about what type of clipping is nicer than others or what cables can and cannot affect but humans are complicated beings and even if its just a psychological difference and its in budget then fine

EDIT:

I cant help it :/ Got to clarify some stuffs.

Those sensitivites can be assumed to be 1w @ 1m (at 1KHz IIRC, but its late and something is telling me this isnt always the case, but it should be because of calibration and stuff).

The responses can be assumed to be within 3dB from reference although there is ALL SORTS of jiggery pokery with these numbers. It is safe to say you wont ever see a proper frequency response plot unless you conduct the test yourself. Most of the published figures use 1/3rd octave band rounding and all sorts to disguise peaks and especially troughs in the response.

All of the above are in anechoic conditions.

I guess all of that went way over the heads of those who didnt really understand frequency response and sensitivity in the first place, but what it all boils down to is this:

When it comes to that loudspeaker being placed in your room and connected to your kit putting out acoustic waves into your ears, those numbers are so far out it just simply does not matter AT ALL.

 

[9designs2]

EDIT:

I cant help it :/ Got to clarify some stuffs.

Those sensitivites can be assumed to be 1w @ 1m (at 1KHz IIRC, but its late and something is telling me this isnt always the case, but it should be because of calibration and stuff).

The responses can be assumed to be within 3dB from reference although there is ALL SORTS of jiggery pokery with these numbers. It is safe to say you wont ever see a proper frequency response plot unless you conduct the test yourself. Most of the published figures use 1/3rd octave band rounding and all sorts to disguise peaks and especially troughs in the response.

All of the above are in anechoic conditions.

.

LOL so I'm not the only one that "had" to bite ....

Your edit is basically my understanding as well as to how it's measured.....manufactures will do anything to "present" some "impressive" figures.... more so at the cheaper end of the market.... sadly genuine quality is rarely "cheap"...

What also makes me laugh is when you hear some of the lesser dealers spout this rubbish, trying to make a sale ....

 

[TomO]

i like it when the cheap stuff quotes frequency response with +/- 6db range. it starts getting a bit pointless then!


"it will probably make some sort of a sound with in this frequency range maybe..."

 

[9designs2]

i like it when the cheap stuff quotes frequency response with +/- 6db range. it starts getting a bit pointless then!


"it will probably make some sort of a sound with in this frequency range maybe..."

hahah nice one.... so some of the music you might not even hear... but hey they did warn you so it's ok !!!

One speaker spec I did like/impressed me, was 20Hz to 20Khz +/-1db ...That's ONE decibel !!!!!!
Think that's what they call a "flat response" !!! (Aktive Linn Keltiks.... I sold them

 

[SideWinder]

In my defence, i don't know everything about speakers and so i started to compare by using the specs of each one, logical really.

/shrugs.



And completing my HiFi suicide...

ACOUSTIC ENERGY AEGIS EVO 3 SPEAKERS (PAIR) SPECIFICATIONS
Power handling (watts): 150

My Amp is 50W per channel so will it still be powerful enough?

 

[DRZ]

Its actually 2dB

There is, to the best of my knowledge, only one speaker that claims to be flat within 1dB (+/- 0.5dB) 20-20kHz and thats the B&W Model Nautilus. Not exactly within the grasp of most people though, you could buy a reasonably new Ferrari for the same money.

In my defence, i don't know everything about speakers and so i started to compare by using the specs of each one, logical really.

/shrugs.

For something as involving as your entire music collection, its bum-on-seat experience that matters the most.

I spent at least 2-3 hours per speaker over quite a long time before I finally bought mine! For such a significant amount of money (to me), it had to sound good in a room

 

[Mr_Sukebe]

but when it comes to my hifi, I bought based solely on two categories:

1. What I could afford
2. What sounded good

Too damn right. Doesn't matter how much you're looking at, it's the best way to deal with the situation. Figures can often have little relationship to actual sonic performance.

 

[DRZ]

My Amp is 50W per channel so will it still be powerful enough?

There is no way that:

a) you will be able to bear throwing 50w into a speaker that sensitive for very long in an average sized room (if you have any sense)

b) the crossovers in those speakers can't take 150w

Impedance vs frequency is far more important - and good luck finding graphs like that for a speaker like that.

50w is plenty. Go to a shop that has both in, sit yourself down and listen.

 

[SideWinder]

Okay, trying to understand what you mean DRZ in regard to A and B...

Mm, i've listened to a few speakers in shops around me, one with same Amp i have (Running M33i's) and it sounded pretty nice. So you're saying it wouldn't sound that good? (A)

As for B, i'm lost.

 

[DRZ]

Okay, trying to understand what you mean DRZ in regard to A and B...

Mm, i've listened to a few speakers in shops around me, one with same Amp i have (Running M33i's) and it sounded pretty nice. So you're saying it wouldn't sound that good? (A)

As for B, i'm lost.

50w into a 90dB efficient speaker is going to be something in the region of 106dB. Two speakers, so that takes it up to 109dB and roughly +4dB accounting for your room and you have 113dB. Thats getting on for rather loud indeed!

Listening at more than ~94dB for prolonged periods of time does significant (measurable) damage to your hearing too.

As for B, think flames and the death of your speakers