High vs. low sensitivity speakers, is there a clear winner?  

Watching Steve is like having a good friend stop by...albeit one with 1000 different shirts!

Love the channel Steve. Very informative for a newbie 20 y/o with bose 901’s

Thank you for this video!!!

I bought 600 m's after your review, paired them with my onkyo tx-8255 sounds really good! Thnx for the input.

So informative and always a cracking shirt to look at too. I just received my Reisong a10 to hook up to my Klipsch Forte II 's Very excited.

This was awesome man!

Have Elac AS61 Adante: Sensitivity: 85dB at 2.83 v/1m Previously had Maggie MMG but the local dealer in Singapore would only give 2 years Gtee as Humidity could affect the Panels, so I went for the Adantes and wow once placed correctly sand loaded and well wired the sound is magnificent but I have also added a REL 9i and a Denafrips terminator. Glorious sound have had Martin logan, and even B&W DM70 Electrostatics yes Electrostatics. love your Audiophiliac show

Thanks Steve 👍

My low sensitivity speakers sound "sophisticated"... my high sensitivity speakers sound "fun"

very informative!

Steve you are bang on here regarding horn speakers and I remember the first time I heard a Klipschorn and thought wow. There is so much magic that you can get from a horn speaker that you can't get from any other speaker and that midrange, wow. High efficiency speakers are great with low output tube amplifiers and give you massive volume output without stressing the amp. I remember AR and they were a great company and I had a some of their products including their rca cables. I think if I had the room, I would have a pair of planars, horns, and a pair of electrostatics. You then get an opportunity to hear a little of everything as well as the compromises, but I would still keep my Vandersteens and move up to the mighty Model 7s.

I've been having fun with high-sensitivity full range drivers in back-loaded horns. No crossover unless you have a peak you need to kill - a very direct way of listening. Still not as fun as my older JBLs, but there is something really magical about them.

Found amazing deal on Cornwall fours so I’m about to order those. Very excited

Man I love my 600Ms I bought them on your review, here in Australia I am loving them to bits and they have bought me back to listening to music.

There are alternatives to horn drivers in high efficiency speakers. I agree with Steve. High efficiency speakers can usually (not always) convey a certain delicacy during quiet musical passages and then have the ability to accelerate at the blink of an eye to play highly dynamic music LOUD. I auditioned two highly efficient speakers in my home; Klipsch Forte III’s and Tekton Design Double Impact speakers. I wound up choosing the Double Impact over the Forte III. I’m not going to go into why here, but my listening space was large enough to support the very large DI’s. One observation I’ve made over the years is that, all things being equal (like bass response), highly efficient speakers are physically larger than than their lesser efficient counterparts. Cheers.

Awesome Content!

I remember the acoustic research bookshelf , my uncle had a pair . Nice sound for the small size.

When they are done well, high efficiency speakers are extremely engaging. I was listening to my KEFs today at a higher than usual volume, and the dynamics left me unimpressed (but I love them otherwise). High sensitivity also translates to lower driver distortion, which is a huge bonus. I'm looking forward to auditioning the Klipsch RP-8000F. I had a pair of Forte IIs for a while and did not like the aggressive upper bass, so I'll be listening closely for that. The response graph on audioholics looks extremely good, so maybe that's not an issue this time.

It all depends on the sound! I loved my inefficient AR-3 for many years, driven by Dynaco Stereo 120 amp (60 wpc)! Now my KEF LS-50 are very much loved, together with my recent (lower performing) Klipsch RP-600M. Domestic listening rooms seem to obtain top quality sound reproduction from both efficient/inefficient speakers!

Hey Steve, I was just wanting to say thank you for putting Klipsch on my radar. Up until a week or so ago I hadn't even considered them, as basically everything I read about them pointed to them being more of a Bose-esque home theater speaker, unsuitable for music. I recently bought the RP-160M (the previous version of the 600M) to upgrade my ELAC B6s, and have been utterly floored by them. I never got that big speakers sound out of the B6s that I heard was untouchable by headphones, so I figured people must be overstating speakers' greatness. (I've always been a headphone guy. Rocking the Koss ESP-950s and Beyer DT1770 Pros!) Those 160Ms though, they hit me from a completely different angle. Suddenly music had a sense of height, depth, there was more precise placement of instruments and sounds within the soundstage. Sounds even get thrown behind me which just about cause me to spin out of my chair. The mids are sweeter than the B6, they have infinitely more fine detail, they're actually approaching headphone levels in that regard. Even bass on them is perfectly respectable, if slightly down in level compared to the B6. I'm a little sour I fell for the hype of the B6s, but the joy I feel for falling for the Klipsch hype outweighs that. At just over $300 I feel like I stole the RP-160Ms. Hah.

I love the sound of the Avant Garde speakers. They have their own sound but still pretty nice. Zu on the other hand sounds very nice initially but after a while it’s kinda dry and gets a bit tiring. I was always wondering why the high sensitivity speakers have a certain kind of sound. Now I see that they got more dynamics and lose out on bass. Thanks!

Enjoyed the video (also enjoyed the many comments). I have to agree with the sentiment of some responders that efficiency is just one aspect of speaker design (albeit an important one that can also affect other driver/speaker parameters). In earlier years I seemed to be drawn to low sensitivity air suspension designs. When I started trying to design and build my own speakers I started to explore the mid efficiency offered by ported enclosures. Eventually I gravitated to transmission line designs. Although there is no denying that personal taste is a factor I believe listener fatigue is also an important consideration. To me you can force drivers to behave a certain way with equalization and/or various active and passive crossovers or you can choose well designed and matched drivers and gently persuade them to behave with minimal passive cross over circuits. To me forcing drivers to do things they don’t want to do invites rebellion. This rebellion takes the form of unwanted distortions. The second gentler approach seems to more naturally enhance the drivers qualities. I believe the more the drivers are forced the less natural they sound and this invites listener fatigue.

I got into Klipsch through their headphones. The Klipsch X4i was the first BA headphone I've ever had, and it totally transformed how I listened to music. Since then I've gotten into great DACs and got a pair of Klipsch Sixes. While I love the timing and dynamics, the mid scoop, while not insane (I think about -3-4dB across 300-1500 Hz or so), is at this point often annoying to me, and makes practicing bass and drums with my stereo painful due to high mid and treble crowding at high volumes. I've added some used Bose 201 which have been really good in filling out the mids without much redundancy. I've always wanted tower speakers, but now I'm hesitant to stay with Klipsch and may want to look more seriously at non-horn speakers. But all in good time. I've grown to love much flatter frequency response over time. I'm especially annoyed with high mids 1.5-2.5 kHz, and if I wanted anything boosted, maybe it would be high bass to low mids 180-360 Hz about. I'm not sure Klipsch can take me there. They all seem to be a bit scooped from what I've seen. My fave headphones now are Sony's IER-M7s, which I currently listen to with an iFi Go blu mainly wired-so basically I need to keep ant components a few hundred below $1K to be justifiable.

I'm in the high efficiency camp with my Kilpsch La Scalas that weight in @ 104 dB/Watt meter. I drive them with a Berning MicroZOTL that's rated at a whopping 1 Watt per channel. My other speakers are Fostex FE206 @ 98 dB/Watt meter. Had Maggies, Quad ESLs, acoustic suspension, Helmholz resonators, etc., but horns are what rock my world. One word - Dynamics.

Own a pair of ADS L1230 speakers rated at 94db sensitivity. Love the sound, agree with the comments around the need for a fussy setup. Ultimately, pairing them with a First Watt J2 provided me the necessary, low noise, amplification that made them sound great... I think that pairing your amp and speaker on the basis of sensitivity is of the utmost importance. Not sure if there are clear winners but I know that a beautiful First Watt Amp likely would not sound nearly as capable on a set of low sensitivity speakers.

Thanks Steve for being a champion for HE (High Energy!) speakers. You are literally kick-starting a movement and have me convinced that I need to investigate them ASAP. I am coming from a set of Harbeth speakers and really enjoy the refined yet detailed sound. I do believe there are compromises with HE designs and am concerned that dynamics and energy may not be enough to overcome their lack of refinement. Would a person who values refinement be better off with a much more powerful amplifier (or bi-amp) to jump start their LE speakers?

I am glad you brought up this subject. I've always wondered what some people have to say about pros and cons of speakers with hi and low sensitivities. There is also the technical difference between sensitivity and efficiency. I hear sensitivity is the more accurate terms? My knee jerk reasoning was that small bookshelf type speakers were low sens and large floor standers with 15" woofers and all that were hi (er) sens. Throw in a horn driver and that clinches the deal. Plus, needless to say, what we "hear" is from moving air vibrations. A small bookshelf speaker just cannot move enough air to give a perceived loudness, or SPL's that can be produced by a much larger speaker system, right? If I'm dead wrong, correct me. A nice compact bookshelf speaker say with a 6" woofer and nice dome tweeter can sound wonderful, full and natural I'm sure, but concert level SPL's? Not so sure. I was reading specs on a budget brand "car" midrange cone driver that said it had a sensitivity of 100db @ 1 watt/mtr. Really? Is that possible? Ya, it had a huge ferrous ring magnet that was like 3 pounds, but still.....I'd figure 92db max IMO. Again, anyone thinks otherwise? Thanks, Steve for your opinions and input on the topic of Hi-Fi. Glad you appreciate horn loaded systems too! I still love my 60 year old University Classics!

It's a tradeoff. We go with our preferences. I do enjoy the wider dynamic swing of a horn/higher sensitivity speaker, but I prefer my Gallo Reference 3.1 speakers which excel at soundstage and inner detail, while not devoid of dynamic jump.

I live with the pioneer sp-ebs73 (85 dba @ 4 ohms) for 4 years now and love them. I tried a pair of the Klipsch RP-280F (98 dba @ 8 ohms) and loved the punch factor, but I got rid of them, mostly due to the mid range and imaging. I agree with AJ that the best 2 way is a 3 way, and I am now a true believer in concentric drivers. I hope you circle back to the Adante Steve! That may be my next speaker.

Yes I love my rf-7 II

I could listen to you talk about audio all day long Steve!

I paired Hales Revelation 3s with a Pass Labs X amp and I have to say, I have still never heard anything like I have from a set of Cornwalls. Life is just more dynamic than is simply revealed in a response curve.

High Sensitivity for me. Long ago, I built a pair of Dallas II speakers designed by Ron Clarke. It's a back-loaded folded horn design using the Fostex FE 206 E driver. A very light cone and a huge magnet really take control of voice coil movement and I think that lets the voice coil follow the electric signal more accurately. The cone has very small xMax travel as the mid bass is generated in the horn. Also, this single driver needs no crossover; less affect on the signal. Great dynamic range and fast bass. The trade offs are a bit ragged frequency response, no bass below 40Hz and the physical size. 11W x 18D x 48H

Great Explanation. Agree with a lot of the comments but did not read them all . Don't know if anyone pointed out that every time you said "Klipsch" the captioning said clips.

I got the chance to listen to some Klipsch RP-160m and I have to say wow😊 it was like the instruments was playing right in front of me. I never had high sensitivity speakers before always low sensitivity speakers but the Klipsch reference line has my name all over it😊I'm going to pick me up a pair with a quickness and I'm never looking back. But im going to miss following And buying Andrew Jones made speakers.

I was like your friend- I had Elac ub5 speakers powered by a Rega Elexr amp and it was enjoyable but in retrospect very "analytical". Heard, Klipsh Heresy and all of a sudden I was emerged in music that sounded "live". Bought the Heresy's traded the Rega for a tube amp and now listen with a huge smile on my face. P.S. I e njoy your daily show and see it every morning with my coffee.

Hi Steve, first commenter on this video so I thought I’d take the opportunity to say how much I enjoy your videos. Keep up the good work. Many thanks!

I much prefer the sound of my KEF R Series over the comparable Klipsh as an example. They were too bright and harsh. People say the hard dome of the KEF can be fatiguing but I find it well in the middle of the spectrum between horns and soft shell dome tweeters. Really well balanced but they do need a little more power to come to life.

I've been DIYing speakers for 40+ years, using midrange and tweeter horns for 30+ of those years. Direct radiator woofer vs midrange, two separate issues. Small acoustic susp woofer has the size advantage as stated in the video, but here are disadvantages. Small cone area leads to increased excursion and higher distortion (AM and FM). Low sensitivity leads to more voice coil heating which can reduce dynamic range and shift speaker parameters due to voice coil resistance increase. Horns got a bad rep in the '50s and '60s due to some bad designs and poor crossovers. Horns need a steep high-pass to minimize signals below the low freq cutoff of the horn. I use 18db/oct. Below the cutoff frequency the frequency response and transient response become poor (due to low frequency waves reflecting at the horn mouth back into the horn). Besides raising sensitivity, the efficient coupling from diaphragm to horn throat reduces diaphragm movement and thus distortion. The high sound pressure in the throat reduces the effect of internal static friction of the diaphragm and its suspension. This allows for more clarity and detail in low volume sounds.

I love my JBL cs3115 and never have any problem with them when it comes to good sounding bass

I purchased a pair of Klipsch R-15M last year when they went on sale. I have always wanted a pair of Klipsch for their efficiency. I have to say, I absolutely love them. For me, they have plenty of bass and they sound amazing.

My dream set of speakers for my personal use four years has been either a set of altec voice of the theaters or a pair of Klipsch lascala

I don't know about low sensitivity speakers having a more complex crossover. My KEF Reference 104/2 floor standing speakers are 92dB, 200W (max) and have a pretty flat response, with a 4 Ohm resistive load. These speakers have a very complex crossover network. I know, because I have restored several pair of these speakers, rebuilding the crossovers with matched capacitors,e tc.. (both bi-wire and non bi-wire versions.) These are still some of my favorite speakers, although on a low-sensitivity front, another pair of favorites for me are Martin Logan Electrostatics, like the Prodigy, or Ascent. The KEFs use a ported chamber for the woofers. Ported enclosures are more efficient, and thus louder with a given input wattage at or near the tuned frequency of the port compared to a sealed box, but they give up some things, like a flat response, and transient delay times compared to sealed as well as dropping off like a brick wall below the tuned frequency for a ported box, whereas a sealed box's roll-off tends to be more dependant on things like room accoustics and transfer point. Granted most of my experience was in the mobile audio world (MECP Gold installer 20+ years) but I do love home audio as well.

what I love with low sensitivity speakers is indeed deeper bass but also the fact they are often non fatiguing, that’s certainly the case of my Wilson Sophia Serie 1 (with way too powerful Bryston monoblocs to power them)

An interesting exercise is to use a very low power 3W single ended tube amp and drive something like an Altec-Lansing Voice of the Theater or a Klipschorn. These speakers present an un-complex load and 3W in most home environments can push them over 100db. I've had the experience several times and it's a lot of fun. Acoustic Suspension designs ( sealed box ) typically have complex crossovers and present complex loads therefore need high power, low damping factor power amps.

I like my Klipsch R-51M and R-120SW combo so much that bought some R-820F towers on sale. They sound pretty good and have 97dB sensitivity. I decided to finally give Tidal a try and I can't tell you how happy I am. My 1991 Pioneer VSX-D1S is powering them until I save enough for an amp or receiver.

I have the pleasure of two different systems. The "downstairs" system has Dynaco A25's (around 88 db) which are kind of between closed and open. I've updated the tweeters to Morel MDT20's (silk dome) for much better high frequency response. The amp is an NAD 3155 which can pump some current. The upstairs system is all DIY. Speakers are big box with JBL 15" woofers, around 99 db. Amps are DIY Push Pull KT88's with limited feedback and running in UL (about 40 watts). Both systems sound great, but yes, the big guys upstairs with B&C compression driver has a much better jump factor and much better nuance for things like hearing the venue. Last night I took Diana Krall to both rooms and I have to say, we had a better time upstairs. FYI, I really like her Christmas album.

Somewhat dependant on amp of choice. I run Avantgarde Duo's, with 8- 22w SET's. I also have some JM Labs Alcor..they like a couple hundred watts on tap. The SET might work with the Alcors(medium sensitivity) but probably not going to get the best from them. With the Duo's you get it all(dynamics and fantastic low end), due to the powered sub.

BTW.. its 2019. Great video. Cheers

Bravo! The most important line in your post: A TEN DB DIFFERENCE IN SENSITIVITY MEANS IT TAKES TEN TIME MORE POWER TO GET THE SAME LOUDNESS. This can be very hard to get your head around. But it is true. It means that you might be able to use a 50-100 watt per channel amp or receiver to fill your room -- with a lot of headroom for the fortissimo stuff. It might mean you don't need that PS Audio 400(?) watt behemoth amp to hear a symphony orchestra at near concert volume. And the headroom left over means the tutti crescendo doesn't have to go "wong-crash-crinkle-crinkle-gasp." And you might not need to fret and worry about loading up the AC power line -- or the amp's limited power supply -- to hear all that. The efficiency factor you talk about reminds me of MY days as a theater projectionist (at a student job). We had your remembered Altec Lansing Voice of the Theater horn behind the screen driven by a 35-watt-rated tube amp. It filled the 600 seat theater -- and the amp was loafing. The output tubes lasted years. I have an ancient pair of Advent (sealed box) speakers in the bedroom. My "100 watt" old Teac A-B receiver starts to clip at just reasonably loud levels. I think I'll replace them with a pair of Klipsch 600s. In the bargain, I expect to be able to keep the old Teac. No new amp. No new preamp. No blue meters. But a lot less than 10 watts per channel (clean, not busting buckles) should suffice. Do not take anything I say here against sealed box speakers. The old Advents are still wonderful (with twice reconed woofers), with tight bass and no boom that I can hear. But, they take a half ton of power to drive them to effortless sound. So, a $1500 amp, $500 preamp -- or, $550 for the Klipsch pair? Choices. And effortless sound can be a wonderful thing. Your wallet keeps some padding, too.

This is why I in general I prefer high end speakers from the vintage era. They just sound more natural as I the music isn't forced out.

Oh,man, deja vu!! My first real stereo system!! AR manual turntable, Dynaco 120 amp, Dynaco FM tuner, Dynaco preamp and AR 3ax (I think ) speakers I bought in NYC in the late 60’s. Loved what I got for the insurance money when my Roberts 770x tape recorder was destroyed in a repair shop fire in Ithaca NY. The store name escapes me. Begins with a K.

I recently started listening to some 50s or 60s Peerless speakers, and even though they're not very accurate at all, I find them so much more enjoyable to listen to than my inefficient Quadral bookshelf speakers. (actually they're rear channel speakers but I'm using them on my desk) I'm now actually considering Replacing those little (5" drivers) speakers with these old Peerless speakers even though they would take up so much more room on my desk, they're 8" drivers.

Your journey into high efficiency speakers has been enlightening. I am a fan of and own both Zu and Klipsch speakers. You should try and listen to some Speakerlab Super 7s made in Seattle by old hippies in the 1970s. They have horn tweeters and mid-ranges with dual woofers in a sealed box, Speakerlabs can be bought cheap, and challenge both Zu and Klipsch. I believe that speakers can’t be judged solely on their specifications, but must judged as part of a system. My systems are primarily tube based. Tubes and horns are a delightful combination. On the other hand, high power amplification can make horns sound shrill and distorted. Those powerful amplifiers sound best with low efficiency speakers. One must also consider the room in analyzing the “best” system. Small spaces work well with low power and high efficiency. Finally, a listener’s type of listening is perhaps most important. I listen at comparatively low levels. This allows me to thoroughly enjoy Cornwalls in a small space (referring to your recent post about big speakers in a small space). Thanks for all you enlightening posts. You have enhanced my obsession with sound and gear. I encourage others to support you through Patreon.

I’ve been running on my Zu Omen’s for a while now and just recently ordered a set of 1.7i Maggie’s. I also have two amps - a small single ended triode Decware with 6 watts per channel and a set of PS Audio M700s that are 700 Watts into 4ohm per channel. With this I can mix and match based on what I’m listening too and my mood. I’ve also got a Zu Undertone to fill in the bottom octave. It’s the best of both worlds.

I like high sensitivity speakers. Just built a full range set and won't go back. One problem I had was it made my minor issues more apparent, ie my phone stage. Solved that and I'm one happy camper. They may be no Forte but I can now listen for hours

My audio journey began 20 years ago with an old pair of Magnepan SMGas. They were affordable but needed (i thought) 250+ watts before they really opened up. Loved the speakers couldn't find an amp. Find an amp I love wouldn't drive my speakers. Get rid of the maggies live with something else for a year, want the maggies back. The only system I ever had that made me consider box speakers was a pair of Klipsch Heresy's with a Jolida 102b 20w integrated and an old Denon turntable. It was the most delicate, nuanced sound I ever had in my living room, but it was bass shy. My dream would be a pair of modded 1.6 maggies that could be driven by a Prima Luna integrated (30W). Openness and delicacy that is unrivaled, but still with weight and authority. Will one day take the autoformer leap.

I always thought high sensitivity meant better. My first two sets of speakers when I got into audio in my teens were the Klipsch KG 5.2 (96db) and the Infinity SM 102 (94db). Also they were both 8 ohms. Then I moved into B&W and Magnepan speakers which were 4 ohms and had sensitivities from 86 - 89 db. What I noticed with the lower sensitivity and 4 4 ohm speakers - deepness and richness. No fatigue. I had a chance to re-listen to a set of Klipsch KG 5.2 years later. Now they sound thin and much too forward. I’m not against high sensitivity speakers. In my journey as an audiophile, I have learned that bigger / better numbers don’t really mean much. PS. I plan to buy very high sensitivity speakers from Zhu Audio to satisfy my curiosity of ultra high efficiency including high ohm.

As usual, I learned a lot from this video. Like most of the folks following Steve Guttenberg, I already knew a lot, and I'm especially fond of speakers, so there's some specialized knowledge about speaker technology. I'm not intending to boast, please excuse, I am simply stating the obvious fact that our demographic knows a lot more about stereo systems than the average guy. Yet still, nearly every one of Steve's videos has a gem, a gift for me, that of knowledge, about something important (to us) that I did not know before watching. If it was possible to actually put a dollar value on knowledge I'd owe this man a million bucks already.

I never really connected Sound Quality and Sensitivity. However, certain technologies tend to be more/less sensitivity. As you mention, horns tend to be on more sensitive speakers.

If you like Klipsch you will love Energy. Energy was acquired by Klipsch some time ago. I have B&W Matrix 801's and enjoy my Energy's just as much. I own 2 pairs of Energy Speakers . . . . e:XL-26 towers (best speaker for the price I have ever heard), + C 7 towers

My favorite low sensitivity speakers were Totem Mani-2, 85 dB, isobaric design, with a good powerful amp, it can sound glorious. I have not owned anything above 86 dB speakers, but someday I would like to try Devore Orangutan speakers.

The thing about horns is they don't sound like they're trying to get loud - like you can feed a bit of power into them and easily drown a less efficient speaker that's buzzing and vibrating from being pushed. I find in general that low sensitivity speakers tend to sound a bit softer/smoother in the midrange until you try to get them very loud, where it helps to have the tweeter be high sensitivity otherwise it will sound a bit "mushier" than a horn. At lower listening levels it doesn't really matter but something like a drum kit tends to have sounds that are louder than you'd think for brief instances in the snare and kick peaks that sound compressed on a less efficient speaker unless it can take a lot of linear power. I think in the bass end of things, the high efficiency horn designs also sound the tightest in the transients (though by far the biggest factor with sloppy boomy bass I think is the room reverberation). I'm also quite a big fan of ported with large PA woofers. The only compromise is the enclosure sizes tend to get rather huge in order to run bass with minimal power requirements. If you have a wife who doesn't want your subwoofer to look like a giant refrigerator in the sitting room, then a high excursion sealed 12" in a couple of cubic feet with a kilowatt amp should service you quite well, though I'll always be curious about what the horn can do.

Hi Steve, highly appreciate your content! You mention the Elac Uni-Fi UB5 : I also read the Cnet review but it leaves me somewhat confused - would my amp be sufficient to drive them nicely? Or too wimpy? Sony TA-Fb940, 120W + 120W (4 Ohm@1Khz, DIN). Opinions welcome. Thanks!

Low sounds better, I think. High is good for PA My Elac FS 507 end Elac CC 507 have quite low sensitivity but they have great dynamic anyway so even if your speakers don't have high sensitivity you can still have a dynamic sound......if you don't have a "lazy" amp.

Heya - I've had some 86db and some 99db (Forte iiis) and have to say that the 86db definitely had more bass, but to the detriment of everything else. The excursion on the bass driver was insane and was really fun to watch moving about. But, the quickness and sharpness was not there where ass the size of the forte's just makes up for it in sheer volume of air movement. The bass isn't as much in terms of quantity, but it seems to fill the room better and has much more texture to it.

I went from proac response 1sc for 22 years to klipsch Cornwall iv. I can’t get my jaw off the floor.

As a former Klipsch La Scalla owner I LOVE high efficiency (HE) speakers! I had to sell due to space limitations. If I were just starting out, I'd go the HE route because it allows so many options in amplification. You can use 1 watt to 1000 watt amplifiers with great results. As far as the Klipsch, I was disappointed with the tweeter performance of this old-school design (LOVED the mid-range, however). Klipsch will have a world beater if they ever put beryllium diaphragms in a Forte III (and maybe a field-coil bass driver?).

Just like hard to drive headphones (Fostex T50RP MK3) ughhhh. But when u get them properly driven, man they can be bliss. Just like guitars however, I love them ALL! Low sensitivity, high sensitivity, 4ohm, 8ohm, 16ohm, I’m into any decent speaker! I can’t help it

I appreciate high efficiency speakers for their ability to hit peaks and sound dynamic and lively. Certain instruments like piano and cymbals sound better to me with HE speakers, and in particular I like to listen to Rock and Bluegrass with horn loaded designs.

I built my high sensitivity BK-20 back loaded horn speaker cabinet with my 98 sensitivity Foster FE206en 8” driver. To match my mono blocks Pass Labs Amp Camp Amps I built. 15W Class A . Match made in heaven for your ears.

2 systems: Low efficiency Kef ls50s spkrs with 250wpc ss monoblocs. High efficiency Rega Naos with 35wpc tube amp. Both sound great. Wouldn't dream of swapping amps

Hey I'm just getting into this and I'm interested in the r 51m klipsch or the rp 600m's but I'm thinking of pairing them with some tubes to give them a bit of warmth but not sure if that dull them down a bit much. What do you think?

Great topic Steve. Is there ever a clear winner in audio? After many years happily using inefficient speakers (Magnepan, Ohm, Mark & Daniel) paired with an appropriate amp (Odyssey, PS Audio, Marantz) curiosity got the best of me and I went in the complete opposite direction. Efficient single-driver loudspeakers (Omega) and a 2 wpc SET amp (Decware) changed my perspective. The pairing is sublime. However, I missed the bass impact and added an Omega sub after a time. I couldn't be happier. Could I go back? If I had to, yes, but I would surely miss the sound quality SET/single-driver speakers bring to the table. As Mr. Deckert is fond of saying "If the 1st watt sucks why continue?".

Steve. Have you or could you do a review on the Legacy Audio Classic HD speakers? It would be much appreciated, thanks!

I am in the middle of it all, I like to listen to something between the two ranges. My two speakers have an SPL of 90DdB. I've seen from spec sheets, and advertisements that most are 91Db, and above. I've heard 87 or 86DB speakers at hi fi stores; but as you've explained such loudspeakers need plenty of power from an amplifier.

I spent around 20 years with 96db sensitivity speakers and moved to a 85db pair about 5 years ago. It was an upgrade in quality so everything sounds way better. I run a 800W poweramp (Michi S5) so power is just not an issue at all but to be honest, it doesn't really feel like I have to turn up the volume much more to get the same level of db.

Theoretically, each increase of 3db of speaker sensitivity doubles your system's volume vs requiring 10 times the amplifier wattage to double a system's volume so ... a 3.5 wpc SET tube amp ( like mine) with my Zu speakers at 97db 1w/meter is as loud as a 55 wpc amp with speakers that are 85db sensitive. Edward Vilchur's approach was new technology at the time and sounded great in 1960( my father had the AR 3's) in small rooms except it was very difficult to sound loud enough until higher wattage amplifiers were developed. This turned out to be a wrong minded approach in my estimation as wizzer cone and horn designs like Sean Casey at Zu or Klipsch have become so refined that it's possibly making the low sensitivity/high wattage approach virtually obsolete going forward. My Zu speakers with the little 3.5 wpc SET and good sound sources are magic!

I’ve had both and gone from high to low and now you’ve got me thinking about going back. The thing I like about low sensitivity is they are more controlled. Any artifacts in the signal are practically ignored. The depth of detail can be found still with massive amplification. …but then your power supply better be clean and if it’s clean you may as well use high sensitivity. LoL I don’t think it matters either way. I just want linear detailed reproduction of the source.

Hi Steve, I am getting my HH Scott LK 150 restore in which I have not used in 20 years. what type of speaker would you recoment I want to filll this large room 14' X 30' between the Clipsch, JBL, and Su. or do you recomend a diffrent speaker may be a use that i can find on ebay?

As a Jbl fanboy I’ve always immersed myself in high sensitivity speakers. The best part is that when you use an active xo you can have a tiny tube amp taking care of the highs and use a d class monster on the lows. I should try something different but old habits die hard.

I love my Klipsch La Scalas at 104dB with 1 watt, however they are a bit of a problem to match with home theater surround speakers since I just can't afford that sensitivity in my 7.1 system.

Did you get a chance to try any of the floor standing speakers Klipsch RP lineup? I like horn loaded tweeters but I worry that a bookshelf won't have quite enough low end for me.

Preferring Low Sensitivity spkrs. for 50+ years, your Apologetics of High Sensitivity speakers is fascinating. The largest caveat applying in my case is s-i-z-e. Fuller-range HS spkrs tend to be b-i-g, occupy a lot of space, and might require extra-careful positioning for bass balance. Am tempted to experiment.

JBL65 speakers since 1978. Sensitivity 105 dB/W/m. Don't listen very loud stuff. Crystal super tweeters. Paper 5" mids and 12" woofers. Klipsch stereo surround. And a sealed Infinity speaker surround that also has a 12 in sub.

Well i'm currently using an 8wt per side tube amp soooo high sensitivity.

Does what you say affect the tube vs solid state argument. It seems that less demand on the amp...

So, will high sensitivity speakers sound great with lower powered amps? For instance, will a Vista Spark be a good match for Klipsch Forte III speakers, or even your RP600m's?

I'm sold completely, thanks for reviewing it. Thank you! Thinking of buying my next pair, now moving down to floorstanding speaker klipsch rp-4000f. Any comments?

I prefer the most efficient I can get within reason. I can't think of any audio reason not to. I will argue that a lower impedance speaker will change the output of the amp where the efficiency has no effect. ( other than being louder per watt ) For most normal quality amps, 8 ohms is the way to go. If you find 4 ohm speakers you will need a higher quality amp to drive them as the impedance is liable to fluctuate from 1-4 ohms and most

I have a pair of ProAc D80R (91dB, 4 Ohm) and I recently bought Avantgarde DUO G2 Omega (107 dB 18 Ohm). OK, there's a big difference in price, but.... wow...the Avantgarde sound so much better! More detailed, fast, alive, refined, precise, outstanding image, really great speakers! I almost can't listen to the ProAc anymore... they seem broken in comparison. So my preference goes definitely to high efficiency speakers. Amplification is The Gryphon.

my speakers are 88db-8ohm and closed box; they sound great with my 65watt amp

You can always supplement the lack of bass with a quality sub. If a high sensitivity speaker provides better clarity and dynamics, then it makes sense to go that way and add a sub.

I have Wharfedale Diamond 225 as a surround speaker and was looking to change them for high sensitivity Klipsch what should I be looking at because I don't want to drown my surround sound with over powered speakers. Don't get me wrong I love what my 225 do but I do have to add 5db to them to hear any presence.

It's a matter of complimentary mating. The problem with the current state of amp design is that they require a large number of MATCHED active components that overlay perfectly the transfer curves. Or the discordant effects could cause distortion. So, for many people they hear the accuracy of simple amps that by default must have high efficiency speakers. For most , save on the electric bill.

I have two systems. Ls50 in one which is I guess is low..er sensitivity and klipsch la scala 104-106 db which is the most I have seen in a speaker. Ls50 is a fantastic speaker. La scalas are in a diffrent league ...they are alive and dynamically beat anything and everything I have heard...

Sensitivity is a trade off between dynamism and frequency bandwidth. The AR3s for example discovered this and traded the dynamism to bandwidth and micro detail mania. However it opened up the small speaker market which made the loudspeakers to fit better in the modern houses, the 5-6” woofers, 1” dome tweeters on bookshelf or floor standing enclosures made it simple to sell and ship the speakers world wide. This business had more customer base than the big speaker lines. For some, they may buy into the fantasy and it may look like listening music under a microscope which can even be their preference. Dynamic speakers may be more “life like” and fun, however there are speakers that can deliver wide bandwidth with great detail, however they require large components like 15” woofers and wide horns to do that, for which nobody has the room anymore.

The only drawback to low sensitivity is power required to drive them. Not just raw wattage, but how good a high powered amp can sound doing so. Low sensitivity also is misleading, because the sensitivity must be defined relative to a need for current delivery, or high voltage delivery to the speaker. While mathematically that amount of power isn't "different" (P=IV), driving an inefficient Apogee ribbon that needs current, versus a Martin Logan Statement that needed to convert current to voltage (using a transformer) is different in power demand. A tube amp itself uses a power transformer, tubes amplify voltage. That transformer converts voltage to current. Some electrostats had built in tube amplifiers driving them without transformers. Some tube amps removed the transformer and used higher current electron deflection tubes (Futterman, Prodigy, Atmasphere)... I think you just can't isolate a single parameter like speaker input sensitivity, it's important, but a speaker's type drivers and therefore complexity of power demand is the part of the equation that always should be included. in the discussion. Factor in that some amplifiers simply sound better driven to a higher percentage of their rated output power, and worse at very low idle power output. - AND vice versa.. two of my favorite speakers were the MBL 101e and the Apogee Diva, both huge power demand hogs. But I also like the low demand Sonus Faber small monitor types, and the Avalon Acoustics speakers.

I own a high sensitivity pair of speakers, if you have low sensitivity speakers and you hear a high sensitivity speaker for the first time you can go wow! That sound's amazing but can you listen to them for extended periods? If you have the right gear behind them you can if not listener fatigue will set in quickly.I have owned both types and like both with the right gear.

I'll pick sound quality over sound quantity any day.