[Ultralight]

OK, my question for today..


Been wondering why is it that some speakers seem to wake up and come alive at the louder end of the volume.  Listening to those at low volume is not very satisfying - there's a sense of distance and lack of engagement. But there are other speakers that are more engaging even at low volume.

By this I am not talking about the Fletcher and Munson curve where one is less sensitive to bass at low decibels.  I understand that some integrated amp can have equalization curves that accentuate the bass.


Taking all that into account, some speakers still come more fully 'alive' if we can use that word.

It is not just an issue of volume. For example, listening to some nice headphones, I can turn the volume down quite low (equal to about 55db on speakers in terms of perception) but still get more of the emotional impact.


Questions:

1. What is it that I am experiencing?  Is there a simple explanation?

2. What type of speaker design (i.e. full range vs two or three drivers,large woofers vs small etc) are generally acknowledged to be excellent for low volume listening?   

3.Is it just an issue of distance where one has to move closer to the speakers at low volume?  (i.e. Wondering if that's what is happening with headphones.)  However, moving closer reduces the scale of the soundtage.

4.  Any other insight?

Thanks!
UL

[MtnHam]

Sound Lab electrostatics excel at this. As an owner of many different SL models over the last 10+ years who listens many hours a day at both low and high volume levels, I do believe this is true.

[barrows]

Yup, electrostatic speakers (and probably planar magnetics to a lesser extent) are good at this.  Low mass driver elements will exhibit less loss at lower volume levels than higher mass driver elements.  Quad, Sound Lab, etc...  Of course you will not get much body or low bass feel... but timbre, microdynamics, and transparency can be very good with an electrostatic speaker at low volumes.

[jarcher]

My wild guess : design / efficiency and materials.  E.g.

Design : Some say high efficiency design speakers are more "dynamic" in general as they require so little power to perform.  So they may also be better at lower volumes as they are designed to be driven with such lower power anyway. 

Materials : some drivers in some speakers are made of very stiff materials which may have a long break in period and even then not really "come alive" until played at higher volumes. Other such as planers and ribbons have very little moving mass and therefore may be more responsive at low volume and therefore more detailed at lower volumes.

I would also assume that in a headphone regardless of the volume level you may get more low volume detail as your ear is so close to the transducer.  E.g. even in a very detailed speaker in a near field set-up is worlds away vs a headphone one less than an inch from your ear. 

That's my quasi scientific winging-it explanation!

[JackD201]

Seldom mentioned is the noisefloor of the room itself. "Coming alive" happens when this is breached. Things like HVAC, having a refrigerator nearby, sound coming in from the street outside, all things the system has to compete with.

That said, I do agree that "big launch" speakers like stats and other planars tend to come alive quicker. I'm guessing is that there is a lot less inertia for the lower mass surfaces to overcome making them much more articulate at very low levels. With standard drivers you have to compensate with some or all of the following, stronger fixed magnets, loading the driver or just more juice for the drivers to behave best.

[MtnHam]

Yup, electrostatic speakers (and probably planar magnetics to a lesser extent) are good at this.  Low mass driver elements will exhibit less loss at lower volume levels than higher mass driver elements.  Quad, Sound Lab, etc...  Of course you will not get much body or low bass feel... but timbre, microdynamics, and transparency can be very good with an electrostatic speaker at low volumes.

When properly set up, SL's deliver excellent body and low bass feel, even at low levels.

[RSB]

I am interested in this as well.  I read a review recently of the Ayre AX-5 on the Soundstage Hifi website that said the sound from this integrated amp was more fully fleshed out at lower volumes.  Also, I have read that Harbeth Speakers exhibit this quality as well.  I have not heard either, but I want to check them out.  Seems like it would be more hearing and neighbor friendly.

Randy

[JackD201]

I am interested in this as well.  I read a review recently of the Ayre AX-5 on the Soundstage Hifi website that said the sound from this integrated amp was more fully fleshed out at lower volumes.  Also, I have read that Harbeth Speakers exhibit this quality as well.  I have not heard either, but I want to check them out.  Seems like it would be more hearing and neighbor friendly.

Randy

I suspect Harbeth's voicing has something to do with that too.

[MtnHam]

I am interested in this as well.  I read a review recently of the Ayre AX-5 on the Soundstage Hifi website that said the sound from this integrated amp was more fully fleshed out at lower volumes.  Also, I have read that Harbeth Speakers exhibit this quality as well.  I have not heard either, but I want to check them out.  Seems like it would be more hearing and neighbor friendly.

Randy

In reference to Ayre, their KXR preamp, which I use in my system, is unique in that it's volume control does not change the character of the sound from low to high volume, which evidently most every other existing preamp's  volume control does.

[*Scotty*]

If you read any of the reviews in Absolute Sound and Stereophile, they will usually mention what SPL they listened at or what SPL they felt the speaker came alive at. If they say that most of their listening sessions were conducted at 92dB this would be a speaker to stay away from as very few people will sit down and listen for a long time at a constant SPL of 92dB. We are reading between the lines here but the implication is that the speakers were unsatisfying until they hit 92dB.
I also think that a more complicated crossover with more parts in the signal path probably works against having the speaker "come alive" at lower listening levels.
Scotty

[ACHiPo]

I auditioned a pair of YG Acoustic Kipods (they were demos thus only a few $thousand above my budget ) and they were fantastic at low volumes.  Basically the voice was the same, just harder to hear.  I found it a bit tiring to listen critically at what I'm guessing was ~85 dB but they sounded really good (I also listened to them at "normal" (~90 dB) volume and "loud" (~98 dB) and they also sounded really good).  Ultimately I decided not to get them as in addition to the price they just didn't make my toe tap as much as other speakers I listened to, but they definitely did the low volume thing well.

Strangely enough the SL speakers were also on my list, but I found speakers I loved (Kef Reference 207/2) before I got around to making the 2 hour drive to audition the SLs (which were also significantly above my budget).

[Doublej]

I am no expert on this but some of it may relate to when the drivers hit their linear region of operation. If this doesn't happen until a volume louder than you want to listen at, then the speaker sounds bad at your definition of low volume.

I remember reading something from Pat McGinty (Meadowlark Audio) on the topic of driver linearity. It may still be out there somewhere on his website, http://www.patmcginty.com/.

Warning - the site is flaky from a performance perspective.

 

[jk@home]

I have also read that electrostatics do well at low levels, but no personal experience here with that.

My experience with Magnepan planars (10 years with MMGs, stock and then modded) is that they DO NOT do well with low volume play back, one of the biggest complains are they have to be turned up to become "alive". It was one of the reasons I finally dumped mine for a pair of small dynamic monitors. The Maggies, sounded like a transistor radio when turned down.

Now the Magnepans could give a decent sound level at the listening chair, and due to the dipole effect, would cancel out the overall sound escaping the room...unfortunately they did not sound good at these lower levels.

Many evenings I eventually abandon  the wife and her boob tube (TV ), go up stairs to the dedicated room and listen to music at low levels. Mating a pair of KEF LS50s, with a SS preamp and amp gives just enough detail and bass at low enough levels (keeping in mind that Fletcher–Munson curve). The KEFs are not said to be the best at lower levels, but they are a big improvement over what I had before.

To the OP, I know you also have the same KEFs, so not sure what to say, maybe try the Harbeths, which are said to be better with this issue. Or incorporate some type of loudness control, like we discussed over at Karma. In my case, upgrading to my present preamp (NuForce MCP-18) did help a little in this regard. You're using Line Magnetic, right?

[RDavidson]

I find my Omega Super 3xrs to be excellent at low volume.

I have also heard others say ESL's, specifically, are good at low volumes. Their diaphragms are so light, they just instantly react to pretty much any signal input, even if they aren't as efficient as other speaker types. Then again, Quads only need like 30 high quality watts to come alive, so there are differences in ESL's, just like any other speaker type.

[richidoo]

Large area drivers have higher acoustic impedance at low freq. Acoustic impedance means gripping the air better at a given freq, so you get the thrilling satisfying bass even at low volumes. It's all about that bass.

Small drivers just slosh air around in their cones, so detail and SPL suffer, the lower the freq. Air rolls off the edge of a small driver at LF because the air is thin enough to escape at the speed of sound before the cone can grab and move it effectively. At higher freq, the cone is moving faster so the air viscosity is too thick to escape before it is plowed by the cone, so you get a solid pressure wave with detail and SPL preserved.

Some ESLs have large radiating surface, so the low volume, low frequency satisfaction remains.

[Wayner]

Most electrostatic speakers have a poor bottom end unless it's a hybrid, like my Martin Logan reQuests. They also expose the driving amplifier to some unusual impedance loads, sometimes, as low as 1 ohm. So while the speakers may have a large radiating area, they need it because of their lack of efficiency and the fact that they radiate from both sides of the diaphragm. I find that I like to listen to my MLs at very lound levels because of this fact, and that at this level, they become very dynamic. I also run an REL sub with them.

In my vinyl room, I listen in near-field. I like to listen to records and FM in this room, and most of the time, I doubt if my amp(s) are pushing more then a couple of watts. The speakers in this room are all dynamic drivers and 3 of the 4 sets of speakers have a 91db/m/w rating.

So my own theory is that if you want to listen to quality playback at a lower volume, you need 2 things and they are efficient speakers and a near field environment.

[MtnHam]

Most electrostatic speakers have a poor bottom end unless it's a hybrid, like my Martin Logan reQuests. They also expose the driving amplifier to some unusual impedance loads, sometimes, as low as 1 ohm. So while the speakers may have a large radiating area, they need it because of their lack of efficiency and the fact that they radiate from both sides of the diaphragm. I find that I like to listen to my MLs at very lound levels because of this fact, and that at this level, they become very dynamic. I also run an REL sub with them.

In my vinyl room, I listen in near-field. I like to listen to records and FM in this room, and most of the time, I doubt if my amp(s) are pushing more then a couple of watts. The speakers in this room are all dynamic drivers and 3 of the 4 sets of speakers have a 91db/m/w rating.

So my own theory is that if you want to listen to quality playback at a lower volume, you need 2 things and they are efficient speakers and a near field environment.

That may be true of most electrostatics, but is definitely NOT the case with my Sound Labs which go to 24hz without a subwoofer. Currently, I am enjoying my music at a very low level with full, rich, engaging sound and low bass!

[roscoeiii]

Yeah, efficient speakers were the first thing that came to mind. Though there are exceptions. But my impression is that less efficient speakers that can deliver quality low level listening experiences often need a quite powerful or maybe just high quality amp to do this, even though their actual power usage at low levels is low. Nope, no real clue the reason why, but in some instances the amp will contribute to the quality of low volume sound.

[Wayner]

That may be true of most electrostatics, but is definitely NOT the case with my Sound Labs which go to 24hz without a subwoofer. Currently, I am enjoying my music at a very low level with full, rich, engaging sound and low bass!

That's nice, but the real problem getting uniform response across the spectrum is not the equipments fault in all cases, it's the ear's lack of sensitivity to low frequencies at low volumes. Hence came the Fletcher/Monson curve to compensate for this, also known as "the loudness button". Unfortunately, no one installs a loudness control much anymore, so it has become a thing of vintage receivers and preamp. I do have one component here in the vinyl room with loudness control, that being on my Marantz 3300 preamp.

Wayner

[DaveC113]

Efficient drivers in horns/waveguides and large, light-coned woofers do this very well as do stats and single drivers but I'd have to say a very efficient horn speaker would probably win out.