Yes, Petar

I would agree with the most but with horn-loading all compromises suddenly do not get evaporated. The horn is not a panacea as the horn-loading is basically as well bandwidth-limited. In fact for objectivity sake I might say that the direct radiators might be even are more flexible to address the problems you mention above. The direct radiators are small and therefore they might be multiplied. 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16 inferior drivers, if they are properly used work better than one good one as they perform “balance loading” sharing the duty across multiple motor and cones. Sure, the increase the radiation surface cause other problems, like beaming and few other but to a degree it is possible to deal with it.

Also, with Accuton-like suspension I do not think that the problem with the softness of suspension but rather with differences of sound prorogation across the suspension and across the cone. In those stupid Accuton-like drivers the cone and the suspension do not know about each other and live by own separate lives, the result is predicable and very auditable.

Still, I feel that the biggest problem of high efficiency direct radiators is not in their intrinsic problems to implement them (those problems do exists) but rather in absence of industry needs in high efficiency direct radiators. You complain that the high-efficiency direct radiators compress but the industry compress sources to much higher degree that high-efficiency direct radiators would. Let be honest: your or my interest and agenda are not smothering the writes user requirements for the driver’s producers and designers. Ad if you look at the today driver’s producers and designers then you would see that for them much cheaper to make an amp a few hundred watts more then to make a driver a few dB more in sensitively. Considering that the majority partisans involved in the audio industry are Morons they o not know any different between high wattage of amplification and high loudspeakers efficiency…

Markus wrote:

I have recently been thinking about efficiency. Apart from enabling you to use low power amps, is there really any reason why high efficiency is better than low or medium efficiency, all else being equal?

Markus wrote:

I have recently been thinking about efficiency. Apart from enabling you to use low power amps, is there really any reason why high efficiency is better than low or medium efficiency, all else being equal (and I know perfectly well it never is, but let's assume it is for this thought experiment)? It occurred to me that historically, the advantage of high efficiency drivers was that they tended to be optimized for low mechanical loss. Low mechanical loss tends to make the sound cleaner, more detailed and more "free" than from drivers with high mechanical loss, a chassis designer told me. It is now possible to buy normal efficiency drivers with low mechanical loss. So, is there a reason to put up with the demands of hi-eff drivers anymore?

Actually if I have time I would probably write up MS Word’s 4-5 pages long of articles with arguments WHY high efficiency is conceptually better and why any extra dB is juts at opportunity. The way to get and the way to use high efficiency is another subject but with all things being equal higher efficiency is better. It is a bit unpleasant that high-fight industry (here I come again!) did not advance the subject and education of public about high sensitivity because they do not do high sensitivity. The industry deployed to public bogus theory about relationship between efficiency and power of amplification and everyone feels settled.

Do not be mistaken – the high efficiency itself is not a cure-all solution and it does not resolve all problems -rather creates them. Still, there are so much “new” this that is “possible” at high efficiency! Regardless the design of your car a high octane gas will prose better drive, will it?

Why no amount of watts will compensate for direct-radiation :

Start with the obvious : When compared to either multiple direct-radiating drivers or a single horn-loaded driver, to achieve the same SPL, a single direct-radiating driver must work harder; its membrane must move more, its "stroke" must be longer.

If the membrane of the single direct-radiating driver is to keep time with the music, it follows that the speed with which it moves through this extended stroke must be greater than that of the relatively short-stroke multiple direct-radiator or horn-loaded driver.

Due to this greater distance, and need to keep time with the music, the moving mass must be driven at a greater speed. As stroke increases, this speed goes up fast; with speed comes inertia. The materials are suddenly being physically solicited beyond their limits, so they are reinforced and mass again rises.

In the end something must go, and the natural result is that the smaller movements (smaller currents through the coil) just get overrun. Even with a very powerful motor, a membrane driven under such conditions simply does not have time to reproduce the smaller movements.

Ways around this issue :  Get SPL via increased membrane surface area (multiple direct radiators), or horns.

Tone :

I suspect that some of what we call tone comes from what is in fact a natural resonance set up by the light-weight, stiff membrane material and its lightness as "seen" by the magnet and coil. Micro-managing a reinforced membrane with increased force is not the same thing.

jd*

jessie.dazzle wrote:

Why no amount of watts will compensate for direct-radiation : Start with the obvious : When compared to either multiple direct-radiating drivers or a single horn-loaded driver, to achieve the same SPL, a single direct-radiating driver must work harder; its membrane must move more, its "stroke" must be longer. If the membrane of the single direct-radiating driver is to keep time with the music, it follows that the speed with which it moves through this extended stroke must be greater than that of the relatively short-stroke multiple direct-radiator or horn-loaded driver. Due to this greater distance, and need to keep time with the music, the moving mass must be driven at a greater speed. As stroke increases, this speed goes up fast; with speed comes inertia. The materials are suddenly being physically solicited beyond their limits, so they are reinforced and mass again rises. In the end something must go, and the natural result is that the smaller movements (smaller currents through the coil) just get overrun. Even with a very powerful motor, a membrane driven under such conditions simply does not have time to reproduce the smaller movements. Ways around this issue :  Get SPL via increased membrane surface area (multiple direct radiators), or horns.

Possibly true, but what's it got to do with efficiency? A normal efficieny driver can be horn loaded just like a hi-eff one.

And isn't our host here on record saying that horns are not about increasing efficiency but about equalisation?