What type of speaker still sounds good at low listening levels?

Speakers that sound good loud shouldn’t sound bad at low listening levels. It’s more a question of how quiet your room is and how low you’ve managed to get the noise floor of your system.
 
Then I guess you have never heard Magnepans at low volume. Or you do not consider them good speakers. They need some juice and volume to sound their best. I have lived with them for 30 years.
 
The Sandman said:
Speakers that sound good loud shouldn’t sound bad at low listening levels. It’s more a question of how quiet your room is and how low you’ve managed to get the noise floor of your system.
Click to expand...

It's all about sensitivity and impedance. Low sensitivity/low impedance speakers require more power and current to come to life. It's not that they sound "bad" at low levels, they just don't jump to life as fast as high sensitivity/high impedance speakers do.
 
mep said:
It's all about sensitivity and impedance. Low sensitivity/low impedance speakers require more power and current to come to life. It's not that they sound "bad" at low levels, they just don't jump to life as fast as high sensitivity/high impedance speakers do.
Click to expand...
Agree. My Fynes are 90 or 91 dB, not bad, with two RELs, but I have to admit they sound better when it's cranked up..
 
My hypothesis:

At low listening levels, the Fletcher-Munson equal-loudness curves (how our ears perceive bass and treble differently at quiet volumes) matter more than the type of speaker. Horns and high-sensitivity designs can sound more lively at low volume because they preserve dynamics and stay clear near the amp’s noise floor — but they don’t fix the ear’s natural loss of bass and top-end at low SPL.

If you apply proper loudness-compensation EQ, almost any well-engineered speaker can sound full and balanced at quiet levels.

Psychoacoustics dominates; equipment choices just help work around it.
 
crwilli said:
My hypothesis:

At low listening levels, the Fletcher-Munson equal-loudness curves (how our ears perceive bass and treble differently at quiet volumes) matter more than the type of speaker. Horns and high-sensitivity designs can sound more lively at low volume because they preserve dynamics and stay clear near the amp’s noise floor — but they don’t fix the ear’s natural loss of bass and top-end at low SPL.

If you apply proper loudness-compensation EQ, almost any well-engineered speaker can sound full and balanced at quiet levels.

Psychoacoustics dominates; equipment choices just help work around it.
Click to expand...

Loudness buttons that used to be prominent many years ago on receivers and integrated amps have all but disappeared.

High sensitivity/high impedance speakers don't need help jumping to life at low levels (meaning your volume control doesn't have to be turned at least halfway up before your speakers come to life along with your wife).

Therefore I disagree with your premise that low sensitivity/low impedance speakers are really not different from high sensitivity/high impedance speakers. High sensitivity/high impedance speakers don't need the punch from a non-existant loudness button to come to life.
 
mep said:
Loudness buttons that used to be prominent many years ago on receivers and integrated amps have all but disappeared.

High sensitivity/high impedance speakers don't need help jumping to life at low levels (meaning your volume control doesn't have to be turned at least halfway up before your speakers come to life along with your wife).

Therefore I disagree with your premise that low sensitivity/low impedance speakers are really not different from high sensitivity/high impedance speakers. High sensitivity/high impedance speakers don't need the punch from a non-existant loudness button to come to life.
Click to expand...
I believe the psychoacoustic realities are a much bigger impact than the equipment wrt the OPs question.
 
Sure.
Here you go!

This plot shows approximate equal-loudness (Fletcher–Munson / ISO-226) contours — lines of constant perceived loudness across frequency.

🔍 How to Read It

Each contour (20, 40, 60, 80 phon) represents sound that humans perceive as equally loud, even though the required SPL changes with frequency.

Key Takeaways:
  • Bass requires MUCH more SPL to be heard as loud as midrange at low listening levels
    → look at the left side of the curves (20–200Hz)
  • The ear is most sensitive around 2–4kHz
    → the dip in the curves
  • As listening level rises (40 → 60 → 80 phon),
    the curves flatten
    → this is why music sounds fuller and more balanced at higher volumes
This is the foundation of and the reason for:
  • loudness compensation
  • dynamic EQ
  • “thin” bass perception at low volume
And why equipment choice matters less than psychoacoustics when listening quietly.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_0545.png
    IMG_0545.png
    167.5 KB · Views: 0
crwilli said:
Sure.
Here you go!

This plot shows approximate equal-loudness (Fletcher–Munson / ISO-226) contours — lines of constant perceived loudness across frequency.

🔍 How to Read It

Each contour (20, 40, 60, 80 phon) represents sound that humans perceive as equally loud, even though the required SPL changes with frequency.

Key Takeaways:
  • Bass requires MUCH more SPL to be heard as loud as midrange at low listening levels
    → look at the left side of the curves (20–200Hz)
  • The ear is most sensitive around 2–4kHz
    → the dip in the curves
  • As listening level rises (40 → 60 → 80 phon),
    the curves flatten
    → this is why music sounds fuller and more balanced at higher volumes
This is the foundation of and the reason for:
  • loudness compensation
  • dynamic EQ
  • “thin” bass perception at low volume
And why equipment choice matters less than psychoacoustics when listening quietly.
Click to expand...

I thought you meant something beyond the Fletcher-Munson curve. I understand how that works.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top