In Reply to: Hi-eff doing justice to piano reproduction? posted by ElDragon on September 9, 2009 at 09:20:20:
Badman makes some good points.
Because of the piano's wide range both fundamentally (it's keyboard/string range) and harmonically, the piano is an excellent test of a sound reproduction system's tonal balance. Also, because it's struck-string mechanism has a very high peak-to-average output ratio and very fast rise times, it's an excellent test for reproducing high crest factor transients. A well-made piano will have a consistent sound quality from the low register all the way up to the upper register, and a well-built speaker system and amplifier will reproduce that consistent sound quality.
To your question... A high efficiency system places much less demands on an amplifier than a low or middlin' efficiency system. This allows the amplifier to work in the lower range of it's output capabilities, and therefore reproduce peaks more easily. So the answer is most definitely "yes": Piano can be reproduced not only well on high efficiency speakers, but better than on all but the finest lower efficiency speakers. But to gain the greatest advantage and best sound, passive crossovers should be avoided, in favor of active crossovers and bi- or tri-amping.
Lastly, the notion that full-range drivers are better because they eliminate all crossovers is simply nonsense. Full-range drivers have multiple issues, not the least of which is progressively greater beaming as the audio frequency rises (which results in an undesirable ambient sound field) and, as Badman noted, serious breakup mode output, not to forget IM and Doppler distortion.
Don't forget that the amplifier's performance at low output levels is important. Some amps don't sound good at the < couple watts output. This is one reason why well-made class A amps are popular among serious listeners.
hth
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- RE: Hi-eff doing justice to piano reproduction? - Inmate51 08:13:52 09/10/09 (0)