Is the most efficient speaker the best speaker?

Thanks folks. I guess I am not really the one getting all upset based on some responses. I posted my comment as the initial post was a troll and if anyone has done any research or has had personal experience on the efficiencies of speakers and the combinations of amplifiers it would be clear that there are many inefficient speakers that some would argue are "the best" and vice versa. Having spent a lot of time with both efficient and inefficient, as well as designing my own Efficient speakers, I am not sure I would be lobbing bombs about my experience, Macrojack.

Sorry to get everyone all excited. Let's carry on and forget about my comments.

Atmosphere: "Its like I said, just follow the money. The advent of transistor amps and lower efficiency speakers was not about advancing the art (although the marketing certainly made it look that way) it was about *making money*"
Hi Ralph,
I really disagree that it was about making money. Or the way I feel that you portray it as "just making money". I have no arguement that they charged what they could for the technology they produced, I would do the same and I'm sure you do also. You know the manufacturing cost difference in a $1,000 retail amp and a $20,000 retail amp, it sure isn't $19,000. If it was only about the money and not advancing the art, why are there so many wonderful solid state pieces of equipment today?

Long ago among other lines, I sold Cerwin Vega. I have no idea if this statement is true, but Cerwin condented that they marketed the first Commercially available solid state amp in 1957.
Lastly, very sensitive speakers has realy never been difficult to produce. Great sounding Hi Eff speakers has. I believe my speaker technology schpeel to be completely accurate. There were certainly some great sounding old speakers, but today, our consistency is in another league.
Tim

Bottom line, is the sound has to reach certain SPL levels to meet the listener's need.

I suppose one way to look at it is that with very efficient speakers, the amplifier is asked to do less to achieve that goal. That opens up a whole different ballgame if you are an amplifier manufacturer in that the burden is lifted to some extent. So you might lower cost on the amp or focus on other quality aspects of the amp I suppose as desired, depending on your target market's needs.

Now, if the speakers are less efficient, there is more of the basic function of an amplifier to do to achieve the goal, ie the amp must amplify more. That changes the game accordingly as well, however my point is that I feel comfortable that modern and more mainstream innovations in amplifier technology, with all the economic advantages that go along with being more mainstream, are up to the task of retaining high quality and value in this game on par with the best out there.

I might not have felt quite the same way about this a few years ago before testing the waters with modern, high efficiency Class D amps that target the audiophile market, but my call at this point is that the efficiencies in modern amp design can offset whatever historical efficiencies may have existed for speaker designers.

I think amplification can be done well in many ways, either mechanically using horns or electronically using modern SS or even tube amps, chose your preference.

Not to say all makers of speakers or amps actually do it really well though. Some do it really well. Many do it pretty well. The rest do not survive or else find a different and less fussy target market.

That is a big difference!

Unsound, Sorry, I don't see that post. Perhaps you could quote it?

Atmasphere, please accept my appologies, the post was dated 7/1/11.