Reverse-engineering my speakers' API to get reasonable volume control

- a larger enclosed volume produces lower frequencies more efficiently

- a larger Xmax (range of motion) on a conventional driver produces louder sound

- a smaller Xmax produces less distortion

- a larger driver area produces louder sound

- a larger driver area can produce more distortion unless the engineering compensates for that, which usually involves more expense in materials and assembly

- the more efficiently coupled a driver is with the room air, the less distortion results

- there are several ways to improve the coupling of a driver to the room air, all of which increase one or more of cost or complexity or size

- larger and/or more complex cabinets cost more than smaller and simpler ones

- adding drivers to a speaker increases complexity

If we had perfect materials, we might build a single driver speaker made of infinitely stiff material of zero mass that accelerates/decelerates infinitely quickly in response to exactly enough power to overcome air pressure, and the parameters we would still have to tweak would be size (to control maximum sound pressure level) and whether we wanted to place it in front of an infinitely sound-absorbing back wall (to change it from an omnidirectional source to a cardioid source).

We don't have any of those things, so for a given budget of price, size, parts availability and complexity we need to make tradeoffs to get to our targets for loudness and quality; not all targets can be reached from a given constraint.

TL;DR: yes.

I have, and I'm not alone. With the possible exception of Apple, there's ample evidence that for decades many, many laptop owners have complained about the horrible and inadequate sound in laptops. As Apple hardly represents much competition to Windows, manufacturers of Windows PCs don't have enough incentive to fix the problem, if all their offerings are essentially the same then there's obviously no need.

"…a Chinese laptop"

…And a Dell, it's American if you recall (even if made in China it has to be made to Dell's specifications).

"Output clipping actually increases power at high frequencies."

Nitpicking over omissions in HN comments is unbecoming as most posters 'shortcut' comments out of necessity. Had I not limited my reply and I'd expanded it then my comment would have been considerably longer and much more detailed.

I'd have had to make mention that clipping done for the purposes of limiting output power often (but not always) involves 'soft clipping' circuity, as it's purposely designed to limit the energy contained within high frequency components generated by clipping.

Moreover, I could have gone even further and explained that (a) such circuitry is often done before the output stage to protect both it and the load (here, the speaker), (b) in addition I could have provided the Fourier math and related calcs to show the extent and effectiveness of said protection.

Oh, and there's even more: a comprehensive report would also require (c) knowledge of typical (nominal) audio signals inputted into the amplifier, and that would have to take into account distortions including intermodulation products introduced by compression and soft-clipping processes, as they significantly alter the power versus frequency spectrum of the output signal. If of a significant level we'd also have to include distortion products introduced by the output stage into our calculations.

There's even more, (d) we need to know the speaker's maximum power handling capacity (power versus frequency rating) to protect both the speaker, and (e) to determine whether the combined distortion/intermodulation products including those generated by speakers driven at or above their maximum rated output are tolerably acceptable to end users/listeners (listeners usually find HF intermodulation distortion artifacts produced under such conditions highly objectionable).

…And there's even more factors to consider but I'll dispense with them for now.

Having to provide such a detailed response to a general point to deter pointless nitpicking is simply madness, nevertheless it's the logical outcome if it's pursued. A question, have you ever designed and built any such circuits, or do your comments come from purely theoretical understandings?

Perhaps, just possibly, your continued hostility towards acknowledging the existence of a very common problem experienced by many PC users comes from the fact that you might be involved with an organization that—at least in part—is responsible for its creation.