I am new to home audio (came from car audio background using mostly focal) but I'm curious the advantages/disadvantages of 2-way vs 3-way.
Lets assume you have a subwoofer that will take you from 10-100 hz. Is it really worth the extra cost and complexity of 3-way? I was thinking 8" - 4" and tweeter.
Lets assume you have a subwoofer that will take you from 10-100 hz. Is it really worth the extra cost and complexity of 3-way? I was thinking 8" - 4" and tweeter.
Don't ignore that there are lots of excellent 1-ways too. With that woofer you are really asking 3-way or 4-way. IMO, the fewer XO points the better, i'm a fan of a FR acting as a mid-tweeter with woofer support on both sides. XO 80-400 Hz.
dave
dave
IMO
Classical three ways crossed at about 300hz and 3000hz ( and no sub) is preferable to 2 ways + sub.
The midrange has little excursion, producing less intermodulation distortion, so clearer sound.
The sound of a plain woofer in the 100-300hz range has more authority/weight than the sound of a midwoofer which has to show a lighter cone (compromise) for good mids.
Classical three ways crossed at about 300hz and 3000hz ( and no sub) is preferable to 2 ways + sub.
The midrange has little excursion, producing less intermodulation distortion, so clearer sound.
The sound of a plain woofer in the 100-300hz range has more authority/weight than the sound of a midwoofer which has to show a lighter cone (compromise) for good mids.
In the car audio world, the minimum of ways is 3 (for HiFi).
In home audio, 3 ways is better than 2 ways but sometimes bigger. I don't see any advantages of 2 ways, perhaps the size ?
Focal is a good choice, i have Focal for mid tweeter and audax aerogel for bass in my car.
No if well done ie with a crossover for the satellite like in car audio. I recommend 2 subs, one per channel.
''I don't see any advantages of 2 ways, perhaps the size ?''
Jeah but what about coherence and sound stage? Good two way monitor can pull out the disappearing act better than big speakers.
Jeah but what about coherence and sound stage? Good two way monitor can pull out the disappearing act better than big speakers.
room and how loud u want to play i think its important to consider.
if u want live music presentation, definitely not 2 way.
cheers
henry
if u want live music presentation, definitely not 2 way.
cheers
henry
A typical Three way tends to suit larger listening spaces where the listener needs to sit further from the speaker for the sound to integrate as convincingly as a two way in a smaller space.
There is no one simplistic answer to this question.
When cost is no object, an excellent designer working on the design and you have reasonable space with good listening distance from the speakers, tolerant neighbours and a taste for higher volumes then three way is often better in many cases.
However you can have beautifully refined sound from 2 way, 2 way D'appolito and 2.5 way systems too, even some 1 way designs can sound nice in close quarters, usually at modest volumes.
Three way typically means more refinement in the midrange when a loud bass note is playing, however you could have a design like the Gedlee speakers which uses large drivers, a low crossover point and carefully designed waveguides for controlled output. If you like to play REALLY, REALLY loud and sit a good distance from the speakers these will be relatively refined way beyond typical hifi speakers, at least for big homes.
A mediocre three way is typically inferior to a mediocre two way. Very few three way designs compare favourably to the Linkwitz Pluto's for instance but you need to listen relatively close to the speaker if you want pin point imaging.
Basically you have to work out what is best within your budget, what space you have to fill, listening distance and in the case of a passive design if your amp is up to the job. To a certain extent you may want to consider what type of music you listen to, if you enjoy Classical and acoustic maybe you will want to listen to open airy sounds of a dipole design.
There is no one simplistic answer to this question.
When cost is no object, an excellent designer working on the design and you have reasonable space with good listening distance from the speakers, tolerant neighbours and a taste for higher volumes then three way is often better in many cases.
However you can have beautifully refined sound from 2 way, 2 way D'appolito and 2.5 way systems too, even some 1 way designs can sound nice in close quarters, usually at modest volumes.
Three way typically means more refinement in the midrange when a loud bass note is playing, however you could have a design like the Gedlee speakers which uses large drivers, a low crossover point and carefully designed waveguides for controlled output. If you like to play REALLY, REALLY loud and sit a good distance from the speakers these will be relatively refined way beyond typical hifi speakers, at least for big homes.
A mediocre three way is typically inferior to a mediocre two way. Very few three way designs compare favourably to the Linkwitz Pluto's for instance but you need to listen relatively close to the speaker if you want pin point imaging.
Basically you have to work out what is best within your budget, what space you have to fill, listening distance and in the case of a passive design if your amp is up to the job. To a certain extent you may want to consider what type of music you listen to, if you enjoy Classical and acoustic maybe you will want to listen to open airy sounds of a dipole design.
I think both do have their advantages with the ::right driver selection::, so it depends on the drivers you choose.
I mean if you're crossing a 15" woofer to a compression driver in a 15" horn near 1khz, that 2-way will probably have superior power handling/output in the midbass when crossed to a sub, and a narrow controlled polar response. If you're crossing a 7" midwoofer to a ribbon near 3khz then obviously it's a different scenario altogether. Make it an MTM and you've improved you power handling and reduced your vertical dispersion in the midrange (which is often desirable)
Likewise for the 3-way - it really depends on a ton of factors.
The one thing I will say is that the crossover parts cost for a 3-way is going to be more expensive most likely. The big advantage is that you can have a distribution of power so that you get a more wide polar response.
Well, how much sensitivity and throw does the 8" driver have? You can't generalize! I do like that combination of driver sizes though, as it should give a wide, even horizontal off axis response and done right you can have the 8" driver handle all of the baffle step transition.
The first question you need to answer, though, is how far do you sit?
I've always believed that all the drivers in a 3 way won't sum up and integrate properly if the listening distance is too near aka. room is too small, but at the same time i want to have a dedicated driver for the midrange, so what should i do? No FRs for me; i cannot live with the trade-offs
Hi,
If you have a sub 2 ways are far more cost effective up to a high cost level.
At a c/o point of 100Hz IMO a 3 way is pointless. What you need
is double subs, so effectively you end up with a 3 way anyway.
IMO 3 ways are about not using subs, because they then make sense.
rgds, sreten.
A very touchy subject.
I like whatever sounds best and whatever works best for me. Single driver, 2-way, 3-way, 4-way, whatever. If it was designed properly with adequate drivers, crossover points and enclosure tuning, they all should perform great in any average size room.
I am a firm believer that less is more. Essentially, fewer drivers and crossover components to get the job done will probably sound better in the end.
Right now I have a pair of mint, vintage Genesis Physics II's playing on my main system, and in a lot of ways, they sound better to ME than my NHT 2.9's in the same system and with half the drivers at twice the age.
With the NHT's, you have a 10" woofer, 6" midbass, 4" midrange and 1" tweeter with a bunch of components in the highly complex crossover. In the Genesis however, you have a 10" passive radiator, an 8" midbass and a 1" tweeter. The crossover only has two components, a single capacitor and a single inductor, both of which go to the tweeter as the midbass plays fullrange.
To me, in my room, in my system, the Genesis' do everything the NHT's do only better. They are slightly smoother on the extreme top end, have full, natural mids and upper bass, and solid punchy bass that goes every bit as deep as the NHT's, and is every bit as tight too. The Genesis' just "jell" everything together better than the NHT's. Maybe because there's more chances of phase shifts with the NHT's and a far lot less with the Genesis'.
I ran into this same thing with my DIY towers with a single 8" midbass and 3" Fostex fullrange and a very simple single series crossover with a single large cap on the woofer and a single large inductor on the fullrange. I prefer them over the NHT's as well simply because they "jell" together better than the NHT's. The DIY towers also do the whole bass thing just as well as the NHT's and Genesis as well as the smoother top end.
I'm certainly not saying that the NHT's are lacking in any way. They're not. They are great speakers and sound great, but I prefer the simpler, 2-way designs for music. The NHT's now pull duty in the HT setup where they shine.
I like whatever sounds best and whatever works best for me. Single driver, 2-way, 3-way, 4-way, whatever. If it was designed properly with adequate drivers, crossover points and enclosure tuning, they all should perform great in any average size room.
I am a firm believer that less is more. Essentially, fewer drivers and crossover components to get the job done will probably sound better in the end.
Right now I have a pair of mint, vintage Genesis Physics II's playing on my main system, and in a lot of ways, they sound better to ME than my NHT 2.9's in the same system and with half the drivers at twice the age.
With the NHT's, you have a 10" woofer, 6" midbass, 4" midrange and 1" tweeter with a bunch of components in the highly complex crossover. In the Genesis however, you have a 10" passive radiator, an 8" midbass and a 1" tweeter. The crossover only has two components, a single capacitor and a single inductor, both of which go to the tweeter as the midbass plays fullrange.
To me, in my room, in my system, the Genesis' do everything the NHT's do only better. They are slightly smoother on the extreme top end, have full, natural mids and upper bass, and solid punchy bass that goes every bit as deep as the NHT's, and is every bit as tight too. The Genesis' just "jell" everything together better than the NHT's. Maybe because there's more chances of phase shifts with the NHT's and a far lot less with the Genesis'.
I ran into this same thing with my DIY towers with a single 8" midbass and 3" Fostex fullrange and a very simple single series crossover with a single large cap on the woofer and a single large inductor on the fullrange. I prefer them over the NHT's as well simply because they "jell" together better than the NHT's. The DIY towers also do the whole bass thing just as well as the NHT's and Genesis as well as the smoother top end.
I'm certainly not saying that the NHT's are lacking in any way. They're not. They are great speakers and sound great, but I prefer the simpler, 2-way designs for music. The NHT's now pull duty in the HT setup where they shine.
I think small monitor with 4" + tweeter add with one subwoofer as all abilities for the worst sound ever. Separate deep bass, lacking upper bass slam and distorted midrange.
Yep, agreed, yet it is the typical home Cinema compromise. Better to go with proper Hi-Fi speakers if listening to music.
Sorry my bad english and short editing time, should have been :
I think small monitor with 4" + tweeter added with one subwoofer has all abilities for the worst sound ever. Separate deep bass, lacking upper bass slam and distorted midrange.
I think small monitor with 4" + tweeter added with one subwoofer has all abilities for the worst sound ever. Separate deep bass, lacking upper bass slam and distorted midrange.
True.
Gedlees speaker are very sensitive so lacking and not intended to use without subs so ---> 3-way.
Mediocre 3-way should be compared to good 2-way (pricewise) and good wins.
I am fairly close, guessing 8-10 ft away but I do enjoy a really well defined mid-bass
The reviews and flat frequency responses of the seas excel line will probably be the drivers that I choose.
So far I have come up with
2-way setup
I will either use a Raal 'original' ribbon paired with a seas excel 6.5 or 8
or
3-way setup
scan speak ScanSpeak Revelator R2904/7000-05 with an seas excel 4" and an seas excel 8"
Last edited:
I am also a 'one way' guy... a single driver (with bass support) is my cup of tea. For playing loudly in the home i just use a full/wide range driver that can handle more power.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.