2 way vs 3 way

[Ian Lyons]

I  am currently still listening to a number of different speakers.My question  at the moment  is about 2 way and 3 way speakers.I dont if I am fooling myself under the guise that more is better,but I feel the 3 way speakers that I have listened to  have more presence than 2 way.One manufacturer said 2 way is most definitely better.I appreciate cost would play a part in  this,but  for an equal value what do members prefer.

[mwhouston]

I build speakers and listen to full range single driver, two way coaxials and horn and woofer. 
 

For me I’d look at 2 way. Simpler Xover etc. 

[aussievintage]

 

 

Less ways is usually better.  One reason - it's much harder to design 3 way, so more bad examples exist.

 

With speakers though,  just keep listening, and what you like, is what's best,  for you.

[mwhouston]

Could  also depend on music choices. As I see it a lot of voice with simple accompaniment may sound better with a smallish 2Way.  

[cheekyboy]

The best examples of both are going to do the job very well, 2 way or 3 way. What happened to the 1 way full range single driver loudspeakers in your listening quest?

 

Cheers,

 

Keith

[aussievintage]

4 minutes ago, cheekyboy said:

The best examples of both are going to do the job very well, 2 way or 3 way. What happened to the 1 way full range single driver loudspeakers in your listening quest?

 

18 minutes ago, mwhouston said:

As I see it a lot of voice with simple accompaniment may sound better with a smallish 2Way.  

 

 

Combining these thoughts, I would note that it took a LONG time to better my full-range single driver TQWT speakers being driven by SET amps playing female voice with simple accompaniment, and small jazz ensembles.

[cheekyboy]

10 minutes ago, aussievintage said:

 

 

 

Combining these thoughts, I would note that it took a LONG time to better my full-range single driver TQWT speakers being driven by SET amps playing female voice with simple accompaniment, and small jazz ensembles.

 

Yep, single driver TLs when done right are bloody hard to beat. Our CH2s are still one of my favourite loudspeakers and you've got to look hard to find a multi driver loudspeaker that will better them.

 

This album below would have sounded great on your old TLs and SET amps.

 

Edited November 21, 2020 by cheekyboy

[niss_man]

There's good an bad examples of both. In general I prefer the way a larger 3 way speaker energises the room to a bookshelf but both can sound excellent or crap depending on implementation. More drivers help with the efficiency of the speaker, or use high efficiency pro drivers and massive woofers. I will be building a couple of other types shortly. 1 being open baffle using lii audio drivers and the second being a wideband Russian 12" driver in a tqwt cabinet .

[Tweaky]

Historically the argument for single driver over 2 way over 3 way speakers is driver coherence , the drivers should seem as the sound is coming from a single point, or as close to a single point as possible.

 

If you can hear the drivers switch over with frequency changes, then that argument rings true, usually that's more obvious with a 3 way, especially if you are sitting too close.

 

I always found this driver switchover very obvious with the old Infinity brand of speakers, but some people couldn't seem to hear it

[mwhouston]

1 hour ago, niss_man said:

There's good an bad examples of both. In general I prefer the way a larger 3 way speaker energises the room to a bookshelf but both can sound excellent or crap depending on implementation. More drivers help with the efficiency of the speaker, or use high efficiency pro drivers and massive woofers. I will be building a couple of other types shortly. 1 being open baffle using lii audio drivers and the second being a wideband Russian 12" driver in a tqwt cabinet .

2 doesn’t have to be a bookshelf. 2 way towers often have excellent bass even from 8”” woofer/mid. 

[Al.M]

This is a common topic you can search past discussions like these 

 

If both are well designed the general consensus and personal experience usually goes towards a 3 way speaker having clearer and more detailed midrange and the bass being bigger and deeper because the extra drivers are less stressed across those frequencies and cabinet can be larger for bass duties, generally speaking. Your room size and amplifier has a lot to do with it as well generally to match.

 

Some 2 ways can be better than 3 ways due to design advantages and technology, such as a hybrid ribbon or electrostatic speaker and some other conventional dome tweeter and speaker midbass cone woofer designs.

Edited November 21, 2020 by Al.M

[kelossus]

If dynamics are a priority (to me they are the single most important aspect of a well engineered speaker) the more drivers the better. Every jaw dropping-ly realistic system I have heard has been a 3 or 4-way with large format drivers. Of course not every room would accommodate such speakers but if you want a realistic reproduction of live music, it's the way to go.

 

That being said I can completely understand the allure of the 15 inch Tannoys. They do certain things very well.

Edited November 21, 2020 by kelossus

[graham121]

I have recently been auditioning a number of 2 way, 2 1/2 way and 3 way speakers with anything up to 6 drivers, stand and floor mounted. I ended up with a pair of  2 way stand mounts as to me they simply sounded the best and  gave the best presentation.

 

However I am sure there are a number of three way speakers that sound better.....likewise many  more that sound worse.

Edited November 21, 2020 by graham121

[Hazzzy]

47 minutes ago, graham121 said:

I have recently been auditioning a number of 2 way, 2 1/2 way and 3 way speakers with anything up to 6 drivers, stand and floor mounted. I ended up with a pair of  2 way stand mounts as to me they simply sounded the best and  gave the best presentation.

 

However I am sure there are a number of three way speakers that sound better.....likewise many  more that sound worse.

Excellent. If you are happy, what else matters? We all hear differently.

[graham121]

15 hours ago, Hazzzy said:

Excellent. If you are happy, what else matters? We all hear differently.

Exactly!

[almikel]

mostly all said above, great examples exist for both.

An important factor that was implied by @Tweaky in his post...

On 21/11/2020 at 1:34 PM, Tweaky said:

the argument for single driver over 2 way over 3 way speakers is driver coherence

...is the way the drivers combine "off axis" in a multi driver speaker.

 

Manufacturers like Revel, JBL and others, and acoustic experts such as Toole, Olive and Geddes all discuss the benefit of a speaker with a smooth frequency response on and off axis.

 

It's "relatively" easy to design a speaker with a flat "on axis" response, 2 way or 3 way, although I would say passive 3 way is much harder, as the crossover slopes are generally not steep enough to prevent interaction of the filter stages at either end of the mid driver band pass.

 

Designing a speaker with a smooth off-axis response is much more difficult.

2 way has some great examples where this can be achieved - mostly with a waveguide tweeter crossing to a large mid bass driver (eg Econowave, Geddes Abbey, Redspade HE2).

 

The polar pattern of the Geddes Abbey is below

 

There are fewer examples of a 3 way speaker with smooth off axis response (eg Danley's Unity/Synergy horn, @Paul Spencer's PSE144 2 way horn crossing to a pro mid bass driver).

 

The polar pattern of the PSE144 horn is below

 

Both examples above demonstrate good speaker "off axis" response.

 

Here's an example of the "off axis" response from a "typical"  2 way speaker, like a dome tweeter crossing to a woofer (source is Geddes paper on Directivity:  http://www.gedlee.com/Papers/directivity.pdf  ) :

The graph doesn't show frequency, but it shows the discontinuity in the "off-axis" response between the tweeter and woofer (where the response narrows).

 

So why is the speaker's "off axis" response so important if we listen to speakers "on-axis"?...

...because the speaker's "off axis" response reflects off the room boundaries and combines with the direct sound - if the "off-axis" speaker response is "different" from the direct sound, they won't combine as well at the listening position.

 

On 21/11/2020 at 1:34 PM, Tweaky said:

the drivers should seem as the sound is coming from a single point, or as close to a single point as possible

I've never had the opportunity to listen to Danley's Unity or Synergy speakers, but I would expect that's what they would sound like.

I own a pair of Redspade PSE144  2 way horns crossing to stereo Acoustic Elegance TD18 mid bass drivers, and the PSE horn top end is a point source from the high pass at 300Hz up - even with your head inside the horn all the sound "appears" to comes from a single point.

 

21 hours ago, kelossus said:

If dynamics are a priority (to me they are the single most important aspect of a well engineered speaker)

I agree dynamics should be a priority for any speaker, but IMHO, a smooth on and off axis frequency response is just as important.

 

At the lower end of the cost scale, a well designed DIY 2 way econowave speaker can deliver both dynamics and good "off-axis" response - but a 3 way speaker design would be much harder to implement...

 

...I'm not referring to the case of adding a sub or subs underneath the main speakers - only discussing 2 way or 3 way main speakers

 

cheers

Mike

[almikel]

11 minutes ago, almikel said:

...I'm not referring to the case of adding a sub or subs underneath the main speakers - only discussing 2 way or 3 way main speakers

I would always recommend adding a sub or subs below main speakers - even with main speakers that can generate low bass at reasonable SPL into the "sub" range (say below 40Hz).

Main speakers need to be placed for good imaging at the listening position, which is rarely the best place for bass sources to produce the smoothest "in room bass" at the listening position.

Subs can be placed anywhere to produce the smoothest "in room bass" at the listening position....

 

Mike

[aussievintage]

28 minutes ago, almikel said:

Main speakers need to be placed for good imaging at the listening position, which is rarely the best place for bass sources to produce the smoothest "in room bass" at the listening position.

Subs can be placed anywhere to produce the smoothest "in room bass" at the listening position....

 

That's a point I had not considered before.  Makes sense,   although hard for me to do with my Osborns with the "subs" built in.  However, if I decide to add a sub to my full-range TQWT speakers - then this placement option will help.

[mavi]

To my thinking it is easier to set up a pair of quality 2 way bookshelf speakers and a sub with good room eq functions than a 3 way system with a bass driver in each box .

 

[almikel]

 

On 23/11/2020 at 8:12 AM, mavi said:

To my thinking it is easier to set up a pair of quality 2 way bookshelf speakers and a sub with good room eq functions than a 3 way system with a bass driver in each box .

2 way doesn't have to be 2 way "bookshelf" speaker as mentioned above by @mwhouston

On 21/11/2020 at 2:15 PM, mwhouston said:

2 doesn’t have to be a bookshelf. 2 way towers often have excellent bass even from 8”” woofer/mid. 

 

"Bang for buck", I'm I big fan of the "Econowave" approach - a properly designed 2 way "Econowave" speaker with a decent compression driver tweeter in a waveguide crossing to a large midbass driver (say around 10"-18") will sound better "in room" than any bookshelf speaker with a tweeter without a waveguide crossing to a woofer...

...the "off-axis" response of "typical" box speakers where a dome tweeter crosses to a a woofer is always ragged/uneven - as the tweeter polar response widens at lower frequencies towards crossover, and the woofer polar response narrows at higher frequency towards crossover.

 

IMO matching the directivity/polar response between the tweeter and woofer to provide an even "off axis" response is very important to achieving good "in room" sound.

 

On 23/11/2020 at 8:12 AM, mavi said:

... it is easier to set up a pair of quality 2 way bookshelf speakers and a sub with good room eq functions than a 3 way system with a bass driver in each box .

I agree - but I would regard "good room eq functions" as the ability to delay the mains more than the sub/s (often required), and the ability to apply individual EQ/delay to each sub to achieve a smooth bass response across multiple listening positions.

I would also add that integrating a sub or subs to main speakers isn't a trivial process, and it's best achieved using room measurements - the human ear is not a great judge for achieving great "in room" bass.

 

I love DSP/EQ and subs - but good application/integration/measurements are required for great results.

 

cheers,

Mike

[TerryO]

Personally I prefer three way speakers, however there are some exemptions to that rule, if you have heard Mike Lenehan’s ML5’s then you have heard 2-way speakers that have no need of subs. Mike’s speakers deliver massive and well controlled bass like few other speakers out there of any design. 
 

Mike’s ML5’s are no one trick pony either, they do everything else exceptionally good as well. 

 

cheers,

Terry

Edited November 24, 2020 by TerryO

[Cloth Ears]

I look at it from a slightly different perspective. IMO, you need a good mid-bass to upper midrange drive to cover about 5½ octaves (about G₁ to C₇). This gives you coherence. The other stuff, tweeter and (preferably 2) bass speakers fill out the blank spaces (you know, where you can hear the percussive on the drum.guitar, but not the note, or the strike on the cymbal, but not the note fading away).

If you don't mind the missing bass, then single drivers can fit the bill, especially for less complex pieces of music, as your ears will often fill in the 'blanks' better than an actual bass driver (or tweeter, for that matter). Ditto for a good midrange horn. I guess I just prefer the sound from a 'normal' mid-bass when it comes to a pistonic driver choice.

That being said, I'd prefer a huge 2-way ribbon (I love the sound of Apogee), but I also wish to stay married...

[surprisetech]

On 21/11/2020 at 11:33 AM, Ian Lyons said:

I  am currently still listening to a number of different speakers.My question  at the moment  is about 2 way and 3 way speakers.I dont if I am fooling myself under the guise that more is better,but I feel the 3 way speakers that I have listened to  have more presence than 2 way.One manufacturer said 2 way is most definitely better.I appreciate cost would play a part in  this,but  for an equal value what do members prefer.

 

I love 3-ways.  Done properly!

Having built,  modified and looked inside quite a few speakers over the years, the main problem as I see it, is that 3-way commercial designs at price points accessible to the majority of hifi enthusiasts simply require more compromises.

Mainly in the areas of;  The choice of Woofer-Midrange crossover frequency, woofer size, quality of crossover components, cabinet size and the bracing & resonance treatments for the lower frequencies attained by having a dedicated woofer.

 

Most 3-way designs have the woofer-mid crossover point at around 700 to 900Hz.  Smack in the middle of the typical male vocal range and that of many instruments.  Bad choice.  But if you've ever looked at the cost of building a quality passive crossover at around 150 to 300 Hz where it should be, you'll understand why the higher frequency is chosen in most commercial designs.

The series chokes alone that I used in my current speakers for a 250Hz crossover point, were about the same price as the midrange drivers.  And the caps were not far off that either.  OK for a DIY project, but not viable in a mass production product.

Also, very few modern 3-way designs have large woofers anymore.  Most have one or two smaller woofers, which, if you do the maths, still don't provide the same total cone area (Sd) as a single 12" woofer.  (2 x 6.5" woofers have a total Sd of around 240 cm2;  2 x 8" around 430 cm2, while a single 12" has around 540 cm2)  This means longer cone excursions required for the same SPL, which can also mean higher distortion.

It doesn't surprise me at all when I see punters opting for a pair of well-regarded 2-ways with reasonable bass extension supplemented by a sub of the same or better quality.  With due attention paid to integrating the sub correctly I doubt you would better the result by spending the same money on a pair of 3-ways.

 

If you look at the various lists of 'best ever' speakers that have been compiled by a few of the hifi magazines, websites, etc. there's plenty of 3, and even a few 4-way passive designs on those lists, so it can be done right, but in eliminating the compromises, they are not cheap.

 

This video is not specifically about 2-way Vs 3-way, but is relevant given the speakers he references.

 

[Spinnergeoff]

2-way and a subwoofer is a much easier way to go, even though I'm fond of and do build 3-ways. 

There's no "better" in this sort of argument, as personal taste comes into it.

[dcathro]

Here are my thoughts on this:

 

• I hate the addition of separate subs - they never integrate  with the mains properly into a cohesive whole;
• there are very few really good speakers of any design;
• two ways are much, much easier to get right than a three way;
• it is extremely difficult to get the crossover of a three way right - hence great three ways are very very rare;
• a three way has the potential to sound better than a two way due to the greater bandwidth and each driver being able to work in it's pass band.
• forget four way and above - I have a pair of four way speakers that I spent over 1000 hours working on the crossovers.