2-way vs 3-way which is better

[mr. budget]

I was wondering, on good equipment, is two-way better better than three-way or is it just a matter of personal preference, I know the 3-way puts hgh/mid frq to twtr and mid/low frq to woofer, and 3-way is high to twt mid to mdrnge and low to woofer, but what should it be, like does it even matter. So which is better for quality accuracy and better sound reproduction? thanks.

[RGA]

it's a matter of the speaker designer and how good they are -- the best speaker I have ever hear at any price has been a two way large standmount speaker - but it does retail for around $30,000.00. Though heard speakers and systems that were not as good for 4 times that price...so in a way it's a bargain.

[kexodusc]

I prefer a well-designed 2 way to a well designed three way. Too me, there's just too much added complication to a 3-way, which always leads to added circuitry or more complicated design parameters intended to compensate for the problems inherent in adding a 3rd driver.
That's not to say a good 3-way couldn't sound better than a good 2-way, I just feel you add cost.
If cost is no object and ultimate performance is sought, then it's quite possible a 3-way could be superior.
There are cases, however, where a 3-way could offer similar performance to a 2-way speaker and be less expensive. Much would depend on your goals for the speaker, and the environment the speaker will be placed in. My own bias is to keep things simple.

Not all 3-ways split the frequencies as you describe. Some of the best speakers I've heard use 2 focused super tweeters and a full range woofer that handles everything below 8 kHz.

I wouldn't recommend shopping for a speaker based on its driver complement unless you have good reason.

My experience with speakers below $3000 or so is that a good 2-way will have fewer issues, but this is a broad generalization.

[Pat D]

I was wondering, on good equipment, is two-way better better than three-way or is it just a matter of personal preference, I know the 3-way puts hgh/mid frq to twtr and mid/low frq to woofer, and 3-way is high to twt mid to mdrnge and low to woofer, but what should it be, like does it even matter. So which is better for quality accuracy and better sound reproduction? thanks.

A typical two way has some limitations which may or may not be significant for you.. In order to achieve deep bass response, you need a largish driver in a good sized box. Largish drivers start beaming at lower frequencies than smallish ones, so to maintain even dispersion very far off axis, the tweeter must be crossed over fairly low. Alas, tweeters tend to be more delicate and can't handle so much power. Hence, the typical two way has a fairly small woofer, about 6 inches or so so that the tweeter can be crossed over moderately high, but give up deep bass response and power handling capacity. Now, this may not be that much of a limitation for many people, for most people listen at reasonable levels. The typical reasonably priced high quality speaker is a two way.

There are ways around this. The old Altec 19 had a robust 15 inch woofer crossed over fairly low to a sectoral horn tweeter, also quite robust. Those who think it was not a good speaker almost certainly heard them with the midrange and high controls poorly adjusted because they could be adjusted to be quite accurate. Paradigm, which makes its own drivers, has some very robust tweeters which can be crossed over fairly low. They and others also may use more than one woofer so the bass response and power handling can be increased.

Now, a three way system can have one or more largish drivers devoted to the bass, a nice smallish midrange with excellent power handling, and then cross over to a tweeter and a somewhat higher frequency. This can give deep bass response, high power handling, and wide and even dispersion.. The crossover is more complex and since there are more drivers, the cost tends to be higher. So, if you need high volume levels, a three way may well be better, even if you have a subwoofer.

You can have high quality speakers either way, and don't listen to those who say you can't. Two ways plus a subwoofer works fine for me but your needs may be different.

[kexodusc]

A typical two way has some limitations which may or may not be significant for you.. In order to achieve deep bass response, you need a largish driver in a good sized box. Largish drivers start beaming at lower frequencies than smallish ones, so to maintain even dispersion very far off axis, the tweeter must be crossed over fairly low. Alas, tweeters tend to be more delicate and can't handle so much power. Hence, the typical two way has a fairly small woofer, about 6 inches or so so that the tweeter can be crossed over moderately high, but give up deep bass response and power handling capacity. Now, this may not be that much of a limitation for many people, for most people listen at reasonable levels. The typical reasonably priced high quality speaker is a two way.

Actually, there's tons of tweeters available that have high power handling, the delicacy of a tweeter only presents itself if a poor crossover is employed, and low frequencies are sent there in abundance. The crossover point is a function of acoustic performance in the midrange, the size of the woofer really doesn't have a whole lot to do with this.
There are many drivers of varying sizes that have good off-axis response, again, for woofers, this is rarely an issue because of the wavelenghts of the frequencies woofers are responsible for.

The biggest problem you will run into with 3-way (or more complex) speaker systems is the smooth transition from one driver to the next, and matching the sensitivities of each driver. I don't like just plugging resistors into the circuits to decrease the volume of a driver as it seems to alter the tonality in doing so.

As for power output, there are some very good drivers with very high sensitivities that will play as loud or louder than three way drivers, not to mention those with high power handling capabilities. You have choice, but if you are going to increase cost by adding a 3rd driver, you can just as easily put that money into higher quality drivers in a 2 way.

I think it comes down to personal preference and cost considerations. I love the deep, tight, accurate bass a transmission line speaker presents, the best t-lines I've heard were all 2 ways. No need for a large woofer for the bass here, 5-1/2 inch units are fine. Totem has acheived impressive results with small woofers in using isobaric designs.

A good example of going the other way would be what Paradigm did with the Monitor 5's, replacing a bass reflex 2-way system with a passive radiator design...(not really a 3-way, but still). There's many ways to arrive at the same destination. I don't think it's as simple as saying a 2-way is better or worse than a 3-way, it would always come down to the speakers in question.

[RGA]

The other aspect with 3 ways is typically that they need a larger cabinet...even two way standmounts that have been converted to floorstanders have added cabinet to get more bass with highly suspect results -- the B&W 305 was essentially the 302 stuck in a bigger cabinet -- while more bass was achieved so was box resonance which muddied the sound.

Many standmounts using cheap cabinets can get away with cheap cabinets because they don't put out a lot of bass -- this is one reason why so many speaker lines' best speaker is the standmount and not the floorstanding model. Mike Ranft and myself were auditioning speakers at Soundhounds and I agree with his take that big boxes also lead to big problems which need to be sorted out -- and I agree with most people who decide that when budget is a major consideration that 2-way standmounts are a better compromise in a number of ways but I only agree with the compromise if you are not sacrificing a large segment of bass response at pretty good levels as well as dynamics.

Too many speakers sound disjointed with the two drivers doing their own thing...I favourably reviewed the B&W 604S3 but here again the bass is one note as if the bass driver is separated from the music...For the money it's good but the 602S3 sounds less conjested and less thumpy. Adding more stuff to be corrected out of the chain as an after effect is less desirable and it's not necessary. There are speaker makers that prove it so get one from them -- I mean Full range standmounts are ideal in that they offer the best of both worlds - and if they are also efficient and sensitive then that's icing on the cake. I have not run across many though.

[Pat D]

Actually, there's tons of tweeters available that have high power handling, the delicacy of a tweeter only presents itself if a poor crossover is employed, and low frequencies are sent there in abundance. The crossover point is a function of acoustic performance in the midrange, the size of the woofer really doesn't have a whole lot to do with this.
There are many drivers of varying sizes that have good off-axis response, again, for woofers, this is rarely an issue because of the wavelenghts of the frequencies woofers are responsible for.

The biggest problem you will run into with 3-way (or more complex) speaker systems is the smooth transition from one driver to the next, and matching the sensitivities of each driver. I don't like just plugging resistors into the circuits to decrease the volume of a driver as it seems to alter the tonality in doing so.

As for power output, there are some very good drivers with very high sensitivities that will play as loud or louder than three way drivers, not to mention those with high power handling capabilities. You have choice, but if you are going to increase cost by adding a 3rd driver, you can just as easily put that money into higher quality drivers in a 2 way.

I think it comes down to personal preference and cost considerations. I love the deep, tight, accurate bass a transmission line speaker presents, the best t-lines I've heard were all 2 ways. No need for a large woofer for the bass here, 5-1/2 inch units are fine. Totem has acheived impressive results with small woofers in using isobaric designs.

A good example of going the other way would be what Paradigm did with the Monitor 5's, replacing a bass reflex 2-way system with a passive radiator design...(not really a 3-way, but still). There's many ways to arrive at the same destination. I don't think it's as simple as saying a 2-way is better or worse than a 3-way, it would always come down to the speakers in question.

One straight factual point: the Paradigm Monitor 5 is a 2.5 way speaker, which means both the bass driver and the woofer-midrange are driven. No passive radiator. ( A passive radiator is a port substitute anyway, a design choice.)

http://www.paradigm.ca/Website/SiteP...nitorSpecs.htm

Now, a 6 inch bass driver can do well in the bass at small signal levels (which can end up fairly loud). However, if you consider a crossover to a subwoofer at around 70 or 80 Hz, which do you think will run out of steam first at 70-8- hz and below: the drivers on my excellent PSB Stratus Minis or the driver on my 15 inch subwoofer. If I really wanted to play super loud, I would need one of the larger PSB Stratus speakers.

When you talk about midrange performance, you seem to think that directivity has nothing to do with it.

The rule of thumb is that as the frequency rises and the wavelengths get to be equal to or smaller than the diameter of the driver, the dirver starts to become more directional. The crossover to the tweeter should be low enough that it's dispersion is still quite wide, because the tweeter's dispersion will be quite wide at the bottom of it's range.

Now, if you think that there are many tweeters out there that will surpass a good midrange drive in output capacity, that's fine. Go argue it out with speaker designers such as Paul Barton:

http://stereophile.com/interviews/231/

Check especially on page 3 of the interview:

http://stereophile.com/interviews/231/index2.html

In his review in Audio magazine, D. B. Keele called the PSB Stratus Gold-i "The 10,000-watt speaker!" This was with very short term signals, of course and certainly not in the bass. Go argue with Paul Barton about power handling.

I heard and liked the Totem Mani-2, which has impressive bass response for a smallish speaker because it has two woofers, one behind the other in the box (isobaric loading). I'm sure the Stratus Gold-i can put out much more bass at 30 or 20 Hz than the Mani-2. I can assure tyou that my subwoofer surpasses the Mani-2 in performance in the deep bass both in extension and output capability. A small woofer can only do so much. I might prefer the Totem Mani-2 to the PSB Stratus Series, or might not. I've never directly compared them.

[kexodusc]

One straight factual point: the Paradigm Monitor 5 is a 2.5 way speaker, which means both the bass driver and the woofer-midrange are driven. No passive radiator. ( A passive radiator is a port substitute anyway, a design choice.)

http://www.paradigm.ca/Website/SiteP...nitorSpecs.htm

Now, a 6 inch bass driver can do well in the bass at small signal levels (which can end up fairly loud). However, if you consider a crossover to a subwoofer at around 70 or 80 Hz, which do you think will run out of steam first at 70-8- hz and below: the drivers on my excellent PSB Stratus Minis or the driver on my 15 inch subwoofer. If I really wanted to play super loud, I would need one of the larger PSB Stratus speakers.

When you talk about midrange performance, you seem to think that directivity has nothing to do with it.

The rule of thumb is that as the frequency rises and the wavelengths get to be equal to or smaller than the diameter of the driver, the dirver starts to become more directional. The crossover to the tweeter should be low enough that it's dispersion is still quite wide, because the tweeter's dispersion will be quite wide at the bottom of it's range.

Now, if you think that there are many tweeters out there that will surpass a good midrange drive in output capacity, that's fine. Go argue it out with speaker designers such as Paul Barton:

http://stereophile.com/interviews/231/

Check especially on page 3 of the interview:

http://stereophile.com/interviews/231/index2.html

In his review in Audio magazine, D. B. Keele called the PSB Stratus Gold-i "The 10,000-watt speaker!" This was with very short term signals, of course and certainly not in the bass. Go argue with Paul Barton about power handling.

I heard and liked the Totem Mani-2, which has impressive bass response for a smallish speaker because it has two woofers, one behind the other in the box (isobaric loading). I'm sure the Stratus Gold-i can put out much more bass at 30 or 20 Hz than the Mani-2. I can assure tyou that my subwoofer surpasses the Mani-2 in performance in the deep bass both in extension and output capability. A small woofer can only do so much. I might prefer the Totem Mani-2 to the PSB Stratus Series, or might not. I've never directly compared them.

Hey, you're right, the Monitor 5 isn't a PR design. My bad.
I agree, we could compare huge woofers to tweeters, and yes, sooner or later it's just going to be to impractical to design a high-output tweeter, but most of us don't listen 10,000 watt speakers in our home, nor do we typically try to achieve SPL's above 105 dB for extended periods, something many tweeters have no problem doing in even large rooms...how loud do you listen to your music?

I'm not discounting directivity, but, just pointing out that large woofer size isn't the only way to achieve a full range speaker design. Some other designers would argue against larger woofers, claiming they sacrifice transient response, or a whole slew of other properties (something I don't necessarily agree with, you can design any size driver to do pretty much anything if you want to). Also, there are many woofer/tweeter combo's that present little dispersion problems (some of the world's best speakers are full range 2-ways).

I will grant you, if we want sub 20 Hz response for musical sources (can't think of any instruments off the top of my head that reach that low, but I'm sure there's a few out there) then we'll probably want a larger woofer.

In the end, I think goal of the speaker system will determine its design. If bass response in the high 20's is all that's desired, and output below 100 dB is the expected SPL, I would sooner invest in a higher quality woofer and tweeter at a given cost than lower quality woofers and tweeters just to obtain more output or lower response. If cost is now object, then things would probably change, but that's rarely the case.

Curious, what do you like/dislike about the Stratus Mini's?

[Pat D]

Hey, you're right, the Monitor 5 isn't a PR design. My bad.
I agree, we could compare huge woofers to tweeters, and yes, sooner or later it's just going to be to impractical to design a high-output tweeter, but most of us don't listen 10,000 watt speakers in our home, nor do we typically try to achieve SPL's above 105 dB for extended periods, something many tweeters have no problem doing in even large rooms...how loud do you listen to your music?

I'm not discounting directivity, but, just pointing out that large woofer size isn't the only way to achieve a full range speaker design. Some other designers would argue against larger woofers, claiming they sacrifice transient response, or a whole slew of other properties (something I don't necessarily agree with, you can design any size driver to do pretty much anything if you want to). Also, there are many woofer/tweeter combo's that present little dispersion problems (some of the world's best speakers are full range 2-ways).

I will grant you, if we want sub 20 Hz response for musical sources (can't think of any instruments off the top of my head that reach that low, but I'm sure there's a few out there) then we'll probably want a larger woofer.

In the end, I think goal of the speaker system will determine its design. If bass response in the high 20's is all that's desired, and output below 100 dB is the expected SPL, I would sooner invest in a higher quality woofer and tweeter at a given cost than lower quality woofers and tweeters just to obtain more output or lower response. If cost is now object, then things would probably change, but that's rarely the case.

Curious, what do you like/dislike about the Stratus Mini's?

There tends to be much less musical energy in the higher frequencies so in fact a tweeter does not have to produce the 105 dB, most of which is in the bass to midrange areas (and it's dangerous to listen at such levels for very long, too). Once CDs became popular, speaker manufacturers began using much more robust tweeters. If you try to push the crossover down much below 2 kHz, you need a pretty robust tweeter. I don't recommend trying to get most tweeters to play continuously at anything like 105 dB.

The point of the comparison with the 15 inch woofer was that it would play much louder than the woofer in the Stratus Mini or the Mani-2 in the deep bass. A smallish two way system with a 6 inch woofer is not going to produce undistorted bass at very high levels, especially deep bass. 105 dB is really stretching it. Now, if you're talking of an Altec 19, that's another story.

32 foot organ pedals have a fundamental at 16 hz. Also some electronic music gets around or below 20 hz.

BTW, what are those 'full range' two way speakers that are among the best in the world?

You have asked about my PSB speakers. Now, my Stratus Minis have excellent dispersion and show a quite even response where it counts most on and off axis. They are fairly insensitive speakers whose impedance gets below 4 ohms in the midbass. They have usable bass down into the mid-30s, believe it or not. Anyway, they seem to play plenty loud enough. While my listening seldom is over 85 dBa, sometimes it gets a little higher into the 90s with no problems at all. If I wanted to play much louder, I would have gotten a bigger model, whether I stayed with PSB or not, simply to enable the speaker to keep up with the subwoofer around the crossover frequencies. If I didn't have a subwoofer, I would have gone for one of the larger models, too, although the Stratus Minis are quite satisfactory on their own with most of the music I listen to.

I haven't compared them directly to the Totem Mani-2, the Paradigm Signature S2, which I haven't heard for quite a while, so what I would think then I don't know. I haven't even heard any of the PSB Platinum speakers yet, some other speakers I would like to hear.
We enjoy listening to music on the Stratus Minis and they don't seem to have any significant faults. I also consider them to be a very good value as they sound to me as good as a number of highly regarded speakers up to several times their price, speakers I also liked. I just put on Diana Krall's Live in Paris CD, which seems to be a superb recording, especially of her voice. I've put my consumer reviews here, at Audioholics and at MyAsylum. The one at Audioholics is the last one and probably is the most complete--anyway, I haven't changed my opinion of them and we now have them even better placed.

http://forums.audioholics.com/forums...ead.php?t=3904

[E-Stat]

I was wondering, on good equipment, is two-way better better than three-way or is it just a matter of personal preference...

I rather prefer one-ways myself. And yes, it is a matter of preference.

rw

[thepogue]

but me wife say's she'd kill me...


it's 2 way fer this cat....


Peace, Pogue