Do you prefer a 2 way or 3 way speaker design?

I have some incredibly good 2 way bookshelfs, but I find myself preferring the sound of the 3 way towers more often than not.

Forget home theater, but for music which do you prefer?

 

Without any doubt 2 ways.

 

x2

 

I don't think it is a significant factor by itself. I'm going 6 way so what do I know?

 

I don't care if it's 2 or 3 ways, as long as they are well implemented and engineered, with quality drivers and crossovers and a beefy overall construction. I've heard 2-way tower speakers kicking 4-way ones in the ****, and roughly at the same pricepoint !!

The 4-way ones had dual 8¨ woofers and the 2-way dual 6.5s. The bigger ones had puny bass, and the smaller ones brought down the house !! The only advantage of the big ones were slightly more natural upper treble.

I don't want to provide brands because of recent accussations of being negative.

 

2 way monitors and 2 subs. Tough to set up, but when you get it there very rewarding.

 

Dual concentric two ways for me.

 

I heard some Yamaha pro studio monitors that was an 8" 2-way system. The midrange clarity was as transparent and detailed as you could want. Unfortunately that is the exception as are some other broadcast / studio monitors.
For the most part a dedicated midrange is needed to achieve that clear, distinct open detailed sound. Once you hear it, you know what it is and will not settle for less.
Most two ways sound good, if not pleasing, but they usually sound veiled by comparison. Often they have a gap / dip in the crossover region.

 

I prefer three-ways, but I've heard good and bad implementations of all kinds of ways.

 

2-way ( generally). To get the crossover right in an X-way is waay more complicated, isn't it?

Anyway, the best speakers I've heard have been 2-ways.

 

My favorites have been 2 way speakers.

 

Two ways are easier to get right, but for wide response a good three way is superior. On the other hand there is a lot to say for two-ways and a subwoofer too. Too easy to generalize.

 

There's nothing like a good three-way.


Oh, speakers?

 

It took twelve replies to get there? You guys are slipping.

 

Like with love affairs, there is an acceptable argument for either,
two ways are great, incredible imaging, and that might seem like enough.
But if you had never tried a three way, with its full range of fidelity,
you would not know what you are missing...

Happy Listening!

 

The very best systems I've heard were mostly three way systems and one that was four way. My system, which I like a lot, is also a three-way system. For me, the heart of a great system is the midrange driver and it really is hard to make a midrange that can also cover either the bass or the ultra high frequency range. Now, if you are also considering non-dynamic drivers, there are one way fullrange electrostatics that sound VERY good, such as the massive top end Soundlab speakers.

 

I have to admit the best speakers I've heard had so damn many drivers and cones I didn't bother to count: giant VMPS towers, some Infinity Kappas . . .

 

I prefer *good* speaker design. Sometimes that's 2 way. Sometimes it's 6-way. But to generalize, usually 2 or 3 ways. Probably because that's what most speakers are configured as.

But as most of us know, there's 6-way speakers that mostly exist to appeal to the "Look at all those speakers!" crowd, and there are 2 way speakers that are thrown together with little thought.

I personally expect coloration from the transducers in a system, as the transducers are the hardest point in the signal chain to achieve colorless reproduction. Therefore I try to find speakers and phono cartridges that are pleasing to my ears. That's also where theoretically one should spend the most money...devices that change physical movement to an electrical signal and vice versa. The equipment *between* these items, I expect colorless reproduction. But that's just me.

The one specification I do look at in regards to speakers is efficiency. I'm not fond of highly inefficient designs. I look for SPL's in the low 90's as a minimum.

 

I'd say a lot of which one is better depends on room set up. If you're going to be close to the speakers in a smallish room I believe 2 ways are better and dual concentrics the best, if you have a large room and some room to sit back away from the speakers then 3-ways can be a great option.

My personal all time favorite speakers are Tannoy Dual Concentrics, the 15 inch monitor gold specifically, in a nice 300 liter custom cabinet.

 

I don't think that most would choose a speaker based on it being a 2-way or 3-way. Naturally, due to size, bookshelf speakers tend to be 2-way. I have a few pairs of bookshelf speakers and they are all 2-way. The Peachtree/Era Design D5's are 2-way but they do not go as low as your Ascend's, so I use them in by bedroom with a small 75W Martin Logan sub, just to have a little extra fill in at the bottom. Your Ascends are amazing in that they go down to 39-CPS, while mine go to about 50-CPS.

An average tower speaker will usually have an additional bass drive to provide for better bottom end and has the additional benefit of a larger cabinet which will improve efficiency at the same time, most towers will be at least 3-db, or more, efficient than a smaller bookshelf version, it's a win-win. But it is often a tradeoff between a smaller point source which provides greater imaging or a tower with a fuller sound.

In home audio, it is better to consider the finished product and compare the sound to another finished product (that both meet your needs) without concerning yourself if it one is a 2-way or one is a 3-way. There are different pro's and cons to each design, but that is better left to the engineer's who designed the speaker. Today, we see 2-way towers and 3-way towers from different manufactures with superior offerings with either design. I have a few different tower speakers and they are all happen three way.

Still, sometime in the future, I would consider purchasing Tekton's or Zu's that are two way, because I have read some really positive reviews and feedback on both of those companies.

Even in my legacy pro-audio speakers, I have, the La Scala's are three way and the Altec Lansing's that are two way. I have a JBL super tweeter on one pair of Altecs that makes it a 3-way. Sometimes I unplug that JBL's when I want 2-way sound or the mix is a bit too hot on top and I can feel HF related listening fatigue setting in. Other times, I enjoy the "sparkle" of the additional HF Tweeter. Currently it is hooked up.

For what it is worth, you, me, and the majority out there do not have the luxury of building our own listening rooms, we simply make the most of what we have. I think that you have done an excellent job with superior equipment you have assembled in the confined space that you have available. I do consider your equipment to be "Audiophile" grade, including and especially your speakers! I have much more respect for the bookshelf speakers that I am seeing and listening to today, than the ones that were around when I grew up.

 

Depends on the speaker. I've owned both that have sounded great.

 

I like that 9-way Bose design.

 

Two way or a single point source a la the Altec 604 or Stephens 206-AXA

 

Your post makes a lot of sense S&G. While I have been enjoying the Sierra 2's with the Raal ribbon, I have decided to place my order for the Sierra Tower Raal. I will always wonder what I was missing with that dedicated midrange and the speakers get phenomenal reviews from everywhere. Cabinets are backordered for 12 weeks but Ascend is letting me keep the 2's until my towers ship and will then give me full credit upon return. I thought that was a class move and speaks volumes about Ascend and the customer service Dave F. has built his company behind.

 

1-way?