In my opinion,
The less complicated, the better. My favorite are the Magnepan 3 ways (3.3R, 3.5R, 3.6R). When you go to a 4 way or more driver scheme, the crossover is more difficult & expensive to implement. Speakers are just like power amps,
more drivers (& more output transistors) no matter how closely matched to a tolerance, are going to still deviate from each other more than less drivers & less output transistors.
A classic example of this philosophy are the Sound Lab speakers & the Martin Logan CLS - just one big diaphragm & no multi way crossover. Another example are the audiophiles who swear by two-way monitors, they can image fantastically when set up well.
I myself prefer the Magnepan because of that 6' tall ribbon. It is very detailed, yet forgiving.
I've personally heard the WAMMs & MAXes, for high SPL rock they are impressive-they can drive you from the room. I just find them too fatiguing to listen to for very long.
The less complicated, the better. My favorite are the Magnepan 3 ways (3.3R, 3.5R, 3.6R). When you go to a 4 way or more driver scheme, the crossover is more difficult & expensive to implement. Speakers are just like power amps,
more drivers (& more output transistors) no matter how closely matched to a tolerance, are going to still deviate from each other more than less drivers & less output transistors.
A classic example of this philosophy are the Sound Lab speakers & the Martin Logan CLS - just one big diaphragm & no multi way crossover. Another example are the audiophiles who swear by two-way monitors, they can image fantastically when set up well.
I myself prefer the Magnepan because of that 6' tall ribbon. It is very detailed, yet forgiving.
I've personally heard the WAMMs & MAXes, for high SPL rock they are impressive-they can drive you from the room. I just find them too fatiguing to listen to for very long.