Which sounds better 2 way or 3 way speaker design

Conventional wisdom(re:audiophiles)says that a 3 way will be heavily compromised compared to a 2 way because of increased cabinet size & component count..They say the same thing about all in one electronics vs separates as well..I just DO NOT hear it that way..
 IMO the 3 way floor standing speakers I've owned have all sounded more coherent,with better bass & superior mid range performance thanks to the dedicated mid driver..If it were not for certain set up constraints I would have stayed with a 3 way floorstander..I also feel an all in one electronics component performs as well as any seperates thanks to better synergy & optimized circuits..
 Conventional wisdom in our hobby is DECREPIT DOGMA  & should have died out decades ago!

I agree with freediver

"IMO the 3 way floor standing speakers I’ve owned have all sounded more coherent,with better bass & superior mid range performance thanks to the dedicated mid driver".

about better mid, but keep in mind the typical larger woofer which does what the IRON LAW says must be done for bass: move more air!

I want to add, the 3 models you mentioned are all limited by the too common 6-1/2" driver, used alone or in multiples, long throw versions designed to MMA.

Larger magnets not only move the cone, they do a better job stopping/controlling the cone.

I encourage you to look for 3 way designs with larger woofers, keep an eye on higher efficiency/sensitivity, avoid too low impedance dips or designs, consider horn tweeter horn mid,

ports, none, or, if any, front facing, optional port plug is good, especially if rear port.

It depends on the design. There are pros and cons with each, but there are a lot of outstanding 2-way speakers.  They're simpler and can typically offer higher quality parts because there’s simply fewer of them to buy. Because of they can be built for less, many are indeed marketed to the more affordable price ranges, but a TOTL 2-way can still be amazing, depending on the recipe used.  

With that said, there are a lot of great sounding 3-way + speakers out there too. Keep an open mind, buy what you like, and what works in your room on your system, and you won’t go wrong.

"Dedicated midrange driver" is typically an oxymoron and very few three-way systems will not put some of the midrange in the woofer and/or tweeter.  You would need to run the driver from ~80Hz-~4kHz for it truly to be "dedicated" to the midrange.

@toddalin , I always am interested in your perspective.  After reading your above post, how would you answer the OP's question?  

Also, if one was  going to go with a two way speaker, is there a sonic advantage in a two way that is built into its own floor standing cabinet versus a two way that is intended to be placed on a speaker stand?

I prefer 2 way stand-mounts with specific OE stands that are designed for use with the specific 2 way transducer. 

I have 2.5 way floor standers and they sound nice bust not as clear, detailed or have the depth or breadth of my 2 ways. 

Now there are many variables that play into this also, room size, room treatments and so forth. 

I have no knowledge of the three speakers in question.

Whether a 2 or 3 (or 2.5 or other) way is best is dependent on the selected components, construction, and it’s implementation. There are fine speakers made in many "ways" and I don’t think that the actual number of drivers is the important factor in deciding which to choose.

In general, I would think that a floor standing speaker would offer more cabinet volume and this would typically allow for a deeper, more generous bass. But of course there are exceptions to everything.

A 4 way and don't look back! 

I've upgraded through the Usher line over the years. Started with BE-718s then Mini One Diamond, then Mini Two Diamond. I prefer the fuller mid bass and the richer sound of a larger output speaker design.

Incorrect question, All depend of design, drivers, crossovers etc 

3 is larger than 2. (until our mighty leaders will change the rules ,at least)

So why would a 3 way not be better? Why would they bother with 3 way?

I think in small spaces you may not benefit from 3-way design, but overall, sure, 3 way should be better, when it's not a cheap 3 way vs a quality 2 way..

I don't know what you mean by full audio spectrum? I would go with the Totem from these three, based on the data. Not that I know anything about speakers in 18K price range

@bache +1

Mike

@bache +2 It’s all about the design. Some prefer a one way speaker!

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=one+driver+speakers&view=detail&mid=7F112A893B9384E32C887F112A893B9384E32C88&mcid=4B7010F7D68B4A11A09E331F024B713A&FORM=VIRE&PC=HCTS&cc=US&setlang=en-US&PC=HCTS&cvid=a7e0bef66bf541eebe2fbb0db7772f3b&qs=SW&nclid=49A8B719DF37EB2497B50AE247FF5078&ts=1735428997821

Agree with @yogiboy, @bache, et al. The question is ill-posed. It's not as if you get a better result if you buy a speaker with more drivers in it! There are always compromises, and crossovers are one such compromise that gets multiplied with additional designated drivers. If, as the OP proposes in his question, "a 3 way design will give the listener a much better chance to hear the full audio spectrum as opposed to a 2 way design," then Maggies would be out of contention, just for example. So would MBLs, which are two-way only because it's so hard to move lots of air with that magical "Radialstrahler" element. Let your ears be the judge!

All of these are floorstanders with double woofers, resulting in total surface area approximating a 9-10" woofer.  If you're content with their bass output, just go with the one whose sound you prefer.

If you're likely to get a sub or two, you might find a standmount a more attractive fit.  This gives you a more versatile arrangement, at the cost of potentially adding significant setup complication.

I agree with @knotscott - quality of the speaker design, parts and manufacturing matter most. But all things being equal (which is almost never true) I prefer a great 2-way design with CD horns to 3-way. I have owned a lot of great 3-way speakers and I can count on one hand the ones where I couldn't notice the effects of the xover. Some more, some less.

Even if you are limiting this discussion to conventional cone drivers (e.g., not considering electrostatic or planar magnetic panel speakers, bending wave drivers like MBL speakers), there are great examples of one, teo, three, and more-way speakers.  No speaker is perfect in all respects and each has different strengths and weaknesses and listeners have different tastes snd priorities such that a wide range of speakers can be favored.  I like the one-way, single driver systems from Songer Audio and Charney Audio.  I like MANY two-ways, some conventional driver systems from the likes of Audio Note (including their near six figure fieldcoil two-way AN-E speaker) ProAc, Harbeth, Fyne, etc., and MANY three ways, particularly three-way horns.  

I don’t think this particular design characteristic is determinative of sound quality.

I’m partial to my 2.5-ways. They use a JBL 18", a JBL 9.7", and a modified Heil. (BTW, a Heil is equivalent to 8 square inches of tweeter surface.) And these do keep the midrange in the 9.7 going all the way up to ~3,500Hz before crossing over to the Heils. This maintains coherency, staging, and imaging. I really don’t fret about a wide dispersion as I always sit in the sweet spot, and a narrower dispersion results in less wall bounce for better staging and imaging.

So lest someone think fewer ways means less cone area, think again. Some of the biggest speakers are 2-ways.

Actually, the Heil is 29.76 square inches of tweeter surface.  I was too late on my edit. 

I am under the impression, (which I may be incorrect) that a three way design is superior to a 2 way design.  
 

Wrong - it’s the quality of the parts and implementation.  Some crossovers are done extremely well they seem seamless.   More crossovers “may” offer more opportunities to have a poor crossover, but it’s not automatic.

As usual, best to demo yourself to hear what resonates with you.

Ime loudspeaker design is a fascinating competition of ideas, every one of which is a juggling of tradeoffs (and anyone who tells you otherwise is in marketing). The implementation of those ideas can take very different forms: Single driver, two-way, three-way, four-way, planars, horns, multidirectionals, omnis... And even among speakers which are outwardly similar, the designers are constrained to giving some attributes higher priority than others.

In general the attributes which I prioritize are more likely to be found in a conventional three-way than in a conventional two-way, but my own designs tend to be unconventional two-ways with rear-firing tweeters, often augmented by subs... in which case I guess they are three-way systems?

Duke

One of my favorite basic design is a three-way, with a compression-driver/horn midrange covering a wide part of the range.  The compression drivers I like are all vintage—from 1930’s to 1960’s.  I own a system fitting that description—twin 12” woofers (modern), bullet tweeter (modern), western Electric 713b midrange compression drivers (1940’s), Western Electric KS 12025 multicellular horn.

I mentioned two single driver speaker companies I like-Charney and Songer—above, and I would now like to give kudos to PureAudioProject which makes terrific open-baffle speakers, modt of them are two-way speakers.  

There are good speakers of all types.
 

Having owned Proac speakers in the past I would not rule out the K3 without having an audition. Unfortunately my listening room will not accommodate them but .....

A great discussion.  I’ve had so many speakers over the years from single element to 4-way in many different rooms including large towers and smaller bookshelves.  I agree with the comments that stress design and execution including component and build quality.   My old friend that was involved in speaker design and build always said there is no perfect speaker and that there were trade-offs in any design and build.  I find a key is the room you are listening in and what sounds good to you at this time.  I now listen in a relatively small room so small towers or 2-way bookshelves fill the room better without overpowering the space.  In addition my old man ears don’t hear as high in range as I used to so sibilance is key as as such there are speakers I liked when I was younger that I wouldn’t listen to now.  Trust your ears and what sounds good to you in your listening room.  I haven’t had those 3 speakers but With an 18K budget you’ve got some great choices.  

Over the last 2 years I’ve been on the Speaker Merry Go Round going through 11 sets of speakers… Yep 2ways, 3ways, and Maggi’s and opted for stand mounts with dual subs… YOU REALLY NEED TO HEAR THEM IN YOUR ROOM TO BE SURE… I can tell you the Triangles I tried had a very short life in my room. I have to say every speaker I tried had a great honeymoon period but once the crucial listen began, 10 of the 11 speakers were asked to leave.

I ended up with Soundfield Audio MMW1’s, Custom designed for my room’s shortcomings and my listening tastes. I met the designer / owner of Soundfield (AJ) at the Florida Int’l Hi Fi Expo in Tampa and his room’s sound blew me away. It’s been nothing but sonic bliss since. There’s several Soundfield Youtube Videos on line, one where the Audiophile Junkie claims Soundfield Audio is the best small room option out there…check ‘em out.
Which ever way you go, LOOK WITH YOUR EARS, not that my speaker has more speakers than yours, LOTS OF GOOD OPTIONS OUT THERE with excellent Build Quality & Component Quality. 

When you start with a fallacy as your premise, you shouldn't be surprised at the questionable validity of your conclusion.

Perfectly legitimate question to me ...

Three way speakers with concentric mid/tweeter designs are another twist that offer very good results. 

6 of one. The square root of 36 of the other.

There can be number of variables approaching infinity related to speaker parameters and considerations. I’m with @skiznfliz on this one: put them in your room and listen to them.

To say, as the OP does, that "a 3 way design will give the listener a much better chance to hear the full audio spectrum as opposed to a 2 way design" is like saying a car with five speeds must go faster than one with only four. It reflects no understanding of what drivers in a speaker actually do.

General rule of thumb...Drivers handling approx 30 hz to 300 hz should always be NOT the same driver that handled 300 to 2000 hz.

Having said that, a guy who put 2 dollar trash drivers in a 3 way and designed a trash crossover/ cabinet can make a 3 way sound worse than a guy who put more money and competence into a 2 way.

Parts and build can make a huge difference, but so can how they’re used. For instance, I have a pair of old Yamaha 2 ways speakers than I’m using in a desktop system where they sit 2.5’ from my ears that sound great!  But there is no way I would put them in my main system and expect them to sound as good.

In my own experience with the ATC lines, three ways always sound richer and more lifelike than the 2 ways 

I’ve noticed that most of the high end speaker makers (Rockport , Wilson , Magico , YG, Evolution Acoustics) all use 3 way or 4 way speakers in their mid to upper end lines. Surely this speaks to the benefits of this type of speaker. It seems that one of the main reasons people go with a 2 way is your room size. I’ve seen many threads where members recommend a 2 way based on room size 

A great 2 way can sound great. It has been said that since the Xover is more simple, it is easier to integrate. Most all mixing board speakers are small two ways.

I would vote for a 2 and a half way....

Both have their own benefits and drawbacks. First, let's assume they are equally well designed. A two-way design tend to make it easier to integrate the two elements into a single sonic "picture" especially at shorter listening distances. A 3-way design tend to reduce distortion as each element is required to cover a smaller frequency span, but also making it more difficult to get them to "gel" into a single sonic "picture", Many times, a 3-way design will require more of a listening distance to get the 3 elements to blend.

Basically, select the one that fits your room and listening distance the best. 

Of course 3-ways would be bigger than 2.5-ways which should obviously be bigger than 2-ways..., right???

These Super Big Red 2.5-ways are only 15.5 cu ft. Those are Chartwell LS3/5A 2-ways on the floor for comparison.

Dear @kjl1065   : Everything the same 3-way is a superior MUSIC reproduction where a 2-way ( almost any. ) has a way higher Intermodulation Distortions that per sé goes against MUSIC in front of the 3-way design.

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,

R.

Am I correct to assume that a 3 way design will give the listener a much better chance to hear the full audio spectrum as opposed to a 2 way design?

Depends on what you mean when you say, full audio spectrum.

If full audio spectrum to you means more prominent low frequencies, than in my opinion I think you would have a better chance of achieving that with a 3-way design, though not necessarily a much better chance. As far as the speakers you have listed, the cello should have 3 db more low end output due to it having two dedicated low frequency drivers, at volume levels approximately 83 db or less (measured at 1K Hz) depending on the dynamic range of your source material and many other factors.

But with any real world test, the proof is in the pudding, so the only way to really know is to do an actual listening comparison.

See  here a two way monitor with attributes of a three and four way design.

Mike

Implementation is everything.

However, while designing a new speaker, choosing a 3-way may remove a number of constraints a similar 2-way would have, related to distortion and dispersion and dynamic range.  I wrote more about this here.

Having said all of that, trying to judge 2-way speaker A vs. 3-way speaker B is a fool’s errand.

We can start to think about the benefits along the same lines of "why use 2 drivers instead of just one?" Similar benefits will appear when asking "why use 3 drivers instead of just 2?"

It is of course possible to go overboard and design a multi-way monstrosity that sounds horrible.

@rauliruegas

Dear @kjl1065 : Everything the same 3-way is a superior MUSIC reproduction where a 2-way ( almost any. ) has a way higher Intermodulation Distortions that per sé goes against MUSIC in front of the 3-way design.

There’s never a free lunch. You stated a potential benefit from choosing a 3-way design, but there’s a flip side.

A 3-way system typically puts a crossover point (a series capacitor) in the 300-800hz region, and it induces any associated delay and degradation from the capacitor. That’s right square in the middle of the vocal range, which covers the primary music range of a lot of instruments. All things the being the same, that’s most definitely a theoretical disadvantage to at least some aspects of the sound.

Every speaker designer faces lots of those choices. Dealing with all those pros and cons, is simply a matter of picking your poison, and mitigating it as much as possible, but no design is immune.

As has been alluded to, it's all about the design.  Most specifically the crossover (assuming you have high quality drivers).  It's easier to get a 2-way design to have proper phase characteristics between the tweeter and woofer/mid woofer.  the coherency of a great 2-way design can be quite beguiling.  To get a 3-way design to sound coherent from top to bottom (highest frequencies to lowest frequencies), and to speak with one voice requires, requires some very intelligent crossover design.  With a 3-way you now have two crossover points which need to be optimized.  Optimizing the phase and frequency balance at both crossover points to allow drivers, on either side of the crossover points, to work in harmony should be the aim of a great design.  When it's done right, it's fantastic.  And the benefits of multi-way designs are now fully appreciated (greater extension at both extremes, lower distortion, greater dynamics, more power handling, etc.).

Dear @knotscott  : I agree that always exist trade-offs .

Now, a woofer in a 2-way design usually crossover around 2khz and the most critical frequencies are handled by that woofer and it's here where is developed that high IMD due that that woofer handled  from around 40hz and up and that developed IMD puts a lot of " dust " in the midrange and in the HF because we have to remember that everywhere are developed harmonics that starts in the bass range.

R.

Then there's a 2-way pair with a sub that can cure or complicate where and how driven and the dispersal of said.....a 3-way with sub would seem to live better in a larger space....

It can as well to consider the thoughts to the size of the various drivers applied, 2 or 3 x sub size.....

...an that's why I like a good equalizer, even if the speakers have on-board adjustments for the x-overs...

My approach, a  IMH....*s*

3 way designs are more difficult to get right. Also 3 ways are more expensive, so be suspect of a 2 and 3 way design of similar price.

It would seem crossover design is really important to a three-way. I guess if one was to ask this question with the assumption that if you had a three-way versus two way which would be better assuming crossover designs are not part of the evaluation process because they are assumed perfect for each situation.

It would seem to me if this was the case the three-way would be advantageous.

And of course assuming driver and cabinet designs are not impacting the decision either. I think it’s a theoretical question and to me if you separate out the mid range and not have it intermingle with other spectrums that may offer interference it would be better to have a third segment of frequency range and create a situation where more detail is better.

I’ve encountered many 2-ways that outperform many 3-ways. It really depends on implementation.

I’d rather own a 2-way design with top quality drivers than a 3-way design with mediocre drivers.

2 ways with well integrated sub can sound really good. They don’t go that loud without being crossed over if bass heavy music.