2-way vs. 3-way

In my opinion the basic concept and format of the model 4430 is sheer genius. It elegantly addresses several significant issues, some of which are still virtually ignored by most of the high-end audio world.

Briefly, the 4430 uses a large-diameter high-quality prosound woofer crossed over to a 90-degree constant-directivity horn at the frequency where the woofer's pattern has likewise narrowed to 90 degrees. The 4435 adds a second woofer that assists in the bass region.

Even today, the 4430 is an outstanding loudspeaker (as are its conceptual ancestors, the Altec Model 14 and Model 19). However, in my opinion there has been advancement in the state of the art since the 4430 and 4435 were designed - specifically the introduction of low-coloration, constant directivity waveguides based on the work of Earl Geddes. The big butt-cheeks horn in the model 4430/4435 was about as low in coloration as you could get in its day, but it has been surpassed (this opinion backed up by a controlled blind listening test).

To comment briefly on the original topic, in general I would probably choose a three-way over a two-way (assuming we're comparing roughly equal-cost, equal-size speakers). The exception would be a two-way designed in accordance with the principles embodied in the 4430.

My speakers, Earl Geddes' speakers, and Wayne Parham's speakers all conceptually trace back to the landmark model 4430. In somewhat different guise, so do Emerald Physics and Gradient. And I'm sure there are others. In fact, I find that speakers I like tend to be ones that incorporate at least some of the philosophy of the 4430, whether deliberately or not.

Duke
dealer/manufacturer

Macro, it doesnt look like I am the only one who feels this way.........does everyone else have to explain?

Chad - I feel pretty sure my speakers are better than the 4430 but that isn't really what I was getting at with my question to you. I thought you were pretty dismissive of Ditusa without explaining why you felt he was mistaken or which other speaker you would consider superior.

I'm finding out that a lot of vintage stuff holds its own very nicely when compared to today's supposed state of the art. There are also many cases of early products being reworked with new materials and modern technological advantages to perform beyond our wildest dreams. The Saskia Turntable is an excellent example.

We should not assume too quickly that older equipment is automatically inferior to the recommended components.

It is the entire "Best on the planet" that I take issue with, it doesnt matter if its old or new, from ADS to Wilson............best on the planet is an opinion and I dont agree.
Ask Dit to explain why and how they are without a doubt the "best speakers on the planet".

The planet is a big place.

My guess is the young man has not heard many speakers.

Why?

He's posted into 13 threads and every single post is a shill job for JBL.

That demonstrates a remarkable lack of experience.

Note to Ditusa: you are far too irrelevant to affect my business.