2-way vs. 3-way

Duke,

Thanks for your comments. I agree that things have improved since this landmark design.

One thing I was curious as to what is the difference between a flat chested bi-radial horn and a Dolly Parton bi-radial horn ;-)

Does one horn sound more chesty perhaps?

What causes the 3% distortion in the upper midrange treble -is that the horn itself ringing or something else?

No speaker can be best on the planet until someone thinks it is.

Perhaps you missed the conditions I gave for being able to do it "ALL" (you missed that too) - "cover the enormous bandwidth with two drivers and do this with low distortion and even dispersion at the higher SPL levels necessary to sit far back"

If you disagree "in general" (not talking about a specific speaker) then please explain?

Yes, I think there are quite a few two-ways that can meet that challenge very well indeed (*certainly* if one considers any type of horn-loading, which I won't).

Neglecting horn-loading, Audio Note AN/Es can play quite load quite cleanly flat to 30 Hz with quite substantial bass content below that.

The two-way Kharmas and dual-concentric Tannoys can do these things as well - although neither with the same bass extension (save perhaps the large 12" dual-concentric TD12; I had the TD10 which was solid to 35-40 Hz).

Obviously, if *max* SPL is the goal, a three-way gives an advantage in sheer driver area, of course. However, for most music and most tastes, well-made two ways can be very satisfying indeed - certainly, unless your goal is rock at 110 dB.

I listen to mostly jazz, 12' from AN/Es in a large room, at 90-95 dB peaks, and there isn't a three-way of any kind I'd take over them. And if I didn't have them I'd be using another high-quality two-way (or single driver back horn).

For me, the advantages of two-ways far outweigh any advantage another driver and crossover give.

Well said Bill (audiofeil)

Paul,

I understand you prefer two way for all applications because of the one less crossover - less compromise - that makes sense - speakers are often a balance of compromises - like how do you place the crossover away from teh critical midrange if you have only one - however, you appear to agree with me that

Obviously, if *max* SPL is the goal, a three-way gives an advantage in sheer driver area, of course.

...I would add that producing clean dynamics in a large room is the main reason I have a three way. A two way would be fine otherwise. I owned two ways for many years and still do - they are even better than a three way for nearfield listening. I have absolutely nothing against two ways - although my list of favored two ways that can produce even dispersion without a "midrange scoop" isn't all that long - perhaps a dozen or so!