Is the 2.5 way speaker the ideal home speaker?


Time for what I hope is another fun thread. 

One type of speaker which is actually pretty common but which gets little press / attention here on audiogon is the 2.5 way. 

A 2.5 way speaker is almost a 3-way, but it isn't. It is a speaker with 3 drivers, but instead of a tweeter, midrange and woofer (TMW) it lacks a true midrange. The "midrange" is really a mid-woofer, that shares bass duties with the woofer. Often these two drivers are identical, though in the Focal Profile 918 the midwoofer and woofer were actually different drivers with the same nominal diameter (6"). 

The Monitor Audio 200 is a current example of the concept, but I am sure there are many others. It's also quite popular in kit form. One of the most high-end kits I know of is the Ophelia based on a ScanSpeak Be tweeter and 6" Revelator mid-woofers. I haven't heard them, but I am in eternal love with those mid-woofers. I believe the original plans come from the German speaker building magazine Klan Ton. 

However many other kits are also available

But regardless of kit, or store purchased, are you a 2.5 way fan? Why or why not? 

Best,


Erik 
erik_squires
Most of the human voice in singing operates from 80 for very low bass male voice to around 1500 which is above natural female vocals to maybe someone trying to hit an extreme note to impress.
Everything that Erik has quoted throughout this thread is correct.
A couple of things that I thought of reading through the thread.
**Crossing a tweeter low: sometimes its a no brainer, the mid has a dip or peak and you need the tweeter to cover that range for a smooth frequency transfer... Other times, I have listened to the mid and the tweeter both at a given frequency and thought the tweeter sounded better and chose to cross lower for that reason.
The rule of thumb for how low you can cross a tweeter is 2x its resonance at 12db per octave. This can be broken depending on tweeter, but it is a good general rule to follow.
For me an optimal in theory speaker would be a 3 way crossed somewhere around 80 on bottom and 2200 to 3k on top. This keeps the deep bass off the mid which really helps keep it clean and it also keeps the crossover out of any critical vocal region. Of course finding perfect parts to put into practice are not always so easy.
Erik, you’ve done a great job with this thread. Getting folks to understand a 2.5 way vs a 3 way isn’t always easy.
Tim
This has been a great thread for me to understand a little bit better about something I enjoy. Thanks Eric for the thread and Tim with your long term experience in speaker building for all your supporting information.
Very good post , helped to clarify things I kinda , sorta knew .
I'll give you a joke I just heard on the local jazz station .
Announcer was interviewing a local retired trumpet player who still does some sub and gigs around the Twin Cities .
The dude had once played for Lawrence Welk , both of them rolled off the names of some pretty good musicians who played for the bubble man over the years . DJ kinda beat around the bush as to why so many good players
played the corn ball . Trumpet man said , "you have to be a hell of a musician to play that bad all the time "  !
Well I am a huge 2.5 way fan. My fav are the Wilson Benesch. As suggested they use the same size midrange as woofer and work very hard to create a woofer that is as fast as the mid range so there is no loss of coherence. The woofer does woof and the mid because it is 7" can go down to 500hz. I think unlike many 2.5 way speakers the WB's midrange goes all the way up to 5000 kHz and this covers almost the entire midrange with male voices and cellos sounding very full and rich.
@timlub

Everything that Erik has quoted throughout this thread is correct.

Thank you kindly.

@marqmike

This has been a great thread for me to understand a little bit better about something I enjoy. Thanks Eric for the thread

Glad to be of service! What makes these threads interesting is the wide variety of experience and expertise everyone brings to them.

Best,

Erik