Sonic Differences Between 2-Way and 3-Way Speakers


I have owned a succession of 2-way loudspeakers. I have read comments suggesting that there are certain things 2-way speakers excel at and other things that 3-ways do better. What have I been missing?
Ag insider logo xs@2xdrubin
Hi Bruce, I noticed in another thread you used to own Spica Tc50s. I own the Spica Angelus, and they're wonderful for most classical. However my live blues recordings (for which the Spicas also do a stellar job on midrange) come to life now I've added a REL subwoofer.

Now I'm not trying to pick a fight, but do you think ALL classical music does not have low frequencies ? What about tympani? I think this has a low frequency component.

I also listen to quite a lot of choral music with organ backing, and those low organ pipes really need the sub.

I guess it's down to taste in music, but you're right that there are some great designs out there. It's such a shame spica is not still in business.
Okay, they can both be great, or suck, depending on how well they are done, and what parts are used. There is not one speaker system in the world that is not a compromise. None. You are compromising something with any design you choose, regardless of what it costs.

Since the 2-ways are getting "picked on" at the moment, if you'd like, I could tear a hole a mile wide, in the 3-way design, by pointing out the plethora of problems with them. I can also do the same with my single-driver system, 2-way, 4-way, subs and sats, and so on.

The bottom line that I've gotten out of the numerous threads regarding speakers on this forum, is that different people like different strengths and can accept different weaknesses in speakers.

It breaks down into 2 main categories, bass lovers, and those who can live with less bass, although not much less. A bass lover will accept what the added driver and crossover complexity will do to the sound, to get his level of deep bass response. One who will accept less bass will do that to get the coherence he wants out of his 2-way, or 1-way.

Oh, I can already hear it. "What do you mean that my 3-way isn't coherent?!". It may be. But likely not as coherent as a less complex speaker design. In a cost no object speaker, maybe the 3 way will be as coherent, but there will be alot of money involved. Not everyone has that amount of money. Excellent bass response is expensive. Probably the most expensive and difficult thing to get in a speaker design. So many would choose to accept a 40-50Hz bottom end, and save a large amount of money, and get a more coherent sound for the money that they can spend.

The woofers are the most expensive driver generally. They also require a large box size and bracing for lower bass. This translates into money. Added crossover costs more. Added design complexity costs more. For a given price, say about $4k, you can get better quality parts and design for your money in a 2-way, if you can live with higher than 20Hz bottom end. To get the same quality in a 3-way with deep bass response, you are going to about double the cost to $8k. And you still may lose something in the bargain, because added complexity means more likelihood of error, or problems.

There are some things, like deep bass response that most 2-way, and 1-way speakers will never do as good as a quality 3-way, but folks, and I know you hate to hear this, there are some things that a 1-way or 2-way speaker will do, that a 3-way never will do as well. Like point-source imaging. Lack of driver overlap, and no(1-way) or less(2-way)crossover distortion. You may think that your 3-way is perfect, but that is not right. It has problems in those areas no matter how good it is.

So what I'm saying is, buy what you like. You are the one who has to listen to it. Convincing us that a certain type of speaker is better than another is chasing your tail. In truth, you are only exhanging one set of problems for another. The problems that bother you the least, and the strengths that you require the most, will be your kind of speaker, no matter what I, or anyone else will say.
Seandtaylor99 is right about 2-way design constraint. 3-way or higher do offer drivers to operate in linear region where they are designed for. But like everyone knows, cross over is extremely complicated to design in 2-way already, 3-way is a million times more difficult. In electrical term, we called impedance because it's freq & phase combined.

You will also notice the best speaker on earth usually employee drivers from ONE manufacture. When manufacture design and build drivers, they apply their know-how from one to another and tend to behave similarly in electrical term. So designing a speaker with mulitiple drivers is easier when drivers are from one source.

Among all the speakers I have owned, my all time favorite were Sonus Faber Extrema & Dynaudio Confidence 5. A 2-way & a 3-way. Extrema got everything right, but C5 made everything better. So yes, a well designed 3-way can sound better than 2-way.

If adding a sub solve all the problems, I doubt manufactures can sell those $10k+ speakers as easily as they had. Till this day, I still haven't heard a sub that fully integrated to main speakers seamlessly. My last sub was a REL Stadium III and I ran it very conservatively (in volume) to make integration easier. Even then, I could still hear it from time to time.
For most...2-ways in a small room...such as hi end Brit monitors...are really the most cost effective way to get coherent sound and precise imaging (even with the lack of bass argument)...decent 3-ways really start with the Vandy 3 series...and as everyone knows...this is the 2k range...and if you factor in you dont need a sub...and have the room...then a 3-way design would be more appealing...