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

Showing 4 responses by seandtaylor99

There seem to be some shocking simplifications in people's responses. A two way will cost less, given equivalent quality components. However a two way places a severe constraint on the low frequency driver .. it must shift enough air to provide bass, but it must also cover the midrange frequencies that are critical for imaging. The advantage of a 3 way system is that the lowest driver can have quite a low roll off frequency and handle the shifting of a lot of air. The mid range (which can now be a smaller cone than in a 2 way design, and can therefore be crossed at a higher frequency with the tweeter) does not have to handle power, not does it have to be crossed in the high mid range, so could theoretically produce a purer midrange. Finally the tweeter comes in at a higher frequency than in a 2 way design, because of the smaller midrange, and so now this opens up the possibility of ribbon tweeters, super-tweeters and the like that give a beautiful and extended HF.

I own a 3 way design (Heybrook Sextet) and a 2 way design (Spica Angelus) and both are great, and different. The imaging is similar on both (very good on both) but the Heybrooks have much more at the frequency extremes. The spicas really need a subwoofer for anything other than chamber music.

I don't think one could say that 2 way design is better than 3 way or vice-versa, and 3 ways don't seem to come into play below $2000 per pair, but I can definitely see advantages of a 3 way design, even if they are more expensive and complex to pull off.
"The bass response of a given design is the easiest to psychoacoustically adjust for.In other words one won't miss it or pine for it's absence or whatever if the speaker is very good in all other frequencies"
I'm sorry .. is this personal opinion, or scientific fact? I have to say that my system is much more enjoyable since I added the subwoofer, and live recordings of some blues bands are in a whole new league since the sub adds the scale of the venue. That is my personal opinion ... if you don't have good bass to below 40Hz you're missing out.
Drubin .. I don't think there is a characteristic 3 way sound, since 3 way designs can vary a lot. My heybooks are almost like stand mounts with a connected sub, since the LF driver is in its own ported enclosure, with the two HF drivers in a small sealed enclosure. Other designs have all three cones driving the same enclosure. I must admit that since I change equipment roughly once every 10 years my experience is quite limited.

If I were to search for a new pair of speakers I would simply pick my price and listen to a number of alternative designs. I wouldn't try to narrow down on the basis of number of drivers, until I heard, and could convince myself that I preferred designs with a certain number of drivers, be that 1,2, 3 or more. All designs can be done well, and all can be done badly. To say that one is always better than another would be like saying that a V8 is always superior to a straight six, or a flat four in a sports car (or vice-versa).
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.