19 replies to this topic

[Kevlar]

Just curious to see if there is anyone out there who believes that a good pair of 6" 2 ways can beat a set of 3 ways in an sq comp.

I haven't been able to yet, and I am starting to think that I may be waisting my time entering sq events when I am against 3 way's.

What is everyones general thoughts???

[Dave]

id say that its quite possible to win with 2ways. just look at the rainbow audio top end splits. regarded as the best set of splits in the world and have a price tag of 8000 AUS or something. and there a 2way

[roughcactus]

It's not what you have that wins the shows it's how you use it...

speaker positioning, tuning, install quality etc..etc...all add up...

3 way splits are not neccessary to win a comp...you just have to make the best of what you have...

[Maz]

My opionion. If the woofer is not reaching Xmax then it should provide plenty of clarity with the midrange.

However if your system is SQL orientated and the woofers exceed Xmax, or 8inch woofers are usedto keep up with the subs, then a seperate midrange would make a noticable difference.

Having a seperate midrange would also allow you to push the midbass drivers harder.

[the[K]id]

2 ways can use 8's as well remember

[ultim8DTM5]

Quote

Originally posted by roughcactus:
It's not what you have that wins the shows it's how you use it...

speaker positioning, tuning, install quality etc..etc...all add up...

3 way splits are not neccessary to win a comp...you just have to make the best of what you have...

 

The Cactus is on the ball.

[Maz]

Quote

Originally posted by roughcactus:
It's not what you have that wins the shows it's how you use it...

So true about other things in life

[Doigal]

maz - best thing that i've heard about that one:

"Its not the size, its not even how its used, its how often it gets used"

As for three ways - install counts for everything. If you can justify it, and have the expertise to pull it off then go for it!

[STIK79]

Somebody once said (damon I think) "It's easy to make a cow into a hamburger, but a lot harder to make the cow again from the hamburger"

ie. The more pieces you chop the sound up into the harder it is to reassemble those pieces into the original music.

I tend to agree, after all wouldn't the best piece of speaker be a single entity producing the whole audible spectrum?

[edit] bah fuxored the saying up

[ November 04, 2003, 14:50: Message edited by: STIK79 ]

[T-Bro]

neither sounds better, some of the nicest sounding systems use 2-ways, many win SQ comps. 3-way offers more flexibility in midrange placement etc, but there are seperation issues. i think in the end you'll find both can offer great sound quality.

[Pyroay]

I agree with T-Bro. Both 2 way and 3 ways have there advantages.

2 ways are often easier to place and keep the mid and tweeter close together for nice tight imaging. There is also less playing with crossovers settings and level setting. Not to mention often (not always) cheaper, less amplifier power required, more variety to choose from.

I have had both and currently enjoy a set of 3 ways which i find can be pushed louder and provide a more solid punchy midbass up front.

I found when i had 2 ways once you get the volume up a bit (and i have a fair bit of road noise with turbo, exhaust BOV etc...) the midrange cone is moving a good amount of air and some of the midrange frequencys suffered.

[Cyberpunky]

with out getting into the 3 way V 2 way thing, as Rough cactus summed it up nicely, I disagree with the cow anology.

Dynaudio has a top of range home speaker that is basically as good as they can make and nice houses cost less, and it uses 9 drivers per speaker cabinet to cover 20-20K. The reality is there is no one perfect speaker that can do the 20-20K thing and so we need to use several drivers to cover the bandwidth properly.

Anyway on the 3 way V 2 way front stage issue, even in a worse case secnario, and you lost a few points for lack of midbass relative to a competitor with 3 ways, there are many points left to be gained in imaging and stageing, spectral balance etc and so you may give up 1 or 2 points but if you get the rest right, you should win in other ares, and if the other guy does all that well too, then unfortunatly(for you) that competitor has a better sounding system at the end of day and so should win.

I wouldnt go 2 way or 3 way, just to win, as its really about doing the best you can with what you can afford and choose to use. If you cant fit 3 ways then do the best you can with 2 ways, as at the end of the day its you who listens to what you have most of the time, and so you should have what you like to listen to, and if it happens to be competitive then even better, but you still have to live with the system.
peace
cyberpunky

[SQBOY]

I tend to think that the arguement of 2 way versus 3 way has more to do with installation then the actual merits of both systems. I agree with both sides, yes 3 ways can "spread the load" in the 20 to 20 spectrum thus allowing each driver to operate in it's "comfort" zone but yes I also agree that a 3 way system has more troubles with speaker location and therefore have troubles with staging and imaging.

However, I think that if you have a good 3 way speaker (eg Dynaudio System 360) AND it's installed well, then you have the luxuary of angling each speaker (and bascially speaking, each speakers range of reproduction) anyway you want. So basically if you are having problems with midbass, you can alter the placement of the midbass speaker and not change the midrange positioning. Also, a secret to a good 3 way system is the crossover. I have heard 3 ways sound worse when a customer chooses to go full active and tries to tune him/herself. Bascially, how each speaker rolls into each other (both frequency and rate of roll off) can affect how they sound together. So to sum things up (god I'm harking on in this post!!) if you trust your installer, and he/she has the skill to pull it off, then a 3 way can offer more adjustablilty, tuneabilty and ultimately better sound - however if all the factors I've mentioned above aren't close to perfect (which a lot of times they aren't) then a 2 way can out perform the 3 way because there are less variables to stuff up!!

Just my 2.2c worth

[ November 07, 2003, 14:49: Message edited by: SQBOY ]

[-DJ-]

yeah i'm a bit partial to 2 ways myself, jsut out of pure simplicity and effectiveness. the saying in high end circles "the more pieces you chop it into, the harder it is to put back together" is somewhat silly tho.

i've heard brilliant 3 ways. i've heard brilliant 2 ways. god i was floored when i heard the Dynaudio evidence masters ($128,000). it all comes down to your application and the way your gear is implemented.

having said that, i'd take some system240esotars over system360s any day....

d

[SQBOY]

Quote

Originally posted by DjHatton:
having said that, i'd take some system240esotars over system360s any day....
d

Can't say I would argue with that, but with that tweeter, comes a whole new set of installation challanges. Must say that the Esotars are up there in my favourites list though....