EDIT: I'm leaving my whole original post below for posterity, but if you're new to this thread please skim the whole thing for my other posts if you're going to respond - I didn't do a very good job of explaining this idea in this first post.
This is being posted with the best, non-sarcastic, friendly intentions, I swear it.
Is any single-driver design actually superior to a 2-way with the same midwoofer size? A lot of people have strong opinions on this, no need to give them here, please. It's kind of the question at hand here, but still I don't really care about the ultimate theoretical answer, and certainly not a zillion subjective reports of random speakers.
Now, for me, any remotely competent single-driver speaker is out of the running for a reference level system because of dynamic SPL capability alone, so I don't talk about them much, and NEVER talk about the big $$ ones. I do have plenty of speakers I never listen to very loud, though, and right now I'm feeling curious.
I happen to think, at least when it comes to conventional drivers, eg. we're not talking electrostats or BMR, that the 2-way always wins. In fact (related to the prev. paragraph), I think that even just taking any existing single-driver design, a crossover/filter and tweeter could help, and that's a huge handicap because almost anyone would choose a different midwoofer if they knew they could have a tweeter.
So... anyone have any ideas for a "challenge" of sorts to make me eat my words? I'm genuinely interested in eating them. On the other hand, I don't want to spend a ton of money doing it, and nobody else is going to try it if it's expensive, so I might as well just make it up. Is there an affordable "full range" design out there that supposedly can't be improved with a tweeter, and/or maybe a filter on the main driver?, and does anyone want to try it with me?. I'm good for $200-300 or so, at least, but it would be a lot more fun if at least one more person was experimenting in parallel. What do you guys think? Not fancy enough on that budget? edit: I just realized I posted this in the multi-way forum... hmm.... hmmm......
This is being posted with the best, non-sarcastic, friendly intentions, I swear it.
Is any single-driver design actually superior to a 2-way with the same midwoofer size? A lot of people have strong opinions on this, no need to give them here, please. It's kind of the question at hand here, but still I don't really care about the ultimate theoretical answer, and certainly not a zillion subjective reports of random speakers.
Now, for me, any remotely competent single-driver speaker is out of the running for a reference level system because of dynamic SPL capability alone, so I don't talk about them much, and NEVER talk about the big $$ ones. I do have plenty of speakers I never listen to very loud, though, and right now I'm feeling curious.
I happen to think, at least when it comes to conventional drivers, eg. we're not talking electrostats or BMR, that the 2-way always wins. In fact (related to the prev. paragraph), I think that even just taking any existing single-driver design, a crossover/filter and tweeter could help, and that's a huge handicap because almost anyone would choose a different midwoofer if they knew they could have a tweeter.
So... anyone have any ideas for a "challenge" of sorts to make me eat my words? I'm genuinely interested in eating them. On the other hand, I don't want to spend a ton of money doing it, and nobody else is going to try it if it's expensive, so I might as well just make it up. Is there an affordable "full range" design out there that supposedly can't be improved with a tweeter, and/or maybe a filter on the main driver?, and does anyone want to try it with me?. I'm good for $200-300 or so, at least, but it would be a lot more fun if at least one more person was experimenting in parallel. What do you guys think? Not fancy enough on that budget? edit: I just realized I posted this in the multi-way forum... hmm.... hmmm......
Last edited:
Rules?
I have certainly heard well regarded 2 ways handily bettered by 1-ways.
dave
Here's a candidate for a full range that needs a tweeter AND it's a powerhouse for a 5" speaker.
Tang Band W5-1611SAF 5" Full Range Speaker 264-918
Tang Band W5-1611SAF 5" Full Range Speaker 264-918
If you use a smaller full range as the mid and tweeter and add a helper woofer XO'd below 200 Hz, that system will beat a conventional 2-way with XO at circa 1-2khz range for realism, imaging, etc due to inherent superiority in a phase/time/space-aligned driver that is free from the effects of a XO to mess with what the brain perceives. It may not win for high dynamic range SPL and complex orchestral or hard rock or hip/hop. If you think about how sound is recorded using a 1-way microphone, reproducing the music with a 1-way system will ultimately have a better chance of reproducing the signal recorded with a 1-way mic. No one uses a 2 or 3-way mic with filter bank XO's do they?
Very cool question.
While I don't know of a widebander that beats an excellent tweeter, the question I ask myself is: why is it (generally) so easy for inexpensive small-ish widebanders to out-perform expensive two-ways in the midrange?
P.S. I don't see how a typical two-way could ever be "reference level" for dynamics and SPL but I get what you're saying.
While I don't know of a widebander that beats an excellent tweeter, the question I ask myself is: why is it (generally) so easy for inexpensive small-ish widebanders to out-perform expensive two-ways in the midrange?
P.S. I don't see how a typical two-way could ever be "reference level" for dynamics and SPL but I get what you're saying.
Have you ever tried to use that full-range microphone as a speaker?
I am sure that a single fullrange wins, if we discuss about earphones! How does that sound from 1 meter distance?
When we listen in a room at distance of 2-3m (7-10') and peak spl 105- 115dBA we need at least a well done 3-way with minimum 10" bass. To make it simple, just to keep distortion at acceptable level.
Horns are a diffrent world.
I am sure that a single fullrange wins, if we discuss about earphones! How does that sound from 1 meter distance?
When we listen in a room at distance of 2-3m (7-10') and peak spl 105- 115dBA we need at least a well done 3-way with minimum 10" bass. To make it simple, just to keep distortion at acceptable level.
Horns are a diffrent world.
I just chanced apron this post but I have to say, what you wrote rings true with m 100%. Thanks for putting into words so clearly something so complex.respect
-What specific criteria are being set for 'superiority', 'improve[ment]' etc.?
-What are the design objectives?
Without establishing these baselines nothing productive can result, since all that is left is opinion. Generic statements e.g.
...get you nowhere without having these definitions. Either can have merit, but it is not a given & is design requirement / circumstance dependent.
-What are the design objectives?
Without establishing these baselines nothing productive can result, since all that is left is opinion. Generic statements e.g.
...get you nowhere without having these definitions. Either can have merit, but it is not a given & is design requirement / circumstance dependent.
Last edited:
IMHO that's because most common two-ways (expensive or otherwise, it matters little in this respect) are fundamentally flawed in having:
- a non-transient perfect crossover right in the middle of the ear's most sensitive band (2 - 3kHz)
- a serious directivity mismatch right in the middle of the ear's most sensitive band (2 - 3kHz)
- a serious dynamic mismatch right in the middle of the ear's most sensitive band (2 - 3kHz)
None of this is inevitable, but, alas, it is just accepted common practice to have a 6 - 8" cone "mid-woofer" cross over to a 1" dome tweeter...
Of course, to cross over much lower (e.g. 500 - 1kHz) would require a different "tweeter", such as a wide-band driver (e.g. 4" "full-range") or, heaven forbid, a compression driver + horn...
Sadly, most modern 3-way (and even many 4-way) speakers suffer from the same fundamental problem, as it's all too common to just use a woofer below 200-300Hz, and then the same 6 - 8" "mid-woofer" and 1" dome tweeter crossed at 2 -3kHz above that.
"Old school" 3 ways, using e.g. a good woofer up to 500 - 800 Hz + a real mid-range (be it cone, dome or horn) to 5 - 8kHz and a (super)Tweeter on top have mostly gone the way of the Dodo, but they were a better way to do it, IMO.
Marco
So basically, if you make it so it's no longer a single full range, it works a lot better. Sounds like stone soup to me.
Um, yep.
For live stuff in our venues, we tend to mic the kick drum twice (one mic inside, one out), taking the LF from the inside mic, and the "slap" sound from the outside mic.
Being able to mix between the two gets much closer to the sound of the actual drum being hit, as otherwise you'd need to avoid close micing to get them to sum acoustically. For live music, you pretty much have to close-mic things if you're running at any volume, or its feedback city and cables/mics everywhere.
FWIW, that then runs into a big 4-way Nexo Alpha system: 3x S2s, 6x B1s (the 15" ones), and 3x M3s, a side (IIRC - might be more).
Closest to reference I've ever heard: you can achieve the volume level of any event you're trying to reproduce, and it'll still sound good enough for me to sit back and enjoy the music.
Chris
To best demonstrate the advantages of a single-driver speaker within the budget. Seeking opinions what those advantages are and on drivers and designs that show them off best.
I wouldn't be proclaiming "superiority" or anything like that. I was imagining more like "here are some measurements, and here are some measurements with a change I made that I thought was a little better". It would then be cool if someone else was there to say "tried that, didn't like it, but then I did this, try this next".
The idea, though, is to TRY to end up with "Well I guess I can't seem to make this better [for its purpose] with a tweeter, can you?". There would be no definitive result, end, winner, etc.
Last edited:
So if the question is are there widebanders which don't need a tweeter and can play down to (let's say) ~80hz, and which can't be improved by a tweeter nor filter, i would say yes -- but they are a very select category of ~3-4 inch drivers for nearfield bookshelves with a sub.
Does that count? Because they basically -are- tweeters with a low Fs, or small midranges with good treble extension. Still dynamically challenged but pleasing at least to some, for certain music. But I'm not sure you'd be happy with them if you aren't already a wideband fan.
Does that count? Because they basically -are- tweeters with a low Fs, or small midranges with good treble extension. Still dynamically challenged but pleasing at least to some, for certain music. But I'm not sure you'd be happy with them if you aren't already a wideband fan.
Agreed... If you're sitting listening at that level, I'd hope it was a large room, because in my 15x12 living room, I've not gotten anywhere near that loud, and its been almost too loud. I'm 31 and already have slight hearing damage from playing in punk and metal bands. I wear earplugs as much as possible now to preserve what's left. I had to leave a friends living room the other day because of tinnitus... Why would you want to listen that loud?
- Status
- Not open for further replies.