That is a well-established scientific fact, yes, although I'm not sure about the "dominates" part. It matters.
You cannot cut off the part about high quality speakers. The off-axis response is essentially the only thing that distinguishes genuinely high quality speakers but this is not the case for lower quality speakers with insufficient cone area, too wide a driver passband and such which introduce audible distortions into the direct sound. It is why studios allocate most of their resources to controlling the indirect sound and the larger well established studio speaker manufacturers are reasonably content to use well designed and manufactured drivers from third parties rather than investing in developing their own to get an edge in terms of technical performance. (There are of course other factors like marketing, supply, quality control,... when deciding on internal or external manufacture of drivers.)
Here is what I pose to folks about the "angle" issue (point source). Suppose you had just two instrumentalists come to your house to play a piece for just flute and cello. Say the cello guy is sitting down and the flute player standing, so the emanation of sound from the two instruments was some vertical distance apart (this happens in an orchestra too just more instruments). This is the way you would be actually hearing the piece. Even though its perhaps recorded with one mic, then you play it back through you speakers, with the xover most of the cello comes out the woofer and most of the flute out of the tweeter. So that wouldn't be a point source either. With rock, bands might place the various speakers on the stage (across and stacked in various fashions) with instruments and vocals divided up who knows how. There is not an "industry standard". This type of example can be applied to choirs with various voice ranges (and their harmonics) in different places.
This is true but you generally cannot control the room aspect, only the direct sound from your speakers. ("Honey we are NOT putting that acoustic padding on the side walls!") 🙂
wow this thread is tiresome.
-power response can be better with smaller mid in a 3 way
-dedicated mid drivers can be better with fewer compromises than a mid/woofer
o.p. still has not identified what he thought were great sounding inexpensive 2 ways
-power response can be better with smaller mid in a 3 way
-dedicated mid drivers can be better with fewer compromises than a mid/woofer
o.p. still has not identified what he thought were great sounding inexpensive 2 ways
Agree with these, I have built 3 way too, still have the more complex xover issue. Alexium though said he was a noob and in that context you can certainly build a good speaker with a 2-way (and add a sub if you want more bass), and that can be easier for a DIYer and less costly. I didn't necessarily say all 2 ways were inexpensive, just can be less so than 3 ways for a DIY project.
For expensive, how about a B&W 705 S3 or inexpensive a JBL Stage A120...many other examples.
1. I have.
2. I understand that in the low budget segment 2-way speakers have a clear advantage of being cheaper (for many reasons), so it makes sense that a 2-way can use better drivers, better enclosure, and come out ahead of a 3-way with the same cost. But I feel that around $1000-1500 there would be a strong bias towards 3-way speakers if they were a clear-cut choice for extracting better sound. But I'm not seeing that. Sure, there are many 3-ways in this price range, but mostly floor-standers, often using a beefier bass section to extend low-end response rather than optimizing the rest of the frequency range. In other words, their third extra band is in the lower frequencies, not in the mid. As for the mid, they're still using the same midwoofers and tweeters (e. g. 5.25") as the corresponding 2-way bookshelf from the same line. This is, of course, not true for every single model, but it's the prevailing approach.
Last edited:
every major studio have both type of speakers: nearfield monitors 2 way, and 3 way mains.
ive tried dozens of commercial two way for over 10 years and eventually gave up and build myself a pair of Mains because commercial mains are around 20k and more.
Nothing can replace a 15" in a BIG cabinet. as long as you have never auditioned such speaker, talking about it makes no sense
So what was your question again? seems like you have all the info you need, just comes down to your personal preference in the scenario you sight.
this is typically a diy forum, so my info is always based on diy builds
At around $1000(ish) well designed examples of commercial mass produced 3 ways start to outperform 2 ways in terms of technical performance at standard levels in an acoustically reasonable room. A touch less for DIY but not by much because DIY isn't particularly cost effective at the budget end. A 2 way using a 5.25" midwoofer is not able to play low frequencies cleanly at standard levels in a room or midrange frequencies for that matter should it attempt to reproduce any low frequencies. The laws of physics are the problem rather than anything to do with the quality of drivers. In order for an expensive 2 way or small 3 way to be relevant requires the objective to be something other than maximising high fidelity in a room at standard levels. For example, sitting close at a desk, listening quietly rather than at standard levels, wanting low output at low frequencies because of room boom, small size, etc... Nothing wrong with constraints (apart from not mentioning them!).
OP - The basic problem is that the wavelengths of audible sounds span a 1000:1 range. 1 KHz is approximately 1 foot wavelength.
A point-source driver needs to be small relative to the wavelengths of the highest frequency sounds that it is reproducing. At the same time, it needs to move enough air and have a lower resonant frequency than the lowest frequencies it is reproducing. A two-way system can reduce the span to 30:1, while a three-way system can reduce the span to 10:1 (these ratios are not strictly followed).
A line-source speaker can do better (I own two-way Magnepans).
Ed
A point-source driver needs to be small relative to the wavelengths of the highest frequency sounds that it is reproducing. At the same time, it needs to move enough air and have a lower resonant frequency than the lowest frequencies it is reproducing. A two-way system can reduce the span to 30:1, while a three-way system can reduce the span to 10:1 (these ratios are not strictly followed).
A line-source speaker can do better (I own two-way Magnepans).
Ed
A couple aspects though in using a 15" in a big cabinet - and in years past I built big cabs with 15s. It depends how high up you allow the 15 to go, as the size, mass and stiffness of such a large cone presents challenges for frequencies above low bass. Cones have both intermodulation and diffraction problems, especially large ones. Sing through a 15" cone, and your voice will change in color. Then big cabinets have larger panels that can be more subject to resonating, so either very thick dense materials and/or lots of bracing. Then you have this big thing to fit into your listening room ("gee honey that's really huge??") and it is really heavy to move, scratches the floor, leaves marks in the rug, et al. 😉
Smaller subs can move the same amount of air with smaller enclosures. Back in the day, the "materials science" was less developed and long excursion drivers with low distortion (overhang) were not available. Of course today, we can take care of low bass 100 Hz and below with smaller sizes, and then when you address above 100 Hz, smaller and more transient mid woofer drivers can do the trick.
a good 15 with smooth response and a proper crossover can certainly go to 300hz, higher if crossing to a horn to match directivity better.
I use my 15" up to 300hz
I disagree again with most of the points you make, as they are false.
oh, you build many 15" cabs? many? hmmm
Yes I agree with 300 Hz but IMO avoid going too far into the vocal range. But why not say a 10-12 in. sub that can move as much air, cross at 80-100 Hz, and let a smaller mid woofer take it from there? BTW, I don't like horns as while they project well, and are good for "PA", they also can color like a cone can.
because 10" still pump much less air then a 15". ditto 12. Im debating whther for my next project im going with a 18" woofer or dual 15"
my system is a 3 way, first order xo, hi efficiency. using a 15" was pretty much forced as I needed the 95db efficiency of the Bass to match the mid. theres not much 10 or 12" that are 95db efficient
y'all are arguing personal preference and then stating it as fact. you can make great systems in many ways.
But not all ways. You can under use more than enough but you can't over use less than enough.