ok, I can see Your point
my point is that - two-way = three problems, three-way = six problems
it is difficult to get a two-way right but it's possible, it is possible to get a three-way right but more difficult and a three-way got right is not per se better than a two-way got right
in practice it all depends on what particular drivers one has, one has to work with what one's got
Nothing is per se better than anything if it isn't done right. But that we already know.
Good three way is better than good two way every day of the week. If both done properly (quality drivers used and good engineering of cabinet and xover) three way will be better in every possible way. Four way even better but i consider three drivers per loudspeaker is the least amount of drivers that has to be used to cover the whole spectrum in a high quality manner. You can do it with less but then it is not high quality and loudspeaker will fall short at some part of the spectrum.
There are good sounding two ways, don't get me wrong, but every two way is defficient (more or less - depends on the amount of atention dedicated to it and driver quality) at some part of the audible spectrum.
Last edited:
Phase distortion seems to be most audible in the range where the ear uses phase to guess locations, ie the lower range.
On the other hand summation errors caused by crossovers (which has nothing to do with the global phase shift throughout a crossover) is probably most audible where the ear is most sensitive.
Sure.......the farther we get from a single point source playing 20-20, the more compromises. I get that.
Could we agree that single point source driver doesn't exists? And if so, that leaves us with a two way where it's best to minimize the harm done. I would choose to cross high........4khz or better for the reasons stated in this thread. That leaves A LOT of work for the midwoofer. Surely in this example IF I were to stay Fullrange 2way, multiples would be needed.....and more compromises...and around and around we go.
Personally I find a mushrooming power response worse than a crossover point in the 2k region. That would leave a 4k crossed 2way limited to 4" midwoofs to avoid mushrooming.
No, to everyones ears
Oh but of course it does make it a threeway. If you need three drivers to cover the whole spectrum then it is a three way. It is a three way that one is trying to build and in the process of choosing drivers decides approximately where xover points will be (based on distortion measurements and off axis response). If you decide xover shoud be at say 80Hz then you can play with woofers positions in room.
That is what i was talking about. For two way you can make it great midrange od great bass. You can't make both of them high quality without the third driver. You either add dedicated midrange or you add sub but there is no way arround it.
Last edited:
Agreed.....the desired performance of a speaker is individual to each of use choosing the compromises we are willing to live with. Yours and mine may not align, and that thinking passes into the commercial speaker realm where there's a healthy variety of systems.
I neglected to mention the possibility of crossing at 1khz or lower which solves most of the 4khz issues but solves others. If you look at closely, it's a classic see-saw where there's no ideal solution above or below 2khz....and hence we have a huge crop of two ways doing it right in the middle, balancing the board. The point of this thread when I started it was to challenge that protocol.
Earl makes some excellent pros for the low crossover option......which creates compromises the HiFi community can't live with....namely the compression driver for HF reproduction. I don't have the answer to that one!😕
I think if we look at this responsibly, the ideal solution is subwoofers....multiples which allow for the system to work better with the room and to relieve midwoofers of power compression and distortion. So is a two way that crosses outside of the 1-4khz region with multiple subs the optimal home playback system?......I think so, but which side of the 1-4khz do you want to be on?
I'm still far away of the idea that high efficiency loudspeakers (that i'm interested in) can be made without midrange compression driver in a horn that can fulfil the demands you've made - xover point out of 1-4KHz.
If we agree that subs are ideal solution, that leaves us with the rest loudspeaker that has xover lower than 1KHz or higher than 4KHz. In the first case you need big horn or waveguide, and in the second you need small enough drivers that can play up to 4KHz and down to 80-100Hz without serious issues.
I'd take the large horn/waveguide routhe but for bassmid i would not put anything bigger than 12". Compression driver in a horn or wg with 12" bassmid would be great thing but the bassmid has to be with Mms < 50gr, Le < 1mH, SPL > 95dB for xover point in the 1KHz ballpark.
I've tried large format wg with 15" bass, xover point at about 950-1KHz and it sounded ok but when my friends and i put three way loudspeaker next to it (same bass, but with 6" midrange) we could hear everything that was missing there in midrange deffinition (from about 400 to 900Hz) that 15" just can't provide because of heavy and thick membrane, heavy vc etc. (Mms-107gr in that particular case). There were enough midrange but the deffinition of it was poor - until we played the three way next to it.
Last edited:
I used to have a pair of Amphion HeliumII and a single sub as my main system. It has a 5" and 1" waveguide crossed around 2500Hz, exceptionally smooth directivity. Mid and treble was honey but low+midbass was anemic. 6½" and DXT crossed at 1800Hz sounded overall much better in bass and almost as sweet/precise in mid/high. ER18DXT does not have as even directivity as Amhion but I'm not sure how much that explains.
Anyway, we have to make compromises all over with "domestic" speakers. It is the thing that makes this hobby so charming - and endless!
Anyway, we have to make compromises all over with "domestic" speakers. It is the thing that makes this hobby so charming - and endless!
According to Jens Blauert's research (Blauert is president and vice-chairman of the German Acoustical Society and member of the German Standards Association amongst many other similar organizations) our chance to correctly locate a sound of 1200Hz in front of us is near zero. It would seem that 1200Hz might be a good candidate to crossover low.
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richtu...diaviewer/Datei:Akustik_-_Richtungsbänder.svg
Can't find an english version but the green curve is for sounds from the front, x-axis frequency and y-axis the likelihood of correctly locating a sound in %.
PS: For some reason the link comes up black for me so here is the link to the complete page:
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richtungsbestimmende_Bänder
Last edited:
And when you look at the JBL legacy series (43** series studio monitors) almost all of the models had xover frequency at about 1200Hz between mid and compression driver in a horn.
"It would seem that 1200Hz might be a good candidate to crossover low."
Ha, I can see this in another way (and I have played lots of sine sweeps lately...) My ears rig in these frequencies always, single driver seem like ringing all around. I see more late reflections in my decay measurements too (windows?).
- It is perhaps WISE to have lots of directivity around 1000-1200Hz, just because of poor localization!
In this case xo around 2000Hz to T might be favourable. Unfortunately my listening experience of complete speakers does not support this idea.
Ha, I can see this in another way (and I have played lots of sine sweeps lately...) My ears rig in these frequencies always, single driver seem like ringing all around. I see more late reflections in my decay measurements too (windows?).
- It is perhaps WISE to have lots of directivity around 1000-1200Hz, just because of poor localization!
In this case xo around 2000Hz to T might be favourable. Unfortunately my listening experience of complete speakers does not support this idea.
So do my 12" Tannoys. ;-)
I have heard it frequently that the 12" are the best sounding DCs. Personally I've got no opinion on that as I've never owned other sizes but may be the 1.2k crossover point hides little nasties the 15s and 10s don't as they cross lower and higher respectively.
This is purely hypothetical of course.
I support the idea of 12" coaxial Tannoy being superior to 15" Tann. I'm one of the advocates of it 🙂
I think that only 15" Tannoy that i have not listened is Westminster that has 15" in a horn and i didn't listen to PA series K3808/9. Every one of them had some problems with midrange deffinition from 500 and up. It just doesn't sound right. Out of 12" i listened to DMT 12 and Cheviots and they both sounded great in the midrange. I haven't got the time to listen to DMT 12 more carefully but friend that owns them says that tweeter is a little "problematic" - how so i don't know. But 12" being more natural than 15" is in line with my experience that 15" driver can't get that high without problems. How serious are they depends on quality of it and it's characteristics.
I think that only 15" Tannoy that i have not listened is Westminster that has 15" in a horn and i didn't listen to PA series K3808/9. Every one of them had some problems with midrange deffinition from 500 and up. It just doesn't sound right. Out of 12" i listened to DMT 12 and Cheviots and they both sounded great in the midrange. I haven't got the time to listen to DMT 12 more carefully but friend that owns them says that tweeter is a little "problematic" - how so i don't know. But 12" being more natural than 15" is in line with my experience that 15" driver can't get that high without problems. How serious are they depends on quality of it and it's characteristics.
Last edited:
The HiFi community can't live with compression drivers? Why is that? Their supposed poor sound quality results from the poor horns that people use, not the drivers on them.
And the hifi community as a whole don't tend to like horns either. Go figure.
I would say though that this has been changing in the last few years, wave-guides have become far more acceptable and in a lot of cases actually wanted. Once you're using a wave-guide, it's a naturally progression to want to try one with a compression driver at some point. The trouble here is that there isn't a lot of documentation and third party measurements on them. If you're going to use a compression driver and want to actually go with a 800-1000Hz xover then you're going to need to buy the right one.
I would say though that this has been changing in the last few years, wave-guides have become far more acceptable and in a lot of cases actually wanted. Once you're using a wave-guide, it's a naturally progression to want to try one with a compression driver at some point. The trouble here is that there isn't a lot of documentation and third party measurements on them. If you're going to use a compression driver and want to actually go with a 800-1000Hz xover then you're going to need to buy the right one.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.