2,2 half & 3 Way speakers

[bigpapy]

can any one explain the difference of 3 way and below speakers.

[gearyt]

A three way speaker has 3 diferent speakers and a crossover that seperates the frequencys and sends to the correct speaker

lows to a woofer, hi's to the tweeter, mids ....

[Johnny Vinyl]

Its to seperate the low-mid-hi frequancies from one another.

Some manufacturers use a 2-way design or a 3-way design and technically I suppose that should matter. However, in my opinion it doesn't. Whether or not its one design over another, good speakers are able to seperate the various frequancy ranges properly. And a speaker decision should not be made based on how many woofers, mid-ranges or tweeters are incorporated. Your ears should tell you !

[yourstupidgame]

It seems like 3-way speakers used to be a lot more popular 10-15 years ago. Now, most speakers are 2-way, even many large floorstanding speakers. First of all, is this observation true? Secondly, if so, why is that?

[bigpapy]

I ask that because I want to get a new towers for my setup the KEF IQ7 and they are 2 way and the ones I got rigth now the Infinity PrimusP362 are tree way I don't know if I will notice any difference,my sorrounds are KEF and the sound awesome also I want my towers match my center.Any one here owns tspeakers?

[Blu-Dog]

Originally Posted by yourstupidgame

It seems like 3-way speakers used to be a lot more popular 10-15 years ago. Now, most speakers are 2-way, even many large floorstanding speakers. First of all, is this observation true? Secondly, if so, why is that?

It's a true observation.

Speakers used to be 3-way, before subwoofers began carrying the load for low tones. Now, 2-way speakers can be made at lower cost, and you add the sub for deeper bass.

More expensive speakers are built with crossover circuits that split the sound up three ways. The drivers (each individual speaker) are more limited in sound range - delivering sound within a more closely defined range. So each driver handles sound in that narrower range, matched by the filters in the crossover circuit. These crossovers are more expensive, and the fancier they are, the more subject they are to damage by high power output.

Quality 3-way speakers have expensive crossovers for this reason. They can handle high power, and have a very sharp "rolloff" (the boundary between frequency ranges), optimizing the power delivered to each driver. These types of speakers sound great with conventional 2 channel stereo output, for example.

2-way speakers use simpler crossovers, with a wider rolloff between driver types, and generally don't deliver huge volume at lower frequencies. While a good 2-way speaker may deliver sound at very low frequencies, it usually isn't at high volume. They're optimized for high volume at higher frequencies, allowing subwoofers to carry the heavy load for low tones.

This is not to say that 2-way speakers aren't as good. Quite the opposite. Most now use two mid-range drivers to increase volume, and quality is very high. Currently, 3-way speakers of quality are generally very expensive, and preferred by audiophiles interested in 2 channel sound without subwoofers.

For the normal Home Theater user, 2-ways, with a good subwoofer, can deliver phenomenal sound.

[Blu-Dog]

Originally Posted by bigpapy

I ask that because I want to get a new towers for my setup the KEF IQ7 and they are 2 & half way and the ones I got rigth now the Infinity PrimusP362 are tree way I don't know if I will notice any difference,my sorrounds are KEF and the sound awesome also I want my towers match my center.Any one here owns tspeakers?

It looks like KEF is using a coaxial speaker arrangement, much like car audio speakers, with the tweeter located in the middle of the driver cone. This is fine, as long as the tweeter is of quality.

You should not notice any tonal problems with timbre matching; go for it, if you've listened to them and like the sound.

[Gohanto]

I agree with Blu-Dog about the quality needs on a good 3-way speaker and multiple crossovers, but don't agree that you'll have matching timbre across the front.

The front 3 speakers should always be as closely matched in every way as possible which goes beyond just matching the 3-day design. Having them from the same company and within the same line is preferable 99.9% of the time because that ensures that the drivers are the same size and mass, the crossover points are matched or at least complement each other, the response curves are close together, and that they match aesthetically.

Unless you rarely listen to 5.1 surround and mostly stick to stereo music listening, it's going to cause more harm than good to switch out only the L/R speakers.

[Blu-Dog]

Originally Posted by Gohanto

I agree with Blu-Dog about the quality needs on a good 3-way speaker and multiple crossovers, but don't agree that you'll have matching timbre across the front.

You may be right; I haven't heard KEF units in a while, and couldn't get a real idea of how the speakers are made to give an accurate determination.

Originally Posted by Gohanto

The front 3 speakers should always be as closely matched in every way as possible which goes beyond just matching the 3-day design. Having them from the same company and within the same line is preferable 99.9% of the time because that ensures that the drivers are the same size and mass, the crossover points are matched or at least complement each other, the response curves are close together, and that they match aesthetically.

Unless you rarely listen to 5.1 surround and mostly stick to stereo music listening, it's going to cause more harm than good to switch out only the L/R speakers.

I don't use timbre matching as a hard and fast rule. I know it's the current orthodoxy, but I really can't buy into it. Here's my reasons:

Sound Mix. The soundstage designed by the audio engineer usually has dialogue and some sound effects concentrated on the center. This is crucial, and the tonal output had to be clear - and to my ears, has to deliver full range sound, with good lows as well as highs. Brightness is important to dialogue (slight whispers, violins, stuff like that) to discern what is said. Rights and lefts are relegated to ambient sounds, even when the soundfield sweeps (a jet crossing from left to right, for example).

Spatial effects. The entire sound field should enhance spatial effects. Sound from the sides - including the rears, and rear surrounds - will be different from the center speaker for realism. It's delayed, and reflected, and will sound different in any case.

Music. Most music is designed for 2 channel playback; the center is artificially mixed in on receivers, and sounds odd coming from there in any case. It isn't mixed by the engineer for that. Timbre matching doesn't help.

I have two rigs; one is all Definitive Mythos gear, perfectly timbre matched, in a 7.1 setup. In the other, I have two centers; a large Vienna Acoustics center, tied to a Definitive Mythos center. The rights and lefts are Sonus Faber Domus units, which match the Vienna center perfectly. The sides are LDL units (a Bose ripoff from decades back), and the rears are again Definitive Mythos speakers. The only discordant piece are the LDL's, woefully lacking in treble, which will be replaced.

For sound, both rigs are astounding in clarity, and the front soundstage on the second rig is close to ideal; with both centers, you cannot miss a single tone for dialogue. And the Definitive Mythos is absolutely not timbre matched with the Domus/Vienna gear, either.

I don't make hard and fast orthodox judgements on timbre matching. More important, I think, is to have quality gear.

[Gohanto]

Originally Posted by Blu-Dog

I don't use timbre matching as a hard and fast rule. I know it's the current orthodoxy, but I really can't buy into it. Here's my reasons:

Sound Mix. The soundstage designed by the audio engineer usually has dialogue and some sound effects concentrated on the center. This is crucial, and the tonal output had to be clear - and to my ears, has to deliver full range sound, with good lows as well as highs. Brightness is important to dialogue (slight whispers, violins, stuff like that) to discern what is said. Rights and lefts are relegated to ambient sounds, even when the soundfield sweeps (a jet crossing from left to right, for example).

Spatial effects. The entire sound field should enhance spatial effects. Sound from the sides - including the rears, and rear surrounds - will be different from the center speaker for realism. It's delayed, and reflected, and will sound different in any case.

Music. Most music is designed for 2 channel playback; the center is artificially mixed in on receivers, and sounds odd coming from there in any case. It isn't mixed by the engineer for that. Timbre matching doesn't help.

I have two rigs; one is all Definitive Mythos gear, perfectly timbre matched, in a 7.1 setup. In the other, I have two centers; a large Vienna Acoustics center, tied to a Definitive Mythos center. The rights and lefts are Sonus Faber Domus units, which match the Vienna center perfectly. The sides are LDL units (a Bose ripoff from decades back), and the rears are again Definitive Mythos speakers. The only discordant piece are the LDL's, woefully lacking in treble, which will be replaced.

For sound, both rigs are astounding in clarity, and the front soundstage on the second rig is close to ideal; with both centers, you cannot miss a single tone for dialogue. And the Definitive Mythos is absolutely not timbre matched with the Domus/Vienna gear, either.

I don't make hard and fast orthodox judgements on timbre matching. More important, I think, is to have quality gear.

You are correct that matching L/C/R isn't an unbreakable rule by any means, but it's the safest bet to ensure equal quality all around.

I would argue that with music is the most important source for matching speakers because you wouldn't want to have the sounds tinted differently when they pan or just have different instruments through different speakers.

The one system I've hear that drove me nuts was listening to The Eagles: Hell Freezes Over soundtrack on a system with Klipsch reference towers for L/R, and an old Polk center (original speaker blew out and wasn't replaced yet). Granted Klipsch is more distinct in its sound than most companies, so this was an extreme example, but I certainly noticed.

I didn't watch a movie on the setup, but I do know from mixing short films that music and effects (especially when panning) usually get put through the center channel to some degree, so it wouldn't have as uniform a presentation as it could if it didn't match.

[Big Daddy]

Originally Posted by bigpapy

I ask that because I want to get a new towers for my setup the KEF IQ7 and they are 2 way and the ones I got rigth now the Infinity PrimusP362 are tree way I don't know if I will notice any difference,my sorrounds are KEF and the sound awesome also I want my towers match my center.Any one here owns tspeakers?

KEF speakers are very good, but don't expect a lot of bass from them. You definitely need a quality subwoofer with them.

[Blu-Dog]

Originally Posted by Gohanto

You are correct that matching L/C/R isn't an unbreakable rule by any means, but it's the safest bet to ensure equal quality all around.

I would argue that with music is the most important source for matching speakers because you wouldn't want to have the sounds tinted differently when they pan or just have different instruments through different speakers.

The one system I've hear that drove me nuts was listening to The Eagles: Hell Freezes Over soundtrack on a system with Klipsch reference towers for L/R, and an old Polk center (original speaker blew out and wasn't replaced yet). Granted Klipsch is more distinct in its sound than most companies, so this was an extreme example, but I certainly noticed.

I didn't watch a movie on the setup, but I do know from mixing short films that music and effects (especially when panning) usually get put through the center channel to some degree, so it wouldn't have as uniform a presentation as it could if it didn't match.

I hear what you're saying. Oddly enough, it's the huge preponderance of folks moving to home theater arrangements that is going to make this more critical going forward. I've noticed how miserable some sound mixes are - especially after moving to some fairly high-end gear a couple of years ago.

My stereo gear has traditionally been 2.0 or 2.1 based, until the late 90's; the source material before then was so bad - VHS tapes, early DVD's, etc. - that centers didn't matter. Once DVD stepped in with DD5.1 as the usual mix, it became more critical - but most source material was just terrible.

Now, with Blu, it's changing fast. I wonder about this emphasis on timbre matching; I've heard it mostly from salesmen, who are trying to prevent the customer from making incremental upgrades to the home system. It's usually, "come on, you need the center speaker, too - that Klipsch you have will never match those Polks."

I even had one clown try to go at my wife with that line, something about "clashing in appearance", like it was some kind of fashion statement. She spent years helping me blend speakers like blending wine - wrong lady to discuss this with...

[bigpapy]

I will be using the same subwoofer from my 5.1 setup.