TWO WAY SPEAKERS ARE REALLY NOT VERY GOOD.

[THOMO]

I have arrived at the conclusion after many years in this hobby that the typical two way speaker is really not very good.

They are probably a sensible choice for budget systems but there are many examples around of two way speakers stuck in a fancy box  and being retailed for around $8,000 or more.Dynaudio and PMC models spring to mind.$3000 for a good two way might be fine but as far as I can tell  spending a lot more than that does not remove the fundamental and inherent limitations of these devices.

Over the last few years I have sought out some of the better ones like the Sonus Faber Cremona Auditor M,Dynaudio Contour 1.3 MkII.I have also had other highly regarded compact two ways in my system from Lenehan and Osborne.None of them were really that convincing.

The only two ways I have used that I really like are the vintage Tannoys but they are a very different sub-species which use much bigger drivers and boxes and which use a dual concentric horn loaded compression driver which is more of a mid/tweeter than a tweeter and which operate at an octave  lower than the typical two way.

Some of the BBC type two ways [or arguably three ways] which use a tweeter and semi super tweeter have also been more convincing than the standard two ways but again they represent  a slightly different formula and deliberately utilise the  sound of the boxes to enhance the overall sound.

 

It seems to me the fundamental problem is worse in some of the more ambitious two ways because they are trying to achieve more extended bass response and that means the drivers having to move in and out a lot more which brings with it other problems in the area of midrange reproduction and cone break up.Perhaps asking a driver to reproduce 8 octaves from 30Hz to 3800 Hz is simply expecting too much.Some of the more convincing ones for midrange reproduction seem  not to go very low.The Rogers LS3/5a for example.

 

One example of this sort ambition coming unstuck was a pair of Usher Mini Dancers which use two 7 inch mid/woofers crossed over high up to a diamond tweeter [around 3800 hz from memory].These speakers also go very low [my guess maybe even down to 25Hz] so a great deal is being asked of those mid/woofers. The result to me was a speaker with a very one-note boomy bass and an obvious distortion/colouration in the presence region from the same driver trying to reach up too high to cross to a diamond tweeter that cannot handle lower treble.A beautiful looking speaker using very good quality drivers and cabinets but just not right.Well very good woofers and a very good tweeter but crying out for a midrange!

 

Perhaps there are some typical two ways around that do manage to overcome these inherent challenges?I am yet to hear one though.

Until then I will be sticking to my three ways [or maybe a 2.5 way] and cringing when I see somebody spending 6-7-8-9 or maybe $10,000 on a pair of two ways.

Surely you can get a much better sounding three way for that sort of money?

Actually I know you can.The Hulgich Ella II for example .A really good three way speaker.

 

 

Edited February 17, 2018 by THOMO

[allthumbs]

cat-piegeons

[allthumbs]

pigeons

[brumby]

Then I guess "one ways" - electrostatics, planars et al - must be terrible, eh? 

[andyr]

1 hour ago, brumby said:

Then I guess "one ways" - electrostatics, planars et al - must be terrible, eh? 

 

I'm not aware 'planars' are "one way"?  The smaller Maggies are 2-way ... the 3 series and the 20 series are 3-way.

 

Andy

 

[Satanica]

In general I agree. Subwoofer(s) done well can be made to relieve them of the hardest of work.

[Bunno77]

I'd like to see them as part of a system including subs.
Totally agree it's asking too much of the woofer.

[JSmith]

8 hours ago, THOMO said:

or maybe a 2.5 way

Depending on implementation and crossover design, often a well implemented 2.5 way will be better than an averagely implemented 3 way design.

 

I agree generally about a 2 way only design, there are limitations there that can be difficult to overcome as there can be in a single full range driver speaker... but they can be overcome and still provide excellent performance.

 

I suppose like any speaker it comes down to careful design, implementation and quality parts/control in the end.

 

JSmith

[Steve M]

A bound to be controversial if generally correct conclusion you have arrived at Thomo/Jon. I have had similar experiences with two way speakers including the  Proac 1SC, Jamo Concert 8, Rogers LS3/5A, Lenehan ML-1, Usher Be718, original Linn Kan & Saras, your Sonus Faber Auditor M and the Mark & Daniels Maximus ...granted all of these are only up to the $8K mark. The Maximus was for me probably the best of them all, being very refined sounding tonally with excellent bass using a long throw custom woofer, but it still had a bit of a midrange suck-out.

 

The problem with all two ways is that they almost all try and ‘fudge up’ the bass spectrum, as you have mentioned. Take for example the Proac, it sounds very sweet and musical with good midrange but the bass signature is plumped/bumped up a few dB so as to sound good, but not accurate. The Lenehans suffer from this also. The Concert 8 is very fast and accurate in the mids and with tight bass, but still sounds a little lean overall. In my case, all of these small speakers have come and gone for larger (and more competent) constructs.

 

I don’t think you will ever get around the issue of manufacturers trying to manipulate the bass output to get small two way speakers to either sound accurate (and lacking bass) or sounding pleasant (by boosting bass) ...the end result being that it will never be a full-spectrum sound, with all the gaps filled. 

 

Having said that, I would defend people’s choice in using two way loudspeakers, namely:

 

* they have high WAF factor, look good in and can match smaller rooms better.

* they can have superb imaging with the effect of voices and instruments floating in the air, but so can a carefully chosen three way with the added enjoyment that low bass brings to the sonic picture.

* generally cost less than three way spkrs, so depending on what part of the hifi journey you are on - can be justified.

 

Steve.

Edited February 18, 2018 by Steve M

[Guest Muon N']

Sometimes two ways don't convince due to the chain feeding the speakers, Lenehan's are an example where you get what you feed them pretty much.

So maybe the issue is not always the speakers themselves IMO.

 

Edit: at the end of the day no speaker is perfect, but sure, for some types of music a two way will have limits.

Edited February 18, 2018 by Muon N'

[THOMO]

Yes I tend to agree that cutting off the lower bass to them and using a pair of subs would probably improve their sound a lot.But why bother?Surely the point of using two ways is their small footprint and overall smaller size but by doing this you end up with four boxes instead of two.Which would appear to negate any of the aesthetic or functional benefits.

I also agree that they can image really well.My Sonus Fabers were really excellent in that department  but to sound their best they had to pulled a fair way out into the  room so were hardly unobtrusive.They did look beautiful though so that was not really a problem.

[allthumbs]

I have always been a little confused about my penchant for 2 way stand mount speakers and I think it may be because what comes out of such small boxes adds to the amazement of the sound produced. But when I drag out my late 80’s 2.5 dual port reflex Elac speakers which get down to mid 30’s Mhz bass ,it gives me pause for thought.

 

Because I do not listen beyond a very moderate level , my room is pretty good for either configuration and the Klipsch experience I had the other weekend has confused me somewhat and has me thinking deliberately and calmly of delineating between a compulsive consumption yen or a genuine appreciation of a better sound.

 

My dilemma has always been, I like all of my speakers for particular traits but I do not get much exposure to a lot of speaker makes, designs and configurations to make an informed choice but in the back of my mind I am thinking of an end game choice and that is more than likely to be a full range option.

[stereo coffee]

Hi Thomo

Your Gale 401a, has 2 x 8 inch acoustic suspension drivers per cabinet, so you would be well conversant

just how good their bass reproduction is.  If manufacturers similarly use acoustic suspension

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acoustic_suspension    in a two way, similar excellent performance is usually the result.

 

One could conclude that acoustic suspension is one of the best ways of loading a loudspeaker, as it achieves lower distortion

and allows smaller cabinet size.   The alternative bass reflex and its unfounded popularity is described at the end of the Wikipedia article as a

compromise  "The speaker enclosure designers and their customers view the risk of increased distortion and phase delay

as an acceptable price to pay for increased bass output and higher SPL. " 

 

However Electrostatics are in another class altogether for midrange and higher frequencies, that said the ESL57 Quads

famous speaker ,can do bass reasonably well, just don't ask too much of them, or use four of them ( tempted to say, per channel ! ) 

 

Martin Logan a two way speaker appear to marry the best of both, with advances in  bass reproduction, and electrostatic technology.   https://www.martinlogan.com/en/martinlogan-bass-advances

 

[Steam]

@THOMO  what do you think of the KEF LS50?

 

 Stupid expensive but the DEVORE FIDELITY ORANGUTAN O/96 can also sound very special IMO

 

Edited February 18, 2018 by Steam

[Mendes]

21 minutes ago, Steam said:

Stupid expensive but the DEVORE FIDELITY ORANGUTAN O/96 can also sound very special IMO

+1 yes, they are very special speakers indeed, they tick a lot of boxes.

 

[betty boop]

speakers like the ls3/5A are a touch flawed...but similarly like a VERY flawed ear piece in a phone they deliver a convincing enough argument for some.

 

personally i would disagree STRONGLY with the title of this thread shouting out....

 

"TWO WAY SPEAKERS ARE REALLY NOT VERY GOOD."

 

not very good ? no I wouldnt concur... I'd actually say...CAN be very good.

 

firstly there are two ways and two ways.

 

ive heard the b&w 805D now super ceded in a smallish room on some good electronics doing very well indeed. and to the point in that setup I would suggest no need for a sub.

 

going even further back many years prior... I heard a b&W 805N then with a stack of naims and gee they did very well indeed.

 

similarly i have sat in on a night of demoing of osborn speakers... seeing mention the brand and blown away at the very end of the night where his little standmount were put on show wiht his large subs as foundation. lot of people I found concurred they were the best on the night of all we heard ! 

 

ive run some little pmc db1i's the babies of the pmc range and been very impressed by them. both on own... and also with some subs extending their range for a pretty flat response down to 20hz...

 

i use my own focal 1007be stand mounts and have been for some years with a subwoofer in tow and can there as well gee they do a great job... yes my 3 way speakers in the main system sounds better but they also cost many multiples more and in a significantly larger room area...

 

my most blow away moment was with the little tiny mission 750LE from years previous... only 100s of dollars and two ways... i could have a sub on tow on them but never bothered they sounded gorgeous as were.

 

2 ways can be very good .... 

[THOMO]

47 minutes ago, Steam said:

@THOMO  what do you think of the KEF LS50?

 

 Stupid expensive but the DEVORE FIDELITY ORANGUTAN O/96 can also sound very special IMO

 

Yes I have heard them sounding good too.Very much like the AudioNotes.

They are not your typical stand mount two way though.Much larger woofers and very large wide baffled boxes.

To quote Troels Gravesen-wide baffle speakers bring their own sound.

They are also very efficient.So not typical at all and VERY expensive for what is in them.

Even so you would have to listen to these things over an extended period to really get a grip on them and in my experience it is that extended use that tends to show up the compromises of two ways.On some recordings you get to hear that which is not quite right.Especially when you are used to a decent 3 way.

Edited February 18, 2018 by THOMO

[murrmax]

All speaker drivers have a sweet spot in their frequency range i.e flat and all designs have compromises, there's so many variables but yes I would generally agree that 2 ways have many flaws and asking 2 drivers to cover the close to full frequency range, especially 6-7in driver is a big compromise + the tweeter will have to go low which will also reduce power handling. 

 

The flaws are certainly revealed when listening to drivers working in their optimum ranges (3 way, 4 way). However other things like budget come in to play, 

   

Quote

 

similarly i have sat in on a night of demoing of osborn speakers... seeing mention the brand and blown away at the very end of the night where his little standmount were put on show wiht his large subs as foundation. lot of people I found concurred they were the best on the night of all we heard ! 

They aren't really 2 ways anymore are they:) 

 

In fact the smaller 2 way 4-6inch mid/bass drivers are pretty much a midrange  anyway if you take away the bass duties. 

 

 

 

[betty boop]

13 minutes ago, murrmax said:

All speaker drivers have a sweet spot in their frequency range i.e flat and all designs have compromises, there's so many variables but yes I would generally agree that 2 ways have many flaws and asking 2 drivers to cover the close to full frequency range, especially 6-7in driver is a big compromise + the tweeter will have to go low which will also reduce power handling. 

 

The flaws are certainly revealed when listening to drivers working in their optimum ranges (3 way, 4 way). However other things like budget come in to play, 

reminds me of those kenwood fridge sized 12 way brash's specials in the 80s .... they sounded shite !  

 

the point is a 2 way implemented well can be magic ! 

 

13 minutes ago, murrmax said:

They aren't really 2 ways anymore are they:) 

 

In fact the smaller 2 way 4-6inch mid/bass drivers are pretty much a midrange  anyway if you take away the bass duties.

they were still working as a 2-way...just happened to have a sub in tow

 

no different realy to a 3 way with sub. eg in my main system... the sub doesnt even  come on at times ... it self wakes as needed ....

 

whether the sub is needed or not is a whole another discussion. but i can think of MANY instances when they will not. i have given some already and illustrating that 2 ways ...CAN be very good ... 

[Ooogh]

Personally I believe there are many different routes to audio satisfaction. I previously owned a pair of AudioNote An/e's (ORIGINAL design) that kept me satisfied for a dozen years. Wide baffle, 8" paper cone. It really should not work. The O/96 should be even more problematic in theory, crossing over a 10" driver to a tweeter should have a poor outcome yet they musically involve many people.

 

There are no shortage of audio fans who are fully satisfied by the traditional two way designs from Harbeth, Rogers and their ilk.

 

Today I would always go the subwoofer route. Then I can pick a two, or three way that suits my low powered valve amplifiers and leave the heavy lifting of lower bass to a dedicated plate amplifier best suited to that task. I can then set my speakers up for best mid-range resolution and my subs for the best bass. This is rarely the same position in the room.

 

 

[betty boop]

1 minute ago, Ooogh said:

Personally I believe there are many different routes to audio satisfaction. I previously owned a pair of AudioNote An/e's (ORIGINAL design) that kept me satisfied for a dozen years. Wide baffle, 8" paper cone. It really should not work. The O/96 should be even more problematic in theory, crossing over a 10" driver to a tweeter should have a poor outcome yet they musically involve many people.

i remember some similar 2 way  snell's run off a naim stack. this would be late 80s early 90s... sounded pretty darn good  !

 

6 minutes ago, Ooogh said:

There are no shortage of audio fans who are fully satisfied by the traditional two way designs from Harbeth, Rogers and their ilk.

indeed...

 

i remember once a group that were ardent followers of 1 ways... it was utter magic with the stuff they were listening to... sans subwoofer let alone woofer of any kind. not my kind of thing but really they seemed pretty happy ... 

 

7 minutes ago, Ooogh said:

Today I would always go the subwoofer route. Then I can pick a two, or three way that suits my low powered valve amplifiers and leave the heavy lifting of lower bass to a dedicated plate amplifier best suited to that task. I can then set my speakers up for best mid-range resolution and my subs for the best bass. This is rarely the same position in the room

could say the same thing about 3 ways though ... surely.... and thats the point. then comes down to the need for subwoofers.

 

some will argue the need, some wont.

 

and i say this with a sub woofer in the main system, bedroom system  and even the car  

[Addicted to music]

Mmmm so I guess that the KEFs LS50 comes under this category.....Shci tt!   

[Steve M]

1 hour ago, Steam said:

@THOMO  what do you think of the KEF LS50?

 

 

Kef LS50 is excellent and pick of the bunch of mid priced small two ways, maybe. Has good point source imaging over most traditional two ways, still needs wall or corner loading (fudging it a bit) for better bass. Drivers tend to fail if you try and play it loud for better dynamics, so no, it doesn’t keep up with a competent three way speaker??

[Guest]

Quite like a bi amplified and DSP helped JAMO C803 over most mentioned but 2 ways can leave one in a position of having to compromise when reproducing more demanding media.

 

[Guest guru]

1 hour ago, THOMO said:

Yes I have heard them sounding good too.Very much like the AudioNotes.

They are not your typical stand mount two way though.Much larger woofers and very large wide baffled boxes.

To quote Troels Gravesen-wide baffle speakers bring their own sound.

They are also very efficient.So not typical at all and VERY expensive for what is in them.

Even so you would have to listen to these things over an extended period to really get a grip on them and in my experience it is that extended use that tends to show up the compromises of two ways.On some recordings you get to hear that which is not quite right.Especially when you are used to a decent 3 way.

Jeez Thomo, your a hard man to please. E's start at $6k for the base model, Russian birch ply , paper bass drivers up to the top model at $300k, still a 2 way. Some of the scariest bass I've ever heard came out of those "limited" 8 inch bass drivers when driven by some parallel 211's. Maybe you just need to hear a combination like that to get a different perspective on what's possible.

have fun stirring the pot anyway.