Recommend a good sounding 3-way bookshelf

[Good4it]

I'm looking for a new pair under $2500. I have a subwoofer.

 

[TLS Guy]

I'm looking for a new pair under $2500. I have a subwoofer.

I would not look for a three way bookshelf. A bookshelf speaker should not need to be three way. Two way should be just fine. Remember every crossover point is a quality spoiler, and changes the relationship of overtones to fundamentals. The less crossover points the better. A sensibly designed bookshelf should have a woofer/mid with enough bandwidth to cross directly to the tweeter.

Good speakers are built round high bandwidth drivers and NOT narrow band drivers.

You need to think this out again.

 

[KEW]

I would not look for a three way bookshelf. A bookshelf speaker should not need to be three way. Two way should be just fine. Remember every crossover point is a quality spoiler, and changes the relationship of overtones to fundamentals. The less crossover points the better. A sensibly designed bookshelf should have a woofer/mid with enough bandwidth to cross directly to the tweeter.

Good speakers are built round high bandwidth drivers and NOT narrow band drivers.

You need to think this out again.

TLSGuy, What about the Philharmonitor BMR?
I'm not sure Dennis would have brought it to market unless he believed it offered the best possible performance at the price-point! Maybe it is not considered a traditional bookshelf since it is +/-2dB at 30Hz.
http://philharmonicaudio.com/BMR Philharmonitor.html

 

[TLS Guy]

That is a bit bigger speaker than is usually called a bookshelf. In addition it has a very interesting and very good value for money midrange. This midrange is very wide band, allowing for widely spaced crossover points. I have been doodling with it.

However I have come down on the side of a novel two way design with a very wide band driver that allows for a 4 K crossover and there are only 4 components in the crossover. It models really well and will have higher power handling especially if crossed to a sub in the 80 to 60 Hz range. I think I'm going to build it. If it is any good I will share it here. I'm hoping it will make a fantastic DIY project.

 

[speakerman39]

Could one of you guys be nice enough to explain what the heck is a 2 1/2 way design? Have heard of the 2-way/3-way or even 4-way designs, but what is a 2 1/2 design really mean? I remember seeing this when I was learning more about Paradigm speakers back in the early 2000's. Have owned a lot of Paradigm speakers over the years. Not even sure which ones were a 2 1/2 way design. Sorry, but am a bit confused on this one. Any explanation would be very helpful to me. Thanks!

Cheers,

Phil

 

[shadyJ]

One three-way bookshelf speaker I like is the Wharefedale Jade 3s. The measurements aren't perfect, but the horizontal dispersion and spectral decay measurements are excellent. Having heard these, I would say they are one of the better bookshelf speakers I have heard, a very nice sound.

Another speaker you might want to demo at your price range is the Sony SS-NA5ES, not quite a 3-way but an interesting design. They sound fine to me as well.

 

[KEW]

Could one of you guys be nice enough to explain what the heck is a 2 1/2 way design? Have heard of the 2-way/3-way or even 4-way designs, but what is a 2 1/2 design really mean? I remember seeing this when I was learning more about Paradigm speakers back in the early 2000's. Have owned a lot of Paradigm speakers over the years. Not even sure which ones were a 2 1/2 way design. Sorry, but am a bit confused on this one. Any explanation would be very helpful to me. Thanks!

Cheers,

Phil

http://www.audioholics.com/tower-speaker-reviews/pioneer-sp-pk52fs/pioneer-sp-pk52fs-introduction

The SP-FS52 is a 4 driver, 2½-way tower design, meaning the two bottom drivers employ a Low Pass Filter (LPF) and the midrange driver employs a very shallow High Pass Filter (HPF) so that it predominately provides the mid frequencies with some assistance in the midbass. Actually the midrange driver is NOT enclosed in its own chamber so it does experience sympathetic vibrations from the other woofers energy radiating back into the cone of the midrange driver. Personally, I would have liked to see this driver chambered off in its own enclosure to improve midrange articulation but it’s understandable why Mr. Jones didn’t do this as it adds cost to the design and penalizes a bit of mid bass punch, which is something quite important in a small, budget design like this. In speaking with Andrew, he told me the three woofers were designed to work together into a common volume. If he had made a true 3-way design, the speaker would have lost bass output capability for the small gain in midrange clarity. At the price point he was targeting, this would have been the wrong trade off. Instead he took a long time optimizing the working range and excursion sharing between the drivers. The network provides some of this splitting, and the non-vented pole piece on the upper driver also helps. It is worth mentioning that the midrange employs a HPF to reduce low frequency cone excursions and intermodulation distortion. I’ve actually seen speakers costing nearly 5 times the price of the SP-FS52s that let their little midrange run fullrange, mucking up clarity of the vocals at higher listening levels.

I believe the key to being called 2.5 way is using the same driver for midrange and woofer, but applying filters so they don't all do both. I think since you are using the same driver, the crossover is simplified.

 

[speakerman39]

http://www.audioholics.com/tower-speaker-reviews/pioneer-sp-pk52fs/pioneer-sp-pk52fs-introduction


I believe the key to being called 2.5 way is using the same driver for midrange and woofer, but applying filters so they don't all do both. I think since you are using the same driver, the crossover is greatly simplified such that it isn't really a proper crossover.

Thanks Kurt. That helped some. Never read this review because I have never cared for the Pioneer AJ speakers to be honest here. Not really a tower guy either. So, basically a 2 1/2 way design is going to be a tower speaker? Makes sense given that most bookshelfs are 2-way designs. Thanks for the link!

Cheers,

Phil

 

[TLS Guy]

Thanks Kurt. That helped some. Never read this review because I have never cared for the Pioneer AJ speakers to be honest here. Not really a tower guy either. So, basically a 2 1/2 way design is going to be a tower speaker? Makes sense given that most bookshelfs are 2-way designs. Thanks for the link!

Cheers,

Phil

The idea is that the top mid/woofer takes care of the bass and mid, but then the lower driver takes care of the baffle step compensation (BSC). This design has a lot to recommend it as it substantially reduces the cone excursion of the mid/woofer at the same time preventing comb filtering that would occur with two one above the other mid/woofers.

 

[KEW]

Thanks Kurt. That helped some. Never read this review because I have never cared for the Pioneer AJ speakers to be honest here. Not really a tower guy either. So, basically a 2 1/2 way design is going to be a tower speaker? Makes sense given that most bookshelfs are 2-way designs. Thanks for the link!

Cheers,

Phil

Doesn't have to be a tower. my Focal Twin6 is a 2.5 way. I'm not sure all 2.5 ways are the BSC design TLSGuy mentioned, but that is probably by far the best implementation of a 2.5 way.

 

[everettT]

Not in a cost effective range for most, and like the BMR a monitor size speaker
http://www.salksound.com/model.php?model=SoundScape 7M

But excellent in all areas

 

[3db]

PSB uses 2.5 BSC design in all of its tower speaker designs most effectively from all the accolades their speakers have received and continue to receive.

 

[everettT]

And another 2 way that is ruler flat with premium drivers
http://www.salksound.com/model.php?model=Ellis 1801
Dennis Murphys crossover work is exceptional again. Dave used to sell as diy and has made a few revisions to it . It's one of my favorite speakers I've heard.

 

[Dennis Murphy]

I would not look for a three way bookshelf. A bookshelf speaker should not need to be three way. Two way should be just fine. Remember every crossover point is a quality spoiler, and changes the relationship of overtones to fundamentals. The less crossover points the better. A sensibly designed bookshelf should have a woofer/mid with enough bandwidth to cross directly to the tweeter.

Good speakers are built round high bandwidth drivers and NOT narrow band drivers.

You need to think this out again.

I think you're oversimplifying here. A good 3-way, be it a monitor or tower, allows you to choose a woofer large enough to do serious bass, and still maintain broad dispersion in the upper midrange and lower treble because those areas can be handled by a midrange driver better suited for the job than a large woofer. If you choose the right drivers and know what you're doing, the sound can still be seamless despite two crossover regions. That said, I would take a well-executed 2-way to a so-so 3 way any day.

 

[TLS Guy]

I think you're oversimplifying here. A good 3-way, be it a monitor or tower, allows you to choose a woofer large enough to do serious bass, and still maintain broad dispersion in the upper midrange and lower treble because those areas can be handled by a midrange driver better suited for the job than a large woofer. If you choose the right drivers and know what you're doing, the sound can still be seamless despite two crossover regions. That said, I would take a well-executed 2-way to a so-so 3 way any day.

Since he mentioned bookshelf speakers I was assuming he meant speakers that could at least be placed in a bookshelf. Yes, large diameter woofers do increase the low end reach and power handling do make a case for a three way speaker.

The point I do want to emphasize though is that the route to better speakers is though wide band width drivers. In you design that mid range is a wide band width bend driver by design.

I think at long last Ted Jordan will get his due. 60 years ago he pointed this out.

I think of all his drivers this was the best of them, his first. Although for a lot of reasons quite a few people ended up having a hand in it including myself.

It has a unique suspension which gives it a good xmax to this 4"cone and a good bass response. It is a true full range driver and appeared in 1959 first, although the MK 1 had a half life of about 20 min.

At our Eagan home in our secondary listening room I installed this pair using only one of these full range drivers a side. It is a small room.

I have really enjoyed listening to them. They create a wonderful sound field and sound nothing like the usual typical full range offerings. You would never guess you were listening to two single 4" drivers.

This has made me realize it is now time to work again with drivers that can handle if not all the audible spectrum but most of it.

I'm convinced Ted was and is right, reproduction is not just about a flat frequency response, though that is a prerequisite, but also about keeping harmonics properly tied to their fundamental frequencies as far as possible.

Now 60 years on it is a scandal that we have so few really wide band drivers. I think things are about to change though with some very competent driver engineers becoming engaged in this task again.

I'm convinced that one of the major reasons people are pleased with your design is because of the use of that very wide band midrange driver.

 

[Dennis Murphy]

I'm convinced that one of the major reasons people are pleased with your design is because of the use of that very wide band midrange driver.

That may be, although I don't use it over that wide a range--crossovers are at 600 Hz and 3500Hz. I've also worked with the Jordan driver, and thought it was the best of the lot. Operating full range with baffle step compensation, it made for a very nice nearfield speaker. Further back, I missed the highs of a good tweeter, and I never heard anything particularly special in the imaging department. But I do agree that a successful 3-way needs very careful driver selection, with a well-behaved midrange being critical.

 

[TLS Guy]

That may be, although I don't use it over that wide a range--crossovers are at 600 Hz and 3500Hz. I've also worked with the Jordan driver, and thought it was the best of the lot. Operating full range with baffle step compensation, it made for a very nice nearfield speaker. Further back, I missed the highs of a good tweeter, and I never heard anything particularly special in the imaging department. But I do agree that a successful 3-way needs very careful driver selection, with a well-behaved midrange being critical.

I'm glad you have experience of the Jordan driver. I agree it is just a hare laid back in the very top end. However that is a good fault. It never screams or shouts at you like other do such as the Lowthers can be prone.

Your mid range is operating over a fairly wide band, two and a half octaves, and then some because of the overlap. I like to try and aim for three octaves.

It seems to me though with subs crossing over in the 80 to 60 Hz range we now have a bass/mid and full rangers that can make a two way with a crossover above the speech discrimination band.

I'm convinced wider band drivers are the way to better speakers.