# Advantages/basics of a 3 way component system



## Jmirage (Nov 23, 2010)

I am loving my 2 way setup, but I have 2 channels on my amp that isn't doing anything, so that must mean I should add another driver and go 3 way, right?

I am just wondering,

1. What are the advantages of going with a 3 way setup, or cons if there are any.

2. Are there any basic concepts I should be aware of while considering doing it?

I've looked for any threads concerning 2 way vs. 3 way, but couldn't find any info at all.


----------



## Sarthos (Oct 29, 2010)

Is your current system 2-way passive, or 2-way active?

It doesn't mean you "should" go 3-way. If you're 2-way passive, I'd start by going to 2-way active or bi-amping... but from this point on I'll just assume you're 2-way active.

The advantages are that by using multiple drivers, you play each driver in a frequency range that it has a better response in. I suppose i could draw a picture.



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

Imagine a setup with drivers like that. If you just use the midbass driver, you will obviously have crappy treble, but decent midbass and okay midrange. if you use the tweeter, you will get terrible midbass, bad midrange, but good treble. If you use both the midbass and tweeter, you'll get good midbass, good treble, acceptable midrange. By combining all three, you can get a good response throughout the entire range of frequencies.

One concept to be aware of with 3-way is time alignment. It's really easy to run into problems with cancellation if you have drivers in multiple places at multiple distances.

Processing capability is also a pain. You generally want each driver to have its own time alignment and EQ functions.


----------



## Jmirage (Nov 23, 2010)

Awesome picture!

I am active, and have t/a/eq processing.

That being said, is there something I am "missing" with a 2 way that I would get with a 3 way? What is the end result difference?


----------



## Sarthos (Oct 29, 2010)

Depends on your drivers and speaker positioning...

I suppose one advantage is that you may be able to get louder. Certain frequencies are "harder" on speakers to reproduce. By limiting speakers to their favorable frequencies, you may be able to give them more power in that frequency range.


----------



## duckymcse (Mar 15, 2009)

I just recently went from 2-way to 3-way and here are my thought.
Running 3-way front active will require you alots of time to install and tune. Also, you might need to add another amp which result in more money. Unless you running passive, that's another story.
Is it worth the time, effort and frustration? To me, that's a big YES!
What I notice going from 2-way to 3-way is the vocal is alots better and I do hear more instruments than before. Everything just seem more livier.
Basic concept, if you know how to do 2-way active, than you shouldn't have any problem doing 3-way. If you never done it before, I wouldn't advice doing it. 



Jmirage said:


> I am loving my 2 way setup, but I have 2 channels on my amp that isn't doing anything, so that must mean I should add another driver and go 3 way, right?
> 
> I am just wondering,
> 
> ...


----------



## Sarthos (Oct 29, 2010)

OP has two extra channels on his amp. Won't need another amp.


----------



## SQ Audi (Dec 21, 2010)

Will need another processor though if he plans on keeping the sub processed too.

The 360.2 is a 3-way processor, Hi~Mid~Sub, but if OP adds another set of speakers, then he will most likely need a new proc, or just use the 360 for the front stage and crossover the sub with the amp's processor.

This is why I junked the 360 idea when I was building my car, and had to get the 701 combo instead


----------



## Eljosh (Sep 29, 2010)

to kind of piggy back on to this topic, what are the advantages of a 2 way active over a passive? and what settings on your do you need? do you need a band pass?


----------



## n_olympios (Oct 23, 2008)

Nice drawing! If only there were speakers with those actual frequency responses lol! :laugh:


----------



## nicholasarmwood (Dec 29, 2010)

I appreciate the drawing


----------



## Sarthos (Oct 29, 2010)

The drawing is just the basic concept. Although I do guarantee accuracy of the drawing within +- 200 dB from 10 Hz-50gHz


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

you know, I opened this thread expecting there to be pages long of information, and I probably would give someone a dreadfully long response to this question had I been asked in person... but, the picture you posted pretty much hit the nail on the head.

good job of being simplistic, yet getting the point across. really.


----------



## gatorgrizz27 (Dec 27, 2010)

One thing I noticed going from a 2 way with a 6.5 mid playing up to 3200 hz, to adding a dedicated midrange and crossing the 6.5 at 300 hz was that the midbass became a lot cleaner and louder. It seems like having it only play lower frequencies allowed it to play them better. Also, switching to a smaller 3" midrange gave me a lot more mounting options to help raise the stage height.


----------



## sqcomp (Sep 21, 2009)

^ I know how that feels!

I'm crossing my mid range and mid bass at 160 Hz. It's a sweet sound for me. It allows my mid bass to play down crossing at 40 Hz to the sub.


----------



## Jmirage (Nov 23, 2010)

Does the midrange need to be in an enclosure like the 6.5"?


----------



## n_olympios (Oct 23, 2008)

_Which_ midrange? 

Some need an enclosure, others don't as they're soft domes, others need as much space in the rear as you can give them (and then some). It's 100% driver dependant.


----------



## sqcomp (Sep 21, 2009)

I know mine is not in an enclosure...just my A-pillar.


----------



## ZAKOH (Nov 26, 2010)

Eljosh said:


> to kind of piggy back on to this topic, what are the advantages of a 2 way active over a passive? and what settings on your do you need? do you need a band pass?


I was searching and sound this thread..

http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum...we-even-discussing-passive-setups-2010-a.html

It seems like the primary advantages is
1. tuning, you set your crossover point
2. time alignment for components
3. More efficient power use

Disadvantages: harder to install, expensive, more complex to tune.

1. For basic setup, you need an active capable HU and an additional amp. 
2. Or.. keep your HU, but add a sound processor and an amp.


----------



## niko084 (Dec 16, 2009)

The drawbacks to actives should be the obvious cost... If you have the extra channels go active and call it a day, make sure you have a bandpass ability for your mid and your life will get much easier.

Actives are the way to go, but at a cost.

Passives work great still, they always have, they always will... But it can be a lot of work getting your crossovers right for your taste and driver selection.

If you want it a bit simpler without spending a fortune, buy a pre-packaged 3 way component setup with their passive crossovers and call it a day, little bit of EQ and you can shape it the way you like, or close at least. It's not as great as making your own set and tuning it, but it's a lot easier.

Personally I think it's worth it. I'm tempted to figure out a way to do a 3-way in my doors.


----------



## ZAKOH (Nov 26, 2010)

I am kind of lazy. If my car had provisions for three-way speakers, like say the new Scion TC, I'd go for it. Otherwise, I'd just get the best 2-way components I can afford, whatever, as long as it fits.


----------



## Roberto (Jul 1, 2011)

During last two months I managed to audition several 2 way and 3 way systems and here is my finding:

2way:

Sounds very well balances in all aspect
Stage comes right on the middle of dash with TAQ
You can even play around with the tweet to get the best out of it( according to preference)
Sounds very sweet and lush 
Ideal for SQ setup
Gives studio like performance after TAQ
Bass doesn’t hit hard but balanced
Can’t go very louder 
Excellent merge of tweeter with midbass driver. 
Excellent for those who listen classical, Jazz, Pop, Ballads, Instruments, Chill out and Ambient Music

Other than SQ:

Much Easier to tune
No hassle to add up a lot of equipment in car especially a lot of amps if system is on active
Aesthetics remains beautiful, clean and simple
Easy to tune


3 way:

Sounds good but not as balanced due to sound pressure which is more than 2 way system
Ideal for SQL setup and hit hard bass lovers
Can go very loud and good for listeners who prefer to listen on loud volume
With tweet you have to move mid means you can’t play around that much with the tweeter position
Excellent for those who listen (R&B, Hip Hop, Rock and Hard Rock kind of music)



Others than SQ:

Hassle to add equipments (car fill with equipment) more than the sound
Cost more
Pain to install
Pain to tune
Hurt car interior aesthetics
Mid and Tweet if installed in A pillar obstacle/distract view which may harmful for driving
Can’t move tweet alone for positioning although it is possible by adding separate pod


IMHO 2 way sounds the best, well balanced and complete sound thus ideal for pure SQ setup, however 3 way is ideal for people who wants to have loud response (SQL) and more of bass response at the same time.

Also, during my audition in different cars I have found that 3 way is mostly preferred by Lads in their late twenties and in early thirties, most of them recently moved from SPL setup to 2 way and than 3 way SQL after few months or year however all 2 way system I auditioned in car of individual in mid thirties to late forties.


----------

