Which 3-Way Component is Better?
05-11-2007, 10:51 PM
#11
"sway01"
Not sure what you saying or asking, but a 2 way front stage can and should cover the same main frequencies as a 3 way. With a 3 way you have more options though, which is the good and bad thing about them. More locations to work with, more crossover points ect. In my personl car, I'm using a 3 way. I did it for a very specific reason. If I could have gone 2 way I would have. My life would be soo much easier.
Not sure what you saying or asking, but a 2 way front stage can and should cover the same main frequencies as a 3 way. With a 3 way you have more options though, which is the good and bad thing about them. More locations to work with, more crossover points ect. In my personl car, I'm using a 3 way. I did it for a very specific reason. If I could have gone 2 way I would have. My life would be soo much easier.
05-11-2007, 11:16 PM
#12
0 Watt CAFz'r
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 13
Originally Posted by fozzz
"sway01"
Not sure what you saying or asking, but a 2 way front stage can and should cover the same main frequencies as a 3 way. With a 3 way you have more options though, which is the good and bad thing about them. More locations to work with, more crossover points ect. In my personl car, I'm using a 3 way. I did it for a very specific reason. If I could have gone 2 way I would have. My life would be soo much easier.
Not sure what you saying or asking, but a 2 way front stage can and should cover the same main frequencies as a 3 way. With a 3 way you have more options though, which is the good and bad thing about them. More locations to work with, more crossover points ect. In my personl car, I'm using a 3 way. I did it for a very specific reason. If I could have gone 2 way I would have. My life would be soo much easier.
So I should just keep it simple and stick with a 2-way?
How are Zapco amps? Or I could get the same results or quality from...?
05-12-2007, 10:37 AM
#13
Administrator
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 16,855
I like a 3 way because I can run more power to the front end and I can separate the midbass range from the midrange range. I run 75w RMS to each tweeter, 75w RMS to each 4", and 300w RMS to each midbass.
BUT many people are happy with a 2way set. I'm going 2way in the Hearse just for hellery.
BUT many people are happy with a 2way set. I'm going 2way in the Hearse just for hellery.
05-12-2007, 12:47 PM
#14
0 Watt CAFz'r
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 13
Originally Posted by Dukk
I like a 3 way because I can run more power to the front end and I can separate the midbass range from the midrange range. I run 75w RMS to each tweeter, 75w RMS to each 4", and 300w RMS to each midbass.
BUT many people are happy with a 2way set. I'm going 2way in the Hearse just for hellery.
BUT many people are happy with a 2way set. I'm going 2way in the Hearse just for hellery.
I take it you're not using the factory crossovers w/ the components? What system r u running?
05-12-2007, 06:20 PM
#15
Originally Posted by sway01
I take it you're not using the factory crossovers w/ the components? What system r u running?
05-12-2007, 07:15 PM
#16
0 Watt CAFz'r
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 13
Originally Posted by Greg_Canada
Sounds like he's running active with an external crossover or DSP... seperate amps for each pair of speakers...
Isn't that not good for components systems since the factory x-overs are tuned specifically for the components? Or is it better to run your own elec. x-overs?
05-13-2007, 07:53 PM
#17
0 Watt CAFz'r
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 42
3-way
Ilike the flexibility of the three way system. I give more power to the 6's than the 4/tweet combo. Running active on the 6's(two in each door) and passive on the 4/tweet (kicks). I use the audiocontrol 2Xs as the active crossover. You can adjust the volumes separately for more even sound stage.
cheers
cheers
05-13-2007, 11:34 PM
#18
Going active will always be better than passive but it's alot harder to tune.
for newbs like me, im sticking passive right now until i grab a deh-p880prs with internal 3 way active crossovers with time alignment (deh-p860mp and 960mp also have this)(dont want to run an external already have bought enough ) I'll probably be running active some time this year but im just breaking the speakers in running passive atm...
With active you'll have way more control.
for newbs like me, im sticking passive right now until i grab a deh-p880prs with internal 3 way active crossovers with time alignment (deh-p860mp and 960mp also have this)(dont want to run an external already have bought enough ) I'll probably be running active some time this year but im just breaking the speakers in running passive atm...
With active you'll have way more control.
05-14-2007, 09:25 AM
#19
^ how do you figure it's harder to tune with an active setup?
Set your x-over points and levels and tune the rest with eq.
How hard is that? I guess it's harder than connecting speaker wires to a plastic box, but the benefits of active out-weigh the simplicity of Passive 10 fold.
Set your x-over points and levels and tune the rest with eq.
How hard is that? I guess it's harder than connecting speaker wires to a plastic box, but the benefits of active out-weigh the simplicity of Passive 10 fold.
05-14-2007, 10:01 AM
#20
if you have the room do a 3way but if you are not willing to put the time into it do a 2way
you asked about amps (the ones i saw was focal and zapco) i would do zapco out of the two . is there a rep for zapco in canada ?
you asked about amps (the ones i saw was focal and zapco) i would do zapco out of the two . is there a rep for zapco in canada ?
