I find the answers provided so far to be very curious. As someone who has owned good quality 2, 2.5, and 3-way speakers, there are general marked differences between the three designs.
And functionally, price isn’t everything, as many companies dump cash into nice cabinets and drivers that appear more premium.
General observations:
-
Every two-way speaker has to compromise due to a woofer/tweeter handoff at a specified frequency. Either it is crossed too high, muddying the midrange, or two low, coloring the tweeter. The best two ways minimize this, but it is impossible to avoid.
-
The more drivers, generally the better the bass. Often this is cabinet size and multi-driver excursion, though some transmission line 2-way designs do very well.
-
Well engineered 3-ways will typically have cleaner midrange with better presence. Again, these crucial frequencies aren’t being slopped up by the woofer, and the handoff between the midrange driver and tweeter can be better set at less critical frequencies. Must have a good crossover.
-
2.5 ways (now very common in mid-fi speakers) simplifies the crossover, and generally bumps the bass, as one woofer handles all bass and mids, while a second has a filter that hands it only bass. Generally not as clean a mid presentation as a true 3-way, but a good compromise for those who love bass.
I have tried various high quality 2-way floor standers and stand-mount speakers ar various times. My current active systems have:
-
Monitor Audio Silver 6. 2.5 ways, but glorious mids when paired with a tube amp.
-
Wharfedale Diamond 12.3. Very nice compact 2.5 way floorstanders, with good all-around sound, though not as open in the mids as the MAs.
-
B&W 683S1 - true 3 ways with two woofers, front ports, thundering bass, yet subtle and nuanced in the mids. My personal favorites, despite being the least expensive.
Best I can state is that regardless of how good a set of two-ways is, they always seem to be missing a certain something good 3-ways have.
I had a pair of the RX1 once, and the little boxes sound great, but not enough SPL or bass for anything other a nearfield or very very small room system.
I’ve also noticed the Wharfedales are a bit less fussy with equipment pairings and bad recordings. The tweeter is not as sharp as the MA one, meaning some detail does get lost, but they also do not become strident or shrill.
I think the RX line does well with analog sources like vinyl. If you’re streaming, the Wharfies are a better fit. And as always, feed them good clean power (I’m partial to British integrated amps), or you may not be maximizing their potential.
And if cheap enough, you could always buy and try, and sell the set you don’t like. Everyone has different gear, ears, rooms and sources - you may not like something I do.