Difference between mono/stereo 2, 3 way

[Dubravac]

Hello everyone, new to this forum and i in advance thank you for all your help. I would like to know the difference between the below.

 

Mono 2-way

Mono 3-way

Stereo 2-way

Stereo 3-way

 

As my band is looking to purchase a new crossover, i'm getting confused with what these terms actually mean. Looking at both the 223XL and 234XL. Right now my band is uses to power amps, with our top speakers being run to one amp, and our subs being run to the other amp. Again, appreciate your help.

[TheDoctorMo]

2-Way = Highs and Lows

3-Way = Highs, Mids and Lows

 

Mono 2-Way requires 2 amplifier channels

Stereo 2-Way requires 4 amplifier channels

 

Mono 3-Way requires 3 amplifier channels

Stereo 3-Way requires 6 amplifier channels

[witesol]

the 223xl is a stereo two way(left and right for your top cabinets and left and right subs), so for you it seems like the way to go. xl meaning it has XLR(mic cord) ins/outs. the 234 can go 3 way stereo, meaning horns, mids and subs in stereo, and it can go 4 way in mon o...probably not what you need.

[Unalaska]

The 234XL (3way stereo) is not capable of running 2 way stereo IIRC. For 90% of users a 2 way stereo is just fine. Use balanced XLR cables whenever possible.

[jwlussow]

 

Right now my band is uses to power amps, with our top speakers being run to one amp, and our subs being run to the other amp.

 

 

You have a 2 way system, as described. The crossover outs have highs and lows. A three way system's crossover will have highs, mids, and lows. That will also require extra amp channels, as stated above.

[Dubravac]

The band i play in basically has two EV QRX 115/75's on each side and 2 118S bins on each side .... what would be the best way to run this setup ? Right now, we have two power amplifiers ... the tops go in to one amp, the bins go into the second ... one cable from each speaker ... would that be considered 2-way Mono ?

 

And DoctorMo, what do you mean by amplifier channels ... each of our amp has two channels. So 2 power amps, 4 channels ...

[jwlussow]

You would need one more amp (and speakers that will allow it) to go three way. Mono or stereo is determined by the signal sent to the amps. Do you run a stereo system (separate left and right sends with panning on the board)? Chances are you are 2 way mono, which is probably the most common setup out there.

 

You do currently have a crossover, correct?

[Unalaska]

2 amps, 4 channels total. This is my recommendation:

 

Mixer - EQ (stereo 31 band) - crossover (stereo 2 way)

 

x-over LOW (left/right) - Largest amp CH1 & 2 - QRX118's L & R (1 cable per amp channel)

x-over HIGH (left/right) - smaller amp CH1 & 2 - QRX115's L & R (1 cable per amp channel)

 

No one says you have to run stereo, to run mono simply use only the LEFT side of the EQ & crossover. Only the largest amp will be needed, subs CH1 and tops CH2.

 

hope that helps

[Unalaska]

Amps when run in stereo don't care what each channel is doing, it's discreet and each side only shares a power supply (some even don't share that!). And amps don't care if a speaker is plugged in either, so use them however needed.

[Dubravac]

Yes, that helps immensely Unalaska. So if i'm going to go 2-way stereo ... i could just grab the DBX 223XL, which will suit my needs ?

 

And last question, at least in this thread .. lol .. what power amplifiers do you recommend with my QRX speakers. On Sweetwater, they say you should have an amp that is double the wattage of your continuos speaker wattage per channel ... therefore, as it applies to mine .. my tops are 400W and my subs are 600W ... therefore i would need an amp that has 800W and 1200W PER CHANNEL ?? That seems like overkill too me, but i'll ask you guys, the experts ...

[Coaster]

 

Yes, that helps immensely Unalaska. So if i'm going to go 2-way stereo ... i could just grab the DBX 223XL, which will suit my needs ? And last question, at least in this thread .. lol .. what power amplifiers do you recommend with my QRX speakers. On Sweetwater, they say you should have an amp that is double the wattage of your continuos speaker wattage per channel ... therefore, as it applies to mine .. my tops are 400W and my subs are 600W ... therefore i would need an amp that has 800W and 1200W PER CHANNEL ?? That seems like overkill too me, but i'll ask you guys, the experts ...

 

 

223xl is fine. i have one in my rack and know of three others in town that all work fine. i wouldnt go too crazy with those speakers power wise, maybe 500 for the tops and 750 for subs, or stick to the rms rating if that gives you what you need. more experienced folks can go higher power if they desire.

[Unalaska]

No more that 5/600 per on the top and 750/900 on subs. That may be too much. Check out the Yamaha P5000's and P7000's (ignore the crossover in the amp), that would be 500w and 700w per channel @ 8 right there and the ability to run everything off one amp (if needed) or double up subs and tops. Really most amps will be able to do this. Avoid bridging, power is cheap.

 

Other good amps:

Crown XTi2000 on tops, XTi4000 on subs

Crest CPX2600's on subs and the next smallest on tops

QSC PLX 2502 on tops, 3102 on subs

QSC RMX... nah, too heavy

 

you get the idea

[Rezrover]

 

The band i play in basically has two EV QRX 115/75's on each side and 2 118S bins on each side ....

 

 

And if you really want to complicate things, those tops are Bi-ampable so you can go three way if you want.

 

http://www.electrovoice.com/documents/ev/QRx-115_75-EDS.pdf

[agedhorse]

 

And last question, at least in this thread .. lol .. what power amplifiers do you recommend with my QRX speakers. On Sweetwater, they say you should have an amp that is double the wattage of your continuos speaker wattage per channel ... therefore, as it applies to mine .. my tops are 400W and my subs are 600W ... therefore i would need an amp that has 800W and 1200W PER CHANNEL ?? That seems like overkill too me, but i'll ask you guys, the experts ...

 

 

Because they make more money selling bigger amps, then later on more money selling parts to fix damaged speakers.

 

Somewhere around the RMS rating up to maybe 1.5x the RMS rating is the maximum I would recommend for most users.

[Dubravac]

So if i follow correctly agedhorse ... for my tops i should get an amp that gives out 600W per channel, and 900W for my subs ... (speakers i have are listed above).

[6Imzadi]

that's also what unalaska suggested above. Yes.

[agedhorse]

Yes.

[The Real MC]

Two way mono is sufficient for small clubs.

 

Halls can benefit from two-way stereo.

 

Three way mono/stereo is best applied for theaters and small to medium size outdoor events.

 

Four/Five way is reserved for the sports arenas and festivals. My UREI 525 can put out 2, 3, 4, 5 way but I'm not equipped to supply sound for the arenas or festivals.

[Craig Vecchione]

Depends.

 

There can be little advantage to running stereo for the mids/highs, and zero advantage to running subs in stereo. Depends on the room and scope (size) of rig. The wider the separation, assuming audience space is proportionally wider, the more difficult it gets to provide a usable stereo image to the majority of the room. You can wind up barely panning many channels, losing the effect in favor of giving the whole room the entire mix.

 

If you've got a large rig where you need to use separate amps for left and right stacks anyway, the added cost for cabling to run stereo is very minimal, and it becomes only an issue of whether the room sounds better mono or stereo. For a small bar rig, stereo is probably not worth the cost and effort.

[witesol]

 

No more that 5/600 per on the top and 750/900 on subs. That may be too much. Check out the Yamaha P5000's and P7000's (ignore the crossover in the amp),

 

 

 

i was just reading through this thread and saw this,..

 

i have a "b" rig of two p7000 and a p3500 (monitors) at it's permanent home and i used the onboard "subwoofer" setting along with the highpass for top 7000. it works surprisingly well, so much so that i've not put a xover in the rack for two years now.. fyi

[DaBender]

Are these recommendations based on one speaker per channel? Isn't it perfectly safe and a whole lot more economical to run 2 per channel?

[6Imzadi]

 

Depends. There can be little advantage to running stereo for the mids/highs, and zero advantage to running subs in stereo. Depends on the room and scope (size) of rig. The wider the separation, assuming audience space is proportionally wider, the more difficult it gets to provide a usable stereo image to the majority of the room. You can wind up barely panning many channels, losing the effect in favor of giving the whole room the entire mix.

 

 

I have what some would call a "dual mono" rig. I call it stereo. I pan the CD for break music L+R so that it sounds like the record. For the band, I have one guitar player. He has a 412 cabinet(Marshal) and I have two mics on it. Each are panned about 10 O'clock and 2 O'clock. I have a keyboard player. His is panned hard left and right. I have 4 back up singers. They are panned a little away from center to make room for the lead singer who is panned in the middle. Bass is center as is the kick. snare is off to the right a bit. The 2 toms are at 11 and 1.

Call it dual mono or stereo. It works really well for me with this band.

[Unalaska]

Mono is certainly fine and means less amp channels/eq/crossover channels. Mono 2way o-xovers aren't available but just use the left channel of a stereo one. Instead of 2 amps, use 1. I've done many gigs mono bi-amp with just a Yamaha P7000 driving subs/tops using the internal crossover, it works just fine and saves 1 rack space and the $ needed to buy an external xover.

[6Imzadi]

Mono is certainly fine and means less amp channels/eq/crossover channels. Mono 2way o-xovers aren't available but just use the left channel of a stereo one. Instead of 2 amps, use 1. I've done many gigs mono bi-amp with just a Yamaha P7000 driving subs/tops using the internal crossover, it works just fine and saves 1 rack space and the $ needed to buy an external xover.

 

You know, that's great. If you have all sorts of crap to choose from. I don't. Most here don't, either. Not that there's anything wrong with that. It's just that I have one system and it's like it is all the time. There's no rearranging of things to make something else. [/soapbox]

 

For the original poster, running the most simple system setup is probably going to be the best for him right now.

 

About a year into my soundman career, I was operating a mono 4 way system with each "way" a separate box. It was a monstrosity. The guy who owned it was kinda that way, too. But, I digress. That system was hard to control and was over my head as far as making it sound flat. I did alright, and learned alot. I would never want to see a newbie, like I was, try to get in over their head to run something more complex than they should be into. Whether they know it or not.

 

That's my 0.02, and I'm sticking to it.

[Unalaska]

At the time I was getting into live sound it was the late 90's and there were still dinosaur peavey FH/MB systems around, many guys that bought the JBL drivers (for a lot of $!) and built boxes for them. PA speakers were just starting to get more affordable and the biggest MI amps were still 200w @ 8 pc. I bought simple easy to use stuff cuz I was poor at the time, the best values were EV S15's and an EV 7300 amp. Keeping it simple was key and always has been. The whole point of mono bi-amp is simple, 3 amps can do mains and 4 mixes in a small footprint.

 

Anyway, tomorrow is a standard 9pc band on the 01V. Gotta drive the cargo van so I have to pack light (and I'm working alone too). Might buy another ADA8000 on the way up since the 1st one I have is in daily use lately in my studio.