Add a Subwoofer to my Vandersteen 1ce s or replace with Revel Concerta2 F36


Hey Audiogon community,
    Perhaps you guy can help here. I have a VPI Scout with Sound Smith Zephyr III Cartridge running into a Musical Fidelity v-LPS that runs into a NAD VISO 5 Receiver and back out to a pair of Vandersteen 1ce's. Since I recently bought the Zephyr III, it revealed some inadequacies, and I am in upgrade mode. My audio advisor from Brooks Berdan suggested I start with the speakers. Mind you, I Love my Vandersteens but wish there was deeper bass realism. I have been listening to the Revel concerta2 F36  recently with a Cronus Magnus powering them via some entry level Oracle turntable. I like the F36 a lot, and feel like they would give me more full range dynamics especially on the low end. I am looking at upgrading to the Rogue Cronus Magnus soon as well. And am hoping that upgrading to the F36 is the smarter choice than adding a sub that would seamlessly integrate. Any thought would be appreciated. Thank you.
voodooman13

Showing 4 responses by bondmanp

My personal experience was similar to yours; trying to improve on the sound of Vandersteen 1Cs. I had a Def Tech sub, but it wasn’t doing the trick. I eventually acquired a pair of Vandy 2Wq subs. Better, but I still found the sound wanting. I upgraded from the in-line crossovers to the M5-HP battery biased crossovers and heard more transparency, but still found the system wanting. Too much etch and grain and congestion in the upper-mids and lower trebles. After upgrading my amp, preamp, DAC, cabling and power filtering, and treating the room, I finally concluded I had taken the 1Cs as far as they could go, without satisfactory results. But those 2Wqs I absolutely love, and still have. In fact, when I began the search for new mains, one requirement I had was that they reach 40Hz without any issues so that I could keep the 2Wqs in the system (they are that good, IMHO). In late 2009, I tried a home demo of Ohm Walsh 2000s, and have been thrilled with them ever since. I have heard many, many systems, with and without subs, and I would never go back to a system without subwoofers. Just my 2 cents; YMMV.

voodooman13 - Please keep in mind that the 2 has evolved dramatically throughout its ~40 year run.  Parts and drivers have been improved significantly over the years.  I think there may be details about the 2's evolution on Vandersteen's web site.  Plus, if not well cared for, the "socks" on the cabinets and the cloth insert on the top can look pretty bad after 10 or 15 years. 


You could also ask the dealers in you area to keep you posted on any 2's that get traded in to that dealer.  Knowing they have a ready buyer for a recent minty pair will encourage the dealer to make the trade up for the current owner to work out.


I bought my Vandy's and my current speakers new, but I have bought other speakers used, including my Vandy subs and the crossovers, and have had no problems with any of them.  But speakers do wear out with age, and may need some repairs to restore original performance.  Most common are the foam surrounds of larger cone drivers that disintigrate over time.  I am about to have these replaced in my vintage (and purchased new in 1978) Advent Large speakers.  Other parts, like crossover components, can also fail over time, and require replacement.

I totally concure with ctsooner's opinions of the 2Wq sub.  Also, I never feel as if I have sacrificed extension or output for accuracy (of course, that's with two of them and the MHP5 crossovers).  I am sure mr_m will be pleased.  I would recommend you mass load them on top (I use boxes of ceramic tiles and ammo).
hifiman5:  HA!  My weight "choices" were determined by a shortage of storage space for several boxes of ceramic tile and a lot of ammo.  Sometimes, stuff just kind of falls into place.  LOL!