Anyone dislike Ohm Walsh speakers?

I have owned W2-100s3 for about 14 yrs. Originally bought original W2s online in MA then sent to John to upgrade before shipping to me in HI. I previously owned Ohm C3s.I also own Kef R3s, Spendor LS3/5, JBL L110, Rogers LS3/5. The Ohms are my favorite for their openness. imaging, bass, easy placemtn and natural sound. My only issue with them is they are not good at low volume/low power for late night listening.thua the Kefs. I also have a wierd, packed room which is also my living room so the omnis work well in that space. For the money I think they are very good The cabinet work is good not great. Ohm Customer Service is good too as JOhn is reposnsive. They did take a number of months to break in and they like good power if you want them to respond best. There are some other speakers I would love to look at but they would all be quite a bit more than these cost, like $8-10K.

Saw this thread, which I previously responded to and it sparked a recurring question in my mind. For anyone who has the current 2000s and heard earlier Ohm Walsh 2 variants, what do you gain with the 2000s upgrade or new buy soundwise? I have been haunted by the sound of some Vandersteen Treo CTs I heard a few years back and have thought about selling ALL my speakers and buying those. Then I listen to my Ohms and how well they work in my so so listening space and think I am delusional. Then I recall that my 2-100S3 version speakers are about 15 years old and in theory better sound is available in upgrading to the 2000 units. So, anyone can articulate the benefits the hear? BTW, John's input was that the bottom end benefited from the 2000 upgrade. I am happy with that aspect of the speaker and if that is all I gain, then it is back to either keep them or go to the Vandersteens which are about 4x the price and of which I know nothing about their placement issues.