I finally purchased these speakers as well this week. I purchased the Canton Vento Reference 3 DC and the Vento 866.2 center channel. They arrived yesterday and and I connected them expeditiously. They are absolutely amazing straight out of the box. I am very thrilled and extremely thankful that I came across these posts. I was concerned because there is definitely a dearth of good information on these speakers.
On a down note, I contacted Canton to determine the differences between the 3 DC and the 3.2 DC. The short answer is NOTHING! There is absolutely no difference between them. So A4L / Canton is using a Stereophile review of the 3.2 to price the speakers at $6k. They are then taking the same speakers and branding it 3, linking to the same Stereophile review of the 3.2s. Of course, the obvious question is How are they different?
This alone leans towards fraud, misrepresentation, and false advertising. Maybe borderline. Borderline. Crosses the borderline. However, when they blatantly advertise on the A4L web site that the 3 has the tungsten / manganese tweeter yet the 3.2 has the ceramic tweeter that clearly crosses the line into fraud. The tweeters are exactly the same because they are the same exact speakers. I confirmed this with Canton. The insert included with speakers upon receipt clearly reads ceramic.
I hope no one who purchased the 3.2s actually reads this post if they want to continue to be happy. Ignorance is bliss.
That notwithstanding, the speakers are absolutely amazing. They are definitely Reference quality speakers worthy of a price many-fold more than the $4000 (or $6000) purchase price. Snicker. There seems to not be a resale market for these speakers currently. That’s easy. Don’t sell them or arrange for a private placement. I don’t plan on ever parting with them. They are that AMAZING.
On a down note, I contacted Canton to determine the differences between the 3 DC and the 3.2 DC. The short answer is NOTHING! There is absolutely no difference between them. So A4L / Canton is using a Stereophile review of the 3.2 to price the speakers at $6k. They are then taking the same speakers and branding it 3, linking to the same Stereophile review of the 3.2s. Of course, the obvious question is How are they different?
This alone leans towards fraud, misrepresentation, and false advertising. Maybe borderline. Borderline. Crosses the borderline. However, when they blatantly advertise on the A4L web site that the 3 has the tungsten / manganese tweeter yet the 3.2 has the ceramic tweeter that clearly crosses the line into fraud. The tweeters are exactly the same because they are the same exact speakers. I confirmed this with Canton. The insert included with speakers upon receipt clearly reads ceramic.
I hope no one who purchased the 3.2s actually reads this post if they want to continue to be happy. Ignorance is bliss.
That notwithstanding, the speakers are absolutely amazing. They are definitely Reference quality speakers worthy of a price many-fold more than the $4000 (or $6000) purchase price. Snicker. There seems to not be a resale market for these speakers currently. That’s easy. Don’t sell them or arrange for a private placement. I don’t plan on ever parting with them. They are that AMAZING.