I have some friends who use the new Vandersteen Sub 3 over their previous REL in that situation since they design them to keep the sound of the main amps so you can tell where they cross over , plus that takes the load under 120hz away from the main amp and speakers. Speakers and a,ps get the advantage here. They are also fully adjustable for the room with a built in 11 band EQ. Just a thought. Designs change and maybe the newer speakers just don’t kick like the older ones. No idea there. Good luck
Underpowered?
Hi guys. Newbie here asking for advice.
I recently purchased a pair of B&W 702 Signature (8Ω, 30-300W, 90 dB) to replace my old faithful 683s (8Ω, 20-200W, 90 dB). I am running them with a McIntosh MA252 (100W into 8Ω, 160W into 4Ω). I purchased them thinking they would complete my end-game system. However, my excitement turned into disappointment when I realized the lows were somewhat lacking. For all their faults, the 683s had a great dynamic low kick (no sub) that I was looking to take one step further. Unsurprisingly, the highs and mids on the 702s were indeed more detailed and separation was clearer, but I couldn't get over the uninspiring lows. I found myself listening at higher volumes chasing for that bass oomph. Neither playing with the EQ at the source nor the amp was satisfactory. So, I did the research that perhaps I should've done before purchasing the 702s and found out they are quite power hungry despite the specs being similar to the 683s. I emailed B&W and McIntosh and they agreed the amp is probably underpowered for the 702s. B&W described the sound of an underpowered speaker as one lacking low response and details, which is spot on. McIntosh suggested the MA352 (200W into 8Ω, 320W into 4Ω).
Of note, I love the MA252 and really wish there was a way to make this work. I don't need a DAC/streamer/etc so I'm happy to put all my money on better sound vs tech features. But I also think the speakers sound amazing even when somewhat underpowered and I'm considering upgrading to a MA352, Michi X3, Hegel 390. Another option could be to get a sub? But I feel that would defeat the purpose of having a 3way standing speaker and then I might as well get a pair of bookshelf speakers (805 D4s, LS50 metas?).
So what do you guys think? Is it normal for a speaker that's rated 30-300W to be underpowered with a 100W amp?? What would you do:
-
Sell the 702s and look for a better match for my MA252?
-
Upgrade the MA252 (MA352? Michi X3? NAD 33?)?
-
Get a subwoofer?
I would really appreciate your thoughts/advice!
Showing 4 responses by ctsooner
If you have played with placement and still aren’t happy, maybe it’s time to move the speakers. Go audition others with your amp. 100w that can double into 4ohms is plenty powerful for most speakers in a reasonable room. The Mac gear isn’t my favorite, but it’s a premium amp that does very listen wrong (for the price I just like some other gear better in My system). I have friends who own Vandersteen’s and Wilson’s who love Mac with it. I’ve never heard that amp sound bad, nor unpowered ever. adding a sub just adds more to the equation. In the right situation they can be awesome, but in you case why throw more money if you are chasing your tail to get better bass from a pair of speakers. Multiple ways to fix something that shouldn’t need fixing. Good luck. | ||||||||||||||||
I honestly don't think you are underpowered. What size room are you in and do you have an app to see how many decibels you are hearing? Please keep in mind that your speakers only go down to 46 hz or so. That's not low at all. From what I remember of the speaker (S2 version), the bass is very tight, but not 'full' like you'd expect a floor stander this size to have. Did a quick comp spec wise (not listening, just to show the difference in bass and efficiency). the 702 sells for $6K/pr. The Vandersteen sells for $3,600/pr including the stands. That's nearly twice the cost.
Vandersteen 2CE Signature III:
B&W 702 S2:
| ||||||||||||||||