Vandersteen 3x Owners: More Bass?

I had a pair of 2Cis for 12 years in a 2 channel system located in a large living room with a cathedral ceiling. I listen to a lot of jazz and the bass was incredibly good - I never considered I needed subs to extend or fill the low end in. The base response measured below 30 hz at 3 db down. The 3s are an improvement on the bottom end so I'm sure they would have performed even better.

If I was trying to combine a HT with my 2 channel, I suspect I would have wanted a more floor shaking kick for movies, and the 2WQ subs would have definitely been the way to go.

Assuming you are considered an upgrade to a 2 channel, I suggest that you consider investing first in the best source and front end you can afford before adding subs.

I agree that your front end is not an issue and especially like the CD3 as a CDP. One of my friends has the 3A/2Wq combination and in his listening room the bass did not sound nearly as good as the 2Cis without subs did in my room. The room can make such a big difference!

I am currenly blessed with the 5As and the subs have made a huge positive difference in my listening experience. They are so well integrated that you never "hear" them and recogize them as subs. The bass is extended,natural and present at all listening levels. I can turn the volume down and still "feel" the music. The bass in jazz has much more realism and richness - you can better hear the notes and harmonics, not just the pulse of the string.

If you have good bass performance currently in your room, you can probably improve it measurably with the 2Wqs and I would highly recommend it. If not, you might want to explore room measurements and reconfigurations first. More information on your room would help.

Your room and setup sounds ideal and not too different from my own. My room is 18W by 30L by 11H (with cathedral ceilings). I too have positioned the speakers out from the back wall and listen in the near field.

The advantages of the 5As over the 3ASigs/2Wqs are many:

Better mid driver, and better cones.
Total seamless integration of speakers and subs.
A 400 watt amp with plenty of reserve.
Fully adjustable in 10 bands to flatten response.
Adjustable level and Q.
Less total furniture and a better looking speaker (WAF).
A cross-over that unloads the amp and thus cleans up the highs.

I don't know about your 10%, but this combination can't be beat at this price in my opinion.

I am using an ARC CD3, an ARC LS 25 MKII, and an ARC VT 100 MKIII. There seems to be a great synergy with ARC and Vandersteen 5As, and I am running all balanced. Without going into too much detail, I have good image height, width and depth, good separation and definition within the image, no apparent digital grain or harshness, and a roundness to the vocals. I have auditioned both the 5s and 5As in the same room with the same electronics and the 5As are a distinctly obvious improvement on both the top and bottom.

All that being said, the 3ASig/2Wq combination is very good and very reasonably priced, and would raise your current performance. You could go this route with the 5As in your future and have little trouble turning that equipment over later via AGON.

While I agree that the location for best imaging and the location for best bass are in geneneral not the same, in my room they are not very far apart and the controls on the 5A easily corrected for the difference. (Only the bottom two bands were adjusted slightly for flat performance.)

The additional controls on the 5A sub seem to overcome the advantage of physical separation as in the 2Wq. There may be problematic rooms where this is not the case and separating the subs might help, but I would imagine additional solutions would be needed as well.

Since Vandersteen has designed both separate subs and integrated subs I suspect he fully appreciates the pros and cons. I find the 5A subs to be the best integrated and best sounding subs I have ever heard. They disappear along with the speakers leaving a naturally distributed sound stage. So for me they work very well indeed.

4yanx, sorry for misleading you. I was comparing the virtues of separate versus integrated subs. The 5A subs cannot be improved on IMO.

Pubul57, the search never stops! (:-)

My next step is addressing power and conditioning. I am currently running 2 Richard Grey 400s in series, with the pre on the first and the CD on the second. The amp and subs are direct. Everything is driven off a single 15 amp circuit with nothing else on it. The 15 amp circuit is a very short run (15 ft.) to the main.

Frankly, I have virtually inaudible ambient speaker noise (even without the RGs), and such great performance that I can't imagine that I can improve on it. Is it possible that the all ARC, all balanced equipment is so well designed and so compatible that any power issues are accounted for?

However, based on AGON reviews and given the reasonably low cost, I can't see any down side to adding dedicated circuits. I would put 3-20 amp circuits in (1 for the amp and 1 for each sub), and 2-15 amp circuits in (1 for the pre and 1 for the CD).

Have you any experience in this area?