I've owned B&W 802 Matrix Series 3 for 20 some years. Always wanted Wilson Watt Puppies but after reading this article a lot of the engineering Richard Vandersteen did in the 70's and 80's seems to indicate that he was ahead of the times. Listening to the "brightness" of the B&W's or Wilson's sounds sweet but my goal is to hear the same sound as produced in the studio. From an engineering standpoint Richard has addressed many of the engineering issues that cloud sound reproduction. I've listened to Vandersteen's a little bit and still have not decided on Vandersteen Quatro Wood CT's or Wilson Watt Puppies.
Vandersteen Forum
I bought an older pair of Vandersteen 2Ce and did not like them. Found out one woofer was crackling (what I did not like was poor tweeter and midrange). I went onto the Vandersteen forum to see if changing a component or two would better the sound than 25 year old speakers. In 2022 almost anyones speakers sound better than 25 year old Vandersteen technology.
The replies raised my eyebrows. I was just wondering if anyone else has had any experience with that forum and did they find it cult-like or is it just me?
Showing 2 responses by covey
I am an aerospace engineer. My dad was an audiophile for decades. He designed and built his own amps, preamps, feedback loop subwoofer (circa 60's), and even designed and built an electronic starter for cars in 1973-4. Because of this background I have always looked at specs. Over time I started getting away from the engineering and started listening to the music. This can be good and bad. Everyone has a sound they like, hence all the variations of sound from manufacturers. However, if the goal is to repeat the sound as it was produced then you can't turn away from the engineering/science. I've now come full circle; I will look at specs then listen but if the specs are bad I won't. I own a pair of B&W 802 D3 Matrix for over 20 years. Been very happy with them. My goal was not to color the music. I liked these speakers because of their "newer design" stiff individual boxes for woofer, mid, and tweeter so as not to color the sound. I'm in the market for new speakers now. I have always been impressed with the sound of Wilson WATT Puppies, ignoring the specs, they sound brilliant. This could be due to men not having as good capability to hear highs. Again, I want no coloration, my definition of my goal as an audiophile. When reading about speaker design, enclosures/reflections, baffles, cross-overs, and cone distortion I saw few that met my goal, no distortion. Then I read this article SoundStage-Richard-Vandersteen.pdf (troelsgravesen.dk) I've read your above comments, thinking Vandersteen people are cult like, so maybe you will consider me as another "drinking the Kool-Aid." Again, I don't own a pair of Vandersteen's I read the article regarding his research and reasoning. If your goal is to have speakers that reproduce the sound, then they should be time and phase correct; I had to consult an expert in electronic cross over theory. His statement is that you can't simply change the polarity + to - to correct for phase. I think Richard Vandersteen created his first speak, with multi-cabinet enclosures and minimal baffles in the 70's. In the 70's all speak designs, except of V, had one enclosure with a huge baffle which creates distortion. He even looked at when the speaker cone is on the return, there is reflection (distortion) due to speaker structure, to create minimal distortion. When I looked at the Wilson Watt-Puppies plots, phase correctness, ect, I was at best disappointed. From an engineering standard V are better. It's up to you if you like the sound. |