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?
My Vandersteen history goes back to 1991, when I bought a pair of 3A's. At that time, I had the honor of meeting a very (as I) young Richard Vandersteen. He actually helped load them in my Suburban. The 3A's were upgraded to Signature in 1997. All Vandersteen's must be setup properly and take considerable break-in time - a properly proportioned listening room also helps!
I agree with you! My 3A's are very natural sounding and pair well with my old MC240 and C11. I've tried several other high watt amp/preamp combos but keep going back to the 57 year old Macs, eventhough, Vandersteen recommends 100W per channel! Simply put, it's a sound that suits my musical tastes, much as a vintage Oregon Pinot Noir. When I want to really chill-out, I put an LP on my old Thorens TD160, turn up the volume and immerse myself in my private concert hall!
As a vandersteen owner I will admit there can be a cultish quality to vandersteen enthusiasts. What I will also say is that if you liked B&Ws better that your probably not someone that digs the vandersteen sound. B&Ws tend to be very bright to my ears. Yes, they will sound glittery and detailed but after some time they start to fatigue my ears. They tend to pair well with really tubey warm stuff like Macintosh. For me the vandys are more natural, more real. But this is just my opinion. You have your opinion. Ultimately , in hifi, we each have our own. It doesn't mean something is good or bad, its just our preference. I loved my old 2ce and love my quatros. Vandersteen for life!
what i've long admired about the "vandy" sound is that they seem to commit sins of omission only. i can live with those. the ones i heard [in an acoustically perfect room, meaning large] were not the last word in definition but they made everything [including old recordings of mediocre sound quality] sound at least tolerable if not 100% shiny. their imaging quality [head-in-vise] was better than average, i could easily get a palpable sense of depth on good stereo recordings. mono recordings came from a very narrow "wodge" between the speakers, that when i moved my head back and forth, smoothly transitioned between the speakers with no lumpiness. i just wished they sounded like that in smaller rooms.
Garbage in = Garbage out, some speakers are designed to be more accurate(polite) these speakers are heavily influenced by source, amplification, quality of recording, and room they are placed in. Some speakers are just more forgiving making everything that passes threw them sound good or better with little thought to room placement or room treatments the SCM-1 sounds like, pun intended, to be a better fit for your room and your gear "Cheers".
The OP was on the Vandy forum and posted some very critical posts-mostly to the effect of how can the speakers be redesigned. He was told in no uncertain terms that he could modify the speakers to his heart’s delight, but the forum would not be party to it. Hence, he is on Audiogon trying to make the Vandy Forum sound ’cult-like’.
Far from it. The forum is for Vandersteen owners to share experiences and learn things they might not have known about. Yes, most forum posters are Vandy fans, we are those that find time and phase correct speakers to provide that ’je ne sais quoi’ that other speakers don’t. If you find ’25 year old Vandersteen technology’ to be so bad, why waste your time complaining?
@2psyop , posted a great reply, as did the other repliers.
I’m on my 2nd pair of Vandy 2CEs... the latest Signature III. I wanted the Treo CT to replace my 20 year old pair of Vandy 2CEs but couldn’t spend $9k. I guess you could say I like the Vandersteen sound, and Richard has sold over 100,000 pairs of the 2 (that success has generated some envy among rivals, I suspect). So, there are a lot of happy V owners, many of whom have moved up to the Treo CT, Quatro CT, Kentos, 5’s, and the amazing 7. I have a short list of other brands which I would consider if I had $20-40k to spend, of course. Or, if I could afford 2 good systems, there are also some 2-way monitors that I would own too for a different experience.
It’s not a cult... they just make a great speaker (and imo they are a good value) if you like the sound. I have not found a US-made full range floorstander that comes anywhere close to the 2CE in performance for $3400. Not even close. They really shine with true bi-wiring and excellent amplification with enough power. I’ve heard them with a $20K Audio Research stack and they shined, rising to the challenge.
Speaker design and opinions about speakers (sound quality) vary greatly. To say the least. What you like or don't like about the used 2CE may be that you don't care for the sound, you didn't have them set up properly, they were damaged , they didn't have enough power driving them or so many other factors. The 2CE has a stellar reputation that goes back decades and Richard is a well respected speaker designer. Glad you like B&W but someone who replaced those same B&W speakers with Klipsch, Revel, Sonus Faber or another brand might say they are inferior??? To each his own...
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
