This was the Treo CT. version.
Vandersteen Treo vs 3A Sig as upgrade
I had my local dealer hook up a pair of Treos to demo them and left with a very mixed impression. I like the overall sound. They have a smoother, more refined and sophisticated midrange that the 3A Sigs can't match. I want that. But the bass was less defined and the top end was bright. The sibilance was very exaggerated - this was with CD. Is this the character of the Treo? Thanks!
202 responses Add your response
I'm considering buying Vandersteen Treos. What is the difference between the two tweeters? I know it's going to be subjective, but I'm at least trying to get an idea. Please advise based on your experiences either in home or at a dealer. Thanks much. Oh, my amp will be a Belles integrated with either AQ or Cardas cabling. My room is 16' x 12'. Regards..... |
In a nutshell the CT Carbon Tweeters and further enhanced crossover design within the Treo CT is more like there are no speakers in front of you. Best JohnnyR "... the whole of the
Treo's performance is more than the sum of those parts. There was never a
recording that I didn't enjoy through these speakers ... Highly
recommended." -John Atkinson, Stereophile The Treo is essentially a passive version of the original Quatro Wood, sharing the same driver complement sans the powered-bass system. It too is offered in an array of wood finishes in a strikingly attractive form factor. But the Treo is also a modern take on the legendary Model 2, a paragon of cost-effective performance that's made in the USA, but in an elegant outer package. The Treo is a time- and phase-correct full-range loudspeaker. Because such great demands are placed on the drivers in Vandersteen’s first-order speaker designs, the Treo’s drivers are the kind of highly advanced transducers typically found in cost-no-object designs. The proprietary transmission-line loaded tweeter and Vandersteen’s proprietary Reflection-Free 4.5” midrange driver break up energy from behind these drivers before they can pass directly back into the room and to the listener’s ears. The 6.5” Tri-Woven woofer offers superior transient response and definition in the crucial lower-midrange/midbass frequencies, with the bass foundation supplied by the ported, carbon-loaded 8” woofer with an ultra-long motor assembly. The impedance-compensated crossovers are ultra high-performance designs featuring extreme-quality parts, and individually tuned in an anechoic chamber. Vandersteen’s Minimum Baffle enclosures ensure maximum rigidity, free of time-smearing reflections and diffraction. All of this technology allows the Treos to offer the kind of exceptional resolution, imaging and natural musicality Vandersteens are known for. Magic in the Midrange Vandersteen’s 4.5” Reflection-Free™ Midrange carried a US patent for over 20 years, and the essential design is still the heart of all Vandersteen speakers. Typical midrange drivers are backed by a large, round magnet structure that’s nearly as big around as the driver cone itself. Because drivers cones emit as much energy backward as forward this “back wave” of sonic energy reflects off the magnet structure and arrives at the listener’s ears in time with the primary signal, smearing the timing of the music and creating sonic confusion. Vandersteen’s Reflection-Free midrange avoids this time-domain distortion by using an open back with a cylindrical magnet structure that allows the back wave to be broken up and diffused inside the speaker cabinet so it doesn’t smear the signal reaching the listener’s ears. The result is a pure and open midrange with true Dimensional Purity … VS Carbon CT
The Vandersteen Audio speaker lineup continues to evolve as a result of the research & development efforts that delivered the patented carbon-fiber Perfect-Piston™ drivers used in the flagship Model Seven. Vandersteen’s Treo loudspeaker is now available in an optional Treo CT version (Carbon Tweeter), which is a $1,000 upgrade that features the superb Carbon Tweeter from the renowned Model 5A Carbon. Carbon driver cones offer the pistonic linearity of metal drivers without the unnatural sonic colorations inherent in metal drivers. While the Perfect-Piston Tweeter used in the flagship Model Seven is the fully embodied ideal of high-frequency purity and resolution, the Treo CT delivers a surprising amount of the air, space and natural purity previously heard only in Vandersteen’s top speaker models: the Quatro Wood CT, Model 5A Carbon and the Model Seven. The Treo is essentially a passive version of the Quatro Wood CT, sharing the same driver complement sans the powered-bass system. It too is offered in an array of wood finishes in a strikingly attractive form factor. Like the legendary Model 2, the Treo is a paragon of cost-effective performance that's made in the USA, but in an elegant outer package. The Treo is a time- and phase-correct full-range loudspeaker. Because such great demands are placed on the drivers in Vandersteen’s first-order speaker designs, the Treo’s drivers are the kind of highly advanced transducers typically found in cost-no-object designs. The proprietary transmission-line loaded tweeter and Vandersteen’s proprietary Reflection-Free 4.5” midrange driver break up energy from behind these drivers before they can pass directly back into the room and to the listener’s ears. The 6.5” Tri-Woven woofer offers superior transient response and definition in the crucial lower-midrange/midbass frequencies, with the bass foundation supplied by the ported, carbon-loaded 8” woofer with an ultra-long motor assembly. The impedance-compensated crossovers are ultra high-performance designs featuring extreme-quality parts, and individually tuned in an anechoic chamber. Vandersteen’s Minimum Baffle enclosures ensure maximum rigidity, free of time-smearing reflections and diffraction. All of this technology allows the Treos to offer the kind of exceptional resolution, imaging and natural musicality Vandersteens are known for. |
thanks Johnny. The difference isn't huge, but it's there. A bit larger soundstage, some extra coherency and a touch more natural on the top end, but not a huge difference. Carmenc, as I said, I'm selling my Treo's in cherry to move up to Quatro's if you have interest. Where do you live? It was fun rereading this whole thread. Shows that folks all hear very differently, that's for sure. Ask Richard the difference between the 3 sig's and the Treo's, lol. |
@hifiman5 ......thanks much for the advice. After many trials and errors, Vandersteen is where I'm heading. I think lots of it has to do with the first order crossover, etc.. ( prior Thiel owner ). Also, I like Richards approach to design. It just seems to me to be no nonsense genius without the idiosyncrasies. I really like your system, having owned McCormack and CJ myself in the past. Congrats on your certificate! Regards........ |
I am following this thread with interest because I am considering both the Treo CT and the Quatro CT. I have an older REL sub that I have been using with various stand mount monitors over the past 15 years. I have been totally pleased with this sub setup and am considering the Treo/REL combo vs the Quatro. I know there is debate between the REL sub recommended hookup method vs Richard Vandersteen's. I understand the merits of both approaches and that is not really the point of my post. Assuming I keep the REL sub and let the Treo run full range is it likely that the quality and amount of bass will be on a par with the Quatro and its built in sub? |
@carmenc Speakers can be tough decisions as there are countless well and less well known brands out there. Vandersteens never disappoint musically. Even the modest Model 1s are amazing. I strongly encourage you to go with the Treo CT. I will say the carbon tweeter takes a lot of time to fully break in. When it does, well recorded cymbals take on the brassiness and the correct timbre. Was listening to a Mapleshade jazz CD the other day and you could hear the drummer transition between a larger ride to a smaller ride cymbal because of the change in timbre between the two. Wow. If you like listening to the finest of details like that you will be enthralled. Another thing..., No metal in the tweeter means no ringing. I never realized how much of that can come from even the finest of metal domes until I heard its absence. The depths of the soundstage are illuminated. Its like a pristinely clean window. |
Hi hifiman.....thanks much for your advice/insight. That's my decision now, to purchase a pair of Treos with the metal dome at a good price or save more and opt for the CT. The metal dome Treos are a mint pair of trade ins in a color I really like. I could enjoy those for awhile and then trade them in for some CT to live with for the long run. Good decision to have. Also need to add a better front end like your Marantz. Will keep you posted. Take care! |
Carmenc, you have an email and PM, lol. Let's talk about the Treo's I'm selling. Hifiman shared the biggest difference. Richards ceramic tweeter coating has done a great job at stopping most of the ringing, but the CT is better and that's why it costs so much more to make, sell and replace. Only you can figure out if it's worth the extra cost or not. |
Thanks Ctsooner.....yes, if I were to purchase either new then I think it would be a no brainier , but a mint used pair of the metal dome would sure put a smile on my face at this point. As John said, I can always trade them in for the CT version down the road. At least this gets me into the Vandy family and hopefully off the merry-go-round! Know anyone who has a mint pair of the originals? Lol. regards....... |
@carmenc @ctsooner Wow this sounds like a win win for both of you. Agree with ctsooner about the ceramic coating. As I understand it, Richard employed the ceramic coating to greatly reduce the ringing. I have not had the good fortune to hear that tweeter but knowing Richard he rarely if ever shoots blanks when it comes to implementing a design. carmenc I'll look forward to hearing from you once you guys can get together to do the deal. All the best! |
I've been very happy with the ceramic tweeter. I just want the bass control for my room. I spoke with Richard about the differences in the two. I have heard the CT speakers since day one. I personally think they are the top tweeters I've ever heard. He just gets the tradeoffs right. That's so hard to do and why so many love his speakers. They are very difficult to dislike. Some do, but you can't please everyone. Yes, this could be a win win. |
I realize that all speakers are not for everyone. However, I seem to see this statement made in association with Vandersteen speakers more so than with other brands. I have even heard people say that either you love them or you hate them. Is my observation accurate? If so, what is it about Vandersteen that would tend to make them less universally liked than with other brands. |
If you are into the "hifi" end of things and prefer the excitement of a speaker that flaps your pant legs then you will probably be attracted to studio monitor types or speakers that command your attention by asserting themselves at you. Vandersteens are speakers that tend to invite you in to listen through them. The soundstage is at or slightly behind the front baffle of the speakers. Many more aggressive designs will image in front of the plane of the speakers and present an exciting initial reaction. They jump out demanding to be noticed. In my experience the conversation around such hifi-ish designs centers on discussing the individual drivers' contribution to the sound rather than the beauty of the music being listened to. There is a population in the audiophile realm who are into the excitement of the sound and hear that assertive approach as realistic, portraying what they perceive as a greater facsimile of a live musical event. If that's what they perceive as satisfying, then they should pursue such designs and steer clear of Vandersteens. As much as I embrace the "Vandersteen sound" I have listened to and appreciated the Proacs, Wilsons, and numerous other designs that make some fine, clean sound. With Vandersteens and especially through my recently acquired Treo CT, the music is the driving force when I decide to listen. The speakers disappear as the sound source and the soundspace takes over. It's an invitation to listen rather than a command to do so. Sorry for the length of this but I am struggling to find a way to express this without dismissing the more assertive design approach. I know several listeners for whom the more assertive approach is the more musically satisfying way to go. If that is what they hear as musical truth then so be it. I am happy that they are where they want to be. Last thought...I have not met the listener described above who "hates" Vandersteens. They will describe their experience listening through Vandersteens as "enjoyable" but lacking the ultimate excitement they crave. This fact is why there are so many different brands and types of loudspeakers readily available in audio-land. |
Hifiman....that's one of the best ways to answer this question (that's always being asked). Funny as I was a Proac guy for years and years. I didn't like Vandy's until the last few years. I think I just realized what the music was all about and that's it's not the hifi part. As Vandersteen owners realize, the excitement is there in spades when it's produced that way. That's the cool thing. They are as revealing as any other speaker on the market, but when they are, they are coherent and sound the way the cymbal or piano are meant to be. The mids are lush, when that's what's called for. I appreciate a pair or Harbeths or Audio Notes (or their relatives) for their musicality. Wilson's and Magico's are the dynamic duo, but the Vandersteens will give you the best of both worlds like you basically stated. This thread is turing into a favorite one for me. Yes, partly because I am a Vandersteen fan boy, but it's really interesting to read what many of you other Vandersteen owners hear through your gear. Oh, many of you know Johnny Rutan who owns Audio Connection in Verona, NJ. He often posts on there and I think he may even be on this thread. He's found an inexpensive integrated that mates extremely good with all the Vandersteen's all the way up to the Quatro's. I think it's under 2k or so. He is pairing it up with the Ayre Codex, decent AQ cables and a Clearaudio TT if you want for an incredible system that has true value. Hi end isn't always about how much you spend, it's about HOW you spend it. I wanted to throw that in because so many folks are always getting in touch and asking how they can get into a Treo or more and not kill themselves with associated gear. We all like to share when we hear of these things. Johnny has the name if you want to PM him from this board or call him. (not an ad at all, but I like it when folks hear of something good and share with me). Oh, I just noticed when I scrolled up that he's been posting here: https://forum.audiogon.com/users/audioconnection |
I think I did overstate the issue somewhat by describing unimpressed listeners as "haters". I was clumsily trying to point out that there does seem to be somewhat of a polarizing opinion about the sound of the speakers. I think your explanation makes sense and probably applies to sound of many components/systems. The type of sound that grabs your attention at first does not necessarily hold it for the long term. |
I have had a pair of Treo CT for two months. I have been listening to Vandersteens for the last 30 years, starting with the original 2C, then model 3 to 3A to Signature. The Treo CT is the same as the Quatro CT Wood minus the built in subwoofer system. I went with the Treo CT as I already have two 2wq Vandy subwoofers. If you haven't made a significant investment in subs. and crave deep, well-controlled, powerful bass then the Quatro would be a great way to go. |
@nrenter You may have! As I type this I am listening to Bobby Battle's "The Offering" on Mapleshade and I want to go upstairs to watch a particular show on TV but I keep finding excuses to stay and listen a little longer. That may be one of the most meaningful tests of how much you love what your system is allowing you to hear and enjoy. Lucky you, you are ahead of me by 6 months. I'll have to try to catch up. |
Take my opinion with a grain of salt. The dealer set the Treo CT's and the one 2Wq sub up meticulously. I gave him a few days notice for the demo. He played some incredible music cuts for me. Guess I got caught up in the moment. Even Richard Vandersteen said this was one of his better dealers and said he had a fine ear for different kinds of music. This was in Wisc. I now live in Arizona. I listened to the Quatro Wood Ct's at a Hifi Shop in San Diego. I listened with similar music and while it sounded good, it didn't grab me like the Treo Ct. sub combo did. That store in Wisc. had to my ears what seemed to be almost magical. Some of the best sound I ever heard and I've heard some pretty fine systems over my 45 years as an audiophile. I previously mentioned that I own a pair of Treo Ct's, and couldn't be happier. After listening with a Vandy sub, I really like the way the sound opens up the stage and gives you that incredible sense of space and timbre, something you don't quite hear with the Treo's on their own. This is what the sub does for me, not just giving me a handful of hertz at the bottom end and more dynamics, although I still consider these aspects important to the music as well. In regards to the carbon tweeter, it also helps down into the mid-range where the vocal region resides. I have listened to the standard Treo at length, and the resolution of the carbon tweeter, to my ears, is well worth the extra grand. IMHO. Happy listening to all you new Vandersteen owners out there!
|
@mr_m great post above. I also have Treo CT. I have two 2wq subwoofers and agree completely with what you said referencing dynamic life and the opening up of the soundstage with the quality deep bass from the subs. Interestingly if you read the online magazine "Copper" located at the PS Audio website, their latest issue, #14 has an article about what subwoofers can do for a system. You are echoing a good bit of what he said. Enjoy the music! |
Thanks for the compliment hifiman. This wasn't the first time I heard the qualities while using a sub. I heard a pair of Wilsons with their Thor's Hammer sub with similar results. Although I thought the Vandersteen combo actually sounded better for a lot less money! I will check out the online magazine "Copper" at the PS Audio website. thanks for the "heads up" on that. Question for Ctsooner. Do you need the Vandersteen filters for the Quatro Wood Ct like you do for the 2Wq subs???? |
Are you talking about the crossovers? Yes, adding subs you will only run your main amp from 100hz on up so it frees it up to sound better. Richard has shared that in order to integrate a sub, you need a full range speaker with a one octave cross over in order to do it right. At least right for what he professes. The way he does his subs is that the amp mimics the main amp you are using, so that's why it will sound better than any other brand with Vandersteens. I wasn't saying the Treo CT with one sub wouldn't sound great, just that personally I feel it needs both. I've heard them that way a few times now and it makes a huge difference, but to me I still fee Quatro's are better when set up properly. Was it at Stereo Unlimited in SD? I bought a ton of stuff from Bruce back in the early 80's when I was stationed out there. It's a great store if that's where you were. No grain of salt at all. When I read stuff that I don't fully agree with I always try to go listen to what they are talking about. It's not easy, but I try unless it's outlandish to me, lol. It's all good man. We all love listening to MUSIC and not the components. |
Yes. It was Stereo Unlimited. Don't get me wrong, Bruce has one of the finest stores I've seen/heard along with the incredible Vandersteen 7's. Maybe there was something with the Quatro's setup that wasn't quite right. Who knows? I do agree that two subs would be better than one, but now that I'm retired, I will have to be satisfied with one sub, at least for awhile as disposable income is at a bit of a premium for me right now. But I WILL own two in the not so distant future. Bruce thought I could get by with the less expensive X-2 crossovers instead of the premium crossovers with the batteries. He felt there wasn't much difference in the overall sound compared to the cheaper X-2's. Richard Vandersteen says differently....Hmmm....decisions, decisions. |
I'm very late, but a cheap meter is a phone with a calibrated mic ($25) and app. On android I use sound tools. It's very nice, and has much better extension than most SPL meters. Dayton imm6 Also works with Room EQ Wizard if you get fancy. Best, Erik |
@mr_m I have the M5-HP adjustable Vandy crossovers. I have two 100k ohm X-2 in mint condition if that would happen to be the value you need . I was just looking at your integrated online but could not find the input impedance listed. You would want an X-2 that is roughly 1/2 the input impedance of the Rogue. |
@mr_m I bought them a number of years ago when I first got my subs. so I had no idea of what they cost. I called Vandersteen today to find out that a new pair of X-2 crossovers is $140. They are worthless at the moment stored in my stereo room closet (they are in the original sealable plastic bag with the owner's sheet). I would be willing to part with them for $40 including shipping cost. That might net me enough for a new SACD or 180 gram LP. If they are not the right value for you I would honor that price to anyone in the continental U.S. |
Dallas....and I will listening to the "R" version. I had a pair of Proac Response 1sc for an extended loan about 15 years ago. I loved the sound of those little stand mounts. I have been interested in auditioning the larger Proacs ever since. I haven't heard the Treo in a number of years..and it was not the CT version. I don't think the dealer in Dallas has a pair of Quatros to demo at this time. |
I heard those 30R's that you will be auditioning, lol. I actually bought the Linn Kiko system he had as he wanted to get rid of it and I wanted something for the bedroom. It's worked ok. I personally think the Vandersteens are much more detailed, dynamic, realistic etc... I don't love the Proac bass. I never did and I have owned three pair for over 20 years. I recently sold all of them. I still like the Proac's and there is a reason so many Vandersteen dealers carry ProAc also. Their ribbon is the sweetest Iv'e heard honestly. I like it better than so many of the esoteric 30k plus ribbons. That's just me, but the CT Vandersteen's magic mids win out. The presentation is about 20 rows back and not upfront. I personally like that as it allows the music to mature and I like air around the notes, just like it is at Carnegy Hall or the local Infinity venue we like to go to. It will be interesting to hear what your thoughts are. Last year they had a pair of Zebrawood Quatro's that were gorgeous. I am still thinking I may go with that veneer when I order mine. Either that or I may have them upgrade to heavy metal flake dark Crimson. I think I'd love that look in my room and I'm not selling for a long time so I don't care if folks don't want to buy that look, lol. The Treo CT's are special speakers. If you loved the Proac's like I have/do, I think you are in for a treat, unless the guy showing them likes the Proac's better. I always always keep in mind that the dealers make more on selling Proac's so they often try to steer us that way ;)....Things to always keep in mind when purchasing, lol....you obviously know what you are doing randy. I've followed your posts, so it will be neat to hear about your auditioning....I forget the guy I worked with there, but I went to OU and have sent them a lot of business over the years. he was a younger guy I think. I'd tell you to say hi for me, lol. |
I really wanted to like the Treo, I really did. I even went to the extent of taking a couple of my friends to listen to them at a Vandersteen dealership and they both had the same opinion, "Your 3A Signatures sound better." Although the Treo does seem to have a more focused midrange, it's simply not enough to over come the lack of low end that the 3A Signatures possess...(the lack of low end could be an advantage if you lived in an apartment)...If only Vandersteen would come out with a 3A Signature CT, I think they'd have a damn near perfect speaker. |
Guys, the bass on the Treo is nearly as low as the 3a sig's, but tighter. I hear folks make the statement that the 3 bass is better, but it just isn't, especially if things are set up correctly. Richard is the first to tell you this. I play everything and I think I've got some very high end gear that is revealing as heck and the Treo bass is much better. Does it go quite as deep? No, but honestly, very little music has that much information down that low where the difference would be. What you are listening to is the bass that you are used to and like, which is fine. The Treo is just a faster speaker and much better overall. If it wasn't, they wouldn't sell it i promise you. that takes nothing away from you guys who love your speakers. You should, lol. |
ctsooner - More accurate reproduction alone does not a better speaker make. Musicality and accuracy without bass drive = Treo. It's OK for polite listening but is less than the sum of its parts on bass heavy rock. BTW there is plenty of rock with bass in the low 30's. Without the oomph behind it that the Sigs deliver the Treo = fail on those recordings. No boogie, no pace, no timing necessary for bass driven music, like the most fun rock is. Quoting the designer won't change that. Suggesting that your superior gear makes your opinion more powerful won't change that. Saying people can't be objective because they're "used to" bad bass won't change that. If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it's a duck. The Treo cannot Boogie, it quacks on heavy rock. The required foundation is just not there. It's a decent speaker. Quick, light and accurate - sure. But where's the beef? In the 3A Sig. |