Ohm Walsh 2000 vs MMG vs Vandersteen 2ce Sig?

WOW! Thanks for that link, I was unaware of HHR. That's VERY cool, too bad they are as pricy as that, but if I were in the $10-20K speaker market, I'd sure give them a listen.

I remember auditioning Ohm Fs in the very early eighties... Ohm Acoustics had only just introduced the "Walsh 2" then. The sales manager for "Tec Hi-Fi" (the main Ohm dealer in those days) was a friend so I was able to take a pair of 2s and Fs home for a week end. I was extremely impressed, but thought they sounded a little rolled off at the top, and were really placement sensitive. I was using a Crown IC150, & two DC300s to drive them so volume wasn't an issue! I ended up buying AR9s instead, but at least I bought the Crowns from my Tec HI-Fi buddy. I ended up going through Walsh 2s,3s, then 4s through the eighties in second room systems, and I'm convinced the later models were/are true improvements over the originals in imaging, high end, and sensitivity. But there was something "magical" about the full range Walsh if you have a room perfectly set up for them, and enough juice to drive them!
Cliff

I have owned both MMG and Older Vanderteen 2's. Its a no brainer for me Vandersteen all the way.

I don't know if you guys know this but, Vandersteen speakers do requires of 100 hours of break-in period. I have the 2CE SIG II and, when I hooked it up for the first time I said, this doesn't sound as good as the demo at the Vandies dealership. Anyway, to make long story short, after 100 hours of usage, the 2CE Sig II became somewhat alive, the staging, transparecy, the clarity just happened. It is so musical and after going through lots of hours placing the 2CE Sig II in my room, wham! the bass got louder and very tight that I have to not use my subs anymore. SO, don't judge the speaker from what you hear unless you're listenning to a properly well broken-in and well placed/positioned Vandersteen.

like mapman, I am an OHM fan, but I am a MAGGIE fan too. I just read about the vandersteen's and would like to own one since I am a speaker fanatic. My opinion is that all three have their strengths and weaknesses but it would be a HARD choice if you were to pick only one. It's sort of like trying to decide between TRIPLETS? Although they are from the same birth, they have their own personalities, and that is how i look at a well designed loudspeaker irregardless of price. I don't really like comparing speakers as to what is better, but rather what suits my taste. what I do not like is making a judgement on a product especially a good one without ever experiencing it. Being an owner of various ohm and magnepans, I do not prefer one over the other but tend to use the ohm's a bit more because of it's more universally adaptable for various applications be it stereo or home theater and not worry about room placements like you would a planar. There is one speaker that should be in this group and that is the ESS HEILs. I have them too and with the right equipment just like the other three, it brings audio nirvana to me and to like minded enthusiasts.

MMG $699
MMG 1.7 2k

Shouldn't you compare it to a like priced speaker? The 1.6/1.7's are incredible speakers. Big jump from the MMG IMO