Vandy 2CE S or Gershman's Cameleon: High-End Spks?

Vandersteens are popular (I have a pair) because they're terrific value for the money, because they sound better than a lot of designs that are far more expensive, because they sound exceedingly neutral and natural, and because they will reveal improvements upstream with marked aplomb. It took me quite a while to get used to my pair, which I've had for a year: I went from living with Thiels for 16 years to the 2 CE Sigs, and for the longest time wasn't happy-- I planned to trade them in for other speakers. After extensive listening, though, I discovered that my restiveness wasn't with the speakers after all, but with my associated equipment. I upgraded my front end and cabling, and voila (it was the addition of an LP12 to the mix that showed me what Vandies are all about). While I enjoyed listening to much more expensive Aerials and Sonus Fabers (and almost bought the Aerials) the Vandersteen are hard to beat for acoustic music IF you're willing to work to match them up to a system that will show them off to their best advantage. PS-- they also sound good, but not great, with average equipment...

There really isn't too much to add to what Swklein notes, very concise well stated and most importantly true. What I really see in great designs is how the intrinsic character of the design is brought out by complementary components. Many folks will fail to realize this well before optimization and give up. My initial experience with the 2 series Vandersteen is that it was the across the board best speaker that I heard compared to speakers costing up to 4 times more. It also had state of the art (at the time) components in front. Oh yes, the more expensive speakers I did listen to at that time did certain things better but none, NOT ONE had a better blend of balance, tonality and full range performance that was in a word, satisfying.

After years of owning those Vandies I sold a friend that pair and they sounded excellent in his room with his gear but he thought they were "boring", go figure. To my ears they sound MUCH better than what he had prior and are at least on a par with what he currently is listening to which is 2.5 times the price of the Signatures which are yet much improved over the 2C's I speak of.

The answer isn't which of your 2 choices is better rather than which one do you prefer. I have heard Gershman speakers, not the ones you mention but a more expensive model and was little impressed. I've also heard the Vandy's and wasn't impressed but lucky me, I've heard them when they have been properly matched with components that really highlight what they are capable of. Only you can decide, not one of us can give you the answer. The Vandies are a steal for the money if full range on a budget is what you are looking for. A great speaker value capable of really great music at least to these ears.

I agree with the above. The Vandersteen's are untouchable in their price range for what they offer. They actually have very high resolution and what is exceptional bass for the money. They are sensitive to setup but once its right---well it's just a great speaker. It doesn't throw sound at you like most all speakers in this price range and higher. They allow you to listen to the music.
As for listings used, a lot of the folks are moving up the Vandersteen line to the 3A Signatures.

I owned a pair of the Vandersteen 2B speakers in 1983 and enjoyed them immensely for 15 years. It also took a well set up Linn LP-12 to really appreciate them. I own the new Meadowlark Osprey, but I sometimes miss my Vandies. They really grow on you as they do what they are designed to do, make music. I am not familiar with the Gershman's to give a comment. Oh, and yes, Vandersteen speakers are definitely considered "high-end",however they need associated high-end components to sound their best.