Opinions on why this system is uninvolving

Stehno, you say that I must be wrong on the Vandy 5's in how they sound, assuming that I must not have listened long enough, while admitting that you do not know what my experience is and have no experience yourself beyond what other people have told you, ie no experience? Interesting approach to an argument, but if you simply have to believe that Vandy's have the spatial and harmonic sophistication of some others based upon a conversation with a manufacturer - not always a good place to look for objective opinion - then ok, I'll be happy for you. Vandy 5's are nice speakers and I would recommend them to many people, but given the poster's sterilty sensitivity, which implies a strong need for sophisticated harmonics and spatial continuity, I believe he should look beyond Vandersteen.

Glad that tweeking has helped, Znak. Now, look at the wires, but don't go nutty - bwhite can help you there too. I still think in the end you will move away from the Revels. Talk to bwhite about his pre and its effects on his system.

Znak_m, the EAD is good isn't it? It's mysterious how other MUCH more expensive transports can be completely blown away by this thing. When it comes to digital, I've had them all and the EAD transport (T-7000) absolutely smoked everything else - even when using lesser DACs.

Now.. the Audiomeca DAC (I suppose you mean the Enkianthus) is amazing. Talk about involving! Its very relaxed sounding and very emotional. Its not a "get up and dance" type of sound but it is certainly magical. That DAC (or an Audio Note) combined with the EAD would be MY choice for the top player right now. Better than AudioAero, Accuphase, EMC-1, etc. and much less expensive. The soundstage from that EAD goes through the walls!

Cables will be your next step after your source is nailed down.

Asa, thanks for the compliment on my "interesting approach to an argument". However, I did not make it up. I saw it in another thread.

In all seriousness. You say you found the Vandersteen's Model 5 are too sterile, etc. Yet, this impression has been reported to be quite common on shorter auditioning periods for the Vm5's.

Yet others that have thoroughly listened to them also can rate them so highly, including Peter Moncrief of IAR who basically tied them with another much more expensive speaker as the most highly rated dynamic driver speaker system.

I have not read (though I'm sure they exist) any professional reviewer speak in the negative sense of the Vm5's as you have. In fact, I've only read positive to very positive things for all Vandersteen models.

As I clearly stated, I've not heard the Vm5's myself, and I certainly don't put too much stock into what most of the professionals may say, but there is also no reason to give you more credence than they especially since you are providing much less information than they. And especially when there's not much on paper or quotes from others to substantiate your claim.

You may be 100% correct, but I think the odds are not in your favor.

Of course, it would certainly help to understand your position by describing your current system, your personal preferences, and finally the system, room, music, and duration of time used for the audition.

Would you care to share that info?

Stehno, you keep making assumptions, as in, if I don't believe that the Vandy's are the last word on spatial and harmonic performance, then, ipso facto, I've somehow said that they are "sterile". That's NOT what I said and I do not appreciate your bending of my words, which, at this point, one must assume is intentional. I said that the 5's can be bettered by other speakers in those specific areas and that, in the context of the poster's listening biases, this consideration is heightened, and, in my opinion, determitive.

I was a "professional" reviewer (TAS,UA) and I can tell you from personal experience, you really need to try and get beyond this conformism to others' ideas in a dearth of your own experience. Mags are fun and informative, but should be kept in perspective. I'm glad you are excited about the world of audio, but, please, in the future, try to think before you leap.

I have two systems: TNT 4, Graham 2, Cardas Heart, Hovland phono cable, NBS & Audionote Kondo wire, ElectraGlide PC's , ESP Concert Grand & Harp, Spendor & Quad US spkrs, Joule Electra line & phono, Supratek pre, AirTight ATM300 amp, Cary 805 monos, dedicated lines & room, all NOS tubed, etc. etc.

You have too nice of a system - hence, have been around long enough - to be comfortable with demanding others to provide information when you yourself have admittedly no experience with the issue at hand.

Your next question, since I know you can't stop...

I have owned 2 Vandy spkrs (1B & 2Ce), heard them more times than I can count and and have recommended them to many people starting out. The 5 is alot of speaker for the $ - I've heard it several times - and, as I said, I would recommend them to many people (and have...). However, the Vandy's as a line - and the 5's continue this - have never been world beaters in some nuanced areas aforementioned. Better all the time, but not the best.

If you do not know this, then we will have to agree to disagree until you either 1) listen to what you've read about, or 2) listen and are entitled to conclude/demand as you do above (assuming that your listening experience aligns with your pre-concieved ideas).

Frankly, I've never seen someone exhibit such tenacity on an issue that they themselves admit they have no experience in.

At this point, its become something apart from "interesting".

Asa, you don't just beat somebody to a pulp and then decide to call it quits while their body is still moving.

1. Not that it matters one iota, as you yourself confirm, that you were once a reviewer.

2. Two, I apologize for using the word sterile. I did not verify your verbage from your previous post. I don't like it when somebody misquotes me and I certainly would not intentially want to do that to another. But again, you stated that I 'demanded' information from you when in fact I simply 'asked' that you share more information.

3. I stated very clearly that I myself had not heard these speakers. Yet in laymans (sp) terminology, I simply attempted to convey to other readers, from my readings and from another who has auditioned them, who's opinion I highly respect, that your opinion was and IS the only descenting vote on this speaker that I am aware of. That has not changed. And I certainly do not believe I need to listen to the Vm5's to qualify that or any other statement I made to you in my previous post.

4. As a professional reviewer, I would think you would realize you have a greater responsibilty to be more informative and constructive before poo-pooing a product since some to many would have a tendency to be swayed by your words and good manufacturers doors can be closed permanently by a reviewer's comments.

5. I've been pretty consistant with my feelings of many to most audio reviewer's opinions just as I believe I was in my previous post to you. Yet you attempt to portray me as one who clings to those journalist's and/or their opinions. See number two above. And your 40 lashes have done nothing to make me love you guys more.

6. Yes I did make a few assumptions about you. That was pretty easy to do since you gave little information regarding your opinion and background. But now I have a few more assumptions.

6. You state in your last post that you are quite informed with the Vandersteen product line and have more experience than some with them. You listed your system. That's good. Now we're getting somewhere. That was all I ASKED for along with a few other things.

Had I known you were some sort of professional reviewer, I would not have asked for those things. Instead, I would have demanded them from you.

You know, Asa, I said nothing to warrant the beating that you tried to give me in your last post. But obviously I hit some nerve. They say that if you throw a rock into a pack of wolves, the one that barks the loudest is usually the one that got hit."

And here you repeatedly and intentionally misquoted me and twisted my words to your advantage. While at same time falsely accusing me of doing those very things to you. Nice try.

Talk about tenacity? How about irresponsible? And I can think of a few other adjectives.

I too have become disinterested.

-IMO