2. speakers
  3. 1174276202

Want something more forgiving than Vandy 3a sigs

I think Mike Fremer's comment about the Vandersteen Quatros, in his Stereophile review, applies to the Vandersteen 3a sigs: "...treble performance may strike some as being too honest...". I'm one of those "some." We all know that a lot of source material out there suffers from some degree of treble emphasis. I listen to a wide range of classical and jazz recordings, and, even after a fair degree of experimentation with cables, pre-amps, and amps, I've been unable to come up with a combination that is sufficiently "forgiving" to allow me to listen, easily and comfortably, to as much of the source material that I want to hear on my Vandys. In particular, I'm often disappointed with orchestral string sound...and indeed, have figured out, with this experience, that massed strings are quite difficult to record well. My system starts with a Linn CD12. I've tried PSE, GNSC-modified ARC LS-15, Cary SLP2002, and am working with a Cary SLP98 now on the pre-amp side; and have tried a VTL ST150, a BEL1001, and an ARC VT100 MKIII on the amp side. I've used various Audioquest, Kimber, BEL, and Purist Audio cable, and am happiest with Cardas Cross and Golden Cross (to which I was led by things I read on this Forum). All of that is good gear, some of it more top-focused than others. None of it has been able to give me as consistently as warm and "lush" a listening experience as I think I ought to be able to find, and this is especially true with orchestral music. Probably not surprisingly, the Cary 2002 combined with the ARC VT-100 has leaned closest to the right direction. (Let me hasten to add, though, that a really well-recorded chamber music or jazz CD will often sound terrific with most of this equipment and the Vandys.) (I should also add that I came to the 3a sigs from the 2ce sigs, which I also felt were capable of being a bit unforgiving, frankly.)

Within Texas, where I live (and where I would prefer to buy), I've figured out that some options include Sonus Faber Cremonas, Audio Physic Scorpios, Wilson Benesh Circles (I think) and not much else (of which I am aware)that will fit into the room without creating domestic discomfort. (My wife thinks the Vandy's are too big as it is.)

Any ideas out there about the speakers mentioned, other speakers, or possibly electronics?
eweedhome
sherod
1,690 posts
 
Eweedhome,
I'm glad to hear that you were able to make a mutual trade with your buddy and that you found something more pleasing to your ears.
regalma1
72 posts
 
I have much the same problem. I am really sensitive to harshness in the upper middle and highs. This is despite the fact that I can't hear anything above 12KHz. The biggest problem in my opinion is the quality of recordings. So many of my favorite CDs are really poorly recorded.

The Vandys are on my short list to audition. It should be interesting. I'll have to add the Harbeths if they are available locally. Personally I have found a Behringer equalizer/RTF to be real boon.

I found the treble on the Acoustic Zens to be real sweet, but a bad recording is still a bad recording.
sgbaird
18 posts
 
This has been an interesting thread. My sensitivity to a quality sound system that produces irritation in the higher frequencies is, no doubt, similar to others who have posted here, and, like so many others, my reaction to Eweedhome's description was one of amazement or disbelief.

I've never owned a Vandersteen speaker, but one of my closest audiophile friends has been using the 3A Signatures for years. My reaction to hearing them for the first time was that these were far more reticent than most speakers in their price/performance range, but I've modified my opinon on this quite significantly over the years.

It has been useful to read of the equipment used with these speakers, Eweedhome, but I never once read any specifics on the software that exacerbates your displeasure with the sound, and that, IMHO, could go a long way for others to "walk in your shoes."

I wouldn't presume to make any recommendations on new equipment, as I, unlike most audiophiles, found the speakers and amplifier I could live with more than a decade ago. Since then, the changes I've made have been small but usually very positive, and I spend most of my time seeking for the best recordings.
eweedhome OP
227 posts
 
I'm happy to oblige with additional information about source material. Here are some "torture test" discs that I like very much, but that I do not favor on the Vandersteens--either at my home, or the dealer's: Delius by Barbarolli on EMI 65119; Delius V Con, etc. by Titner on Naxos 8.557242; Joseph Marx, Nature Trilogy for Orch., ASV 1137; Telemann, Orch Suites, Schneider, cpo 999994-2. The problem is in the massed strings, especially as the strings play louder. They can sound somewhat thin and edgy, and generally unpleasant (and not "real") on the Vandys. As noted, I got the best results at home with the Vandersteens coupled with the Cary SLP 2002 coupled with the ARC VT 150 MkIII (but on the 4 ohm tap...the 8 ohm tap was unpleasantly bright on almost all source material). This was using Cardas Cross or Golden Cross cable (prefer the former, frankly).

These recordings all sounded better on the Wilson Sophias and the Scorpios. They sound better, also, on the Harbeths. When I say "better", I mean the strings are warmer, generally fuller, and generally without harshness.

My reference comparison comes from having played a great deal of music (I have a degree in music) and, in the course of my travels for business, having heard some wonderful orchestras in some of the great halls we have in this country: Carnegie, Orchestra Hall in Chicago, Symphony Hall in Boston, and others. (Most of my orchestral listening has been in either Orchestra Hall or Carnegie Hall in the last 15 years.)

This has, indeed, been an interesting thread, thanks to all the considered responses. I admit that I have had an issue with "brightness", or whatever you want to call it, that has been a bear to deal with since I've been playing around with high end gear, on and off, since the mid-80s. I am coming to believe that it is possible to have too much detail in the high end, that makes some recordings sound really good, but others not so good (even though they are not necessarily bad recordings). I also completely agree that there are some recordings that are just so lousy, nothing with make them sound good.

Thanks

My next project is to listen to various of the Spendor speakers.

I
sgbaird
18 posts
 
Well, I was hoping that there would be something familiar among your list of recordings, Eweedhome, but, alas, I have none of these. Nor have I ever had the good fortune to hear the legendary Linn CD 12, but its reputation would have me thinking that that the culprit futzing with your string tones has to be something quite simple. Given that the 3As have a reputation for showing low impedance in the bass frequencies, I'd gather that the 4 Ohm setting on the ARC would produce the better sound.

If there are any similarities between our systems, they would be in our choices of amp and preamp. I run a 23 year old Quicksilver that makes 95 watts per channel, and a highly modified tube preamp that's based on the Marantz 7 design. This pair develops considerable dynamic range and good sound, but can sound a bit strident with many audiophile "sacred cow" accessories. I solved the string tone issue years ago by doing several things, including rolling literally scores of tubes through my components, then finally finding the solution by replacing the vaunted Telefunken 12AX7s with some Sylvania 5751s and replacing my speaker cables with those offered by Monarchy Audio. These might work for you as they are extremely smooth but open in the highest frequencies.
More to discover