2. speakers
  3. 1224610771

$ 2500 ....Stay with Vandersteens ??...what else ?

Please refer my "system" to see my current set-up. Everything sounds wonderful together.....extremely musical, great soundstage depth and width, beautiful rendition of timbre and tone, natural presentation of voices and acoustics. BUT....I have the speaker "upgrade itch," wanting fuller, richer, deeper sound, and I need advice from my friends at Audiogon.

I spend around three hours a night of "serious listening," about 2/3 digital and 1/3 vinyl. Roughly 70% of my enjoyment is 1950's - 1960's jazz (Miles, Coltrane, Basie, Rollins, Brubeck, Ella, Mobley, Morgan, etc., etc.), 25% "classic rock" that I grew up with (Allman Brothers, Dead, Dylan, CSNY, James Taylor, Joni Mitchell, Led Zep, Yes, Hot Tuna, etc.), and the other 5% "newer jazz audiophile stuff" (Patricia Barber, Rebecca Pigeon, etc.)

Keeping the rest of my system the same (except for bi-wire speaker cables if needed), what do you guys recommend for new speakers ? Vandersteen 2CE Sig. II's seem a natural option, but what else should I consider ? I'm open to all kinds of suggestions. Thanks a lot, and Happy Listening !
adam18
adam18 OP
670 posts
 
Okay,...... so let's go with the theory that the midrange speaker is a key element to the "Vandersteen sound" in the models above the 1C. Now, how do the mid-range and tweeter drivers in the 2CE Sig./II compare to those in the 3A Sig. ? What do you guys think ?
stringreen's avatar
stringreen
6,470 posts
 
Gee whiz... get the 5A's and be done with it.
samhar
1,048 posts
 
My understanding is that the 2Ce Sig ll are a leaner sound more in line with the wood Quatro. The 3A Sigs have a more Vandesteen house sound and align with the 5A's. I've auditioned the Quatro Wood and liked the 3A Sig 2Wq combo better!
rufipennis
118 posts
 
>>>how do the mid-range and tweeter drivers in the 2CE Sig./II compare to those in the 3A Sig. ?

The 2ce Sig IIs and 3A Sigs are *identical* in the mid-range and tweeter! With the latest iteration of the 2s, you only give up a bit of bass extension (and, possibly, definition) compared to the 3s. IMO, the 2 Sig IIs give you nearly all the performance of the 3s in a smaller (thus, more attractive) and more affordable package.

I own the 2 Sig IIs and have heard the 3A Sig driven with the same model amplifier, but in a different room - so I have direct experience to inform this opinion. I've also heard several mega-buck speakers (Wilson W/P 7, Thiel 7.2, Avalon Eclipse, Revel Studio, among others) and am here to tell you that - no, the Vandersteen is not better than these - but gets you nearly all the way there for a fraction of the price. If I ever upgrade ($$$ dependent), I'll be looking at stuff like the Quatro ($7-11 K), Thiel 3.7 ($12K), or lower-end Avalons (>$10 K). I'm convinced that that's the kind of money I'd need to spend in order to get a substantial sonic improvement!
samhar
1,048 posts
 
Rufipennis I'm not knocking the 2Ce Sigs ll some prefer them to the 3A Sigs especially with the 2Wq's. I've heard the 2's, 3's,Quatro Wood and 5A's in the same room with the same equipment at Optimal Enchantment in Santa Monica CA. It was months back that I listened to the 2Ce Sigs ll so I can't compare directly. My opinion there comes from Randy's responses to my questions and other clients questions and opinions as to the 2's & Quatro. The QW is a great speaker, one I could easily live with, it seems "quicker" than the 3's with 2Wq's and less full (one less 8" woofer ?) and it doesn't seem like a mini 5A.
More to discover