ctsooner - More accurate reproduction alone does not a better speaker make. Musicality and accuracy without bass drive = Treo. It's OK for polite listening but is less than the sum of its parts on bass heavy rock. BTW there is plenty of rock with bass in the low 30's. Without the oomph behind it that the Sigs deliver the Treo = fail on those recordings. No boogie, no pace, no timing necessary for bass driven music, like the most fun rock is. Quoting the designer won't change that. Suggesting that your superior gear makes your opinion more powerful won't change that. Saying people can't be objective because they're "used to" bad bass won't change that. If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it's a duck. The Treo cannot Boogie, it quacks on heavy rock. The required foundation is just not there. It's a decent speaker. Quick, light and accurate - sure. But where's the beef? In the 3A Sig.
Vandersteen Treo vs 3A Sig as upgrade
I had my local dealer hook up a pair of Treos to demo them and left with a very mixed impression. I like the overall sound. They have a smoother, more refined and sophisticated midrange that the 3A Sigs can't match. I want that. But the bass was less defined and the top end was bright. The sibilance was very exaggerated - this was with CD. Is this the character of the Treo? Thanks!
- ...
- 202 posts total
- 202 posts total