Vandersteen Treo vs 3A Sig as upgrade

Yes, for Rock, you want that pressuring bass and often times the poorly recorded stuff sounds better when it's not as revealed. I agree with you on that.  Always have.  I personally don't see why something is outside of a discussion, but thats' fine. Again, I'm not putting down the 3's at all. Your personal feeling is that if something doesn't pressurize a room as much as another speaker that has larger displacement, that it's whimsy...I completely disagree and that we will respectfully disagree on. It's all good. We all listen differently.  I get plenty of reinforcement in my set up and I like hearing individual notes etc.... I was just listening to rock this morning and it had plenty of boogie and drive.  

As for selling 8-1, those are folks who still love rock I can promise you that.  There are tons of us driving them without subs and loving them and being able to boogie.  Just set them up properly and feed them a great signal and most are fine.  

I speak with a lot of Treo owners all the time.  Most of us aren't running our systems full blast anymore.  I can play my system at very loud levels and there is tons of drive.  I'm a former drummer and know full well what it's like to pressurize a room.  Like I have and will say, the 3 goes lower and will give you more quantity, but sometimes even for rock, many of us love quality even more.  

Again, I'm not trying to fight you on this.  I'm really not.  If we were having a beer and talking about this, I think we'd probably agree with each other in the end.  It's the same trade off debate, quality or quantity. There are more rockers out here than you think who are getting plenty of quantity with quality and are happy they have.  Again, like anything, much of it is still in the set up and using the room to reinforce bass.  Will I move up in the line?  Yes, I will and I knew it when I purchases my Treo's last year.  That was and still is my plan.  Do many get Treo's and add a woofer?  Yes, some do, but not many.  At least Richard makes various speakers that allow us to all enjoy anything we listen to and we can easily move up as wanted to get what we want out of our speakers.  To me, this whole discussion just shows why we love our Vandersteen speakers.  If the are wimpy to you, then those are your words and that's all good.  Strong mid 30's to me isn't wimpy, but that's our big difference I think.  If the price was the same, would you own Treo's with subs set up properly or stay with the 3's?  

hifimans response was directed to me personally in response to my observations of the Treos unaided bass.  He extolled the virtues of the mids and treble, stating that he had no experience with the Treos run full range, therefor no opinion on the bass.  I guess he wanted to say something positive in response, it just didn't apply to the particular vein the thread was in at the time - outside the parameters of the moment, certainly not outside the parameters of the thread.
 I would like to hear from the "tons of us" that think they boogie on rock, sans subs.  They are noticeably absent from the thread.  Everyone has an opinion and I invite them to express it.  If they stick to describing what they hear, good or bad, about the Treos or the Sigs then fine.  If their product evaluation takes a turn and the owners become the target, I take issue with that.  When I read that owners opinions are dismissed because they're used to inferior sound, or their equipment doesn't allow them to evaluate the product properly, or a musician hears things regular mortals can't, or sight unseen that it's the fault of the set-up - well you get the gist.  The reason I insisted this thread be about the speakers and not those other things is because when I researched before starting this thread all the threads ended up the same.  You jump in, Johnny jumps in, the set-up is blamed and the thread is monopolized and dies.  Only the tiniest bits of fact unrelated to set-up were available about the Treo from real users.  I'm not looking for a fight either, but you're now attempting to monopolize yet another thread and if history is any indication, you won't give up until you sugar coat and white wash anything that could be construed as a negative about a Vandersteen product.  I'll fight you on it.  The public deserves a decent thread with real information.  I've fought for it, here it is.  
Would I buy the Treo with subs?  If I could fit the subs in the same room with my wife (she's a feisty 105 lbs.) I would certainly entertain the notion.  As stated, I like the Treo for polite music.  It just doesn't get down and boogie - for me and for others who actually have spoken up here on their own behalf.  Caveat Emptor.

I went from 3 a with a 200 WPC Mac amp to an Ayre VX-R driving 5 A. I liked the 3 a better for rock. They were set up right and believe me they ROCK....the rest of the line is pretty polite above 100 HZ..and I would say that about my 7 mk 2.
now..for low bass, resolution etc the 5 a win hands down. But as others have said, I believe in Richard..
There is a really nice pair of Quatros Fs here..maybe try those...

i should add that I have very wides tastes so rock does not define what I want. it counts but it does not dominate my decisions.

 Any one who wants can post and should.  I'm not monopolizing anything.  Not sure if Johnny is posting or not as I haven't gone back to read.  Just living in the moment.  

You don't think the Treo's can rock or boogie or whatever and I certainly feel they do as do many  others I speak with.  Didn't know I had to have everyone I speak with about audio posting to prove what I say isn't a lie. As for your comments about me dismissing your thoughts and feelings, nothing is further from the truth. I have posted that I understand what you are saying.  I said that the 3 does go deeper (I've posted that in other threads about them that you haven't read or at least posted on on other boards.  i love the 3's for their price, but the 8-1 purchases of the TReo over the 3's comes directly from Richard.  To me, that's folks who are choosing them over the 3's and many of us do listen to a lot of rock, but we would rather have an overall better speaker even if it doesn't have the displacement and or the room pressurization of the 3.  That's the reason they cost more and Richard has engineered them to be much better.  If you feel the 3 is a better speaker for you, that's cool and I'm honestly happy for you. I really am, but 8-1 would win out over some posters on a board (yes, me included).  Again, those are the facts.  I would venture to say that many of us who ended up with Treo's or Quatro's etc... have listened to the speakers one below and chosen to spend a bit more, because it fit's OUR system and personal tastes.  

Many threads I've read on all the boards meander and go all over the place. I can promise you that I'm not the only one who takes things that way. I have basically spoken about the difference in the two speakers and haven't been talking about other speakers or electronics.  As for the set up part that you take umbrage with, that was directly from Richard.  I'm sorry that upset you, but for any speaker it's important to set them up correctly.  Like I said, mine are about 3 feet from the rear wall I believe and they sound great on all music.  That's not trying to start a fight and it's not white washing a thing.  Honestly I have never said anything negative about the 3's and I haven't taken any swipes at you. If you feel I have, then I'm truly sorry.  Not my intent ever. 

When you read print instead of hearing voice inflection and reading non verbals, you don't always get the other person's thoughts fully.  I love the 3's and feel they are a great value.  The true value statements in the line are the 3's and the Quatro's to me.