Vandersteen Treo vs 3A Sig as upgrade

wlutke- I agree with you, I like my 3A Sig's but after reading what hifiman wrote I will look into the Treo's and Quatros. My other thought was if the sound of those don't tickle my fancy then I would look into the original 5's. I'm thinking it would be keeping with the original Vandersteen sound but give me more of the lower end my 22' X 33' room deserves. By original Vandersteen sound I'm talking about the number speakers not the worded speakers.
Right now I'm working on multiple subs (currently have 3 each 2Wq's) similar to the Swarm set-up just using Vandersteen subs. After that will move up from there, where ever up is from there.
I also need to get my system updated as hifiman made me realize I haven't been keeping it updated.
 

@ig316b I just looked at your virtual system.  You have a very well thought-out rig with high quality gear.  Seeing your system, if you do decide to move to the Treo CT, with Three! 2wq in your expansive space, you will be able to realize the high level of sophisticated sound that your gear is capable of.  Again...no slam whatsoever on the 3A Sigs. it's just that once you hear what the more advanced drivers and crossover of the Treo CT deliver, you will be joyous at hearing the rest of your quality system for the first time.
All the best!

It's also good to see folks using the Vandersteen woofers with the Vandy speakers.  They are designed to work together.  Personally, I'd get the Treo or Treo CT's and use the woofers you have.  You will move a lot of air and have better sound.  The CT's are the way to go if you can afford them.  They would sound better than the original 5's.  Keep us posted.

ig316b -

I'm with you.  I like the Treo but sadly no subs allowed in my room.  

Wlutke, if you can find a pair of used Quatro's I think you'd be in heaven for your Rock.  Even the other ones move a ton of air.  I personally only like the look of the wood versions, but I've heard the sock Quatro's set up with highest of end CJ with all the tweeks and top cabling and was blown away.  I've also heard them with NAD separates and an Ayre Codex DAC with basic Audioquest cable and it sounded incredible.  

To me, that's hard for most speakers to pull off.  You made a salient point to me on your moving air issue.  I'm totally on board after rereading your posts etc... I never thought we were that far off and I think I'm much closer to what you have posted about the movement of air deep down.  Some, like you, really need that in order to get 'moved' (pun intended).  I'm not quite like that as I need my music to give me everything else.  Hey, the Treo's go very low and move a bit of air when set up properly.  They are very satisfying to many and that's why the Quatro is out or those top subs he sells.  I want the Quatro for myself due to the tunable bass, but deep down (no pun), I want more air movement on the bass, but I hate most subs as I need tuneful bass that is articulate and homogenous with the main speakers.  I hear coherency in speakers more so than many do and that's what drives me nuts about so many manufacture's who make and market high end speakers.  So many are not coherent. Richard nails it and always has.  My Proacs were the same way years ago.  The newest Paradigm Ref speakers I got to hear last month on pre release were also pretty amazing, but they cost 7 or 8k more than the 5CT's and are not nearly as good.  

Folks can set their price range and figure out what's most important to them and see if they can fit it in.  I still feel that out of all the Vandersteen speakers ever made, that the Quatro is THE sweet spot in the line for price/performance.  JMHO