Vandersteen 3A Sigs vs Klipsch Forte III

The Lascala II has taken care of many of the weaknesses of the original. Thicker, less resonant cabinet ( especially noticeable with the doghouses ), upgraded crossover components, upgraded wire, etc. But, even the series II can be improved, but, it is my secret on how......sorry..........MrD.

I just have a subscription to Rolling Stone....

ha

not really, Seattle and Cleveland before that....

but it I think you have witnessed apples and Octopus writ large, could not get two more different approaches and speaker companies and designers.... and sounds...

Heardthat...

i think your Mc integrated is definitely up to the task of providing sufficient power to enjoy the possibility of the Vandies, and it’s most definitely up to providing that and more with the higher efficiency Klipsch.  For a brief time I had the latest McIntosh receiver - 6700? - which was 200 watts per into 4/8ohms along with sufficient current. 

However, methinks you are best suited to the Klipsch choice simply because you won’t find yourself chasing different amps/higher power to get the Vandies to sound “right”.  And that’s a good thing.  
For the past few years I’ve been guilty of chasing the audio dragon in that vein much in part to moving off the Klipsch.  Thiel, Dynaudio, Magnepan...all and each lower efficiency than any Klipsch. B.  A. T., Pass Labs amps...the list is surprisingly long for a man of my means, and rather embarrassing to a certain degree.  

Just for the absolute hell of it I picked up a 5 watt per channel DIY version of a Pass Labs SS amp.  I think I’m gonna find a used pair of Klipsch and see if returning could be fun!

The two contenders here sound nothing alike. My findings are similar to Phil’s. I was using VMPS models for 12 years. Very engaging planar mids with outstanding bass response. I picked up a set of Klipsch Quartets for cheap at an estate sale, for kicks really. I was immediately floored by the dynamic sound of live music. I heard no internet myths such as ’honk’ etc.
The top end was nice and resolving, not quite as extended and resolving as the VMPS excellent EMIT tweeter. Not harsh. I looked inside the horn and could see they had they upgraded titanium diaphragms. Also the same tractrix horns as the ForteIII.

With placement experimentation I got very good imaging by toeing them in to cross just in front of my listening spot. 16" off of the wall. Not quite as good as the VMPS, but with those you lose taht sweet spot it if you move from the narrow beam.

The VMPS are also very dynamic. The Quartets, more so. The first speaker I’ve had that sounds lively even at low volumes.

The VMPS has a very narrow sweet spot, being planars. The Quartets sound great anywhere in the room and the soundstage retains depth. With their controlled directivity there seems to be no reflection from walls.

The VMPS have deep solid bass into the the upper 20’s 3db +/-

Quartets-38db. Overall, the Quartets beat out the legendary VMPS. It totally surprised me.

Vandersteens have a nice, tonality and soundstage but sound polite in comparison. Weak dynamics. They do not sound like live music, but nothing offensive about them.

I suspect cheap, bright SS amps might sound rough with the Fortes.

I'm totally on board with Tomic on this one.  I guess we all hear differently, but I also use some decent electronics that I match properly with my VAndersateen Quatro's..>I've owned plenty of speakers over the years as well and I get to audition many speakers of all price ranges and have an idea of what we are discussing here.