Vandersteen Quatro CT or Wilson Sabrina

I agree with previous comments that you should convince yourself as to the sound you prefer.

My love of Vandersteen is documented on this board, so you know where I come out.  I will say that even putting sound to the side, Vandersteen is very good in terms of product upgrades and product support.  And the powered bass section also provides practical advantages in terms of amplifier flexibility.

What are your perceived strengths and weaknesses of each?  What are the most important aspects of speakers and sound reproduction that are most important to you?  Just curious and may have a thought based on your answers. 

No idea what the Wilsons sound like but the Quattro CT paired with an ARC integrated was probably the best sound I’ve heard in anyone’s house. It made my home system (older McIntosh, 2Ci) sound broken by comparison. I was very depressed to say the least. Sorry no help,  just sharing an experience.

I would probably take the *regular* Quatro over a Wilson *Sasha*. So, Quatro CT over a Sabrina is a no-brainer, in my book.

Kalali

.....broken....man that hurts a bit, but i understand....
i have spent last several weeks breaking in and dialing in the Treo CT ( which you know do not have powered bass ).... then came “ home “ to Seattle to the 7’s......€¥&*@@@@@@@ !!!!! holy, what is missing....that bottom 2 octave wallop....

but it aint fair, with amps 16:1 money......and a condo with subwoofers essentialy banned ( self imposed )

i will say in the Treo and the Quattro for that matter ( some value for the OP ) what is not missing is absolutely seemless driver integration in the treble, critical midrange, the midrange driver is very very good. With a Basis / Delos front end it is liquid smooth with superb depth of image....Eva can make me cry, as she does on the 7

i would continue to hone your setup ;-)

best to all in the search