Vandersteen 2CE Signature III — video review on YouTube by Steve Guttenberg (1/15/2023)

Hi patrickdowns, being a long time critic of Vandersteens it doesn't surprise me that making the treble more accurate bothers many. Every time I listened to the older version they sounded similar to whatever I had IF you tossed a thick towel over the tweeters. Don't be bothered by the detractors, nor me. Beauty is in the ear of the listener! If your happy, it's perfect! Personally I am glad to hear that he is making them more accurate. I have always wanted to like Vandersteens, and perhaps I now would. That's me though, it's you who needs to be happy with them, don't worry about the rest of us!

I have the 2ce Sig1’s. I went from Maggie’s to 2ci & up. The change from 2ce to 2ce Sig added a bit on top.

They are extremely capable speakers, as witnessed through system changes.

I have heard the Larsen’s & prefer mine.

My most recent system change was from Soundsmith Zephyr cart to the Zephyr MkIII ES cart. That alone is a significant upgrade which added a bit on the top.

Being ‘rolled off’ could be due to system…

durkn

Hi— I would be curious to know which Larsens you listened to and what you did and didn’t like, if you care to share. I was mostly interested in the 6.2 and the 8.2 (the latest). From the reviews, they are supposed to be quite a different listening experience than typical front-firing speakers we are mostly used to. They throw up a wall of sound, more like a live performance, it is said.

One dealer said that to me over the phone once he listened to them a lot, he decided that listening to typical front-firing speakers is more "artificial", saying that hearing individual instruments so specifically arrayed within the soundstage is artifice, not like a live performance. I think it depends on what kind of live performance, but with recorded music that artifice is certainly is created when the record is produced, by the person running the soundboard, yes?

From AbSound review of Larsen 8:

<< The Sound In General
While the Model 8s have the consistency between room sound and direct sound of an omni, at the same time they are quite directional thanks to their wall placement—they are by nature half-space radiators. So the sound has a much greater directness than one gets from omnis. And this directness leads to extraordinary definition from the lower midrange on down. Trombones, for example, have the solidity and definition of attack that they have in reality. (Hearing a real trombone after listening to a trombone on a speaker tends to be a disconcerting experience. The speaker version lacks adequate definition of the complex initial structure all too often. But not here!)

This is not easy to quantify in measurement, but it is surely easy—and rewarding—to hear. The lower brass, the cello and basses, the bottom range of the piano, all such things acquire the kind of precision and sculptured sound that they really have. There is a good reason to have bass drive up against the boundaries. This is, of course, also the reason for the development of the corner woofer systems of TacT and Lyngdorf, and much earlier for the Allison speakers, which were placed either in corners or against the wall with woofer close to the floor.

This stuff works! One really hears the lower mids on down better. Not only is the presentation more even in frequency response but better in definition. (Because minimum phase matters, these two things are related, but in listening terms they are perceived as quite distinct.)

The stereo imaging of the Model 8s is again different from an ordinary speaker. The directness makes images seem very solid, but the focus of them is of a different character from free-space speakers. The images are either more “dimensional” or less focused, depending on one’s viewpoint. This is not an obvious matter in terms of realism, since the kind of focus of image that can arise in stereo is not really a feature of real sound. One can get to like it a lot, but in a real concert environment, the extreme image focus does not actually happen. The making of recordings has to some extent responded to this by using spaced microphone techniques that blur the stereo images in the recording no matter how one plays them back. Again, life is complicated. In any case, the Model 8s sound close to reality, but not exactly like other speakers as far as imaging is concerned. Imaging is convincing and hearing into the recording venue is excellent but the imaging is different in character. The wide pattern gives unusual stability, but focus is less precise. >>

AbSound / Larsen 8 review

I have always been curious about Vandy speakers because they consistently get great reviews.  All Models it seems.

Therefore, is it worth buying any of the higher end models?  Or just buy the 2Ce sig 3 and be done?  Are the Treo TC or the Quatro worth the money?  Anyone heard all 3, or 2 of these 3 and made a comparison?

tubular1

I own the latest 2CE Sig III and auditioned the Treo CT at the time I was deciding, and since. Also the Quatro CT, and have spent time in front of the 7 with the top Vandy monoblocks (AMAZING system). All are listed as Editors’ Choices in their price brackets by Absolute Sound in their Recommended Components guide, iirc.

There is a consistency of sound, the "Vandersteen Sound", among them. I would say it comes down to budget. IMHO, the 2CE is a best buy and punches way above its weight. But, if spending $10k (vs $3500) is in the budget, the Treo CT is superb and is much better looking. I may soon get the Treos. BUT—again IMO—I think the Quatro CT is in the sweet spot of performance vs value in its price-range and in the Vandersteen lineup, when compared to the top of the line 7 (really great) or even the Kento. There is really no wrong answer. I would REALLY love a pair of Quatro CTs.

It is quite common to see Vandy owners move up from the 2 or 3 to the Treo, and then to the Quatro or Kento as/if funds allow. So, "worth the money?". Only you can decide that. There is the law of diminishing returns in high-end audio, and to some of my friends spending even $3500 on speakers is insane, but I would gladly spend the $$ on the Treo CT or Quatro CT.

There is a member here who has the Treo CT and the 7 with monoblocks (which I have heard). Maybe a 10X difference in price and I asked him specifically if he felt like the Treos come up short compared to his 7's.  "No way," he said. He said there is a consistency in the sound, and that he loves the Treos but that the 7 is just more of a great thing. 

CAVEAT: The Treo and Quatro are superbly-resolving speakers and will highlight any deficiencies elsewhere in your system. It is important that the components upstream are up to the task, including cabling. I have an Odyssey Audio Khartago+++ amp, and though it’s not super expensive I like it and it’s a Jon Valin best-buy, I think it would be adequate or fine with the Treos. A more expensive amp *might* even be better (I would like the Ayre VX-5/Twenty maybe, or mono blocks, for the Treo). Richard Vandersteen recommends "zero negative feedback" amps like Ayre, and so do many dealers. A good Vandersteen dealer will tell you about good pairings (Optimal Enchantment in Santa Monica, or John Rutan at Audio Connection in NJ are two...where are you?).

I am not a card-carrying fanboy, blindly loyal, but I have found Vandys to be speakers I can live with for a long time, and I don’t have the money to scratch every itch and jump from brand to brand. Vandys are extremely musical, for lack of a better term, and let you forget about them and just enjoy the music. For me, that is the goal. GOOD LUCK!

The 2CE and Treo are on this AbSound list of 50 Greatest Bargains in High-End Audio 50 Greatest High-End Bargains List