For Vandersteen 2Wq users.

One more questions. Since the Vandy is wired in a parallel method, along with the mains and only samples the source, does this also mean that if my amp is not producing good low frequencies, then the Vandy won't push those frequencies, either? In other words, the Vandy can amplify a signal it doesn't get, right? Can the Vandy get hooked to the pre-amp instead of the amp?

The 2Wq is designed to operate off of the speaker outputs of the amp. This was done by Vandersteen so that the mains and sub would have the same basic tonal character in the lows. I really do not know of an amp that will not pass a low frequency amplified signal that is inputed into the amp. Most amp problems come about with interfacing with the speakers(such as BEMF from the main drivers)The signal taken from the amp does not effect the amp due to the extremely high impedance of the sub input. If you want to use low level inputs, then the V2W is the one to look at. It is designed more for home theater than music. I also agree that 2 2Wq's are a must for high definition stereo. There is bass separation and soundstage cues down into the low regions from modern sources.
I think if the amp is slow in the bass it could make for a slower sounding sub. I sorta ran into this accidently with the changing of my Theta Dreadnaught to the Belles 350A. The Theta was never known for its bass but for the mids and highs. The Belles is quicker and way more defined through the lows which I feel was reflected through the sub as a quicker, tighter sub performance. However, I do have a caveat. The Belles drives the 3A Signatures better with a tighter, more driving bass line(best I've ever heard on the 3A Sigs)So, this difference could be imparted to the sound through the mains since they are now quicker. With a 6db filter, you do get a considerable amount of frequency overlap.
Sorry, but I'm not a big fan of the REL subs. Also, I find them as difficult as the Vandersteen's to set up correctly. Overall, I do not like the way they blend or sound for that matter. I know a lot of audiophiles seem to like the REL but I find that the Vandersteen sub is easier to make disappear. I am convinced that Vandersteen's sub theory is a more accurate solution and that's what I look for in a system. I have some real questions about REL's theory on this(especially their high rate crossover)but this is me. I'm also for whatever rocks an individuals boat!

I agree with most of the excellent advice above. I was thoroughly researching this subject for myself until recently, when i found some used model 5's.

Let me add a few points: the "forward correction" feature is designed to sense a signal that would cause distortion and remove that part of the signal BEFORE the woofer sees it. This is said to be better than servo correction, which requires an error (distortion) to occur before correction can happen.

As far as crossovers, i have heard many model 5's (including my own) set up with the model 5 xo's, so i know that these are excellent. I have however seen an ad on agon by someone making inexpensive x2's with upgraded caps. i was going to go that route.

As far as the difficulty in setting up vandersteens, i just went through this with my friend who is buying my 2ce's. He remarked how much of his modern electronica music sounds bad through the new speakers, while more acoustic stuff sounds great... i had to explain that he is just hearing more accurately (though i beleive i better cd player would benefit). My point is, with any vandersteen product, careful set up is required, but is rewarded with ever improving sound.