Vandersteen 5 vs Model 2c/2wq Combo


If anyone out there has read any of my posts, I have been scouring the Earth to find a speaker setup that will fit my needs and fit my pocket book. I have found some great info here and now I have another question.

I thought about getting the Vandersteen Model 5. I believe that with this setup, I would not have a need for a subwoofer, but my listening room is small and I believe that the Model 5 would be alot like practicing scales with my guitar plugged into 100 watt Marshall stack in the bathroom. It would be complete overkill in both price and size for me; plus, I don't think I could afford that big of an investment all at one shot and you know how savings usually goes out the door because of emergencies or whatever. However, I could afford to get the Vandersteen Model 2ce this year(with help from tax refund) and then next year maybe get one Vandersteen 2Wq subwoofer. How would this setup compare to the model 5 in sound quality? The model 5 would probably still be much louder and probably get better integration, but how close can I come to a good sound with the 2ce/2wq combo?

TIA
matchstikman
Well, this is becoming a good thread with lots of relevant commentary. I have a few clarifying remarks I'd like to add:
1. I did not mean in my opening post to sound disparaging about the 2Ce/2Wq combo. Before owning 3A Sig's, I owned the 2Ci and then the 2Ce, and I think it is an excellent speaker offering very high value. IMO, however, the 2Ce is some distance from the Model 5 in performance, whereas the 3A Sig is much closer.

2. Someone above commented that the 3A's are much bigger than the 2Ce's. Depends on what aspect of size you mean: the 3A/3A Sig's are about 8" taller than the 2Ce, but the width and depth of the two speakers are identical (16" wide, 10" deep). Put differently, both speakers have the same footprint, but the 3A is taller. The extra volume of the 3A/3A Sig speaker cabinet contributes to its slightly lower frequency response, but the main difference between the 2Ce and the 3A series is attributable to the 3A series having better quality drivers and crossover.

3. Marakanetz comments that the Model 5 has a more powerful built-in amp than the 2Wq sub: 400 watts vs. 300 watts. As a practical matter, this power difference is negligible, amounting only to about 1db difference in power output. The smallest discernable increase in volume for most people is 3db, and to achieve a 3db gain you must double the power of the amp (i.e., go from 300 watts to 600 watts).

The 2Wq sub is capable of response down to about 18 Hz, whereas the subwoofer in the Model 5 may get down another 2 Hz or so lower. As a practical matter, this is also largely irrelevant, since your listening room will almost certainly restrict output below 22-24 Hz. The lowest frequency reproduced by any musical instrument, the pedal organ, is about 16 Hz, but there are not more than a handful of recordings with frequencies that low. The LFE in home theater is also restricted below 25 Hz. Hence, it does not make much sense to obsess about trying to reproduce frequencies much below 22-24 Hz unless you have a really large, really GOOD listening room.

The chief virtue of the equalizer built into the Model 5 is to provide a more uniform frequency balance in the lower 2 octaves (20-40 Hz, and 40-80 Hz), not to enhance response below 20 Hz. It's 11-band equalizer allows the user to discretely adjust for dips and peaks in the lower 2 octaves, where there can be significant response anomalies from one room to another.

If you read the posts made by owners of the Model 5, you will generally find that they most appreciate the balance and transient response of the subwoofer. The proprietary subwoofer in the Model 5 actually uses two 12" cones which oppose each other and operate in push-pull fashion, and are driven by an enormous magnet assembly. The 2Wq sub uses three 8" drivers which have roughly the surface area of a single 14" driver, which is substantially less than the two 12" drivers in the Model 5.

To wrap up this rather rambling note, I don't mean in any way to discourage you from starting your system with the 2Ce/2Wq combo. However, if your budget will allow, get a pair of 2Wq subs, since they provide much better system performance than a single sub. Infact, Richard Vandersteen really designed the 2Wq to be used in stereo pairs.

Last, if your budget allows, get a pair of used 3A's -- there is a pair listed here on Audiogon for $1500. They will give you better performance than the 2Ce, and they can be upgraded to the 3A Sig's at a later time for relatively little.

Hope all this helps and isn't overkill. Good listening!
This has been a big eye opener when it comes to what I want, what I need and what I should get. After reading all the specs on the Vandersteen site and reading what other who own them have to say, I now feel that the Model 5A may be a little more than I need; however, I am now leaning toward a model 3A/2Wq combo. In reality, I only want them for music. I do not need them to go down so low I can only feel it and not hear it. I am thinking of getting the 3As sometime next year after I have a chance to try out a pair at my home. It may turn out that they produce all the bass that I need. Right now I am using B&W DM602s as my mains and an Infinity subwoofer that has had some tweaking done to it that gives it a little more push than it use to get(please, no laughing). As you can see, any Vandy might thrill me to death as it is.
I think the 3A/2Wq combo would be an excellent place to start for you, providing a lot of performance for a reasonable sum of money (by high-end standards), particularly if you buy used equipment. Further, you have an upgrade path available to you with the 3A Signature. Whatever you eventually decide to do, always remember the audiophile "caveat": trust your own ears!
I would like to chime in here as Vandersteen products are among my favorites. Throughout their lineup they offer some of the best values in audio.

Matchstikman a few years back I had the opportunity to audition side by side both the 3a Sigs and the 2ce Sigs with an Audio Research VT 100 Mk II amp and a Ref 1 pre. I know there are many positive comments on the pairing of the Vandy's with both McCormack and Scott likes the Bryston but to my ears over the years, the Vandy/ARC combo is the best I've heard, great synergy. This particular set-up was ideal. I listened to both speakers and had goosebumps almost the entire audition of the 3a Sigs with my music, excellent, excellent. Check out that combination before you commit to anything.

Also for the price difference I concur with Scott, go with the 3a's or Sigs if you can. As good as the 2c's are the 3a's are really worth the difference. I also agree with Maxgain and all respondents concerning not skimping on the quality of the gear up front, the Vandies will reward you well if you do, good luck!
Hi,

I am a newbie audiophile who has just upgraded his electronics and have only one old component....a Genesis 44 speaker from 1985!! I have witnessed their getting better and better with each component purchase(all used!) I intentionally did this to educate myself. WOW! I read reviews and threads all day and, in theory, Vandy is the way to go for me. Now all I have to do is audition them. I live in Vegas and have a store with a 3a for me on Monday. There is Ces next month! :-) I did get to hear a Dunlavy 3a and it was tremendous.(little bass shy) These are second on my list. I plan to get a used 3a and upgrade to Sig. I cannot imagine anyone's selling a 3a sig.(I guess you guys have helped sell me, along with the rave reviews) I do have a question. I have an expensive FB212 Monitor Audio sub. Would this be a good substitute for the Vandy subs? I obviously will not get another FB212 ($$$$) and this could be superior to 2wq. The FB212 seems similar in operation to the 2wq on the surface. I admit to not studying the 2wq, but some thread somewhere lead me to conclude that! I will have to sacrifice the balance of two subs unless you guys feel it is absolutely essential.
Thanks for any advice!

Audible Illusions L-1
Sony 222ES sacd player modified by SACDmods
Marantz MA500 monoblocs(4 of them)(this may be a weak)
Audioquest sidewinders and type 4 speaker cables for now