Vandy or Maggy?

In my quest for speakers that could do classical well I did try the ET LFT-8B for a few months. While the highs very polite I could never get tight bass from the woofer in my room. The biggest drawback was they could not play loud. With bass heavy music, I would often hear the panel slap. I wish the panels were crossed over a bit higher to avoid that. The newest Martin Logan hybrids are much better IMO. They sound very clean at high volume.

Schubert,

Have not a/b 'ed Totem/Triangle but does not surprise.

Titus XS are teh smallest and smallest sounding of all my speakers. But pretty top notch in the right application. Maybe the best at low volumes (like Maggie). Output levels are limited, but using with subs remedies that. My Dynaudio Contour monitors are more extended and can go louder than the Titus as well, not even close. Dynaudio and Totem sound have a lot in common IMHO. Use of a sub is more optional in general with these. BOth deliver a lot of good sound and pop out of a smallish box. My old OHM Ls that I rebuilt myself are somewhat larger and can hit bigger than either Dyns or Triangle, but are not as refined overall.

Of course, the OHMs still rule in my house. I've used all my speakers in each room, big and small at one time or another. OHM 5s turned out to be my Maggie replacements in my largest room. OHM 100s, Dynaudio, and Triangle can each pinch hit for each other in any other room of my house. Each is unique, but the 100s are the best of the three all around. Triangle's are a different breed, more efficient and tend to work best of different gear. Those play best with tube gear clearly. WOuld like a tube amp for those someday. Dynaudio and Totem are not very tube amp friendly TTBOMK. OHM is somewhere in between.

Using baseball analogies, The Triangle Titus are like Ozzie SMith, fast and athletic and a good hitter, but limited power.

Dynaudio Contour monitors are like Joe Morgan. Fast, athelic, refined and decent power.

OHM 100s are Micky Mantle. More powerful yet still versatile all around.

OHM Ls: your typical better than average hitter, .280 average, 20 home runs.

OHM 5s are my Miguel Cabreras. They can do it all pretty much as good or better than most. Just thank good they work for less. :-)

ML is not a bad option to consider in this case I'm thinking.

I've read bass integration with the ES panels has gotten much better with some newer MLs than used to be the case. I last heard a serious ML demo (in comparison to Focal) about 5-6 years ago (more recent demos at Best Buy in poor setups do not count) and they sounded very nice. Should appeal to panel speaker lovers seeking a more dynamic sound. Do not rule out without hearing!

Every speaker has it's pro's and con's and you have to decide what you can live with. I have Vandy 3A Sigs in one system and Maggie 1.6's(with a Vandy sub)in another and they both do wonderful things in different ways. They certainly move air and energize the room very differently.I've had to really spend time setting both up properly in my rooms to get them to perform the best they can with what I have.If you're willing to take some time and do that, you will be rewarded with great sound from either brand.Vandersteen and Magnepan have been around for decades and for good reason. They make products that have proven to be quite good and reasonably priced. Each company has it's fans and critics. All I really am trying to say since I own and love both, is that they're different and only you can decide which are right for you. As others have mentioned, maybe neither one is.A different design is going to give you something altogether different. A Klipsch Cornwall will be very different from a Martin Logan.I just heard a friends system which had Tannoy Edinburghs,SET Fi 300B Mono Blocks, etc. Completely different kind of presentation than either of my systems and I totally dug it.Which one is right? They all have their attributes. Good luck and enjoy the journey.

Tj said it well!