Vandersteen 2ce Signature, I don't get it!

[Woochifer]

They hacked off several things that many spekaers were in fact doing very nicely on dynamics pace timing envolvement and look basically at imaging and the soundstage - most of which ow sounds homogeneous and compressed more than it ever was - but boy do voices come from the middle more now than before(even when they shouldn't).

So, I guess that a "dynamic" sound that seems to beam out of two point boxes, and forces you to practically wear a restraint that locks your head into that small sweet spot to get any kind of stereo image is preferable?

And how would you know when a voice should not come out of the middle? You mean a "homogenous and compressed" speaker will magically shift a sound mixed into the left channel into the phantom center mix? That would be quite a feat! Let me know of an example where you've observed this phenomenon, and I'll verify it on my "homogenous and compressed" system.

The reviews have a tough time because to stay in business they need makers to keep sending them stuff and advertising - If we did have a "perfect" attainable sound then how on earth can one publication positvely review completely different sounding speakers from Horns, stats, line arrays and whatever the heck Vanderstten is all about. They are not reviewing against correctness but reviewing what they THINK some people might like.

Quite the contrary, Vandersteens are often cited in the reference rigs that reviewers use at home. At least two of the reviewers at The Absolute Sound, one at Stereophile, and one on Soundstage (or Hometheaterhifi.com) have noted that they OWN a set of Vandersteens for their reference system. And Widescreen Review uses Vandersteens in two of their three reference theater installations (the ones that they use for their DVD and equipment reviews). So, they're not reviewing based on what they "THINK some people might like," they are basing it on what they feel is best reference system.

[RGA]

The reviewers who own vandersteen and only vandersteen - ever in your life see them review something positively that wasn't a Vandersteen? Ahh.

My comment about this was never intended to be solely about Vandersteen but a generalized comment. And like I said there is a big following - a reviewer can of course be part of that following - nothing at all wrong with liking Vandersteen - and there is nothing at all wrong with not liking them - indeed, it helps me know that the reviewers who do probably don't hear things the way I hear them so I don't need to really pay attention to their reviews.

[46minaudio]

The Vandersteens get great reviews.The reviews have a tough time because to stay in business they need makers to keep sending them stuff and advertising.

You say this...

The reviewers who own vandersteen and only vandersteen - ever in your life see them review something positively that wasn't a Vandersteen? Ahh. .

And now this...You state this as fact.Please provide proof.Its funny when a reviewer owns AN all is good in the world.When they own somthing else ther must be a flaw..Yes I happen to own the 3sigs powered by a Aragon 8008st with a Lexicon prepro.They do have more paddind in the tweeter than the 100v2s I own..I really enjoy both systems for music and HT.More thay likley its the room but I prefer the Vandys for HT...

[RGA]

You say this...

And now this...You state this as fact.Please provide proof.Its funny when a reviewer owns AN all is good in the world.When they own somthing else ther must be a flaw..Yes I happen to own the 3sigs powered by a Aragon 8008st with a Lexicon prepro.They do have more paddind in the tweeter than the 100v2s I own..I really enjoy both systems for music and HT.More thay likley its the room but I prefer the Vandys for HT...

Well A) just because a reviewer owns Audio Note or Vandersteen doesn't mean you are going to like them and that was my main point which I suppose could have been read as an attack on Vandersteen but was not the intent. And this illustrations shows that since the two sound completely different that reviewers have their own taste. Vandersteen is much more widely known and I would bet way more people have heard Vandersteen than Audio Note - we all pick the best we have heard up to a certain point in our lives. The B&W N805 was the best standmount I had ever heard and now it's steadily dropped out of my top 5. Simply because I have heard better since then - the N805 didn't get worse by any stretch but my reference point changed.

Consider that UHF Magazine has been in the reviewing business since 1982 and just this year heard their first Audio Note product (A discontinued cd transport and DAC). These guys go to the shows - there are so many brands you can;t give them all justice - listening to something for 10 minutes in some room someplace ain't it. It stands to reason that even reviewers can't listen to everything. Indeed, reviewers are no different than myself or anyone that goes out and listens to gear. I have plenty of live references, and over 10 years with gear too and if I ever bothered to proofread what I write - an English minor.

And like everyone has said Vandersteen has a kind of sound that I suppose has somehting people adore - the Quad ESL 63 Commercial electronics had in their used section for example has a staggerring following and many reviewers hold it as a reference speaker - I sure would not - I get why people like stats - I like what they like - but I want more from a speaker. Other people will trade the weaknesses in for the unboxed presentation.

And reviewers/store owners also have budgets to work within just like the rest of us. A number of them don't own incredibly high end gear - they get into money troubles or feel that hey they get to try new stuff out for months anyway so why spend big bucks. Steven Rochlin the editor of enjoythemusic had to sell his ONGAKU amplifier($80,000.00US) and downscaled big time due to financial issues.

Like I said in my original reply - this poster and I are not fans of the speaker - and I noted that others are - and that's why there's no one speaker out there. And it's also a reason I'm not trying to convert fans - I haccve said many times that people who go by my recommendations(To audition never to BUY) NEED and SHOULD be hearing it the same way I hear it.

If Roger Ebert reviews ten movies let's say and you agree with his view all ten times and Roeper reviews 10 movies and you wholeheartedly disagree with him strongly on all ten movies - then chances are when the new movie opens you will be more inclined to go to the movie Ebert recommends(and doubly so if Roeper saysthumbs down). You of course may still be dissapointed but you played the odds. That is why I say to people - if you don't like and i repeat this if you DON'T like what I generally don;t like for the same reasons I don't like it - then maybe you'll want to try something I do like. I have had people say yes I didn't like X speaker and noticed exactly the problems I have indicated with it - they have gone to Soundhounds and did what I suggested which was not to buy anything but to listen and tell me if they heard what I heard - generally they have agreed with me.

Obviously someone like yourself - and I'm not saying you're in any way wrong or that I'm right - really doesn't need my advice becuase you're happy with X brands that I would not be - so we hear things differently and thus the speakers I like may very well not be to your liking.

Like Michael Moore my preaching, as it were, is to the choir. People who hear it the way I do will agree with me and those that don't will call Moore a nutty lying shill for the democrats.

There is of course bound to be a crossover too that we both will like the same thing, just as the critics will agree on the same movie.

There are people in this world - many of them - who for some reason think Jim Carey is funny. I don't get it. Other people think the Lord of the Rings is the greatest series of films in history and hey they even got nominations so the "reviewers" must be right eh - we should not put all are eggs behind what the reviewers think. I'm sure if you look you'll find at least one film that won best picture since 1990 that you didn't like or found at least 15 films that year you would have picked over it. I can think of only 2 films since 1990 that I would say deserved best picture. Schindler's List and American Beauty(and this one was close).

And don't think speakers are any different - go to rottentomatoes.com (I used to post a LOT there on the film forums) and you'd be amazed how many long arguements you can get into over the very subjective issue of films - speakers? Man talk about almost as subjective - throw in an element of science(a small one filled with very little information) and boom arguments galore.

I suppose I should make it clearer that it's an opinion or stress more often that one should be looking more at what I said above about the corresponding agreemant factor - If I don;t like speakers A, B, F, and G and you don't either - then perhaps you will like L, R, X, and Y that I do like.

[46minaudio]

Well A) just because a reviewer owns Audio Note or Vandersteen doesn't mean you are going to like them and that was my main point which I suppose could have been read as an attack on Vandersteen but was not the intent. And this illustrations shows that since the two sound completely different that reviewers have their own taste. Vandersteen is much more widely known and I would bet way more people have heard Vandersteen than Audio Note - we all pick the best we have heard up to a certain point in our lives. The B&W N805 was the best standmount I had ever heard and now it's steadily dropped out of my top 5. Simply because I have heard better since then - the N805 didn't get worse by any stretch but my reference point changed.

Consider that UHF Magazine has been in the reviewing business since 1982 and just this year heard their first Audio Note product (A discontinued cd transport and DAC). These guys go to the shows - there are so many brands you can;t give them all justice - listening to something for 10 minutes in some room someplace ain't it. It stands to reason that even reviewers can't listen to everything. Indeed, reviewers are no different than myself or anyone that goes out and listens to gear. I have plenty of live references, and over 10 years with gear too and if I ever bothered to proofread what I write - an English minor.

And like everyone has said Vandersteen has a kind of sound that I suppose has somehting people adore - the Quad ESL 63 Commercial electronics had in their used section for example has a staggerring following and many reviewers hold it as a reference speaker - I sure would not - I get why people like stats - I like what they like - but I want more from a speaker. Other people will trade the weaknesses in for the unboxed presentation.

And reviewers/store owners also have budgets to work within just like the rest of us. A number of them don't own incredibly high end gear - they get into money troubles or feel that hey they get to try new stuff out for months anyway so why spend big bucks. Steven Rochlin the editor of enjoythemusic had to sell his ONGAKU amplifier($80,000.00US) and downscaled big time due to financial issues.

Like I said in my original reply - this poster and I are not fans of the speaker - and I noted that others are - and that's why there's no one speaker out there. And it's also a reason I'm not trying to convert fans - I haccve said many times that people who go by my recommendations(To audition never to BUY) NEED and SHOULD be hearing it the same way I hear it.

If Roger Ebert reviews ten movies let's say and you agree with his view all ten times and Roeper reviews 10 movies and you wholeheartedly disagree with him strongly on all ten movies - then chances are when the new movie opens you will be more inclined to go to the movie Ebert recommends(and doubly so if Roeper saysthumbs down). You of course may still be dissapointed but you played the odds. That is why I say to people - if you don't like and i repeat this if you DON'T like what I generally don;t like for the same reasons I don't like it - then maybe you'll want to try something I do like. I have had people say yes I didn't like X speaker and noticed exactly the problems I have indicated with it - they have gone to Soundhounds and did what I suggested which was not to buy anything but to listen and tell me if they heard what I heard - generally they have agreed with me.

Obviously someone like yourself - and I'm not saying you're in any way wrong or that I'm right - really doesn't need my advice becuase you're happy with X brands that I would not be - so we hear things differently and thus the speakers I like may very well not be to your liking.

Like Michael Moore my preaching, as it were, is to the choir. People who hear it the way I do will agree with me and those that don't will call Moore a nutty lying shill for the democrats.

There is of course bound to be a crossover too that we both will like the same thing, just as the critics will agree on the same movie.

There are people in this world - many of them - who for some reason think Jim Carey is funny. I don't get it. Other people think the Lord of the Rings is the greatest series of films in history and hey they even got nominations so the "reviewers" must be right eh - we should not put all are eggs behind what the reviewers think. I'm sure if you look you'll find at least one film that won best picture since 1990 that you didn't like or found at least 15 films that year you would have picked over it. I can think of only 2 films since 1990 that I would say deserved best picture. Schindler's List and American Beauty(and this one was close).

And don't think speakers are any different - go to rottentomatoes.com (I used to post a LOT there on the film forums) and you'd be amazed how many long arguements you can get into over the very subjective issue of films - speakers? Man talk about almost as subjective - throw in an element of science(a small one filled with very little information) and boom arguments galore.

I suppose I should make it clearer that it's an opinion or stress more often that one should be looking more at what I said above about the corresponding agreemant factor - If I don;t like speakers A, B, F, and G and you don't either - then perhaps you will like L, R, X, and Y that I do like.

RGA no need for the book...I will try to be as nice as I can.You have posted more than once how some reviewer from streophile(I think)owns audio note.You do this as to brag about how good the ANs are.Yet when wooch post about another brand owned by reviewers there seems to be some huge misjustice...Again please peovide the proof about reviewers who own Vandys giving only positive reviews to Vandys ..If not just shut the **** up..

[RGA]

46 min please state where I said that Vandy owners only say good things about Vandersteen - I didn't even imply that. What I said was that reviewers are in the business to review - and they review for who? The reader. The reviewers who own Audio Note or Vandersteen or whoever has chosen a speaker for themselves they felt was best for them out of the speakers they have heard. Just like you did and just like I did.

The reviewers in the review industry have more tact than I do when it comes to giving reviews. And one can learn to read a bit between the lines as to what they really think as opposed to what it seems like they said. What I am saying is that they are reviewing a lot of very different speakers positively - and yet they don't own them.

If I worked for major magazine - and had a gag order on me then I would be WAY WAY more tactful in review and word it in such platitutes of I enjoyed my time with the speaker (Ie; because I appreciate even more the speakers I actually own), or you may need to work on the positioning (Ie; it's got problems and can't be fixed), Or it gives a very analytical presentation that really shows off the detail (Cold and bright and will drive you bats in month 2). The difference is I don't work for the magazines and have to hide behind double speak.

Film Critics we want bluntness from to save us from wasting our $9.00 at the movie theater but for some reaosn we want "all is good" with things that could cost us $10,000.00 or more. I don't really understand that.

The other issue with Vandy in particular is that I didn't know they had on board adjustments - so that may very well have yielded a much better result indeed.

Hi-fi choice "With the preset levels at 'flat', the treble sounds very restrained, even dull, and I much preferred the overall balance with the treble set to +2dB. Voices still sound a shade 'hooded', but the extra sparkle is well worthwhile. At the other end of the spectrum, the bass has good extension, weight and power." (They recommended them and awarded the 5 stars for sound).

The speaker may very well be excellent and I shall revisit them again sometime down the line. In fact this was the 2CE which probably not the one I heard anyway. Indeed, I would probably be more interested in trying this design than the by the numbers stuff I keep hearing.

[LVMF]

Ok, I'd love to hear you guys debate the merits of George W.!!!

How does their bookshelf speaker sound to you?

As I have re-entered with great interest Stereo and music recordings, it does amaze me the difference in what reviewers hear and what I hear, especially with speakers. I had the B&W 805 N's to demo, and at the same time the Monitor Audio Gold 10's, and in my listening room, driving them with Musical Fidelity's X-150, the 805's didn't compare to the 10's...now a month later, I've decided the 10's are way too sterile and am looking for an alternative in this price range...any ideas are greatly welcome.

Thanks

[Woochifer]

46 min please state where I said that Vandy owners only say good things about Vandersteen - I didn't even imply that.

The reviewers who own vandersteen and only vandersteen - ever in your life see them review something positively that wasn't a Vandersteen? Ahh.

If I worked for major magazine - and had a gag order on me then I would be WAY WAY more tactful in review and word it in such platitutes of I enjoyed my time with the speaker (Ie; because I appreciate even more the speakers I actually own), or you may need to work on the positioning (Ie; it's got problems and can't be fixed), Or it gives a very analytical presentation that really shows off the detail (Cold and bright and will drive you bats in month 2). The difference is I don't work for the magazines and have to hide behind double speak.

In other words, if you worked for a major magazine (and based that very well might be wishful thinking), you would be just another one of the hacks that you always take shots at?

Film Critics we want bluntness from to save us from wasting our $9.00 at the movie theater but for some reaosn we want "all is good" with things that could cost us $10,000.00 or more. I don't really understand that.

Bluntness is one thing, making false exaggerations and using commentaries about speakers as a soapbox to make unrelated generalizations is quite another. You still haven't cited any examples of where a "homogenous and compressed" speaker will shift the voices to the center even if it was not mixed that way. If you really interpret imaging and soundstage as collapsing everything into the middle, then you're in no position to compare yourself to the many published reviewers that do understand how those attributes actually contribute to the enjoyment of an audio system.

Hi-fi choice "With the preset levels at 'flat', the treble sounds very restrained, even dull, and I much preferred the overall balance with the treble set to +2dB. Voices still sound a shade 'hooded', but the extra sparkle is well worthwhile. At the other end of the spectrum, the bass has good extension, weight and power." (They recommended them and awarded the 5 stars for sound).

The speaker may very well be excellent and I shall revisit them again sometime down the line. In fact this was the 2CE which probably not the one I heard anyway. Indeed, I would probably be more interested in trying this design than the by the numbers stuff I keep hearing.

Once again citing the very reviews that you repeatedly berate as useless and overly positive.

Please tell me which reviews of the Vandys or people's praise of those speakers relies on "the numbers stuff" that you "keep hearing". I certainly didn't mention any figures or measurements when I noted the strong suits of the Vandys. "Trying the design" -- how about simply LISTENING to the speaker, rather than focusing on all these externalities.

[Woochifer]

The reviewers who own vandersteen and only vandersteen - ever in your life see them review something positively that wasn't a Vandersteen? Ahh.

Negative reviews? I thought in your world, those didn't exist, so therefore reviews are worthless (well, unless they're praising Audio Note, then they're words of wisdom). Those reviewers that use Vandys in their rigs are perfectly capable of praising or criticizing another speaker as they see fit. Just because they prefer a certain type of speaker does not mean that they automatically equate every other design to crap or dungheaps or donkey balls or what not. Some people are just open minded enough to see merit in a wide range of approaches to speaker design. I'm sure that even those reviewers that you claim own Audio Notes don't hate on 90% of the speakers out there just because they prefer the ANs.

My comment about this was never intended to be solely about Vandersteen but a generalized comment. And like I said there is a big following - a reviewer can of course be part of that following - nothing at all wrong with liking Vandersteen - and there is nothing at all wrong with not liking them - indeed, it helps me know that the reviewers who do probably don't hear things the way I hear them so I don't need to really pay attention to their reviews.

Cults don't like it when their members absorb different points of view either.

[RGA]

Ahh Woochifer

Lots of speakers I recommend from all sorts of designs - just like pro reviewers. There is a difference though between me and a pro reviewer - There is no influence on me. You are the one who said a while back that one Wilson reviewed was pulled back and another review put in its place to be favorable to a major advertiser - Wilson.

I review positively a lot of speakers I would not want to own - but at a given price point versus what else I've heard I'll say hey this is a good speaker for the money. That is not condescending in any way either because most live in a budget and if someone has a max of $300.00 then here are X and Y which I felt stood out from the pack. Here's the best buy tag.

There is a lot going on behind the scenes with a lot of pro-review organizations and it's tough for it not to happen - if you make friends with Paul Barton say and you review his stuff -you are more inclined to word things a certain way if you're not really on board with it and you may very well be inclined to be dazzled with the thank-you gifts and smoozing that Musical Fidelity has been known for. The same is found in the film industry - they have given holidays to film reviewers all expenses paid for a viewing of movies to gain a favourable review - heck Sony bypassed all that and reviewed their own films with a fictitious critic. Now that's stacking the deck.

I post reviews of stuff I back because some people HAVE to have the security blaket of seeing a review. And most times I still note that you should not go by the reviews that everything gets a good review blah blah. But some people just have to read it other than some unknown guy named RGA on some forum.

There are plenty of speakers I review very warmly all over the price spectrum - and every shopper probably does that at least subconsciously. And presumably people buy the one they felt was the "BEST" given their criteria - I'm no different than anyone else - speaker A is best to me - speaker B was something else. And I may like a lot of speaker B and not much care for speaker H and despise speaker Z.

Now I'm sorry if you happen to like a speaker I despise - and it must be nice for you not to despise any speaker in the history of loudspeaker design. I wish I could like everything but oh well.

[Woochifer]

Ahh Woochifer

Lots of speakers I recommend from all sorts of designs - just like pro reviewers. There is a difference though between me and a pro reviewer - There is no influence on me. You are the one who said a while back that one Wilson reviewed was pulled back and another review put in its place to be favorable to a major advertiser - Wilson.

Yeah, and I don't see pro reviewers using terminology like "donkey balls" and "dungheaps" or claiming that they can't stand 90% of the speakers on the market either. And they don't resort to making false generalizations to state their case, for example about how speakers now funnel voices to the center, even if it wasn't recorded that way.

Yup, that's different alright.

I post reviews of stuff I back because some people HAVE to have the security blaket of seeing a review. And most times I still note that you should not go by the reviews that everything gets a good review blah blah. But some people just have to read it other than some unknown guy named RGA on some forum.

And that's why people flag you on it, because you don't see how contradictory that is. One minute you're berating reviewers and magazines for giving nothing but positives for everything that they review and practically accusing them of accepting bribes, and the next you're citing them whenever the reviews support your point of view.

Now I'm sorry if you happen to like a speaker I despise - and it must be nice for you not to despise any speaker in the history of loudspeaker design. I wish I could like everything but oh well.

Never said that I liked the Vandys, only that I've noted specific things they do exceptionally well. Overall, I would not want them, but that does not stop me from acknowledging their strengths. Plenty of speakers that are not my favorites, but I've always noted that nowadays there are far fewer truly awful speakers on the market now than there were 15 years ago. Considering how you glorify the good old days, you very well might have enjoyed some of those pieces.