2. speakers
  3. 128043-22735

Best of both worlds, Vandersteen and B&W

In my mid 30's, living in New Orleans at the time, I purchased my first pair of high fidelity loudspeakers, B&W matrix 802's. I have had a long term love-hate relationship with these speakers. I love thier dynamics and solid base but have always been bothered by a tilt toward the higher frequencys and an upper midrange glare I was unable to banish with ancillary equipment. After much deliberation I recently purchased a pair of Vandersteen 3A signatures. As promised these speakers are smooth and warm, without a hint of midrange glare. With jazz or classical music they sound beautiful and I initially thought I had solved my speaker problem. That is until I queued up rock and roll. The highs and mids still sounded wonderful, but the bass was hugely disappointing. Flaccid, aneimic, distant, without any drive or authority. My wife, who could not care less about high end audio, commented, "they sound a little flat", and "they don't have the same power".

I live in Maine where there is little opportunity to audition equipment. My question is are there any speakers that have both the smooth treble and midrange of Vandersteen and the excellent bass of B&W?

Ag insider logo xs@2xbewoods1962

Showing 2 responses by tls49

tls49's avatar
tls49
1,351 posts
 
Everyone is certainly entitled to their opinion, but any time there is an issue with the bass, subwoofer recommendations seem to be plentiful regardless of the scenario. Looking at basic specifications of the two speakers in question,

B&W Matrix 802 Series 3

Frequency Response - 42Hz – 20kHz ± 3dB
Sensitivity                   - 90dB spl(2.83V 1m)
Impedance                 - 8 ohms nominal (minimum 3.4 ohms)

Vandersteen 3A Signature

Frequency Response - 26Hz – 30kHz +/- 3dB
Sensitivity                   - 87 dB, 1 meter/2.83 volt input
Impedance                 - 6 ohms nominal 4 ohms minimum

Since the 3A's are 6 ohm that makes their 1 watt sensitivity ~85.5db compared to the 1 watt sensitivity of the 802's being 90db. With the 3A's going deeper in the bass but with a much lower sensitivity, I'm thinking the issue is power, but can only guess not knowing the amp being used. Also, having experience with both speakers, I do somewhat agree with this comment,

"Both speakers play well with the right set-up and equipment. If not, the Vandersteens may bore and the B&W’s may glare/sizzle. I can't imagine them working interchangeably in the same system."

tls49's avatar
tls49
1,351 posts
 
ct0517

Yes, I have knowledge of the BAF, however the vast majority of Matrix 802’s are being used without one. This was an optional piece sold separately. The specs I cited are straight from a B&W brochure. I agree that if he is using a BAF, my comment is irrelevant, however I seriously doubt he is using one. In that case I stand behind my original comment.

"Subwoofers are certainly all the rage these days."

Yes, but that doesn’t mean that any bass issue can be solved by adding one."

As I said, everyone is entitled to their opinion, however due to his comment,

"Flaccid, aneimic, distant, without any drive or authority."

I see this as a power issue. The 3A’s go fairly deep, but with inadequate power would have no punch, drive, or authority and what was adequate for the B&W may not be enough for the 3A's due to the much lower sensitivity.

More to discover