Ohm Walsh 2000 vs MMG vs Vandersteen 2ce Sig?

Ohm Walsh 2000 versus Magneplanar MMG versus Vandersteen 2ce Signature II? How does they compare with respect to speed, dynamics, tonality, texture, detail, tranparency, extension and sound stage?
It has been awhile since I have trawled through some of the forums here, and was looking through this thread. Since the last time I posted on this matter, I have added a pair of Rel T-3 subs to my MMG's, which funny enough, brings the pricing right in line with a pair of Ohm MWT's. In this mode, the MMG's might have the edge in my listening room. This is the first time I have been able to get any sub to work well with the Maggies, and it is quite nice. With the exception of a still somewhat narrow sweet-spot compared to the Ohm's, the overall balance is maybe a bit better, and now with the bass thrown in.

I have also played around with the subs on the Ohm MWT as well, and have to say, this also is a very, very satisfying setup. Either one does it for me very nicely, and taking the subs into consideration on both pairs of speakers, really is a toss-up. They both have very similar qualities, and yet they each also have some things they do differently, some better, some worse.

I have always liked the way MMG's do acoustic guitar, they have that bit of leading edge bite, whereas the Ohm is maybe a bit more softer around the edges. The Ohm is bit more dynamic though on most other things in the way a typical cone-driver speaker tends to be. I know that almost sounds like a bit of a contradiction of sorts, but there you have it.

The MMG also seems to provide more of a wall of music-yet with depth and imaging, the Ohm more diffuse, but still in a very natural/realistic way. I guess it is all turnabouts and roundabouts.

I have always loved my MMG's, while certainly not perfect, with the addition of the subs, it has gone a long way to getting what I got out of my Ohm's. But I still love both for the positive things they do, and not many negatives really.

So much for my 2 cents. Enjoy the music! Tim
MMG's are better than the other 2 and not by a little bit.
THE problem is that they are thought of "starter " speakers when they are really more "end" speakers in that they need the best of amps, pre's , and wire to do what they can , not to mention a lot of audio savy with room placement, none of which the average buyer of these has.
I've heard 50K systems which sound worse then my MMG system..
sound anchor stands(tilt to taste)
Byryston BP-6 or Modded PAS 3
Van Alstine synergy 550
Cambridge 740 CD
Analysis Plus Oval 12 SC (CRUCIAL, this THE SC for MMG)
Audio Zen Tsunami Power cords all around.
this is an interesting discussion thread. Problem with the MMG is that Magnepan themselves describe the speaker as their intro product and that most owners will move up to their "better models" after experiencing the MMG. Doesn't exactly inspire me to purchase over a well developed and established product like the Ohm Walsh.
Ladavid, well Ohm's, ehich I've had, are sure plug and play,MMG's are not for the faint of heart.
I had MG12's - loved them and one of my audio regrets selling them. Never had Ohms though.