Opinions on why this system is uninvolving

Definitely recommend the McCormack DNA-2 for about $2200 used, and then sending it to McCormack for the Rev A upgrade at $2500. This will give you one of the very best amps out there. And I believe that the amp is the most critical piece to a system, especially for listener involvement.

Based on my experience, if your amp is doing it right (some to very many do not), so many other aspects of your system will sound 'right'.

After that, look for power conditioning and dedicated lines.
These tweaks along with the DNA-2 Rev A should give you the involvement you are seeking.

-IME

Hockey, do you realize what you are saying? You gotta' know that there's at least one Revel idolater in this thread who worships the spiked feet that the Studio's rest on?

And in one swell foop, you brought their shrine down to a pile of rubble.

I'm not a Madrigal fan myself but you know there is a following.

Znak_m, your initial impression of the Vandersteen model 5's is a very common one according to the rumors. But once situatated, settled-in, burned -in, mated with appropriate equipment, the Vandersteen Model 5 is claimed to be one the most outstanding speakers made. Again, according to rumors and reviews.

If you should happen to read up on the man Rick Vandersteen and the tremendous detail he put into the design of the Vm5's, it becomes apparent why some consider it among the best. Time and phase coherent, every driver is custom made, the inertness of the cabinet, the first order crossovers, upgradeability, the list goes on. Make no mistake, RV is anal.

If you have the means to consider speaker replacement, read as much as you can about about the Vm5's and give 'em another 'thorough' chance.

-IMO

Asa, I've never listened to the Vandersteen Model 5, nor have I ever seen a model 5 in person. Now that you know where I'm coming from, I'm going to say that you probably don't have a clue what you're talking about when it comes to the Vm5's.

You may have listened to them, but as with any listening, even as illustrated in this thread, if everything ain't matchin' you would have no clue what the component or speaker is capable of.

I am basing my opinion solely on reading reviews and detailed papers on the model 5, reading interviews with R.Vandersteen the man and also on his research into making the model 5, and a friend who is seriously considering the model 5's at this point in time.

But supposedly one common occurrence with the Vm5's is that the initial impression of listening to the model 5's is people walk away wanting more and not satisfied. They say that listening to some of the more popular speakers on the market with pumped up highs to make a speaker sound better in the showroom or perform other showroom tricks will make those sound more 'hi-end' than the Vm5's. They say it takes some time for the listener to settle before they realize exactly what they are hearing.

Time and phase coherent, first order crossovers, each driver is custom fabricated to compensate for the typcial deficiencies found in almost all drivers, the cabinet's inert construction qualities, etc., etc.. Most people cannot believe he is only charging $10k for these speakers.

I'll stop there. You may be correct in your opinion. But for now I have no reason not to believe these could be one of the finest speaker systems made. And I'm not alone.

-IMO

Asa, thanks for the compliment on my "interesting approach to an argument". However, I did not make it up. I saw it in another thread.

In all seriousness. You say you found the Vandersteen's Model 5 are too sterile, etc. Yet, this impression has been reported to be quite common on shorter auditioning periods for the Vm5's.

Yet others that have thoroughly listened to them also can rate them so highly, including Peter Moncrief of IAR who basically tied them with another much more expensive speaker as the most highly rated dynamic driver speaker system.

I have not read (though I'm sure they exist) any professional reviewer speak in the negative sense of the Vm5's as you have. In fact, I've only read positive to very positive things for all Vandersteen models.

As I clearly stated, I've not heard the Vm5's myself, and I certainly don't put too much stock into what most of the professionals may say, but there is also no reason to give you more credence than they especially since you are providing much less information than they. And especially when there's not much on paper or quotes from others to substantiate your claim.

You may be 100% correct, but I think the odds are not in your favor.

Of course, it would certainly help to understand your position by describing your current system, your personal preferences, and finally the system, room, music, and duration of time used for the audition.

Would you care to share that info?

Asa, you don't just beat somebody to a pulp and then decide to call it quits while their body is still moving.

1. Not that it matters one iota, as you yourself confirm, that you were once a reviewer.

2. Two, I apologize for using the word sterile. I did not verify your verbage from your previous post. I don't like it when somebody misquotes me and I certainly would not intentially want to do that to another. But again, you stated that I 'demanded' information from you when in fact I simply 'asked' that you share more information.

3. I stated very clearly that I myself had not heard these speakers. Yet in laymans (sp) terminology, I simply attempted to convey to other readers, from my readings and from another who has auditioned them, who's opinion I highly respect, that your opinion was and IS the only descenting vote on this speaker that I am aware of. That has not changed. And I certainly do not believe I need to listen to the Vm5's to qualify that or any other statement I made to you in my previous post.

4. As a professional reviewer, I would think you would realize you have a greater responsibilty to be more informative and constructive before poo-pooing a product since some to many would have a tendency to be swayed by your words and good manufacturers doors can be closed permanently by a reviewer's comments.

5. I've been pretty consistant with my feelings of many to most audio reviewer's opinions just as I believe I was in my previous post to you. Yet you attempt to portray me as one who clings to those journalist's and/or their opinions. See number two above. And your 40 lashes have done nothing to make me love you guys more.

6. Yes I did make a few assumptions about you. That was pretty easy to do since you gave little information regarding your opinion and background. But now I have a few more assumptions.

6. You state in your last post that you are quite informed with the Vandersteen product line and have more experience than some with them. You listed your system. That's good. Now we're getting somewhere. That was all I ASKED for along with a few other things.

Had I known you were some sort of professional reviewer, I would not have asked for those things. Instead, I would have demanded them from you.

You know, Asa, I said nothing to warrant the beating that you tried to give me in your last post. But obviously I hit some nerve. They say that if you throw a rock into a pack of wolves, the one that barks the loudest is usually the one that got hit."

And here you repeatedly and intentionally misquoted me and twisted my words to your advantage. While at same time falsely accusing me of doing those very things to you. Nice try.

Talk about tenacity? How about irresponsible? And I can think of a few other adjectives.

I too have become disinterested.

-IMO

Znak_m, good to hear that you are pleased.

Per my original post near the top, I have found that the amplifier is the most critical component for so many sonic areas including 'involvement'.

Only because some to many amplifiers have some to many deficiencies that some to many simply overlook or are unaware of.

-IMO