Vandersteen 2ce Signature new version vs 3a Signat

I am looking at possibly buying a pair of Vandersteen 2ce Signatures (again). How much better is the newer version than the old and is the Vandersteen 3A Signature still appreciably better? I will be using them mainly in an A/V set-up with occassional 2 channel use. Thanks!
Many people might disagree but I found the 2ce more to my liking than the 3a. The balance & proportion of the music were impeccable on the 2ce, "just right" as the cliche goes. Quatros and 5s, however, are in different leagues.
Can anyone describe the differences they've heard between these last three series 2 models? Thanks
From what I understand, the newer 2ce Sig II is a step closer to the 3A Sig. I think it has the same tweeter & maybe midrange too. The bass is still where the big difference is.

I've owned 1c's, 2ce's, 2ce Sigs and currently 3A's. IMO, the 3A's are the best, top to bottom. They have a smoother more detailed top end, better integrated, more realistic mid-range, as well as deeper, tighter bass.
The new 2mkII has been upgraded to include the same patented midrange, tweeter, and necessary crossover improvements as the 3A Sig. The bottom plate of the speaker has also been made thicker and more substantial.

The 2mkII is a pretty easy to drive 8 ohm load vs. the 3A Sig which is 4 ohms and more power hungry.

The 2mkII sounds the same as the 3A Sig in the midrange and highs but not quite as extended and articulate in the bass. To beat the 3A Sigs just run two of the 2Wq subwoofers which will handily outdo the 3A Sigs while making the 2mkII's really easy to drive. I even prefer the 2mkII with one 2Wq but don't tell Richard:)

I'm a Vandersteen dealer.