Vandersteen 5a or Eggleston Andra II


This question is for those of you who have listened to the Vandersteen 5a AND the Eggleston Andra II or who purchased one after listening to BOTH.

I am looking at upgrading from the Energy Veritas 2.8 to one of these speakers.

I listen to everything except country. I love the built in 400 watt amps in the 5a, and I love the tweeter in the Andra II.

I have read all the reviews on both of these speakers and would like to hear from you as to why you like one over the other.

Thank you in advance.
rknight
Shad,

I am by no means an expert. I am an audio engineer and i do love music and "hi-fi" so i have heard some systems, but i don;t go around to CES or anything.

My personal speakers are as follows:

Dunlavy sc-IV's (with upgraded tweeter), B&W 801 series 2 limited editions with north creeks crossovers, spendor sc-100's, quad esl-57's, B&W matrix 805's.

Among these the dunlavy's are by far the most accurate and dunlavy's in general are among the most accurate speakers I have heard. The B&W's are pretty reliable too. I have heard seen many classical music engineers using them. they have a little low mid bloom and are not as razor sharp as the dunlavy's but really in terms of that kind of imaging and detail, I dont think even Revel Salons are (though they are great speakers). A lot of people find the dunlavy's clinical as they have no realy midrange "glue" that so many speakers have. My favorite mastering engineer has duntech soverigns. I feel they translate well to other systems and are brutally honest.

The quad esl 57 or the spendor/rogers ls-35a speakers are examples of great musical speakers which are not terribly neutral.

i think the B&W's of the earlier generation and the duntchs and dunlavy's represent quite a value at this point depending on what you look for. Coming from the pro audio world, I am more used to less "colored" speakers and enjoy the feeling of flat response as something that jumps out and hits you in a piece of audio equipment, generally i find to be abrasive later. Pro-ac's, in my limited experience with them seem to be in the more "neutral" category as well.

really, one should listen to anything one enjoys. While i used solid state amps in the studio, I use tubes amps in my stereo. I do not consider the tube amps to be less neutral but they are more euphonic and subject to heat and current changes.

As far as this argument goes, my experience with the Andrea speaker is all i can offer. I haven;t heard those Vandy's.

There is no best stereo or best speaker, so the "different league" talk should be taken with a grain of salt.

Unless we are talking about Bose of course!
Extra consderation...I purchased the andra2 and I am really impressed.I considered the Vandys but I read somewhere that they have very limited space for speaker spades so I scrathed them off my audition list.
Well 4yanx you seem to really going over board and off the deep end, get a grip it's only audio have you had your meds today?

Mothra regarding "different league" depends on the context and how it is used.

In my thread, I gave my experience of listening to two different systems, one being superior over the other.

If you heard a system that was great but then heard another system with the same music listening to both male and female voices and one left you in awe what would you call it?

You listen to a variety of music including all kinds of musical instrumentals including the piano and one system is alright but the other is just more realistic what would you call it?

You then listen to pieces that show off stage presence, pieces included such as Phantom of the Opera, Oliver, My Favorite Year and the stage presence was just so unbelievable scary real what would you call it?

When you put on other music like Tchaikovsky 1812 and when the canon shots go off they startle you like it was the first time you ever heard it. You then put on Dafos and Kodo Drums and it's all so real sounding what would you call it?

Ending the evaluation listening to Fiesta! Dallas Wind Symphony "Prelude and Axtec Dance" and there is just no comparison then what would you call it.

I call it in "another league"
MOthra,

Dunlavy sc-IV's (with upgraded tweeter), B&W 801 series 2 limited editions with north creeks crossovers, spendor sc-100's, quad esl-57's, B&W matrix 805's.

Awesome I am very impressed by your choices. You have some classics. Perhaps one day you will post a few pics....I will be drooling!!!. Youu are in another league from me.

I agree with you that second hand Dunlavy's are great value rather than chasing the latest and greatest.

I agree on your Wilson comments (although I am reticent to criticse the bass response because they are so successful - obviously people like them!) On the Andras ( a bit bass light ) I can understand that you might want a sub with these. (I use a 15" sub with my ATC100s as they roll off in the lowermost octave below 35Hz and it seems you can never have too much clean tight bass power at elevated listening levels -provided it is all critically damped - I dislike mushy boominess in the bass but love it when I can clearly discern a bass guitar riff from behind a close-miked kick drum)

I suspect you may not like ATC as you mentioned Doug Sax has a system you don't understand (or is it his brother's designed tube based EQ setup that you struggle with?). No problem, some people say ATC's make their ears bleed and I have no problem with that as they are quite forward sounding in the mid range and certainly play so loud the music can always be made to eventually sound harsh (at extremes), furthermore, everyone is entitled to their personal preference. Frankly, I could live with your preferences/taste too but then again who is "Shadorne"...I am a complete nobody in audio compared to someone like Bob Ludwig. (Sorry but I respect many of these engineers - even the weird ones!)