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
tomic601's avatar
tomic601
12,869 posts
 
As you move up Vandersteen line you get subwoofer amps and analog EQ to fix freq response in bass at listening positions.

adding two subs will get you close but without EQ

who is your dealer ? Let me know how I can help


gdnrbob
4,422 posts
 
A pair of Vandy subs should give you what you need. I ran the 3a sigs with a pair of 2w subs, even without 'q', it was amazing.
Can you tell us what your other equipment is? It may help in diagnosing your 'anemic' sound.
I just bought a pair of Treo's, mostly because they fit my room better, and am still using the 2w's- I am in heaven.
Bob
miketuason
334 posts
 
I have the Vandersteen 2CE Sig II I'm very satisfied with the bass. 
Driven by McIntosh monoblocks MC601 (600 watts per amp)
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."

cedargrover
302 posts
 
I have 3A Sigs driven by a NAD S200 (225w/channel into 8 ohms and it close to doubles into 4 ohms).  I would never think to comment that these speakers are bass shy or anemic in any sense.  A room/placement problem is often to blame for bass issues, but I have found those issues are better solved with a pair of Vandersteen subs than by moving your speakers in a way that improves bass to the detriment of other things.  Just my $0.02.
More to discover