Best of both worlds, Vandersteen and B&W

I have the Vandersteen 2CE Sig II I'm very satisfied with the bass. 
Driven by McIntosh monoblocks MC601 (600 watts per amp)

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."

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.

Tls49

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

Tls49
if you go to the actual owners manual you will see the 802 speaker specs with the BAF.

frequency range 22k -25k ± 6db
frequency response 27k - 20k ± 2db

All matrix series 2 and 3 models were designed by John Bowers to be used with the BAF for fuller range.

Tls49

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.

Subwoofers are certainly all the rage these days. :^)
One can go ahead and EQ with a subwoofer, sure.... or in this case with this 802 speaker, you can just EQ them with the BAF, as they were designed this way to be more full range...... for those needing / wanting it. The BAF also keeps the impedance more linear making them more amp friendly.

bewoods1962 - did you use them with the BAF ?

Cheers

ct0517

Yes, I have knowledge of the BAF, however the vast majority of Matrix 802’s are being used without one. This was an optional piece sold separately. The specs I cited are straight from a B&W brochure. I agree that if he is using a BAF, my comment is irrelevant, however I seriously doubt he is using one. In that case I stand behind my original comment.

"Subwoofers are certainly all the rage these days."

Yes, but that doesn’t mean that any bass issue can be solved by adding one."

As I said, everyone is entitled to their opinion, however due to his comment,

"Flaccid, aneimic, distant, without any drive or authority."

I see this as a power issue. The 3A’s go fairly deep, but with inadequate power would have no punch, drive, or authority and what was adequate for the B&W may not be enough for the 3A's due to the much lower sensitivity.