Vandersteen Forum

what i've long admired about the "vandy" sound is that they seem to commit sins of omission only. i can live with those. the ones i heard [in an acoustically perfect room, meaning large] were not the last word in definition but they made everything [including old recordings of mediocre sound quality] sound at least tolerable if not 100% shiny. their imaging quality [head-in-vise] was better than average, i could easily get a palpable sense of depth on good stereo recordings. mono recordings came from a very narrow "wodge" between the speakers, that when i moved my head back and forth, smoothly transitioned between the speakers with no lumpiness. i just wished they sounded like that in smaller rooms. 

As a vandersteen owner I will admit there can be a cultish quality to vandersteen enthusiasts. What I will also say is that if you liked B&Ws better that your probably not someone that digs the vandersteen sound. B&Ws tend to be very bright to my ears. Yes, they will sound glittery and detailed but after some time they start to fatigue my ears. They tend to pair well with really tubey warm stuff like Macintosh. For me the vandys are more natural, more real. But this is just my opinion. You have your opinion. Ultimately , in hifi, we each have our own. It doesn't mean something is good or bad, its just our preference. I loved my old 2ce and love my quatros. Vandersteen for life!

I once criticized the frequency response of a past version of a Vandersteen model. Someone called dad to tell on me, which was weird. Poor Richard.