|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
Model: | 2Ce |
Category: | Speakers |
Suggested Retail Price: | $1,295 |
Description: | 4-driver floorstander, 1st order xover, 86 db, 7 ohms, 4 ohm min. |
Manufacturer URL: | Vandersteen Audio |
Model Picture: | View |
Review by Rufipennis on August 25, 2007 at 22:12:59 IP Address: 4.228.57.202 | Add Your Review for the 2Ce |
This is a review of the recently released 2Ce Signature II, which features the tweeter and midrange drivers from the 3A Signature (Vandersteen's website still is lacking information on the new model but does provide a link to the Stereophile review). I previously had Thiel 1.6s, so many of my comments regarding the Vandersteens will be relative to the Thiels. BTW, I thought the Thiels were fabulous although lacking in bass - essentially nothing below 50 Hz in my room whereas the Sig IIs seem to have full output down to the mid 30 Hz with some energy down to the mid 20s.
After much agonizing over whether to add a subwoofer to my Thiels or upgrade to 2.4s, I saw the Stereophile review for the 2Ce Sig IIs. I had previously considered the 3A Sigs and would have bought a pair except for their plain looks and massive size, so when the 8" shorter 2Ce promised near 3A performance, it became a no-brainer. I've had the Vandersteens in my system since February. I initially had them wired with a single run of Cardas Neutral Reference, using a length of El Cheapo speaker wire as a jumper. I did some serious listening with only a few hours logged on the drivers. The first thing I noticed was that they have “more meat on the bones” than the Thiels. Yes, there’s more bass but also a richer, fuller sound – even my wife took a rare turn in the listening position and commented on the difference. The soundstage was noticeably larger, especially in depth. Through the Thiels, female vocals were clear, resolved, and immediate but could also tend to sound overly bright on some passages of certain songs causing me to grab the remote (but don’t take me wrong, this issue with the Thiels was a minor and fleeting intrusion). I have yet to reach for the volume while playing female vocalists through the Vandersteens. Coming from the Thiels aluminum midrange/woofer, I expected a bit of resolution loss due to the Sig IIs plastic midrange driver, but didn’t notice much. If anything, the Vandersteen’s appear to have more overall information, probably due to their greater bass content.
Warning: there were a couple of days early during break-in when I began to wonder if I had made a mistake! The sound was incoherent and vaguely irritating. Luckily, this stage didn’t last long and things settled in for the better. Adding sand to the stands helped a lot.
I then experimented with two runs of El Cheapo to hear the effects of bi-wiring which Vandersteen claims to improve performance. Having decided that bi-wiring was promising, I put the Cardas back on the tweeter/midrange binding posts and put a longer run of El Cheapo on the woofer until I finally figured out a permanent bi-wire solution. During this time, the sound of the Sig IIs grew on me, especially their cavernous soundstage that invites me into the music. In fact, they’re about as good as I’ve heard I that regard. Moreover, they can disappear into my room, even when the signal is all in one channel. On some recordings, sounds appear to emanate from outside the bounds of the speakers.
I’ve heard tighter, deeper bass (e.g., Thiel 7.2), a more convincing hall image (e.g., Wilson Watt/Puppy 7), and a more resolved and transparent midrange (e.g., Avalon Eclipse), but the Sig IIs are plenty good in these categories. In terms of overall musicality, the Sig IIs are about as good as anything I’ve heard (and I’ve heard many others besides those mentioned, though only the Sig IIs and 1.6s in my room/system). And there is a physical presence to the bass. For example, Ani DiFranco’s baritone guitar is felt as well as heard. Again, the Sig IIs are not the best I’ve heard in that category but they do hold their own.
My only notable complaint was a slightly veiled quality on voices (especially female) and some acoustic instruments. Luckily, the Vandersteens are plenty musical enough that this was rarely a distraction. After months of fretting over how to bi-wire – including an ill-fated attempt to get a used pair of Cardas to match my own, I got two used pairs of Ayre Signature Series. I am amazed to say that the veiled quality is now all but gone; vocalists are now much more open and immediate. Wow – these Sig IIs, and my whole system, can really make music!
Warning #2: At very high SPLs (much higher than I like to listen), the Sig IIs become very congested. This probably is not the speaker system for The Who fans wanting to listen at rock concert levels. Although to be fair, I’m not certain that it isn’t just my Ayre integrated running out of steam driving these somewhat inefficient speakers.
IMO/YMMV: In conclusion, the 2Ce Sig IIs do some things about as good as anything out there. Their other audio attributes likely are a bit short of the best out there but close enough for me and they are seriously musical. Oh –did I mention – they freakin’ only cost $2K (and they’re made in U.S., not China, both being important to me). Perhaps it’s obvious, but I agree with most of Art Dudley’s review in Stereophile. But I’ll take it further: the Sig IIs give you a fat helping of the high-end at a relatively affordable price. My guess is I’d have to spend $10K to get a substantial improvement (e.g., Vandersteen Quatro or Thiel 3.7). My vote for best buy in audio!
Product Weakness: | Relatively big and plain looking, needs to be bi-wired (which adds to the cost, especially if you shoot for the moon like me). A bit short of SOTA midrange transparency and resolution, as well as SOTA bass definition and extension – but check the price tag! |
Product Strengths: | Highly musical, near SOTA soundstaging and imaging, disappear into the room, coherent, accurate, etc.<br>Gets you a long way towards the best out there at a crazy bargain price! Of course, a non-audiophile would think I’m crazy to buy $2K speakers and then call them a “bargain”. <br> |
Amplifier: | Ayre AX-7e |
Preamplifier (or None if Integrated): | None |
Sources (CDP/Turntable): | Ayre CX-7e/Kenwood KD-500/Kenwood KT-7500 |
Speakers: | on review |
Cables/Interconnects: | Ayre Signature Series |
Music Used (Genre/Selections): | Folk, rock, bluegrass, R&B, jazz |
Room Size (LxWxH): | 18 x 19 x 8-14 |
Room Comments/Treatments: | Wall coverings |
Time Period/Length of Audition: | 6 months |
Type of Audition/Review: | Product Owner |
If you wanted to go for the lowest octave and get some Vandersteen 2Wq subwoofers, not only would your overall performance increase (assuming you are interested in the lowest bass), but the powered 2Wqs could relieve your main amps of some significant work. Power is increasingly handed off to the subs as you go below about 100 Hz by virtue of the crossover design. I don't really know how much this would do for you in a quantitative way, but in principle it could make a real difference. Then you get excellent performance to 20 Hz, and quite possibly your present amp will never run out of steam. Just a thought. Of course two subs would cost more than your speakers, but the result could be a extremely impressive speaker.
Joe
Thanks for the response. Yep, the subs could very well do everything you say. But I'm in no hurry to find out as I'm very happy with my system now and I can't get excited about having two more boxes in the living space. But maybe I should ask my wife!
I should emphasize that my amp is doing everything I'm asking of it. Yes, it does clip (according to its designer) but only at SPLs beyond my preferences even when I want to rock out. I was merely testing the limits of the system when I cranked the volume. IMO, my amp sounds pretty freakin' amazing.
The 3Ce .
Yes, the 3A Sig is awesome and insane value for the money. The original poster heard it in our factory (we had a pair in our listening room for a year or so). He didn't buy it because it is so big and ugly. That's why he was excited about the new 2 Signatures -- they have the same midrange and tweeter as the 3A Sigs. The 2 Sigs fit much better into his listening room (and his budget).
New model?
Oz
nt
< < At very high SPLs (much higher than I like to listen), the Sig IIs become very congested. Although to be fair, I’m not certain that it isn’t just my Ayre integrated running out of steam driving these somewhat inefficient speakers. > >
It's probably the Ayre running out of steam. Here are the numbers:
a) The CX-7e has an output level of 4.5 Vrms when using the balanced outputs and the disc is playing full scale (fairly common with rock recordings).
b) The AX-7e has a maximum output level of 22 Vrms before clipping.
c) This means that you can run a maximum gain of 22 / 4.5 = 4.89x, which is about 14 dB, before it will clip with a full scale output on the CD.
d) Since the maximum gain of 35 dB is achieved at an indicated "66" on the front panel, and each displayed unit is 1 dB, then you will reach clipping at an indicated "45" on front panel of the AX-7e in your setup.
Your ear can handle brief clipping without too much problem. So you might be able to get into the high 40's without too much problem. But by the time you reach "50" on the display (with this particular combination of equipment), you will definitely be clipping when playing a rock recording. (Classical recordings are often cut at lower levels.)
Hope this helps.
I am using the first edition of the 2CE sig, actually 2ce's that were upgraded. I would suggest not only bi-wire, but bi-amping the Vandy's. They do like power and I found they really opened up when I added a second channel. I still use a sub to handle the lowest octaves.B&K pre/pro
Parasound amps
Vandersteen 2Ce Sig
Straightwire cables
M&K sub
Thanks for the informative reply, Charlie.
That completely makes sense - and I was being kind when I said it sounds "congested", it actually sounds sh*tty. When I have the house to myself, I might listen at about 38-40 on the display, maybe 45 if I really want to rock out. I only went higher 'cus I was curious to see how loud they'd play. Things started to fall apart at about 50 and seriously bad at 55. When I had the Thiels, I would usually listen at about 32-35 and cranked it once to about 50. That was just too freaking loud for my ears thru the relatively sensitive 1.6s, so I never noticed the clipping.
Thus, the AX-7 has plenty of balls for my system and preferences (and I might have to give it honorable mention for best buy in audio - I don't think I'm missing much compared to more expensives separates).
I am most impressed with your answer and the fact that you are being critical of your own equipment and yet provide a detailed and informative explanation.
It is extremely refreshing to see such such honesty and to receive such an informative post.
I thank you, very much....
Stu
Thanks for the kind words.
I cheated a bit, as I've corresponded with the original poster before. His listening room is fairly large, with a high ceiling and opens up to other rooms in the house. Plus I know that he runs a balanced connection from the source to the amp. I had a sneaking suspicion that the amp was clipping based on his description.
There's only so much you can do with 60 watts. Maybe he should look at one of those Musical Fidelity power boosters... (just kidding!)
Charles Hansen was simply being objective and informative about the equipment match. Too many people reading "critical of your own equipment" may interpret that as a negative comment. Stu, I'm sure that was not your intent.
It's not as if I've never stated something that couldn't be read two different ways, but I'm amazed how many times Inmates get off base from the poster's intent. (read too hurriedly?)
Anyway, thanks for your complementary response which I agree was worth stating.
.
The 3A Sigs behaved very similarly during the break in. The major improvement when adding the subs was in the midrange, the bass became more tight and more coherent, but the midrange just cleared up and the whole system became larger and more alive....The 3A sig with the subs is a truly spectacular setup for the money. OK, I still fell for the Soundlabs in about 5 minutes, but they are a totally different ball of wax, if you want to keep your sanity do not, under any circumstances, listen to any of the Soundlabs. All the things you wish the vandies could do, the Soundlabs will, and still have room to surprise you.
dee
;-D
True terror is to wake up one morning and discover that your high school class is running the country.Kurt Vonnegut
Yeah, I had seriously considered the 2WQs for my 1.6s. Adding them to the Sig IIs is an obvious upgrade path (and I've read Hardesty's review that supports your statement regarding improved midrange performance). Problem is, I'd have to add two more large boxes to my living room. And, if I had a dedicated sound room -where looks didn't matter - I could probably afford something better anyhow! Snark. Thanks for the input, though, and maybe someday I'll try the 2WQs.
I think that Vandersteen makes some of the better speakers available, and for the money he's got to be right at the top. But, IMO, his designs are not what most people (especially women) want in their living rooms!
yeap the Vandies are considered ugly by a large number of people, but try to sell putting a pair of Soundlabs in your living room :-). That is something else. Even though the A1s do that disappearing trick sonicly extremely well, they do not rate high in unobtrusiveness.
dee
;-D
True terror is to wake up one morning and discover that your high school class is running the country.Kurt Vonnegut
Excellent review. I have had the original Vandy 2Cs for almost 10 years and recently upgraded to the Vandy Sigs. Vandersteens are only rolled off and "dark" if you compare them to "detailed" speakers but if you listen to a lot of live music they are never lacking. You might want to bi-wire them with the same cables. Richard Vandersteen recommends that for coherence.
< < You might want to bi-wire them with the same cables. Richard Vandersteen recommends that for coherence. > >
Richard is absolutely correct in this regard. If you look closely at the review, you will see that the poster used different cables at first just as an experiment. But in the end he got identical cables (and much improved sound).
Oops...my bad. I had a momentary lapse of reason and missed that. I realized that as soon as I posted.
No problem, it was an important point that was worthy of emphasizing. Thanks!
Pretty much the same observations I had concerning my 3a sigs. I hear things that I did not on my 1.6's, and there's a fullness that makes other speakers sound like somethings missing. I drive mine with Ayre seperates, so that would be an obvious upgrade path for you later. It's interesting that you are comparing them to speakers that cost MANY times more then the 2CE's. That says a lot...They do vinyl extremely well. At least for me. Good write up.
> > > They do vinyl extremely well> > >Oh yeah! I just replaced my Monster POS interconnect with Cardas XLR to tie my P-5x into the AX-7. I spun Dire Straits "Brothers in Arms" for the first time in many years and now I'm gonna have to rethink my opinion that my digital and vinyl sound more the same than different. Wow!
> > > I drive mine with Ayre seperates, so that would be an obvious upgrade path for you later.> > >
Yeah, I'm saving my pennies for MX-Rs! I wish. No, I'm really, really happy with my system right now. Sure I could do better, but I'm thinking to spend more money on the software side for a while.
Speaking of MX-Rs, I recall when Fremer reviewed an NAD integrated recently, he stated that he'd rather have a $3K integrated driving his MAXX2s than $40K of electronics driving a $3K speaker system. Well, I haven't heard the MAXXs but I have heard the WP7, and I'm thinking a pair of MX-Rs driving the Sig IIs would stack up quite nicely against the NAD/MAXX2s.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: