Vandersteen Treo vs 3A Sig as upgrade

@carmenc  @ctsooner   Wow this sounds like a win win for both of you.  Agree with ctsooner about the ceramic coating.  As I understand it, Richard employed the ceramic coating to greatly reduce the ringing.  I have not had the good fortune to hear that tweeter but knowing Richard he rarely if ever shoots blanks when it comes to implementing a design.

carmenc I'll look forward to hearing  from you once you guys can get together to do the deal.

All the best!

Ok, will call you.  Be good to finally meet you if you make it west in Oct.

Will keep you posted hifiman.  You two take care and have a good week.

regards........

I've been very happy with the ceramic tweeter. I just want the bass control for my room.  I spoke with Richard about the differences in the two. I have heard the CT speakers since day one.  I personally think they are the top tweeters I've ever heard.  He just gets the tradeoffs right.  That's so hard to do and why so many love his speakers.  They are very difficult to dislike. Some do, but you can't please everyone.  

Yes, this could be a win win.  

I realize that all speakers are not for everyone.  However, I seem to see this statement made in association with Vandersteen speakers more so than with other brands. I have even heard people say that either you love them or you hate them. Is my observation accurate?  If so, what is it about Vandersteen that would tend to make them less universally liked than with other brands.

If you are into the "hifi" end of things and prefer the excitement of a speaker that flaps your pant legs then you will probably be attracted to studio monitor types or speakers that command your attention by asserting themselves at you.  Vandersteens are speakers that tend to invite you in to listen through them.  The soundstage is at or slightly behind the front baffle of the speakers.  Many more aggressive designs will image in front of the plane of the speakers and present an exciting initial reaction.  They jump out demanding to be noticed.  

In my experience the conversation around such hifi-ish designs centers on discussing the individual drivers' contribution to the sound rather than the beauty of the music being listened to.  There is a population in the audiophile realm who are into the excitement of the sound and hear that assertive approach as realistic, portraying what they perceive as a greater facsimile of a live musical event.  If that's what they perceive as satisfying, then they should pursue such designs and steer clear of Vandersteens.  

As much as I embrace the "Vandersteen sound" I have listened to and appreciated the Proacs, Wilsons, and numerous other designs that make some fine, clean sound.  With Vandersteens and especially through my recently acquired Treo CT, the music is the driving force when I decide to listen.  The speakers disappear as the sound source and the soundspace takes over.  It's an invitation to listen rather than a command to do so.

Sorry for the length of this but I am struggling to find a way to express this without dismissing the more assertive design approach.  I know several listeners for whom the more assertive approach is the more musically satisfying way to go.  If that is what they hear as musical truth then so be it.  I am happy that they are where they want to be.

Last thought...I have not met the listener described above who "hates" Vandersteens.  They will describe  their experience listening through Vandersteens as "enjoyable" but lacking the ultimate excitement they crave.  This fact is why there are so many different brands and types of loudspeakers readily available in audio-land.