1. Home
  2. speakers
  3. 1264368865

B&W vs Vandersteen?

After a long search and lots of auditions I narrowed my options down to 2 very different yet excellent brands. I know they sound very different but still. For my 50 sq.meter living room with 5 meters between the wall and the sofa (something like 3,7 meters between the speakers and my ears) and approx. 2,4 meters distance between the centers of the speakers I'm choosing between B&W and Vandersteen at the moment. Each option has something going for and against it.

Vandersteen 3A Signature is

much cheaper than even 802, not to mention 801 and 800 and is not as difficult to drive. I can buy it right now.

It has glorious musical midrange and highs and sounds big.

Since Vandies are not as deep as B&W I can give them more space between the speakers and the wall - up to 1 meter (maximum 60 - 70 cm in case of B&W)

But I'm not sure if it can be as open and dyamic or as fast and tight with heavy metal and other modern rock music. Also I'm not sure it's perfect for movies because of the same PRAT issues.

And most likely I'll have to move away from the well known McIntosh line (I'm a Mac guy for many years now) since Mac and Vandersteen is not a perfect match and get back on audiophile treadmill of choosing amps etc.

The weird small-spades connections make any audition of cables almost impossible since I can only use cables specially made for Vandies.

B&W 800 or 801 or 802?

sound absolutely neutral and equally great with Carpenters and Celtic Frost.

The can be cranked up as high as possible without becoming shouty. Their speed must be perfect for HT use.

I can stay with Macs since they are a classic combo.

Demand huge and highly expensive amps.

Are much more expensive themselves. The only model from the old 800D line still available is 802 so unless I can find a good deal on used 801 and 802 I'll have to settle for 802s or start saving for new 800 Diamonds which I'll be able to afford by the end of this year with good luck...

What do you guys think? I know some would say - audition both at home and choose for yourself. Not possible at the moment and anyway I'm interested in your opinions!
__________________
antonkk
budt
157 posts
 
If you think the 802D is fast and dynamic then I can only conclude you have never lived with a really dynamic speaker. There is no mistaking the compression of the 802D for those who have.I am simply telling it like it is.
Why has B&W went changed magnet motor assembley in the new range? Why have the also changed the magnet assembly?
Is it simply marketing or are they trying to correct a problem?
I guess time will tell.

I would encourage you to audition a well regarded active speaker( maybe ATC or PMC). Then you will realize just how compressed the 802Ds really are.
Incidently my current up-stream components are a Bryston bp26 pre, Bryston 4b sst amp.So I don't think these are the cause of the sluggish performance of the 802Ds.
philjolet's avatar
philjolet
2,262 posts
 
Budt

I concur that the ATC midrange is unimpeded, the music just flies out of those things. Active 50 is what I heard...

Antonkk it sounds like you have made up your mind, I believe a good stereo is one that sounds good to you, period. The rest does not matter...

good luck and enjoy
antonkk OP
137 posts
 
Would I start the thread if I allready have made up my mind? No. Dynamics are of course important to me, but it was my main concern with Vandies, not B&W.
marakanetz's avatar
marakanetz
5,473 posts
 
All Bowers have a shy bottom end and yet one of the best midranges.
Vandy's have enough resolution on that ballpark but the bass response is extremely slow compare to the speakers of the same class.
If you plan on Bowers and need more bass I would suggest a sub or a couple.
philjolet's avatar
philjolet
2,262 posts
 
Antonkk,

I was thinking you made up your mind to like the B&W but I guess that is already established.

Sorry I lost track of the goal....
More to discover