There's a pair for sale semilocally, and I've heard good things about them. The only pair I've actually heard was dramatically underpowered. Are they set up for bi-amping with the ports on the back?

How do they compare/contrast with the DQ-10s?

I heard a new pair of Vandersteen 2's at a local stereo shop and I was not impressed. The bass had enough quantity but lacked definition. The mids and highs were somewhat better but were a touch hazy. I'm not sure the baffleless design of the upper drivers is a success, the paper cones are not my favorite. And there is more than a whiff of Bose 301 in the mid and tweeter arrangement. I am also not a fan of the "sock" cloth cover.

I love my vandy's, they are a bit picky with placement, and will let you bi-amp them also. I am not all up on the audiophile talk that sam has to say, but I think they sound very good, I will hopefully soon get to listen to a set of DQ 20's for a little comparison.

btw, I wouldnt pay over 400 in pristine condition, and that is with the stands.

elroy

Thanks for the info, Elroy, including the extra pricing tidbit.
The guy wants 375 for them, and they look about pristine.
I'm not serious about them, because I have the DQ-10s that
need to be restored, and I'm figuring I will be pretty happy with
them, based on the input from some people on this site
whose opinions I highly respect. Plus, with all of the divergent
opinions regarding speakers (I'm listening to some Klipsch 3.5s, and despite
the harping I've heard against Klipsch, I think they sound terrific.
and there's the ongoing debate about AR-9s), I have never heard anyone
snipe on DQ-10s, much less make a compelling argument.

taking an objective point of view, the Vandy's are a fine speaker that can easily be enjoyed by anyone with a discerning ear. as to how they stack up against DQ-10's i cant say, but my instinct says to get the DQ's up and running. then again if you can swing the funds, i know you'll dig what the Vandy's do.

I would second that since you have the DQs waiting. No eexperience with them but they get great reviews. Had a chance at a needy set a couple years ago but didn't want another set of large speakers needing repair taking up space so didn't make an offer.

okytober and his woman came over today to pick up the adcom gfa 555, and they had a little listen to the vandies, without the pre-amp, I have a cr 1020 posing as a preamp.

A comment Jon mentioned was that they have a serious WAF factor, they are pleasing to the eye. and they sounded pretty good today. I would guess that jon might fill us in with his new amp, and what his wife liked and disliked about the vandies.

elroy

IMHO you can never make an acurate opinion listen to this kind of speakers in a stereo shop.
Vandersteen's handbook recommends placement of the speakers parallel to the rear wall and at least 12" away from it, with the side walls at least 24" away. Speaker placement, as you might know has always great sonic impact - for better or for worth, and the excellent Vandersteen 2 are very sensitive speakers concerning placement which is rather difficult to achieve in a stereo shop.

Placement was not bad for a stereo shop, there was at least 24 inches of clearance to the back wall and not a low of clutter in the listening room. I heard enough of them and seen enough not to like them or recommend them.

there are two things that I have found negative about the vandersteens, the first is what clint said, very, very picky, I can move the 4 inches forward and the bass turns a bit boomy.

and the big negative that I have, is a small sweet spot, I mean they sound ok everywhere in the house, but if you want some critical listening you better be 15ft back directly in the middle and head high with the speakers or you will miss the sonic value. the difference is big.

If the placement in a stereo shop was kinda close, just aint good enough, because if they are off on placement they will sound just ok.

elroy

Too narrow of a sweet spot means the dispersion is no good. The floating mids and tweeters similar to the Bose 301 promise omni-directional sound but what you are getting is forward phase and rearward opposite phase from the back of the driver that is reflected off the back wall. No chance for cohesion except with picky and near ideal placement. Sorry, too gimmicky for me. I am a firm believer of K.I.S.S.

we've been down this road before. come on Sam, enough of the thread-crapping. if you want to address these points then do so in a separate thread.

Thread-crapping? Alternate viewpoints are necessary in order to keep this site from becoming in-bred and boring. I've stuck to the gear as closely as possible but obviously you have decided to cross the line.

your first post in this thread was adequate to address the topic at hand. continuing to address your reasoning which is obviously not shared by many others only derails another discussion away from its original intent. any and all viewpoints are welcome, but going into another discussion about a gimmicky design doesnt serve the purpose of this thread.

Seconded.

Jim