What Are the Best Sounding Speakers UNDER $2,500 that You've Ever Heard.?

[beetlemania]

Vandersteen 2 series, and second place is not close. They were well below $2500 at the various times I've heard (and owned) them, though they have recently edged up to $2560. Guessing you could pretty easily find a retailer who would discount them to below $2500.

 

Yes, the latest 2 Ce Sig IIs are a must-audition at this price point unless you need a small monitor or have 8W SET amps.

[beetlemania]

Several people have recommended the Vandersteen 2Ce IIs but judging from Sphile's measurements these speakers are probably quite bright and forward sounding.

 

 

I wouldn't bother with a listen and perhaps try the 3s instead.

 

R

 

That figure is JA's in-room response and I suspect it is an artifact of interactions in his room and how he measures over a "listening window" rather than where his ears are. This puts 1st order speakers at a disadvantage in this test. Also, this graph is quite different than his quasi-anechoic measurement!

 

May I kindly suggest it is well worth bothering with a listen rather than rely on JA's dubious in-room measurement? Many folks have suggested Maggies on this thread. Can you imagine how *those* would look using JA's measurements!

[beetlemania]

Planar speakers, especially large ones, are difficult do measure.

But let's not change the subject; we are not talking about Maggies.

 

But since you are dismissing the significance of JA's in-room measurement here's another plot, this time a gated near field measurement which is quasi anechoic above 350Hz:

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]31184[/ATTACH]

 

R

 

The Maggies are relevant because they illustrate that measurements are not the be-all, end-all that replace the experience of actually listening.

 

I'm not dismissing JA's in-room measurement so much as suggesting to take it with a grain of salt. The sum of JA's quasi-anechoic measurements for the 2 Ce Sig II looks respectable to me although, curiously, not as good as Vandy 2 measurements from an earlier iteration also measured by JA. I have read that RV has taken issue with the height that JA measures his designs. Also, RV told me (at RMAF) that he has upgraded the Sig IIs since that SP review.

 

Meanwhile, I've noticed that many high-dollar speakers with near ideal anechoic measurements very often show suck-outs in the upper bass and/or lower midrange in JA's room.

 

* I have a dog in this fight - I'm listening to my Sig IIs right now! I've heard many $$$ speakers over the years. My faves are the Vivid Giya, TAD Ref 1, Vandy 7, and Avalon Ascent. The Sig IIs are, clearly, not as good as those. They are not the last word in frequency extension or resolution but they are always superbly musical and give most of what those $$$ speakers do for a fraction of the price. YMMV.

[beetlemania]

More Vandersteen 2 measurements

This is the in-room response of the Vandersteen 2C from a 1986 review. That's very near ideal even for a $$$ speaker. This is also JA's room . . . in Santa Fe rather than NY. But, it's always possible that RV made better speakers 30 years ago!

 

This one is from the 2Ce review in 2000 and comes from RV as he took exception to how JA measured his product. This is missing the nearfield from the woofer but see esldude's post above.

 

If you're shopping at this price point (or even up to $5K) and have space for a largish floorstander (and can live with it's monolith appearance), the Vandy 2 Sig IIs deserve an audition. I have no regrets and am still happy 8 years in. I'd like to upgrade to the Treos but might simply buy current production Sig IIs - RV has made several changes since they were introduced including replacing the midrange with the one he used to put in the Model 5.