vandersteen VCC-5 Review (Center Speaker)

[squeedle]

If his ultimate goal is time alignment(which it seems to be), why not just go active? That should allow even better time alignment, and do so without adding all those compromises in other areas.

You should suggest the same to him. No argument here.

 

[sarumbear]

You tonality says 'engineer' as if it was foot fungus?

I don’t know how you extracted tonality from an incomplete sentence but you may want to check my profile before trying to guess my “tone”.

 

[Holmz]

In my opinion, it is unfair to judge or compare a location-specific or purpose-specific speaker (center, surround, ,...) on things like frequency response, directivity and music, in a standalone setting by itself.
...

Last millennium when I bought speakers, it was done by listening.
Then driving to another shop miles away and listening some more.

If one cannot use directivity, then which way should they be toed? (toed in or toed out)
However we are in a new millennium now.

...
The only fair way to do a listening test on these type of speakers is to substitute them into an existing surround sound system. Swap out the existing reference center/surround and place the one you want to test and then play the tracks you want to audition in full surround.

In Aus, that would be a drive which includes an east/west component that looks like crossing Texas.
Does one just swap them into a any old system with 2 way, 2 way, or 4 way towers and ”god knows what” in terms of steps function response?

Therefore I would take measurements from the US, over some “in person” listening… and I’m already a “Vandy FanBoi” (VFB)… or maybe VFP?

If the 2C# model also measured less than ideal, then I would have t rethink why I like their sound so much. Hopefully we will see that at some point. I should have thrown in Dunlavy with the Spika/Thiel/VFB treo… and maybe quad?

 

[Rottmannash]

One coax tweeter/midrange flanked by two interior-mounted woofers.

Thank you for the reply-earlier I received a rather snide answer in the form of a question.

 

[Daverz]

A designer who is not an engineer.

John Dunlavy was an engineer who used first-order crossovers in his speakers. He would never have let a speaker go out with his name on it with this kind of frequency response, though.

 

[Doodski]

A designer who is not an engineer.

I knew a bachelor of commerce graduate that designed and manufactured micro-ohm meters. They where a sweet little handheld box that cost some thousands of dollars and he sold all of them for aircraft skin measurements. Then there was another commoner type guy that was designing speakers and selling them at his storefront. I think a intelligent person with the drive can study and learn crossover design especially with all the software options available today.

 

[H-713]

Aren't most of the Vandersteen speakers a 30-year-old design? If so... that's pretty decent since a lot of the tools we take for granted now weren't so available then.

I gave a postman panther. It's certainly not perfect, but it's not too bad. I've listened to a lot of speakers like this (not terrible, not perfect), and to be honest, they all sound a little different, but whether I'd pick them or a "perfect" speaker really depends on my mood, the track, the room, etc. It's a different story when you have something that is really screwed up (like something with a huge peak in the response, or a lot of severe resonances).

Most of what that $2700 is buying is related to build quality and fit and finish... as it is in any product. Real woodwork is expensive to do well, and I can completely understand paying a huge premium for it. If I didn't have the skills and tools to do that kind of work myself, I'd be 100% willing to pay for it.

 

[Holmz]

Aren't most of the Vandersteen speakers a 30-year-old design? If so... that's pretty decent since a lot of the tools we take for granted now weren't so available then.
…

I am not sure that is true in the case of the 2C speakers.For instance they were using FFT based test equipment early on.
And the design with the tweeter and MR in separate places reduced a lot of the cabinet diffraction stuff. And then the woofer is something like a waveguide, or maybe a Passive radiator… so they were a pretty different beast in the late 70s and 80s. And I believe that they have been all over cabinet resonances from early on as well.

Hopefully someone can get a 2Ce to Amir. And also some of the other contemporaries like Dunlavy, Spika, Thiel which were time.phase correct.

However I did hear some Focal‘s the other day that raised my eyebrow a notch. I actually pulled out the iPad OSHA app to see what it was doing… It was the “usual” 85-90 dB(A) slow response and peaks to 100+.
(The ”usual” being that it sounded so quiet, but when I had walked out the room, I knew it was loud… and went back in to see what teh SPL was.)

 

[HerbertWest]

Hopefully someone can get a 2Ce to Amir. And also some of the other contemporaries like Dunlavy, Spika, Thiel which were time.phase correct.

No idea if they measure&sound great, but they do look like two “Minions” to me

 

[FeddyLost]

If the 2C# model also measured less than ideal, then I would have t rethink why I like their sound so much. Hopefully we will see that at some point. I should have thrown in Dunlavy with the Spika/Thiel/VFB treo… and maybe quad?

It may be due to time and phase correct speakers. I suppose some people (with their preferred genres) just like "3D" solutions better if FR still within acceptable margin.
In times of passive speakers good alignment was not an often option, so you might be just familiar with Vandersteen sound, while it can be not the best on-axis right now.

 

[Dmitri]

No idea if they measure&sound great, but they do look like two “Minions” to me

Well ya gotta undress ‘em first....and that’s kind of creepy. ; )

 

[Shazb0t]

I thought about rating it "not terrible" and then went with "poor" after seeing the horizontal dispersion. Way to much early drop off for a center channel IMO.

 

[pseudoid]

I knew a bachelor of commerce graduate that designed and manufactured micro-ohm meters. They where a sweet little handheld box that cost some thousands of dollars and he sold all of them for aircraft skin measurements. Then there was another commoner type guy that was designing speakers and selling them at his storefront. I think a intelligent person with the drive can study and learn crossover design especially with all the software options available today.

Yeah! Like if you wanna be the richest person the galaxy; then, all you gotta do is just get a Bachelors in physics and economics!
pfffffft!

If finding out that my brand new Polk R350 center (tested by my ears and @amirm) had a terrible case of [ummmm....] ED wasn't bad enough! Realizing that Atmos was actually sucking the mids right out of my floor-standing ('full-range'?) Vandersteen 2ce (in an effort to push them thru this center), I think I have given up both on surround processing and center speakers. How dare they rob me of my mids?

 

[Doodski]

Bachelors in physics and economics!

Lol... I've seen a few engineers with commerce/business degrees. Usually they are running corporations etc. It's a great combO for business.

 

[krabapple]

This is one of the things I love about this place: 'legendary', often high-priced, audio products* interrogated by measurements.

(*especially loudspeakers)

 

[pseudoid]

This is one of the things I love about this place: 'legendary', often high-priced, audio products* interrogated by measurements.

(*especially loudspeakers)

I think the PP' partner that gave you the first Like, has stated (somewhere, maybe via youtube) that this was one of his primary missions for this great place. He is doing a dandy job of draining the audio swamp.

 

[skyfly]

"Kevin Voecks from Revel answered first by saying there was huge advancement in distortion measurements with Klippel system."

Distortion there probably means harmonic distortion.

Did he mean that Revel uses something other than Klippel for spatial radiation pattern?

 

[617]

"Kevin Voecks from Revel answered first by saying there was huge advancement in distortion measurements with Klippel system."

Distortion there probably means harmonic distortion.

Did he mean that Revel uses something other than Klippel for spatial radiation pattern?

Before the NFS came out, Klippel was best known for equipment to test speaker driver linearity. Much more advanced than the distortion measurements produced by the NFS.

 

[skyfly]

Before the NFS came out, Klippel was best known for equipment to test speaker driver linearity. Much more advanced than the distortion measurements produced by the NFS.

My point was not how good Klippel is for distortion measurement.

My point was the Revel guy did not mention Klippel for spatial power response measurement. Does that mean a company like Revel cannot rely on Klippel for spatial power response? A company like Revel needs more accurate measurement of spatial power response?

I think Klippel is not our god. We are free to say something imperfect about Klippel.

 

[pseudoid]

I think Klippel is not our god. We are free to say something imperfect about Klippel.

I may be totally incorrect but from the results of ASR' Klippel graphical data provided for speakers, I am having a few problems:
It appears (to me; who is void of experience with), Klippel treats all types of speakers as just 'any old speaker'!
Taking 1000 scans in the near-field and then to apply this data to generate the far-field acoustic envelop, makes/takes a few BIG assumptions.
I would not mind getting corrected that Klippel actually does allow the 'speaker type' selection of the type of speaker: Specifically, whether DUT is a center, or rear, bookshelf (etc.) type speaker.
For example, how does Klippel know that a center speaker (DUT) is going to be 'centered' about the room, where as two floor-standing speakers, will be spaced symmetrically (or asymmetrically) within the boundaries of that room, or how close to such boundaries they are? NOT just side walls but also the floor, ceiling, etc.
Maybe such dependencies, do NOT impact (greatly) the far-field representation of the outcome but few grains of salt seem to be needed while reviewing Klippel final results.