AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Speakers › Vandersteen 1C or PSB Image T6
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Vandersteen 1C or PSB Image T6

post #1 of 31
5/12/12 at 8:00pm
Thread Starter 
So I found someone on Craigslist selling both of these speakers locally, used at a good price. I'm going to be running them with just a Peachtree Nova for the foreseeable future, using them for music and HT in a 2 channel setup. Turntable, Macbook Pro (optical out) and a PS3/Xbox 360 will be the main sources.

Having heard both of these, I'm leaning towards the Vandersteens. They seemed to have a warmth and detail to them that was missing from the PSBs.
The PSB seemed a bit less refined, and certainly more neutral.

The reason for my post is that I still have some nagging feeling that the PSBs are the better speaker, with more room for growth, especially if I decided to add a subwoofer, go full 5.1, add an amp to my system,etc. Admittedly this is my first purchase of "real" speakers, so I'm just looking for some guidance and experience.
Reply
Reply

AVS Top Picks

post #2 of 31
5/12/12 at 10:51pm
I haven't heard the 1C, but I have heard the 2CE and the 3A from Vandersteen. They sound incredible. I would say they are even better with HT and can certainly make a very good 5.1 setup. I am assuming the 1C sound very similar as most of the Vandersteen line sound very similar, they just give you more of that sound as you move up the product ladder.

PSB are very good as well, but I find the Imagine series to be more favorable, bang for buck than the Image series. Though PSB makes excellent speakers across all their lines also.

If it were me I would buy the Vandersteen, since I am assuming the used prices between the two are very similar.
Reply
Reply
post #3 of 31
5/13/12 at 4:49am
Had 1C's many years ago. Very nice even top to bottom sound. On the warm side but the type of speaker you can listen to for hours. I eventually sold them and moved up to 2CE's which I owned for years and set up an all Vandy surround system. Just one bit of advice. To get the best out of these speakers keep them away from the back and side walls, about 2 ft. each way. It will really open the sound and it'll give you a very nice sound stage.
Reply
Reply
post #4 of 31
5/13/12 at 8:29am
Over the past 25 years, I have had Vandersteen speakers at my homes and I love them. I am currently running the 3A speakers at my desert home, and have had them for about 15 years there, I guess.

I had the Model 1 at my old house at one time, but they are just not the best of the line; I was not satisfied with them and I replaced them with the 2C at that house (which I sold when I retired).

My current second home has the PSB Image T6 speakers, which I find very good. I also considered the Vandersteen Model 1 and the KEF Q900, but I find the T6 to be a better overall speaker than the others. I have had them for over a year now, and am very happy; they sound great with all types of music.

I was thinking about going with the Vandersteen 2C when I set up the system at my current second home, but I simply did not have have room for the 16" width at this location, and I didn't want the Model 1.

There is no question in my mind that the T6 is a much better speaker than the Vandersteen Model 1C, but the Model 2C is a bit better than the T6, if you have room for it.

If you were not impressed with the T6 speakers, you might want to think real hard about the associated equipment that you heard them with and the acoustics in that location. That can make a huge difference. You should definitely try them at home with your amplifier in your acoustic environment before making a final judgement on them. They can be quite impressive if given a decent setup, and I think your Nova will sound very good with them.

I use them with an Audio Research LS-26 preamp and Bryston 3B-SST amplifier and the sound is nearly as good as my big system with the Vandersteen 3A speakers at my desert house; they really are that good. You don't have to have $10,000 worth of electronics to drive them, but they sound great in this setup. They previously sounded great with a Musical Fidelity M3i integrated amplifier too; I had that here for a while.

If you have a good deal available on the Image T6, I would advise you to jump on it...lol. I very much doubt that you will any less happy with them than I am.




Quote:
Originally Posted by rbf1138 View Post

So I found someone on Craigslist selling both of these speakers locally, used at a good price. I'm going to be running them with just a Peachtree Nova for the foreseeable future, using them for music and HT in a 2 channel setup. Turntable, Macbook Pro (optical out) and a PS3/Xbox 360 will be the main sources.

Having heard both of these, I'm leaning towards the Vandersteens. They seemed to have a warmth and detail to them that was missing from the PSBs.
The PSB seemed a bit less refined, and certainly more neutral.

The reason for my post is that I still have some nagging feeling that the PSBs are the better speaker, with more room for growth, especially if I decided to add a subwoofer, go full 5.1, add an amp to my system,etc. Admittedly this is my first purchase of "real" speakers, so I'm just looking for some guidance and experience.
Reply
Reply
post #5 of 31
5/13/12 at 2:08pm
Both speakers are pretty darn good for the money, but to my ears the Vandersteens bring out more detail and have better instrument tone and timbre. Based on musical performance I'd go with the 1C's. Since you've heard both and like the 1C's better I say go for it.
Reply
Reply
post #6 of 31
5/13/12 at 4:53pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuance View Post

Both speakers are pretty darn good for the money, but to my ears the Vandersteens bring out more detail and have better instrument tone and timbre. Based on musical performance I'd go with the 1C's. Since you've heard both and like the 1C's better I say go for it.

For undemanding music played at lower volume levels, the Vandersteen 1C is hard to beat. But, if you want to play Rock or Metal music loud, or God forbid, Rap music, you can easily fry the Vandersteen tweeters because they use a first order crossover.
But, for serious music, played at sane levels, the Vandersteen 1C is hard to beat as far as value goes, on the used market.
Reply
Reply
post #7 of 31
5/13/12 at 8:37pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ka7niq View Post

For undemanding music played at lower volume levels, the Vandersteen 1C is hard to beat. But, if you want to play Rock or Metal music loud, or God forbid, Rap music, you can easily fry the Vandersteen tweeters because they use a first order crossover.
But, for serious music, played at sane levels, the Vandersteen 1C is hard to beat as far as value goes, on the used market.

What does a first order crossover have to do with rock, heavy metal or rap music? The 1C's play pretty darn loud with good power behind them, even while listening to Bodom or old In Flames.
Reply
Reply
post #8 of 31
5/13/12 at 9:23pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ka7niq View Post

For undemanding music played at lower volume levels, the Vandersteen 1C is hard to beat. But, if you want to play Rock or Metal music loud, or God forbid, Rap music, you can easily fry the Vandersteen tweeters because they use a first order crossover.
But, for serious music, played at sane levels, the Vandersteen 1C is hard to beat as far as value goes, on the used market.

You are correct in theory. In theory yes 1st order crossovers CAN allow unwanted frequencies to get through to the LPF (low pass filter and the HPF high pass filter). If a first order crossover is not time coherent and in proper phase at the point when it reaches the tweeter/midrange then yes in theory you can cause damage to a tweeter because tweeters are not designed to handle larger power inputs below their frequencies. BUT in true first order crossovers the slopes are far too shallow to allow this level of degradation in the filter itself.

Like anything else in life it's all about how the crossover is implemented. Yes some first order crossovers that are not time coherent and not in proper phase can cause problems with the tweeter. But you are making a very broad assumption. That part I don't agree with.
Reply
Reply
post #9 of 31
5/14/12 at 5:42am
Having owned both Vandys & Thiels (which are both time coherent 1st order crossovers) they can play very loud. Vandersteens have a great reputation and when thet go up for sale they never last long.
Reply
Reply
post #10 of 31
5/14/12 at 6:04am
I've had my 2Cs for 25 years and have never had any problems, despite some deafening levels when I was much younger. I've had plenty of power on hand though, clipping is another story.
Reply
Reply
post #11 of 31
5/14/12 at 6:34am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matts View Post

You are correct in theory. In theory yes 1st order crossovers CAN allow unwanted frequencies to get through to the LPF (low pass filter and the HPF high pass filter). If a first order crossover is not time coherent and in proper phase at the point when it reaches the tweeter/midrange then yes in theory you can cause damage to a tweeter because tweeters are not designed to handle larger power inputs below their frequencies. BUT in true first order crossovers the slopes are far too shallow to allow this level of degradation in the filter itself.

Like anything else in life it's all about how the crossover is implemented. Yes some first order crossovers that are not time coherent and not in proper phase can cause problems with the tweeter. But you are making a very broad assumption. That part I don't agree with.

Right on. Vandersteen's crossovers are time and phase coherent too, so I am not sure where Ka7niq is coming from here.
Reply
Reply
post #12 of 31
5/14/12 at 7:20am
Thread Starter 
I've been reading about the Ohm Walsh Micro Tall speakers, and they sound like they could be what I'm looking for. Has anyone here had them, or can anyone compare them to the Vandys?
Reply
Reply
post #13 of 31
5/14/12 at 9:02am
Quote:
Originally Posted by rbf1138 View Post

I've been reading about the Ohm Walsh Micro Tall speakers, and they sound like they could be what I'm looking for. Has anyone here had them, or can anyone compare them to the Vandys?

Have you heard them, though? Unless the company offers an in-home trial period, I wouldn't buy anything before having a chance to listen to them. You've already heard the Vandersteen's and PSB's, so...

What are your room dimensions and how far will you be placing the speakers off the walls? Vandersteens need room to breath, which is why I ask.
Reply
Reply
post #14 of 31
5/14/12 at 11:14am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuance View Post

Have you heard them, though? Unless the company offers an in-home trial period, I wouldn't buy anything before having a chance to listen to them. You've already heard the Vandersteen's and PSB's, so...

What are your room dimensions and how far will you be placing the speakers off the walls? Vandersteens need room to breath, which is why I ask.

The Ohm's have a 120 home audition, so I'm gonna try them out. I'm also going to another local dealer who carries the Rega line, as well as KEF, Quad and Wharfedale just to get a broad range of speaker types into my head.

At that point, I'll have to decide between the Vandy 1C which are the cheapest, the Ohms, or perhaps the Rega RS1/3/5.
Reply
Reply
post #15 of 31
5/14/12 at 11:20am
Quote:
Originally Posted by rbf1138 View Post


The Ohm's have a 120 home audition, so I'm gonna try them out. I'm also going to another local dealer who carries the Rega line, as well as KEF, Quad and Wharfedale just to get a broad range of speaker types into my head.

At that point, I'll have to decide between the Vandy 1C which are the cheapest, the Ohms, or perhaps the Rega RS1/3/5.

Awesome- happy listening.
Reply
Reply
post #16 of 31
5/14/12 at 5:48pm
Thread Starter 
So I just got to hear some KEFs, Regas and Wharfedales in the same price range as the MWTs. The standout was the Wharfedale 10.7s, even above the pricer KEFs and Regas. The midrange was what really got me, the bass wasnt too tight or too bloated, and the highs werent fatiguing or cold (as I found the Regas to be). They werent as fast as the Regas, but they sounded more laid back and sweet to me than the more forward and clear Regas. The KEFs didn't really factor.

If I end up not liking the MWTs, it'll be the Wharfedales for sure.
Reply
Reply
post #17 of 31
5/14/12 at 6:18pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matts View Post

You are correct in theory. In theory yes 1st order crossovers CAN allow unwanted frequencies to get through to the LPF (low pass filter and the HPF high pass filter). If a first order crossover is not time coherent and in proper phase at the point when it reaches the tweeter/midrange then yes in theory you can cause damage to a tweeter because tweeters are not designed to handle larger power inputs below their frequencies. BUT in true first order crossovers the slopes are far too shallow to allow this level of degradation in the filter itself.

Like anything else in life it's all about how the crossover is implemented. Yes some first order crossovers that are not time coherent and not in proper phase can cause problems with the tweeter. But you are making a very broad assumption. That part I don't agree with.

I've read this a couple of times and still can't make sense of what you're saying. Can you clarify your comments?
Reply
Reply
post #18 of 31
5/15/12 at 12:58am
Quote:
Originally Posted by beaveav View Post

I've read this a couple of times and still can't make sense of what you're saying. Can you clarify your comments?

Well I didn't realize when I posted that I had taken out part of my original paragraph and did not put it back in. I also mixed up two parts.

Crossovers divide the frequency spectrum into two or more bands that can be processed independently. Crossovers are constructed of Low Pass and High Pass Filters, and their controls relate to the corresponding controls of their component filter sections.

A first order crossover simply uses only 2 bands, LPF and HPF. In the simplest possible way to explain it: the incoming audio signal (which for argument sake we will say a typical amplifier with cover a frequency range from 20hz - 20khz) is filtered or split at two points. The slope indicates the selectivity of the crossover between frequency bands. The first control sets the slope at which the lower frequency band cuts out. The second control sets the slope at which the higher frequency band cuts in. 1st order crossovers require large overlapping driver bandwidth, and the shallow slopes mean that non-coincident drivers can interfere over a wide frequency range and cause large response shifts off-axis. Proper driver implementation avoids these problems.

Many people prefer a 1st order crossover because this type of filter passes amplitude and phase unchanged across the range.

In 2nd order crossovers there will always be a phase difference of 180° between the outputs of a (second order) low-pass filter and a high-pass filter having the same crossover frequency. In a passive 2nd order crossover the tweeter is wired with opposite polarity from the woofer. In a 2-way system, the high-pass section's output is usually connected to the high frequency driver 'inverted', to correct for this phase problem.

Phase simply refers, at least in this context, to keeping the frequencies in the proper time alignment. So that each sound wave begins and ends their cycle in phase. If one wave is in phase and the other is out of phase this can create a problem.

A well implemented 1st order crossover avoids these problems with it's inherent simplicity.

Of course as I mentioned there can be side affects with a 1st order crossover in that in some cases unwanted frequencies can get through the LPF and HPF, than with higher crossover configurations. But again the implementation here is the key.
Reply
Reply
post #19 of 31
5/15/12 at 5:53am
Quote:
Originally Posted by rbf1138 View Post

So I just got to hear some KEFs, Regas and Wharfedales in the same price range as the MWTs. The standout was the Wharfedale 10.7s, even above the pricer KEFs and Regas. The midrange was what really got me, the bass wasnt too tight or too bloated, and the highs werent fatiguing or cold (as I found the Regas to be). They werent as fast as the Regas, but they sounded more laid back and sweet to me than the more forward and clear Regas. The KEFs didn't really factor.

If I end up not liking the MWTs, it'll be the Wharfedales for sure.

That's awesome - Congrats on your speaker audition! The midrange is the most important thing for me in a speaker, and it sounds like the Wharfedales were a step above the rest in that department. Now the question is, did you like the 10.7's better than the Vandersteen 1C's and PSB T6's?
Reply
Reply
post #20 of 31
5/15/12 at 6:29am
Even if you like the 10.7 unless you hear all of them in your own room it's a moot point.
Reply
Reply
post #21 of 31
5/15/12 at 6:33am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Veda View Post

Even if you like the 10.7 unless you hear all of them in your own room it's a moot point.

Yes and no. A really well designed speaker should still sound more similar than not in most rooms. The room has the most effect below the Schroeder Frequency, so if the dealer has the room properly setup/treated the listener will get a real good idea of how the speaker can perform in their own environment. The room can be fixed, and it's the poorly designed speakers that sound vastly different in various rooms; at least that's what I gathered from Floyd Toole's research and book. Speakers with a controlled directivity design or very good off-axis and sound power response should perform very well in most rooms; the problem is many speakers suffer in those areas.
Reply
Reply
post #22 of 31
5/15/12 at 6:50am
Sorry I should have clarified that I was referring to using the same equipments to run the speakers...
Reply
Reply
post #23 of 31
5/15/12 at 6:54am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Veda View Post

Sorry I should have clarified that I was referring to using the same equipments to run the speakers...

I gotcha. Unless the equipment is highly flawed, though, you'll still get a good idea of what the speaker sounds like.
Reply
Reply
post #24 of 31
5/15/12 at 8:49am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuance View Post

That's awesome - Congrats on your speaker audition! The midrange is the most important thing for me in a speaker, and it sounds like the Wharfedales were a step above the rest in that department. Now the question is, did you like the 10.7's better than the Vandersteen 1C's and PSB T6's?

The T6s are pretty much out as a choice. Between the Vandersteens and Wharfedales it'd be closer, but I think the Wharfedales still are on top. They just have a bit more energy and more neutrality, compared to the slightly warmer Vandy. Also, they're pretty excellent looking.
Reply
Reply
post #25 of 31
5/15/12 at 10:15am
Quote:
Originally Posted by rbf1138 View Post

The T6s are pretty much out as a choice. Between the Vandersteens and Wharfedales it'd be closer, but I think the Wharfedales still are on top. They just have a bit more energy and more neutrality, compared to the slightly warmer Vandy. Also, they're pretty excellent looking.

Then go for it and don't look back into this thread. Life's too short to waste for another day on a choice that "could be" or "may be". Everyone has their own preference in brand or style so there's always a flaw in anything you choose. Sound quality / satisfaction derived from knowing that you got the best choice at the moment is greater than you think.
Reply
Reply
post #26 of 31
5/15/12 at 10:43am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Veda View Post

Then go for it and don't look back into this thread. Life's too short to waste for another day on a choice that "could be" or "may be". Everyone has their own preference in brand or style so there's always a flaw in anything you choose. Sound quality / satisfaction derived from knowing that you got the best choice at the moment is greater than you think.

Word.
Reply
Reply
post #27 of 31
5/15/12 at 12:04pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matts View Post

Well I didn't realize when I posted that I had taken out part of my original paragraph and did not put it back in. I also mixed up two parts.

Crossovers divide the frequency spectrum into two or more bands that can be processed independently. Crossovers are constructed of Low Pass and High Pass Filters, and their controls relate to the corresponding controls of their component filter sections.

A first order crossover simply uses only 2 bands, LPF and HPF. In the simplest possible way to explain it: the incoming audio signal (which for argument sake we will say a typical amplifier with cover a frequency range from 20hz - 20khz) is filtered or split at two points. The slope indicates the selectivity of the crossover between frequency bands. The first control sets the slope at which the lower frequency band cuts out. The second control sets the slope at which the higher frequency band cuts in. 1st order crossovers require large overlapping driver bandwidth, and the shallow slopes mean that non-coincident drivers can interfere over a wide frequency range and cause large response shifts off-axis. Proper driver implementation avoids these problems.

Many people prefer a 1st order crossover because this type of filter passes amplitude and phase unchanged across the range.

In 2nd order crossovers there will always be a phase difference of 180° between the outputs of a (second order) low-pass filter and a high-pass filter having the same crossover frequency. In a passive 2nd order crossover the tweeter is wired with opposite polarity from the woofer. In a 2-way system, the high-pass section's output is usually connected to the high frequency driver 'inverted', to correct for this phase problem.

Phase simply refers, at least in this context, to keeping the frequencies in the proper time alignment. So that each sound wave begins and ends their cycle in phase. If one wave is in phase and the other is out of phase this can create a problem.

A well implemented 1st order crossover avoids these problems with it's inherent simplicity.

Of course as I mentioned there can be side affects with a 1st order crossover in that in some cases unwanted frequencies can get through the LPF and HPF, than with higher crossover configurations. But again the implementation here is the key.

That's better, but you're still mixing up a little terminology when you say "A first order crossover simply uses only 2 bands, LPF and HPF." That has nothing to do with the order of the crossover but instead refers to the number of drivers in the speaker. The order of the crossover is not related to the number of bands.
Reply
Reply
post #28 of 31
5/15/12 at 3:18pm
Wharfedales are excellent speakers. The new Jade line is really outstanding. Also you may want to check out Music Direct they have Wharfedale Evo 2-20's for something like 60% off. A real steal if you like their sound.
Reply
Reply
post #29 of 31
5/15/12 at 5:37pm
Thread Starter 
Interesting...how do Evo 2-20s compare to the Diamond 10.7? What is the difference between the Evo line and Diamond?
Reply
Reply
post #30 of 31
5/16/12 at 4:57pm
Evo's were a step above the diamond series. They were recently repalced by the Jade line. A definite step up from the diamonds at the same price because of the big discounts.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Speakers
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Speakers › Vandersteen 1C or PSB Image T6