I would love to do a comparison. I haven't heard the Salon 2 yet though.
This thread doesn't seem like it could go anywhere positive though, considering the animosity many people feel towards Wilson speakers. I doubt you will get any real comparisons, but certainly you will get a lot of knee jerk posts for or against either side... |
That sort of ends the debate,no? |
I've spent some time with both speakers at a dealer's. The Salon 2 is more laid back than the WP8 and a tad warmer sounding. Very dynamic with a lot of low-end punch. It also does an amazing job of disappearing in the room--no mean feat for such a large speaker. The WP8 is more exciting to me and I prefer the more forward sound. But for the money, the Salon 2 is going to be very hard to pass up. |
Thanks Eujin,
I listen primarily to classical and am seeking detail,nuance,microdynamics,soundstage and imaging for a 'being there' sensation as I find any decent speaker is dynamic enough for me. I had a chance to listen to a Wadia 581 recently via Aventguarde Trio Classico w 2 subs and individual amps for each driver and was impressed with the intimacy provided and the clarity & depth of full orchestral pieces.
Which of the above do you feel would provide more of that
intimacy & detail? Happy listening in a great 2008. |
I listen primarily to classical and am seeking detail,nuance,microdynamics,soundstage and imaging for a 'being there' sensation as I find any decent speaker is dynamic enough for me. I too am looking at speakers, share your criteria and suggest reading M.Fremer's Stereophile review of the Verity Sarastro. A new Sarastro is supposed to appear at this month's CES - I'm very interested in this speaker. Best of luck. |
Heard em both, at different dealers. The wilson's are the better speakers. Both sound and build. The wilsons have bigger and faster dynamics, more detail. They'll sound worse in a crappy room, though. |
I have had extensive experience with the W/P 7s and the original Salons in my own system. So my comments are only relevant to the extent you believe the W/P 8s and the Salon 2s have adhered to the "house sound" of the immediately preceding models. (I don't personally know whether either of the new models has made a dramatic change in the overall personality of the speakers.)
That being said, I agree with some of the comments above that the W/Ps offer a more exciting, dynamic sound with faster bass. The W/Ps also soundstage incredibly well. The soundstage was impressively wider and taller than the soundstage of the Salons. (By comparison, the Salons offered a bit more soundtage depth.)
Nonetheless, I preferred the sound of the Salons in my system by a significant margin. In my system, the W/Ps tended to exhibit an electronic edge in the playback of recordings featuring acoustic instruments, especially classical music and the reproduction of violins. On the other hand, the Salons present the timbre of acoustic instruments with startling accuracy and have a natural, relaxed presentation that is more in keeping with the sound of acoustic instruments in a live venue.
I think that your preference between these two speakers will come down to the type of music you listen to and your personal preference/priorities. If you prize timbral accuracy and tonal balance and you listen primarily to acoustic music, I think you will gravitate toward the Salons. On the other hand, if you prioritize dynamics, quick bass response and soundstaging, you will probably be drawn to the Wilsons.
I hesitated to post here given that my experience relates to the preceding model for both of these speakers, but I went ahead and did so recognizing that these comments might not have continuing relevance to the extent the current models have made a dramatic departure from the sound of the preceding generation. However, given that successive generations of products often stay in the same general "school" or style and given that I had the unique ability to live with both of these older generation speakers in my own system for an extended period, I thought it made sense to go ahead and post for what it's worth.
|
Cincy bob, Thank you. You experience living with both is very rare and I respect the reference it gives you. Judging by your response you are obviously an excellent listener to the questions posed to you,a pleasure to see in these forums. |
I heard the Salon 2 this week at a dealer driven with Levinson gear. Unfortunately they kept the grills on, which probably killed the imaging.
I was quite impressed even so. I thought they had loads of inner midrange detail and the bass was quite extended and deep while being very controlled.
On a recent post of mine I mentioned someone that had done a shootout between WP7 and the Salon 2 and another speaker. |
My understanding is that the System 8 sounds much more natural than the System 7. |
after years and years of auditioning wilson speakers, i have come to the conclusion that it is wisest NOT to compare them to other speakers. their designs, sonic attributes, and price points rarely coincide with what other loudspeaker companies are trying to acheive with THEIR products. i strongly feel that you need to buy the right amplification, preamp, wire, and cdp (the exception being perhaps turntables) along with the wilsons (whenever you can financially swing it). your room might (let's face it, probably) will also need some work before the dealer/installer can set them up for your listening position. also be aware that truly lousy recordings should be moved to the attic/basement- they will sound icky (i have eggleston andra's, a more forgiving speaker, but i will not listen to old rock and roll cd's on them just to end up hating the band- and it wasn't really their fault, it was supposed to sound "ok" back in '68 on a pioneer system, and it did. but not anymore.)
wilson's are an audio religion where you are obligated to bring the music into ever-sharper focus. the aesthetic experience is re-defined as eliminating any/all forms of distortion or veils between the listener and a performance that was recorded using great equipment by an engineer that wants you to hear every musician, not just the "cello section". if you missed the composer's "idea" while concentrating on these sonic details, perhaps it's not the main reason you put the cd on in the first place. if you picked up on that too, obviously that's great. BUT, after reading harry pearson's article on cd's he feels are recorded properly in the latest absolute sound, i am astounded by the specificity he employs in picking and choosing, not just the cd, but which movement, or even PART of a movement that sounds "right" and "true". clearly he is, while writing for the magazine, also dissecting this section and that, to satisfy in his own mind where someone "messed up" but then somewhere else, perhaps for the last 5 minutes of track 6, came "close" to the absolute sound. one cd was from a movie soundtrack for moses's sake, and had no musical value at all... |
I suggest you try the escalante fremonts!!!! I have owned the wilson 7's and for under 20k the fremonts are untouchable!! They do everything so well and can satisfy both tube and solid state. They are very dynamic, very fast, very delicate, maintain a flat 8 olhms, are 93 db effient, and have midrange and bass to die for as well as a non fatigueing high end that rivals the vr9's from von schweikert. I have owned them both and they are quite a revelation. Sorry to change threads but I had to interject. |
heard them both, the salon2 without question is the best speaker I have ever heard, regardless of cost. puts most other speakers to shame, including any of the wilsons. If you like forward bright sound the wilsons might be your thing, but the revels have the best intergration of drivers
I have ever heard ,more real timbre than anything I have heard, the most natural midrange with gobs of detail, in all the revels just sound far less colored than most other
speakers including the older revels. sorry I actually like
wilson speakers in generall , I just think that the days of wilson being the best speaker out there are over. other speakers have caught up and serpassed them in technology. |
Hi Fries,
It is utterly amazing- that dissection you speak of-and it can only be done with an extremely analytical approach.
I admit to listening that intense way when I am introducing changes to my Spectral/MIT system. For example- I have the polarity marked on the 6 AC Enacoms I use(manufacturer says
they have no polarity; but I find a significant improvement by confirming the polarity(and I also use Equitech balanced power and MIT conditioning &isolation products & MIT's upper end PCs). I realize I'm very fussy but I find it's worth it for my enjoyment of complex, dynamic orchestral music in particular.
I guess that HP is that way about all reproduced sound; it is his job; but when the sound lacks music-I would find it a dreary, boring task. |
Chrissain, your post is noteworthy for sure as you like Wilsons. It sounds like the salons are remarkable. |
Chrissain, your post is noteworthy for sure as you like Wilsons. His post wasn't clear to me. If you like forward bright sound the wilsons might be your thing... And then.. I actually like wilson speakers in generall Leaves me puzzled. Maybe it is just my biased Wilson ownership keeping me from understanding this. Further, I have no brightness issues with my W/P's as he affirms. I just think that the days of wilson being the best speaker out there are over. Whoever said they were? |
He's probably referring to the press falling all over themselves praising Wilson speakers. At the end of the day, many people, myself included, are of the opinion that Wilson hasn't been SOTA (ever?) for some time now, particularly not with Focal's hand-me-down tweeter showing its age.
As to the revels, while their driver integration is amazing, the praise heaped on them recently is imo excessive; they're great speakers but they surely are not the end all. |
One thing is for sure, we all have our opinions and these threads are full of them, many total opposites as others. As for me, I laid my cards down already, as a Wilson owner, and I guess I'll go blindly with the press and praise Wilson. Nowhere in that statement is it stated they are the one all and for all. To each there own, there are many wonderful choices on the market and I certainly don't have near the experience as others here, but with the experience I do have, I will not be convinced my W/P speakers are not exceptional, as well they should be for the cost. |
No doubt about that, if there was one right product there wouldn't be hundreds of manufacturers; I don't think any serious enthusiast would ever have the delusion that there is a best. The key is that the person is happy with their system. |
at the end of the day it does come down to personal preferences, in the past I have liked, and still do like the wilsom max2s, and the wilson sofias, i think overall
they are a great speaker, but after hearing the new revels the wilsons have a much harder time justifying there existence, the revels sound much less colored from top to bottom , with much better driver intergration than any wilson I have heard, and yes I do think the wilson tweeter is voiced a little on the bright side, but your tasts may differ... I say this not to offend any wilson owner , or anyone else for that matter . I think that you can put a great sounding system together with wilsons, I also can say that for right now the revels are without question the best speaker I have heard regardless of cost, and I have
heard some very expensive speakers out there ! |
Brianmgrarcom, I see in your system you have McIntosh electronics with your Wilsons. That is a combination you don't usually see and I've wondered why as I imagine they do very well together. Obviously you think so, can you offer a little insight? |
Jamnesta, for me it has been a wonderful pairing; this is the longest I have went without making changes. I tried a Jeff Rowland Concentra II at one point, hoping to recoup some money, but the McIntosh was far better with the Wilson's. This surprised me a bit because I used a Concentra II with B&W N803's with great success in the past. |
I don't understand people saying the W/P 8 is on the bright side... If anything it is rolled off gradually as it approaches 20KHz. When people say something like that, I tend to assume they haven't listened to the W/P8 in a decent environment and/or are basing their remarks on hearsay.
Now, if you truly want to hear a bright speaker, check out a B&W Diamond tweeter speaker. Personally, bright doesn't bother me, as I used to own the 802D which had excellent highs (attack and decay were extremely accurate, more so than anything else I've heard), though it was lacking in mid-bass and mid-range clarity. Those speakers were a bit bright, but I definitely wouldn't call the W/P 8 bright... If you like, you can look at my in-room response measurements in my System thread. There is an overall excellent gradual decline in the 1/6th octave in-room frequency response measurements (both in the singular measurement, which was at a lower "normal listening" volume for me, and the overlay, which was taken at a considerable increase in volume).
Given, it is a well designed room in terms of acoustic treatment (Rives Audio), but if you are spending ~$28,000+ on a speaker, you should at least be treating the 1st reflection points in your listening environment as well as randomly adding absorption and diffusion in order to kill slap echo. The only thing I can imagine that would spark a comment that the W/P8s are too bright, is listening to the W/P8s in a bad environment. In such a situation, only an excessively rolled off speaker will not sound bright... |
Since I had a chance to audition both Salon2 and W/P8 I can say that both speakers are good. Honestly, I like Salon2 little bit more. For all seeking speaker in this class check out new KEF Reference 207/2 as well. It is really as good as John Atkinson said in his review.
Regarding W/P8 sounding bright... To my ears they sound little bit "hot" in lower treble(not high treble). I even personally discussed that "quality" with Peter Mcgrath on one of his presentation of W/P8s(he setup the system with W/P8s on that presentation)... So, we can asume that prominent lower treble is Wilson sonic signature.
Regarding Escalante Fremonts check out review in February issue of Stereophile... I audition Fremonts as well and was not that impressed with their sound. |
Hi Branimir,
I have the W/P8 at home for the last 3 month. Before I bought them, I was afraid from brightness, strident upper midrange and aggressiveness, but I proved false.
With an Audio Research Reference 3+ Reference 110 amplification, the sound is on the warm side. I measured my room/speakers with a DEQX 2.6. The room correction decrease only in the 70- 100Hz range (my W/P8's stand "11 from the back wall), and didn't change anything else. The measurement show a flat FR graph with a small drop from 5K- 20KHz.
|
The brightness of the Watt comes from its tweeter's dome break-up that is too close to the audioband. It is not brightness, it is simply distortion. Some, may find it exciting.
Just got the new SP with the Revel review. Objectively, I see no comparison between the two speakers. Under JA measurements, the Salon are light years ahead of the Wilson. The rest are just subjective opinions. |
Sorry, I meant the Revel studio 2. I would assume that the Salon would be even better. |
For all people who are interested in either Salon2 or W/P8 my advice is to visit your local dealer and try to audition both speakers personally. Then make your own judgement and buy one of these great speakers. Both are excellent but, there is difference between them. Some people will like more W/P8, other will like more Salon2. That is difference in our taste and hearing. Long live the difference in opinion! |
BTW, regarding my post about W/P8 highs if it was not clear I didn't mean to imply that Peter McGrath had stated that the W/P8
has prominent lower treble. He actually stated that many other
speakers are deficient in that area while the W/P8 is not. |
Dhaan,
Most people won't hear the break-up mode. Keep in mind that the average adult can only hear 12Hz to 16KHz well and the breakup occurs at ~20KHz. Also, the frequency range it occurs in is responsible for qualities of sound that are fairly ethereal in nature if not completely unnoticeable in practice. So, it is a little over the top to make an issue out of it IMO. If you were a Dolphin or a Bat, perhaps it would bother you. :)
The Studio2 measures very similar to the Salon1. I had the opportunity to hear those a few times and didn't like them. Despite any awards in the objective measurements category, I thought they sounded flat dimensionally and lacked midrange transparency. I had the opportunity to buy some Salon1s fairly cheap but was not taken with their sound. Objective measurements are a nice starting point, but they aren't everything IMO; I've noticed that in my experience there is a direct correlation between extremely flat frequency responses and a "lifeless" sound to the music they reproduce. People do hear differently when it comes to stereophonic effects, not in terms of dB levels, but in terms of the illusions certain combinations of sounds create in our brains. So it is possible that a flat frequency response won't be a great thing for everyone in terms of the perceived authenticity of the event being recreated.
I was also a little peeved to find out that Revel cherry picks its testers, teaches them to listen for their speakers in particular (by teaching the testers to listen for specific sonic traits their speakers have) then use their test results to prove that their speakers are subjectively "better" sounding. Meanwhile, Paul Barton, who also worked under Floyd Toole, said something to the effect that uninfluenced blind tests showed that most people actually prefer additional bass in their frequency response rather than a truly flat frequency response. All the Revel tests prove is that they can pick the right people, that those people can be taught to learn to hear the Revel speaker sound qualities and that those people can use what they learned to pick the Revel speakers out of a group of other speakers.
Personally, I would use my ears over a graph to decide what sounds best to me. I can't hear with a graph, and a graph can't tell me what I like to hear. I use graphs to get a generally decent confirmation that a speaker is in the ballpark, then use my ears to decide if I like how it sounds.
In short, as others have said about subjective opinions, such as Branimir, use your own ears to decide... |
Regarding W/P8 sounding bright... To my ears they sound little bit "hot" in lower treble(not high treble). I even personally discussed that "quality" with Peter Mcgrath on one of his presentation of W/P8s(he setup the system with W/P8s on that presentation)... So, we can asume that prominent lower treble is Wilson sonic signature. I wouldn't say you have a good rationale for making the above assumption. My measurements and my room don't reflect those qualities you describe. My guess is, it was just a bad room without adequate lower treble room treatment. I've noticed that Wilson only puts up a curtain in its demonstration rooms, which would not be adequate room treatment for anything but the highest frequencies. You aren't going to hear how great a speaker sounds unless you put it in a well treated environment. Unless the speaker is rolled-off at the higher frequencies, you will get a cacophony of high frequency sound in untreated or partially treated spaces. The exact frequency spectra being affected will be determined by the frequency ranges not being acoustically treated... I've heard demonstrations at shows, et al., as well and I know what you are referring to, but that is an issue with the room, not the speaker. I've also been to dealer demo rooms that were properly treated and the difference is stark. Not to mention listening to them in my own room... |
The Studio2 measures very similar to the Salon1. I had the opportunity to hear those a few times and didn't like them. Despite any awards in the objective measurements category, I thought they sounded flat dimensionally and lacked midrange transparency. When I refer to "those" in the above sentence, as in "I had the opportunity to hear those a few times," I mean the Salon1, not the Studio2. Sorry for the confusing post... |
Call me a bat but the Watt sound to me exactly like they measure. I believe that the word bright should be change to harsh. In regards to the break-ups, you need to keep in mind that when these get agitated, distortion levels of the entire tweeter rises. That is where the harshness come from. |
Call me a bat but the Watt sound to me exactly like they measure. I believe that the word bright should be change to harsh. In regards to the break-ups, you need to keep in mind that when these get agitated, distortion levels of the entire tweeter rises. That is where the harshness come from. If you are hearing those things, it is all in your head IMO. That or I must be very lucky. I'm 33 years old and I'm not hearing any of these issues in my setup... :D |
You are not alone Jkalman, my experience tells me different as well; comments such as those by Dhaan do not phase me. |
It is all in your head I am afraid it is on paper as well. I must be very lucky I guess that for Watt owners, hearing loss is a bliss. BTW, let it be known who started the insults trend (See Jkalman usual condescending posts above). I really do not mind it but soon you will run away crying about the Wilson bashing again. So, as they say, if you live in a glass house, you should not throw stones. |
You are not alone Jkalman, my experience tells me different as well; comments such as those by Dhaan do not phase me. I think what happens is, people get an idea in their heads from other people or graphs and convince themselves they are hearing things that are not in all probability audible. Sadly, it is pervasive in this hobby... :( Thanks for the support. I'll be back when I get a chance to hear the Salon2, though to be honest, unless I can put them in my room or unless the dealer's room is an adequate setup, I am loath to come to any overwhelming conclusions. I'll still be willing to give my impressions with any inherent disclaimers. I'm still trying to find an environment where the Magico Minis have been set up well in my area. The Salon2 and the Magico Mini... Two speakers I would love to hear properly. |
While at it, you should add the Magico V3 to the list. |
I am afraid it is on paper as well. Yes, and outside your hearing range, unless you are prepubescent. Considering your comments, that is a possibility I am contemplating. I invite you to point out some specific places on some specific albums where you heard this phenomenon. I admit, I am baffled by your conclusions and want the opportunity to listen to this problem myself. That shouldn't be too hard if you are basing this on an actual instances and not just prospecting via graph. Let us all learn from your experience. I'll gladly eat crow if I can't find other valid reasons for the idiosyncrasies using Adobe Audition and my alternate studio monitor setup. I'm not above admitting I am wrong; I'm only human... I also entreat you to stop confusing my writing style with condescension. Perhaps it is just a case of your kettle calling this pot black... A case of terminal hypocrisy on your part. You were right about one thing, I do leave arguments when I get bored. I'm sorry if you have bored me in the past. ;) |
If the W/P 8 placed correct and match with the right component (generally with tube's amps), the sound is superb: rich but not fat, detail yet natural, control and extended.
I heard the Revel Salon 2 in the CES for a brief time, it was one of my best demos. At $22K, I think it's the best value for money together with the Magico V3.
Still, the W/P 8 is more involving than the Salon 2.
|
Very typical response. All open for a discussion I'm not above admitting I am wrong; I'm only human but then again, not really I'm sorry if you have bored me in the past Make up your mind. In the mean time, go listen to any decent violin or soprano recording and see how much of it you can take on your Watt. Then try the same on the Salon or even better the V3. And yes, I know that a violin high note is only around 3.5K but its harmonics easily excites the break-up modes of the Watt. What you should hear is clear audible grain riding the entire treble. It would get worst as you increase the volume. Anyway, I am probably boring you again by now
|
while i am not a wilson fan, the w/p tweeter is not at all grainy or harsh. a violin's sound, however, WILL be sharply defined. to some people it sounds "etched", to others it is refreshingly free of distortion. as i said earlier, WITH the right room acoustics and high-caliber components properly matched, the W/P will blow alot of other speakers away. it is these very strict requirements, however, that make buying wilson's a daunting task- to acheive their maximum potential. for those looking for an easier and usually less-expensive path of putting a good system together, i can think of several other speaker designs that ALSO sound startlingly good without quite as much attention to the room and the rest of the audio system, although they will still need something well above NAD or ROTEL electronics. and as stated before, at that point, many people may not be that happy listening to recordings that USED to sound "pretty OK" and will strongly prefer better-sounding records and cd's. |
to others it is refreshingly free of distortion But it is not. If some prefer the sound of distortion, what exactly are we talking about? Subjective opinions with no merits behind them. And if you have to completely twist your system and room around a product with such deficiencies, why not start with something that actually work to begin with. |
Considering the oft repeated "careful matching" when speaking of Wilson, I recently had to abolish my prejudices when I heard a demo at my local audio salon consisting of Krell evo electronics driving the new Wilson 8's. Reading the forums you would expect this combination to drill your ears from your head with laser like intensity. On the contrary. Though my experience and audio vocabulary is limited, my sensitivity to what is referred to as bright is pretty intense. What I heard was rich, smooth, dynamic and non fatiguing...now you guys quite fighting ;-) |
In the mean time, go listen to any decent violin or soprano recording and see how much of it you can take on your Watt. Then try the same on the Salon or even better the V3.
And yes, I know that a violin high note is only around 3.5K but its harmonics easily excites the break-up modes of the Watt. What you should hear is clear audible grain riding the entire treble. It would get worst as you increase the volume. Anyway, I am probably boring you again by now
I listen to Joshua Bell and Julia Fischer all the time among others (as well as classical music and opera occasionally with both soprano and violin!). I don't get these issues you are referring to. Both are clean sounding in my setup. I also listen to the same music on my studio monitors sometimes, which don't have the same resolution as the W/P8s (among other things). Give some exact examples please, as previously requested. Your statements about the Wilson speakers appear to be purely theoretical. So far you have not shown any evidence that you are actually hearing this problem you are pontificating about. It is likely you are hearing something that can be explained off as other issues in the recording chain. I certainly don't hear the problems you are referring to in my setup... To be sure, I just finished evaluating Joshua Bell playing the first 11 minutes of Tchaikovsky's Allegro moderato on both my Wilson setup and my studio monitor setup. The only issues I am finding are common to both setups and are likely related to echos of the timbre vibrato changes on the violin, likely from cavity resonance in the instrument of a high harmonic being picked up by the close miking, but that is a natural occurrence... The other thing it could be is the actual sound of his fingers or bow on the string muting certain harmonics. It is occurring on only the right side speakers where the violin output isn't as heavily weighted, and it is only during the heavier attacks. It occurs in both setups. Unfortunately, while I have been to many orchestral events, I am not an expert on violins and what exactly causes the sound I am hearing on this particular recording. So I can only offer those two ideas as possibilities. Yes, these two sets of speakers I am using sound different because they are different speakers, but the audio content is not changing between the two setups in any way to insinuate that distortion is occurring. There is no "grain riding the entire treble" as you declared earlier. Though the studio monitors lack the same level of resolution, involving clarity, depth of soundstage and lifelike presentation (among other things), they are still decent for music editing. On the W/P8s the recording is as clear as a Bell (sorry, I couldn't resist...). The next one I tried was a version of Mozart's Don Giovanni (Robert Norrington - EMI Classics). I used song 2 on side 3 for soprano testing. This test is the one that started to worry me, because I was hearing distortion like elements, but I believe they were due to the recording. To test the hypothesis that they were not due to tweeter break-up I tested the same area of the song over and over again at different volume levels. The issue did not get worse with increased volume (it actually seemed to dissipate with increased volume, likely because I could hear it better, though some of the volume levels I tried were obscenely loud and hurt my ears... So I only did very time limited trials at those volumes). My theory is, since these problems are happening at the loudest moments of her singing, not necessarily at the highest frequencies, that she overloaded the mikes they were using... The stability of the issue, despite changing volume levels by large amounts, would seem to support that. in any case, it isn't tweeter break-up modes, or the problem would get worse with increasing volume. Another reason I decided to do the above experiment with changing the volumes, is in case the two speakers I am using share similar qualities between their tweeters. After all, if they exhibit similar behavior in the treble, it is possible that they have similar break-up modes. I feel confident that, even if that is true, the varying volume levels eliminates any issues I've heard as being break-up mode issues. In short, I believe you are incorrect. IMO, your argument is the type that happens when someone applies theoretical ideals to a topic without making sure they are "sound" concepts of the audible world in practice. Perhaps you heard something, but it wasn't what you thought it was IMO. IMO, you should spend less time making assumptions from graphs and more time testing those assumptions in the real world. I'll be waiting for you to offer up some albums, track numbers and specific times on those albums where I can hear the issues you claim to be hearing on the Watt Puppy 8s. Have you ever done any practical listening and testing with the W/P8 personally, or are you just basing your statements on graphs alone? So far you have avoided listing specific albums with which you have tested the W/P8 in order to find these issues you are claiming exist, despite my attempts to solicit that information from you... Thanks. |
I am not sure how me pointing out to what I hear as harshness and grain (Plus hollowness, lack of body, artificial upper midrange and lumpy bass) will make you hear it as well. Obviously, you purchase these speakers cause you liked the way they sound. I have said, time and again, that the WP sounds to me exactly like they measure. They always did. Way before I saw any measurements on them. I would also argue, that to an experience listener, it makes more sense for any speaker to sound more like it measure then not. Perhaps, in a way of comparison, once you hear a better implemented design, you will hear what I am talking about. Then again, perhaps not. WP8 have many audible issues that can be measured and explained. I happened to hear most of these issues when I listen to them. Telling me that all these issues, that are clearly visible in the data measured by different sources, are not audible is not a serious argument. Perhaps you do not hear them. But I sure do. |
I am not sure how me pointing out to what I hear as harshness and grain (Plus hollowness, lack of body, artificial upper midrange and lumpy bass) will make you hear it as well. Obviously, you purchase these speakers cause you liked the way they sound. I have said, time and again, that the WP sounds to me exactly like they measure. They always did. Way before I saw any measurements on them. I would also argue, that to an experience listener, it makes more sense for any speaker to sound more like it measure then not. Perhaps, in a way of comparison, once you hear a better implemented design, you will hear what I am talking about. Then again, perhaps not. WP8 have many audible issues that can be measured and explained. I happened to hear most of these issues when I listen to them. Telling me that all these issues, that are clearly visible in the data measured by different sources, are not audible is not a serious argument. Perhaps you do not hear them. But I sure do. Pointing it out will allow me to analyze whether or not what you heard was really due to break-up modes or something else. I am more than qualified to be able to listen for these kinds of issues. I've taken David Moulton's Golden Ears courses. I can hear the general shape of the frequency response. I know what distortion sounds like and I can hear it, as that was part of the training course as well. I know what phase issues sound like, as well as differing levels of compression (etc, etc... For a full list of things I have learned how to hear look up the Golden Ears course outline). I have excellent hearing for my age (I was tested around two years ago by an Otolaryngologist). Of course, all these other issues concerning the frequency response, aren't what our argument was about. Our argument is about whether or not the break-up mode on the W/P8 is audible; your last post was full of straw-man arguments. I have things I think are imperfect about my speakers. No speaker is perfect, and all speakers are compromises from a perfect transducer. People also experience stereophonic illusions differently, so that people will subjectively prefer some compromises to others in terms of perceived "realism." Again, these weren't what out argument was about... Our argument was about the audibility of the break-up modes on the W/P8. Where I take issue, is with people posting about hearing things that are below hearing threshold under realistic human listening conditions. You want to talk about deviations from linearity, deviations from a perfect frequency response, phase issues, and distortion issues, you will find that I won't disagree with issues that exist if they are audible under human listening conditions. All speakers suffer from issues in these measured areas in one form or another to varying degrees. Speakers compromise in some areas in order to be stronger in others. If you turn the volume up enough, every transducer starts failing miserably, it is just the nature of those kinds of physical mechanics. How can I validate your assertions if you won't show me how you arrived at them in the "real" world so that I can repeat your experiments myself to see if what you heard could be something other than the cause you are ascribing it? So far it seems to me, based on your level of cooperation and my own testing with the type of material you recommended on the W/P8, that the placebo effect can work for people that look at graphs just as easily as it can work for people who believe in other imaginary audio phenomena. Tell me how you tested and what testing methods you used to prove to yourself that you were hearing actual break-up modes, or at least admit you didn't do any controlled testing and are basing your statements on pure speculation. If you don't supply your testing criteria and material, I'm forced to assume you didn't test at all and are fabricating your statements about hearing break-up modes. Your statements aren't facts unless you back them up with valid testing data and allow others to see if they can find alternate explanations for what you heard... If no alternate explanations can be proven, then you may have proven a fact, but if alternate explanations can be proven true, then it isn't a fact. Your statements seem to suggest that you haven't done any detailed testing and have only done some casual listening, perhaps under less than desirable conditions. Why are you so resistant to being cooperative? You only stand to be proved correct or to learn something... :( Thanks. |
Why are you trying so hard to defend your purchase and disprove another person's opinion. You guys disagree; leave it at that as it's quite obvious neither of you are about to come over to the other side. |
Dhaan, if you wouldn't mind, what are you currently listening to? |
I would not mind but I am not trying to start a pissing match here. There are quite a few loudspeakers I would rather listen to then the W/P. I am also more than willing to accept that some may not like what I like. |
