For the record, Bud Fried was offering his "C" satellite, same shape as David Wilson's "Wilson Audio Tiny Tot", back in 1979. Wilson Audio didn't come out with their "WATT" til 1985. Who copied who?
Fried's "C" satellite used a first order series x-over, transmission line loaded mid/bass driver, and had quality bass below 60hz. They could easily be used on their own but Fried offered them as a "Super Monitor" system by adding a pair of subs with 12" drivers that were also transmission line loaded. The "C" satellite sat on top(think WATT/Puppy) providing a system with true 20hz to 20khz response.
The WATT, like most designs, used a more traditional x-over(think easier to implement), was ported, and had almost no bass. Without a sub, the WATT was pretty much useless so those with the necessary funds usually added an Entec LF-20 or LF-30 sub. At the time, they were considered the best mate for the WATT. Those with money to burn often went with two Entec's providing a nice platform for the WATT to sit on. Seeing money to be made, it didn't take Wilson long to introduce the Puppy; Duh, pretty much an Entec clone.
For the record, I owned the WATT3/Puppy3 and in my opinion, they were way overpriced and a huge sonic disappointment. I couldn't wait to get rid of them! On the other hand, I still own a couple variants of Fried's "C" satellite which continue to give me pleasure.
Hope you enjoyed the history lesson.
Peace! |
Rfogel8, I often wondered if the model C came out prior to the WATT. I still own a pair of c3/l sitting atop d2 subs. They are a very fine speaker system for sure. My very first pair of high end speakers were c2 and I never forgot how good they sounded. Many years later, I was able to score the c3/l with d2 combo and jumped at the opportunity. If I am correct, I believe Fried called this the Valhalla system and it looks almost exactly like the WATT/Puppy. Thanks for the info. |
|
Way back, I believe that the SOTA Panorama speakers were similar in appearance and build to the WP. Hyperion speakers had the same look as well, though they were one-box speakers. |
The Swans Allures copied the look quite a bit. They were one cabinet, though. I have a pair in my bedroom. |
Csmgolf, Yep, Bud did call it the "Valhalla System" and by then the sats were C/5's. I owned the C/3L's(still do) and borrowed a pair of D2's from a dealer friend for an audition. No big surprise, the D2's really added a lot of power and weight to the music plus the soundstage expanded in all directions.
In the end and after many conversations with Bud, I decided to go with his larger "O-4" subs using 10" drivers transmission line loaded. Bud used them in his own system, and having heard a friend's "Super Monitors" many times(12" driver in transmission line), I knew they'd be great; they are.
It wasn't long before I added a pair of C/5's to go with the O-4's, both done in furniture grade Honduras mahogany and finished in hand rubbed Tung Oil. Besides sounding wonderful, they're beautiful to behold!
Now years later, I still have the C/3L's, C/5 & O4's, plus I've added a couple more Fried inspired systems to my collection. Needless to say, I'm still a fan of Bud Fried and his enthusiasm for first order series crossovers and transmission line loading. Most of the other yin yangs designing speakers these days don't have a clue. |
pojuojuo, yup your right.
Someone on Audiogon has them.
The cabinet looks really nice.
http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?vhome&1313672086 |
Audiodude, how do you like the Swan Allures? They do look nice and they use the Audax Aerogel drivers.
I notice the people who have them online use the Swan Allures with Tube amps.
Here's a system with the Swan Allures.
[/url]http://www.arduman.com/aa/sayfalar/doug/doug.htm[/url] |
I enjoyed the Bud Fried comments above. I had the original Fried H which had satellites for each channel and a center subwoofer with twin transmission lines. Fried later came out with the M which used the same satellites placed on top of a separate subwoofer for each channel. The M had better integration of drivers. I later built O subwoofers which were similar to the M but used a 10" woofer, and I placed the H satellites on top of the subwoofer. My brother continues to use that system to this day. Despite the passing of over 30 years, they still sound really good.
As far as I can tell, these designs by Bud Fried were really the origin of the Watt/Puppy concept. |
|
I'm sure anyone that spoke to Bud at any length at all knew of his tendency to always remind you that "he was a Harvard Man". A true character - in the good sense.
Bud would roll over in his grave if he could see the reviews certain speakers with sealed boxes where getting today. |
Salectric: I have a good friend who still uses the "H" sub in one of his systems. It looks like a large coffee table and houses two separate transmission lines, each with it's own 12" driver. Serious bass indeed! Now picture this, it's used in a surround system with five highly modified "C" satellites, four of which sit on D2 subs; two front L,R and two rear L,R. He actually has four systems, three of which use Fried inspired speaker designs.
Soundcomponents:, Back in the mid 80's, I used to see Bud pretty regularly at Jemstone Audio in East Lansing, MI. He'd come to town and give seminars for the owner, Jeff Morris. Jemstone was one of the few high end shops in MI back then and they carried some really nice stuff; Fried, Celestion, Apogee, Quad, Krell, Meitner, and much more.
You're right, Bud did often mention his Harvard background and was actually a lawyer by trade. He was quite brilliant and very opinionated, telling me on more than a few occasions that the only two speakers worth listening to were Quads and his own(those using 1st order series crossovers and transmission line loading). He was friends with Peter Walker of Quad and had nothing but good things to say about him and his speaker.
I used to call Bud at his home in Philadelphia to "pick his brain" and every single time, I'd hear classical music playing in the background. The phone would ring and he'd answer, "hello". I'd say, "Bud"? He'd always come back with, "who's this?" I'd laugh and say, "are you dodging bill collectors?" I really enjoyed those conversations.
|
They sound fine. They don't really compare to my Vandersteen 5A's. They're just being used in the bedroom hooked up to an Adcom 5400 and Sonos ZP90. I've never had them in my main room so I honestly don't really know how they stack up. |
Rfogel8, Are you sure your friend's H sub used 12" woofers? I built the H using Fried's kit instructions, and it used a single 8" KEF woofer per channel. It was a special version of the KEF B200 which had a nice synergism with the TL cabinet. Deep, tight bass, but limited power handling. It was also easily overloaded by subsonics such as from a warped record. |
Salectric, you're right about the "H" using two 8" drivers. As I was typing, I was still thinking about another friend's Super Monitors which did use 12" drivers.
Regards |
Another speaker that copied the Wilson Watt Puppy look is the SGR MT3F.
Here's a pic. Its the 2nd pic from the top.
[/url]http://www.msbtech.com/history/shows.php[/url] |
Another speaker that looks like the Wilson Watt Puppy is the
Music culture technology speakers.
Here's a pic. Click on the link.
[/url]http://audiofederation.com/blog/archives/1025[/url] |
|
|
Also SOTA (yes the turntable company) , Time Domain IV Speakers.
They cost around $4,000 back in 1992
Very good sound, but not enough base.
it was called, the poor guy Wildons.... |
|
It's very typical look and design to make a buzz out of it. |
i find this topic interesting as the speakers i own were blasted for looking like sonus faber speakers and here are dozens of speakers that look alike and not a word is said. |
This is one of the few times the term "puppy look" has been used with a complete lack of cuteness. |
