2. speakers
  3. 192666-406

Stereophile review of the new Wilson Watt/Puppy

I received my copy of the latest Stereophile yesterday and was curious to see what Martin Collums had to say about them, even though I would take it with a grain of salt, knowing that he had owned them in the past. He's still one of the reviewers that I consider to be most technically informed and balanced in his reviews.

I'm starting this thread because I want to know if others found his conclusions as confusing as I did. He says that the speakers have deep powerful bass, great detail, wonderful dynamic range, and are able to play very loud without breakup. 

However, after all of that, he concludes that they are better for jazz and orchestral and perhaps a bit reticent for pop and rock. This made no sense to me, especially for a $40.000 speaker. I am curious about the opinions of anyone else who has read the review. 

roxy54

Showing 1 response by stinkyvink

stinkyvink
2 posts
 

I have been in the HiFi industry professionally for the past 35 years as a dealer, manufacturer and enthusiast.  That being said...I have a few confessions to make:

#1.  The new Wilson Watt/ Puppy speakers do sound great with rock/ alternative.  Kick drums sound amazing!  

#2  You really can never trust reviews.  I worked for a MAJOR manufacturer (Harman) and we give stuff away to reviewers for FREE.  Not discounted 50%- 100% FREE.  When a reviewer says that they are on LOAN...that means permanent loan.  For Harman products (Revel, Levinson, etc), we would make them sign a document that they would not sell the products for at least 1 year.  That is why there are so many listings for hardware on Audiogon in the first place.  They are all us...LOL.  It is a way of "paying" someone for a good review.  The money they keep when they sell it is theirs.  If they want to keep the products, they can.  This is why magazine reviewers can "afford" such amazing equipment for their homes, when you know that the publishers pay them next to nothing.

#3.  Most of this is really pretty subjective.  I have spent my life designing the most expensive systems, but everyone hears differently.  Some people prefer imaging, soundstage, details.  Others think it should sound like a live performance.  In reality, a speakers job is to be a microphone in reverse.  Play/ sound like the instruments, vocalist, and room it was recorded in.  At the end of the day, the sound "should" sound exactly how the recording engineer/ mastering engineer wanted it to.  Also...they mixed the audio on custom mixing boards.  The mastering engineer played back the audio on custom speakers, PMC, Genelec or Focal.  All of them active monitors, so unless you are using these, you will never hear what it was meant to sound like by the mastering engineer.

Just thought I would pull back the veil a bit....

More to discover