My guess would be that the drop to almost 2 ohm at approx. 25 hz and 85 hz for all those Wilson speakers listed above will pull more current from the amp(s) and increase the bass presence.
|
Hello, I have Wilson Watt Puppy 8 powered by 2 McIntosh MC275s monoblocked with a McIntosh c2300 preamp. I think they sound fantastic. The bass is the best I have heard in my price range for tower speakers, but, I bought them used. Top end is clean and sweet. The whole 2 ohm issue seems overblown to me and I do not perceive the sound changing when I stand up. Before the Watt/Puppy 8, I ran ML Electrostats with a Sub with the same equipment except an extra SS amp for the sub. Nice setup, but, it does not compare to the W/P 8, and the sound of the MLs did change when I stood up. Overall, the W/P 8 sound, punch, & air movement just work well together. I like the bass coming out of the W/P 8 better than running a separate sub... Maybe the idea with the W/P 8 was to create a smallish tower that did not need a sub ? without bi-amping and all that complexity.... Is that worth a 2 ohm dip on a specific frequency ? Definitely worth a big listen before judging. Here is a pic of my system:
PS. Anybody that has heard my W/P 8 says they sound glorious, but, they are not audiophiles, so, it is possible that they do not have the right trained ears.
|
|
As I mentioned in my previous post, I own the Watt Puppy 8s, which I bought used. I listened to them before I bought them and I was impressed with the sound. I like bass, imaging, and clean highs, and I believe the W/P 8s deliver that. The diffraction pad foam had deteriorated, so, I contacted Wilson and bought a new set, which seems to be some kind of wool type material. I wonder why GR research did not do the same thing. I mean why not try the updated perfect fitting diffraction pads from Wilson before making your own? I also bought new resistors from Wilson and replaced them. There is something nice to be said about a company that supports replacement parts for their speakers from 2011. It is also something I really like about McIntosh. Here is a pic of my W/P with the new perfect fitting diffraction pads from Wilson.
|
fyi, Here is cool pic. I have the new James Gang SACD cranked on the song "Bomber" as high as my ears can stand it. You can see the meter on the C2300. BTW, that remastered SACD sounds like it was recorded yesterday. it is outstanding, and the bass is fantastic. There is not a ripple or even the slightest movement in that glass of water. W/P 8 with GAIA I footer on a hardwood floor on top of a cement foundation. I feel lots of punch with those 2 Mc275s.
|
I do believe two Mc275s in mono are enough to drive the W/P 8s. However, I do waffle between the 8 ohm tap and 4 ohm tap. These taps are halved when in mono mode, so, in mono mode they are supposed to be 4 ohm and 2 ohm. The 4 ohm tap produces more current and less voltage than the 8 ohm tap, and I believe you can hear and feel that in the bass. For excellent high res (SACD) recordings with good bass, the 8 ohm tap is hard to beat. For older, thin sounding CDs like Punk Rock, he 4 ohm tap sounds better fills the room much better and fixes thin sounding CDs. Also, on the 4 ohm tap, my furniture and bar vibrate more from the bass.
|
Thanks for the kind words. It is much appreciated. From what I have seen, most Wilsons have that almost 2 ohm dip at around 25 hz and 80 hz or 90 hz.... It is not something particular to the W/P 8..... but, Ok, good idea to test with a SS amp.... I do not have any high dollar SS amps, but, I do have an Adcom GFA-585 LE in my home theater that I am currently having refurbished due to cap leakage. I also have a Sony STR-GX9ES receiver in another room - which I think does not qualify... The Adcom GFA-585 is hardly high $$, but, it does put out lots of current - 250 watts at 8 ohm, 400 watts at 4 ohm.. When it is done being fixed, and I am satisfied that it is again working to spec., I will try the 585 on the W/P 8s. Attached below are the specs of the Adcom 585... Do you think it is a good enough amp to make the test between two MC275s tube amps and a decent SS amp on the W/P 8s ?
Some additional quotes I found regarding this Adcom GFA-585LE amp. I am not sure if it is competitive to today’s amp technology.....:
"this is the Crown Jewel of Adcom amplifiers.It is regarded as the best Adcom has ever made. There were only 3000 of these made. This is an extremely powerful amplifier. It puts out a real 250wpc into 8 ohms and 450wpc into 4 ohms. To give you an idea of the power of this amp,you would have to put two 565 Adcom monoblocks in the same chassis to equal it.The 585 will drive any speaker. Not even the 5802 Adcom can go there with this amp.It uses Bipolar technology along with being a dual mono design. The transformer (70,000 uf storage)in this amplifier is at least half the weight of the entire amplifier. For the money this monster's hard to beat. It is perfect for electrostats, or hard to drive speakers, or if you just want a lot of headroom".
|
Thanks for the recommendations. I actually like the 4 ohm tap on the MC275s in monoblock running the W/P 8s. The reason is additional low bass. In addition, low quality CD recordings with no bass that normally sound thin, actually sound much thicker on the 4 ohm tap. The manual says I should be running the 8 ohm tap because I am running them as monoblocks, and now the 8 ohm tap is 4 ohm, and the 4 ohm tap is now 2 ohm, but, it does not stop me from liking the 4 ohm tap better.... On recordings with decent bass, the 4 ohm tap vibrates the furniture more.. It is like I have an additional sub in the equation.
|
Thanks.
For one MC275, I found some specs:
16 Ohm tap 34.6 V / 2.2 A
8 Ohm tap 24.5 V / 3.1 A
4 Ohm tap 17.3 V / 4.3 A
So, when I monoblock my two MC275s on the 4 ohm tap, I should assume the voltage stays at 17.3, but, the current doubles to 8.6 A, and the resistance changes to 2 ohms...
By the same rule, the 8 ohm tap also seems adaquate because the current doubles, and the resistance goes to 4 ohms. I guess I am wondering where is the trade off for Voltage vs Current regarding the sweet spot for the two MC275s parallel monoblock and the W/P 8s ?
|
Thanks. I have been switching back and forth between the 8 ohm tap (now 4 ohm) and the 4 ohm tap (now 2 ohm). I even tried the 16 ohm tap (now 8 ohm), however, I did not like the 16 ohm tap at all. Overall, I like the 4 ohm tap (now 2 ohm) because it seems to emphasize the lower end of the frequencies just a little more than the 8 ohm tap (now 4 ohm). I have always gravitated to the lower frequencies, so, I believe that is why I prefer it. It also makes my older thin sounding CDs sound much thicker. On more bass heavy recordings, I just marvel how much wall shaking bass comes out of these W/P 8s. It is really impressive for a tower speaker. I can tell you that the bass is much better than my old Genesis Servo 12 Sub that I was running with my Martin Logan Electrostats...
|
Yes, no problem. I am (c). With the same ID, I have a few posts on AudioKarma, you can see some previous iterations of my stereo, and some reallly old ones on AudioAficionado, but, my ID is not valid anymore on AudioAficionado. I am mostly on Audiogon on rare occasions to look for used equipment or learn something from the forums. I agree that it is weird that my first post on Audiogon is 12 years after I joined...
Here is my story:
This is my fourth stereo system. My first one started way back with a Marantz 2230.
It took me 13 years to get to where I am today with my 4th stereo system. I bought every piece I have used. I started in 2013 with one MC275 and one McIntosh c2300, and an old Pioneer turntable, an old Sony CD Player, an IPAD, a WD my passport server, and hand me down Martin Logan Aerius and a Genesis servo Subwoofer that my brother gave me. I bought replacement woofers and panesl from Martin Logan and very, very slowly started adding pieces. I added another MC275, then, an MT10, then a McIntosh D100 replaced later by a D150, then, a McIntosh MCT450 - and the new hobby of SACD, then, replaced later by a MCT500 where I love using the USB sticks which have all my ripped SACDs, CDs, and my Qobuz purchased songs. Last year, I noticed my old Genesis servo Subwoofer amp buzzing and the woofer would flap at high volume. So, I started wanting to replace my speakers. My brother has a pair of Wilson Sophia 2 that I did some critical listening, and I really liked them. So, I started looking around for speakers. In Audio Mart, I found a pair of W/P 8s for sale locally for a fantastic deal, so, I went and listened, liked what I heard, especially the bass, bought them, put them in my truck and brought them home. Then, I contacted Wilson and bought new resistors, and new diffraction pads and replaced them. I also added Isoacoustic GAIA I footers From there, I bought a used Shunyata DPC-12, 5 IFI Nova power cables, and an Adona Altair rack that I had built to my height requirements. I declared myself finally done, and I really liked the sound of my system. When I saw the GR Research video about the W/P 8, I was really surprised, & it really peaked my interested, so, I responded to some threads about it.
|
fyi, Here is the Stereophile measurements of most of the Wilson Watt/Puppy and related line of speakers in order of release. Probably covers almost 3 decades of Wilson Speakers - Impedance, Phase, Frequency. It shows a pattern and trend that is obviously part of the Wilson philosophy. I do not see that the W/P 8 is any different or special from the rest of the line. If I am reading it right, it seems the only obvious change was with the Shasha DAW and Shasha V where two low freq. (15hz, 45 hz) impedance peak higher and sync up better with the phase ? is that correct ?
|
Based on these impedance curves of speakers over 3 decades, it has to be obvious that these curves are providing exceptional sound to the people grading and buying these speakers. The objective they have set for the speakers are being met. Wilson speakers are very expensive, so, is it reasonable that they expect quality amps to drive them to get the most out of them - either a stereo amp or two mono amps ?
I see two main issues:
1. Adding a woofer planar amp to the Puppy so you can dial in any bass you want is creating a whole different speaker. It is now basically a sub-woofer type situation that is user definable. It is obviously not what Wilson was selling, and is completely changing the sound of the speaker. A more valid comparison would have been to compare his new crossover with the same amp setup.
2. The deterioraton of the old diffracton foam on old Wilson Speakers is a well known issue. Wilson sells new diffraction pads for people to update their speakers. Why not try that first to fix any diffraction issues ? When I bought my W/P 8 used, I knew that updating the diffraction pads was an additional expense that I had to factor in. Did I notice a difference when I added the new Wilson Diffraction pads ? Yes, I think I did. Maybe, I am wrong because I could not A/B the change, but, it would have been nice to measure the before and after using the Wilson recommended method for addressing this issue.
Lastly, I am not sure what to say about the whole "off axis" response issue.
|
To simplify, based on the impedance curves above, Wilson likes to parallel two 8 inch woofers in their Puppy cab which gives you a low impedance in some specific lower frequencies. This seems to be done in all the models throughout the decades. Obviously, Wilson and others like the way that makes the low frequency sound. So, saying it is wrong to do that, is maybe looking at it in the wrong context... For example, Wilson assuming that the customer will use an amp that can drive a 2.x ohm load for some specific lower frequencies may sound better to them than using a lesser quality amp and changing the woofers wiring/crossover to achieve a higher ohm load. The context may be to take account the quality of the amp together with the speaker crossover/wiring -- Wilson may be looking for that little additional edge in bass sound from a total system. So, when making assumptions, we should assume both the postive and negative. One thing I can tell you is that everybody that has heard my W/P 8 loves the bass coming out of those things. Subwoofer not required.
|
yes, ok. How about, for the same db, lower impedance requires more current, which equates to a bigger power supply (ie. in A, AB) which may increase the cost of the amp. Something like that.
|
