The $27,900 disappointment? Wilson Audio Watt Puppy 8 issues.

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. 

An amps ability to drive lower impedance loads has no relation to the amps quality. 

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.

"An amps ability to drive lower impedance loads has no relation to the amps quality."

I can’t agree with this. The ability to drive lower impedance loads means that the power supply has to be up to the task. This would include such things as heavier gauge wiring in the transformer, and other places, and "bigger" supply caps, and that does infer a higher quality.

"An amps ability to drive lower impedance loads has no relation to the amps quality."

I can’t agree with this. The ability to drive lower impedance loads means that the power supply has to be up to the task. This would include such things as heavier gauge wiring in the transformer, and other places, and "bigger" supply caps, and that does infer a higher quality.

And more output devices, and more heatsinking...but this assumes an "equal grounds" approach via traditional A / AB topologies with linear PSU’s. There’s rail switching designs, PSU modulating, class D - all kinds of alternate approaches that can be utilized to generate more power and low-impedance handling with less cost.

Boy we are way off topic lol. All good engineering makes certain assumptions about the intended applications and audience for a product. It’s completely valid for Wilson to take the approach they have - for the sound quality they were trying to achieve, the context of the time perdiod, their intended audience (who are generaly NOT cheapskates when it comes to amps), etc. Complete hubris for DR to come in 20 years later and act superior for tearing down a Wilson against the parameters of his TOTALLY different goals and customer base. He wants to show neat "high value" BOM’s and flat FR graphs for his modest boxes (mostly focused on bookshelf form factor) and drive them with receivers, I get it.