jafant - first a disclaimer. I have no real experience with the WATT or any other Wilson products, beyond interested observation. My connection is primarily one of curiosity. The WATT has been considered an audiophile reference from its beginning, and called such by JA in Stereophile. It turns up in very discriminating systems and spaces. My curiosity revolves primarily around what all of us at Thiel would hear from it and see in its measurements, which is a flawed design, a broken speaker (in its early iterations), from our point of view. The WATT/PUPPY illuminates by contrast how Thiel never really fit into the high end mindset. We required even-handed solutions to all identifiable aspects of performance and cost, whereas much of high end tolerates and even extols excellence in some areas regardless or at the expense of other aspects.
The Wilson approach has certainly won the day. Most high end speakers would flunk Jim Thiel's first-pass analysis. They are plain wrong in many ways while being outstandingly good in some ways or other. But Thiel didn't engage in competitive analysis - at all. We had our hands full doing our own thing, independent of whatever 'the market' or 'the times' seemed to relate to.
David Wilson was a star. His audiophile recordings were extremely good. He with his soprano wife Cheryl moved in high circles. He had a ready audience and nearly demanded respect. On the contrary, at our first 1977 CES we came out with a lovely corner suite, and garnered a positive, encouraging response from many attendees; but there was no safety net. I remember an establishment industry person asking to general amusement why we were 'here'. 'Shouldn't you be barefoot and pregnant back home?' Kentucky wasn't seen as legitimate compared with the genesis of most aspiring companies. I'm not complaining, Thiel received solid, constant support and encouragement from the audio press along with pioneering dealers who wanted something different, what we wanted to provide. My point I guess is that if we had come from Kentucky with products that contained the design shortcomings of early Wilson products, we would have been summarily dismissed.
My comments are more general sociological observations than any particular analysis of any particular products. The marketplace is an ecosystem unto itself and companies make their ways however they can from wherever they begin. Wilson was a trail-blazer into a different sphere than where Thiel lived. We lived where we were comfortable, creating products we hoped would bring value to people with whom we identified.
And here we are. What a pleasure to be here.
