I've always wondered why there are so many people out there, that more than any other speaker manufacturer, really hate the Wilson line. I own Maxx 2's and also a pair of Watt Puppys. They are IMHO quite wonderful.
I have done thousands of tests, and I understand how 3 dimensional sound works and what you need. The reason why it is difficult, is that most products and brands are 2 dimensional.
This means when you bring one 2 dimensional product into a system what owns only 3 dimensional products, you go back to an almost 2 dimensional stage.
All the results showed the same outcome, over and over again. This is why audio is shootout. Audio is for me like a big puzzle, and I want to understand everything.
So you need to test over and over again. Hundreds of times each single year. This is how addicted and commited I am to sound. Creating new information. And mann I love it. This is not work, this is a part of who I am since I was a child. It has become my second nature. And I can do it blind.
The funny
thing is that when I tell people I have done thousands of tests in audio they really think; he is making it up. But everything I say is exactly as I wrote and told it.
The good thing about Wilson Audio is that Wilson is a very commited person who wants to create great products. You don't have to like them, based on the fact you don't like the sound. But how stuppid you would be to say: I hate them.
Hate is a word when you dislike these people so much that it makes you angry. So that is why I say: I would use faster materials and tweeters which will better fit to hi res recordings. And will have more grip.
This is only a personal opinion, nothing more nothing less. Why for God sake you use the word hate? I wish each single company in audio the best. When I visit people and I see over and over agian the same limitations. I write it down. And I hope the companies will do it differently the next time. To give their clients the best products.
What is wrong to give this information? Nothing is perfect, neither are we. But when we help eachother more people will have better quality. No one should be excluded.
First listen to the new Platinum series and then give an opinion. I am even prepared to talk to Wilson about the problems people have with their Wilson Audio loudspeakers.
When I say: I never auditioned a loudspeaker what can reveal so many layers of a recoding. It is a personal experience. But I never auditioned this at any client I visited with Wilson Audio loudspeakers.
At the end it is just a personal experience, don't make a big deal of it all the time.
Same thing when I said: I never could hear the diversity in height of recordings so obvious. This is the truth and each single person I gave a demo experienced it the same way.
With the the Sasha we could hear that all the instruments had the same level in height. This was with the system of my client. It is just based on this system.
The new Platinum drivers are superior in timing, control, dynamics
and layering than we had with the Sasha.
I would be even prepared when we get a Wilson Audio loudspeasker to demo it. In 2017 we will start a videoblog as well. Beside our own language we will do it in english as well.
We want to use it to share information about sound&vision. For us audio is all about shootout and what we can hear. At the end it is to give people the highest level in quality.
In 2017 we will audition many new products and when we think it is better than what we have, we will change it. I know it is different, but we are different. Because we believe that this is the best way to give people the highest quality.
I am a perfectionist, in each single thing I buy I do research to find out what is the best. It is inside my system since I was a child. This is how I sell and advice sound&vision.
And all people in audio have the same changes to do it their way. May the best win. And yes I want to become the best in sound&vision in the world. I will never do it for anything less.
Others in this world have to proof they can do it better. So proof it...
The Pl-500 is the most relaxt loudspeaker I have auditioned sofar. I also auditioned the Alexandria 2 and this demo was rarther poor. Still it was the setup of the distributer.
My perfectionism is this huge that each single kind of imperfection makes me F. irritated. It needs to be perfect, flawless.
With classical music the Pl-200 could reveal details of instruments which were not auditionable with the Sasha. Beside this the layering in the lowest freq. missed information as well.
When you compare the 100khz AMT tweeter against the 23khz dome tweeter of the Sasha, the differences could not be bigger. The AMT not only reveals more details and information but has so much more authority and grip on the high freq.
The new drivers are in response faster than anything we auditioned sofar. 2 weeks ago a person who’s biggest passion is music an audio. He owns a system far over 50.000 dollar. He said; this is the best low freq I ever auditioned. He called it reference low frequency.
I have to admit that S.A.P. creates a superior timing what never can be created by any kind of old school highend audio. But you still need fast drivers.
The accuton drivers have a coloration what I call: the mjeh sound. You hear it when you compare a violin/cello in real. Played by systems who use accuton drivers a violin sounds a lot more clean and misses the layering in sound a violin can reveal.
The old drivers of the first Platinum series were also made of ceramics with some aluminium. Accuton uses similar construction. I owned the Pl-300 of the first Platinum series. I liked them, but I did not like the mid freq. of this speaker. It was a different coloration compared to accuton drivers. I could not listen to classical music with these speakers.
It needs to sound as in real or I cannot bare it. The Pl-200 which came out in 2010 used new crossovers and with classical music it sounded much more natural.
But the new drivers of the new Platinum series are a lot different. What I said; we never auditioned so many layers in sound than with the new Platinum series.
A voice coil limits the timing of a driver. The technique Monitor Audio uses is superior in timing. And mannnn this makes a huge difference. At low volume it can build so much more dynamics and layering in the lowest freq.
What they changed as well it using carbon fiber on the back of each driver. And this creates a much lower level of distortion. With classical music you get a superior level of realism and layering in sound.
When you own the Pl-500 and you visit clients, shows and other shops it is F. insane at what level of quality and realism they listen to.
When we visit shops, new clients, audio shows and distributers we always go back in time. We listen to systems with many mistakes and parts of Tru-Fi which are missing.
They all have acoustic problems, we do not
have them anymore for many years now. When I see a picture of audio systems in most situation I know that the combination does not make sense at all.
This is based on the properties they connected to eachother. But they use audio by trial and error. They do not
know the properties of each single part. That is why I call it audiogambling.
When I ask the question: can you tell me why the stage and sound is what we hear? And no one can answer it, it stops for me.
Your testimonial about yourself is impressive. You are not the first to claim you have discovered the holy grail. None of what you have written demonstrates any understanding of loudspeaker construction and design but I guess your enthusiasm for the products you sell more than makes up for that!
There has always been a "latest and greatest" and like fall fashions they come with great fanfare and promotion and quietly fade away with next years "new and improved". And then there are products that have survived the test of time. I know what I will choose - like my Gibson Les Paul or my Fender Precision bass or Pearl ref drum kit - knowledgeable buyers keep buying well made products that have proven themselves time and time again with countless buyers! IMHO Wilson falls into the category of time proven.
bo1972, based on your posts and the system linked to on Facebook I find you to have no superiority in setting up systems in comparison to better dealers. In fact, I see what I consider to be a glaring mistake in your method. :)
we call a system 2 dimensional when the stage depth is 1 metre max.
Many 2 dimensional systems have even a lot less. So when you put some music on, voices and instruments are al most standing on the same line.
What this does with your emotion is that the music is less involving and people often use the words; it is more standing away from you.
When you listen to the same music in a 3 dimensional system, the voices and instruments are more separated from eachother but also separated in depth.
You are pulled into the music and you become more one with the music. When I changed from 2d to 3D you always see the smile on the faces of people.
Their reactions was the reason why I stopped selling 2 dimensional sound. I work on behave of the people who wants to buy an audio system. I want to give them the best possible, not second best.
When I was them I would only want the best. I become them and I make the same decisions as I would make for myself.
Music is a part of my life and I want others to get the same addictive feeling as I experience.
We sell many parts like cables, sources, conditioners and modifications to many peole with expensive sets. Money does not garantee you anything.
You have no idea what we created and what we do. Most things we will never post or share. I can garantee you that it will change the world in audio in 2017.
We are far ahead in knowledge and insight than all other people are. We have now a specialist in Marketing and we will share the knowledge and ideas with manufacturers.
It outperforms anything in highend audio at this moment. It is that more precise and natural sounding. When I say: we create and sell a sound. It is a new approach.
This is a new level in creating audio systems. What is superior in effectivity. This is based on the fact that trial and error is ineffective to create an audio system.
We work and think based on the human emotion. This creates a much higher level in realism and quality.
This will give people a new level in listening to their beloved music.
People focus on brands all the time in audio. They think when we buy products with great reviews
we will have an awesome system.
Audio does not work like that. You can use it this way but at the end trial and error always will be very ineffective.
You can create a superior level in sound when you would focus on just properties of each single part of your sustem.
That is why I say: we don’t care about a name, but we are just interested in properties a brand or product can give us.
Based on the properties togheter of a product we decide if it fits into our Tru-Fi. The focus is always on Tru-Fi.
Tru-Fi makes it possible to use all the qualities/properties a loudspeaker owns. Because we want to know the DNA of each single loudspeaker.
Then we know which quality/properties it owns. It is our goal to reveal all the properties and quality the speaker can give.
But when you will use this speaker and create your system by trial and error. I can garantee you that it is impossible to use all the properties it owns.
And you know why?
Because you are not able to know what the properties of each part of your system are. Most of the choices you made these are products which do not own all the parts of Tru-Fi.
At the end you are not able to use all the properties/qualities of the speaker you own.
...This is only a personal opinion, nothing more nothing less. Why for God sake you use the word hate?"
bo1972,
I never used the word "hate" in my two posts (or any other post I ever made) nor said anything negative about Wilson, your opinion, or anything else. I am however sensitive to referring to God in such a callous way as you did above, especially on Christmas Day.
I agreed with one of your statements early in this thread (regarding holographic imaging) and disagreed with one later (regarding your statement that 99% of audio components are incapable of 3D imaging). That's it.
Do you even read and think about what others say or just jump right into repeating the same diatribe ad nauseam as if your opinion or experience is the only one worthy of consideration?
I went down and took a close look at all my equipment. All components were 3 dimensional, having a H, W and D. :-)
When my friends come to hear my system, comments I most often get refer to the holography of the soundstage. That soundstage, and dynamics are two aspects that I strive to maximize. For this I believe the room, and equipment placement within, to be critical. Not that I could argue that there is no difference between components in this regard. Differences that can't be measured exist. Due to the nature of the characteristic under measurement and the resolution of the measuring device.
Obviously, other aspects are also important. I enjoy a tight and articulate bass (quality over quantity), a smooth cohesive midrange, and a relaxed upper end (not over stated). To this end I focus on products that provide these things. To get the most of this within my budget I sacrifice the bottom end, believing I can't afford the bottom octave.
my religion is very important in my life as well. That is why I protect each single client. And I will always do the best I can to give them the best possible for the money they spend.
In the last years I met too many people who were not advised on a honest and respectful way. That is why I would like to see a more open and honest world in audio.
This only can be achieved when people have more respect to the people who buy their products.
bo1972, is "Tru-Fi" objectively derived (i.e. through test equipment measurement) or subjectively derived (i.e. through listening impressions)?
If it is objectively derived, i.e. through analysis or measurement by machine, or a new component, then it may be worth further consideration. If the claim is made that it is objectively derived through a particular collection of gear, I am finished with this discussion. If it is subjectively derived, then I am not interested in spending any further time on this discussion.
I very much agree that sense of 3rd dimension increases greatly the enjoyment of the system. In fact however, when I go to live concerts I rarely if ever get that 3 D sound that I so enjoy in my system.
@bo1972 Please refrain from calling other members "stupid" as you have done a number of times. Feel free to voice your opinion, but let others have their say, and respect their opinions as well. This is a discussion amongst gentlemen, not a lecture class in university.
That being said, I am a Canadian citizen, and travel across Europe every summer, during the month of June on a motorcycle adventure, with no particular destinations planed. I think that you are in South Eastern Europe, and I would like to meet with you, if possible to hear you back up your claims. No animosity BO, just an opportunity. Your call.
Tru-Fi has nothing to do with any kind of equipment. There are different aspects you can hear when you listen to a system.
I give you an example: Diversity in sound is the most important part to create emotion for us humans. It is a part of Tru-Fi
A few days ago we did a shootout between the S1 (AudioFacts modified) and the new Esoteric N-05. The person who does Esoteric in the Benelux visit me and wanted to do a shootout.
The difference in diversity in sound was huge. The S1 was able to reveal a lot more layers in the whole freq. range. Voices were not only richer, but you could hear the layers of a voice. When we listend to the same music withe the Esoteric it was like the layers were gone.
There was no connection witht the music. Like the emotion was gone. With the S1 you directly are connected with the music.
A friend of mine gave classical live concerts for about 60 people in his house. Here I learned that voices and instruments are very direct and small in dimenson.
I was hypnotized when I closed my eyes and I heard a voice live. I call this intimate sound. It is a part of Tru-Fi.
You want to hear voices as realistic possible. They need to be small and own the same size as in real. When a voice becomes more physical apparant we talk about a higher black level. This is also a part of Tru-Fi
With the right properties you can create a higher black level. It is very easy to compare parts in how good they are in this part. What we do is we use music and pick one part of Tru-Fi and explain it to our clients.
When you compare for example cables, the differences in how big instruments anv voices are in proportion is big. Same about how physical these voices and instruments are tangible.
Tru-Fi makes is easier for people to understand what the differences are between cables, amps, sources, speakers etc.
Tru-Fi has nothing to do with any brand or product. The focus is on the sound you can hear at the end. And you want to hear all the layers of the music. Toy want to hear the space of the room. You want to hear the diversity in sound, You want to hear the place in depth and width of an instrument and voices. You want to hear the differences in height of instruments when they used microphones at different heights.
The Esoteric could create stage depth and width. But the stage of the S1 was so much deeper and wider. This is dna you cannot change.
The S1 was a lot more dynamic and controled. This is the difference in dna as well. Like instruments and voices became more free and apparent withe the S1. Instruments and voices were a lot less tangible with the Esoteric.
The person who brought the Esoteric said at the first song within 10 seconds; okay clear, no comparison.
We are talking about superior quality between the S1 and the Esoteric.
In this year we have done a lot of research in smog, electricity, magnetism and diversity in sound. With different technical people we developed new parts and ideas to modify sources, amps and powersupplies. We made huge progress in many products.
Perfectionism goes on and on in my head. It never stops and it always needs to become better. So we go on testing. I work with great people who are also autistic in audio like me. Togheter we create new thoughts in audio.
I have ideas in my head all the time, and I use their technical support to create it. This is their specialism. For me this is what I love most. It becomes very addictive when the results are mindblowing.
2017 will be the year we share it with manufacturers and customers. We have done it with many people all ready. But now we will make it public as well.
We will invite many people in 2017. Everyone is welcome in our world. We will never disclude any person. We create it to make other people want to buy more audio.
We want to give people a much higher level in realism and emotion during listening to the music they love.
It outperforms any silly system created by trial and error.
I hope your separate budget tweeter doesn't fail on your speaker. I know your Esoteric very well. In my world this is inferior audio. I am even prepared to demo it especially for you :)
Sad to see another interesting thread hijacked by a salesman. First Audioquest cables, now Monitor speakers. Where's a good moderator when you need one.
That’s the spirit @bo1972-- a takedown of Tannoy super tweeters and an Esoteric K-01X with a rubidium clock and custom Paul Hynes power supply that you cannot have heard in combination, not to mention the silliness of housing that stack in a Starsound Rhythm rack with custom silver PCs and balanced power. All by trial and error, of course.
With respect to Tru-Fi, I was fishing for details on methodology or testing instead of a repetition of exclamations. BTW, I have heard Monitor Platinum 500s and do like their technology and value.
To the OP, I do like Wilson and lived with Watt/Puppies for 10 years before migrating to Merlins VSMs. All decisions are made at a point in time. For me the Merlins were a better platform for modifications that have kept this model viable over the years, albeit without that last octave of LF extension.
We compared the Esoteric K-01X with the Meridian 800daxv4 and 808 several times. The Meridians sounded much more analogue and had a much better individual focus of instruments and voices. The owner of the Esoteric had to admit that the Meridian sounded much more analogue. He also listened most of the time to his recordplayer.
You can modify it but still the dna you cannot change. Audio is all about shootout and comparison.
The Tannoy tweeter is not that special anymore at the time we live. We auditioned it several times and did not blend well with many loudspeakers.
I tested several silver PCs as well. I was not a fan of it. Jim Aud of Purist Audio has the same idea’s as I have. He only made one because people asked for it.
Silver loudspeakercables and interconnects is a whole different story.
You will hear and see it soon, trial and error will never be effective.
Each brand who makes sources has its own dna how it builds the stage. I also sold different modified Marantz sources.
What you cannot change is that it is a 2 dimensional source and it will stay like that also after a modification.
Even when you own speakers and amps who are able to build a 3 dimensional stage, the source needs this dna as well.
in 2015 I brought 2 brothers from a 2D stage to a 3D stage. They both owned Marantz sources. Shootouts proved these sources limited them in the stage of their system. So the Marantz sources had to go!
Thank you for the lengthy description of 2D bo. Despite the ignorance plaguing board discussions at times, I for one find all this very interesting.
Great stuff It brings another question to mind. Will we see, hear rather a 4D or even a 5D system any time in the the near future, or even in our lifetime? Maybe I am jumping way too far ahead of technology.
I think the polarizing attitude for Wilson is the pricing. It never goes down but only up, although I agree they are not the only one. The latest offering (the WAMM) is just ridiculous, not matter how you cut it. I suspect the price is just for shock value. I am sure it is well made and sounds good, but REALLY good speakers (and companies) find ways to make really good sound at a price more people can afford. Sadly, this is rare.
One thing I notice is that it seems to me that this is the time that affordability should be embraced. Once the well-to-do boomers push through the upcoming generation will be left with an out of control escalation of prices that few can afford. Moreover, if the hope is nonexistent, you don't focus on it. I enjoy the highest end like anyone else, but being an audiophile I can at least have some context to appreciate it. But to outsiders, or those ambivalent to audio at least, it is just ridiculous. The latest WAMM is $685K, and when you stop and look at what that can get you, especially not considering luxury goods, it makes it even more outrageous. You can buy an airplane for that.
I think as well that although Wilson has done well, in the grand context they really have done nothing new or revolutionary. True, the WATT/PUPPY combo is the best one sold, but it was also one of the first, and the originals always sell. But in terms of technology that has really pushed the art and science of speakers forward, Wilson has not been one of them. The used available drivers. Magico has pushed the boundary of enclosure design with all-aluminum boxes and pushed further with cone and driver design. Focal has brought us EM woofers, TAD brought us concentric beryllium drivers....Wilson just made speakers, albeit good ones. Were they ever the best? Maybe. But it is debatable. But certainly at the forefront in cost, and the further out of reach something becomes, the more anger it generates. And it is easy to be the industry "whipping boy" when you have the recognition of Wilson. I suppose every hobby has its own Wilson.
3 dimensional sound is not about money, it is all about properties. But the problem is that knowledge and insight is very limited in audio.
I give you an example; people think when I buy tubes I get a more musical sound and more emotion.
In the last few weeks people visited me who own expensive tube amps; like AudioResearch and Absolare.
They were stunned that my sound is even more involving than their sound and owns so much more layers. These layers influences our emotion the most.
I do not use tubes. Read the articles of the Pass labs XS-300. When I have the money I will buy a set of these.
You have no idea how much further I can get into sound and change each parameter of sound. Audio is your hobby, I earn my money with it. I never saw it as work. It is in my blood. It is inside my head.
I can adjust each single part you judge sound for. With this you can create a superior level in realims what never will be possible by trial and error. Even when you spend 1 million of dollars.
S.A.P. can reveal details which you cannot hear with a pre amp of 50.000 dollar. Money does not create the same level of details. Money will not give the same level in timing.
It is insane that many companies in audio have been sleeping for a long time. Many think it is still 1980.
Without giving a name, I can garantee for 100% that many highend manufacturers of expensive loudspeakers often use 2 dimensional amps and sources.
They often use the wrong cables. They have no idea of the properties. It is just a guess what they do. But audio does not work like that and it never will. You need to learn to look further!
I've only heard Wilsons in dealers' showrooms. They have always been playing percussive jazz at high volumes, and the effect was hard and fatiguing, making me want to exit the room a.s.a.p. rather than stay and listen.
That, combined with the price of admission to most of the models, makes them--to me--utterly irrelevant.
Having said that, the Sabrina looks interesting and promising.
Hopefully, the multiple Stereophile recommendations will cause people to buy them up, and then a couple of years from now some will tire of them and pass them on, at which point I might look at them seriously.
@blackfly I could not agree more with the comment on the absurdity of the WAMM pricing. Who in the real world will ever be able to seriously consider these? I am a happy Wilson owner, but by no means would ever be able to justify such a purchase (not that I have the means) I guess WAMM has a double meaning !! :) LOL
Bye the way, are you still using the S8 V2’s and Bryston
There is a reason why they are fatiguing, this is based on the fact of missing grip in a that particular frequency range.
The people who don’t like the things I write, are not able to handle the truth. Because thye do not want to read what I write.
This is your personal limitation. Read the Stereophile again and read the comparison between the Wilson Sabrina and the Pl-300. And why it is a better loudspeaker.
I would suggest to compare a Pl-500 with An Alexia. We will see if we can arrange it in 2017. I love shootout. Audio is all about the truth and not about a paid review.
The Sasha showed fatiguing in the high freq. many times. The Pl-200 II with the same music was flawless. This need to be demoed to the Wilson Audio people. Then I want to talk to them. This is how audio should be compared.
The people who react negative on my remarks own brands and products I made remarks of. The truth is difficult to handle sometimes.
In audio the best and most convincing sound will always win.
crazyeddy: I still have the S8v2's but sold the Bryston 14bsst a few years ago. I happened upon a Luxman M 05 amp and the midrange liquidity and treble sweetness was to die for. I got a second (selling the Bryston for half of what I got for it; got to love depreciation) and got another M 05 and have two running bridged. Amazing setup. I never liked the S8's after v2. They got rid of the fixed pole piece in favour of a dust cap that was shaped like a waveguide which added mass. Moreover, they made their bass speakers 3db louder by corrugating the surrounds for more travel; despite the fact the speakers are clearly designed to be used with subs, of which I have two. Small point but the speakers are awesome.
And yes, the new Persona line looks really good, and it has gone up in price, but not to the extremes of the top end Wilsons, Magico et al....expensive but still within reach (at least the 5F and 3F). Add in subs (which most likely one has) and the combo would be killer.
But personally, I find Wilson offering a WAMM at $685k to be everything that is wrong. If Dave Wilson were to make a REAL Magnum Opus, it would be the same speaker at a price less than the Alexandria, or XLF. And don't be shocked by this one: I bet Wilson will sell every one of the WAMMs they make. Count on it.
It’s funny that one listener found Wilson speakers to produce an image too high. One thing I have always found lacking in the smaller Wilsons (the WATT/Puppy in particular) in their "knee to waist" image height. I don’t care for the view from the balcony---looking down on the performers, preferring to look up at the performers on stage as if from a floor seat. I like vocalist’s mouths to appear about 5’ from the floor, as they do in life. Low image height is a major obstacle for me in the goal of achieving the suspension-of-disbelief. I find line-source speakers and planars in general provide that better than do cones in boxes, generally speaking.
bo1972 - First of all I would like to thank you for posting such great, informative messages here. There are times when I have to read your posts at least thrice to fully comprehend the dimensions. At first I used to read them only twice, but then one day it dawned on me that I was really only getting 2 dimensional benefits. Now, I make an effort to read them three times, and I’m finally (I hope) getting all the dimensions. Thank you.
Bdp24 I must say that if you have heard the Watt Puppy series in a way that shortened the height of images, you did not hear them properly set up. I too am very sensitive to speakers that foreshorten image height. (I know that for some listeners image height is a nonissue). Indeed, that very problem prevented me from trading up last year to a $50,000 pair of speakers from a competing well known manufacturer which exceeded the performance of Sashas in other important respects. I stood up and the sound was almost completely below me. I agree that this can destroy the suspension of disbelief. Certainly line source speakers are the best at image height and, of course, nothing beats the placement of drivers in a tall speaker. But for a speaker under 4 feet tall, the Watt Puppys and Sashas project image height as well or better than most. Of course, my definition of proper image height may be different than yours if you believe the singers voice should be 5' from the floor in you listening room.
"I stood up and the sound was almost completely below me."
Hi gpgr4blu,
No snarkiness intended and I have never owned Wilsons, but it never ever occurred to me to judge image height (or anything else) of speakers while standing. Is that what you meant to say?
gpgr4blu, I heard the WATT/Puppy a lot at Brooks Berdan's shop (his main listening room is excellent, built to the Cardas formula, and treated with RPG diffusers and tube traps), but also at CES and all the consumer California shows (both Northern and Southern). One place I never heard them was in a home---I have never had a close friend who was an audiophile. Musician's have the WORST Hi-Fi's! Evan Johns played me a demo tape of songs in preparation for the recording of an album we were about to begin, and he played in on his system---a boom box!
I'll bet the speaker you passed on was the Vandersteen 5 or 7. As good as they are (and they are VERY good), they too produce a waist-high image. That is a deal breaker for me. Maybe if they were to be placed on a 2' high stand? But then the time-alignment of the drivers would go to pot. Another reason I prefer line sources and/or planars---many of them sound the same whether one is sitting or standing. Not the original QUAD, of course. But that's one reason I had a stacked pair!
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
