Wilson Audio Haters

The immortal has spoken! So it is written, so let it be done!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h4emcNAf5lY

You know, sometimes I think that Bo1972 is AudioGon's version of Fabio......

Did I just say that ?    ah, work with me on this.
 
Well we now know, it is in fact - fact, as evidenced on this thread;  that Bo is bigger in importance than the music room itself .... 

@ Bo1972 - I have a business suggestion  

forget Tru-fi ....  Its boring sounding, and breaks no new ground.

I have a better business name and slogan for you and your services.

"Fabio Audio ... by Bobbio"

"When we get finished with your room, no matter what gear you own, it will end up in a line-io"

***************************

fun thread 

sorry to the Op for digressing. 

When Tru-Fi comes birds will fall from the sky and all will rejoice in the sonic bliss that was given by Bo. Thank you for starting this foundation to give people a better life.. you are a great man. 

My opinion isn't more valuable than anyone else, but I have owned both Wilson Audio(WA) and currently have Monitor Audio(MA) PL500 speakers. Although with different components, I've been able to compare WA Sophia 2's, 3's, and Sashas to MA PL500's in the same room, which to me is one of the more important factors that impacts the overall sound. I think BO and so many of you do a disservice to potential buyers of either speaker. In the final analysis let your own ears decide, but don't destroy the other product because you have a different preference.

@erik_squires

I am sure you are right that AMT can be built to avoid compression however doesn’t this result in a transducer that is too large a diaphragm for the frequencies they transmit?

In short: Eliminate the compression means you begin to have directivity problems.

Rule of thumb is that the diaphragm should be no bigger than 1/2 the wavelength or you start getting beaming at that frequency and for even higher frequencies (shorter wavelengths) you get off axis lobing.

Lobong creates a spurious 3D effect where certain sounds come from the ceiling and some from the side walls depending on the frequency. An overly tall tweeter will have serious lobing in higher frequencies in the vertical axis but less so horizontally - it is the weird vertical response that gives spurious 3D effects while listening to music with a variety of frequencies - nothing to do with the source and everything to do with bad design and poor implementation.

Technical details explaining why you get spurious 3D effects with this design:

Please refer to the article and charts at this link

http://www.acousticfrontiers.com/20131129controlled-directivity-speakers-open-up-your-acoustic-treat...

The AMT folded ribbon driver in the PL 200 is 3 inches tall. At 6000 Hz it has a KA of 5 in the vertical and at 12000 Hz it has a KA of 10. These frequencies are within the important musical range. You can see on the polar plots how serious of a problem these speakers have in the vertical axis.

Bo, Isn't Tru-Fi chocolate brand?
How it's compared to Lyndt or Godiva?

Is Tru Fi the same thing as Tuning? It certainly comes across that way least in terms of the dogmatism, mysteriousness, hostility and prostelyzation if not in actual implementation. Could it be that Tuning has spread to Europe? 

😧

shadorne,

Let's say everything you suggest is true about AMT folded ribbon drivers. I still prefer the MA PL500's over any Wilson speaker I've ever owned or heard. I've learned after making a generalization about Class "D" amplifiers that unless I've heard every component out there, it's hard and/or impossible to say how it sounds based on specifications or design.

@shadorne You say "problems’ as a speaker designer I say "possibilities."

The directivity of an AMT is different than a dome or ring, but if you are going to attack it, you will attack all line or planar sources, including ESL speakers from Martin Logan or Sanders, Quad, blah blah. not to mention most horns as well.

You are conflating compression with directivity and lobing. Three different things.

Let’s get compression out of the way first. When you add X dB to the input but the output is not uniformly X dB louder. About the only reviews that have this routinely are the one’s from

speakermeasurements.com

So I stand by my original statement, the best AMT's can compete with the best of any other type of tweeters in terms of compression.

Let’s discuss the rest. Lobing isn’t really caused by a single driver but how it interacts with another. It is caused by one driver interfering with another at different angles over the frequencies at which they are both working. This can be pretty complicated as the acoustic distances between 2 drivers varies in three-dimensional space. This is why lobing is a 3D problem, and why many manufacturers align their drivers in a vertical line, to minimize the complex and unpredictable (but not impossible to simulate) nature.

A single driver can not lobe. Single driver and single panel ESL speakers  are immune from this behavior but any 2 drivers can lobe, it is not an issue of planar vs. dome at all. It’s an issue of the acoustic centers not being aligned and crossover design choices.

Any time you have 2 or more drivers which overlap in the frequency domain and are not coincident in 3D space lobing can occur. With a theoretically perfect crossover, lobing disappears, but no one has made this yet. Admittedly the Joseph Audio 100 dB/octave crossovers come close. Co-axials are another nearly perfect solution to this problem.

Lobing is sometimes deliberately caused. For instance, the super-expensive, super-ugly B&O Beolab 90 takes advantage of this, and uses DSP to stagger the delays between similar drivers. Also a technique used in professional arrays. In the Beolab only dome’s and cones are used, but it’s been demonstrated many times they can "lobe" very well.

So with that out of the way, neither very broad nor very narrow drivers are "best."

Narrowing the angle of radiation can be VERY beneficial. Time domain problems, and therefore frequency response, at the listening location are greatly reduced by using larger diaphragms and have the perception of transparency and neutrality in spades. Anyone who has spent time listening to a good AMT or larger ribbon driver will attest to this.

Sure, if you are designing a speaker that needs extremely broad radiation in the vertical and horizontal plane, a broad frequency, planar driver is not going to be for you. That’s a reasonable trade-off, but neither should be judged by the Audiophile Gods of All That is Good as an absolute measure of "better."

Unfortunately, I find your prejudices unjustified. You should of course buy and live with whatever drivers you want to but AMTs in general deserve a better treatment than you are giving them.

For the top end, I really encourage anyone who can listen to the Gryphons to spend some time with them and compare to some of the low-end "giant killers" being touted as superb.

Best,


E

@erik_squires

Sorry but you are misinformed - single drivers can and do beam and ALSO can have lobes - just not as common a problem as not many folks use 3 inch tweeters for 3.4KHz and above range! You are absolutely correct that lobing occurs more commonly with multiple drivers and panels. It is rarer in most modern speakers because designers do not often make mistakes like MA has done.

I do not discount any of the designs such as AMT, Ribbons, horns or panels - all can sound great and have pros and cons.

However, when an amateur tells everyone incessantly that he has the found the holy grail in speakers I feel compelled to point out the very obvious deficiencies and false 3D artifacts coming from said design. It is common audiofoolery to promote weird designs that sound different and have artifacts because they do sound impressive or very different - good if you like that kind of thing but NOT the holy grail in high end accuracy - in fact far from it!!!!

So Wilson's are the "holy grail" in high-end accuracy? 

@shadorne

Your writing confuses "beaming" with "lobing" and "compression."

Until you do some reading on this I'm afraid we'll be unable to discuss things on common ground.

Best,


E

@ricred1 Eff no!!

The last thing I would call them are accurate.

Definitely preferred by some.

High-end I would think are objectively close to very accurate include Crystal Cables, Monitor Audio, Gryphon, Magico. Whether they are preferred, that’s another thing entirely.

I think if anything, you should look at some of the articles about how Wilson chooses his tweeters. He’s definitely going by subjective preference above all, which puts him in the category of "trendy" and in many ways, helping to set the Stereophile "house curve" to which other speaker makers sometimes gravitate to.




E

I want to add:

No one buys "accuracy." We buy music pleasure, or we should.

Some car drivers like having a slippery rear end. It’s part of the fun. Many speakers in this day and age are like that. Life is short, and money limited. You should not go to your grave adhering to some intellectual principle that doesn’t serve your enjoyment of music and culture.

I also discourage anyone from focusing on technology being superior. Be tweeters are a good example. My gods, there is a VERY broad range of quality and construction and cost and performance between all Be tweeters, and there are some very good dome and ring radiators which challenge all of them. Having a Be tweeter nor not should not be what motivates you.

There is also the matter of ACTUAL listening styles. A lot of us buy speakers like we buy SUV’s. Preparing for the apocalypse, when we mostly drive to the store.

Pay attention to your actual listening style and pick gear according to that. Do you listen on a throne? Do you work and move around? Are you on the phone? Do you do half movies/ half music? Concert levels, really?

Best,


E

I love my Watt- Puppies, I love my Sophia's, I love my Cub's, My Klipsch Horns, My LaScala's, Pro-Ac's, My Altec A-5's and all of my big and little speakers, different music, different speakers........You never have too big or enough speakers.......That's my take...........AUTOSPEC

@erik_squires 

"your writing confuses beaming with lobing and compression"

No it does not. I am just talking about trade-offs between several related factors.

One way to solve compression problems from a driver with inadequate SPL or not enough linear dynamic range from the drive motor is to employ a larger diaphragm - this is why folded ribbons are larger than dome tweeters because they don't have as good linearity at higher SPL. The downside of a larger diaphragm is initially beaming (at lower frequencies) and eventually lobing at much higher frequencies. 

Beaming is related to lobing in that the initial beam is actually one lobe that is directly forward of the driver and this eventually becomes narrower and narrower as frequency increases. Also additional side lobes appear as frequency increases. This is all interrelated to the problem of using to large a transducer or diaphragm.

OK Shadorne, you win.

bo1972
2,243 posts

Hmmm...2,243 posts so far in this never-ending misinfomercial, yet not a single testimonial from a satisfied client.  Weird, huh?

p59teitel,

I'm not a client of bo1972's, but I'm very satisfied with my Monitor Audio PL500's. I think bo1972 goes about it the wrong way and talks about audio as absolutes as opposed to opinions/preferences. I've been in this hobby/obsession for 30 years. I don't know everything, but I think the room has a large impact on what speaker works best for your particular preferences.
Although not "speakers", I recently traded subwoofers with my friend. I had a SVS SB16 Ultra and he had a JL Audio F110 v2. My room is larger than his and has acoustical treatment; however his room is completely open. In my room, no matter what I did the SB16 wasn't musical and had too much output. In his room , no matter what he did he felt the F110 v2 lacked output. Now both of us are happy! Different rooms, different results. I might add, different preferences. He prefers exaggerated bass, I prefer very tight musical bass. 

p59teitel,

LOL :)

ricred,

I can confirm again that MA PLII series are some special speakers. Very nice sounding and the stage is very spatial. I have listened these many times with different amps and they are far from distorted sounding. Vast majority of other brands are just a bit boring and mid-fi sounding. No need to even a-b or some blind tests.

JL makes one of the best subs available and for a reasonable price. I have F112 myself and must say that they have incredible customer service as-well. I must also thank Barry from Soundoctor. Very helpful and knowledgeable person. Barry has a guide with test CD on how to properly set up JL sub that I can recommend. It is very profound. Nothing that you will find on some webpage. Anyway you have extremely good speakers. Don`t worry what some measures or thinks.

ricred1

your speakers appear to be about 4 feet from the front wall. 
how deep does the drummer play on most recordings with no digital processing - just a 2 channel amp ?

also have you heard them butted close up against the front wall ?
what is the drummer depth this way also?  

thanks    

@ricred1

Your PL500 must sound fantastic. My comments above with regard to MA design are primarily directed at Bo who is a shill for MA on a thread about Wilson. The design choices or trade offs MA have made have clearly resulted in a world class speaker. I just deliberately disagree when Bo claims MA have discovered some new 3D paradigm in audio that totally trashes everything else. I just wanted to point out that Bo's 3D discovery while desirable, impressive and enjoyable - might not be what every audiophile or speaker designer is striving for. Simply put - there are tradeoffs in every design. Horses for Courses. There isn't one speaker that is totally perfect at everything but there probably is an ideal speaker for each audiophile - one that suits listening preferences, space and aesthetics...

ct0517,

My speakers are 5 ft from the front wall. 
As far as how deep the drummer appears when setup properly or close to the wall? I'm not Bo and really not interested in a conversation about that. They sound good to me and I enjoy listening to music more than ever before...that's more important to me.

Shadorne, 

My only point is you attack MA, because of your disagreement with Bo. Despite the fact that I love my speakers, I repeatedly say there are no absolutes in Audio. As a matter of fact I didn't like MA Platinum Series I. I think it's more productive to describe the differences between speakers using several recordings. I've had several speakers in my room during the past few years. The best way to discern differences is through listening, not based on design. It was relatively easy to hear the differences between the Aerials and Revel speakers I had. 

"I’m not a client of bo1972’s, but I’m very satisfied with my Monitor Audio PL500’s."

I’ve never heard your speakers, and I’m glad you like them. The issue isn’t the gear per se, it’s the pure arrogance in claiming that only the gear he prefers will give the best results - and even then it can only sound right if he sets it up according to some hidden process he only describes with a gobbledygook buzzword.

p59teitel,
Bo isn’t the only one that’s arrogant on Audiogon. The epitome of arrogance is when someone makes statements about how somethings sounds, yet they’ve never heard it and many people on Audiogon do it all the time. Again, I don’t agree with Bo and how he approaches audio. Despite what Bo thinks, I can name several speakers that I would take over my PL500’s.

Maybe I’m missing here Something ,it looks very strange to me if such huge speakers as the MA PL 500 with its 4 x 8’ bass drivers (!) can’t produce enuogh bass so required additional subwoofer ???

I really don’t get it something must be wrong with this speakers...

I use my sub in my HT system.  I prefer 2-channel without a sub, but occasionally listen with the sub  That being said, you should search for Dave Wilson's comments regarding why he uses subs with the  $200K XLF speakers. I guess it makes you feel better to say something bad about my speakers. As a matter of fact, educate yourself on why many people use subs with their speakers.

Subs when well integrated are breathtaking.

At all other times they are miserable failures that make you wonder why you ever got into Hi Fi at all, and whether you will ever be happy again.

Best,

E

Good Hi Fi system should produce enuogh bass without adding sub otherwise something is wrong with the speakers, amplification (not enough power ?) ,cables or the listening room.

itzhak1969,

Sorry I don`t agree. Even the biggest speakers like Focal Grand EM benefit from properly installed subs. Of course you need a fast sub that matches your mains.
Your statement may be somewhat correct if your listening room is very small but again then there are more reflection bass than a real pure bass.

Anyway the main topic here seems to be our beloved BO.
So I did a quick google on our mighty leader and enlightener Bo.
It seems that it`s not at all about MA. He has probably fallen in love in some some artifactial DSP surround. 
I will continue in my next post.

"It seems that it`s not at all about MA. He has probably fallen in love in some some artifactial DSP surround.
I will continue in my next post. "

Your comment is perfect adding a sub is no more than addiction to artificial unnecessary extra bass .

Or

Maybe the amplification doesn’t have enuogh power to drive the MA, maybe the cables need ugrade or the listening room is very big I don’t now ....

The MA 500 should handle low frequencies properly without adding sub .

Long live our big leader and pathfinder Bo!

I use the Onkyo PR-SC5509 these days as a pre amp. With Audyssey Volume and EQ you can reveal details which are not there even with the best highend pre amp. I give you a few examples. Compared to the XP-20 you hear word endings on a sss, ttt of th so much more clear than with the XP-20 .

Now I need to push this.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eYByo7KPnwo

Soooooo........... to all serious audiophiles!
2017 is a yeat of Tru-Fu coming and we all will be blessed and enlihtened.

A second coming of our big leader and the mysterious Onkyo DSP.

1. Evey serious audiophile must use Onkyo 5509 as a preamp and procces the signal through it`s messed up DSP to hear it`s artificial 3D  surround effects. It`s leading to real 3D sound that will go up to 8m behind the loudspeakers.

2. No room treatment or proper placement needed! All can be compensated through a messed up digital room correction programs.

Now I need to push this again.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eYByo7KPnwo

itzhak1969,

No, No! The sub really helps but you need to take some time to install and blend it correctly. Today we have many subs that can act fast and can be integrated perfectly to top high-end systems. 
Barry from Soundoctor has one of the most complete guides for this job.

Missing my evening lecture from Bo............

itzhak1969,

Cables are mostly snake oil and somewhat woodoo market. All You need is a nice (preferrably) monocrystal silver cabling with nice Teflon  cover (from a real manufacture who has the license).

Also a very big influence is in the the connectors that most $$$$$$ brands seem to forget. These must be also a solid very high content copper or better a pure silver because silver is just a better conductive material.

As far if you don`t mess your cables with PC or other cables you don`t need shielding. In my experience unsealded sounds a bit better.

Soon it will be there...............and then you can judge :)

Plutos

I don’t undrestand what’s the point to buy speakers with 4(!) 8’ (!) bass drivers and add a sub for them.

And still people judge on products............this is audio 1980.

AUDIO IS ALL ABOUT SOUND.

The 5509 is only used for the DNA and the measurement. We stripped it and it is modified with other parts of over 3000 euro.

It is about creating a new level of pre amp what outperfroms anything regarding price. You all still think at the level of a child.

Sound is based on properties and we create sound by properties. This brings you so much closer to the truth than any stuppid 1980 way of trail and error.

I am galaxies away from the rest. I owned 5 different Pass Labs monos and poweramps. And I owned the XP-20 for over 2 years of time. The 5509 without modifications and S.A.P.-measurement outperformed the XP-20 on all parts with each single Pass labs power amp.

But now in 2017 we are galaxies away from that. Because we created many new things to improve the sound and realism. As we improved S.A.P-measurement. I can improve sound a few times each month.

The level of new thoughts in my head is of a speed no one can reach. It will make any pre amp like a cheap inferior chinese dicky toy.

And people still focus on brands and are extremely limited in thinking about audio. Your insight creates what I call; AUDIOBLINDNESS.

Tru-Fi will proof how blind you were and that your inferior way of using trial and error is one big laugh!

We will help all the music lovers who are able to look further, for those who will stay blind (or deaf) I would say; enjoy your audio system created by your own trail and error!

Stealth Low Frecquency will become the new reference in low frequency.

I hated subwoofers for stereo use untill 2010. When I was able to put the loudspeakers and subwoofer in phase and were it is located my thoughts about subwoofers totally changed.

In 2005 I had ideas how subwoofers would be working for stereo use. But I thought it would never be possible.

Stealth Low Frequency goes even a lot further. It brings the energy exactly where it is at the recording. Stealth Low Frequency showed that you can use subwoofer a lot further.

But people think in 1980 and will stop at 50,60,70 or maybe 80hz. Stealth Low Frequency also showed that Rel and Velodyne subwoofers are a lot slower than the Monitor Audio subwoofers.

The response and timing is the essential part of subwoofers. With Stealth Low Frequency I can proof (it is all about proof :) that it is possible to create a higher level in quality and speed with Monitor Audio subwoofers.

Again this is based on the differences in properties and DNA. They make the differences, not a name or brand.

Tru-Fi gives you full access to all the qualities of the subwoofer. The 1980 silly trial and error way of thinking will always use a very limited part of the full potential. And you cannot change that. You are not able to think in properties.

You always need to go back to think in trial and error. This will limit you in quality until you die.

Stealth Low Frequency proves stereo without a subwoofer is of a lower quality. These days I seldom sell stereo without a subwoofer.

Because when people audition it with or without the subwoofer, you would be a fool not to use it. Tru-Fi and Stealth Low Frequency makes subwoofers so much more effective and important.

It is insane what the level is of a subwoofer created by trial and error. When we visit a show or shop the people who demo it are often negative themselves.

I have to admit that without Stealth Low Frequency I would never want to use a subwoofer for stereo use either. In that way I understand the 1980 way of thinking!

Itzhak1969 you couldn't be more wrong!  Pretty much all speakers benefit from a properly placed and integrated sub.   And 4 8" drivers is not an overwhelming amount/size. Do you understand what the excursion would be for a 20hz note??!!  And then they may be required to do a 400hz note at the same time. 

With small 8" woofers obviously you need a subwoofer. 2 x 8 inch does not even equate to a 12 inch. Furthermore small voice coils and less Xmax and poor linearity and poor heat handling make small woofers totally inadequate for ultra LF - so except for pleasing aesthetics of a narrow speaker this size woofer really is still around the mid point of highest end - it can sound excellent but is still short of true full range.

I have 15 inch woofers on my mains now and I don’t feel need for the 15 inch sub anymore - it doesn’t add anything - except for movies. When I had 12 inch woofers the subwoofer was actually necessary.

With respect to the Onkyo 5509. I can concur with Bo that this is a great DSP for HT systems - it worked great in my 7.1 setup. When you have 7 speakers in one room you definitely need a clever DSP with something like Audyssey XT32 or other room EQ software. I am completely sold on that concept. The room is a huge problem and getting a balanced totally clear clean sound is a huge challenge with so many speakers creating LF modes and reflections everywhere. The 5509 with the calibration microphone fixes everything in less than 20 minutes - brilliant.

That said, I prefer two channel music listening without any DSP at all. Although the Audyssey XT32 room correction sounds very good - to me pure two channel still has the edge but it might be just my room (in another less favourable room perhaps DSP two channel might have the edge)

Many Full Range capable speakers are set up in rooms that do not support 20 hz. Meaning...... they can’t hit the notes or the notes are way too low in DB for the room. This could be for a number of reasons; the room space itself, and/or the constraints in how the owner is allowed to place the speakers in the room; the amp, etc...

The speaker manufacturers know this. It’s a very old story. They have a choice to make. They can EQ their main full range model, with woofers to handle EQ; or they can leave well enough alone, and bring out a new speaker - the subwoofer - to add to the bottom line both financially, and music wise. The subwoofers provide the additional benefits of allowing optional placements to fit bass into the room better with the main speakers.

.... unless you’re Bo1972, whose business model we have seen, is to place the subwoofer beside the main full range speaker butted up against the wall. Then EQ the hell out of it. And hey ...why not.... For the average person whose gear - no matter what gear - needs to placed along the front wall, this business model works out.

But put that same person in a room where the speakers are placed, and amp’ed as designed; and that person, depending on how audio crazed he/she is after hearing; will be looking for a new place and/or spouse.
How far do you want audiophilia nervosa to take you?

If you want to see how well your rig does without having to listen to test tones. Send this Phill Collins "In the Air Tonight", Bass TEST, through your DAC on your rig.

Click on the link.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D0U5qunTUJk

"With small 8" woofers obviously you need a subwoofer."

I guess Jim Thiel (RIP) did not get that memo. The CS5 he designed used 8" woofers and measured flat at 30Hz, -3db at 25Hz, and -5db at 20Hz.

Dave

shadorne

With small 8" woofers obviously you need a subwoofer.

Not necessarily. The Infinity RS1-B speaker system used 8-inch woofers, and it surely didn't need a subwoofer. To be fair, it did use six of them per side.

I didn’t mean say you can’t use 8 inch woofers - just that they are inadequate to properly do the highest end true full range. I guess I should have added - at realistic volume levels! Of course the limited excursion of 8 inch can be used down to 20Hz but you won’t get much useful SPL out of it....as it needs to move linearly for several inches to have any meaningful output.

Agreed that 8 of 8 inch woofers is probably equivalent 2 x 15 in area but still won't be as good at powe handling or large excursions (won't get as high SPL)

To sub or not to sub, that is the question.
Whether it is nobler on the ear to suffer the rise and fall of room modes or by equalizing, end them.....

The further down the octaves you go the more problems you need to solve. 2-way speakers aren't better, they are simpler. It is usually much easier to get very good sound out of a limited bandwidth speaker than a true full-range and/or speaker plus sub.

Where the trade-offs are ideal is up to the listener, the human being who has to trade off living space, decorations, and even friends and a chance of finding true-love in exchange for unlimited bottom end in their music.

Two advantages subs have is placement, and equalization. You can hunt for the best place to put a subwoofer, but your main speakers are usually limited by where you want to sit. Also, by using an EQ that only sits in the way of the subwoofer you eliminate a lot of contamination in the mains.

I think $200K for a subwoofer is absolutely ridiculous. IMHO what makes a subwoofer great for most consumers is how good it's integration features are. Right now JL leads the pack. However with skill and experience you can use a far less expensive sub with outboard EQ's and get as good of a performance.

I don't think there's any 1 right answer about what any given listener should do. I just wanted to point out, there's challenges either way.

Best,


E