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.
Call me on it if you will, and many have and I’m not alone. That dog won’t hunt; distort the time domain and you distort timbre, pure and simple. This is why live music sounds the way it does, because it does NOT distort in the time domain. To knowingly subtract from that while prettying up the product to create over expensive esoterica is inexcusable if one cares about preserving MUSIC!
And you know something, it’s those few milliseconds time difference between our ears that allowed us to hear from which direction the saber toothed tiger approached that saved our asses!
I’m going to call on a couple of your claims. Several milliseconds would be equivalent to several feet offset. Very hard for any crossover designer to do. Do you have a link to a particular measurement that shows this?
You may mean to say that they are not time co-incident. That is true, few speakers besides Thiel or Vandersteen or Dunlavy are or were. That loudspeaker design has not stopped and all become time co-incident is an indicator of the cost/value proposition and market acceptance. As a consumer and speaker builder, I’m not really interested in this feature, though I could make my own speakers like this. Certainly it is relatively straightforward to achieve this digitally. But even then, several milliseconds?
I’ve never seen any Wilson measure with poor phase matching either.
If I was going to criticize the crossovers and speakers it would b in the tonal balance, and treble smoothness.
And...$48,500 for Alexias that have the tweeter and midrange drivers out of phase in the several millisecond time domain? Cmon, really? I'll stick with my sub $10K Thiel CS6s thank you.
The only thing I have against Wilson Audio speakers is that 1) they use high order crossovers (not good for time alignment at the cross over points due to phase angle shift) and that 2) they invert the polarity of some drivers, by design or necessity, relative to others, to do the least amount of "damage" to timbre and phase. But to me the bandaid will never fix a fundamental design flaw. One can only hope to do the least damage to timbre in the time domain. Human ears are very sensitive to it, and I can hear it every time.
These two features combine to distort time and phase accuracy. If Wilson addressed these issues, perhaps I would give them another listen. Until they do, count me out as a fan of their products. The flashy paint jobs are excessive and unappealing to my eyes and ears.
Cone material sometimes makes subtle it can make subtle yet very very sweet difference gold ears arent required to hear sweet natural timbre of percussion. I think vocals sound most realistic on speakers with paper cones also, that I have heard. among other strengths they have. all the top line speaker manufacturers their best lines are more often paper.
I like how bo thrashed on paper cones its old forgotten tech and how he eloquently puts people that favor natural material stupid in another speaker topic haha then in this topic hes praising it like that never happened.
My subs have paper cones, they are some of the most natural sounding Ive heard regardless sof cost. Again I dont think golden ears are required, nothing like that, you just have to listen.
i am amazed at how many posters have strong opinions about sound characteristics of driver materials etc. sometimes i wonder if you guys are for real with your amazing ears. dont get me going on those of you who have extreme dislikes and likes for certain metals in your wires and cords. my hat is off i guess. someday someone will set up the perfect demo room with all the products and all of us experts will have to take blind tests and have our scores published online for all to see.
What Sasha's can do with Roger Waters Amused to Death I found quite amazing...voices from well outside the speakers. I didn't buy them, though, for other reasons--boomy bass and appearance (WAF) chief among them. I ended up with Focal Scala Utopia v2. I haven't been able to replicate the pyrotechnics of the Sashas with them on Amused to Death, but I've been happy with them otherwise in terms of timbre and musicality. Where I've gotten the most from my system in terms of holographic imaging has come from playing native DSD, which I can do thanks to a Light Harmonic Da Vinci dual DAC.
We don't have to "hate" a brand just because we don't like the sound of their products. I have heard B&Ws for decades and they have never warmed to me. Likewise, I heard the Wilson Alexx recently and again, it just didn't do it for me. No harm in that, and I don't hate either company. My preference in a speaker's characteristics is my own personal choice, just as it is with all of us here.
"In fact, to me, in audio, finding the "diamonds in the rough" in terms of gear and speakers is the real thrill; the gear that is passed over or older etc that no one gives any time to or no longer has "relevance" that is superlative in sound quality and accessible, financially. That takes talent and skill that no amount of money can buy."
Perhaps the most enlightened audio-related statement of 2016. Only one day to go. Welcome aboard.
Audio is one of those hobbies where simply throwing money at the hobby will get you results, whereas with fly fishing, for example, if you cannot cast a fly with practice and effort, you get nowhere, despite any amount of money. Money can get you any car, but not the experience and skill to drive them. I think (and I freely admit this) that Wilson is one of the companies out there that targets the well-heeled directly. The newest WAMM, for example, has 5 years of R+D....no new drivers, no new enclosure material, no new tweeter diaphragm material, no new crossover.....simply derivative not ground breaking. At least Magico came out with aluminum cabinets, full CNC machined parts, Beryllium tweeter, Graphene woofer cones etc.....pushing the limit, at least showing some progress. Wilson for the longest time used off the shelf Focal drivers...not original. So I can see the "hate" thing, but it will be a while before I can actually afford any of the highest gear.
In fact, to me, in audio, finding the "diamonds in the rough" in terms of gear and speakers is the real thrill; the gear that is passed over or older etc that no one gives any time to or no longer has "relevance" that is superlative in sound quality and accessible, financially. That takes talent and skill that no amount of money can buy.
Barfly & Ohlala, thanks for your input here. I suppose though, that my days of enjoying the 'envy of it all' in this hobby are likely behind me really, but I can certainly see your points. I was able to "graduate", if you prefer, past Wilson, et al, if, in my case, for no other reason than the fact that I was convinced that I'd never be able to afford them! And, while I did in fact end up finding my own "nirvana" (with a small "n") by learning to go a completely different sort of route, it only ended up taking me what, a few decades??...LOL! So if I were to begrudge any of it (which I don't), it would probly be that it just took me so darn long (ha,ha!), so I don't really mind other folks having more money to throw at it than me, that's just the way life is and I have certainly learned to take that sort of stuff in stride, I suppose...after all, what I've gotten from the experience in return, I have to say, has made me a happy man.
I echo others' sentiments that if Wilson was not very successful, no one would hate them. Some people seem use Wilson as comparison to sound smarter as they "graduate" past the brand, which is social marketing issue not related to the product. The value of Wilson speakers is questionable as viewed as an opportunity cost and although there is a very distinct house sound, some models are better than others, imo. What I think the haters do not consider is that Wilson's competitors, i.e. other expensive box speakers, tend to fail in comparison in terms of dynamics and often scale and time alignment, especially Wilson's lack of dynamic compression for their sensitivity and form.
Ivan: I agree; you see the same thing with high end cars. People with financial means can gain entry, but whether there is any ability to extract the best or appreciate it is another matter entirely. I can think repeatedly of seeing fine high end sports cars being driven as family sedans, with no expectation of extracting an inkling of its potential. The item is itself a status, nothing more. I suspect audio is no different, and for those whom have been in audio for a while can appreciate, but not afford, the items others can afford but not appreciate. I think part of it is that the "earning of the right" to own expensive gear is often not due to years of audio experience but financial prudence (however that is attained). I think deep down a part of it is envy, but a lot of high end companies make gear explicitly for the well heeded, not necessarily the audiophile, and after a while, one develops a sense (to them) whom these companies are.
I hear you, why do some of our fellow audiophiles have such "strong" opinions? Hey, if a speaker "floats your boat", good for you!
I bought my current speakers (Focal Sopra No2's) about a year ago. The search took me to showrooms with many a fine speaker brand, including the Wilson's, but I just like the Focal's, for my hearing, they were more pleasing.
Having said that, I have friends who have Wilson's and love them. My response, "good for them".
There is probably demand for the WAMM from the Asian market. I hope he sells them all. I have owned Watt Puppy 7’s. They were Brooks Berdan’s demo speakers from his showroom. They replaced Martin Logan Odysseys. Years later I am now retired and upgraded to Maxx 3’s I bought from Sunny's. It’s a much larger and more dynamic speaker compared to the WP/7’s.
dlcockrum: No offense taken.To put the matter in better context, as I listened to them from at least 15 feet away in a seated position, the sound from the speakers seemed to be noticeably even with and below me. This caused me to not feel enveloped by the sound, a feeling one should feel with any high end floor standing speakers. In many years of shows, visits with dealers, etc.in which I have heard hundreds if not thousands of speakers, I had never felt this sensation before. In fact, I had never considered image height as an element of the sound field prior to this although I was aware of its salutary presence when listening to line source or other large (6 ft+) speakers. In any event, I stood up merely to confirm for myself that the sensation was not an illusion. It clearly was not as it sounded as if the music was stuck underneath a shelf. I have never judged a speaker before or since by standing up as I have never felt that sensation again and I don’t listen to music in a standing position. bdp24: You are absolutely correct--the speakers in question were the Vandy 7s. It seems you may be attuned to this sensation. I can say that I’ve heard of Brooks Berdan’s shop and it is universally held in high regard. Nevertheless, I have not heard this problem with any WP or Sasha and certainly haven’t heard it at Innovative Audio in NYC or in my listening room where WP 7s and then Sashas have been in residence for a combined 14 years. That being said, if you favor line source and some planars, I could see why the Sashas (and probably quite a few others) don’t work for you in that regard. I wish all a happy, healthy etc.
This is my own particular sense of it certainly, but I'd say that if you're the kind of customer that does not have a lot of specialized experience or detailed working knowledge or familiarity of the audio market (and perhaps speaker market especially) - the kind that can take many years or decades to cultivate anyway - IOW you are **not** what we'd call a "hobbyist" per se, nor do you have any kind of DIY background as well, but instead are perhaps, say, a young, or middle-aged, professional with a more limited exposure and are possibly looking to employ someone's professional help or input up front in your decision making process, then I'd say that certain companies like Wilson or B&W might have a more intriguing profile for you than some others. They tend to attract such buyers by offering well-reviewed designs (by that I mean In-House reviewed, I'm not really talking about pro or user reviews, but here I mean ee reviewed designs in-house). These guys tend to be more 'careful' in their design approach and they essentially want to "play it safe", so to speak, on behalf of their customers. That is, they don't do things in a splashy sort of way, they don't go in much for design fads or the very latest trends and they don't introduce new models or discontinue older models at anything approaching a dizzying rate...more of a steady-as-you-go, tried-but-true approach that is meant to project, along with good service, support and marketing, the reassurance of a certain measure of authority and professionalism. Say what you want about such companies, and I count myself among those who might say that, for my own tastes anyway, they might be playing things a little *too* safe generally, but they have been around a long time and seem to continue to do some business at a time when the audio market, nationally or worldwide, happens to be deader than 4 o'clock.
For my own purposes, while I would likely say that Wilson does not do things quite the way I would prefer my kinds of manufacturers to do things, that may really only be because I've been around the audio neighborhood a while (45 yrs) and have since acquired the kind of audiophile background that has allowed me to 'outgrow', if you will, the need for such a company business model and that that may not be necessarily the case for others...but, I certainly don't hate them.
I actually heard the original WAMM's, at John Garland Audio in San Jose. I think they were priced at around $80,000, in 1980's money. Didn't think about them again for years until Brooks Berdan, shortly before his death in 2011 (seems like a lot longer ago), took a pair in trade on whatever were the biggest Wilson's at the time. Those two loudspeakers would have made for an interesting comparison!
YES Dave, I must present him with one of my customs. Fair trade for a new set of WAMMS. Damn, what was I thinking??? Perhaps you should come to work for me in sales !!!!
As several others have noted, "hate" is the wrong word. Opinions are a dime a dozen in this hobby and everyone has one. It's a simple issue of different people having different preferences.
I've heard Wilsons many times and they are not my cup of tea. I don't find them all that natural sounding. They suffer from what I call the "Kodachrome" effect -- impressive, but, to me, not natural. Throw their price tag on top of that and my response is "definitely not for me."
You can blame the set up, associated equipment, room acoustics or whatever, but my impression has been consistent in every encounter.
That said, lots of other people love them. Not much different from the way people respond to every other category of products out there, whether cars, cameras, cooking equipment or whatever. Big deal... buy what you like and leave the rest.
I have read that Wilson already has 25-26 pre-production orders !!
I'm not on that list LOL
27 a month ago when I attended Alexx demo.
Also
Peter McGrath said he has personally performed 20+ Alexx setup at customers home, not including dealers, so Dave Wilson is LOL all the way to the bank and GOOD FOR HIM!!!
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!
"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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
@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
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.
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 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.
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.
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.
