Who cares you got great speakers enjoy them i have Magico people love to bad rap them as well i really don't care.If you are very happy with the sound as i am enjoy them many people have not heard these speaker set up well mine are in a great set up as I'm sure yours are that is all that counts.Enjoy!!
Wilson Audio Haters
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.
Why does Wilson get so much thrashing?
429 responses Add your response
bo1972, " We don't focus on a name or brand but on the quality and properties we are looking for." I am confused how you can say this. You pretty much only focus on a few brands and if others state they like anything but your brands you callously put them down. I really don't mean to sound rude, but you certainly don't hold back trashing others' purchases when they talk about them here, inlcuding the purchaser of the B&W 800 D(3)s who was asking about amplification. I mostly think you just copy and paste the same lines. |
@dlcockrum Thanks for the compliment on my bike. Custom bikes are another obsession of mine :) If I had no interest in bikes or HiFi gear I would be a wealthy man indeed LOL @jmcgrogan2 Just wanted to be clear that I am by no means looking for others approval, I could care less what others think about my choices. I painted one of my Harleys pink, for example. How about that? HAHAHA The reason for the post is that I have noticed over the years, even well before I owned Wilson, a trend towards slamming them and have been curious as to why. You make a valid point on pricing. I have never had the means to by new Wilsons, so I go after the used market and do quite well. You also hit the nail on the head mentioning proper gear upstream. Mostly with power. These are real bears to drive, and need lots of good power up front. I use a pair Bryston 28B STT2's so no issues there. They also keep my listening room nice an toasty warm in the winter months :) |
Audio is all about music. Music is all about emotion. When you want to be able to hear all the emotion the music possess than you need an audio system what can reveal all this information. That is why we work by Tru-Fi. Tru-Fi consists of 8 parameters you judge sound for. This has nothing to do with personal taste. But is based on the human emotion. Each part of Tru-Fi influences our emotion. We learned in over 18 years of time to subtract each single part of an audio system. We test each single audio tool on what the DNA is. We build an audio system by properties of all the tools togheter in each system. We can proof and demo that each audiosystem by Tru-Fi owns a higher level of emotion and intensity. Audio is normally chosen by trial and error. This means people connect an amp, speaker, source and cables togheter en judge. The limitation of this all is that you will never understand why the stage and sound is what you hear. For us it is very simple to explain to people who have created an audio system by trial and error that it is incomplete. Incomplete means it misses parts of Tru-Fi. From experience I can tell that people understand directly what is missing and what this part is and does. Read what Tru-Fi means: https://www.facebook.com/bobby.kingma/media_set?set=a.10156554423700083.1073741937.588405082&typ... https://www.facebook.com/bobby.kingma/media_set?set=a.10156573228780083.1073741942.588405082&typ... We want to give each single person the highest level in sound&vision possible. We don’t focus on a name or brand but on the quality and properties we are looking for. We do a lot of reserach and tests. And we listen to new products to see if the quality would add to our demands. We don’t care about the name or brand. We want the best quality in each price range at the moment we life. Only the best counts and 2nd and 3th best does not add anything in our world. In vision we work at the same level. We know in each price range what the best screen is. This is the only one we sell. We calibrate each screen with the best calibration system in the world. |
I remember a few years ago I was just on the verge of writing a check for Wilsons...the sound was glorious. With curiosity, I ran home and got some of my own records as a final test. I was glad to run out of there without dropping the check.... not at all musical (to me). The store demo used records that really showed off his speakers.....I wanted to listen to mine. |
Good explanation shadorne. I have to admit to being addicted to venue recreation (imaging, soundstaging, air, and presence) so I go for the time/phase coherent speakers and cables. Something about having a sonic hologram in the room simply amazes me. Appreciate and respect those that prioritize other qualities. In the end, I think we want it all, no? Best to you shadorne, Dave |
@dlcockrum Not exclusve but correct timbre/musicality/dynamics is more important to me. I respect others have a different view and they may place much more importance on 3D effects. Our brain processes sound for both directionality and the timbre/musicality/dynamics of the sound itself. The two processes are quite different. One seems to be related to the first arrival or first few cycles of a transient sound and how it hits each ear differently in time/phase, while the other appears to be more related to frequency/harmonic analysis (which clearly must examine the sound over many cycles and follows the tonal variations (such as pitch bend) and decay). |
| Post removed |
I also don’t like AMT tweeters - they compress way to easily. Bo1972, you seem to be fixated on 3D soundstage and their curious artifacts from the artificial stereo reproduction. I respect that many audiophiles are fixated on this but for me I am much more interested in accurate timbre and dynamics that replicate real instruments and voices precisely rather than a 3D holographic sideshow or curiosity. I am interested to reproduce what I hear when I listen to live music and not some artificial creation such as Roger Waters Amused to Death. I do understand and respect where Bo1972 and many other audiophiles are coming from and what they are chasing. However, I don’t think Bo1972 grasps the awful coloration that myself and others are hearing from his favorite impressive 3D type presentations - to me this sideshow is just a curiosity and as impressive as it sounds - it isn’t musical to my ears! Now I am not claiming Wilson is perfect and neither do I regard Monitor Audio as a total failure - Monitor make great speakers in China and hopefully they can maintain QC which is so difficult (B&W make their top of the line in the U.K. possibly for QC reasons) However, both designs are targeting different listeners who are looking for different qualities. Both have their place and Wilson has a much more illustrious longer track record than Monitor which is a testament to their ability to meet many listeners specific criteria in terms of sound. |
Listen to the new Platinum series. These days they use ceramic drivers with carbon fiber. A client of mine owned the Sasha and only plays classical music. The new Platinum II ouperformed the Sasha in realism. The Sasha was not able to create the realism in sound and layers The slow drivers coulours the sound of realism. The other limitation is that the layers in the low frequency were missing when we listend to the Sasha. The Platinum 2 could reveal much more details in the whole frequency range compared to the Sasha. Monitor Audio has build their own factory in China supervised by English people. The store and shipment is still in England. Audio is about the quality in sound. In this part it outperforms the Wilson. For example the new AMT tweeter is superior in each part you judge a tweeter for. The new Platinum can easily let you hear the differences in height of a recording. When you listen to the Sasha, the instruments and voices are played at the same height. This is a lower level in quality. Again this has nothing to do with personal taste. In the world of highend, stage depth and width are essential parts. The new Platinum series can build a wider and deeper stage. Beside this the individual focus of instruments and voices is more intimate and sharper than the Wilson. This means a higher level in quality. |
I am not at all a fan of Monitor Audio and especially the drivers they use. I have never liked metal or ceramic drivers period. I can hear the coloration these type of drivers add but I do respect that many people can not hear their ringing and internal resonances. Are Wilson made in China like Monitor? I don’t like the poor quality of Chinese products - it is very difficult to get consistent quality from China. |
In real audio is a lot different than what you read. Audio should be all about the best quality in each price range. Most reviews are paid these days and this way consumers do not get the real information about a loudspeaker. When you compare the new Monitor Audio Platinum with different Wilson Audio loudspeakers there is no other way than conclude that the material they use is outdated. This has nothing to do with personal tast. It can be auditioned and understood by each single person. Using 'cheap' dometweeters does not make sense at all. Based on the properties it is insane to use this in 2016 (almost 2017) They should use better materials. Different shootouts showed that the drivers are too slow and are not able to let you hear all the layers you should hear. Again it has nothing to do with persona taste. We are talking about facts. |
First let me say I'm glad you found speakers you enjoy. I am not a hater but I really dislike Wilson speakers. I have heard them only in showrooms and not with my music but each time I found them producing impressive sounds but not impressive or immersive music. To me they represent the trend in hi fi toward hyper detail and precision, leading away from sweet, forgiving systems and enjoying great music. To me speakers should make the music I love and have sound great. I dont want my system dictating what I play. I also dont want to have to change every part of my system for the sake of the speakers. I think some of the strong feelings about Wilson relate to the precision vs sweet sound debate, the price of Wilsons, and how finicky they are with components and rooms. |
Had Watt Puppy threes for about 10 years. They are excellent if set up correctly. At shows they were fpr many years never set up the right way and the sound suffered. They could float an image independent of the speakers better then almost any other speaker. The cabinets were really works of art but therefore were costly. I have found that most people who "hate" Wilson speakers have never heard them Alan |
In my experience the people who hate Wilson speakers are those who can't afford them. I personally do not own a pair of Wilson speakers. However, I do know they are tremendous, albeit lacking in visual appeal to some people. I remember being at a HiFi show in London once and hearing a guy, who judging by his appearance, was not wealthy, say; "Krell, horrible". Really! |
Why the word hate? Everyone can have their own opinon. I visited many Wilson Audio owners in the last 12 years. They are not easy speakers to drive or use in most houses. In the past I visited many who had acoustic problems. This is based for a part on the design. The material they use for their drivers is not that fast, this makes it more difficuolt to controle. Beside this theu need current to control it. Even with Krell amps I often miss the layers other speakers are able to give. The thing I don't understand why they use out dated dome tweeters which got till 23khz of 27khz. A clint of mine owned the Sasha, he had difficulties in the high frequencies. It is ridiculous for the prive they cost that thye use this limited level of tweeters. Also in stage depth and width there are enough speakers who are able to create a much bigger stange. This year the Monitor Audio Pl-200 II outperfromed the Sasha like it was a speaker in a lower price range. People have no idea that the technique of the new Platinum series outperforms a Sasha that easy. This is a hard truth for people who spend a lot of money on their speakers. In the past I also did shootouts between Wilson Audio and the older Platinum series. Stereophile is the first magazine who has the gutts to tell the truth. And explains why the Platinum is a better speaker than the Wilson is. I can promiss that they are even polite. In real the difference between the Sasha and Pl-200 II is huge. When people would hear it themselves it will change your thoughts about Wilson and also about audio. Audio is not about paid stories, but about the real sound and quality during a shootout. These shootouts tell the truth, they are a lot differrent than what you read. Read it yourself: http://www.stereophile.com/content/monitor-audio-platinum-pl300-ii-loudspeaker#gmvb6Pu2jDHEtBlj.97 |
So many great speakers out there . This whole what i bought is best mentality is so narrow minded . I can appreciate all speakers big , small , cheap , expensive . Setup with the designers intentions . IE using gear that works with it should produce fine sound . Its only the mis matched system that will have a negative affect on any particular piece hifi . |
All products have their fans and detractors. I've heard folks bash ARC, Vandersteen, B&W, VAC, Krell, Mark Levinson, MIT, Nordost, VPI, etc., etc. The more popular the brand, the more fans and the more detractors. Maybe, as a Wilson fan, you are just more susceptible to Wilson criticism. From my point of view, Wilson speakers can sound alright with the right gear, but are far to pricey for the sound you get. I certainly do not hate them, but I have no desire to buy them, as I feel I can do as good, or better sonically for less $$$. As with all things in audio, YMMV. If they make you happy though, that's all that should matter. Why do you need the approval of others? |
Wilson deserve their excellent reputation a lot more than B&W. They tend to have a bit of a resonant bump in the bass (which people love) but apart from that I find it hard to fault them. Wilson tend to use traditional driver materials (pulp paper and damped fabric) and my ears are very sensitive to the horrible coloration from modern ceramic or rigid metal drivers and for that reason Wilson will always be a speaker I would not hesitate to recommend. |
I don't think the look of some of the line would appeal to some people. For example ; the new WAMM. For me, I think it's a look of absolute beauty. I don't think others would like the look of a speaker that seems to be looking at the listener as the next meal, like a hungry Tyrannosaurus, but it works for me. Ultimately it's the sonic characteristics that are the most important aspect of the speaker, and for me, the Wilsons do the job quite well. @arafiq I agree that the B&W's get a lot of bashing as well, but I think the Wilsons get it more. Bye the way, I had an opportunity to audition the 800D3's and thought that they were a fine loudspeaker. They were actually on my consideration list a few weeks ago when I was looking at new speakers. |
