Wilson Watt 3/Puppy 2 Loudspeaker

I wouldn't buy them. They will have great lows and quite a bit of punch but no high end articulation. Like other reviewers, I'm not dead yet and I owned a pair of fives, I would also say that a pair of 13 to $16,000 loudspeakers could easily out match them.

@yoyoyaya @mesonto Thank you for pointing out the fault of mid-treble / treble region, which corresponds well to the hum bet. 10k-20khz shown in the Stereophile measurements below.

Vertically, the WATT was perhaps best-balanced with the listener’s ears at or just above the tweeter axis; ie, some 37" from the floor. Above that, a peak in the mid-treble can be heard; sit so you are at WATT woofer level and the midrange becomes very peaky.

So, even the discounted price which I did not disclose before is below $3k, are you still not recommending it? Can the birghtness possibly be toned down using warmer sounding preamp / amp?  I am thinking biamping them using SET / lower wattage class A since WATT is relatively efficient (91dB/w-m).

@lanx0003

For 3K providing the crossover inside them is still in great condition (but these are really old) they will still have a less than stellar upper range. (there is just no way these speakers will be 'bright') 

And please remember that the chart from Stereophile is from a new pair of speakers fairly fresh off the line.

Let's be honest, the new speaker technology is just better a few decades down the road, especial with the upper range and detail. It was always fairly easy to do the mid/low ranges. 

Ozzy typo from 5k to 9k

@ozzy62 Audiotroy is still recovering from the effects of a stroke. He continues to share his extensive knowledge & experience with the audio community. Our passion for music is why we’re all here.