In my experience, people who have good hearing do not hear differently but they might have different preferances and they might have different tolerance for distortion. For example, I don't have much tolerance for high frequencies distortion, some of mid and low are okay. I have a musician friend whoes hearing is better than mine but not different. He prefers the sound of panel speakers, I don't. But, he listens to mostly classical, and I don't listen to classical, only some neo-classical.
66 responses Add your response
I have the VMPS RM 40’s for speakers. The owner and maker of these speakers passed on and his wife shut down the company. I paid under $2000 for these speakers compared to the Wilson’s that sells for thousands of dollars. I do not hear my system either. I hear sounds in the wide range beyond my speakers. I also hear great depth. Sound coming from the rear of the soundstage and sound from the front of the soundstage. Highs, midrange, bass are excellent. I listen to two channels only. People cannot believe what they are hearing when I put on vinyl, super audio cd, cd or DVD. Makes no difference. What does make the difference is the right components to drive your speakers. What makes the biggest difference is setting your system aright in your listening area or room. This is a must. Then of course there are good engineers and bad engineers when it comes to good sounding vinyl, etc. A good room setup with a recording done by an engineer that knew what he was doing can make any decent sounding component and speaker sound good. I am completely satisfied with my system and I do not hear my speakers or components. |
Yep, That's what we need! A straight 3-way speaker with a twelve inch woofer, six inch midrange and a sparkly tweeter. This used to be the norm (60's - 70's). then we started getting these "tower" speakers with the eight inch woofers (please). "Not to worry -if you want good bass, we'll sell you a subwoofer too!". I'd like to know why Mr. Wilson gave up on the Witts... |
Have to chime in and say I have never been happier with a pair of speakers than I am now with my old Wilson Witt series 1. Ugly as a brick outhouse...definitely Soundstage, vocals and bass to die for...assuredly Yes these use Focal tweeters, I know as I had to replace the pair as one was blown along with the mid driver resistors in the crossover, one reason I picked them up for a song. About $300 later and I am a VERY happy camper. Are they for everyone, of course not. Could I even dream of owning a 30k plus set of Wilsons, not in my limited lifetime! Does their 220lb weight give me a hernia if I need to move them, yep! Am I happy...you betcha |
This is more a matter of taste and also attitude/ideology. I personally am not excited with them, as, for my taste, they give a bit sharp and a bit aggressive (non-smooth) sound, the lower frequencies they give are not as good. They are not bad, of course, but the the relation quality/cost, I think, is too low for them. If someone does not care too much about the real sound quality and has a lot of money, he can buy these speakers (shining "Rolex watches"). For me, Wilsons are not the best sounding speakers, even regardless of their cost. Someone else though may like them more than the ones I like. |
I own 2 sets of Wilsons. Watt Puppys, and Maxx 2's. Obviously they are the "right" speaker for my taste. Are they for everyone? probably not, but if we all had the same taste/sonic sensibilities, I suppose there would only be one speaker, one amp, 1 turntable etc.. etc.. etc.. To each there own, I say. Enjoy what works for you, and let others choose for themselves, without showing criticism towards their choices. |
The key is to make speakers that are so expensive that no dealers stock them and almost nobody has ever heard them. You can claim they're the best and shame anyone who questions you by claiming they're just too poor to afford them. I won't listen to anything less than the higherfi opulence. I'm guessing none of these have ever been built but if anyone ever orders a pair they'll build and ship them off for a cool million. They're the best and anyone who doubts that is an ignorant pauper. https://www.higherfi.com/speakers/higherfi-audio-opulence |
I've heard a few Wilsons. I heard a pair of Sabrinas which were quite good but not really full range; for their price, I preferred Focal Sopra 1's. Good speakers, generally, but every time Ive listened to Wilsons I always thought better speakers were available for less $. However, if I'm a big ticket amp manufacturer, you can be sure I want to demonstrate my amps with very good and expensive speakers. |
Having heard at least a dozen Wilson demos over the past 20 years, they never fail to bore me with their lack of colorations. For me, they just seem to suck the life out of music. Only once was I impressed, but i think it was with just the right music and a charismatic sales rep. I wouldn't fault someone for liking that sound, but it's just not for me. Plus I really like natural wood veneers, and I don't find the Wilsons attractive at all. |
"For some reason many electronics manufacturers use Wilsons for shows. Why is that?" If I was an electronics company, I would want to show with speakers that a) are going to sound good; b) are a well-known, well-respected industry benchmark and will help draw people to my room; and c) are not so unusual and exotic that nobody notices my electronics. Duke |
For the most part, I think people love to debate, argue, speculate, and try to dominate . . . but in actuality, it is all subjective to the person who puts down the money and takes it all home. Those with the most cash flow or credit like to think their money also buys them credibility and authority over the guys, who have less financial resources, but the great equalizing force is that money doesn’t buy natural physical gifts as accurate hearing . . . nor along with that, the exposure, nor the self-education, it takes to even approach the title of EXPERT of all things. It is rather arrogant to boast of being the best, when there are so many other arguments and attempted efforts to be “king of the hill” by reason of more muscle or strategy, and thereby, dominating the rest of the competition out of the picture. But this doesn’t make one the “BEST” -- at least for any length of time when some younger, stronger buck takes your indisputable title away from you . . . at least not until the next one comes along who is stronger, etc. Bullying proves nothing as it stands beside arrogance and inflated egos. I personally don’t see how anyone, aside from someone who came to monopolize the audio industry, could ever make a claim for being the best. One could claim the most expensive, but in truth, the other parameters are subjective at best -- even the so-called exacting measurements, taken under various circumstances and conditions, don't cement down such a claim as even they can be manipulated and falsely stated. There are absolutely too many variables to make such a claim until every combination was examined and unanimously agreed upon . . . and by the time that was settled, there would be how much more NEWCOMERS fighting for the title and back to the overwhelming frustration of being able to do all the combinations with an impossible unanimous agreement dominating the process all over again. We all want -- even demand to be heard and be at the top of our game; however, truth be know, we are all as humans absolutely fallible, and as much as we don’t like to admit it, not everyone at all times -- not even the experts, can be right with all their theories and hypothetical indisputable calculations are right 100% of the time. Pride goeth before a fall . . . and an absolute perfectionist, if it theoretically could be achieved, would never be content, because they would know deep inside that just one more step of research or imagination could beat their indisputable position of being the “BEST” . . . and that position, in my opinion, not only is always open to debate, but is essential to the growth and progression of motivation, creativity, and invention. Without it, we would be stagnant. Therefore, be careful when you claim being or having the “BEST” cause there is always someone or something just wanting and waiting, who not only have the desire to prove you wrong -- but the ability to do exactly that. |
was at a hi-fi shop a while back and was listening to a set of watt/puppys. they were playing jazz and classical cds thru aragon paladium amps they sounded great it was a quiet day so they said go to the cd rack and play what you want out of the 50-60 cds there was only a steely dan cd well ricki lost the number that day. the quality came back down to earth i would love to own a set of wilson speakers--any one of them but to say the best... theres lots of really good speakers out there |
When I spent time with Wilsons, the dealer had some pieces he played for me. I thought they were fabulous but before writing a check, I wanted to hear MY recordings through the same system. The next day I sat, listened, and left.....didn't do it for me. They can be good, but you have to play their favorite recordings. |
@koost_amojan Yes the F cone is a fibrous fabric design. Excellent cone material. JM Lab are following well understood and proven design criteria while many manufacturers do not. Sandwich designs allow for shear mode damping if the internal material between the sandwich is soft - this works well. https://www.focal.com/en/flax-sandwich-cone The point I am making is about internal damping and the importance of "neutrality of the sound" as JM Labs puts it. Cones with high internal damping sound better to me as they reproduce timbre more accurately due to the lack of internal resonances to color the sound. I only mention pulp paper and fabric or doped fabric as two long proven examples that work and are highly damped internally. Flax is a fabric so I would include F Cones in my short list of better sounding transducers. Of course you can use other materials to make a light internally damped diaphragm however Metal and Ceramic and plastic/polypropylene are popular but definitely poor choices for materials and the coloration that their ringing adds is very audible to my ears. Accuton had to add rubber dampers on their cones because the ringing was so bad! |
The only Wilson Audio speaker I personally had the opportunity to spend a bit of time with was the Sophie II and I have no idea how that compares to others of the Willson lineup. They were being used in a friends home to audition several very nice power amps - tubed and SS. In his rather large room with a 20’ ceiling. As long as you sat dead center in the sweet spot, they sounded very real, with a huge detailed stage and did a very nice job at revealing subtle differences in each piece of electronics. Maybe it was just the room, but no matter how we arranged or tweaked the speaker position, if you moved even a few inches from the dead center sweet spot, the image shifted and the magic of the huge stage seemed to collapse. In my home, after a bit of tweaking, my little Maggie 1.7s do a very fine job at about everything (except deep base) and regardless of where you set, the image does not shift and the stage doesn’t collapse. If money and space were no object, I would prefer to have a set of well serviced Apogee, Duetta II Sigs. over about anything else I’ve ever had the pleasure to audition. Others on my favorites list would be the larger Martin Logans or even the Maggie 3.7i. and still love my old Quad ESL 63s. I guess if I had somewhere up of 100k to spend on a set of speakers (I don't) I think the Martin Logan Neoliths might also be high on my list. I guess I’m just a ESL/Ribbon kind of guy that has to live on a budget; but then to each their own...Jim |
Count me out. In the 90s I did extensive listening sessions with the then-top-of-the-line Wilsons powered by Krell Audio Standard amps ($25k monoblocs) each on its own 20-amp dedicated circuit. (I worked at a dealer and would listen after hours.) Wilsons are colorless all right, but uninvolving to me. No argument with those who like them, but I have never had the slightest desire for Wilsons since then. |
Wilson Audio philosophy is to not add "coloration" to the system, and they dont. So any electronics manufacturer would be attracted to using them at shows because you would hear THEIR equipment. Wilson (example Maxx 3) is fully capable of reproducing any signals thrown at it. Unfortunately if you are throwing garbage it will reproduce garbage. Inna, can you just not afford Wilson audio? Is criticism your compensatory behavior? |
| Post removed |
You would have to own a pair of Wilson speakers in your system for some time to have a credible opinion (good or bad) I did just that as they certainly were not moving me at shows. I kept it affordable and got Sophia 2’s. They turned out to be very nice speakers for the time I had them, not the best but no complaints here. Show experience is almost useless and I’ve been to many over the years. The Sophia 2’s were light years ahead of the Spatials (M3 & M4 Turbo S) I used to sell. Sabrina’s are very nice with the right gear. +3 on the MBL love but way out of my snack bracket. |
Gents, I have been to RMAF and other big audio shows and frankly have never been favorably disposed to the sound of Wilson speakers. Quite the contrary. I find them as hard on my eyes as they are to my ears. If I hit the CA Lotto big time, beyond a shadow of a doubt, I'd have the full panoply of MBL gear. Speakers, electronics, the whole shmear. Their ~$1M audio set up at the audio shows I have attend have far and away surpassed any other similarly priced systems I have heard. I remember my jaw dropping in utter amazement when I first hears their Raidlastrater (sp) speakers, which I think are about $250K a pair. The speakers absolutely disappeared into the room and the music simply hung in the air effortlessly. In the meantime, I am ecstatic with the sound of my $2500 Spatial Audio Hologram M4 Turbo S speakers! There are the best speakers I have ever heard in my system... |
Right. Then both Lamm and Ypsilon should know that they might also lose part of their potential market, people with both money and ears. Frankly, I don't understand their problem, anyway, if they have it. They should be able to sell everything they make without leaving their offices. They are just showing off and socializing. |
| Post removed |
@kosst_amojan Good point. It is hard to totally generalize. Wilson has its share of lousy designs as well as designs that are legendary like the Watt Puppy. I would say to my ears the best sounding Wilsons are with pulp and paper woofers/mids and fabric domes. I understand that not everyone is sensitive or focussed on timbral accuracy and to some the ringing from rigid cone materials is no big deal. |
| Post removed |
To answer your question, electronics manufacturers partner with Wilson because they think Wilsons will present their electronics in a positive light to many listeners, not all of them. I’m sure Wilson is only one of a number of speakers the electronics manufacturers would consider partnering with. You dislike Wilson speakers. That doesn’t mean they are lousy speakers, it means you don’t like them. Everybody’s different and that’s good. |
