This thread is a derivation of the thread: Wilsons, EMM, Ozawa, Saint-Saens and...

clarkjohnsen wrote:

While in general I agree with Romy about Wilsons, I have once or twice heard them sound really, really good. On the other hand I have also heard them sound really, really miserable -- worse than anything. I'm not talking merely mediocre here, folks; I'm talking disaster.

Well, it complicated…. about the Wilsons.... as many other things in audio the reality of the Wilsons has nothing to do with pubic perception of the Wilsons.

The smaller Wilsons are quite poor speakers. All those multiple versions of the Watts, Cubs, Maxx, Sofias, Puppies are not really interesting. With meticulous setup and only under condition of the accidentally lucky rooms those smaller  speakers might be more or less balanced but still they  would show off huge amount of problems, partiality with serious music. I never seen anyone was able to make the smaller Wilsons to sound acceptable, nor I’ve seen any person with advanced “audio intelligence” even trued to experiment with sthe maller Wilsons.

The larger Wilsons: the Grand Slams III and Alexandria (I did not hear the Wamms) are very different speakers from the rest of the Wilsons line. Many things that the larger Wilsons do are very correct (only compare to other box, mass-loaded speakers) but the larger Wilsons also some very serious, not to say mortal problems. The issues that I have with the larger Wilsons are following:

1) UNACCEPTABLE LOWER BASS. Pretty much whatever below I would say 120Hz should be filtered out as the ported Wilson’s channel NEVER sound correct. I understand why David Wilson went for this – this way the speakers become the speakers of the manageable size but I am taking about sound in listening rooms not about the marketability of the products. From a different perspective David kind of personally hearing-impaired to the port’s noise and to the dipole diluteness of bass by dirt coming form the port, or at least he refused to acknowledge it publicly (I would to it too if I were at his place). Even in his XS modules, where he had “no limitation” he went for dual drivers and ported enclosure? Why? “Romy, do not forget that we have +20 db compare to the John Dunlavy at 20Hz” – David told me. Yes, David, you do and I am sure it is easy to sell loudspeakers to public that do not require those 800W amplification. However, I am talking about the sound in the listening rooms not about the marketing suitability of a product. Should John Dunlavy not use the extremely crappy drivers in his largest sealed enclosures (it is what he ordinary used) then perhaps David Wilson might learn something from the sound of the LF sealed enclosure. The size? The size is not really a problem. The LF section of the Grand Slams has very much enough volume to sealed accommodate I would say 18” something-like-Leviathan woofer with free air resonance of 11-13Hz and with the crazy Aura’s underhand motor. Was Wilson not able to afford the use something like this if they sold the speakers for over 100K?  How different the larger Wilsons would be if they employs the sealed LF? How much more simpler would be to the setup of the larger Wilsons if they had no port-sources?

2) HIGH QUALITY AND HIGH PRECISION BUT NOT MUSICALITY. This is the most important and unfortunately not defeatable point with the Wilsons that pretty much eliminate any serious interest to the Wilsons’s idea. When the Wilsons were very, very, very, very, very, very, very… very meticulous and very, very, very, very, very, very painstakingly set up (less than 1% of all Wilsons users I would estimate) then the Wilsons could produce very good Sound. Pretend that the room is very lucky as well and pretend you were able to mask of the noise from the port. (It would be imposable but pretend that it did take place). In this scenario for instant the Grand Slams do very well but what would be the definition of that “very well”? The Hi-Fi would be doem wonderfully, and the Audio Sound would be phenomenal. However, Wilsons never go for the Humane Sound. What I mean? Clark, when you experience a very high quality symphonic play then this “high quality rendering” it is favoriteable but not self-sufficient condition to be taken, daunted by musically. In order the subordination of listener awareness to the musical force took place it should be something more in Sound then just a perfect rendering of fundamentals, harmonic and overtones. When we talk about the reproduction then in the loudspeakers there is nothing as prominent and nothing as important as a simple quality of the drivers. Here is what the “inhumanity” of the largest Wilsons derive form: Wilsons use not finest, contemporary and very much not “humanity accommodated” drivers. There are many drivers from past that do much more “humane sound” that produce and those driver produce that above mentioned “subordination of awareness” to the mush degree higher then Wilsons can do. Ironically, some of those drivers cost a fraction of the Wilsons, although they can’t even approach the Wilsons in the Hi-Fi-ness. So, the question would be: what would manifest Good Sound - the highest quality of “sonic rendering” or the highest impact to the listener’s personality from the reproduced musical peace? If the answer was first then the larger Wilsons might be useful. If the second then the larger Wilsons are out of the game.

(I feel that it is necessary to make a discourse in here and to say that I am NOT a vintage speakers freak. There are plenty of the idiots out there who collect, worship and almost religiously devoted to vintage speakers. I do NOT share this vision.  All know to me completed vintage speakers are NOT good and all of them VERY relentlessly compromised. Anyhow, the vintage speakers are very different subject and I do not blindly appreciate their “talents”.)

3) PEOPLE WHO USE THE LARGER WILSONS. I have seen/heard a few people who use large Wilsons and generally I was always very dissatisfied with them. They were more or less wealthy people who got their largest Wilsons due to their own Intellectual audio-laziness.  If you observe the audio interests and audio judgments of the largest Wilson’s owners then it very noticeable that they all demonstrate immunity to audio sensibility. Their audio actions and their audio motivations are oblivious to the no-nonsense results. Also they always disassociated form any other reference points then own slavery of the Wilson ownership. With all of it above, their entire playback usually demonstrate very-very ordinary Sound and their advancement in the audio-understanding are less then satisfying. So, a typical Moron ™ with Grand Slams or Alexandria in his listening room consider himself as a belly-button of universe, despite his usesly dreadful sound and his own disability to get better Sound out of the Wilsons. This “belly-buttonism” of the Wilsons owner makes them to behave patronizing.  Their stupid self-confidence brewed on the own ignorance and very high level of audio superficiality is something that always makes me laugh when I deal with the owners of the largest Wilsons. Those people are under impression that better speakers deliver better audio result and they god the best speaker they know of and then they feel that the automatically blessed with the best audio outcome. For those people the largest Wilsons are actually a dead-end because those speakers replace for those listeners thier ability to understand what the real speakers could do. Well, there is nothing wrong to have bad sound in own listing room. However, to have a dreadful sound on own room whale being completely not familiar with reproduced sound in the way how it MIGHT BE and at the same time to spared own semi-idiotic patronizing judgments about somebody “associated equipment”…here we go… you go the complete snapshot of a typical Grand Slams audiophile. Talk with many of the Grand Slams owners about audio gear and you will see what I mean….

So, does all that I said mean that anyone who uses the largest Wilson is Morons? Certainly not, but whoever are not Morons and whoever do have skills and taste to get any more or less useful sound from the largest Wilsons are NOT KNOWN in the audio circles and they do NOT expose their own listening room to the publics audiophile travesty.

So, what it all leads me to? I feel that the largest Wilsons are in away are grotesque loudspeakers where the amount of spent efforts (I do not mean money) is not adequate to the results. Are the largest Wilsons bad? Nope they are not, in fact they are better among many others loudspeakers. Today when the used pair of the Grand Slams being sold for under $20K-$25K they are still much more interesting loudspeakers than the army of other high-price but low performing crap. The best among the worst? Well…

I feel that the largest Wilsons are fine if the demands are very generic, very none-specific, very non-involved and very superficial. You always get what you paid for. In case of the Wilsons you do not spend anything but money and you do not get anything “special” from the larges Wilsons. You get only what you can get for money: good quality but no soul. Also, you get with the largest Wilson that body-armor of the Wilson community who suffer from a half-inch of own ego enragements. However, if  you have something else to do with own ego or with own applied sense of taste and demands then you most likely pass on the Wilsons…

Mr. Richard Hardesty has published recently on his site an article on the similar subject.

http://www.audioperfectionist.com/PDF%20files/APJ_WD_21.pdf

I would in a way agree with his findings and observations. However, I would not agree that the needs to argue with the reviewers and partially regarding the smaller Wilsons as the smaller Wilson speakers (smaller then Grand Slam and Alexandria) do NOT deserve ANY attention at all. Some of the problems that Richard mentioned are resolved with the largest Wilsons, though the largest Wilsons have issues on thier own.

I would like to live the largest Wilsons alone and ask what makes people to buy all those Sophias, Maxxes, Watt-Popyes and there rest of the Wilson smaller line. I have heard countless installations with sampler Wilsons and all of them were horrible, not to mention that each single small Wilsons owner with whom I have opportunely to talk about audio expressed views of an complete audio-idiot (from my perspective).  I am not kidding: none of the were to understand how much off the wall sound they are getting. When I was asking them what made them to bring those small Wilsons in thier rooms then they reached some older audio magazines with circulated by colored markers paragraphs and replied: “Look, Romy, the Mr. Framer loves my new buy and he said that if I buy the Sophias then I could feel a leg of my beloved Patricia Barber right in my hand.”

I mean the objective and the references of those people are so primitive that it scares. I have local guy recently who bought a pair of small Wilsons. I was warring him against it informing that he will have huge amount of problems and no results but there are not entry points ingot the brains of audiophiles.  The audio magazines readers do not understand what fundamental and resolvable misery the forth-order vented fart-machines can do with sound. They have also no ability to sense an auditable result during the test auditioning, not to mention that there the is no properly set up and performing Wilson dealer installation in entire US (!!!) So, what my local guy got after all? As any other smaller Wilson buyer: he was raped by completely ignorant but “certified” Wilsons dealers, left them many thousands dollars and got in his room a big problem with no sound. However, he enlarged his self-viewed audio pines for a 1/2 inch and become “more valuable” for the socializing with another audio freaks who have no sense of reasoning or identity.

I, being much more radical in audio then most of audio people out there, wonder how long Audio people will tolerate this abuse by the industry. It is know that most of the audio complains do not have extensive marketing recourses and the printing audio propaganda IS THE external marketing departments for the most of the audio manufactures. So, might this fitly audio machinery to be hold responsible for anything that they do?

I wonder: we return badly performing merchandise; we sue for false advertising and malpractice, and in some third countries we have a tradition that if some psycho did not like the service that he got and had no reimbursement then he show up at the door of the salesman next days with a rocket propelled grenade launcher…. So, can we, the civilized Americans, to take care about our own needs to have our audio industry to serve us in a respectable way?

Rgs,
Romy the Cat

…how do not spread Ketchup to all food you eat.

The regular readers of my site know that I very seldom pay compliment to the audio reviewers. I do it because they are mostly unspeakably Morons and their writing/thinking is mostly primitive and brainless garbage. So, considering my very low expectations I was surprised to come across to a very rational, thoughtful and reasonable audio review. British Roy Gregory published in Hi-Fi+ (#46) his article about Wilson Audio MAXX loudspeakers. The review had completely different feel, much different then the typical waste that the audio writers staff audio publications.

In fact, the Roy’s article was not a review but rather a description of his experiences. It is not exactly what I would anticipate from an industry QA but if he has chosen this style then it is what it is. The important part is that whatever he expressed had very high level accuracy and it is very commendable.

Interesting that wherever Roy described his observation he was spot on but when he brought his assessments he was less correct from my point of view. However his is perfectly in his constitutional rights in his incorrectness as his incorrectness do not sound foolish in context of that writing.

The reviewers are in a tough spot. They initially write for very dummy public who has very primitive understanding and none-noble interest in the subjects of reviews. Also, in order to make their dummy readers to comprehend what they red the reviewers obliged to use language and stylistic of adjectives that the dummy readers are accustomed. Roy Gregory in his review generally did not go for this BS and did not try to implant into the consumers brain how the Wilson MAXX sound. Those few moments where he did, he did slip and lost his high accuracy mode (the comments about bass for instance). But I feel that he did it exactly because he needed to fulfill the expectation of the industry dummy readers.

Still, the biggest problem with the review is that the review was not about the Big Wilsons (Grand Slam or Alexandria) but about the small Wilsons. The MAXX sonically is not mini version of Grand Slam but the maxi version of Wilson Watt Puppy. In the end the MAXX and Big Wilsons sound very different and delivery different results but how a reviewers writing a review about MAXX can mention it? Here is when the reviewer’s tough spot come to the game: they must to use adjectives. A reviewer uses phrase “sounds good” for instance but this “sounds good” is applicable only in the scope of the restricted horizon of the given products. The very same is with Roy’s few positive comments about the MAXX: if he was familiar with Grand Slam’s performance then the MAXX would be completely out of game. Nope, the big Wilsons have own problems as well but they demonstrate what the big Wilsons can do, and they can do very interesting things for the box loudspeakers.  The MAXX are in the different scale: they are juts a half-ass compromise with substantial amount of not interesting aspects of performance.

However, the Roy Gregory write up about the Wilsons is highly advisable. It is good for Wilsons that such an inelegant writing about their product took place: it was much different then the pathological lack of common sense that American Mike Farmer did in his doodles about MAXX. It is good that Roy Gregory had in his disposal a dealer who actually knew what he was doing no mater how difficult to get the Wilsons dealership but there ARE very many incapable dealers among the Wilsons resellers (still a day for the total setup sounds too implausible to me). In the end it was a pleasure to read the Roy’s review, agree I or not with the review conclusions. Our American writers should learn.

Rgs,
Romy the Cat

Well, I do not know what it would mean. Regardless his “constitutional status” Row’s article is much more informative and much more educational for people who have interest in the MAXXes then the brainless saliva dropping that many industry cheerleaders  (courtesy to Marc Mickelson and Michael Fremer) have performed around the Wilson MAXX. I think that important moment that Roy Gregory has missed is the performing differences between the old MAXX and the new one, but once again: to his credit he did it most likely intentionally as he probably not being familiar with the older MAXX did not want to reprint the “literature” that Wilson marketing people would write for him.

Unfortunately it left out of the scope the very import point: the general tangency that the industry has by navigation the “industry deliverable sound” toward the sharps, harmonically inverted but the immediately impactfull sonic surrogate. If someone looks at wish direction the French Grand Utopia went in their new production, the New large Wilsons, the new smaller Wilsons (Mosel 7, and MAXX) and many other today’s loudspeakers then it would not be no surprise way the dimmest audio victims falls in love with Kharma Ceramic and Magico Mini sound.

Rgs,
Romy the Cat

I bought TAS magazine yesterday, second time this year. It is year afar yeas the more boring and boring to read Robert Harley. All his massaging of Reality and try to put the industry’s problems and idiocy into a mask of rationale and cheap sophistication got more and more saturated with primitive clichés and feeling that he writes for kindergarten children. I read two of his articles in this TAS: one is announcement of Series 2 of Wilson Alexandria and another about new Revel loudspeaker. The glorious BS that Robert Harley spread about new Revel Salon probably should become a subject of my dedicated public objection at my site. Those Robert Harleyes keep pushing the Industry Sponsored Sound deeper and deeper toward that sonic surrogate that the 95% of audio Morons out there are so eagerly and gullibly embraced.

Anyhow, purpose of this article is to pay attention how primitively Robert Harley sells to public the introduction of Wilson Alexandria Series 2. The “cook up” story about David Wilson “discover a new Sound” was very romantic. I wonder why  Harley’ colleges Marc Mickelson, Jeff Fritzm and Ken Kessler who reviewed the  Wilson Alexandria never mention that the speaker had shortcomings. Interesting that David Wilson addressed (according to Robert Harley) in his new Series 2 the problems that Robert Harley desired to sell to public not the problems that the Wilson Alexandria in fact had.

Robert Harley presents the Series 2 even as some kind of unique opportunity forgetting to mention that each Wilson speaker had many-many revisions. I was wonder also how a change of a driver and a crossover (probably for less expensive) would affect price for near $20K more? Would it be more honest to say that that since 4-5 years as Alexandria was introduced the dollar dropped too much and it was time to change the price? Would it be also more honest to say that it was time for Wilson to “turn over” the customers who have already bought, injecting them with a new “revision”? What the beast way to do it? Probably to hire a “big mouth” that is willing broadcast any prescribed for him BS? No criticism, no analyses, no person sonic integrity of any kind – juts a stupid stream of standard drooling adjectives and battering  up a glory over own journalistic mediocrity.  It was exactly what Robert Harley did – good job, Baba!

A year or so ago (I do not know exactly when it started as I but audio publication irregularly) I have see that Wilson Audio begin to advertise their new loudspeakers as the design inspired by David Wilson’s revelation after he  was sitting at the Vienna’s’ Musikverein rehearsals.  When I saw the ad first time I was laughing but the trend got strong and now that same plot is peeing spin with other Wilson’s speakers.  Furthermore, this week Marc Mickelson of Soundstage.com published a review about Alexandria X-2 Series 2 where he said the following:

“I suspect that even then, David Wilson and the engineers at his company were working on ways to improve their very best speaker, a process that came to fruition a while later. As he sat in the Musikverein in Vienna, considered among the best concert halls in the world, Wilson realized that his speakers didn't fully capture the Musikverein's personality: its unique ambient signature, transient liveliness, and harmonic complexity -- all characteristics of the live event. While some speaker designers sit at the drawing board and conceptualize what they would like their speakers to do sonically, David Wilson sat at the Musikverein and heard what he wanted the X-2 to accomplish musically. I don't know about you, but I know which approach I trust.”

Well, all that I can say: that is all bullshit. I do not make any critical comment about Alexandria X-2 Series 2, in fact my protest is not about what David Wilson does but undoubtably Mr. Wilson “has approved this message” and the initial intention to pass own photogenic opportunity at Musikverein Concert Hall as a merchantable article of trade that would sell more loudspeaker derive directly from David. That is sad but at the same time it brings a few questions:

Before being exposed to the “Musikverein revelations” did David Wilson knew how music might sound?  What David Wilson has learned during his revelations? To sit in a concert hall, would it be Musikverein, the Vienna State Opera, the Worcester’s Mechanic Hall, the Konzerthaus or the Amsterdam Concertgebow is not automatically imply an exposure to serious music or to serious Sound.  Over the last 25 years or more each 18 moths Wilson Audio (similar to any other audio manufactures) introduce a new model or alteration of their current model.  Could David Wilson correlate the introduction of Models 5.1, 5.2, 5.3 (zillion revisions) with his specific exposure to some kind of “Musikverein revelations”?

I can go on and on about it (not to mention that not all Wilson Audio’s ”Next Series” were better then previous ones) but what is the point? Isn’t it better to say that 2 years passed, the audio media machine need a new wave of stimulation, a new access to the customer valets is needed…. Have you even seen an industry reviewer write a review about old or even absolute model that still demonstrate exceptional sonic results – never. The industry reviewing is about sale not about Sound and Mr. Wilson play this game well. It is say as who knows: the Alexandria X-2 Series 2 might have eliminated the troubles that I heard in the first Alexandria X-2. The problem is that if I have a chance to hear the Series 2 the very first question I would ask myself: “Do I become a fatality of Wilson’s marketing revelations?”

The bass reflex construction of a system with the size of Grand Slam/Alexandria is a mystery I have not reasonable answer too.
The behavior in the lower bass area can be easily predicted, specially in my "favorite" configuration when the vent is placed on the back.
 When we talk about the Alexandria X-2, I am surprised that nobody mentioned the giant sound of this system. When I say "giant", that means literally a GIANT reproduction of the sound picture. Many listeners to this system I told with, confirmed that, with the eyes closed, they imagine the performers as if they have a giant size. This is, of course, impressive, but far away from the real life. Something more - this "effect" depends of the sound level.
Maybe this is a not a problem, but a feature ...

I do not feel that there is any mystery in Wilson’s bass – they sound as they shall – like crappy ported speakers and it is very unfortunate in my view. David Wilson ether do not know what and how he is listening or know very much what he does but care less about it. Regardless the result is the result – the Wilson’s bass is the weakest element of the largest Wilsons.

I would also disagree that Wilsons have any specifies tendency for giantomania of imaging, the installations that I heard did not suffer from it. It is most likely that the experience that you, rutcho, had with them was with a context of not properly set up Wilsons, which is 99% of them out there. It is very difficult to set the Wilsons up properly in a room, it is an independent form of art if you wish, and it is very seldom people go into this extend of “owning Sound”. Anyhow, I do not concur that Wilsons “image large” – they are fine in this department. If you want to hear an example of speakers that image “idiotically large” then try the Martin-Logan Statement system.  They do depict a flute of the size of elephant’s ears…

If to talk about the Wilson’s mystery, as least in the way how I pensive it then I would names two things. Important to mention that what I am taking about it I mead ONLY the big Wilsons: the Grand Slam and Alexandria. Anything smaller than them, including the MAXX that many Morons-reviewers are trying to squirt of own ass to public attention, would not be applicable to have the “Wilson’s mystery”.

So, to me the first “Wilson’s mystery” of the biggest Wilsons is in absolutely wonderful and absolutely unique among all speakers unanimity of transient characteristic across the whole range. Even in the bass where the biggest Wilsons are so weak they somehow maintain very smart transient balance – amassing quality in my view. The second “Wilson’s mystery” is that fact that the biggest Wilsons are the only one mid-sensitively direct radiation know to me speaker that do not compress sound (if driver with proper amplification). At least I, with my DSET driven, nearfiled operating, 109dB sensitive dynamic-spoiled listening habits recognized no dymick problems when I was listening Grand Slam or Alexandria. I have no idea how they did it….

Actually is not mystery but juts economics. BTW, the large Wilsons are I believe are not juts ported but so called fourth order design. With a sealed enclosure of the identical size the Grand Slam / Alexandria would go in Stereophile category of speakers with restricted bass…. Of course I am kindling but the point is that it would be incredibly interesting if David Wilson with all it’s skills would try to punch the envelope of the possible with sealed bass enclosure. Sure it would have 10-15dB leas at 20Hz but it is possible to overcome if to throw money to the problem. Pretend a short-throw driver with 96dB sensitivity and resonance frequency of let say 15Hz but with very high power handing necessary for those speakers. It would be hard to do and David Wilson would straggle to keep the Alexandria’s price user $150K. But I think it is possible…

I think that Wilson does what he does with his biggest flagman is not even because of the economics but because the idiots-reviewers that sell all of it to public let  Wilsons and anybody else to go away with unadequateable result per effort. If any of writing whores of Mickelson or Framer level instead of kissing the underperforming products into the asses and keep oiling the machine of audio stupidity would  demonstrate an integrity and would take a stand then Wilsons and other would take notes and would know that discriminated taste and marketing crap are not necessary the same things. In any other industry – producers work to satisfy the demands level of QA (quality assurance). In audio the reviewing is not QA but rather the continuation of production…

Paul S wrote:

I think it is fair to say that no big speakers are going to "work" up to their potential without some serious effort expended in setting them up.  IMO, this is no small matter, and Wilson obviously agrees, including, "professional set up" in the price of admission.  While I don't know if the set-up is actually worth a damn, you can include me in the group who would much prefer to have someone else do it, that's for sure.

There is a young new “reviewer” Jacob Heilbrunn who spread his “wisdom” about Wilson speakers:

http://www.avguide.com/blog/three-myths-about-wilson-audio

the guy is so off the way that it funny, apparently the big dogs gave a poppy a slot subtest to run mouth about. I did not even know that Winson MAXX has MK3 version out. According to the “reviewer” who used Winson MAXX MK2 it was so perfect that what the hell they did in MK2. If the MK2 was PERFECT and the MK3 has so many changes then would it be presumable that MK3 it less perfect?  Is any degree of perfection above PERFECT?  Wire the US constitution starts from “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union…”, so I assume that word perfect is not a stage of perfection but have digress.  Probably the word “unique” has degrees as well.  I might say I guess that Jacob Heilbrunn is unique reviewer. What is so unique about him? The answer would be that there is a few hundreds of “reviewers” like him. Welcome to English for dummies, or perhaps to the foolish thinking in any language for dummy audio people.

Anyhow, what made me to laugh on thy Jacob Heilbrunn post are the myths that he INVENTED. I never in my life heard people complain about the “myths”. Sure in order to see goods the frustration that good might address need to be invented.  I posted a message to Mr. Heilbrunn but it got deleted, so I repos it at my site. Perhaps instead of reply button those people need to have “Kiss me in my ass” button… Nevertheless, he is the deleted reply:

Jacob,

I am sorry but you are a person with very lightweight audio views, which BTW perfectly qualifies you to be an industry reviewer. With what kind idiots you hand out that you were able to collect those myths – I never heard anybody who has sense express them? Did you spend too much time with Morosn? Now you are writing a “review” to contradict the Moron’s views - good luck with that “noble” venture. Your 3 myths are absolutely bogus and it looks like the generation of the cretins who were brainlessly cheerleading Wilsons before you might retire as they will have a “deserving” following…