Controversial Opinion

[PHC1]

Originally Posted by C220MC275

Things would be more easy if speakers companies could have a mission statement smarter than " The only Sound ", the " Speaker company " and so on.
If Rega would say for example :
"Our speakers are designed to make you have a good time, when you'll listen to any kind of music; we do not look for a live performance in your room but we want you to relax and simply enjoy the sound as a massage to your mind. We do not search for absolute neutrality".
And the opposite for Magico for example.
That would clarify the spirit behind the design and would stop some debates....

Jerome, then Wilson's should be "Much like a woodsplitting maul, we will still split the audiophile community into true lovers and true haters of our products"....

[PHC1]

Originally Posted by jax4736

I am interested in reading all these replies. I still like my Wilsons, and I did compare them to a number of so-called "better measuring" speakers. They simply sound more like real music to me (I play piano professionally and know what the real thing sounds like, both from within the ensemble and as an audience member). Not just looking for hi-fi sounds.

I've read criticism of Wilson; it was the "paint job" jab that concerned me. I also consider that Peter McGrath works for the company and has done hundreds, if not thousands of classical recordings. This is a man who hears live music probably more often than anyone else on this board. It's not a stretch to assume he provides feedback for Wilson speakers under development.

One topic for discussion: is speaker design more art than science, or both? Take a Stradivarius violin, for example. Would taking measurements inform you about Antoni Stradivarius's art and secrets? Measurements can probably back up a good, artful design...but I've heard speakers which measure excellent and fail to move me musically. Perhaps it's psychoacoustics. I am interested in what others feel on this topic.

Glad to hear you "still" like your Wilson's. I guess Doug will need to try harder next time...

[PHC1]

Ok, I'm going down to listen to my Wilson system now, wish me luck, I hope I still like them when I emerge from my theater room. We audiophiles are a very impressionable bunch after all...

[dmnc02]

Originally Posted by VT Skier

Don't we want reviewers to voice their honest opinions? I know I certainly do, whether the reviewer thinks my gear is great or not. In fact, I would much rather have a knowledgeable person tell me that Product X is very good, but for the money, Product Y is a better value, even if I own Product X. Maybe I'll go listen to Product Y and agree, or maybe I won't. But hopefully I'll have a better idea of why I like Product X.

And that's all Doug did. He did not "slam" Wilson. Nor did he insult anyone or "call them out". He simply wrote that he thinks there are better products available for the money. Which is what many reviewers have implied when they write about Vivid, YG or other manufacturers that are generally considered to be industry leaders at the moment.

And, remember, Doug was responding to a specific question from a reader who asked about specific manufacturers. I'm glad he wrote what he did, and that's one reason why I read Soundstage and Ultra Audio.

Originally Posted by trponhunter

If the goal of a high end speaker is to truthfully present the music - to show you what is on the recording, then even, linear frequency response is a basic requirement. If you just want a sound tha you happen to like, that's ok too - but it should not be confused with a truly, linear system that shows you what is on the recording.

Doug's point about the basics should really be considered, and not dismissed that he has some type of vendetta. He expects good solid engineering - linear frequency response as a starting point. It is one way to de mystify audio to some degree, and after spending lots of time with speakers that do measure well, I can attest that his point is valid, in my opinion. All the speakers in my store that test well, reward you with LONG term listenability and in essence, get better the more time you spend with them. They sort of sneak up on you rather than shout at you and may not sound better on every single recording, but they do tend to sound more truthful over a wider range of material.

+1

[Face]

Originally Posted by PHC1

Ok, I'm going down to listen to my Wilson system now, wish me luck, I hope I still like them when I emerge from my theater room. We audiophiles are a very impressionable bunch after all...

[Jerome W]

Originally Posted by PHC1

Ok, I'm going down to listen to my Wilson system now, wish me luck, I hope I still like them when I emerge from my theater room. We audiophiles are a very impressionable bunch after all...

Serge,
You say this on the fun mode, but you know that part of this statement is true.
Moreover, when a pro reviewer makes negative statements expressed not as opinions but as facts, it is normal to feel disturbed, at least during a few minutes.
I remember Jean Marc being a bit upset by my comments of the rather poor sound of his WP8 during the first years. And I'm not a pro reviewer !
And I remember him being extremely happy when I told him that his system was one of the very best I ever heard !
Audiophiles are very sensitive persons !

Sent from my iPhone using A.Aficionado

[Face]

Originally Posted by C220MC275

I have WP8 and PMC EB1i speakers.
They of course have both their strengths and weaknesses. The EB1i are more flat but less alive than the Wilsons.

The Wilsons either have deeper bass extension, are more efficient, or both.

[Jerome W]

Originally Posted by Face

The Wilsons either have deeper bass extension, are more efficient, or both.

True.

Sent from my iPhone using A.Aficionado

[NoahG]

Originally Posted by Face

Thiel CS2.4:


Sophia:

Here the Sophia 3's chart:

[eljr]

I have read many times in many places that Wilsons measure badly yet they are the best sounding speakers I have ever heard at their respective price points. How/why is this?