| Search | Login/Register
   Home » Audio Discussions » About Wilson Audio Loudspeakers (54 posts, 3 pages)
  Print Thread | 1st Post |  
Page 1 of 3 (54 items) Select Pages:  1 2 3 »
   Target    Threads for related reading   Most recent post in related threads   Forum  Replies   Views   Started 
  »  New  VTL TL-7.5 Reference: His name was Marc Mickelson he wa..  VTL TL-7.5 Reference: His name was Marc Mickelson he wa...  Audio Discussions  Forum     0  20821  03-16-2005
  »  New   Wilsons, EMM, Ozawa, Saint-Saens and.....  Re: Correction: EMM Lab DAC-transport....  Audio Discussions  Forum     4  42258  10-02-2005
  »  New  The most promising “best” commercial speaker..  Viva Audio...  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     190  1236451  12-06-2006
  »  New  The loudspeakers for a powerful SET..  Mission Accomplished?...  Audio Discussions  Forum     48  278442  04-11-2008
  »  New  Macondo vs. the “industry sponsored speakers”..  Correction : "Man in the street"...  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     4  35426  05-11-2008
  »  New  Wilson Audio and the Moore's law..  Sneak peak of modesty...  Audio News Forum     19  51086  04-26-2009
  »  New  A new CES 2010 loudspeaker?..  Good idea, indeed......  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     15  115000  01-13-2010
  »  New  A primer on high-end marketing: Wilson XLF..  About Wilson XLF by Robert Harley...  Audio News Forum     8  39082  12-17-2011
  »  New  Lamm ML2.2 and Mark the BS teller...  Keeping beaching about Spectral…...  Audio Discussions  Forum     7  44661  01-30-2012
10-05-2005 Post mapped to one branch of Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,495
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 1
Post ID: 1509
Reply to: 1509
About Wilson Audio Loudspeakers

suboxone naltrexone and naloxone

is naltrexone and naloxone the same thing carp-fishing.nl

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…

Rgs,
Romy the Cat


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
10-06-2005 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
clarkjohnsen
Boston, MA, US
Posts 294
Joined on 06-02-2004

Post #: 2
Post ID: 1511
Reply to: 1509
Re: About Wilson Audio Loudspeakers
I concur with these sentiments.

clark
10-27-2005 Post mapped to one branch of Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,495
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 3
Post ID: 1595
Reply to: 1509
Another reasonable article about Wilsons and more....

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


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
10-28-2005 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
clarkjohnsen
Boston, MA, US
Posts 294
Joined on 06-02-2004

Post #: 4
Post ID: 1604
Reply to: 1595
Re: Another reasonable article about Wilsons and more....
"I could feel a leg of my beloved Patricia Barber right in my hand.”

And there you have it!

However, I do take issue with "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?"

The audio industry, like our public servants, serves us right.

So long as equipment is bought from reviews, rather than from one's own experience and tastes, it shall remain as is.

clark
08-23-2006 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,495
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 5
Post ID: 2771
Reply to: 1509
Roy Gregory and Wilson MAXX or…

…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


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
08-23-2006 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
clarkjohnsen
Boston, MA, US
Posts 294
Joined on 06-02-2004

Post #: 6
Post ID: 2772
Reply to: 2771
Sorry to have to tell you this...
...but Roy Gregory is one of those unfortunates who have no "constitutional rights".

clark
08-23-2006 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,495
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 7
Post ID: 2773
Reply to: 2772
It is a part of a larger process.

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 wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
12-15-2007 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,495
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 8
Post ID: 6125
Reply to: 1509
Wilson Alexandria Series 2

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!

Rgs, Romy the caT


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
12-15-2007 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Paul S
San Diego, California, USA
Posts 2,130
Joined on 10-12-2006

Post #: 9
Post ID: 6127
Reply to: 6125
Alexandria is slow and smeared
I got my copy of TAS on Wednesday, literally counting down until the "Wilson Post" appeared here...

According to Mr. Harley, the previous Alexandria sounds "slow and smeared".  I wonder what that does for the punter who's check for a pair has just cleared?  Do they do a "recall" in cases like this, or do they shave off 50,000, or what?

The only big Wilson I heard was the WAMM, which seemed to have promise (ok, that's something...) but also some "issues", especially phase issues, when I heard it.  Seemed to have serious potential for dynamics, however...

It is my understanding that the Alexandria is Wilson's "flagship", so what a shame to learn that Wilson has been so far off the mark up to now, all those lesser lights orbiting the wrong star.

Safe money is on source problems, ie, Euro vs. $US.

If you have to ask the price...

Best regards,
Paul S
10-22-2008 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,495
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 10
Post ID: 8597
Reply to: 1509
Wilson revelations. Everything is for sale. The stupid sale
fiogf49gjkf0d

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 Cat


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
03-23-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
ArmAlex
Iran
Posts 80
Joined on 02-15-2009

Post #: 11
Post ID: 10076
Reply to: 1509
Wilson WATT/PUPPY 7 Modification
fiogf49gjkf0d
Dear Romy,
I made a simple yet very effective modification to 7 which transformed its sound to a much higher level,
it has been done by placing viberation reduction devices between WATT and PUPPYs.
I can send you details if you think its interesting.

All the best,
Armen Alexandrian
03-24-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
rutcho
Bulgaria
Posts 2
Joined on 03-24-2009

Post #: 12
Post ID: 10078
Reply to: 8597
Alexandria
fiogf49gjkf0d

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 ...


Ich bin ein Bild von Stein und Zeit...
03-24-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,495
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 13
Post ID: 10079
Reply to: 10078
The Wilson’s mystery
fiogf49gjkf0d

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….

The Cat


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
03-24-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
rutcho
Bulgaria
Posts 2
Joined on 03-24-2009

Post #: 14
Post ID: 10081
Reply to: 10079
The Wilson Mistery
fiogf49gjkf0d
There is , of course, nothing misterious in the ported speakers and the sound exactly meets your description above.
The mistery for me is the decision of the designers to use bass reflex.
The large image can be, of course due to a wrong setup.


Ich bin ein Bild von Stein und Zeit...
03-24-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,495
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 15
Post ID: 10082
Reply to: 10081
The Wilson Bass: the reasons.
fiogf49gjkf0d

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…

The caT


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
03-24-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Paul S
San Diego, California, USA
Posts 2,130
Joined on 10-12-2006

Post #: 16
Post ID: 10083
Reply to: 10082
Wagner Meets Dickens; The Ring of Great Expectations
fiogf49gjkf0d
It has been said before that big speakers have big problems, and I have always found this to be the case.  At the least, 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.

As pathetic as the codification, stratification, and self-stimulation of object-porn (such as The Robb Report) are, yet this has certainly proven to be an effective means to move expensive goods.  And I think that the basic Robb Report tenets reach further and deeper into the mainstream than some might suppose.  Doesn't everyone, at least secretly, want to "own the best"? And, along with this, who doesn't sometimes imagine that acquisition through diliberation will somehow impart Peer status along with ownership?  I believe that Wilson not only understands this phenomenon but he actually caters to just this sort of "needy" customer.

Let's face it, the big Wilsons are, indeed, Big Speakers, as anyone can quickly hear for himself.  If nothing else, they simply leave no doubt in one's mind that he is, clearly and in point of fact, listening to something really BIG.

But don't think from this that I think Wilson's job is Sound, first.

In the end, as in the beginning, Success for Wilson, really, is nothing more than meeting client expectations.

Now, we can circle back to priming and massaging Market Expectations with exactly the things that one is [ostensibly] best able to provide.

Paul S
03-24-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
yoshi
Jefferson (MA), United States
Posts 69
Joined on 05-04-2005

Post #: 17
Post ID: 10084
Reply to: 10083
Wilson set up
fiogf49gjkf0d
 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.
I once heard Grand Slam newer version at one guy's house a couple of years ago. The room was nice and spacious. It was passivelly bi-amped by two pairs of Lamm LM-2.1. I don't remember the pre-amp, but the digital front end was all EMM.

The owner said the entire set up was done by Wilson's own crew.

The system had a big suck up in lower mid-range as if the woofer section and the mid-low section was connected out of phase (it was so obvious, so maybe it was). A bariton sax sounded like a tenor sax! The transient was pretty dull too. If that's a professional job, they professionally screwed the guy up perfectly (took money and run).

Yoshi
08-12-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,495
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 18
Post ID: 11365
Reply to: 1509
The new stupid voice on the Wilson Drumming Chorus
fiogf49gjkf0d

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…

Good luck,
Romy the Cat



"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
08-12-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Stitch


Behind The Sun
Posts 226
Joined on 01-15-2009

Post #: 19
Post ID: 11367
Reply to: 11365
Money for nothing...chicks for free
fiogf49gjkf0d
AVguide? Isn't that the Platform from corrupt J. Valin? Seems, that these "specialists" (you would use a different word) are finding each other automatically... It is always the same bullshit from these "reviewers":

-they have MK1 and give one rave after another without knowing what to improve

-they have MK2 and give one rave after another without knowing what to improve and interestingly here we can read the very first time why the MK1 was so weak that it needed the "upgrade"

-they have MK3 and give one rave after another without knowing what to improve and interestingly here we can read the very first time why the MK2 was so weak that it needed the "upgrade"

-they have MK...you know


and there are endless wealthy customers out there who have nothing better to do than waiting for the postman to read that crap. and after reading that nonsense they go into forums and write, that they got it now and that this new one is much better than the model before...
they get what they deserve
and they are lucky
what other choice do they have?
to buy diamonds for their wife? C'mon..no, that's a mans world.
toys for the - big - boys


Kind Regards
Stitch
08-12-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,495
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 20
Post ID: 11369
Reply to: 11367
The Wilson is simply a rock ‘n roll speaker.... and more BS
fiogf49gjkf0d
Stitch,

I hope you talk not about Wilsons but about the cretins who write the stupid stories about them. Wilsons do what they do and what they do is OK. Sure the Wilsons, as anything else have own problems but those problems are never get pointed out by “critics”. Instead, as you can see in the Jacob Heilbrunn position, he invented the non-existing taking points, his myths, against whish he said something (honestly I do not read his explanation father then 3-4 words of each paragraph).

I know Wilsons well and believe I do understand how they sound. I spoke with a few people bout them and nether in my very critical perception of Wilsons nor in the comments of anybody who love of hate them I never heard what Mr. Heilbrunn presents as “myth”. Kahrma for instance cannot play loud. Everyone knows it and if a person disagrees with it then he might call the Kahrma’s disability to play loud as myth. However, you can’t call a myth soothe that no one take or aware about. That contradicts the whole concept of dealing with “myth”…

However in my reply, if to look deeper then one might recognize that there is a bigger wish to fry. If you look at the nature of Jacob Heilbrunn invented myths then I feel that there is a very credible reason to claim that Jacob is an Audio Moron and the people with whom he socialize as just audio-idiots if they made his to feel that the 3 myths that Jacob outlined are pubic myths. I see some fool feel that Romy The Cat “again” attacks somebody personally but there is nothing father from truth. I am sure that in his regular live Jacob is a wonderful son, father, husband, taxpayer and citizen. I do not judge or have business to judge the content of his character but I do judge the specific his experienced that deeply related to his judgments as a reviewer. If I charter a pilot for my private cruse then I would not care if he white, black, green, purple, gay, straight, republican, democrat, Mensa member or former military drill sergeant. However, if I learn that his definition of flying is to chase birds in sky and try to slice them with left propeller then I will consider many times before hire him. Can I call that this birds-chasing and the birds-slicing pilot is an idiot. How about if he is a member of a club club of the people that have the similar tendencies? OK, now we approach very close to what Jacob Heilbrunn said.

“The first myth is that Wilson is simply a rock ‘n roll speaker…. The second myth is that the Wilson tweeter is harsh and unrelenting…  The third myth is that Wilson loudspeakers have a bloated or souped up midbass.”  – who the hell says it?! Aren’t the people who bitch that Wilson can’t not play rock ‘n roll are audio-idiots by nature? If yes, then what Jacob Heilbrunn does arguing with them? Unless he is willing to score some point among idiots, making the idiotic contra-arguments…
 
The Cat


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
08-13-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Amir
Iran
Posts 143
Joined on 02-11-2009

Post #: 21
Post ID: 11371
Reply to: 11369
Wilson wat puppy
fiogf49gjkf0d
I think correct positioning the watt puppy and maxx model in room is not easy and each time i listened to them i sensed a bloated sound, I guessed bloated sound refer to acoustics. i know these model drivers are not fast but i guessed in a good room and good position we hear a non bloated sound with these speakers.

when i close watt puppy 7 to rear wall, sound loose dynamic and flow with increase in tonal resolution and a sense of peace, when i move speaker against the rear wall i get better dynamic, more airy and open sound but with sense of bloated sound that cause stressing me in long term.

I believe in a good room we can find a very good position for watt puppy but i know access to good result is hard and maybe impossible in general rooms.
I tried to position gryphon sealed box atlantis , it gives better result in shorter time and i sensed i can find a very good position in shorter time.

It seems that ported speakers are so sensitive to acoustics and their placement is harder and sealed box speakers can give better result in our rooms.

wilson speakers should be compared with other speakers on market not with a absolute reference. i agree our ideals maybe far from market products.
I agree wilson speakers have some problems and i know they are expensive in their performance class but in this crap market they have a over mid position in my idea. i never heard many speakers but in iran between 20 speaker brands they were over mid class.
duette, sophia, watt puppy 7 driver quality were near crap but maxx and watt puppy 8 tweeter and mid drivers were good and alexandria drivers were faster with more resolution.
alexandria in lightness (transient speed) and resolution was in another league but maxx and wat puppy 8 driver quality was acceptable.

I have this sense that they sound good for rock'n roll but i do not think they just are suitable for rock'n roll.

market is full of crap products and better components like ESP Concert Grand SI Speaker are in corner and have a small market.

Is there any idea about ESP Speakers? http://www.esploudspeakersna.com/

I never listened to these speakers but it seems they have a good sound in comparison with other market products.


I Love My Mom
08-13-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Stitch


Behind The Sun
Posts 226
Joined on 01-15-2009

Post #: 22
Post ID: 11372
Reply to: 11369
No Wilson bashing...
fiogf49gjkf0d
Romy,

no, I am not one of those who bash Wilson. I respect his work, his business and his products. I listened to some of his models a few times, but this here is about reviewers...

I am a little bit frustrated. I am a customer who want to go ahead, when I read those "reviews" and I have the chance later to listen to it, most is simply untrue. It is like a paid positive advertisement. And I know no magazine which is different, probably Stereophile is an exception now.

I read TAS since 1990 and at that time it was really good. I remember a review about Magneplanar, 3 Reviewers had 3 different Models (I think, 1.6/2.7/3.5) and wrote about it.
It was a normal report with their positive sides AND their negatives (Poweramps...). I was impressed, because their description was at the point (I had one of these models at that time). Anyway, the Magneplanar sales person (Wendell??) wrote a very angry letter which was published ("...1000's of happy customers all over the world and none wrote that....")..
Harry Pearson made a response, which was in the way:"..it was a report from my reviewers trust but I will check that personally."
3 issues later HP wrote his comment about Magneplanar report from his Reviewers, it was VERY short: "I proved it and all they wrote is right"
Bang. Finish.
This impressed me. He was not the slave from industry and was writing FOR the customer. And he was very respected in this Business.
We all know, that has changed dramatically. No I read stories from Valin & Co. which are far away from being serious.
And all do that.
1997 I made a decision: I stopped "believing".
I knew at that time when I would follow their "recommendations" I can burn my money right away.
The frustrating experience: I was right.
I saved a lot of money and got better units but I was lonely.
the other "Audiophiles" around me still read those recommendations, bought them and were frustrated. Some married and they had luck, their wives killed that nonsense very fast (..."that's the 4th CD Player in 3 years and you always tell me, that one is perfect and everytime you kill 70% of the money...I want a new kitchen...")

Now we have the Internet
not bad, but the Morons discovered it for publishing their ultimate brain free nonsense too. When something is written in a Mag I think, you have to be a little bit serious, only a little bit, but now we have the "support" from "Customers" who get something cheaper and for that they support the product whenever possible. And sometimes very aggressively, a few Germans are very advanced in that. They don't need Dealer network, they do it via Internet. Simple story, super high final price, long waiting list but when you really want it, there is a chance to get it for a nice price....yes, "Audiophiles" among themselves have to "help" each other.
A sick business. I feel sorry for those who try to do it serious...I don't know, but I think, they will loose..



Kind Regards
Stitch
08-13-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Axel
South Africa
Posts 80
Joined on 07-18-2009

Post #: 23
Post ID: 11376
Reply to: 11369
Wilson myths or thruths?
fiogf49gjkf0d
maybe what is mentioned as being some myths is closer to what at least used to be pretty close to the actual truth?

Wilson speakers are pricy, expensive, un-affordable, take your pick. So maybe some of the commentators about Wilsons never had one in their listening room, and if they had one in their room, maybe only the smaller ones like I did - a Watt Puppy 5.x?

So? What about my experience about that lot?
ALL three points mentioned most certainly were THE CASE in my auditioning, nothing about myth at all!
I could not STAND that sound in my listening environment, I found it offensive to my ears - upsetting, unsettling. BUT, I can only comment on those small ones that Romy in any case considers beyond comment.
My point is: couldn't it just be the case, that a lot of 'myths' are stemming from reviewing the smaller speakers and then are projected up to the bigger ones?
It pretty much is what I think is the case about it, EVEN though a generalized sound characteristic might well be the case - but in a much more 'refined' fashion.

So, that's my take of where those "myths" came from. Applied to the smaller wILSON SPEAKERS e.g. Watt Puppy they where actually the bloody truth!

Cheers,
Axel
08-13-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,495
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 24
Post ID: 11380
Reply to: 11372
Missing the point
fiogf49gjkf0d
Stitch,

When I hear people defend audio reviewing in present form (as most of the industry establishment do) or offend it (as I do) I think they both miss the point. I was truly laughing reading the comments after the Jacob Heilbrunn’s post where all imaginary industry players come together to defend or deny the audio gifts, free loans  and those soft of things. Take the same David Wilson, create a circumstance where he might not be hurt, ask him about the industry and about the very same people who made his business to kiss David’s ass during his diarrhea.  The truth is that EACH AND SINGLE audio manufacture has inherent deep abhorrence  and revulsion of those blood-sucking marketing leaches, they just can’t escape of that dirt as the marketing people are  actually are plugged in the distribution process and in reality make living for manufactures. Those marketing sleazeballs take it all very seriously but they cannot imagine how much we, the sane audio peoples do not care if the Mike Framer bought, sold and got his Wilsons as a gift.

People try to find justifications for reviewers’ preference in the reviewers’ personal agendas, corruption, listening ignorance, cultural limitations of just in the personal idiocy. That all might be the cases but it ALSO misses the point. The missed point is that those good or bad reviewers with this beast or worst intentions, in most of the cases still do not say anything important or meaningful about audio products.  Let take the same Mike Framer with his long-lasting infatuation with MAXX.  As many times the Framer opened his mouth about his speakers I always ask myself – are the MAXXes so bad that Framer not able to say anything intelligent about them? There is absolutely nothing in all BS that he expressed about his MAXX that make his expressions to be attributable to MAXX. This is an example where criticism does not rise to the level of a creation, which is a typical– we know much more talented composers then talented musical critics… Anyhow, I understand why David keeps Framer around on a leash. Framer sells to public the notion that Small Wilsons (including 6, 7 and MAXX) has some attributers of quality the Big Wilsons have (Grand Slam and Alexandria). It is not that big Wilsons are flawless but they are an accomplishment vs. the Small Wilsons are juts cashing out of the accomplishment. Here is where the whorish cheerleaders like Framer and alike do their job. In realty, in the coordinate system of audio thinking, all those Framer-Mickelson-level of people are no more than those guys who stay on street with signs informing that there are available parking spots on a given lot right next to the stadium where Red Socks is playing….

So, what is the Missing Point in all of it? The Missing Point is that the audio equipment in reality is NEVER GOT TRULY REVIEWED by official industry and by public opinion, even if it has many published reviewers and many sold customers. The more complex audio component is the more true capacity of the component eludes to be exposed in the typical stupid audio reviews that we are accustomed. With the example of Wilsons, I do not read all of the reviews and I do not read them attentively, but from what I am familiar I do not feel that anything ever was said sensibly in “reviews” about the sound of Big Wilsons.

The Cat


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
08-13-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
clarkjohnsen
Boston, MA, US
Posts 294
Joined on 06-02-2004

Post #: 25
Post ID: 11386
Reply to: 11376
"Myths" -- the wrong word?
fiogf49gjkf0d
The right word would have been "truisms". Obvious statements. "Common knowledge." But by no means always true. Often, not!

clark
Page 1 of 3 (54 items) Select Pages:  1 2 3 »
   Target    Threads for related reading   Most recent post in related threads   Forum  Replies   Views   Started 
  »  New  VTL TL-7.5 Reference: His name was Marc Mickelson he wa..  VTL TL-7.5 Reference: His name was Marc Mickelson he wa...  Audio Discussions  Forum     0  20821  03-16-2005
  »  New   Wilsons, EMM, Ozawa, Saint-Saens and.....  Re: Correction: EMM Lab DAC-transport....  Audio Discussions  Forum     4  42258  10-02-2005
  »  New  The most promising “best” commercial speaker..  Viva Audio...  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     190  1236451  12-06-2006
  »  New  The loudspeakers for a powerful SET..  Mission Accomplished?...  Audio Discussions  Forum     48  278442  04-11-2008
  »  New  Macondo vs. the “industry sponsored speakers”..  Correction : "Man in the street"...  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     4  35426  05-11-2008
  »  New  Wilson Audio and the Moore's law..  Sneak peak of modesty...  Audio News Forum     19  51086  04-26-2009
  »  New  A new CES 2010 loudspeaker?..  Good idea, indeed......  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     15  115000  01-13-2010
  »  New  A primer on high-end marketing: Wilson XLF..  About Wilson XLF by Robert Harley...  Audio News Forum     8  39082  12-17-2011
  »  New  Lamm ML2.2 and Mark the BS teller...  Keeping beaching about Spectral…...  Audio Discussions  Forum     7  44661  01-30-2012
Home Page  |  Last 24Hours  | Search  |  SiteMap  | Questions or Problems | Copyright Note
The content of all messages within the Forums Copyright © by authors of the posts