A really great speaker, one of my fav. [Archive]

RGA

10-26-2005, 04:49 PM

Nice speaker, but how much does he want for the Macs in the background??? :D

4" thick MDF baffle? I'd hate negotiate the shipping for that one....talk about damping.
Those things are bullet-proof!!!

Impressive specs for a 10" woofer in a sealed cabinet. Very impressive!

Sound Plus on Broadway carried hales I heard there top of the line speakers and a another model which was around $7,000.00Cad connected to a $90,000.00 front end Of big Krell and the Linn CD 12 which is a $30,000.00Cad CD player. The Hales were pretty good but I preferred much cheaper speakers the dealer carried. Hales folded and that same dealer is now carrying Wilson and Dynaudio. The Sophia is a nice speaker but at $16k I often wonder why Wilson is the go to speaker when people compare -- probably due to price and the fact that Stereophile loves them for some unknown reason. I'm not surprised they went under - and I won't be when consumers figure out Wilson.

topspeed

10-27-2005, 10:07 AM

I often wonder why Wilson is the go to speaker when people compare -- probably due to price and the fact that Stereophile loves them for some unknown reason. Or, God forbid, it could be they actually like their sound :rolleyes:. Respect isn't given, it's earned. Just because you don't, doesn't mean other people agree with you.

I'm not surprised they went under - and I won't be when consumers figure out Wilson. What an asinine statement. Which consumers would that be? The ones that have made the W/P the most popular hi-end speaker in the last 25 years? Don't forget, Dave Wilson has been successfully building speakers for decades now. He may not have the financial reserves of Peter, but he likely has a larger client base. Of couse, the very nature of the hi-end is so fly-by-night as it is, I wouldn't be surprised to see the majority of purveyors play Casper .

Florian

10-27-2005, 01:44 PM

Hey Topspeed your forgetting something! It cost Peter 50$ to build those IKEA speakers and he find people that buy them for 4000$.....its no wonder he stays in bizz :p

Companys that close are all bad. Genesis has been bankrupt 3 times, Pipedreams are no longer, neither is Hales and Infinity only made it cause they stopped building world class speakers. Apogee died because they just sucked, you didnt know? And Wilson will die soon too, since they AudioNote is kicking it up a notch by using hotglue instead of a sticking system :(

-Flo

RGA

10-28-2005, 11:26 PM

Or, God forbid, it could be they actually like their sound :rolleyes:. Respect isn't given, it's earned. Just because you don't, doesn't mean other people agree with you.
What an asinine statement. Which consumers would that be? The ones that have made the W/P the most popular hi-end speaker in the last 25 years? Don't forget, Dave Wilson has been successfully building speakers for decades now. He may not have the financial reserves of Peter, but he likely has a larger client base. Of couse, the very nature of the hi-end is so fly-by-night as it is, I wouldn't be surprised to see the majority of purveyors play Casper .

I know an Ex Wilson owner (and what he replaced them with) and I've directly heard the Sophia -- have you? The Sophia is a good speaker but at $16k connected to a $50k front end in a professionally set-up room that was strictly made for the Wilsons. It was far from a speaker that made me think I was not listening to a speaker and it was not free of problems. For what it's worth at least the Hales were not as overpriced. Umm what statistical evidence do you have that Wilson is the most popular speaker in the high End -- High End is a lame word that means high priced most of the time. Financial reserves are created by selling thousands of speakers and products and saving money by not "thanking reviewers" with advertising revenue to keep them in a job. I don't see what they have to do with my comments on two speaker companies. I heard Hales well before the main speakers I have and that was what I felt about them way back then. The Sophia I worte and reviwed here and liked but they don;t have the bass depth I am use to nor the integration and "as one" to the sounds of instruments that I would like. It's the price I balk at and wonder if there are shoppers buying on price and prestige than on merit. The Gershman X1/Sub 1 is IMO a similar sounding but better IMO better sounding option than the Sophia for about $11k less money. But if it's about prestige and gotta have it because a mag says so and I need to be somebody important through what I buy then hey spend the $11k extra - what do I care.

theaudiohobby

10-29-2005, 11:15 AM

I know an Ex Wilson owner (and what he replaced them with) and I've directly heard the Sophia -- have you? The Sophia is a good speaker but at $16k connected to a $50k front end in a professionally set-up room that was strictly made for the Wilsons. It was far from a speaker that made me think I was not listening to a speaker and it was not free of problems.

You do not like the speaker...or is the AN 20K speaker you speak fondly of, perfect?

But if it's about prestige and gotta have it because a mag says so and I need to be somebody important through what I buy then hey spend the $11k extra - what do I care.

From someone who trumpets the virtues of speakers costing USD85K (all silver AN-E) 18K DACs (DAC 5 blah blah blah ) and 78K power amplifiers (Ongaku) this is rich.

RGA

10-29-2005, 12:11 PM

You do not like the speaker...or is the AN 20K speaker you speak fondly of, perfect?

From someone who trumpets the virtues of speakers costing USD85K (all silver AN-E) 18K DACs (DAC 5 blah blah blah ) and 78K power amplifiers (Ongaku) this is rich.

I don't trumpet any of these things since i've heard none of them -- whether I would pay the premium for any of these is doubtful -- And I never once broght them up??? It is strange that if I make a comment on any speaker it is you and your friends who start talking about what I own! If you make a comment on B&W I don't change the subject to Quad and Elac or for the other subject changers about VS or Apogee or Magnepan. My comment was to Kex to listen rather than judge solely based on the design...considering the original poster hates anything with MDF he has now reverted to praising a speaker that is all MDF I wonder why - and to attack speaker that use no mdf and lies and says they do.

My comments on Hales are not exactly new nor do they differ much from what even the press who usually loves everything had to say. "I moved the Transcendence Three's into a different environment, hoping that a changed acoustic might bring them to life. Even this made no difference. The same fundamental problem remained. I could not get a sense of musical enjoyment from them. They remained technically impressive but emotionally uninspiring.../...Unfortunately to me, it rarely feels as it the music is essentially reassembled. If I was wearing my sound engineer's hat then I'd probably be ecstatic, but as a domestic speaker I found the Hales tantalising, and ultimately frustrating.
When the time came for the Hales Transcendence Three's to be packed away I was still in awe of their technological refinement, but I just couldn't help feeling that there are older and simpler units, of flapping paper and wooden box construction, which are musically more satisfying." Hi Fi + on the Hales Transcendence Three By Chris Binns Issue 1 - April 1999.

I don't understand why the topic needed to be changed - I am talking about the Hales speaker maker and their top line. The Revelation 3 was much better to me in terms of value for dollar - I made the trip to the dealer to listen to Hales due to the reviews as the Rev 3 was in my price range - I also wanted to hear the top of the range because I like to hear how close the family sound is (or if the designer has a clear goal across the speaker range). I could not relax to them nor do I find anything particularly exceptional about them that a host of other speakers were doing. That said the same store is now carrying Wilson which was also brought up - not by me - and I hear similarities but moreover the Wilsons are more expensive. The Wilsons are more relaxing but I would want another listen because Woochifer noted some upper mid lower treble issues while I noticed a lack of cohesion from the drivers - so the tweeter could in a longer session draw my ear to that issue. Hales I found to be largely what that reviewer noted - I simply could not get into the music otherwise I would have bought them. Geez you state a listening session of a speaker that went out of business and everyone starts talking about an entirely different company - I gather most have not directly heard Hales top lines - and it appears not Wilson either.

I stress that I liked what I heard from the Sophia but just not at the price when there are similar sounding if perhpas even a little better sounding speakers of similar approach like the Gershman Acoustics X1 Sub 1 for 1/3 the price - do yourselves a favour and listen to both and you may agree that spending $11,000Cad more on the Sophia is not necessarily the smartest thing - but if you have a need to impress audiophile neighbours Wilson has prestige - Gershman may illicit a "who's that."

theaudiohobby

10-29-2005, 12:42 PM

It is strange that if I make a comment on any speaker it is you and your friends who start talking about what I own! If you make a comment on B&W I don't change the subject to Quad and Elac or for the other subject changers about VS or Apogee or Magnepan

You do...and on a couple of occassions you went on a rampage, or have you forgotten the Genelec 8000 series debacle, and that is just one example.

My comments on Hales are not exactly new nor do they differ much from what even the press who usually loves everything had to say

Why do you find it so convenient to quote the press to buttress your points and yet you denigrate those who quote the press to support their own viewpoint. Learn to air your viewpoints without using crutches.

do yourselves a favour and listen to both and you may agree that spending $11,000Cad more on the Sophia is not necessarily the smartest thing - but if you have a need to impress audiophile neighbours Wilson has prestige - Gershman may illicit a "who's that."

Do yourself a favour and have some self-awareness, the Ongaku is as much a prestige symbol as the Wilson, both will impress the neighbours and audiophile friends alike.

Florian

10-29-2005, 01:19 PM

RGA

10-29-2005, 03:26 PM

You do...and on a couple of occassions you went on a rampage, or have you forgotten the Genelec 8000 series debacle, and that is just one example.

Why do you find it so convenient to quote the press to buttress your points and yet you denigrate those who quote the press to support their own viewpoint. Learn to air your viewpoints without using crutches.

Do yourself a favour and have some self-awareness, the Ongaku is as much a prestige symbol as the Wilson, both will impress the neighbours and audiophile friends alike.

Well you are going to another post to support what you are saying here -- that is a crutch -- indeed, you argue against my tactic by using the same one which is a nullifier. The press generally likes everything -- so it is unusual to find one that is is generally negative. I stated what I thought of the speaker period end of story -- but you and your co-horts bring up entiorely different companies and entirely different componants. What does the Ongaku have to do with a discussion on speakers from Hales. I have heard the Hales I have not heard the Ongaku. There is a difference between a prestige product and a prestige product that lives up to its hype. The Wilson Watt 5 or other top Wilson's may warrant the price and the hype so might the Ongaku -- then again I may not find them to do so if I ever hear them. I talked about products I have directly heard. And my opinion is based of hearing the Sophia and the Gershman Acoustics X1 and Sub 1 (a speaker of similar approach). Of course if you're in the more expensive is "always" better approach then there is no point in talking further to you on these points. No point getting into a battle of wits with unarmed opponants.

RGA

10-29-2005, 03:43 PM

AMEN!

Hey wait, a fight with RGA and i am not involved? Something is wrong here! Oh wait, AudioNote is better then Wilson, thats because they only show a setup that is dirt cheap and runs 500000$.......;) but dont worry, it wont impress your neighbors :(

I'm not sure I follow this point - People buying should be buying to impress themselves - and I don't get the showing part - showing what at 500,000? Do you mean showing gear at shows? By all means all my comments on Wilson and hales are solely based on my auditons with them - their job to get my sale is to impress me - and they did in some areas and the Sophia did but not at the money because the Gershmans I like better at 1/3 the money so they impressed me way more. What my neighbor prefers or what other people prefer is up to them since it's their money and their time listening to the speakers. My neighbor very well may like the sound of the Wilson better than the Gershman and feel the 11k extra is worth it.

Florian

10-29-2005, 03:47 PM

RGA

10-30-2005, 12:29 AM

hahaha - Flo have you considered suing your brains for non-support?

Feanor

10-30-2005, 03:00 AM

...
Do yourself a favour and have some self-awareness, the Ongaku is as much a prestige symbol as the Wilson, both will impress the neighbours and audiophile friends alike.
If a neighbour or some buddy of mine got himself an Ongaku I'd be impressed ... that he had 'way more money than brains.

No, I haven't heard the Ongaku: but nothing with that type of specs could sound so good as to justify the price.

Geoffcin

10-30-2005, 03:13 AM

kexodusc

10-30-2005, 03:46 AM

Thats cool, because noone on this forum as ever been impressed by the value or the sound of the speakers you hype. You cant talk about value...85K for 6 wooden panels, 2 drivers and some silver wire and parts. You post reviews and articles, but so do the others and your points simply dont hold anything. You say for yourself, go and listen and ignore the press. Well, how can we ignore it when you psot it as your defense on the AN's?
I think Wilson is a better value, sound and build quaity wise then the AN's and i am sure we all exept you agree on that.

-Flo

I can't speak for the $85K AN's, I haven't heard them. I have spent a lot of time with the AN E and AN K, and have heard briefly the AN J though. A bit with the AX models, but I don't like them at all for the money. The E and K are pretty good values IMO. Very nice speakers that have distinct flavor. Simple,effective design. Not my favorites for the money but as good or better than a lot of other crap out there.
Audio Note makes good speakers, we shouldn't deny that. It's the BS marketing-that-isn't-marketing and the odd fanatical musing of the owner that turn me off a bit sometimes. When someone goes through a lot of trouble to bash a lot of speaker designs and philosophies, cites their superior methods and sound, and the fails to show me more realistic, better sound, I get a little disappointed. More effort spent into the product and less bashing others on the internet might accomplish something.

My comment was to Kex to listen rather than judge solely based on the design
Thanks...I have never dismissed any real speaker (except obvious sub $100 made in china specials) without first giving it the benefit of the doubt. I don't have a favorite design, I just like great execution of whatever design is used. I determine great execution by listening. First and foremost. That said, when I can't listen to it, I look at the design for hints. The sound is the design, the design is what you are listening to. The two are not mutually exclusive.

I was just surprised in this case the designer felt the need for 4" of MDF...More than a few articles and studies I've read have shown 1" MDF is the breaking point for 10" woofers or smaller(except in rare high SPL cases) beyond which no benefits are realized (in fact new disadvantages are introduced)...0.75" or birch ply is usually better. One thing I've noticed about audiophiles is that weight seems to mean a lot to them, not necessarily build construction. Ask someone if their speakers are assembled using mortis and tennon joints and they'll tilt their head at you. But damn, they're good and heavy, so they must be A grade. See it in amps and receivers all the time...rediculously oversized heat sinks or archaic power supplies that just add cost and weight. I'm sure manufacturers aren't dumb to weight being a quick judging tool, and exploit this.

I think HDF would have been cheaper, stronger, lighter, and offered some reduced size and shipping cost benefits...then again, the guy that made these enjoyed some success obviously, so maybe he honestly feels the extra weigth was doing something else.

Geoffcin

10-30-2005, 04:09 AM

I was just surprised in this case the designer felt the need for 4" of MDF...More than a few articles and studies I've read have shown 1" MDF is the breaking point for 10" woofers or smaller(except in rare high SPL cases) beyond which no benefits are realized (in fact new disadvantages are introduced)...0.75" or birch ply is usually better. One thing I've noticed about audiophiles is that weight seems to mean a lot to them, not necessarily build construction. Ask someone if their speakers are assembled using mortis and tennon joints and they'll tilt their head at you. But damn, they're good and heavy, so they must be A grade. See it in amps and receivers all the time...rediculously oversized heat sinks or archaic power supplies that just add cost and weight. I'm sure manufacturers aren't dumb to weight being a quick judging tool, and exploit this.

I think HDF would have been cheaper, stronger, lighter, and offered some reduced size and shipping cost benefits...then again, the guy that made these enjoyed some success obviously, so maybe he honestly feels the extra weigth was doing something else.

The reason for a designer going with an over-designed front baffle is the same reason that several manufacturers have gone to isolated bass modules; Isolation of vibration induced harmonics between the drivers. Companies like Thiel also use a thick front baffle, and go even further by making the baffle a radiused and sloped, to reduce diffraction effects & bring the drivers into time alignment. Also Wilson is famous for it's attention to the cabinet harmonic transfer effects. Even going so far as to develop different density specific material for each driver!

Florian

10-30-2005, 05:04 AM

If a neighbour or some buddy of mine got himself an Ongaku I'd be impressed ... that he had 'way more money than brains.

No, I haven't heard the Ongaku: but nothing with that type of specs could sound so good as to justify the price.
Actually, i heard the Ongaku and i also heard my friends big Silvaweld and Allen Wreights Realtime Preamplifier and also this AudioNote Japan electronics are much more expensive it did sound very good indeed. But their speakers are a joke for the money, no matter how you cut it in my opinion.

-Flo

RGA

10-30-2005, 10:37 AM

Kex - Weight is associated with more damping I suspect so the heavier you make it the more it probably seems like you're getting for your dollar - though I suspect that is true with generally BIG speakers. They are after all selling mainly to males.

I have found that a number of very heavey big speakers have a tendency to sound dead as though the enrgy is being stored rather than released (or kept in the box).

And yes Kex i may be on a one note but this is based off my experiences so far and until I hear better competition then this is the place I am in for the next while. And when you go up against the massive industry loved stuff you're going to take some heat from many quarters. But this fellow while I don;t agree with much of what he says seems to be an awful right in my view of a number of highly raved about designs that are shilled off in Stereophile and TAS -- namely setting his sights againsts Wilson - I stress I don't agree with all his points or even some of his comments on the sound of the speakers such as the Sophia
http://www.audioperfectionist.com/PDF%20files/APJ_WD_19_20.pdf
A Wilson Maxx review http://www.audioperfectionist.com/PDF%20files/APJ_WD_21.pdf

kexodusc

10-30-2005, 11:20 AM

The reason for a designer going with an over-designed front baffle is the same reason that several manufacturers have gone to isolated bass modules; Isolation of vibration induced harmonics between the drivers.
I think there has to be some truth behind this, most of what I read on the contrary questions the validity of suggesting this is a real benefit though...some say it just mass for the sake of mass, some say you over-damp, some say it benefits the speaker. If it was definitevely proven, I think we'd see just about everyone doing it now.

The most logical arguments I've read basically state the noise of these harmonics is considerably low relative the signal strength, so we can't hear it for all intents and purposes, and what you lose damping the hell out of the baffle is worse than what you gain. Or you lose nothing, but you just add weight, cost, and time.
For many speakers with just 2 or 3 drives, 8" or smaller that aren't being fed 300 watts, I just don't think it matters enough. You get into some complex suckers like Thiel CS7.2s with a 12" driver and a 12" passive radiator, and you probably want a bigger baffle. 4" thick though? That's crazy.

As for isolated bass modules, I did that with my Vifa/Seas towers. The guy who designed them and helped me build them said it was better. I'd always thought that if the top and bottom sections are touching, the vibrations are transferred whether they're "isolated" or not. Or their phsically and spacially separated, in which case it becomes a sub/satellite system... I guess then it becomes a trade-off of controlling the vibrations and losing acoustic energy. Some drivers like being damped a lot, others don't. That probably influences the decision as much as anything.

Companies like Thiel also use a thick front baffle, and go even further by making the baffle a radiused and sloped, to reduce diffraction effects & bring the drivers into time alignment.

This is textbook, sound speakerbuilding, especially as you start adding, 3rd, 4th and 5th drivers into a system.. Thiel use to use concrete and other super heavy materials for their front baffles, then just MDF for the rest A lot of people are moving starting to move away from the sloped baffle approach for time alignment. ...I'm not even gonna begin to understand all the theory behind why, my limited understanding is there's been some sort of miscalculation all these years in determing acoustic centers of drivers, acoustic offsets, and sloped baffles have been deemed bad ideas by some quant-jock speaker designers. All I know is it takes a lot of guts to argue against guys like Thiel...I think they've reached a point of splitting hairs here.

Also Wilson is famous for it's attention to the cabinet harmonic transfer effects. Even going so far as to develop different density specific material for each driver!
Driver density and strenght are very important parameters for achieving desired sound characteristics. "Cabinet harmonic transfer effects" is a new phrase to me...or at least I've never heard whatever the concept behind the term is, called that yet...can you explain?

kexodusc

10-30-2005, 11:33 AM

Kex - Weight is associated with more damping I suspect so the heavier you make it the more it probably seems like you're getting for your dollar - though I suspect that is true with generally BIG speakers. They are after all selling mainly to males.

I have found that a number of very heavey big speakers have a tendency to sound dead as though the enrgy is being stored rather than released (or kept in the box).

I know many who say the big heavy thick speakers will choke the speaker out, I can't say I've heard it personally, but I'm at the point personally where I think there's breaking point for a given driver size where too much mass adds no benefit for the extra effort. I acknowledge I could be wrong and it's just bad for speakers to be thick and heavy, but I haven't seen any definitive evidence of such. I've got 8 speaker books beside me as I type this, all mention that for 10" woofers and smaller .75 is fine with 1" baffles. 1 mentiones that for larger subwoofers with super long excursions, you'll want to got 1.5" front baffles. Basically match panel thickness with the interior volume of the speaker...tall, fat or tall, deep speakers would need thicker material. I've used 1" MDF and 1.5" MDF walls for speakers now. Didn't sound dead to me at all. I guess I'd have to go back and use .5" and .75 and do a listening test. Somehow I don't think I'd be able to tell which cabinets were thicker by sound alone at the volumes I could tolerate music at.
I've heard crappy 3/8" particle board speakers. that's a whole different animal.

Florian

10-30-2005, 11:53 AM

stress I don't agree with all his points or even some of his comments on the sound of the speakers such as the Sophia
http://www.audioperfectionist.com/PDF%20files/APJ_WD_19_20.pdf
A Wilson Maxx review http://www.audioperfectionist.com/PDF%20files/APJ_WD_21.pdf
Do not post them as REVIEWS! They are NOT reviews but articles from the "watchdog" and are a general opinion of the speaker technology. This has been discussed at Audiogonquite intensively and they are NOT reviews!

theaudiohobby

10-30-2005, 02:50 PM

But this fellow while I don;t agree with much of what he says seems to be an awful right in my view of a number of highly raved about designs that are shilled off in Stereophile and TAS -- namely setting his sights againsts Wilson - I stress I don't agree with all his points or even some of his comments on the sound of the speakers such as the Sophia
http://www.audioperfectionist.com/PDF%20files/APJ_WD_19_20.pdf
A Wilson Maxx review http://www.audioperfectionist.com/PDF%20files/APJ_WD_21.pdf

As usual throwing out a scatter load, hoping that some of it will stick, if you take time to read the articles, you will notice that his comments are at odds with your own comments on this board about speaker performance, the Audio Notes actually follow the same path, it is the good ol' tussle between euphony and accuracy. In the second article , he criticizes the Wilson MAXX for not sounding accurate, note he did not criticize it for not sounding good. Try and recall the number of posts you have written here and elsewhere that take the opposite view to this position. And since he states that he is not a fan of expensive low-power amps, a good example being the Ongaku, should we take it that Hi-Fi Choice is a shill for Audio Note? They heartily recommended a low-power 29K amp with audible hum from the listening seat, wow!

I have decided to anchor this post with a quote from the article that highlight the points made previously in this post.

These measurements clearly show that this speaker system was designed to deliver a specific “sound” rather than accurately reproduce the recorded signal...

RGA

10-30-2005, 05:24 PM

I knew full well TAH would say pretty much this exact same thing which is why I also made it clear that i don't agree with everything he states -- for instance he considers panels innacurate -- and he thinks Vandersteen is the epitomy of speaker design -- he also seems to believe that small woofers are better -- so i take exception to much of what he has to say -- but he's not alone in statements about Wilson -- and not different too much from what I have actually heard from Wilson - the articles were more of an attack on other magazines the way I read it than on the speaker - in that Stereophile dances around stating it like it is than making the reader guess if they liked it or not. Of course Dick isn;t really talking to me because I largely gave up reading Stereophile a few years ago when I realized that what i would buy from them largely would have me on an endless upgrade cycle.

there are two things seemingly at odds in discussions like these accuracy and musicality versus value for dollar. I could give a rats bottom what the Sophia is viewed as by people in terms of accuracy sionce that changes with whoever you talk to and how they interpret the measurements and since unless the speaker has perfect ploar response is dead flat and has dead flat power response in any seat at all listening levels with perfect dynamic range and zero distorition then it is not accurate -- unless you believe the guy on AA who says a 9db sloping drop in frequency is most accurate.

My problem with the Sophia is not the sound because I gave it a good review - my contention is that you can pretty much get the exact same speaker from Gershman for 1/3 the price and to my ear despite lesser equipment and being in a non professionally set-up room like the Wilsons the Gershmans managed to sound better to me. And thus supports the only real points I agree with Dick on and that is paying more does not = getting more and perhpas it really is prestige. It was also surprising to get home to my standmounts and get deeper more articulate bass from a set of standmounts whcih are considerably smaller and less expensive - though that does not surprise me anymore.

His arguments on accuracy versus what is liked better or euphony (which means pleasing and good) is a dopey point. Live music is pleasing and good and the stereo should recreate this -- if it is creating ear bleeding drive me from the room sound from every source disc going then it's not right - if that is what passes for accurate then others are welcom to it - I would rather listen to something that sounds as clear at my seat as the best headphones I have ever heard but also add back those things headphones cannot do - the first criteria is to be able to match and beat headphone rigs such as the Orpheus tubed headphone sytem, or the Stax 007 Omega II set-up at the listening position and then add those things speakers do inherently better. I'm still amazed the Commercial Electronics sold the Orpheus rig which I believe was in over $20k for a headphone system - very perty tube amp though. I must say it was very good -- so too was the Stax which at something like $9kCad was better value for the dollar http://www.smr-home-theatre.org/ces2001/accessories/image_014.shtml

theaudiohobby

10-31-2005, 01:19 AM

And thus supports the only real points I agree with Dick on and that is paying more does not = getting more and perhpas it really is prestige.

The irony here is that his comments apply just a much to the Audio Note line, so maybe it is time to put PQ to task ;) for not providing VFM, afterall the Ongaku at 78K was compared to the Reichbert at 5K and that amp has its measure at less than 1/10th its price, do we move on to the 18K DAC or the 85K speakers? And for all your criticism about Stereophile, your favoured magazines and reviewers fall at the same hurdles, some are even worse, but you quote them because they validate your choices.

As for getting speakers to match the sound of an Orpheus or a Stax Omega 007. :D , let's just say that is a discussion for another day ;) , those headphones will beat most of the best loudspeakers in a couple of areas hands down, just the nature of the thing. Also an electrostatic headphone will not sound like a dynamic loudspeaker and vice versa.

topspeed

10-31-2005, 11:06 AM

I know an Ex Wilson owner (and what he replaced them with) and I've directly heard the Sophia -- have you? No. I've listened to the WP7's.

For what it's worth at least the Hales were not as overpriced. My problem with your post wasn't your opinion of the Hales. As I stated, I've never heard any Hales so I have no opinion of them. The implication from your post in question was that people only like Wilson speakers because they blindly follow Stereophile and TAS. You added to that by opining that once these supposed blind-sheep consumers "figures out" Wilson, they too will go out of business. "Figure out" what? Methinks you consider your own opinion too highly...

Umm what statistical evidence do you have that Wilson is the most popular speaker in the high End I remember this from the Robert Harley's review of the WP7. I'm too lazy to look up which issue it was. If it's that important to you, do a google.

Financial reserves are created by selling thousands of speakers and products and saving money by not "thanking reviewers" with advertising revenue to keep them in a job.As you're into statistics, I'll gladly wait for your links proving this assertation.

t's the price I balk at and wonder if there are shoppers buying on price and prestige than on merit.These are luxury goods, so naturally prestige factors into the equation. However, the tone of your post was that the Wilson's are more marketing than substance, and that is simply wrong. If you don't like their speakers, fine. Your statement, "I'm not surprised they went under - and I won't be when consumers figure out Wilson" is essentially calling out everyone that does. In fact, you're insulting them.

Florian

10-31-2005, 11:22 AM

AudioNotes are the same prestige models as Wilson Audio. When people figure out they spend 85000$ on 2 cone drivers and 6 wodden sides with no bracing and some silver wire they will go under too.

RGA

10-31-2005, 06:20 PM

The irony here is that his comments apply just a much to the Audio Note line, so maybe it is time to put PQ to task ;) for not providing VFM, afterall the Ongaku at 78K was compared to the Reichbert at 5K and that amp has its measure at less than 1/10th its price, do we move on to the 18K DAC or the 85K speakers? And for all your criticism about Stereophile, your favoured magazines and reviewers fall at the same hurdles, some are even worse, but you quote them because they validate your choices.

As for getting speakers to match the sound of an Orpheus or a Stax Omega 007. :D , let's just say that is a discussion for another day ;) , those headphones will beat most of the best loudspeakers in a couple of areas hands down, just the nature of the thing. Also an electrostatic headphone will not sound like a dynamic loudspeaker and vice versa.

I like how you worded that sentence "has it's measure" - but Lynn certainly didn;t imply equal. Bently has its measure with Mercedes S class -- Both are excellent top class no question marks would be levelled at either and their "in league" but Bently has nothing to worry about.

I have heard these headphones and systems - the great thing is they always sound the same in any room. So I can compare them to my headphone rig for an evalutaion but only my headphone rig in an A/B against my main system. It's quite easy to do a very quick switch A/B test with cans -- you simply run from the tape out of your amp to the headphone amp and you just have to switch the tape out selecter on or off. The same cd player in real time is played through one or the other with an instant switch (and as fast as you can get the headphones off your head.

Headphones advantage is clarity, microdynamics, low level resolution, transients and escaping room reflections. Headphones are an excellent way to get a great system for relatively low money compared to speakers at the same or in many cases many multiples of the price of headphones. Starting with entry level quality headphones such as the Senn HD 580, 600 or AKG 1000 it has for me been tough to find anything under 5kk that does these things approaching very closely or doing as well as any of these headphones when appropriately driven - some cd players I heard no difference from can be heard in blind listening level matched headphone auditions so I highly recommend people to conduct any CD player testsession with good headphones and if you can;t then detect them on your home speakers you need new speakers or room or both. These headphones listed should be good enough in practical terms though they are not the Omega or the Orpheus - the AKG is very interesting as it can be used with a subwoofer and runs off the mains of amplifiers. I am comfortable that my go to reference headphone experiences was what I wanted when shopping for speakers - the upgrade from Wharfedale needed to better than those elite headphone experiences or get as close as is possible with my funds. IME the choice easily surpasses my headphones in every conceivable way or the Stax Lambda pros and AKG 1000. For the Omega and Orpheus it takes IME the E/Spe or maybe the E/SE and they require a different front end which is more expensive. I'd love to go back in time and not make some of the purchases I did and use the money better.

RGA

10-31-2005, 06:40 PM

No. I've listened to the WP7's.

My problem with your post wasn't your opinion of the Hales. As I stated, I've never heard any Hales so I have no opinion of them. The implication from your post in question was that people only like Wilson speakers because they blindly follow Stereophile and TAS. You added to that by opining that once these supposed blind-sheep consumers "figures out" Wilson, they too will go out of business. "Figure out" what? Methinks you consider your own opinion too highly...
I remember this from the Robert Harley's review of the WP7. I'm too lazy to look up which issue it was. If it's that important to you, do a google.
As you're into statistics, I'll gladly wait for your links proving this assertation.

These are luxury goods, so naturally prestige factors into the equation. However, the tone of your post was that the Wilson's are more marketing than substance, and that is simply wrong. If you don't like their speakers, fine. Your statement, "I'm not surprised they went under - and I won't be when consumers figure out Wilson" is essentially calling out everyone that does. In fact, you're insulting them.

Topspeed I oppologise -- I have seen a number of speakers that get hyuped and hyped by Stereophile and then go belly up -- and that is why I had the comment that I would not be surprised if they went under. I should not have Implied though that all Wilson's sucked or that people would figure out they were no good. The two were linked in my post and I should have separated the two points more clearly -- Indeed, sometimes "hype" can create a negative view before people even give the product a try (see RGA on AN). Plenty of people have done exactly what I asked them to do and go to Soundhounds and compare them to anything they caryr new or used and have been genuinely grateful for the recommendation and for providing them an upgrade. At the same time though I creat animosity for some and one on another forum has said that my posts are the reason he will NEVER even listen to any product from the company even if they drive up to his door.

The problem perhaps many people (and if you think I'm the only one go on to more experienced forums or talk to Woochifer because people seem to take him as more objective than me, have with Wilson may in fact be an expectation bias. If you think about huge huge hype for something can create an expectation that it will live up to the picture the magazines have created for you and then could come crashing down so any weakness in the product will now be viewed as serious flaws rather than a minor weakness. For me when I hear a $16k I am expecting something that should pound every 10k speaker I have heard and when I don;t hear that and actually hear better from much less then it's tempting to go off the deep end and trash it like Dick did. If you remember my review of the Sophia on this forum I rated it very highly on a sound rating - it's up to you if you think it's worth it. I just find them very overpriced for what you get sonically -- I don't in the least bit care about the technology used how many drivers are used what the drivers are made of etc...

When I look for value it is based on the sound per dollar and when it comes to the actual sound then that is a subjective exercise for individuals to make -- I personally feel that the Wilson Sophia at 16k can be bested by at least 5 speakers in the $3-$3500.00 and if you can live without some bass $2k. (starting with the Magnepan (1.6) I can;t PROVE to that the 1.6 is better than the Sophia -- the only person you can prove that to is yourself -- but if you took price completey out of the equation (tough to do) and said to me you have two choices to live with through eternity the B&W N804 at $5kcdn or the Maggie 1.6 at $2k I choose the latter. If price is in then I choose the N804 so I can sell it get the money and buy something better. I try when I can to listen first and ask about price later -- I don;t want that bias to get involved. I listened to the 1.6 i liked most of what I heard and then the price will influence the outcome. When i heard the price of the 1.6 it would generate in me a want to listen to the speaker again because gee it just pounded 3 straight speakers that go for about 30-60% more money. The Sophia had the opposite effect because I said gee it sounded nice but holy crap $16k for that?