A really great speaker, one of my fav.

[kexodusc]

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]

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]

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/PD...J_WD_19_20.pdf
A Wilson Maxx review http://www.audioperfectionist.com/PD.../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]

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/PD...J_WD_19_20.pdf
A Wilson Maxx review http://www.audioperfectionist.com/PD.../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]

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/ces2...mage_014.shtml

[theaudiohobby]

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. , 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]

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]

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]

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. , 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]

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?

[theaudiohobby]

RGA,

I currently own an AKG K1000, AKG 501 and Stax SR3 and previously owned Seinheiser HD595 (decided the sound was not for me). So I have my views on this topic, but they are for another day and another thread.

[RGA]

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.