WAMM Master Chronosonic by Wilson Audio

[Blumlein 88]

I have that recording and it is a very nice recording. Even if it is all colored up with tubes and tape.

 

[Blumlein 88]

I'll be submitting my order after the holidays, getting all my friends Rolex's and new Caddy's for Christmas right now.

We're pals aren't we Sal?

 

[Sal1950]

We're pals aren't we Sal?

Not to worry Dennis, your top of the list!

 

[RayDunzl]

Some more foo...

http://www.stereophile.com/content/...r-wamm-master-chronosonic#gGBspdo8Pq6uXTsH.97

 

[Blumlein 88]

Some more foo...

http://www.stereophile.com/content/...r-wamm-master-chronosonic#gGBspdo8Pq6uXTsH.97

Hmmm, Wilson big speakers when I have heard them are always extremely good. His Watts and some middle of the line models could be less than enjoyable though good in many ways. I bet these sound great.

Now, to what did you object to the most? Foo about measurable differences in wire twist or perhaps the microseconds alignment foo? And what a shame, Stereophile didn't measure them. Or was it that after talking about microseconds timing they auditioned them with only the finest sources from a turntable of course.

By far the most impressive thing is they are limiting themselves to only making 70 pairs of these at $685,000 a pair. Why that is only a mid-sized Lexus sedan short of $48 million of product. WOW!

Besides why wouldn't someone want at least 5 for surround sound or maybe 11 for Atmos. Mounting the god speaker overhead if it were one of these will be quite the chore. Makes that Beolab speaker for $84K which includes everything except a source seem downright cheap. Not inexpensive, but cheapy cheap.

 

[FrantzM]

I need someone to explain to me how he achieves the Time Alignment they so much talk about... As for the asking price, it is to let you know how much better it has to be. This speaker surpasses anything that cost less and is thus, inferior to anything costing more.

 

[Cosmik]

I need someone to explain to me how he achieves the Time Alignment they so much talk about...

Move the boxes backwards and forwards relative to the listener's ears.

 

[FrantzM]

And that would work at all frequencies... regardless of crossover slopes, etc ???? WoW!!

 

[Sal1950]

And what a shame, Stereophile didn't measure them. Or was it that after talking about microseconds timing they auditioned them with only the finest sources from a turntable of course.

I would guess the measurements will come in the future promised Mikey Fremer review.
Check the comments for my post. LOL

 

[Cosmik]

"It's about time; it's all about time. Flat frequency response, low distortion, extended bandwidth, and accurate timing synchronicity are equally important. It's nice if you have phase coherence, but it is not necessary. What I'm interested in is the synchronicity of the leading edge of each note."

Yes, that's probably what I'd say too if I didn't have phase coherence.

 

[Frank Dernie]

Yes, that's probably what I'd say too if I didn't have phase coherence.

Well whilst it is true that very, very few speakers are phase coherent, Quqd 63 and derivatives perhaps (??) it is also true that almost zero modern recordings are either.

Any recording mixed from multiple spot microphones, ie all pop and nowadays pretty well all classical too, can not be phase coherent.

These two facts lead me to be happy that phase coherence in speakers could make, at best, a microscopically tiny contribution to SQ and then on pretty well only vintage recordings.
If phase coherence was an important contributor to SQ we would have to have been well aware of it and I suppose high-fidelity equipment would never have developed in the way it has.

 

[Purité Audio]

The Kii Three is completely phase coherent on 'normal ' latency, you do lose that though if you select 'low' latency mode. It is the only speaker available to offer this I believe.
Keith

 

[Cosmik]

Well whilst it is true that very, very few speakers are phase coherent, Quqd 63 and derivatives perhaps (??) it is also true that almost zero modern recordings are either.

Any recording mixed from multiple spot microphones, ie all pop and nowadays pretty well all classical too, can not be phase coherent.

These two facts lead me to be happy that phase coherence in speakers could make, at best, a microscopically tiny contribution to SQ and then on pretty well only vintage recordings.
If phase coherence was an important contributor to SQ we would have to have been well aware of it and I suppose high-fidelity equipment would never have developed in the way it has.

A quote from a review of a speaker where the phase correction can be turned off:

Low-latency mode brings the in/ out delay to a perfectly usable 1ms, by disabling the look-ahead element of the LF overload limiting and also by switching off the system phase correction. It makes for a fascinating listening experience. I very much doubt that a change in LF overload protection would be audible at the kind of moderate levels I listen at, however the change of phase response is clearly audible. The monitor loses a little of its imaging ability and overall precision in low-latency mode so that things sound a little less ‘together’.

One problem with the audio 'meme' that "phase doesn't matter" is that historical experiments could not compare undistorted phase against distorted phase because there were no speakers capable of producing high quality sound with undistorted phase. Couple that with the 'meme' that all listening tests are best carried out with in mono with single speakers, and it easy to see how it could have been missed that phase is audible, and especially that undistorted phase is essential for excellent stereo imaging.

As to whether recordings are 'phase coherent', I am not sure what that means. Even if the recording is a composite of several tracks and multiple mics, if the bongo is recorded raw with a phase-coherent mic, then I want to hear it phase coherent when played back.

 

[Thomas savage]

This is not the kii three thread, please don't ambush every thread with kii three propaganda..

Many thanks

 

[Cosmik]

The fact it was a Kii Three review was just incidental. It could have been any speaker where phase correction can be turned on an off.

I have removed the offending words from my earlier posts.

 

[Thomas savage]

The Kii Three is completely phase coherent on 'normal ' latency, you do lose that though if you select 'low' latency mode. It is the only speaker available to offer this I believe.
Keith

Not so, linn make one too.. So I believe .

 

[CAP]

Its the creativity that brings about the desire to push the boundaries in this hobby. We need the David Wilson's and the Dan D'Agostino's, Albert VonShwenkert's to push the boundaries.. We all will benefit from trickle down technology.. Wilson them selves are great at this with using drivers and learned tech in their lower down the tree designs.. Lets embrace these and hope to hear them some day