Wilson Audio Speakers: Why do people like them?

[Keith_W]

There are measurements here and there of large-ish ones, Stereophile has lots and I see no reason not to considered them.

I did specifically say "Spinorama" in my post. In-room measurements of the axial response does not give you a complete picture, i'm sure you will agree.

 

[Sokel]

I did specifically say "Spinorama" in my post. In-room measurements of the axial response does not give you a complete picture, i'm sure you will agree.

That goes without saying.
The specific review is a rarity though, probably because of size/weight even if it includes a semi-anechoic one.

They usually do full spins as you can see at the rest posted.

Here's the compared Magico A5, full spin despite it's 85kg.

Magico A5 loudspeaker Measurements | Stereophile.com

Sidebar 3: Measurements Because of the Magico A5's bulk and weight, I drove my test gear to Jim Austin's apartment to perform the measurements in situ. As always, I used DRA Labs' MLSSA system, an Earthworks microphone preamplifier, and a calibrated DPA 4006 microphone to measure the Magico A5's...

www.stereophile.com

Wilson is much-much heavier though at 225 kg.

 

[thewas]

Not great at all, agreed to that and they look even worst as they follow closely the wonky on-axis response.
But no error, so perfectly EQable at least.

?? As well known equalisation doesn't work well at loudspeakers with poor directivity.

 

[Sokel]

?? As well known equalisation doesn't work well at loudspeakers with poor directivity.

What I see, is not poor directivity (apart from Alexia maybe)
What I see if the off-axis matching the on-axis, despite the mediocre response.

That's equable, it means that reflections follow the direct response.

 

[Multicore]

Sorry for arriving late. To the Q in the OP:

No idea. Why do you ask?

 

[thewas]

What I see, is not poor directivity (apart from Alexia maybe)

So these are not poor directivities for you?

The Magico one you posted above is smooth, not this mess.

 

[Sokel]

So these are not poor directivities for you?

View attachment 463963
View attachment 463964

View attachment 463965

The Magico one you posted above is smooth, not this mess.

No, there are not.
Poor FR maybe, but directivity follows.
It would be poor if the off-axis was messing with the direct response or be vastly different as we see at other spins.

Edit: the chart may be deceiving, as the 20kHz mark is not the end of the chart, it's probably 25-30kHz up there.

 

[thewas]

No, there are not.
Poor FR maybe, but directivity follows.
It would be poor if the off-axis was messing with the direct response as we see at other spins.

No, the Stereophile directivity plots are normalized to the response on listening axis, so if they show bumps and dips these are directivity deviations.

 

[Fledermaus]

The looks are of course subjective, but even if they aren't your cup of tea you'll think them well made. They are very picky about setup. VERY. I think the latter is because they try and achieve 1st order roll offs between drivers which necessarily makes for large up and down off axis response.

This.
I listened to a pair of big Wilsons once, as a salesman was trying to impress me while I was shopping for a preamp, and visual ugliness apart, I got almost uncomfortable due do what I attributed to phase artifacts between drivers within speakers, which prevented me from getting any listening pleasure.
Presumably too close listening distance (room was smallish) and no fine tuning wrt relative depth of adjustment for each of the stacked boxes. Anyway, not something I'd wish to have to deal with at home.

 

[Sokel]

No, the Stereophile directivity plots are normalized to the response on listening axis, so if they show bumps and dips these are directivity deviations.

It's normalized at the tweeter axis, not in general and it also includes the reference response.

 

[thewas]

It's normalized at the tweeter axis, not in general and it also includes the reference response.

Its normalised to the listening axis response and everything seen there is a directivity deviation. This can be also easily seen as the line for 0° is always flat.

 

[Sokel]

No, its normalised to the listening window response and everything seen there is a directivity deviation. This can be also easily seen as the line for 0° is always flat.

Tweeter axis may come handy in quasi anechoic like Stereophile's as a stable reference but it's not the acoustic listening axis per se.
The shape of the > 30° off-axis following each other is the only stable clue here. Very poor directivity would also make those show uneven.

 

[Sokel]

As an example. compare a good directivity one, Stereophile Vs Erin:

Really close.

 

[thewas]

Tweeter axis may come handy in quasi anechoic like Stereophile's as a stable reference but it's not the acoustic listening axis per se.
The shape of the > 30° off-axis following each other is the only stable clue here. Very poor directivity would also make those show uneven.

Stereophile doesn't say they always use the tweeter level and in the end even if they don't it will be an offset but won't make huge bumps and dips suddenly appear or disappear especially on the horizontal one.

As an example. compare a good directivity one, Stereophile Vs Erin:

Yes, so what is your argument? The Stereophile directivity measurements of most Wilson loudspeakers are by far not as good and thus would be also with different representations like above or a contour plot.

 

[AdrianusG]

I haven't seen detailed measurements of any of the big Wilson models. I would guess they at least have good bass extension and SPL... maybe good time alignment given all the goofy physical adjustment they offer.

But of course, knowing they cost $2M probably makes them sound a lot better. If you told people they were $300 apiece they might not sound like much.

They look like speakers Darth Vader would have in his personal chambers. That's got to be worth something?

Yes, but the black version of course, Darth Vader i mean!

 

[Sokel]

Stereophile doesn't say they always use the tweeter level and in the end even if they don't it will be an offset but won't make huge bumps and dips suddenly appear or disappear especially on the horizontal one.


Yes, so what is your argument? The Stereophile directivity measurements of most Wilson loudspeakers are by far not as good and thus would be also with different representations like above or a contour plot.

Of course they are not as good, that's not the point.
My point is that the contour plots (as bad as they are) are even-ish up to 20kHz (SP's chart is deceiving going to 30kHz) so EQuable.

Is it as good as it gets? Of course not. Given the choices though not bad at all.

(at least its enjoyable, it's not the irritating new B&W presence that takes no prisoners)

 

[thewas]

My point is that the contour plots (as bad as they are) are even-ish up to 20kHz (SP's chart is deceiving going to 30kHz) so EQuable.

Sorry but as much as we repeat ourselves there I cannot agree to that, those Wilson plots are textbook example of not good directivity where equalisation doesn't work well.

 

[Sokel]

Sorry but as much as we repeat ourselves there I cannot agree to that, those Wilson plots are textbook example of not good directivity where equalisation doesn't work well.

I'll stop repeating then.
Even if we agreed that it's EQable and we wanted to EQ it (I wouldn't, not up high at least) do we have reliable anechoic data to do it?

That's what started it.
My experience all the times I have listened to Wilsons are the same, nothing bothered me and mid-bass-bass urges you to push them, they kick like mules with the right works.
I do prefer others more though, and looks play their part too as I don;t like middle stuff.

You're either industrial like Kyron Gaia or your nice as SF or Rockport. The in-betweens are not my kind.

 

[Blockader]

I'll stop repeating then.
Even if we agreed that it's EQable and we wanted to EQ it (I wouldn't, not up high at least) do we have reliable anechoic data to do it?

That's what started it.
My experience all the times I have listened to Wilsons are the same, nothing bothered me and mid-bass-bass urges you to push them, they kick like mules with the right works.
I do prefer others more though, and looks play their part too as I don;t like middle stuff.

You're either industrial like Kyron Gaia or your nice as SF or Rockport. The in-betweens are not my kind.

Even with speakers that have decent directivity, using on-axis EQ with peaking filters above 2x / 3x of the room transition frequency is overly optimistic and should be avoided unless absolutely necessary.

I experienced this first hand while I was using KH 310s. I tried everything to fix the KH 310's issues in my room, but despite its good directivity the problems persisted regardless of what on-axis EQ I applied. Making the in-room response tidy & smooth isn't answer to everything. We are cursed and blessed at the same time for not having linear hearing function like microphones have.

 

[Digital_Thor]

What on-axis EQ did you apply.... cause I can't see you can do much to improve on this:

Measurements for speaker Neumann KH 310A

www.spinorama.org