Wilson Audio Speakers: Why do people like them?

[Sokel]

(Strange comment about speaker tonality being “bs” though).

What's so strange about it?
Any nice speaker at that level should be good enough to be EQ-able anechoically (flat-ish FR, nice on and off-axis, etc, the works) so tonality is not a problem, it can be whatever you like.
Compression, inability of handling high crest factor works, etc is very much a problem.

 

[Lsc]

I mainly heard the Wilson’s at Axpona the last few years and they all sound excellent. I don’t know how they measure but from the Sasha to Sabrina to maybe the Alexx they had there…and yes the bass and dynamics are something else.

Having said this…I am at my endgame with my salon2 with Gothams using the CR-1. I have more bass than I need.

And the Wilsons are cost prohibitive. But they sound great - the false assumption that the very wealthy are deaf sounds a presumptuous to me.

 

[Pearljam5000]

Because they look awesome and have many drivers

 

[Bjorn]

The Wilson Chronosonic XVX is a terrible design from a technical standpoint. Serious phase and diffraction issues. IMO they also sound exactly like that and I believe it's the price tag, commercial, and lack of references that fill up the rooms at exhibitions.

The smaller models are ok. Not great sounding for anyone with really good references but good enough to convince many. Wide cabinets with low baffle step does have advantages. The felt minimizes diffraction some and the cabinets seem to be resonant free. They generally sound better than for example Genelec at shows.

 

[MediumRare]

So @MediumRare How many Wilson based systems and/or demonstrations have you personally experienced?

For me, I've always been impressed, but felt they were, without fail, too bright to my ears. But many of those systems were put together by older audiophiles, often in sparsely decorated designer rooms with a lot of 'live' surfaces. I'm sure in the right room, carefully set-up, they would be just as good, and better than most loudspeakers if you could live with their looks.

I think two (both at Axpona), and they sounded great. I wanted to get a conversation going here as I am not fully satisfied with Spinoramas as a predictor of great sound. Amir has noted some outliers as well. I’m hungry to find the missing ingredients beyond a target FR curve and smooth directivity. Not to say those aren’t helpful, but there must be more.

 

[Ilkless]

Because coherent, smoothly dispersing speakers are so rare in that megabuck woo-woo zone that almost no one seriously shopping at that level would have heard one.

So give it a lumpy thumpy curve, low distortion and high SPL and people just have no reference of better that's grounded in psychoacoustics.

In that sense they are like luxury Cerwin Vegas, regardless of what some certainly woo-woo apologists that love crapping up ASR with pseudo-intellectual sophistry like to think

 

[Mort]

My golden-eared dad left me a pair of Wilson Sophia's when he passed. I sold them to a tube amp guy and bought some big Genelecs. The Wilson's were ridiculously heavy.

 

[Mnyb]

I think two (both at Axpona), and they sounded great. I wanted to get a conversation going here as I am not fully satisfied with Spinoramas as a predictor of great sound. Amir has noted some outliers as well. I’m hungry to find the missing ingredients beyond a target FR curve and smooth directivity. Not to say those aren’t helpful, but there must be more.

I think that other thing is as simple that some tracks in some certain room with some certain speaker can sound good , because circle of confusion etc the stars align .

Vs scientifically designed speakers tries to make make most tracks in most rooms sound good with varying sucess.

And spl not in playing super loud but in a way the puny 2 ways many audiophiles are used to does not have . Imagine a speakers that does not budge in its whole operation range large expensive speakers tend to be truly full range.

 

[boxerfan88]

From the linked Stereophile article measurements, most (not all) look pretty decent for in-room measurements. Pretty flat in the midrange, nice bass hump.

( I have not heard the Wilsons myself. )

 

[Bjorn]

I think two (both at Axpona), and they sounded great. I wanted to get a conversation going here as I am not fully satisfied with Spinoramas as a predictor of great sound. Amir has noted some outliers as well. I’m hungry to find the missing ingredients beyond a target FR curve and smooth directivity. Not to say those aren’t helpful, but there must be more.

Yes, there's more for sure. I have written several times about the weaknesses of Spinorama and also why it at times can be directly misleading. I'm not going to bring that discussion in here, but you can read some about it in introduction thread below. https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...a-high-quality-speaker-many-can-afford.58054/

 

[Sokel]

Yes, there's more for sure. I have written several times about the weaknesses of Spinorama and also why it at times can be directly misleading. I'm not going to bring that discussion in here, but you can read some about it in introduction thread below. https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...a-high-quality-speaker-many-can-afford.58054/

For someone shopping at the $30-40k there are sure better options (and nicer looking) which also follow the general rules.
I mean look at this beauty:

Rockport Technologies Avior II loudspeaker Measurements | Stereophile.com

Sidebar 3: Measurements I used DRA Labs' MLSSA system and a calibrated DPA 4006 microphone to measure the Rockport Avior II's frequency response in the farfield, and an Earthworks QTC-40 for the nearfield and in-room responses. A complication was that the 220-lb loudspeaker was too bulky for me...

www.stereophile.com

and the in-room comparison with Magico S5 MKII (Rockport is red)

But companies don't only sell speakers, they sell stories, and Wilson probably knows how to do it.

 

[Bjorn]

For someone shopping at the $30-40k there are sure better options (and nicer looking) which also follow the general rules.
I mean look at this beauty:

View attachment 441187

View attachment 441188

Rockport Technologies Avior II loudspeaker Measurements | Stereophile.com

Sidebar 3: Measurements I used DRA Labs' MLSSA system and a calibrated DPA 4006 microphone to measure the Rockport Avior II's frequency response in the farfield, and an Earthworks QTC-40 for the nearfield and in-room responses. A complication was that the 220-lb loudspeaker was too bulky for me...

www.stereophile.com

and the in-room comparison with Magico S5 MKII (Rockport is red)

View attachment 441189

But companies don't only sell speakers, they sell stories, and Wilson probably knows how to do it.

Not sure you are aware, but you just confirmed what I indicated. You're showing a very nice near field measurement of a speaker and which would likely score very high on the spinorama but the measurement in the listening position isn't very good. Remember that the graph is with 1/3 octave smoothing.

A better speaker design would measure much more even in the listening position but the Spinorama wouldn't reveal this. And that's only the frequency response in the room, there's also much more to speaker design.

 

[Sokel]

Not sure you are aware, but you just confirmed what I indicated. You're showing a very nice near field measurement of a speaker and which would likely score very high on the spinorama but the measurement in the listening position isn't very good. Remember that the graph is with 1/3 octave smoothing.

A better speaker design would measure much more even in the listening position but the Spinorama wouldn't reveal this. And that's only the frequency response in the room, there's also much more to speaker design.

???
JA's room is a real one*, that's not the estimated in room response like we use to see at Klippel.
As far as I remember is untreated and the MLP is around 3 meters. If I remember well positioning is a little strange too.
+/- 5dB up to 10kHz in real,untreated room is not bad at all.

I would put more value to the comparison, which irons out things.

*Edit: I think I found it:

 

[Pearljam5000]

Who makes the drivers for Wilson? Or are they made in house?

 

[Frank Dernie]

Four decades ago I experimented with reducing cabinet talk in my DIY speakers and found it made a difference in my auditioning.
A microphone does not "know" whether it is measuring accurate sound coming from a drive unit or hash radiated from cabinet walls so AFAIK the only way to estimate how big a difference cabinet talk makes is by calculation rather than measurement.
I remember being told of, and briefly experiencing, the difference made by an inert cabinet by a clever engineer I know. It sounded significant to me.

Wilson are not the only speaker makers with an inert cabinet but they were one of the first to make a considerable effort.

 

[Pearljam5000]

Love the colors

 

[Keith_W]

???
JA's room is a real one*, that's not the estimated in room response like we use to see at Klippel.
As far as I remember is untreated and the MLP is around 3 meters. If I remember well positioning is a little strange too.
+/- 5dB up to 10kHz in real,untreated room is not bad at all.

I would put more value to the comparison, which irons out things.

*Edit: I think I found it:

View attachment 441194

That's JA's room? He owns the same speakers as me! I never thought I would meet another one.

 

[Purité Audio]

Hideous, imho.
Keith

 

[Sokel]

That's JA's room? He owns the same speakers as me! I never thought I would meet another one.

If I'm not wrong that's the one.
And if I'm also not wrong he doesn't own speakers like that, his own are older, don't rememberer which.
These are probably there for testing, search if you can find them at a review.

 

[DanielT]

18" with 4" VC is serious real estate.
I'm not sure though that they would do as good as they could with a small cabinet in terms of dry punch.

I take 8183A as a reference for the smallest possible bass cabinets when it comes for non-soffit-mounted true high SPL mains.

8183A was a good example.

If size is not an obstacle, you can load anything into a pair of speakers. Why not double 18 inch bass drivers in the speakers and then place them in a small apartment? By the way, it only took a few months after he built them before he sold them. Fascinating that he wasn't beaten to death by the neighbors before that. I followed that story on another forum. I'm guessing it's PA 18 inch bass drivers, but I don't remember exactly:

So DIY bass boxes are only limited by the physical size, in combination with interest/wallet. A pair of stable large bass boxes can be built by anyone with tools (though sensible port tuning in combination with a resonance-free, non-puffing port can be a challenge to achieve). But , then to get a good Hifi full range speaker, as you and most others know, you need a lot more. That when you add (DIY) top speaker to the bass boxes.

The speakers in the picture above might have sounded good, mediocre or crap. I have no idea.