Wilson Audio TuneTot Review (high-end bookshelf speaker)

[Bill Brown]

I suspect the upper bass "bump" is a classic technique to give the impression of more bass than there really is, subjectively. The classic example of this is from JA's reviews of the LS5/3a:

"but it can be seen in fig.3 that the woofer's response peaks by about the same 6dB in the upper bass. This is the classic "LS3/5a bump," which gives the impression that this little speaker produces more bass than it actually does. However, this bump will make the speaker sensitive to excessive boundary reinforcement when not used in free space."

Falcon Acoustics LS3/5a loudspeaker Measurements

Sidebar 3: Measurements

www.stereophile.com

Further up, I suspect from Amir's measurements that the subtle peak around 1khz will add subjective detail, and the 2-3khz dip, though a bit lower than the classic BBC dip, will be subjectively pleasing to many listeners (who may not know or care how it measures)- see classic Spendors, Harbeths, others.

So while they are not as linear as many of the studio monitors measured on this site, it is certainly possible they would be enjoyed by many music lovers. They might feel that all small speakers involve compromises and think that the compromises chosen in these are worthwhile.

Bill

 

[Frank Dernie]

Did you get your Taycan yet?

No. Over 5 months since I paid the deposit

 

[zeppzeppzepp]

Amir is a bass head.

I would feel pride of that if it's true.
Why does anyone want to listen flat-response small speakers in random rooms and think the bass will be accurate? even with Dirac and subs whatever, reality is not just as people thought.
I'll be pride of being a bass head if I need to.
It depends...........

 

[Frgirard]

I suspect the upper bass "bump" is a classic technique to give the impression of more bass than there really is, subjectively. The classic example of this is from JA's reviews of the LS5/3a:

"but it can be seen in fig.3 that the woofer's response peaks by about the same 6dB in the upper bass. This is the classic "LS3/5a bump," which gives the impression that this little speaker produces more bass than it actually does. However, this bump will make the speaker sensitive to excessive boundary reinforcement when not used in free space."

Falcon Acoustics LS3/5a loudspeaker Measurements

Sidebar 3: Measurements

www.stereophile.com

Further up, I suspect from Amir's measurements that the subtle peak around 1khz will add subjective detail, and the 2-3khz dip, though a bit lower than the classic BBC dip, will be subjectively pleasing to many listeners (who may not know or care how it measures)- see classic Spendors, Harbeths, others.

So while they are not as linear as many of the studio monitors measured on this site, it is certainly possible they would be enjoyed by many music lovers. They might feel that all small speakers involve compromises and think that the compromises chosen in these are worthwhile.

Bill

Do you think Wilson design a speaker with this peaks and deeps?
Me, I think not. They can not do.

 

[Robin L]

Do you think Wilson design a speaker with this peaks and deeps?
Me, I think not. They can not do.

I know the original WATTs had a gawdaful peak around 4k-8k, really screamed up there. I remember one Audiophile King toss socks over the tweeters to deal with it.

 

[zeppzeppzepp]

I suspect the upper bass "bump" is a classic technique to give the impression of more bass than there really is, subjectively. The classic example of this is from JA's reviews of the LS5/3a:

"but it can be seen in fig.3 that the woofer's response peaks by about the same 6dB in the upper bass. This is the classic "LS3/5a bump," which gives the impression that this little speaker produces more bass than it actually does. However, this bump will make the speaker sensitive to excessive boundary reinforcement when not used in free space."

Falcon Acoustics LS3/5a loudspeaker Measurements

Sidebar 3: Measurements

www.stereophile.com

Further up, I suspect from Amir's measurements that the subtle peak around 1khz will add subjective detail, and the 2-3khz dip, though a bit lower than the classic BBC dip, will be subjectively pleasing to many listeners (who may not know or care how it measures)- see classic Spendors, Harbeths, others.

So while they are not as linear as many of the studio monitors measured on this site, it is certainly possible they would be enjoyed by many music lovers. They might feel that all small speakers involve compromises and think that the compromises chosen in these are worthwhile.

Bill

Right, it's an old trick.
If this is done to the cheap speakers and it'll be very terrible (so does the terrible LS3/5A, ha......though not so severe with closed design).
Money buys less distortion, I'll get anything cheap with low distortion and fix whatever problem by EQ or something.
People get almost no tool to improve distortion without degrading the design.

 

[pablolie]

Mind you I am beginning to think Porsche ownership is intended for people more patient and tolerant than me...

OTOH in my opinion everybody needs to own a 911 at least once in their life. I am more of a motorcycle guy (I adore motorcycles in fact), but loved my 911 until my ex-wife totaled it (she was fine, the car did its job even though it was a F150 that ran a red light).

That said, we have raised the subject of cars and watches and motorcycles, which clearly show there's more to buying decisions than pure rationality. Yes, some can say the Wilsons here are too expensive for the measured performance... but does any Ferrari or 911 owner extract ever maximum performance of the car? I know for a fact that one of my motorcycles, which has about 180hp, would kill me on the spot if I tried to truly push its capabilities on the road (or turned the electronic aid functions off :-D).

 

[Bill Brown]

I'll get anything cheap with low distortion and fix whatever problem by EQ or something.
People get almost no tool to improve distortion without degrading the design.

I, and many (most?) others here would also, though there are many listeners out there who want to place them, hook them up, and listen to music. They might be perfectly content.

Bill

 

[beagleman]

As we can see, the dip about 1.5kHz is there in the raw driver response too.

I did not want to say I am sure it is natural, as that makes one look like a Know it all type.....

Adding the crossover will give that ledge area as it pulls all the upper range down lower.

 

[MattHooper]

OTOH in my opinion everybody needs to own a 911 at least once in their life. I am more of a motorcycle guy (I adore motorcycles in fact), but loved my 911 until my ex-wife totaled it (she was fine, the car did its job even though it was a F150 that ran a red light).

My pal is a motorcycle fanatic. I get the appeal.

But they terrify me - every ride I've ever had on a motorcycle has felt unpleasant and a constant threat. So...they ain't for me.

I really enjoy driving and do like sports cars, as in I'd enjoy owning one if it was given to me. I don't spend any time thinking about them though.

 

[Crosstalk]

Again...you just keep begging the question. This is what happens when you refuse to consider any view but your own on a subject.

The purpose of any X derives from the values/goals of a person...it is not intrinsic to X.

It's like a Sushi chef opining that any knife that fails to be optimized for cutting sushi is "broken," they are poor knives. But actually, people can design knives for other purposes which fulfill THOSE purposes well. The Sushi chef is blind to anything be beyond his own use case. Don't be that Sushi chef. ;-)

The goal YOU have for a loudspeaker - e.g. 'accurate sound reproduction' whatever specifically you have in mind for that - is YOUR goal, but it is not written in to the fabric of the universe that it is THE GOAL that every designer, or every consumer has for loudspeakers. The sooner you can accept this, the less puzzled and frusterated or annoyed you will be by instances like the Wilson or other speakers.

An example I've used before are Zu speakers, which always measure with wonky frequency response errors. They are "broken" if the goal for those speakers was Perfect Accuracy. But that is NOT the goal for the speakers. The designer self admittedly cares less about even frequency response and more about the sense of vividness and liveliness that he finds exciting in reproduced sound, and which also can remind him of "live" music.

I'd never heard a Zu speaker until I was enticed in to a room at an audio show by sound that was particularly "live" sounding to my ears in terms of a sense of life-like energy and vivid "attack" to the transients and playing of the instruments, especially drums and guitar. It really did have a bit more feeling of "music happening now, being played by musicians" than simply being a recording. I only found out afterward it was Zu speakers I was listening to. Then I instantly "got" what attracted many to that sound. Longer listening with more tracks may have cued me more in to the frequency response errors, and so I may have in the end said "not for me" but I'd STILL understand why they have attracted the fans they have. In on-line forums I've seen tons of truly ecstatically happy Zu speaker owners. The designer likes a certain sound, it's not perfectly accurate, and it seems there is an audience for that sound, a niche he is fulfilling, so good on him and lucky for those who love those speakers!

It's great to point out the objective performance of a speaker, and great to correlate the sound to audible characteristics. But it's also wise to recognize that not everyone shares your goals....and that's ok. You can still work to achieve your own goals (by purchasing equipment designed toward that goal - e.g. "accuracy" as you want to define it).

I’m not begging, but you guys are the tune tot fans who are begging me to like it. Sorry guys, it’s garbage to me. But one guys garbage can be another man’s gem. For me gems are genelecs, revels and kefs. We are entitled to have our opinions. And this here is my opinion. You can continue to disagree.

 

[Crosstalk]

Come on guy...do you take yourself seriously?

How you going to make a 10db bump in a closed box with the right volume? speaker has SPL of 86db, woofer has 86db? How can you bring it to 96db in a box with the right volume? I like to learn it.

Can you please say something constructive about the rest of the spectrum?

You are not passing my question over and over again because you have not measured it with foam plugs and there is no graph of the née measurmen. Every thing you say on the top of it is just escaping with some stick man’s argument

 

[Crosstalk]

Come on guy...do you take yourself seriously?

How you going to make a 10db bump in a closed box with the right volume? speaker has SPL of 86db, woofer has 86db? How can you bring it to 96db in a box with the right volume? I like to learn it.

Can you please say something constructive about the rest of the spectrum?

There is nothing constructive to say about this speaker. At its price is a horrible speaker. That can be the most constructive thing I can say about it.

 

[beagleman]

I suspect the upper bass "bump" is a classic technique to give the impression of more bass than there really is, subjectively. The classic example of this is from JA's reviews of the LS5/3a:

"but it can be seen in fig.3 that the woofer's response peaks by about the same 6dB in the upper bass. This is the classic "LS3/5a bump," which gives the impression that this little speaker produces more bass than it actually does. However, this bump will make the speaker sensitive to excessive boundary reinforcement when not used in free space."

Falcon Acoustics LS3/5a loudspeaker Measurements

Sidebar 3: Measurements

www.stereophile.com

Further up, I suspect from Amir's measurements that the subtle peak around 1khz will add subjective detail, and the 2-3khz dip, though a bit lower than the classic BBC dip, will be subjectively pleasing to many listeners (who may not know or care how it measures)- see classic Spendors, Harbeths, others.

So while they are not as linear as many of the studio monitors measured on this site, it is certainly possible they would be enjoyed by many music lovers. They might feel that all small speakers involve compromises and think that the compromises chosen in these are worthwhile.

Bill

I have some (un-named) speakers that use the same "Tricks"....The 1khz rise, and the 2-4 or so dip.

They sound very vivid and lifelike, at least when I listen to them alone.....

But as soon as I switch to something more neutral, the other ones seem like a boosted too forward and fake to some degree.

So it is QUITE possible to like something, until you compare to neutral sound.

 

[pablolie]

I’m not begging, but you guys are the tune tot fans who are begging me to like it. Sorry guys, it’s garbage to me. But one guys garbage can be another man’s gem. For me gems are genelecs, revels and kefs. We are entitled to have our opinions. And this here is my opinion. You can continue to disagree.

In my mind, personal opinions and beliefs on stuff that we decide within our personal realm only merit brief discussions.
If anyone was disputing the measurements or claiming they are close to some ideal, hey let's argue some about that.
OTOH I know I sometimes. love speakers that supposedly measure poorly. An example are the Totem Dream catchers, which - as ususl- I love by pairing them with a sub and using a humble NAD D3020. I set that system up at my girlfriend's place. I spend many completely enjoyable hours there listening to music (among other things :-D)... and she played flute in a classical orchestra and loves the sound (she can hear herself on some recordings, she says). Streophile had an interesting review about those speakers, with the listener absolutely loving them while the measurement guy was not happy with the results (for reasons very similar to the Wilson's in this thread). I also owned Totem Element Fires that I loved even though I am pretty sure they wouldn't measure awesome either.
So to me, measurements are not necessarily the gatekeeper to great sound. I am always curious about the Genelecs, but must admit their design isn't my favorite.

 

[DSJR]

I suspect the upper bass "bump" is a classic technique to give the impression of more bass than there really is, subjectively. The classic example of this is from JA's reviews of the LS5/3a:

"but it can be seen in fig.3 that the woofer's response peaks by about the same 6dB in the upper bass. This is the classic "LS3/5a bump," which gives the impression that this little speaker produces more bass than it actually does. However, this bump will make the speaker sensitive to excessive boundary reinforcement when not used in free space."

Falcon Acoustics LS3/5a loudspeaker Measurements

Sidebar 3: Measurements

www.stereophile.com

Further up, I suspect from Amir's measurements that the subtle peak around 1khz will add subjective detail, and the 2-3khz dip, though a bit lower than the classic BBC dip, will be subjectively pleasing to many listeners (who may not know or care how it measures)- see classic Spendors, Harbeths, others.

So while they are not as linear as many of the studio monitors measured on this site, it is certainly possible they would be enjoyed by many music lovers. They might feel that all small speakers involve compromises and think that the compromises chosen in these are worthwhile.

Bill

Do PLEASE remember that the LS3/5A was NEVER ORIGINALLY intended for domestic use and the godawful response shown above is mimicking the mid 1980's B110 drive unit (1.5khz peak) which appeared after KEF were apparently forced to alter the surround material (I can't give a link but it has been mentioned online). Early 3/5A's had the midrange scoop (deliberate I believe) and the tweeter being fizzed up more than an uncovered T27 was again to emphasise hiss and so on in program material in OB vans as per its original usage.

I believe it became a good commercial thing for the makers to market dumbed down versions for the domestic market (I remember the BBC insisted on absolute centre-line spec samples for their own use and they all had XLR sockets on the back I also recall). Ghastly screechy screamers threse things are (the vastly superior on paper and to me Harbeth P3ES3 models are found by 3/5A fans to be too sweet and 'nice' sounding, so choose your poison here), but the uninitiated love the DEEETAIL these things appear to produce and who cares about the elevated prices of even these?

 

[Pdxwayne]

You are not passing my question over and over again because you have not measured it with foam plugs and there is no graph of the née measurmen. Every thing you say on the top of it is just escaping with some stick man’s argument

Read the chart again. Read the green texts. Amir already measured with port closed. How can you miss it?

 

[beagleman]

There is nothing constructive to say about this speaker. At its price is a horrible speaker. That can be the most constructive thing I can say about it.

You are mis-placing your holiday angst, against this cute little Tiny Tot speaker.

Seriously, its not for you, or for me or most of the forum, but just ignore the thread. Not worth getting all worked up over my friend!

 

[DanielT]

I have some (un-named) speakers that use the same "Tricks"....The 1khz rise, and the 2-4 or so dip.

They sound very vivid and lifelike, at least when I listen to them alone.....

But as soon as I switch to something more neutral, the other ones seem like a boosted too forward and fake to some degree.

So it is QUITE possible to like something, until you compare to neutral sound.

I've experienced that. There is an allure in that extra colored. It attracts attention. But in the end, I probably want them neutral anyway.

Though it's a matter of taste.However, completely flat without any appealing curves eh .... best to stop with allusions.

 

[watchnerd]

The more I read this thread, the more I want to go demo the Tune Tots.

Feels subversive.