Wilson Audio TuneTot Review (high-end bookshelf speaker)

[Leif]

There must in fact be many more rich people than I tend to think, because our local suburban shopping centre has a Rolex dealership that fairly regularly sells watches that cost more than the TuneTots. In fact, I'm hardly rich and if I had to spend the cost of my system on a from scratch replacement I could (but no way I would) put them in that replacement system (but I don't drink, drive, smoke, etc) and my wife doesn't go in for expensive items, just books in large quantities

The economics aren't so bad for them, and these speakers will sell. So they'd better be good enough for Amir to recommend.

Rolex is a unique brand, there aren’t many luxury brands outside of cars that are a household name, and which are instantly recognisable such that fakes and design copies are commonplace. Rolex is a true Veblen good, it is a symbol of success, and many fairly ordinary people aspire to a Rolex. Apparently they are very good at managing supply in order to maintain demand and brand status.

I had never heard of Wilson before reading this post, but then again I’m British and not an audiophile. Obviously you are right that they are priced according to what the market will tolerate, using lots of marketing science and/or knowhow. I think the name TuneTot is clever.

I do think Amir has sullied his brand a tad, as he has previously rubbished items based on poor measurements, and yet here we have him recommending an item with atrocious measurement. Still, noone is perfect.

 

[Purité Audio]

They have ‘sullied’ themselves Amir has merely exposed them for what they are, hugely overpriced mediocrity.
Keith

 

[Mart68]

They were specifically recommended without taking the price into account.

Obviously there is no rational reason to pay that kind of money for that level of performance. Unless you really like the look of them or want to impress the one mate you have who might know what they are and what they cost. Or random people on the less enlightened hi-fi forums.

Everyone has heard of Rolex, I bet that less than one in ten thousand has heard of Wilson.

 

[MattHooper]

They have ‘sullied’ themselves Amir has merely exposed them for what they are, hugely overpriced mediocrity.
Keith

The host clearly disagrees that they produce "mediocre" sound.

Unless maybe you also consider the Revel products to which he favorably compared the Wilson are also "mediocre":


"For comparison, I switched back and forth a dozen times with Revel M106 speaker ($2,000). The Revel had a smaller halo and sounded more focused than the TuneTot. It had none of the brilliance of the Tunetot but his was a dual edged sword in that the TuneTot constantly gave the impression of a more detailed, and "audiophile" high frequency notes that were very nicely delineated. TuneTot also had deeper and cleaner bass response than the M106. Overall, I preferred the TuneTot over Revel.


And even compared to the Revel Salon2, which sounded better overall, Amir still found aspects of the TuneTot could "amaze" him.:


I briefly compared the TuneTot to my Revel Salon 2 ($23,000). Revel did not have the exaggerated spatial qualities of the high frequencies that TuneTot had but overall presented a much more balanced tonality and of course, much more bass impact. Its midrange was so smooth and nice. Still, I was amazed how the TuneTot did not sound small compared to it whereas the M106 did"



You are of course free to disagree with our host.

This review was a nice indication that Amir is not so dogmatic as to never give a high priced audiophile speaker any props.

 

[pablolie]

...
I do think Amir has sullied his brand a tad, as he has previously rubbished items based on poor measurements, and yet here we have him recommending an item with atrocious measurement. Still, noone is perfect.

"Sullied" is way too strong a word. He measures diligently and fairly, and provides us with all the info we need to decide if something may pique our interest or not. The recommendation part is -as always- influenced by purely subjective factors - with a "form of the day" variable thrown in. I never read too much into it, because when it comes to subjectivity I'd rather create my own - as we all do, I think.

 

[MattHooper]

I do think Amir has sullied his brand a tad, as he has previously rubbished items based on poor measurements, and yet here we have him recommending an item with atrocious measurement. Still, noone is perfect.

Nonsense. Rather, he's shown he's not as close-minded as some of his critics assert.

Look, you can set some goal as to how you want speakers to measure, and then evaluate them in terms of how closely they meet that goal.
That can make life easier if you just have a set of measurements you are trying to hit and then "job done." That can also make it easier for the layman:
"Just look for a speaker that measures like this..."

But that is not all there is to say in audio. All the other speakers...which are most speakers...sound different than the ones that hit that particular measurement
metric. And it can be interesting (to many) to see in what ways they sound different from one another. Speakers are complex, all the ways they can influence the signal, and expertly predicting EXACTLY how all speakers will sound just from the measurements is not easy, as virtually everyone who measures speakers attests.
That's why attempts to subjectively evaluate the sound in a review can be valuable as well.

Sometimes a speaker that doesn't measure exactly as prescribed by the Harman curve can, balancing other attributes, still sound quite impressive.
Which is exactly what Amir found. Despite it's tiny size, the Wilson sounded bigger and more impressive than the Revel bookshelf speaker.

That's a nice bit of subjective data to know. It also comports well with the impressions of other people who have had the speaker to review.

This place is very useful, but it also has an internal struggle to keep from getting too dogmatic, and reviews like this one help with that.

 

[RobL]

And yet many in this forum lust after professional monitor speakers like Genelec:

Which I find distinctly off-putting.

I can see why some find the Wilson speakers to be ugly….

But still, fit, finish and fine looking materials can go a long way to upgrading the look of a speaker. I'd take the look of the Wilson Sabrina speakers over the
plastic-butt-hole look of the Genelecs any day:

What? I feel like I’ve returned to grade 2…

 

[Killingbeans]

He's not wrong though. They do have some b-hole aesthetics going on.

But I don't care. I'd still love to own some.

 

[DMill]

He's not wrong though. They do have some b-hole aesthetics going on.

But I don't care. I'd still love to own some.

Me too. So I can sell ‘‘em for some BMRs

 

[RobL]

He's not wrong though. They do have some b-hole aesthetics going on.

But I don't care. I'd still love to own some.

Sorry, but is this what ASR is morphing in to? Certain members are slowly transitioning it to another subjectivist cynosure.

 

[Killingbeans]

Are you kidding me? Do you really believe that "good looking speakers" is an objective term?

From what I've seen, the Genelec Ones are extremely good speakers, and I'd truly love to own a system based on them.

Why do you care that I talk about the visual associations I get from their function-over-form design?

 

[RobL]

Are you kidding me? Do you really believe that "good looking speakers" is an objective term?

From what I've seen, the Genelec Ones are extremely good speakers, and I'd truly love to own a system based on them.

Why do you care that I talk about the visual associations I get from their function-over-form design?

Not directed at you.

 

[Killingbeans]

Fair enough. Still, I don't mind a devil's advocate as long as he/she makes a good point.

 

[pablolie]

To quote Ovid: "video meliora proboque deteriora sequor" aka "I see and approve the better but follow the worse".

 

[MattHooper]

Sorry, but is this what ASR is morphing in to? Certain members are slowly transitioning it to another subjectivist cynosure.

So...subjective opinions about the look of audio gear is out of bounds on ASR?

Shirley, you can't be serious.

 

[RobL]

So...subjective opinions about the look of audio gear is out of bounds on ASR?

Shirley, you can't be serious.

Well…maybe when terms like “butt hole” enter the lexicon.

 

[pablolie]

Everybody has a formula that goes something like... SpeakerAppeal = (MeasurementExcellence * MyPriority1) + (AestheticAppeal * MyPriority2)

where: SpeakerAppeal can be 1.0 at most, MeasurementExcellence and AetheticAppeal are max 1.0 and MyPriorityX *adds* to 1.0, i.e. if you put measurements above everything else then MyPriority1 is 1.0 and MyPriority2 is 0. That way the closer you get to 1.0, the more something caters to your preference.

Personally, I'd define MyPriority1 (measurements) as 0.75 and MyPrioroty2 (looks/tactile) as 0.25 as a start.

 

[Pearljam5000]

We're turning into AFR (Audio Fashion review)

 

[MattHooper]

Well…maybe when terms like “butt hole” enter the lexicon.

Horrors.

Maybe we need an ASR drive for a fainting sofa, for the more sensitive members.

 

[Pearljam5000]

The Genelec looks much better
I bet most women would also like it more because of the minimalistic design