Does the WATT/Puppy 8 image as well as the 7?


One of the strenghts of the Wilson WATT/Puppy system in its various versions always has been its ability to image with great specifity and precision. With the absence of lead ingots in the most recent version of the WATT/Puppy, the 8, and, correspondingly, less mass, I was wondering whether the company has compromised this wonderful characteristc, despite the change to better materials. Does anyone have experience with both versions that can speak to this concern? Before I buy this expensive rendition, I would welcome opinions. Thanks.
je_pense
I have to agree with Jfrech in reguards to the W/P evolution..I would buy a pair of Sophias before venturing into the W/P 6..The W/P 8 is far from "worthless". IMO an outstanding speaker and stands head and shoulders over the 7 model..The new Sasha is super duper!!!
The 6's had way too much upper treble glare, ear piercing.
The 8's were better.
Still I though the 8's sound was dis-jointed. That is, the bass seemed seperate from the rest of the music.

You either have to like the Wilson sound or find equipment that tames the upper frequencies.
I was very intriqued and heard sasha last week on well known setup ,similar to where i heard wp8. i can agree that its better estetical- more beautifull,not cubic . but any other sonical comparission makes me laught.sasha is not better or worse sounding than watt puppy 7/8. not a single point. its just diferent sounding speakers. tonal balance is diferent- its more warm sounding and have more ebnergy in lower midrange higher bass. but less imediate in midrange.just diferent. WP7 is still my favourite from the bunch.
Sasha is better than the WP 7/8. It is more resolving, much better integrated from top to bottom, and lacks the coloration evident in the 7/8.

The Sasha is really a different speaker from the older series.

I have owned them all, and have loved the 7/8. But this is a totally different ball game.
I learned a lot about my aesthetic priorities by comparing the 7s and 8s. Heard side by side on the same equipment, which included separate, expensive tube and solid state rigs, there was not a single sonic attribute for which the 8s did not outperform the 7s. Bass extension, treble smoothness, dynamic contrasts, midrange linearity, etc. were all somewhat to very much superior in the 8s than the 7s. However, much to my astonishment, I always found music more compellingly presented through the 7s than the 8s. This was as true for recordings of symphonic recordings at full tilt as recordings of solo piano, guitar or voice. Music through the 7s easily elicited an emotional rush that I did not experience as easily with the 8s. The sound of the 8s was definitely more accomplished but, perhaps more sterile. However, I can definitely envision someone having precisely the opposite opinion. Regardless, the 7s and 8s remain among the very best speakers that I have ever heard.