Stereophile review of the new Wilson Watt/Puppy
I received my copy of the latest Stereophile yesterday and was curious to see what Martin Collums had to say about them, even though I would take it with a grain of salt, knowing that he had owned them in the past. He's still one of the reviewers that I consider to be most technically informed and balanced in his reviews.
I'm starting this thread because I want to know if others found his conclusions as confusing as I did. He says that the speakers have deep powerful bass, great detail, wonderful dynamic range, and are able to play very loud without breakup.
However, after all of that, he concludes that they are better for jazz and orchestral and perhaps a bit reticent for pop and rock. This made no sense to me, especially for a $40.000 speaker. I am curious about the opinions of anyone else who has read the review.
@toddalin surely you can do better comparison, Bugatti is a sports car, pretty silly response. like I said earlier, at $40k they should be able to play all music, some better than others but at the end of the day all speakers should be able to play any music to a point, especially at $40k |
When I heard them they were without a sub and I didn’t feel them “needing” one, as neither do the 801s that they will replace. That said I do use one- a VMPS Larger for very low bass energy that is only there on select tracks - and will do likewise with the WWPs. But if I didn’t already have a sub I don’t think I’d bother. |
I don’t have a problem with reviewers who gush platitudes, but I do question how discriminating they are when a new product arrives in short order, one that replaces the old model, and they then magically hear the improvements of the new model. What occurs now that made them unable to hear the failings of the previous iterations at the time of their prior review? |
