Wilson Sophia vs Usher Mini Dancer II

I personally would love to know the answer to your question! I currently have Maggie 3.6's with a Vandersteen 2wq sub and looking to simplify my system by getting a full range speaker that doesn't need a sub for my size room and I've been looking into exactly what you have mentioned the Usher Mini Dancer 2 vs. the Wilson Sophia 2. Would love the 3 but cost is an issue. I don't have the Usher's available for audition and need to get out to hear the Wilson's in person. From your experience how do the Usher's sound vs the Maggie 3.6?

Good question. The 3.6's and Ushers are definitely different sounding speakers, each has a different set of good and not so good points. As you know, the 3.6's are difficult to drive properly and you need a really good amp to get the best from them, especially if your room is medium to large sized. However, the Ushers are not exactly an 'easy' load being that they are a 4 ohm just like the Maggies. To my ears, the Maggies paint a more realistic soundstage, all the players and instruments are true-sized, you can easily tell for example if a performer is standing and singing or seated. The width and depth of the soundstage is also better with the 3.6's. Finally, I like the way that the Maggies produce the top end; to my ears it is very difficult to do better than the ribbon tweeter. The Maggies sound 'sweeter' and a bit more extended on top to me.

Having said all that, the Ushers are definitely better at producing dynamics and projecting some power and 'thump' into the room. They produce more impact and a greater visceral feeling in the mids and upper bass than the Maggies and are a 'richer' sounding speaker overall. The Maggies can sound a little lean on certain types of music (i think that is less true with the new 20.7's that I have now)... The Ushers will play louder too with less strain...

I have 20.7's now and an old pair of 1987 KHorns, definitley differrent ends of the spectrum! Before the 20.7's I had the 3.6's. I'd like a pair of the Ushers or the Wilsons too because I have yet to find a perfect speaker that I can afford. My room is medium-large at 26 ft long and 17.5 wide and it is fairly easy for me to move speakers around (it's a dedicated listening room). So, when I want to 'rock-n-roll' I simply slide the 20.7's over to the side walls and fire-up the KHorns...(which are designed to sit square in the room corners).

Overall, for me, I'd probably give the nod to the 3.6's, and most definitely the 20.7's. The 20.7's are a much better speaker, in every way, than the 3.6's! However, if your tastes lean towards a steady diet of rock, then the Ushers or Wilson might be a better choice....

Curious, how big is your listening room? What amps are you using to drive the 3.6's? There is a nice review of the Usher Mini Dancers in the latest Absolute Sound; worth reading.

My room is 14' wide by 26' deep. I'm using the Audio Research 100.2 (solid State) as the amp to drive them (see my system page). I currently have to set up in the room but it is optimized for the Maggies. I use the Kestral 2 as a near field set up on the back end of he room. The 3.6 and the 100.2 are a wonderful combo when using the Vandersteen Sub to carry the bass. Without the sub it's still okay just not nice as the combo. I love the grainless quality of the Audio Research 100.2 and in an effort to slightly simplify I would like to get a friendly load fork the amp. That's why I've been thinking about the Sophie 2 until I recently started reading about the Usher Mini Dancer 2. I think my sub for the Absolute Sound might have lapsed can you tell me if it was the January issue I'll have to go out and pick that up...

I was off by a year! The Mini Dancer II review is actually in the Dec 2012 Absolute Sound.

One is for hear music, the other is for hear everyhing. What do you like?