Wilson Audio Watt Puppy 7 vs. Kharma 3.2


I'm very undecided, since I have not heard the Kharma speakers. Heard very nice things about them both. I'm looking for anyone who has heard both speakers and can comment on both. When commenting on the 3.2 please specify which model. Thank you.
imt8t
I listened to both, in depth, in several different systems, over several months a few years ago. These were the current versions of both speakers at the time. I don't know what their designations were.

I found both designs to be extremely pleasant to listen to. Although, I agree that the WP7 seems to fall victim to improper setup with greater frequency, I found both to be easy to listen to over a prolonged period, my first criterion for ownership.

I found myself most sensitive to the differences in the dynamics of these speakers' presentations. Orchestras, solo voices, drumkits and lutes, which span the full gamut in terms of their dynamic envelopes seemed more convincingly portrayed by the WP7s. As a result I felt more connected to the musical flow, be it rhythmic, melodic, etc. While there was never anything abruptly discontinuous about the Kharmas presentation, I didn't quite feel the sensation of being "permeated" by the music as I did with the WP7s, and at live events. Their musical radiation pattern seemed to stop short of wherever I was. This is not to say that the soundfield of the Kharmas was in anyway curtailed. In fact, I've seldom felt more immersed in the sound than when listening to these speakers.

There are many other differences between these speakers, any of which may be more important to you than anything I perceive as being particularly important. So, go listen. They are both astoundingly good, and deserve your full consideration.
Personally I think Jtinn is right on the money,in his description(especially regarding the Kharma sub,addition).I have heard both,on many occassions.I've even a/b'd both,in differing electronic configurations.The watt/pup's are a great MTV set-up(not a criticism,but you get the point).The 3.2's can do damn good bass.It MUST be set up right.Not deep,but when set up correctly,with proper amp/pre,like the LAMM stuff(please Jtinn,don't go on,about the virtues of the "Darts"),they are "ALL ABOUT IMMERSING YOURSELF IN MUSIC"!I can't put it any other way.BTW--I don't own LAMM or Kharma,but I know what moves me.Just my opinion,though.
Thank You All. . . for the Very helpful information.
A mention was made regarding the "Proper Set-up" for the Wilson WP7's. (?) If I purchased a used pair on-line, would I be out-of-luck with "correct" set-up? What are the proceedures required to set-up the WP7's for optimal performance?
proper setup for wilsons?

patience & a good ear.

also, IMO the rives setup methodology (found on AA faq) is the best way to get them right.

rhyno
"I will provide some additional information about my system. My room size is about 22' x 22' with a 20' high ceiling. Accoustics are difficult, due to several open walls leading into other rooms and windows."

You may want to look into the new Focal SM11's or SM8's with built in DSP may be the best choice as the modestly priced 8's ($7500/pr) have a Beryllium tweeter and these speakers redefine neutral, but play louder and have better bass and clarity than either of these two over laquered wannabe's. The 8's would wear out the similar Kharma's in every possible category and the Kharma's still can't be eq'd to correct room problems. W-cone Focal and Beryllium tweeter, versus old school tioxid and ceramic?

The SM11's ($20K) are unbelievable for such a small package and with the room correction built-in to the effects of your cubed room could be minimized, especially since you can sit near-field on these monitors. The 11's can match the Wilson in every positive way....the only reason I bring this up is your room is a cube and I suspect it has big windows etc, so no matter what speaker you buy your room is a big ugly acoustic monster that must be dealt with and considered.

Personally I think both the Wilson and the Kharma's are weak choices at this price point and if they are so tricky to setup, you can forget it in your room. Also the Focal speakers are designed for near-field listening so you can cozy up to them to further eliminate room effects.

If you're looking for sonic value for $20K, you may want to look elsewhere, although pride of ownership is very high for both these models, the fact is an ATC Anniversary 100's can put the smackdown on Maxx's and Midi Exquisites at $26K (ie high value, but no braggin' rights), you may want to consider the price of entry to the Kharma/ Wilson club and what you're paying for. Have to remember Focal tioxid tweeters are $20 and the Accuton/Scan speak mids are $175. So what are you paying for really?

Well I guess that's off topic enough to make some people angry at me. But buying difficult speakers and placing them in a difficult room seems like a difficult time to get "musical" results.

What do you think?