Sophia 2 vs. Vandersteen Quatro

Add the Green Mountain Audio Calypso to your short list.

I listened extensively to the Sophias, the Watt Puppy and the Maxx (the last I could no way afford) when I was on my quest to replace Dynaudio Contour 3.0s. I liked the Sophias at first because the bass and high treble were emphasized. After awhile I noticed the mid range was not to my taste.

Having said all this, one of the most impressive demos ever was a Watt Puppy powered with Classe amps and Levinson front end at the audio show in Montreal a few years ago. They were playing soem big band Count Basie music. But the room had been treated to the gills and there was no way this type of set up could be found in my home. I'm not bashing Wilson, I just question the design philosophy; why not use the reasearch resources and focus on accuracy is what I don't understand? Because it's not important? See?

Both excellent speakers. Matter of personal choice. I own Quatros.

How will you live with yourself if you pass up the name dropping snob appeal of the Wilson and settle for the pedestrian Vandy? I can hear them now; "I don't know about Wilson, but my ex college boyfriend had some Vandies".

That has to be the silliest post I've seen in a long time. No one at college and 99.999% of the world have no idea what Wilsons and Vandersteens are, and most likely every other brand unless it is sold at Best Buy (and if they can remember any speaker brand names, besides ones they bought and own, from Best Buy is even contentious).

Only an audiophile would know who any of these companies are, unless someone close to those other people owns a pair and they have seen them a few times before...

Vandersteens are time and phase correct and Wilson are not. Do you care to hear harmonic content that captures timbre accurately that is essential to the enjoyment of music? Also, Wilson uses a midrange driver that makes no sense to me; 7 inch?

No contest. Vandersteen.

See, this is proof that people don't like the same things. I heard the Vandersteen 5a speakers at HE2007 along with the Wilson Watt Puppy 8. To my ears the Vandersteens lacked midrange detail and sounded grainy in general. The soundstage was also rather dimensionless in comparison to the Watt Puppy 8 rooms. Like looking at a two dimensional picture instead of a 3-Dimensional recreation of an event. Correct me if I am wrong, but the room had been set up by Vandersteen I believe, or at least he was there sitting in a corner and must have approved of the setup I would think.

The Watt Puppy 8 on the other hand, despite having a more oddly shaped room, had greater midrange clarity and detail, lacked any grain, and had proficient bass as well. They also had incredible dimensionality, the notes and instruments seemed real and to scale with other instruments on good recordings (no speaker can make a bad recording or highly compressed Pop music sound better unfortunately). The soundstage was palpable to me. To my ears the Watt Puppy 8 with the BAT gear was the best sounding room at the show. The great thing is, I get that same experience at home too, not just on a show room floor.

I had previously been considering the W/P 8 speakers, and I consequently own a pair now, as well as Sophia 2 speakers for my surround channel speakers. It doesn't matter to me how "correct" someone thinks a speaker is on paper, because if it doesn't sound incredible and "lifelike," who cares? It also doesn't matter to me what people have said in previous online periodicals, who likewise have complained about the driver size in some Wilson speakers.... As the only judge that is worthwhile is your own ears.