Revel Salon 2 versus WP 8

I have had extensive experience with the W/P 7s and the original Salons in my own system. So my comments are only relevant to the extent you believe the W/P 8s and the Salon 2s have adhered to the "house sound" of the immediately preceding models. (I don't personally know whether either of the new models has made a dramatic change in the overall personality of the speakers.)

That being said, I agree with some of the comments above that the W/Ps offer a more exciting, dynamic sound with faster bass. The W/Ps also soundstage incredibly well. The soundstage was impressively wider and taller than the soundstage of the Salons. (By comparison, the Salons offered a bit more soundtage depth.)

Nonetheless, I preferred the sound of the Salons in my system by a significant margin. In my system, the W/Ps tended to exhibit an electronic edge in the playback of recordings featuring acoustic instruments, especially classical music and the reproduction of violins. On the other hand, the Salons present the timbre of acoustic instruments with startling accuracy and have a natural, relaxed presentation that is more in keeping with the sound of acoustic instruments in a live venue.

I think that your preference between these two speakers will come down to the type of music you listen to and your personal preference/priorities. If you prize timbral accuracy and tonal balance and you listen primarily to acoustic music, I think you will gravitate toward the Salons. On the other hand, if you prioritize dynamics, quick bass response and soundstaging, you will probably be drawn to the Wilsons.

I hesitated to post here given that my experience relates to the preceding model for both of these speakers, but I went ahead and did so recognizing that these comments might not have continuing relevance to the extent the current models have made a dramatic departure from the sound of the preceding generation. However, given that successive generations of products often stay in the same general "school" or style and given that I had the unique ability to live with both of these older generation speakers in my own system for an extended period, I thought it made sense to go ahead and post for what it's worth.

Cincy bob, Thank you. You experience living with both is very rare and I respect the reference it gives you. Judging by your response you are obviously an excellent listener to the questions posed to you,a pleasure to see in these forums.

My understanding is that the System 8 sounds much more natural than the System 7.

I heard the Salon 2 this week at a dealer driven with Levinson gear. Unfortunately they kept the grills on, which probably killed the imaging.

I was quite impressed even so. I thought they had loads of inner midrange detail and the bass was quite extended and deep while being very controlled.

On a recent post of mine I mentioned someone that had done a shootout between WP7 and the Salon 2 and another speaker.

after years and years of auditioning wilson speakers, i have come to the conclusion that it is wisest NOT to compare them to other speakers. their designs, sonic attributes, and price points rarely coincide with what other loudspeaker companies are trying to acheive with THEIR products. i strongly feel that you need to buy the right amplification, preamp, wire, and cdp (the exception being perhaps turntables) along with the wilsons (whenever you can financially swing it). your room might (let's face it, probably) will also need some work before the dealer/installer can set them up for your listening position. also be aware that truly lousy recordings should be moved to the attic/basement- they will sound icky (i have eggleston andra's, a more forgiving speaker, but i will not listen to old rock and roll cd's on them just to end up hating the band- and it wasn't really their fault, it was supposed to sound "ok" back in '68 on a pioneer system, and it did. but not anymore.)
wilson's are an audio religion where you are obligated to bring the music into ever-sharper focus. the aesthetic experience is re-defined as eliminating any/all forms of distortion or veils between the listener and a performance that was recorded using great equipment by an engineer that wants you to hear every musician, not just the "cello section". if you missed the composer's "idea" while concentrating on these sonic details, perhaps it's not the main reason you put the cd on in the first place. if you picked up on that too, obviously that's great. BUT, after reading harry pearson's article on cd's he feels are recorded properly in the latest absolute sound, i am astounded by the specificity he employs in picking and choosing, not just the cd, but which movement, or even PART of a movement that sounds "right" and "true". clearly he is, while writing for the magazine, also dissecting this section and that, to satisfy in his own mind where someone "messed up" but then somewhere else, perhaps for the last 5 minutes of track 6, came "close" to the absolute sound. one cd was from a movie soundtrack for moses's sake, and had no musical value at all...