Wilson Sophia 2's on Marantz Reference

Another vote for the Wilson Sophia here - I shopped/auditioned the Sophias against the B&W 802D and Revel Studio2 - and much preferred the Sophia - they simply sound more like real music to me - I have them set-up in a large room - with no motivation to upgrade into a larger Wilson System - which I'm well-familiar with since my local Wilson Dealer stocks the entire line. I've auditioned more than 1/2 a dozen Amps with these Speakers, and they have always sounded great!

A very happy and satisfied Wilson Sophia Owner here!

Well obviously to each his own, and certainly as YOU are paying for your speakers, you are entitled to YOUR opinion!

The Sophia 2s do cost more than the 802Ds, and that unfortunately has an effect on many people when comparing the two. No doubt Wilsons are seen as more "exclusive" and "better", and why shouldn't they be? Wilsons "entry-level" is basically B&W's "reference".

On a whole, does Wilson make a better speaker than B&W? Of course! That's been my whole point. Wilson Audio started out as producing really only "reference" speakers and through the years, they have had to make some "entry-level" models for financial reasons. But they certainly are aimed at the "high-end audiophile".

B&W makes iPod docks and "entry-level" speakers that start at $150, not $14,000. There really is no comparison when you are talking about "brands".

But if you are talking about individual speakers, that's when it gets interesting. I have no qualms about people liking the Sophia 2s. It's all a matter of taste. Personally, I find its lack of slam and attack, and limited micro-dynamics compared to other Wilson models EXTREMELY frustrating. I know how good Wilsons can be, and the Sophia 2 falls flat for me, when compared to obviously the X-2s and MAXX 3s, but even the WATT/Puppy 8s.

If the only Wilson you have ever heard is the Sophia 2, then consider yourself blessed. You literally don't know what you're missing. And if you're considering the Sophia 2s and they are the only Wilsons that are within your budget, by God, don't listen to the other Wilsons!

I, unfortunately, have opened Pandora's box, and I won't buy a pair of Wilsons unless I buy a pair of WATT/Puppy 8s, at the minimum. Unfortunately, that is not possible at the moment and I'll see where I'm at in the future after this economy lifts itself from the gutter.

I did audition extensively many other speaker brands including many of the B&W speakers, and think the 802Ds are the best speakers I listened to within my price-range. Yes, better than the Sophia 2s. And impressing my friends isn't much of a concern since none of them know anything about speakers anyway. If I told them I got new Wilsons, they would think I got a new tennis racket! The key is to listen to the Sophia 2s for multiple extended periods (if your dealer lets you) with a wide variety of music. Any Wilson will provide a "honeymoon" period, but the Sophia 2s are the most likely to grow obese with a mustache and sleep with dirtbags at the gas station.

Does anybody else think Dylanhenry needs some couch time?

Dylanhenry

It’s all about perspective… your perspective as to what comprises “HIGH END” and my own simply differ.

You are a proponent of Wilson, referring to them as the best speakers in the world. Fine by me. Wilson, just like any other brand has it’s own sound. I dare say it doesn’t appeal to everyone. Nor do I suspect some recent objective gathering has since crowned them as the sole principal in the industry. The only definitive statement I can make about Wilson is that they are expensive… and as I said, perhaps over valued as well.

Another one could be, thay have too much “can’taffordium” or ‘unobtainium’ used in the materials list.

I assure you my own rig sounds more palpable, and musical than that which I experienced at the dealership listening to the Sophias.

And as usual the orig poster asked for others to subjectively mention the likely synergy between his Marantz int and the Sophia IIs.

My stance from hearing them and seeing what they were paired with for that level of performance I realized on the spot, is that more power than his integrated amp will supply, will likely be needed to get the best out of them.

Other’s said go B&W… and as well, I noted again, these two are power hungry units. More so than their specs reveal them to be.

I’m a proponent of great sounding systems. Cost is part of it all, but I’m not dismissive of components due to their price points. Neither have I read anywhere articles which have outlined the pricing guidelines declaring what is and what is not, “high end”. Consequently, I’d not proclaim that whatever expense would be needed to surmount the least level.

That phrase is as subjective a thing as any other discussed around here. It’s also a phrase some cling to for sheer affluent effect. I find it disdainful to indicate $14K as the ‘entry level’ price point for loudspeakers comprising the high end realm of audio recreation. By intimating such a thing submits to all others in this hobby who have thrown tons of duckets at their rigs, that they are still muddling their way along in a ‘less ‘than’ enterprise. It implies yet greater separation amongst the throng of avid enthusiasts.

By my reckoning, I’d venture to say 90% or more, of the consuming public at large would submit other criteria for the phrase “high end”… and isn’t the majority just another word for ‘mass’? I think aside from mere terminology, “high end” has a larger berth than you will concede. Maybe adding something more definitive such as ULTRA to preface the phrase is in order…. Probably more to your liking as well

The other subtlety I was transmitting to the orig poster was, given the state of items on hand there were many other fine choices for less money… and there are in fact. Truth be told, I’ve found far more often than not, those rigs wherein the greater body of the investment lays in front of the speakers out perform those where the investment is the other way around, laying largely on the loudspeakers.

It’s disconcerting at the very least to spend 6K on an amp, 9K on a pre, 8K on speakers, 4K on a sub, 10K on conditioning & cabling, let’s not speak of the accessories…. Then to be told you are of the mid fi or mass fi market, or worse yet… below the entry level threshold of high end audio. Doubtless, other loudspeaker and device makers would argue it as well.

It’s perspective…. Or maybe just the choice of words being used which casts at times, a pall of diminishment & separation. I’ll take issue with it routinely, as I’m more aligned to share and be a part of though.

No worries, your opinion is welcome and respected. As for clarification of when I said $14,000 is "entry-level" for the "high-end", I'm referring strictly to that class of manufacturers where $14,000 really is the entry-level and barely buys you a ticket for admission.

Am I saying any speaker under $14,000 is "bad" or even "not as good"? Absolutely not, and in my previous posts, I've actually stated the opposite. One can find a lot of incredible speakers for much more "value" than you can with most "high-end" speakers.

It's the same as if I said $200,000 was "entry-level" for "high-end sports cars". That class would be Ferraris, Lamborghinis and Bugattis, etc. Would I be incorrect? Sure, there may be some examples where you can find a new Porsche for less than $200K, but not many.

At the same time, that doesn't mean that any cars less than $200K are "bad" or even "not as good". Some would argue a new Corvette or Supra is just as good or provides "more value". That's certainly their prerogative and I wouldn't necessarily be inclined to disagree, at least on the value part. But I wouldn't classify them as "high-end sports cars". Again, just my opinion.

You are right, I love Wilson speakers. I just don't love the Sophia 2. Not a bad speaker, but not nearly as good as what Wilson is capable of. For that price-point, the B&W 802D is better, in my view, for the reasons I've already stated.