My apologies_Upgrade path from Wilson WattPuppy 7's?


Folks-

I am the naive person who posted about which speaker to buy next, my system is all McIntosh, except for the downloaded high-resolution music content. Since I have price limitations, I have been attempting to audition loudspeakers under $15K, preferably used or demos. In various stores, I have heard the following:
  • Vandersteen Quarto CT's: Great bass, but an active system that does not seem to resolve high mid-range strings like a Wilson;
  • Triton GoldenEar Reference;
  • Sonus Faber Venere S and Olympica's, great sound in the store.
Currently, I am auditioning (in-house) Wilson Yvette speakers (it cost $400 for an in-house demo), and they sound great to me, but they are too expensive, even at a reduced demo price.  I started comparing frequency and impedance curves where I could obtain them (mostly Hi-Fi news from the U.K.), but I am becoming too obsessive about this.

So, I guess I could buy the Wilson Sabrina or Wilson Sasha WP (discontinued Series 1), since I seem to like the Wilson sound. Any advice?

Thanks again - Gerry
128x128Ag insider logo xs@2xgerryah930
Ken Kantor of NHT designed Stereophile’s "simulated loudspeaker load" network for them to use for their tests, as a copy of what NHT’s speakers load an amp like.

This (the grey trace) is the McIntosh 275’s effective frequency response into that "simulated speaker load) load, (it’s acting like a tone control)
https://www.stereophile.com/images/archivesart/1010Macfig03.jpg

Now everyone here who knows their speakers, knows that the Wilson 7’s would be a far worse load than the simulated "NHT" load, have a look at any floor standing NHT load graph compared to the Wilson 7's. 
So it’s safe to say that the Mac 275’s frequency response into a "Wilson 7’s simulated load" would look even more awful than the NHT’s

Sorry Gerry, but it should be clear to most here now, that the Mac 275 is far from the ideal amp for the Wilson 7’s, unless you like listening to a tone control as an amp.

Cheers George

George, yes I saw that figure in the review of the MC275 V.

First, that figure is based on the 16 ohm tap (!), which per JA’s measurements has an output impedance of 0.87 ohms, which is well over twice as much as the 0.33 ohm output impedance of the 4 ohm tap (which is the tap that I presume would generally be used with most Wilson speakers). (Note that references to the 8 ohm tap appear identically in the captions beneath figures 1, 2, and 3, which is obviously a mistake, but the text makes clear which tap each figure applies to).

Second, the frequency response variation that is shown for the simulated speaker load, even with the 16 ohm tap, is within a range of about +0.4/-1.0 db, which doesn’t seem to me to be a big deal. Especially given that the dip of -1.0 db just occurs in a fairly narrow range of frequencies centered at a fairly high frequency, about 5 kHz. And for the 4 ohm tap the variation is within a range of an almost negligible +/- 0.25 db, as stated in the text.

Third, as I mentioned the output impedance of the MC275 VI is probably significantly less than that of the V.

Fourth, 0.33 ohms is a very small fraction of the impedances you quoted from Stereophile for the WP7:
Its impedance drops to 2.4 ohms at 78Hz and remains below 6 ohms for much of the region where music has its maximum energy (fig.1). In addition, an impedance of 4 ohms at 59Hz is associated with an electrical phase angle of -34 degrees, which will add to the drive difficulty.
Finally, as JA said in the review of the V:
... the modification of the McIntosh’s frequency response due to the interaction between this source impedance and the impedance modulus of the loudspeaker was relatively mild.
Regards,
-- Al

Ok here is the (misprint 8) 4ohm tap (gray) into the easy NHT simulated load, the Wilson will be significantly worse, probably double as bad. Especially around 100hz where the 7’s are 2ohm and -40 negative phase angle, which could equate to a EPDR of nearly 1ohm!!!! as seen by the amp.
.
If you like the sound not flat in frequency response, then good for you Al, I know you like your tubes, but the line has to be drawn somewhere between what your hear is the a flat FR, or one that’s very contoured the, 275 will be different in sound with all hard to drive speakers, such as the 7’s ect.
https://www.stereophile.com/images/archivesart/1010Macfig02.jpg

Cheers George
Here is how the Boulder amp behaves into the simulated easy NHT load, note the grey scale is almost the same as the pure resistive ones. This is how an amp should behave into the NHT’s easy simulated load.
Yes it will be a little worse into the WP7’s but nowhere near as bad as the Mac 275 would be.
https://www.stereophile.com/images/217B2150fig1.jpg

Cheers George

Most of you know my protestations about Audiotroy's comments that consistently appear in threads about Wilsons. It's not about defending Wilsons. We all have our tastes in speakers and Wilsons are certainly not for everybody.  If I were an ATC, Raidho, Eggleston or Rockport fan (and I am, big time) and Audiotroy was constantly invading those threads to sell his wares, I would have the same problem.