A brutal review of the Wilson Maxx

I am willing to bet that Audioperfectionist is a fan of time/phase correct designs (drivers aligned spatially to have an identical pathlength to a single point in space and utilizing 6 db/octave crossover slope). He also seems to require a small midrange and/or mid/bass driver (low mass/inertia and better dispersion). In other words, probably a fan of Vandersteens, Green Mountain, and maybe, Thiel.

Just a guess.

He has a "measuring stick" that obsesses about 6db octave crossovers. No speaker manufacturer need apply without 1st order crossovers & good step response. "Set in stone" beliefs will always color perception. Like in the stereophile review, little of the text describes the sound. This a very large speaker & most set-ups & reviews I've seen (soundstage/stereophile)have the speaker in very normal sized rooms that I would think were much too small for the speaker...

http://www.vandersteen.com/pages/Pdffiles/Model%205A%20Reprint.pdf

I'm not a big fan of the Wilson sound either, and Hardesty doesn't SEEM to have an agenda. Who knows for sure, but I think he's just telling it the way he hears it. Only way to tell for sure is to listen for yourself. I thought the review was pretty well done, but in kind of an "expose" style. I've heard the Maxx2s a few times, and IMHO they're way overpriced for what they offer. But one man's turd is another man's gold nugget, so go figure . . . .

Good guess Larry - I think Hardesty wrote for Widescreen Review which, if I remember correctly used Dunlavy V's in the biggest and best test rig.