A brutal review of the Wilson Maxx

I'm glad to see Michael Fremer weighing in and weighing in strongly. I think it's quite unfair to him to assume that his positive evaluation of a speaker is because he is corrupt. It's so unfair, and it's unfair precisely because it's a non-rebuttable allegation. It's too blanket.

The inescapable madness of discussing this hobby is that people can't even agree on the meaning of a term like "accurate." And even if they can agree IN WORDS on what "accuracy" in a speaker means, their ears often don't agree when they sit down at the same time to listen to the same speaker. (So forget about listening to the same speaker with different associated equipment, in different rooms, with different musical preferences and different listening histories to compare the present speaker against. And totally forget about it if I don't agree with your definition of "accuracy" or if I don't rank "accuracy" that highly among my preferences.)

And by the way, when did all these audiogoners become socialists such they are so quick to charge corruption whenever commerce is involved?

Just because Hardesty runs no ads in his mag does not mean he's more "objective." He could have his own quirks and biases and limitations that are present even without commerce figuring in.

Hardesty would be much better off acknowledging his preferences and biases in sound (we all have them) and then explaining why his preferences are the way to go.

Michael Fremer is honest enough to say that every speaker is "colored" or flawed. For that, he wins a lot of credibility from me.

Interesting response by Mr. Fremer, but he doesn't address any of the specific criticisms made by Mr. Hardesty of the build quality, choice of materials (e.g. the choice of a rather large 7" midrange "woofer") and the problematic measured performance of the Wilson speakers.

Instead he seems to say that "ALL speakers are colored" and "choosing a speaker is like choosing a mate". And he basically repeats things like this over and over again in a variety of different ways. The unfortunate thing is that Mr. Fremer is a high-end audio reviewer and not a casual listener. I would hope that he is experienced and knowledgeable in ways that the casual listener is not, and would therefore be better able to address the specific issues raised by Mr. Hardesty, point by point.

I do not blame Mr. Fremer for lashing back at those who claim he is a "huckster" or somehow swayed by the manufacturers who advertise his magazine. If he is the honest man he claims to be, and I believe he is, he has every right to defend himself against such reckless charges.

It is interesting that Mr. Fremer talks about his relationship with some of the manufacturers and the difficulty of being "friends" with some who he has to write product reviews for. I would imagine all reviewers deal with that same issue.

At the same time, Mr. Hardesty is a high-end audio reviewer as well. Mr. Fremer, along with some of the other posters here, have called Mr. Hardesty's Watch Dog piece "a review". I don't find any indication that Mr. Hardesty himself considers his Watch Dog column a review. On the contrary, his Watch Dog column is often a response to another journalist's review of a given product. I also don't doubt that an experienced reviewer like Mr. Hardesty has had countless opportunities to listen to many of the Wilson speakers in a wide range of system configurations and rooms over the years including shows, manufacturers listening rooms and customers or friends homes. God knows, I am not a reviewer and I have heard Wilson models so many times that I couldn't even begin to count them.

It is therefore not valid to respond to Mr. Hardesty's comments simply by assuming he is somehow unqualified to make those comments. At the very least, anyone is qualified to look at the measurements of a Wilson speaker (including the measurements included in the Stereophile review in question) and point out significant problems. It is also perfectly valid for Mr. Hardesty to ask how a 7" Scanspeak woofer is able to provide the kind of midrange resolution and detail that is expected of a $10,000, $20,000 or $40,000 speaker system.

Lastly, the debate over the issue of steep-slope crossovers and time/phase distortion one is an interesting one for the whole industry. Mr. Fremer doesn't seem to have much interest in addressing Mr. Hardesty’s well documented statements about the consequences of this kind of speaker design to the integrety of the waveform. I think it is at least worth discussing.

Wilson speakers are unusually expensive and therefore deserve to be held to a very high standard. Mr. Fremer is a high-end audio reviewer for one of the two most respected audiophile journals and should also expect be held to a higher standard. His response to Mr. Hardesty seems to fall far short of this high standard. If “all speakers are colored” and “choosing the right one is just like choosing a mate”, then why would anyone need to read reviews from people like Mr. Fremer or Mr. Hardesty?

My post was not meant as a personal attack on MF, whose unique motives I cannot possibly know. His is simply the name that comes up most often when discussing "reviewers". And indeed, the fact that he purchased Maxx2's (regardless of the discount) means that he really, truly likes them.

But since MF wants to get into it name-calling I'll indulge him another opportunity just this once:

First off, as consumers, we have every right - and every reason - to question the credibility of those who recommend big $$$ purchases and receive very valuable $$$ consideration from the manufacturers they are recommending. "Questioning" is not "Indicting". Questioning your motives is indeed our responsibility. There is an outrageously clear POTENTIAL conflict of interest that we'd be idiots NOT to consider. The fact that so few reviews in the mainstream media mention a flaw serious enough to reject a purchase is evidence, in and of itself, of a very strong bias - the standard industry arguments which you don't need to repeat, notwithstanding.

That Fremer angrily and relentlessly berates with name-calling (see Arthur Salvatore's website if you want some real examples) those who even "dare to question" brings to mind Gertrude's, "The lady doth protest too much, methinks." It also makes me personally doubt that his motive is always the altruistic goal of introducing people to the fun of this hobby. The two personality traits do not seem consistent to me.

Calling someone an idiot four times in one post doesn't make it true, and defending your integrity with a fusillade of insults followed by one or two anecdotes of honesty from a long career probably doesn't convince the heretics.

Again, no reader can possibly know a particular reviewer's motive in a particular case. All we can know, keeping "buyer beware" in mind, is that precious few negatives have ever been mentioned in the Audio Mags about major advertisers.

In this case, there is absolutely no reason to doubt that MF likes the Maxx's very much, but that doesn't negate Hardesty's opinion as to Wilson's entire speaker line. Or the fact that many experienced audiophiles hear it the same way as Hardesty. Or that Wilson's measure out as fairly colored speakers. Since all speakers are apparently so colored, why bother even doing test measurements? Is that the next logical media revelation?

Hardesty (and I with the huckster comment) may have over-stepped the bounds of courtesy, but I can't think of any logical reason to doubt his knowledge of what goes on inside the industry, inside speakers or his integrity. And I have absolutely no axe to grind with either of these guys. What I do know, is how Business works, how Marketing works, and how employees subservient to a corporate entity MUST work, unless they don't really want their job. Does this apply to Audio Reviewers - I dunno, I'm an Idiot - you decide.

Way off topic, but I own the Definitions and they defy understanding or categorization.

Back on topic, the hostility and conspiracy BS that has become prevalent among the communicating public (us) has gotten way out of hand. I for one really appreciate the work it takes to do a review and these guys aren't getting paid big to do it. I assure everyone Mr. Fremer did not fund his Wilsons by writing about audio gear.

Having dedicated audiophiles with a talent for writing provide us with foreknowledge of available products is INVALUABLE. Yes, foreknowledge. They are not making up our minds for us nor determining which companies succeed.

Sure, it helps a company to get a good review and a bad review would hurt, but a good review won't keep a company afloat for long if their product is poor. Imagine if there were no reviews - where would we even start our diligent research? Yes, there are good companies who don't advertise or get reviews and do succeed, but we would all be the poorer without them.

And, since these folks aren't making bags of dough off this, I would imagine reviewing is somewhat a labor of love. Who would love crafting something in the best way they know how only to have it criticised openly based on half-truths, non-truths, and suspicious assumptions?

I don't doubt there is at least some consideration for companies that advertise. But, the reviews Are Not Making Your Decisions For You. Don't we use them as a starting point, finally deciding with Our Own Ears? And, for those pathetic sheep that we accuse of buying solely on the basis of reviews and a 10-minute audition with someone else's music - are we trying to save them from the vagaries of the Evil Review Empire? Isn't it their own decision to make? Freedom to decide does not require Your Understanding.

Sorry for the caps, but there is so much suspicion nowadays and it drives me nuts.

This is a pretty silly description of the MAXX2s or any other speaker. It's like responding to an expensive car review by saying "It's just 4 wheels, a suspension and an engine." I realize the analogy is not perfect but look, if I take a given engine and put it in a frame made of noodles it's not going to perform as well as one that was super-rigid. Denigrating the MAXX2's cabinetry as "over elaborate" is pretty foolish. Speakers parade through here all the time and NONE in 20 years of reviewing have achieved the bass performance of the MAXX2s. That's just a measured and listened to fact. I get 20Hz response in my room, the quality of which is unsurpassed in my experience. The accelerometer test proves that the cabinet is anything but "over-elaborate." As with Rockport's Antares, going to extreme lengths to build a non-resonant platform for woofers pays big dividends. Getting really deep, tight, well defined bass costs $ and takes up a good deal of space to get it. Making these cabinets out of this difficult to machine material costs $$$. I saw how they are made. It is a time consuming labor intensive process and the auto paint finish is not what you're paying for.

So then after trivializing the MAXX2s, you change gears and write advertising copy for the speaker you like. Fine, have it your way. but I can't take what you've written seriously because it is transparently ludicrous.