A brutal review of the Wilson Maxx

Arthur,
I've enjoyed your site for some time. It's important that SOMEONE points it out when the king,indeed,has no clothes. It's ok for people to spend their money anyway they want but they should be informed when a product is selling at a profit margin an order of magnitude above it's competitors. This actually is a marketing strategy to attract wealthy custumers who equate expense with quality. I believe that reviewers have an ethical responsibility to point this out to their readers. They may still want the " Wilson sound " but they should know that they are not ,infact, expensive speakers to produce. Reviewers should not underestimate how important their ratings are to potential customers. Look at what Parkers ratings do to wine prices. The subjective opinion of a single reviewer can quadruple (or more) the price of a bottle. If Stereophile gives a class A then it is included in the companies marketing campaign and MANY people buy based on this.Check out A-gons dicussion forums and see how many relate to the latest "buzz" created by magazine "reviews". This is acomplished because we are dying for someone to tell us what is good rather than doing the hard work ourselves and we are addicted to ratings so that we can compare ourselves to others. It seems to me that Wilson epitomizes this. If you truly love them by all means buy them . I just think you should be more fully informed. Jim

Love the Salvatore! He still thinks I wrote in as someone else to defend myself! Read his "reasoning" as to why it must so. But calling him "paranoid" is an insult. Now that's rich! over and out. Yes, I sent Phonogram the email I sent Salvatore so the subscribers could read it and enjoy it since most of the people there hold Salvatore in deep contempt. Phonogram is a subscriber based list, not a public website but these distinctions matter little to him.....BUT HE'S PROVEN THAT I'M A LIAR!!!!!!!

So yes, all of you, take the time to read what I sent Salvatore and yes, read his entire site. It's really a hoot. Now back to work. I have taken so many manufacturer bribes, and am so corrupt I must do my masters bidding or I might be rubbed out. No time to waste!

ok....mr.fremmer is a talented writer and simply worked within a flawed, yet approved, system to purchase speakers he loves. mr. hardesty pointed out that the speakers in question are overpriced and flawed(so far this is nothing new). roy halee bought a pair(what color?) and paid retail, which has nothing to do with the production quality of those old S&G records. the loudspeaker in question is simply a lightning rod for an industry that grows smaller and more isolated each day. 'pride-of-ownership' is an unspoken truth in the hi-end. it has nothing to do with the way a product sounds, but it is every bit as important to a consumer. i have always felt that the product in question was very well made, sounded pretty good, and cost more than a dozen pairs of loudspeakers combined that sounded every bit as good. in truth, recordings are made to sound like recordings, not a live experience. there is a 'cool' factor, and also a 'collector' appeal in the hi end which also has nothing to do with sound. a rogers ls3/5 for example(i don't have a pair)is immeasurably 'cooler' than the speaker in question. at the end of the day, what you have in your home(sometimes painfully so) is a reflection of who you are, and not exclusively based on quantifiable merit. it is a certainty that no one will wax poetic in ten years over the speaker in question like the rogers, the ohm, the dahlquist,the quad,the ar, the epi,the jbl, the corner horn,the spica, and hundreds more. the price tag and the paint job have sealed its fate.

I decided to stop my subscription to Mr.Hardesty magazine when in issue 12 he killed both planars and electrostatic speakers. That was like a heart attack for me. I can reprint the text because I will infringe copyright law I guess.
Basically the opennes/trasparency we hear in planars seems to be called "Time smear". Now to hear that also wilson (cannot afford them but at any single fair I went they were between the best sounding speakers to my ears) are pointed by his , seems to be a bit too much.
Reading him carefully sounds like between the 3 main technology of speakers building 2 of them are just for stupids.
Cheers
Daniel

Look folks. All of this is entertainment, OK? Just like professional sports and anything else in life that requires "spectation" on the part of the spectator, either visual or audible, or both. Stereophile, TAS, Hardesty and others are all about entertainment, and that is why I read them. If I get a little "philosophy" or "insight" in the process, and maybe it points me in a direction I want to go in terms of thinking, auditioning or purchasing, that's my choice. If I had no high end system, you can bet that I would find a way to make my JVC boombox satisfy my musical cravings.

Both Michael Fremer and Richard Hardesty have contributed to my education, evaluation and enjoyment of the "spectation" because they have influenced personal choices that I am satisfied with. I have respect for both of them. It is not easy being an entertainer. Neither is right, neither is wrong.

Buyer beware, for both entertainment and for purchases of so-called high end gear. And I did not fail to notice yet another dig at Krell from one contributor here...FASCINATING!