A brutal review of the Wilson Maxx

Well a lot of people slander the above mentioned review, some based on their allegiance to the Wilson line, others based on their allegiance to the magazines that are insulted by R. Hardesty and some just purely due to their rebellious spirit which they feel needs to run counter to anything they read in stone ... but nothing is written this way.

I hope all who have posted replies here have bothered to read the review in question ... it's imperative to the discussion.

I think Mr. Hardesty does bring up some very valid points about the build theory of Wilson line. And true to a reviewer he should. Now, before the Wilson bandwagon jumps on my back and starts whipping me, hear me out to the end .... please! I'm not here to insult anyone. I do believe that Hardesty's review was brutal indeed. It blatantly showed his dislike for these speakers. I suppose if he reviewed all speakers in the world we would all be left with only one speaker to chose ... the speaker of his choice which, similar to the Halcro amps ... would have overall distorsion measurable in ppm (parts per million).

Wilson audio has gained wide acceptance in the industry for producing leading edge speakers ... are they the best in the world? who knows? The X-2 may sound outdated in 10 years perhaps, technology is bound to leave them and all speakers of our generation behind as it introduces newer and "better" designs. Is there a non-colored speaker on the market today? Maybe we should ask Mr. Hardesty, I really am curious as to what he would suggest.

Many people say that the B&W Nautilus series was the REFERENCE speaker for its utmost flatness ... based on the fact that it was used in remastering studios around the world ... right? can't say for sure! ... but B&W recently introduced the new diamond tweeter in this line ... what about the old REFERENCE line? were all B&W owners mislead previously? ... anybody willing to take a shot? And another thing ... does everyone own B&W speakers? I personally always found them a little dry sounding for my tastes.

I think that the vast majority of people in the so called audiophile sound prefer colored sound. I think colorations pervade the entire system ... from source all the way to speakers, so in reality the speakers end up doing their best to portray an already colored picture with some added bonus. Two questions: do we like the sound? ... and secondly does it fit our budget? if the answer is yes, well than go ahead and get it! Nevermind all this scientific measurement crap, who cares? We all knwo that the truth hurts, maybe not all recordings are recorded with the "BEST" equipment.

Overall, I found the discussion created here to be entertaining even more so than the review itself. I want to thank everyone involved for that, keep up the good work and add my 2 cents to it.

Aldavis: Excellent posts, thats all I have to say, and a good number you threw out for the speakers you own, and would say Definatly at 23,000 I could take the Wilson maxx 2 at a much more serious consideration which is in the wheelhouse of what you own and comprable, but double that cost at 45,000? Come on there is a point of Gouging guys, Anybody can justify How to buy anything, I could tell you that buying a 400.00 electric self cleaning super duper Toothbrush is Worth it, but does it really do a bottom line better job than the very efficient 1.99 special from walgreens, thats the point here, not who can spend what, and why they would spend it. Basically I see the Watchdog thing this all started out with a wake up call to find some Common sense back into the audio world is all. Not that I agree with all of the excessive bashing or calling out reviewers but who cares, its simply developed to open your eyes.

John Atkinson's measurements of the MAXX II reveal nearly a +/- 10db differential in frequency response. There is a 6-7db boost in the bass. How many of us would accept these large abberations in our amplifiers, preamps, cd players, or even our phono cartidges?

Opalchip's right on point.

Not only are none of the people here are willing to address the specific performance/measurement issues raised by Hardesty, but the responses from John at Wilson and Michael Fremmer completely ignore those tough questions. Is anybody who wants to defend Wilson capable of addressing those issues. Also, some of these issues apply to a majority of other so-called "high-end" loudspeaker designs.

Issues:

**Steep-slope crossover causes time/phase distortion and requires that midrange driver be wired out-of-phase with tweeter and woofer.

What if you had purchased a new high-end power amplifier and found that it inverted the phase of the midrange frequencies in relation to the rest of the spectrum. This would be laughably unaccceptable. Why isn't the same true in a loudspeaker?

How can a design like this accurately reproduce the waveform?

** Frequency response is less flat than many inexpensive designs. Why?

** How can a 7" woofer reproduce subtle detail in the upper midrange?

Geez, a lot of responses about a speaker only 10 people in the country will buy. (O.K., maybe 15.)