A brutal review of the Wilson Maxx

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

I assume you are kidding. Just related to people I know, let's see: Audio Research, VTL, LAMM, two editors at SoundStage, our company owns two pair, and then there are the consumers I know who've bought either the X2's or MAXX' 2's that number in the dozens.

I have NO problem with Hardesty having a contrary opinion or writing a negative article. Listen, no one in this thread is bashing Wilson detractors. There are detractors of every speaker ever made.

The SP measurements are what they are. One set of measurements taken by an individual, albeit a very skilled person. According to Michael, there were also in-room measurements taken that were exemplary. Also, the NRC measurements of other Wilson designs posted at SoundStage.com seem to denote a well designed product.

I agree, first order designs have great merit. I'm a big fan of the Joachim Gerhardt designed Audio Physic products of yore. Calderas, Virgos etc.

I'm neither a Wilson apologist or rank protagonist, just an interested observer that believes that if a "writer" decides to TRASH a product completely, the way Hardesty did, there should be an empirical process followed. Conducting ones own investigation, conducting ones own measurements, conducting ones own controlled listening within their OWN room, Explicated specific parts used that are claimed to be "off the shelf", supporting the "rip off" theory.

Or have we become so lazy as readers and reporters, that a re-hash of someone else's reporting is fine? As long as it provides fodder for internet ranting, it appears not many care.

Sad.

forget about measurements ,parts quality and whatever other nonsense.if the ultimate test is your ear and if it sound good to you then it must be good.then why the heck are we reading these magazines/reviews? however if hardesty feel that wilson is not a good design , maybe he should offer a specific make/model that he thinks is better or just as good as the wilson for less moeny. and maybe the magazine or somebody and do a shootout and tell us what they think. or dare i say, do a double blind test, see which speaker people prefered.i heard the x-1 before not but cup of tea , but i thought it sounds pretty good, is it the best spearke in the world, i don't know , ihaven't heard all the top speakers in the world.

"i heard the x-1 before not but cup of tea , but i thought it sounds pretty good, is it the best spearke in the world, i don't know , ihaven't heard all the top speakers in the world."

I owned X-1's before I bought the X-2. I love the X-2 and almost certainly will never buy another speaker. Having said that however, had the MAXX ll been available before the X-2 I would have sold my X-1's and bought the MAXX as they are so much better at 1/2 the price.

Chanliz,
My "mommy" is dead. I buried her three years ago. As per my last post I was responding to a personai attack which in effect called me ignorant of capitalism and suggested that I investigate socialized medicine just because I held a position which dissagreed with his. I hope you can understand how that would strike a guy whos in medicine and who was an econ major.Perhaps I should have resisted the urge to respond but I did not and thats that. As for your "comment" which appears to be written to hurt me personaly I guess I just feel dissapointed in you. Please, no more personal attacks . Lets stick to dissagreements about music reproduction and treat everyone with respect.-Jim

Richard favors, I am told, the Vandersteen 5a's and other like designs, which are credible, long-standing industry supported products-- as are Wilson designs.

There is room for both, and they are different enough that there will be spin in both directions. I just believe that expounding on measurements that you _did not_ conduct is flawed reasoning for trashing ANY product.

This isn't about promotion or defense, it's about fairness and editorial integrity. Period.

Grant