A brutal review of the Wilson Maxx

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

OB, "To me the Maxx ll blows away the VR 9 at less money"

where did that come from? is it somehow directed at me? maybe you are simply trying to make a point about costs but your approach hits close to home and i just wonder what your intent is.

if you have read my posts here i have been firmly against Hardesty's rant as improper and unfair. i know that Kharma and Von Schweikert are not your favorite....as Wilson is not mine...but 'blow away'?

how about "it's not my cup of tea"....or...."i've only heard it at a show but it didn't float my boat".

what about the famous OB perspective of 'to each their own according to their tastes'?

to me this thread is about proper methodology; not personal taste. brutal comments (from self-appointed experts--i'm specifically NOT referring to you here) require considerable effort to justify! have you spent sufficient time with the VR9 to feel justified with that comment or is this like Hardesty?

we can start another thread regarding the MAXX II verses the VR9 if you like. i've heard the VR9's sound like crap and the MAXX II's sound very good.....and visa versa.

BTW, i love ya anyway.

;^)

Mike

there is nothing intended at you or yours, so please take a breath and stop taking things so personal.

My point is very simple---there is great discussion here about Wilson, Von Schweikert and Kharma as many members here have such gear.None of these speakers are anything more than a box, some wires, drivers and all of the R&D that goes into their production. I am happy to spend the money as are you because we share the passion. Nothing was directed at you. It just seems these 3 speakers seem to be the ones mentioned and I was using them, (INCLUDING MY OWN X-2's I MIGHT ADD),to serve as an example.
Luv ya too Mke.

It is a flavor thing. I respect you for yours and I am sure the same goes the other way. I read your posts. My point was that none of these speakers are worth what MSRP is, but I will say it again...it is all about our ears and our wallets. I respect you for Wilson not being your cup of tea and I am sure you feel the same about me and Wilson.

As I have said above, there is nothing in an X-2 that is worth $135K except for buying Dave Wilson at the pinnacle of his game.

Now every one needs to take a deep breath

Not defending Hardesty (he's perfectly capable of doing that himself) but several things are being lost here. 1. His magazine is not online, it is by subscrption and a right costly one at that. 2) While all are posturing on his "Watchdog", he is not the one who posted it in this forum. He writes these for his subscribers who, having read his other "Journals" have a complete understanding where he is coming from.
He has gone to great lengths in his journals to explain himself and to validate his points. He has explained the "Watchdogs" in length which are not reviews as everyone seemed to think.
All I've gotten from this thread is some people think the Wilson's sound good and therefore justify their hefty price tag. I have not read one person defend the engineering of the speakers nor refute the accusations that the drivers are off the shelf stuff(which to me says Wilson put a lot into looks.)
If you have the money and want to spend it on these speakers, it's fine with me. Personally, I would like to know a little more about the design of these speakers.
I also have to admit that my bias says that a "Midrange" out of phase to the woofer and tweeter is audible. But that's just me.
As I said before, I guess engineering doesn't matter. As long as it sounds good, right? It's also funny that for a speaker to be noticed as "The best", it has to have a high price tag.
I suppose we could spend days refuting each other. If you own the speakers, yea, I guess you would be testy to criticism.
And just for information, Ayre, Aesthetix and others use the Vandersteen 3a Sigs in their soundrooms---
Jim White, Steve McCormack and others use these same speakers personally. My point being, you don't have to spend a fortune for a well designed "Reference" speaker. These guys use them because they let them hear what they need to hear. Reference can mean a lot.