A brutal review of the Wilson Maxx

The difference is sound resulting from the choice of microphone, its radiation pattern and physical placement is several orders of magnitude greater than the difference in sound between a well designed first order crossover/time aligned speaker and an equally well designed higher order/non time aligned speaker. I'm not saying that phase accuracy doesn't add to sonic realism, but that it's drawfed by arbitrary decisions made during the recording process.

Onhwy61,I cannot debate your statement as to recording equipment, etc. I know there are HUGE differences.
However, I would like to add that if you take a fairly close miked (on good equipment) recording of individual or groups of individual instruments, you can readily hear a difference in the final presentation played back on different speakers and/or designs.
I have tried this with sax, clarinet, flute, strings and acoustic guitars. By using the same recording (hence, placing the speakers on equal footing for direct comparison)I have noticed substantial differences in how the speakers in comparison handle harmonic structure and overall accuracy of tone.
Of course, I guess one could argue room effects due to radiational patterns of the speaker, equipment interface or whatever but they're substantial differences in the presentation.
It's amazing how drivers out of phase suddenly sound out of phase.
With the absence of any standard's, I guess one has to go with what they perceive as the most realistic, hence all the designs, etc. That's perfectly ok with me. Free enterprise is a wonderful thing and I for one would never want to hinder it. However, my thoughts do evolve around trying to find the most faithful reproduction based on what meager comparisons I can derive.

I wonder what would be the best way to confirm Onhwy61 and Bigtee's copmelety different view on Microphone selection and placement. Say if you close mike instruments like Bigtee suggests IN a anechoic chamber and play back in two different philosophy systems (time aligned, phase coherent, 1st order cross over designs v/s say wilson's), How would be the comparision then? Or Record with same close mike set up in a properly design hall and play it back again with two different systems in the SAME hall, how would the two systems sound. Or the question is which one would sound more realistic in both options? I would think the former one would sound closer to reality.

I do agree that very good recording using right mikes, right technique (like Mapleshade for example) does make a huge difference ( That is why Mapleshade recordings still sound good in as Mapleshade says in $50 boom box) as but colored system would be still evident if this recording is played back on these two systems.

I could be wrong, but I don't think there's that big a difference between what Bigtree and I have said. It's more a matter of preference and emphasis. If the majority of your music collection was recorded using minimalist/purist techniques with a minimum number of mics, then I have no doubt that such recordings sound better on phase coherent designed speakers If you like opera, big band jazz, anything electronic/synthesized, reggae, classic rock, pop vocals or symphony recordings, all of which are typically recorded and mixed via multitrack with synthetic soundfields, then the benefits of phase coherent speaker designs are greatly minimized and their faults still remain. Since high quality recordings can be made using some many different techniques, it's not surprising that listeners have different opinions about what is realistic sound reproduction.

BTW, most minimalist recordings I've heard sound unimpressive on lo fi systems (boomboxes). No impact, overly distant somewhat indistinct sound. Some music just cries out for go old fashion compression/limiting.

I do agree my emphasis is more absolute I think what Onhwy61 says is probably true. The recording has so much to do with the end result and this is why I think some demo with certain recordings that favor a given speaker/design. I guess my goal is to have a speaker faithfully reproduce the recording for better or worse.
In this vain, I have found well designed 1st order time and phase coherent speakers to deliver over a wider range of recordings. But that's just me. Everyone is entitled and this debate will go on and on.
If a person likes the Wilson or whatever---great. They certainly overwhelm most rooms and sure have a lot of driver area. I wonder if shear driver area has an affect on perceived sound since a louder presentation usually sounds better to most? Given the cone area, you would certainly have more impact even at lower volumes. Shoot, I don't know!