Wilson Speakers & Reviewers

keithahughes: I don’t buy on opinion, I just don’t want to be odd-man out....

As someone who used to defend Wilson, I was getting knocked-down in forums. So I went on a search and came to the same conclusion as ’gpgr4blu’ above. Compared to other brands, Wilson’s freq. response was not accurate and tonal balance out of whack.

(2) others above -’mzkmxcv’ and ’tutetibiimperes’ echo these thoughts.

It seems people who like Wilson are simply not aware of other brands -like Emerald Physics, Spatial or PureAudioProject horns. Or Tekton. Or Devore O-series, or, or , or....

@jonnie22 - " ...I just don’t want to be odd-man out...." this is what I was referring to.  Unless you are afraid to accept your *own preferences* as valid on their own, why on Earth would you care about being "odd-man out"?

Did you miss my acknowledgment that Wilson has a "house sound"?  No speakers have a *flat* frequency response - none - and each has a particular sound based on the trade-offs each make, and their priorities. 

"It seems people who like Wilson are simply not aware of other brands -like Emerald Physics, Spatial or PureAudioProject horns. Or Tekton. Or Devore O-series, or, or , or.... "  yet another attempt to dismiss other's ***PREFERENCES***  as merely ignorance. Why are you so afraid to accept that some people like Wilsons *because* they sound as they do?  Why the need to denigrate others as ignorant rubes?  Were you bitten by a Watt/Puppy as a small child?

Yes, I was bitten, as a WP-6 owner. And as I remember (the 90s and 2000s), the back pages of Stereophile were LOADED with people selling their Wilson’s.

I reported what I heard -in line with others here, but you refuse to acknowledge that.

Yes, other opinions matter, just to make sure I’m not hearing things. With so many variables in our systems, it's the right thing to do.

@jonnie22 - I don't take any issue with you reporting what you heard, just with reporting what you *assume*, yet cannot possibly *know*, i.e. that "... people who like Wilson are simply not aware of other brands...".   Such statements simply demean people who have, indeed, heard many, many brands, and still prefer their Wilsons.  You don't like them, fine, no problem, many don't.

We'll just have to agree to disagree on the subject of making one's own sonic preferences contingent upon other's opinions.  I'm afraid the concept of "making sure i'm not hearing things" doesn't make sense to me in this context.  I hear what I hear, that's what is real to me.  I can't perceive what *you* or anyone else perceives, in the way you perceive it, but even should my preferred sound drive the audiophile masses screaming from my listening room in horror, it would have no affect on my perceptions, and certainly wouldn't make my perceptions *wrong*.  In the context of personal enjoyment, perceptions cannot be wrong, by definition.  To me, that's the right thing to do.

YMMV

I've auditioned virtually every high end speaker available in the US market over the past 20 years--and some have come close to the overall Wilson presentation for me for various reasons (Eggleston, Rockport, KEF, Revel, Vandersteen, YG, Lawrence Audio, Raidho) and others have proven superior to me (MBL) but require a much bigger investment in ancillary equipment to be driven properly.
However, I'm with other writers who utilize Wilson as their reference in addition to those mentioned above like Jacob Heilbrunn, Jason Victor Serinus, Edgar Kramer, Anthony Cordesman (one of 2 references) and manufacturers like Audio Research and Dan D'Agostino both of whom used Wilsons to voice their equipment (although ARC currently uses mainly Sonus Faber for obvious reasons ). Wilsons are by no means everyone's favorite and I understand the reasons why anyone could prefer any of the above brands and many more. BUT--they are a popular choice in the high end among audio reviewers and the buying public and like all popular choices, they will be subject to sometimes intense criticism by those who prefer other brands. That's life.