2. speakers
  3. 1288439450

Wilson MAXX

I had an opportunity the other day to compare Wilson MAXX 1 with WATT PUPPY 7 in a friend's house. Quite to my surprise, WATT PUPPY 7 was superior in almost all frequencies and I wonder how is it possible that MAXX which is almost 3 times more expensive sounded so dull compared to WATT PUPPY 7. The midrange was congested and tweeter lacked the icy impression and openness and bass was not tight and so on....
I am really confused how is it possible. My frinds who have MAXX and were present in the audition had the same feeling and I do not know if anyone has an answer since the set up and room acoustics were the same during the audiotion?
Thanks if anyone has an opinion!!
fpooyandeh
andromedaaudio
170 posts
 
And here the Maxx http://stereophile.com/floorloudspeakers/324/index6.html , the puppy 7 is also tested somewhere in the archive , maybe somewhere is mentioned what the minimum listening distance will be for the Maxx , W/P series .

Good magazine stereophile , i bought my sme 20 just on mike fremers recommendation ,i 've never heard it .
andromedaaudio
170 posts
 
This also very important in answering the topicstarter expirience , its from the maxx measurment ,....listening height:



With respect to the way in which the speaker's response changes with listening height, the midband region changes quickly off-axis, due to the significant vertical separation between the pair of midrange drivers. Even so, any change was minimal over a ±7.5 degrees window, the worst-case difference being 6dB from 700Hz to 2kHz. The wisdom of the slight mid lift seen on-axis is apparent. For the speaker to "sound" correct, the forward "energy" must be in balance. Over a 30 degrees vertical window, the MAXX's midrange output averages to flat uniformity.
goatwuss
877 posts
 
How big is the room? If you're not pushing 400+ square feet minimum, then you are too small for the Maxx.
More to discover