Flawed? Wilson's Aspherical Propagation Delay

Designing decent user-adjustable crossovers would be a lot more complex than it sounds. Adjusting the array to restore the correct speakers-to-listener geometry makes a lot more sense to me.

The dowsides are greater diffraction, as Shadorne noted, along with higher cost, greater dependence on trained professionals for initial setup, and introduction of the opportunity to screw things up.

Duke

If Wilson used active crossovers then they could offer adjustable x-overs at reasonable cost.

Frankly I am with buconero on this one, at least in regard to the very large Wilsons. I have no beef with the triangular sloped baffle on the Watt Puppy - as this does look like a genuine attempt to adjust for dispersion & maintain good diffraction characteristics. It seems Wilson is doing much the same as any manufacturer at the ultra-high end of the product range: countless questionable additional benefits that justify an astronomic price tag. To be fair this happens with cars, skis, watches, electric shavers...you name it! So I don't want to imply that Wilson products are inferior in anyway - they both look and sound great!

02-20-11: Buconero117
Flawed, yes. Its a business model thing. Think about it, the bigger the 'boxes', the higher the price you charge. The 'effect' of Wilson speakers can be purchased at one tenth the price they charge....

Which "Wilson effect" are you talking about--low level resolution where you can hear the air coming out of the trombone's bell?

Frankly, I'm surprised that Mr. Wolf would say this.
For a speaker to be 'truly' phase correct, time function, being 'distance' in this context, would have to be correct also.
Time alignment, in the loudspeaker context, places the drivers in a position so that the sound from each, arrives, (without room interaction, which is impossible to do)at the same time. This preserves the 'unit body' of a multi-frequency/several octave tone, being played by multiple drivers. Preserving phase relationships is universally thought of as being a first order/6db per octave slope.
Wilson, by having adjustable enclosures, one's which allow for adjustments for the listeners height/distance, are giving a more accurate arrival signature.
If approximated time alignment, (think THIEL dating back to the late '70's early '80's) aligning the drivers so that the sound from each driver arrives at the listener at the same time (allowing for the concave/convex nature of the drivers)works, then EXACTING alignment would by default works BETTER.
THIEL used a minimum distance of 8' for their time alignment, without regard to the height of the listener, instead, approximating a 40"(?) height.
Many years ago, I was aligning a loudspeakers drivers for a listening session with my old friend Jim Thiel...I was being anal and Jim, more interested in getting to dinner said, "That's close enough Larry." Knowing how OCD Jim was about all of his work, I gently said, "You know, if approximate time alignment works, perfect time alignment works better," He just smiled and shook his head in agreement. Dinner would wait.
I'm thinking that Mr. Wolf is giving up some ground to Wilson on this by not making the necessary adjustments to his crossovers. Surprising given the incredible 'technical bent' that seems to be an important aspect of his designs.
Best,
Larry

Lrsky wrote:
"For a speaker to be 'truly' phase correct, time function, being 'distance' in this context, would have to be correct also"

According to JA, Wilson speakers are neither phase correct nor time aligned or coincident (Their midrange is actually wire out-of-phase).
I thought that physical time alignment happens when drivers physical location are aligned with each other , not to the listener... I mean, how exactly can you "time align" anything on an angle?

Looks to me that Wilson has to "tilt" his drivers simply because they are located to high for any reasonable listening position. It has nothing to do with time or phase alignment.