Searching for new speakers: Wilson, B&W, ??

Just add a Martin Logan sub. By alleviating the amp and speakers from producing that much bass will really open them up. Since bass draws so much power, your mid bass may be lacking from too little power.

Thank you for the responses. The primary objective here is to have fun and find a speaker that will make music enjoyable to listen to, not to explore the inner detail of the perfect recording at the compromise of the 100's of other recording in my collection. My Martin Logans (Aeons) sound very good and great at low volume detail and imaging. And even though I have a JL F110 sub, I find the low end (or rather mid bass) lacking. As well as just wanting to have fun with a new sound. I tried Vandersteen 3A sigs, and found them to just not work well in my room. They seemed to want to be turned up to sound full (in my room) and then they were over powering the room. Ironically we threw in a pair of 20 year old Polks just to try and whereas they did not sound as good over all. They were more listenable. I have heard both B&W and Wilson at different times in different showrooms and like most of what I heard. There are fewer Hi-Fi shops these days at least where I live so the only way to be an enthusiast is to buy some and try it and if I don't like it sell it and try something else.

Mr_m,
Why do I think this is a trap...hmmm.
OK, and these are my ears only--except for comments mentioned later.
But, after the ML's which are VERY nice and neutral sounding through the midrange...fast, lightning fast...with very low coloration...the B&W's have very identifiable colorations...the Kevlar has a distinctive mid range 'honk' (not my description, but a well referenced call by many). I hear that, don't like it.
Then...there's the lack of coherence (NOT a problem with the ML) from the lower mid, all the way through the high frequencies...with a delicate top on the ML's...not a strength in the B&W's.
Maybe I'm too hard on the B&W's...but I have to say...after designing the LSA's...then taking a pair of $1K speakers into a store...comparing them ON THE FLOOR...people crowding around...shocked beyond belief at the disparity in sound between my humble little speakers and the $3K 805's...it was very telling.
I asked myself...how can, why would all these heady engineers at B&W design a speaker that sounds like that? With such obvious colorations?
Then there's me...NOT AN ENGINEER...armed only with ears...(sounds weird) who can voice a speaker that just kills theirs that costs three times the price. How can that be?
Not a fan...B&W's...if you love them, that's great...great...everyone likes a flavor...I like 'neutral'...they're not.
Hope I didn't shoot anyone in the foot...especially myself!

Good listening,
Larry

Hi Vdosc,

My experience is that with almost al speakers (priced for mortals) a subwoofer is mandatory in order to have good bass when listening at low levels. Luckily you have a sub already. Also, often floorstanders need to be cracked up a bit in order to open up (I talk here about midrange and high frequencies). Thus, IMO for listen sessions at low levels one is better off with a pair of good monitors and a sub than with a floorstander.

Regarding your question, i.e. B&W vs. Wilson, the Sophias are much better speakers than the B&W models you've considered. Also, being more dynamic than the B&Ws, the Sophia will most likely play better at lower volumes.

Good luck and keep us posted!

Happy new year to everyone!
Paul

Sophia 3 or Sasha. Great speakers.