Wilson Watt 3/Puppy 2 Loudspeaker

i owned both the Wp threes and fives great loudspeakers in their day however a new loudspeaker  from 56k to 9k will outperform them

@OP They are still good speakers in many respects, particularly in bass punch and articulation. However, they were always bright sounding. If buying used, be aware that the bass units used a foam surround which is prone to deterioration with age.

@audiotroy 

From 56,000.00 to 9000.00? Seriously?

If you'd slow down when you type and proof read what you wrote, you'd be much better for it. Even the for sale ads you post read like they were written by a six year old.

I wouldn't buy them. They will have great lows and quite a bit of punch but no high end articulation. Like other reviewers, I'm not dead yet and I owned a pair of fives, I would also say that a pair of 13 to $16,000 loudspeakers could easily out match them.

@yoyoyaya @mesonto Thank you for pointing out the fault of mid-treble / treble region, which corresponds well to the hum bet. 10k-20khz shown in the Stereophile measurements below.

Vertically, the WATT was perhaps best-balanced with the listener’s ears at or just above the tweeter axis; ie, some 37" from the floor. Above that, a peak in the mid-treble can be heard; sit so you are at WATT woofer level and the midrange becomes very peaky.

So, even the discounted price which I did not disclose before is below $3k, are you still not recommending it? Can the birghtness possibly be toned down using warmer sounding preamp / amp?  I am thinking biamping them using SET / lower wattage class A since WATT is relatively efficient (91dB/w-m).