The $27,900 disappointment? Wilson Audio Watt Puppy 8 issues.

Its funny - I’ve read time and time again about Wilson’s lack of efficiency and low impedance. Hence requiring high quality amps to drive them. And when they are driven by the proper amp most people seem to agree that they sound very good.

here’s the thing, I’ve never heard a Wilson owner complain about this. I think thats because most Wilson owners have no intention of buying anything but a high quality amp.

Would I, or any other Wilson owner, prefer they improve their design to be more efficient? Speaking for myself I say no. Because theres a possibility the sound I get from my setup is a result of the relationship between the speaker and the amp. And I would never spend the $$ on Wilsons with the intent of connecting them to an underpowered amp.

Personally this lack of efficiency in design is irrelevant, except to those who wouldnt buy or own them in the first place.

Am I unique in feeling this way - or are there Wilson owners that listen to their speakers and say “damn, yeah it sounds good… but the impedance inefficiency is driving me nuts!”

Low impedance is immaterial when speakers are paired with amplifiers that are right for them.

Lots of folks out there under-power their speakers.

Some speakers, especially vintage ones, will react to this indignity by either sounding like garbage or by frying the offending amp.

Other speakers will still sound pretty good, yet withhold their best. 

At the end of the day the vast majority of speakers, polite ones included, benefit sonically from high-power / high-current amplification.

fyi, Here is the Stereophile measurements of most of the Wilson Watt/Puppy and related line of speakers in order of release. Probably covers almost 3 decades of Wilson Speakers - Impedance, Phase, Frequency. It shows a pattern and trend that is obviously part of the Wilson philosophy. I do not see that the W/P 8 is any different or special from the rest of the line. If I am reading it right, it seems the only obvious change was with the Shasha DAW and Shasha V where two low freq. (15hz, 45 hz) impedance peak higher and sync up better with the phase ? is that correct ?

There are certain amps (i have a couple) that can make any turd of a speaker sound ok. 

At what point is it the speaker's magic on its own? Or at what point is it just getting carried by a very high quality front end?

Its funny - I’ve read time and time again about Wilson’s lack of efficiency and low impedance. Hence requiring high quality amps to drive them. And when they are driven by the proper amp most people seem to agree that they sound very good.

here’s the thing, I’ve never heard a Wilson owner complain about this. I think thats because most Wilson owners have no intention of buying anything but a high quality amp.

Based on these impedance curves of speakers over 3 decades, it has to be obvious that these curves are providing exceptional sound to the people grading and buying these speakers. The objective they have set for the speakers are being met. Wilson speakers are very expensive, so, is it reasonable that they expect quality amps to drive them to get the most out of them - either a stereo amp or two mono amps ?

I see two main issues:

1. Adding a woofer planar amp to the Puppy so you can dial in any bass you want is creating a whole different speaker. It is now basically a sub-woofer type situation that is user definable. It is obviously not what Wilson was selling, and is completely changing the sound of the speaker. A more valid comparison would have been to compare his new crossover with the same amp setup.

2. The deterioraton of the old diffracton foam on old Wilson Speakers is a well known issue. Wilson sells new diffraction pads for people to update their speakers. Why not try that first to fix any diffraction issues ? When I bought my W/P 8 used, I knew that updating the diffraction pads was an additional expense that I had to factor in. Did I notice a difference when I added the new Wilson Diffraction pads ? Yes, I think I did. Maybe, I am wrong because I could not A/B the change, but, it would have been nice to measure the before and after using the Wilson recommended method for addressing this issue.

Lastly, I am not sure what to say about the whole "off axis" response issue.