Wilson or Kharma

First, I do not participate much in these forums. I do read them and find them informative and quite amusing at times. Your question is one that I had not too long ago and find it necessary to now put my "two cents" in.

Having recently been in the market for a speaker in the $18 - $25,000 price range, I auditioned quite a few speakers. I listened to the Piega C40(35K), Wilson WP7, Wilson MAXX, Kharma 3.2 CRM, Eggleston Andra, and Maggie MG20.1's. All were pretty good, but none grabbed me like the Kharma's.

Here is my take:

The Piega's were nice, but not worth the money. Very open, good but not terribly deep bass and a bit bright.

The Watt Puppies were very impressive for about half an hour and then fatigue set in. I heard them with both the ARC Reference 300 MK II and Levinson monoblocks. Excellent dynamics, but musicality and driver cohesion were missing. Soundstage and imaging were terrific.

The MAXX was also very impressive, but more of the same as the WP7. A bit bloaty in the lower midrange and a little mechanical in the vocals. BIG DYNAMICS and air movement.

The Eggleston's were a bit on the dark side and appeared to need massive amounts of power to get the pumping. Like the Wilson's, they did not seem to integrate too well between the woofers and the midrange.

The Magnepan MG20.1's were very impressive for easy listening music. With the kind of music I listen to (70's rock, jazz, blues and bluegrass), they do not provide any of the dynamics I like. Nice staging with good, but not great pinpoint imaging. Very fast and sounding "whole" throught the frequency spectrum. Way too big and massive amounts of power are required. Not for me.

I have saved the best for last. I visited Chambers Audio and Jonathan Tinn had the 3.2's setup with the Tenor OTL's. This was the best sound I have ever heard, regardless of the music we played. It had a bigger soundstage and much better imaging and clarity than any of the other speakers I listened to. The bass was a complete shock to me. How could these little 70 pound speakers produce the punch and bass that I heard? I have no idea. It was AMAZING! Maybe the Wilson's had a slightly greater degree of impact, I am not sure. I did not hear them in the same room. All I can tell you is they did everything that the Magnepan's did in terms of cohesion, but had punch and a clarity I cannot live without. I listen to live music at least twice a month and these speakers come closer to "being there" than anything I have expereinced.

Needless to say, I bought the Kharma's from Chambers Audio and my search is over. They play everything better than any speaker I have heard. If you are anywhere near Portland, consider this an open invitation to come listen. If you hear them, I would be shocked if you did not buy them.

Dale

Where did you hear the Piega's?

Oakrow, too bad you didn't get to audition the WP7 on amps in the same league as the Tenors ; )

I find these discussions to be remarkable, less because of what they reveal about the nature of the equipment than what they reveal about the people that use it. Listening biases are much more clearly divulged than any truly salient characteristic of the components musical abilities. That being said, I will add my humble opinion to this list because I've heard both speakers in similar conditions. First off, both the 3.2s and WP7s are immensely likeable speakers. I found neither off-putting during extended audition, both leaving me with the intense desire to listen further when the CD or LP was finished. For me, this is the first, and most essential measure of a speaker's ability to convey music. I've found many wonderful sounding speakers that fail in this regard. The second most critical characteristic of a music system is the ease with which I become emotionally engaged with all kinds of music. In this regard I found the WP7s to be my better match. The range of emotions that I found myself experiencing while listening through them was extraordinary, and unprecedented. I found the 3.2s to be engaging as well, but not to the same degree. I'm not at all interested in exploring the high-end lexicon for sonic explanations. That is better left to the critics for whom that is their bread and butter. Suffice it to say that these speakers differ significantly in their sonic emphases, and that could bear significantly on your preference. Finally, there is no way that I would substitute anyone's experience for my own, especially with components as special and expensive as these.
Listening to both was a great pleasure that I wouldn't want anyone to miss.

Neither! Your speakers are better than W/P or Kharma. You will be regressing if you are to switch to either dynamic speakers. W/P are as demanding speakers with unquenchable thirst for power. Maybe Revel Salon, but only if you must!