Please rate WATT/Puppy 7

Another tip:
If you go for Dynaaudio C4 that is nearly twice cheaper you'll understand what's realy meant in most comments of this thread.

The Watt/Puppy is one of the most controversial products in audio. I own the 5.1's. They are a pain. The room and upstream equipment better be right. But, if everything is just so, they are something to hear. It took me years to get them to their current level and I suspect I can still get more out of them.

My point is this. Speakers as this level cannot be discussed in a vacuum. It all depends on your equipment and your room. If you want something to set up and play, and you don't want to fiddle with it, you don't want Wilson's. People that say they're poor speakers are correct AS FAR AS THEY KNOW because it's so difficult to get them to sound good.

Personally, I suggest a pair of 5.1's or 6's as they are so much cheaper. Then take the extra money and place it in room treatment and better equipment. I suggest tubes in the chain somewhere, I use a CAT Ultimate. I like MIT Cables with mine. If you have the funds to do all this and still get the 7's, which I'm sure are better, great. But, if you are spending this type of cash I'd find a dealer that will help you put all this together including room treatment and set up.

If you prefer to consider something easier to deal with I suggest the Vandersteen 5 A's. They are much more room friendly. Either way, make sure the dealer will give you your money back on the speakers if they don't work for you. For this kind of money a showroom demo is folley, you must hear them in your room.

On the plus side, excellent dynamics and fairly accurate. Downside, difficult/demanding of setup/positioning, substandard imaging/soundstage, they never pull a disappeaing act, require careful component matching, low speaker height makes it diffult to scale with tall images.

Keep in mind that I have not owned these speakers. I've only heard them in dealer showrooms. But I think that in itself indicates how difficult it is to get the most out of these speakers.

To put it succintly. The Watt Puppy's sound exactly like what they are and were intended to be. That being expensive studio monitors.

For your musical tastes I would recommend Kharma before Wilson.

I concur with Jazzdude. I owned 5.1s and while I understand that Wilson changed course with the 6 and evolved that new sound with the 7, the WP I owned were always exciting yet never enjoyable. Very demanding speakers and perhaps if you are willing to change your gear over 18 months you will find a semblance of nirvana. I felt my stereo should allow me to relax and enjoy the music rather than worry about the sound. I went to a Kharma which is not so slam-bam dynamic but is in my opinion, more legit in bass representation and accurate/deep in the midrange (vs flat, razor-sharp). At 10K a WP6 or WP7 might be worthwhile but not at 22K.

However, knowing what I know, I could have a pair of WP5.1s around the house in a secondary system at a 5K used price. What they do they do better than any but I think the sound is not a do-everything speaker.

Classicjazz raises some good points. His comments caused me to think of this. I went from ESL 63's to Wilson 5.1's. The Quads made almost everything sound good. The Wilsons made everything sound different. The better recordings got better, the poor ones worse.

What is a speaker supposed to do?