Please rate WATT/Puppy 7

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?

Allow me to ditto the comments about set-up. It's a chore. I had 5.1s and just couldn't fall in love, despite expensive cabling, lots of tweaking in the (tube) and SACD electronics feeding them. Revealing, yes indeed. Too much so. Then I got the 7s. It isn't even close. THESE I can love. They even sound better several rooms away. And speaking of rooms, I too, believe that many naysayers who have heard these or earlier versions heard them in rooms which weren't optimal or through less than synergistic equipment choices. I hope to build a gen-u-wine listening room designed by the best of the best. THEN we'll hear what these things can do.

Don't judge the 7s from the 5.1s. I never heard the 6s.

Best regards.

I too think most of the issues with the previous versions have been resolved with the 7’s. I have never listened to the 5.1’s, but I auditioned the 6’s on several occasions. I was very impressed with the accuracy, bass reproduction, and dynamics of the 6’s but could never warm up to them. Then came the 7’s. They did everything the 6’s did but better. They are a bit mellower on the top end without the loss of detail. I agree that they require careful system matching and may complement tube gear better than SS. I do not agree with the comment that they will not disappear. If properly positioned, you will be immersed in the sound and the 7’s are gone. As a matter of fact, they disappear better than any speaker I listened to in their size and price range. As far as price goes, they are not cheap. However, I don’t know why so much more emphasis is placed on the WP’s price. Other speakers in their class are comparably priced, and some cost more. I don’t think anyone that does his or her homework and shops around pays full retail anyway.

The 7’s will enhance a great system and reproduce what’s going on upstream. If you are looking for coloration, look elsewhere.