I had a similar internal dialog within the past several months, however, several other speakers have also been part of the mix. I found that 5As and WP7s were similarly appealing with respect to long term listenability, but they were not equally compelling to listen to. On the very best systems there seems to be an elevated ability to convey the communication between musicians, or even the meaning of a song sung by a solo vocalist. These subtle shades of meaning may lie in very small dynamic and tonal changes that are very brief in duration, and very easily obscured. I've heard the 5As and WP7s several times on the same systems (once, perhaps, in the same LA area dealer as Agaffer), and the 5As obscure what the WP7s reveal in an unparalleled way. I thrive on that aspect of musical expression, so my choice is obvious.
Vanderteen 5A's versus Wilson WattPuppy 7's
I can't decide between the WattPP 7's and the Vandersteen 5A's.
Both sounded great albeit with different front end digital (Wadia 861 with Vandy's and Mark Levinson 390S with WP7), preamp (ARC II vs Hovland), amps (Quicksilver V4 vs CJ Premier 140). It is impossible to audition these side by side. Both sounded great with their respective electronics. Both had great sound stage and deep extension. The Vandy's had base that was really visceral (too much at times when the sub comes in). The Wilsons had very tight clean bass and amazing clean high freq. I think the midrange was better with the Vandy's but concerned about the boomy low end. I may just not be used to real visceral lower energy. Any comments? From what I have read, the Wilson's are show offs with a more up front and dynamic presentation and the Vandy's closer to live music.
Both sounded great albeit with different front end digital (Wadia 861 with Vandy's and Mark Levinson 390S with WP7), preamp (ARC II vs Hovland), amps (Quicksilver V4 vs CJ Premier 140). It is impossible to audition these side by side. Both sounded great with their respective electronics. Both had great sound stage and deep extension. The Vandy's had base that was really visceral (too much at times when the sub comes in). The Wilsons had very tight clean bass and amazing clean high freq. I think the midrange was better with the Vandy's but concerned about the boomy low end. I may just not be used to real visceral lower energy. Any comments? From what I have read, the Wilson's are show offs with a more up front and dynamic presentation and the Vandy's closer to live music.
- ...
- 13 posts total
- 13 posts total