Gizmodo Visit With Mikey

[microstrip]

Perhaps, perhaps not. I would think that even IF they do work in Fremer's room....they would work a heck of a lot better in a much larger room.

Surely. But, unless people are in forums just to denigrate the high-end reviewers, they will read the opinions of the several reviewers who listened to them in a few different spaces and merge their opinions. MF uses the XLF speakers as a tool for reviewing and for his own listening. He is very clear in his review "Had Wilson Audio Specialties been looking for a space in which to demonstrate the efficacy of Dave Wilson's group-delay technology, in particular the Aspherical Group Delay adjustability (see below) implemented in the Alexandria X-2 and the new Alexandria XLF, they couldn't have found one more challenging than my listening room, which measures only 15' by 21' by 8'. " .

The XLFs were also reviewed by Jacob Heilbrunn in TAS in a very large, well treated space. David Wilson has been careful to get his best speakers reviewed in different situations - and the XLF is abundantly referred in press in different rooms. Unfortunately some people love the gossip, but seem to ignore the reviews and just comment on post quotations.

As always nothing surpasses our own auditions. Although I only listened to the XLF in great spaces, I have listened to X2 sounding great in a few limited size spaces.

 

[Steve williams]

And you know that big speakers in a smaller room can work better because you're sitting closer and don't have to deal with as many room reflections? In fact, more direct over indirect sound? Kind of like big headphones if you please.

What I don't get here is not only are people criticizing Mikey not having heard the speakers but Wilson Audio also. Don't you think, A) Wilson would have told him that they wouldn't work and B) Wilson wouldn 't have set them up optimally in Mikey's room. So basically people are calling Wilson idiots too. And as I said before, Mikey is far from an idiot, no matter what people here think and wouldn't permanently install a speaker in his room that wouldn't work. Not to mention, Mikey could have his pick of speakers installed in that room. In the end, he chose the XLFs.

It's too bad that Debby isn't around and could get her Dad just to comment on the use of the big speaker in smaller size rooms. After all, it isn't just Asia that tends to have small rooms, but basically much of the rest of the world including Europe.

when I designed my room I was faced with 2 obstacles

1. Limited geography to build the room inside the house (It was built above my living room)

2. I own Wilson X2 series ll's and love them and shared the same concern most people are talking about here, specifically using large speakers in a small room. I understand my room is slightly larger than Mike's but not by a great deal. My room is 20L x 15W x 9H. I was told by most of my audiophile friends that the only way I could pull this off would be to sell the X2's and trade down to a pair of Alexias (which BTW I love). The idea of doing this also posed another problem of using my amps with the Alexia. They simply wouldn't work well with the Alexia. I was agonizing as to what to do. I did speak to the people at Wilson, Debbie as well as to John,Jerron, Dave and Daryl about what I wanted to do. Not only did they say it was doable but also commented that it would be easier to adapt to the smaller room as the adjustable upper modules give more leeway than those of the Alexia. They also commented to me that they have heard (set up) Fremer's room which apparently is slightly smaller than mine and they said it sounds wonderful. I agree with the comment about the cross ported XLF and the front ported X2 being very helpful in using the speaker in smaller rooms such as those rooms in Asia. Not only were they designed for smaller rooms but also to perform well if placed close to the front wall. I was certainly concerned about front, side and rear wall reflections and so in order to verify if this was a doable project which could be brought to fruition I spent months working on a design with an acoustician who uses room mapping software to design the room. It took almost 8 months from idea to bringing it to fruition and the rest is history.

I personally never once commented on the sound of his room because I've never heard it. I guess I brought the house down when I commented that the room was an absolute mess. That was my only gripe. Now, to think there could have been some wall treatments is mere speculation on my part because I feel it is unfair to comment about the sound of someone's system until unless I have heard it myself.

I guess it is my being married to a very fastidious and neat woman who would carve me a new backside if she ever walked into my room and it looked like that That was my only point

Having lived with my room now for the past year and having many audiophile friends audition it I feel quite comfortable in stating that as good as my last room was, my new one is far better and it exceeded my wildest expectations.

For newer members or other readers my room write up is described here

http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showt...Steve-Williams&p=191656&viewfull=1#post191656

 

[puroagave]

I'd give up the hobby if I had to spend my time listening in a room maintained like that. That is even worse than the photo I have seen of Ken Kessler's room.

I am sure it sounds great because the XLF's are flexible in their set-up. I would have to keep my eyes closed and that isn;t going to happen.

he has an enviable music collection, wouldn't you say? I even spot quad 57s on the floor - sweet!

 

[GaryProtein]

he has an enviable music collection, wouldn't you say? I even spot quad 57s on the floor - sweet!

I see Mikey and Ken are wearing glasses. I could never wear reading or any other glasses while listening to music, live or recorded. I keep them in my pocket or near my remotes or equipment stack if I need to make any adjustments. Wearing glasses while listening is a detraction for me! Of course YMMV on this.

 

[TheMadMilkman]

I personally never once commented on the sound of his room because I've never heard it. I guess I brought the house down when I commented that the room was an absolute mess. That was my only gripe. Now, to think there could have been some wall treatments is mere speculation on my part because I feel it is unfair to comment about the sound of someone's system until unless I have heard it myself.

Curse our imprecise message. When you said the room was an absolute mess, I presumed you meant both physically AND sonically. I'm sure I'm not the only one who misinterpreted that.

The XLFs were also reviewed by Jacob Heilbrunn in TAS in a very large, well treated space.

I don't really read or pay attention to TAS, but I went and found pictures of this room.

http://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/state-of-the-art-in-dc/

All things being equal, I'd rather spend my time in Jacob's room. That is one comfortable-looking space.

 

[Steve williams]

Curse our imprecise message. When you said the room was an absolute mess, I presumed you meant both physically AND sonically. I'm sure I'm not the only one who misinterpreted that.

nope

my comments were based on close to 30 years of marriage

 

[es347]

Huh? Miley Cyrus, Wrecking Ball, naked Miley on a Wrecking Ball music video, you're Mikey into Miley typo....never mind.

..ok I'll respond here...good catch Jack even though it evoked the dreaded cricket sounds

 

[JackD201]

I guess I'm the only one here with tweener kids.

 

[Steve williams]

All things being equal, I'd rather spend my time in Jacob's room. That is one comfortable-looking space.

Here is Jacob when he visited me in my last house and spent some time listening

http://www.avguide.com/blog/three-megabuck-systems-rockport-wilson-and-magico

 

[caesar]

Here are measurements in Fremer's room, and the bass response is not that bad:



And here's the caption: MBL Radialstrahler 101E Mk.II, spatially averaged, 1/6-octave response in MF's listening room as set up by MF (blue) and by MBL's Jeremy Bryan (red), and of Wilson Audio MAXX 3 (green).

For a fuller context, this is Figure 5 at this link:

http://www.stereophile.com/content/mbl-radialstrahler-101e-mkii-loudspeaker-measurements

 

[caesar]

Gentlemen, let's not forget that Fremer is one of the good guys in this hobby. He is usually spot on in his descriptions and he hates analytic sound that is so prevalent in most audiophile media these days. Sure, he could have a better room and may "only be pecking the super model on the cheek", but he is a lot more trustworthy than most other guys out there.

 

[Joe Galbraith]

Have you heard this room? Suddenly you can now tell how anybody's room sounds based on how it looks?

Dre

I have. I can say without question that looks can be deceiving. The room sounds very good indeed.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Here are measurements in Fremer's room, and the bass response is not that bad:

View attachment 14284

And here's the caption: MBL Radialstrahler 101E Mk.II, spatially averaged, 1/6-octave response in MF's listening room as set up by MF (blue) and by MBL's Jeremy Bryan (red), and of Wilson Audio MAXX 3 (green).

For a fuller context, this is Figure 5 at this link:

http://www.stereophile.com/content/mbl-radialstrahler-101e-mkii-loudspeaker-measurements

Really? Maybe I'd better learn to read graphs, because it looks like a nearly 10 db 60 cycle hump followed by a precipitous drop-off. That's what I'd expect from unimpressive stand mounts trying to fake bass out of a 6" driver. What am I missing?

Tim

 

[MylesBAstor]

Really? Maybe I'd better learn to read graphs, because it looks like a nearly 10 db 60 cycle hump followed by a precipitous drop-off. That's what I'd expect from unimpressive stand mounts trying to fake bass out of a 6" driver. What am I missing?

Tim

Not for the Wilsons.

Also did you take the time to read Atkinson's disclaimer on the difficulty of measuring BIG speakers like the XLFs?

 

[mep]

Gentlemen, let's not forget that Fremer is one of the good guys in this hobby. He is usually spot on in his descriptions and he hates analytic sound that is so prevalent in most audiophile media these days. Sure, he could have a better room and may "only be pecking the super model on the cheek", but he is a lot more trustworthy than most other guys out there.

The problem is that lots of people don't see it that way, and lots of people who don't see it that way are digital lovers who have had their feelings hurt by the harsh things he has said against digital. So basically, MF is a polarizing figure in high-end audio. You have to remember that many people who love digital think it blows all analog in the weeds (even if their digital that blows analog in the weeds was sourced from analog). So they think people who proclaim that analog sounds better than digital are looney.

I was surprised at how quickly people jumped all over MF's room and pronounced it as a mess and saying it couldn't possibly sound good. And yet, and yet, not one of those people have been to MF's listening room and heard his setup. One guy on this forum who 'knows' his room nodes has declared that MF's room couldn't possibly sound good. Eyeball science is a wonderful thing.

My point to all of this is don't waste your breath and keystrokes trying to convince people on this forum that Fremer is "one of the good guys in this hobby." To many, he is the enemy. Even the fact that he wears his glasses while listening is under scrutiny now. And as if we couldn't possibly be anymore polarizing on this forum and in this hobby, some people are trying to start a movement to separate those who drink alcohol from those that don't because those that don't drink alcohol can hear better.

 

[caesar]

The problem is that lots of people don't see it that way, and lots of people who don't see it that way are digital lovers who have had their feelings hurt by the harsh things he has said against digital. So basically, MF is a polarizing figure in high-end audio. You have to remember that many people who love digital think it blows all analog in the weeds (even if their digital that blows analog in the weeds was sourced from analog). So they think people who proclaim that analog sounds better than digital are looney.

I was surprised at how quickly people jumped all over MF's room and pronounced it as a mess and saying it couldn't possibly sound good. And yet, and yet, not one of those people have been to MF's listening room and heard his setup. One guy on this forum who 'knows' his room nodes has declared that MF's room couldn't possibly sound good. Eyeball science is a wonderful thing.

My point to all of this is don't waste your breath and keystrokes trying to convince people on this forum that Fremer is "one of the good guys in this hobby." To many, he is the enemy. Even the fact that he wears his glasses while listening is under scrutiny now. And as if we couldn't possibly be anymore polarizing on this forum and in this hobby, some people are trying to start a movement to separate those who drink alcohol from those that don't because those that don't drink alcohol can hear better.

You make great points.

Another thing to consider is that people have different realism triggers. Most people would take a +/ -7 db variation in the bass in their room, while having the rest of the musical spectrum within 3 or 4 db. Others prefer harmonic qualities of tubes. Others the jump factor. Other prefer vinyl/ digital. Others get off having a better musical experience thinking about the high tech drivers in their speakers, etc. People prefer whatever they prefer. The rest is just intellectual masturbation.

 

[Peter Breuninger]

My system is better than yours because:

My glasses are wireframes
I wear top siders
I shave before I listen
My wife has black hair
I drive a rear wheel drive car
I am right handed
I wear briefs and not boxers
I have a Samsung phone
I like ice cream

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Not for the Wilsons.

Also did you take the time to read Atkinson's disclaimer on the difficulty of measuring BIG speakers like the XLFs?

I was responding to a post of the graph, not the disclaimer. And while I appreciate that it may be difficult to measure big speakers in a small room, I've got to assume Atkinson is somewhat confident that he rose to the challenge or he wouldn't have published the results in his magazine.

Not for the Wilsons.

What's not for the Wilsons?

Tim

 

[MylesBAstor]

I was responding to a post of the graph, not the disclaimer. And while I appreciate that it may be difficult to measure big speakers in a small room, I've got to assume Atkinson is somewhat confident that he rose to the challenge or he wouldn't have published the results in his magazine.

Please read Atkinson disclaimer then Tim before commenting.

What's not for the Wilsons?

Tim

The graph presents measurements for two speakers. You're looking at the data for the MBLs.

 

[Dre_J]

I have. I can say without question that looks can be deceiving. The room sounds very good indeed.

Joe,

That's what I would expect but for some reason we have members that seem to be all knowing of things related to audio based on a picture and a graph, which is a very sad state of affairs, IMO.

I'm been around the block too many times to allow myself to make sweeping statements of the sort. Within a very short distance of my home, I can put some of these guys down in several different rooms/systems at wildly varying price points that all sound remarkably good but different and I'm willing to guess the ones that are thought to not perform well based on a visual would surprise many of them.

All too often audiophiles music lovers get a bad rap. Myles puts up one post about a very rare complimentary report and instead of celebrating the article, we turn on and cannibalize our own...

It's sad.

Dre