Thoughts on hearing a Wilson XVX Chronosonic System at Evolution Hifi

[Charles S]

I believe the XVX will have a production run substantially longer than 5 years. How long is anybody's guess. In 2023 Wilson released special edition XVX's and they are doing the same this year for the Alexx V. An update would only include the new tweeter but the tweeter module for the XVX is enormous. Much larger than on any of their other speakers and the only improvement of the new carbon tweeter is in the rear chamber. The XVX treble is already incredibly smooth, extended, and refined. It already has the new capacitors, etc. The XVX doesn't have many competitors. The M7 doesn't seem to be one. I thought it would make much more of a splash than it has. I am certain it is a very fine speaker. Rockport has not so far stepped up to the plate to offer an updated Arrakis, which I believe they need to. If my room were any smaller at all, I would be waiting on an updated Lyra, because an XVX wouldn't fit. So for folks that are in this market, the XVX remains quite viable and their sales prove this.

The other thing is that mine was installed the first week of January 2020. I got speakers 39 and 40. The XVX was released right at the end of 2019 in December so it is still less than 5 years in production. It's my final speaker. I won't be buying an XVX Series 2 and I suspect most folks owning one won't either. As far as I am concerned personally, I would prefer it over anything on the market, including the new M7. Why? Because the XVX is really a system like the ageless WAMM. To appreciate its full glory you need to add dual Subsonics and this kicks it up to about 650K. This makes it fully competitive with the WAMM or M9, both of which will not be updated for many years to come.

 

[Tascam]

It doesn’t matter. You didn’t hear the Wilsons in other members’ rooms either. The Evo line is a the same as the III and the prior generations before it. Everyone has gone into better enclosures and they still use MDF. Even the gloss finishing in the side panels are sub par. The top section of the Maestro is tenuously attached and my friend’s unit broke on install.

Not a fan.

But that’s not the point. You spew hatred on this thread. But you can’t stand it when someone doesn’t like what you own. Get over yourself.

The Focal Evo line is not the same as the 3. There are upgrades. Nothing wrong with high quality MDF. Even B&W uses it in some of their most expensive speakers. Wilson’s material is different but not necessarily better. The finish quality is beautiful on mine, very similar to Wilson, so I’m not sure what you mean by subpar..mine arrived in perfect condition

 

[Charles S]

The Focal Evo line is not the same as the 3. There are upgrades. Nothing wrong with high quality MDF. Even B&W uses it in some of their most expensive speakers. Wilson’s material is different but not necessarily better. The fish quality is beautiful on mine, very similar to Wilson, so I’m not sure what you mean by subpar..mine arrived in perfect condition

I honestly don't think that T spews hatred. T simply is quite direct and to the point.

 

[Tascam]

I honestly don't think that T spews hatred. T simply is quite direct and to the point.

Exactly. Thank you

 

[Zeotrope]

Wilson is a cabinet shop. They don’t build their own drivers or crossovers. They do customize the crossovers, however. I am sure this big Wilson is a fabulous speaker, nonetheless. But, it lists for $369K. This is insane for a pair of speakers, no matter how good they are. Why is Wilson using Scanspeak drivers instead of something they make themselves? I never got to hear these speakers you have. I used to live in Nashville and bought my Wilson Sophias from a dealer in Cool Springs. The excess bass problem I heard with Wilson was probably related to the rooms I heard them in. My Sophias sounded boomy to me. The other rooms maybe weren’t large enough, but I heard the new Watt Puppy recently in a 15x20 room and they sounded way too boomy and bass heavy even with other speakers moved out of the way. I heard this on Sasha and Alexx models in the same room. Thanks for your compliments about my system.

Stop, man, just stop. This is useless info that absolutely NO ONE in this thread cares to read. You are wasting your time and wasting electrons. Move on.
+1 to Ignore list

EDIT: Ha! He left and deleted his account.

 

[treitz3]

As an FYI, that is incorrect. He was permanently banned from the WBF due to his actions. I learned a day or two later that he was banned from yet, another forum.

It is sad that some adults can't behave better than a 9 year old.

 

[Zeotrope]

It’s the classic move of putting down competing products to make yourself feel better about your purchase.

 

[LL21]

As an FYI, that is incorrect. He was permanently banned from the WBF due to his actions. I learned a day or two later that he was banned from yet, another forum.

It is sad that some adults can't behave better than a 9 year old.

I take issue with your comment on behalf of well-behaved 9 year olds everywhere...kidding.

 

[joey_v]

I honestly don't think that T spews hatred. T simply is quite direct and to the point.

I’m glad Tom @treitz3 saw it differently.

 

[Audiohertz2]

I believe the XVX will have a production run substantially longer than 5 years. How long is anybody's guess. In 2023 Wilson released special edition XVX's and they are doing the same this year for the Alexx V. An update would only include the new tweeter but the tweeter module for the XVX is enormous. Much larger than on any of their other speakers and the only improvement of the new carbon tweeter is in the rear chamber. The XVX treble is already incredibly smooth, extended, and refined. It already has the new capacitors, etc. The XVX doesn't have many competitors. The M7 doesn't seem to be one. I thought it would make much more of a splash than it has. I am certain it is a very fine speaker. Rockport has not so far stepped up to the plate to offer an updated Arrakis, which I believe they need to. If my room were any smaller at all, I would be waiting on an updated Lyra, because an XVX wouldn't fit. So for folks that are in this market, the XVX remains quite viable and their sales prove this.

The other thing is that mine was installed the first week of January 2020. I got speakers 39 and 40. The XVX was released right at the end of 2019 in December so it is still less than 5 years in production. It's my final speaker. I won't be buying an XVX Series 2 and I suspect most folks owning one won't either. As far as I am concerned personally, I would prefer it over anything on the market, including the new M7. Why? Because the XVX is really a system like the ageless WAMM. To appreciate its full glory you need to add dual Subsonics and this kicks it up to about 650K. This makes it fully competitive with the WAMM or M9, both of which will not be updated for many years to come.

Charles do you know how the MC3500mk2 sound compares to the Mk1 ...?

 

[Charles S]

I’m glad Tom @treitz3 saw it differently.

I'm sorry that T has left. I'm not sure if T was male or female. I think that some folks have anger issues and rather than reject them which only makes their condition worse, try to find some common ground. I thought he was just beginning to warm up. But if he's/she's gone, there's nothing I can do about it. I like WBF a lot because folks speak their mind and can be a bit abrasive. I hope T returns perhaps after some reflection.

 

[Charles S]

Charles do you know how the MC3500mk2 sound compares to the Mk1 ...?

Ron Evans come out of retirement to spend 2 years designing it. The issue with the 3500 MK II was its poor reliability. With my XVX using the 4-ohm tap I blew tube after tube and my left amp had to return to the factory because of a malfunctioning Sentry Monitor circuit. However, with the advent of the green labeled EL509S output tubes, the reliability issue is now solved and I have 550 hours on both amps with no failures. I now run my XVX off the 2-ohm tap because it is in reality a 2.5-ohm speaker.

The design of the two amps is quite similar so how would a totally restored original 3500 compare to the MK II version? I would expect very similar. The 3500 both versions will do well over 500 watts without any difficulty. Right now I am listening to Mahler's 6th on SACD. The needles often peg to 350 watts (volume set at 65%) and because of the extremely low distortion of my system and the beauty of my tubes, it doesn't even sound loud. Very few tube amps can really take advantage of the dynamic capabilities of an XVX, but the 3500 Mk II is one of the few.

 

[abeidrov]

Here is an excellent video that explains why there are not many bad reviews in our hobby.

Herb Reichert is one of the best reviewers out there in my view, and he has done as many as five negative reviews! I wish all audio reviewers were as honest and experienced as Mr. Reichert.

 

[godofwealth]

Ron Evans come out of retirement to spend 2 years designing it. The issue with the 3500 MK II was its poor reliability. With my XVX using the 4-ohm tap I blew tube after tube and my left amp had to return to the factory because of a malfunctioning Sentry Monitor circuit. However, with the advent of the green labeled EL509S output tubes, the reliability issue is now solved and I have 550 hours on both amps with no failures. I now run my XVX off the 2-ohm tap because it is in reality a 2.5-ohm speaker.

The design of the two amps is quite similar so how would a totally restored original 3500 compare to the MK II version? I would expect very similar. The 3500 both versions will do well over 500 watts without any difficulty. Right now I am listening to Mahler's 6th on SACD. The needles often peg to 350 watts (volume set at 65%) and because of the extremely low distortion of my system and the beauty of my tubes, it doesn't even sound loud. Very few tube amps can really take advantage of the dynamic capabilities of an XVX, but the 3500 Mk II is one of the few.

If the XVX is really a 2.5 ohm speaker, I’d recommend switching to solid state amplifiers. The best and heaviest one I owned was a Krell 700cx, which would comfortably output a few thousand watts at 2 ohms, assuming your power lines would support that current. It ran pretty warm as well. My current ARC 750SE will output perhaps a thousand watts into 4 ohms, but I would not use any tube amplifier into 2 ohm loads, no matter what the specs say. That could be why your McIntosh is blowing tubes. My general impression of Wilson’s is that they are quite efficient and friendly to tube amplifiers. ARC uses them to voice their products. Perhaps yours are different.

 

[Charles S]

If the XVX is really a 2.5 ohm speaker, I’d recommend switching to solid state amplifiers. The best and heaviest one I owned was a Krell 700cx, which would comfortably output a few thousand watts at 2 ohms, assuming your power lines would support that current. It ran pretty warm as well. My current ARC 750SE will output perhaps a thousand watts into 4 ohms, but I would not use any tube amplifier into 2 ohm loads, no matter what the specs say. That could be why your McIntosh is blowing tubes. My general impression of Wilson’s is that they are quite efficient and friendly to tube amplifiers. ARC uses them to voice their products. Perhaps yours are different.

I appreciate your concern. However, the problem with the 3500 MKII was not me running it off the 4-ohm tap but with the tubes themselves. When the MC2KW came out in 2005 with the new ThermalTrak output transistor McIntosh had a heck of a time with the amp because of the new transistor. This was the reason the 1.2KW had to use the older transistor. The same analogy is applicable to the EL509S tubes used by the 3500 MKII. Since the advent of the new green labeled EL509S tubes all the problems with blown tubes have vanished. Wilsons run quite well with tubes for some reason, but most Wilsons IMO should be run off the 2-ohm tap with a tube amp if possible. My friend on AA who has a VAC Statement 450 runs his new Alexia V off the 2-ohm tap. My XVX sounds wonderful with my 3500.

I have a question for you. I have great respect for ARC and believe that your 750SE would sound great with an XVX. But why has ARC abandoned the 2-ohm tap? The ARC 600 has 1-2-4-and 8 ohm taps. The problem with the 2-ohm tap with Mac amps has been the lousy binding posts. You need a really solid connection for a 2-ohm tap. I actually believe my XVX sounds better run off the 2-ohm rather than the 4-ohm tap. The Solid Cinch binding posts present on all modern Mac amps has been a tremendous improvement. They are some of the best binding posts going. They have a little eye socket hole. Using a spade lug you fully insert one of its ends through the little eyehole and screw the cinching mechanism down on top of it and you have a 100% perfect connection with any size spade lug. It's an excellent piece of engineering because you can obtain a perfect connection with any size width spade lug.

I agree with you generally regarding specs with tube amps but with McIntosh, regarding 3500 MK II specifications, it says FTC Power Rating 350 watts into 2, 4, 8 ohms. The 3500's run cool driving my XVX when run off the 2-ohm tap under all circumstances. They don't generate as much heat as do my 1.25KW's, which I run off the 4-ohm tap. The 1.25KW's run hotter than most Mac SS amps and noticeably hotter than their predecessor, the 1.2KW's. I have owned both amps. I liked the 1.2KW but much prefer the 1.25's.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

I have a question for you. I have great respect for ARC and believe that your 750SE would sound great with an XVX. But why has ARC abandoned the 2-ohm tap? The ARC 600 has a 1-2-4-and 8 ohm taps. The problem with the 2-ohm tap with Mac amps has been the lousy binding posts. You need a really solid connection for a 2-ohm tap. I actually believe my XVX sounds better run off the 2-ohm rather than the 4-ohm tap. The Solid Cinch binding posts present on all modern Mac amps has been a tremendous improvement. They are some of the best binding posts going. They have a little eye socket hole. Using a spade lug you fully insert one of its ends through the little eyehole and screw the cinching mechanism down on top of it and you have a 100% perfect connection with any size spade lug. It's an excellent piece of engineering because you can obtain a perfect connection with any size width spade lug.

i do not have any opinion about ss or tubes on an XVX. but your viewpoint about attaching a spade to the binding post for maximum holding by inserting it into the 'eye' of the post could be less than ideal as i understand it. so it would only have an edge of the spade as the contact?

agree that it will keep it snug; but i would also expect it to result in a lower performing connection. a spade is 'designed' to have a broad solid surface interface with the binding post.

if the spade is able to stay level with the binding post while the lug is in the eye hole, then that is better than it just using an edge, as part of the whole spade is mating with part of the whole binding post surface. might there still be lower performance compared to the whole spade interfacing with the whole binding post? hard to say? maybe?

cable interfaces are always important. we can hear how better plugs or spades sound better. the metallurgy matters. but the actual connection being done right is assumed. it's the first thing.

there are multiple ways to retain a snug connection. i've had to use zip ties in one case to keep the very stiff and heavy speaker cable leads in a particular angle and pressure so they did not come loose. currently i suspend the speaker cables to unweight them. but however you might need to get creative, my expectation is that you want to try and use the binding post and spade as they are designed to be used. the 'eye' is primarily designed to take bare wire.....which would then compress and offer a better connection.

will every system and set up reveal the benefits of an ideal speaker cable interface equally? maybe not. but you have gone to much effort with your outstanding system, and so this type of housekeeping likely would help.

doing an A/B to listen to a connection approach would be very tedious, but just think about my perspective.

i might be completely wrong here and off base; but felt i should at least offer my viewpoint. YMMV.

 

[godofwealth]

I found a detailed set of measurements of the XVX on Stereophile.

https://www.stereophile.com/content/wilson-audio-specialties-chronosonic-xvx-loudspeaker-measurement

Boy, that’s one nasty impedance. I’m not surprised your Mac is having conniptions. It’s a 1.6 ohm load at frequencies that require plenty of current. Why would one design such an impedance curve? Reminds me of the old 1 ohm Apogee Scintilla whose primary virtue seems to have been that the manufacturer could take it to audio shows and show it blowing up even good solid state amplifiers.

 

[LL21]

Martin Colloms did some measurements of the XVX, and it certainly seemed to have some pretty low impedances in the spectrum. I do recall he said it should be considered 2+ ohms, and that it had sub 2 in certain areas...my memory could be incorrect, but I do recall some quite tough numbers.

 

[godofwealth]

Here’s what John Atkinson said about the XVX load. Personally I would not feel safe driving such a speaker with a tube amplifier. When impedances start falling below 1 ohm, bad things are likely to happen. It just begs the question of why a manufacturer would design such a loudspeaker.

The magnitude remains between 2 and 4 ohms for almost the entire audioband, with a minimum value of 1.5 ohms between 310Hz and 340Hz—roughly consistent with Wilson's specifications. Using an Excel spreadsheet to calculate the EPDR (footnote 1), the resistive load that gives rise to the same peak dissipation in an amplifier's output devices as the loud speaker, revealed that the XVX is a very demanding load, with EPDR less than 1.1 ohms between 52Hz and 66Hz and between 197Hz and 287Hz, with minimum values of 0.91 ohms at 450Hz and 0.94 ohms at 3250Hz. The Chronosonic XVX should be used with amplifiers like MF's darTZeel monoblocks that don't have problems driving loads of 2 ohms and lower.

 

[Audiohertz2]

I found a detailed set of measurements of the XVX on Stereophile.

https://www.stereophile.com/content/wilson-audio-specialties-chronosonic-xvx-loudspeaker-measurement

Boy, that’s one nasty impedance. I’m not surprised your Mac is having conniptions. It’s a 1.6 ohm load at frequencies that require plenty of current. Why would one design such an impedance curve? Reminds me of the old 1 ohm Apogee Scintilla whose primary virtue seems to have been that the manufacturer could take it to audio shows and show it blowing up even good solid state amplifiers.

Its a high sensitivity multi driver system , the impedance curve is not a surprise at all or nasty , well , nasty to pam pam Poser amplifiers for sure ...