Wilson Alexandria XLF Measurements "Quite Poor"

[Revel Salon 2]

Check this reply from Doug Schneider, I agree 100% with him...let the drama begin !!

Guy;-)

link: http://www.soundstagehifi.com/index.php/reader-feedback/514-wilson-xlf-measurements-quite-poor

 

[mep]

This thread should be interesting...

 

[Revel Salon 2]

I made a bag of popcorn just for this.....

Guy;-)

 

[JackD201]

I've always found it amazing how some people can look at a graph and assume that the graph doesn't lie. All it shows is the measurements under those specific circumstances. Microphone orientation by a few degrees and inches alone can skew results greatly. I can't see how you can get measurements for speakers that large that are truly representative unless you have a facility to do so. Even in an anechoic chamber measurements are made from 2m and plotted as 1m. Something the size of an XLF would require 3m. The modular M-T-M design doesn't lend itself to 1m measurements either where everything below 300Hz is cut off.

JA may know how to measure a speaker but it doesn't mean he can do it right on his driveway. At least he tried. I'll give him that. For a more meaningful set of measurements, I'd like to see how they perform in something like NRC's facilities.

As you can see below, I have no affiliation with Wilson Audio. Their products are our biggest competitors in fact being the current market leader for 6 figure loudspeakers in our country. I'm just calling it how I see it.

 

[A.wayne]

Phew , lets me off the hook ......

 

[Bruce B]

Who cares what they measure? What they sound like should be the deciding factor!! Sounds like an Audacity Cowboy....

 

[A.wayne]

I've always found it amazing how some people can look at a graph and assume that the graph doesn't lie. All it shows is the measurements under those specific circumstances. Microphone orientation by a few degrees and inches alone can skew results greatly. I can't see how you can get measurements for speakers that large that are truly representative unless you have a facility to do so. Even in an anechoic chamber measurements are made from 2m and plotted as 1m. Something the size of an XLF would require 3m. The modular M-T-M design doesn't lend itself to 1m measurements either where everything below 300Hz is cut off.

JA may know how to measure a speaker but it doesn't mean he can do it right on his driveway. At least he tried. I'll give him that. For a more meaningful set of measurements, I'd like to see how they perform in something like NRC's facilities.

As you can see below, I have no affiliation with Wilson Audio. Their products are our biggest competitors in fact being the current market leader for 6 figure loudspeakers in our country. I'm just calling it how I see it.

Read it again it was measured @ 3M , (stereophile) JA, was , well , professional .....

 

[A.wayne]

Who cares what they measure? What they sound like should be the deciding factor!! Sounds like an Audacity Cowboy....

True , but there's correlation , we can of course choose to ignore them .....

Fremer liked them , best speakers in the world , so there must be something there...

 

[JackD201]

Read it again it was measured @ 3M , (stereophile) JA, was , well , professional .....

Yeah but he had to do it on the ground on a driveway and in-room. A room with an 8 foot ceiling at that. Gee, how would that affect the upward firing rear tweeter? The graphs are stitched. JA says that he feels there is a good amount of correlation. He never made the claim that his measurements are absolutely representative. I personally don't think they are the latter either.

My point is that unfortunately, many readers or critics will look at these graphs and assume that they are. That's the crazy part. Then there's the part about the degree of correlation, something that can not be determined until the measurements are done in a place where they can be done and done properly.

 

[A.wayne]

With due respect to all parties involved and it's not my place to say speaker A sounds better than speaker B, you choose what works for you and i fully respect that , so I'm approaching this from a technical point of view ..

IMO , JA knows what to do and while the measurements were not GP , you need to take a look at the impedance mag/phase , it shows issues in the same area as the FR, if this was not the case i would agree with your assumption , that it could be an measurement artifact , in sight of testing it myself , i can only confirm what those graphs pose ...

The lack of low bass as suggested, is also plausible , not because it has none , no but because of the hump at 70hz , you better be investing in a lot of tube traps , the port is tuned pretty low , but it is a bit undersized (as per JA measurement)

Now what does this all means , will it sound bad, no, it tells me room tune and walking that speaker into position will be critical , its a big powerful speaker , get it all right , or a little DSP and we might all just feel like Fremer ...

Regards...

 

[Revel Salon 2]

you've asked for it

Wilson anechoic measurments at NRC

link: http://www.soundstagenetwork.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=16&Itemid=140

 

[Robh3606]

Check this reply from Doug Schneider, I agree 100% with him...let the drama begin !!

What drama?? It's a tailored response speaker that has been voiced in a particular way that the designer feels meets his goals.
I don't happen to agree with the design goals with it's but it's not my call. It is what it is and either you will like it or you won't.

Rob

 

[rockitman]

Who cares what they measure? What they sound like should be the deciding factor!! ....

+1
you read my mind. I trust my ears not a graph...

 

[A.wayne]

What drama?? It's a tailored response speaker that has been voiced in a particular way that the designer feels meets his goals.
I don't happen to agree with the design goals with it's but it's not my call. It is what it is and either you will like it or you won't.

Rob

True dat ...

 

[A.wayne]

you've asked for it

Wilson anechoic measurments at NRC

link: http://www.soundstagenetwork.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=16&Itemid=140

The XLF are not on that list , the Sophia's measured well ...

 

[jap]

Has anyone that's posted in this thread heard the XLFs?

I haven't.

A couple of years ago, I was in my local dealer's showroom and listened to the Revel Salon 2s and the Wilson Sophia 2s.

The Sophias had me tapping my toe to the music, the Revels were just very nice HiFi.

Later, we went into another room with Maxx3s, if MF says the XLFs are much better, they must be
awesome.

 

[rockitman]

This thread should be interesting...

I know, let's look at a graph before we pull the trigger on a $200k speaker...lol. I get a real kick out of these spec threads...

edit: Of course there is no graph for any of the Alexandria series in the posted link. What is up with the OP...Revel insecurity ?

 

[A.wayne]

I can see clearly now , the rain is gone ....

More fodder ...!!!

http://www.absolutesounds.com/pdf/main/press/HFNAlexXLF10124web.pdf

Regardless, Anomalies aside , again , they consider the XLF presentation to be no1, ...

 

[andromedaaudio]

Doug has a point i think, although FR response is just one of a speakers qualities , it does dip quite low at 2,5 khz (hifi news ), i wouldnt be surprised if that was audible .
Another thing is : what are the resistorsettings on either the hifi news and the "anechoic " stereophile graphs this could result in the anomalies .
If you look through the nrc graphs you see that the WP 8 for example measured exxelent FR wise .
One big difference between the maqico Q 7 and wilson XLF is that magico wears its beauty on the inside , wilson on the outside
Didnt TAS state very recently that the Q 7 was the best ever .??? and now according to TAS (the absolute sounds )its XLF??

Both great speakers no need to fight who is best , its all a matter of taste

 

[LL21]

I will throw two non-technical cents in here. Having heard the X1 Series 1, 3, X2 Series 1, 2 and XLF, all in the same room with ARC or Krell equipment over the years...not scientific...i have spoken with the dealers, their team about the improvements of the later series over the early ones. Maxx3 over Maxx2? Yes, definitively. But the X1/X2 series...setup appears to matter more than which version. How about all things being equal in setup? Unclear...no one could answer the question with conviction.i have to imagine its much better. I cannot think that someone as dedicated as DWilson isnt going to tirelessly work to improve things.

By coincidence, i happened to post links to the XLF measurements on the other XLF thread, alongside those of the original X1...becase i was wondering how much improvement there is between these 2 speakers separated by 18 years of time, effort, experimentation, upgrading, etc. Unfortunately, seems like it is difficult/impossible to meaningfully compare the 2 sets of measurements.

http://www.stereophile.com/content/...-slamm-loudspeaker-system-measurements-part-2