Wilson Alexandria XLF Measurements "Quite Poor"

[Bruce B]

Wow,..... just looked at A-gon. Never seen so many X-2 and Sasha's up for sale.

Are the Sasha owners upgrading to the Alexia and the X-2 owers going to the XLF? Hmmmmmmmmmmmm

Maybe Dave has a hit with that new tweeter!

 

[rockitman]

very interesting Christian as I am going to face the same in my new room.

How did they decide on +0.5 Db midrange and + 1 Db tweeters for the room vs other resistors

They didn't, I did. They were setup stock. Overtime I started to realize I wasn't getting enough treble extension. The next step up according to the resistor chart in the manual was + 1 dB for treble and +0.5 dB for the mids. I am happy with the balance now for my room.

 

[rockitman]

Wow,..... just looked at A-gon. Never seen so many X-2 and Sasha's up for sale.

Are the Sasha owners upgrading to the Alexia and the X-2 owers going to the XLF? Hmmmmmmmmmmmm

Maybe Dave has a hit with that new tweeter!

The good news is, you can get a factory certified x-2.2 for $65k. You can't buy a speaker new that sounds that good. The XLF buyers did us mere mortals (like me) a favor by upgrading from x2

 

[Imperial]

A Revel needs like several 100's of watts to sound nice. That Wilson is able to pull great dynamics and tonality out of the hat with just 5w++ is just remarkable!

Besides, I read a comment here where D. Schneider asks about what the LF limit on the XLF is. "it seems to not extend below 50hz..." he says in his comment about the Hifi news test he links to.
Oh come on Mr Scheider! Did you read the review?
HFN TEST: http://www.absolutesounds.com/pdf/main/press/HFNAlexXLF10124web.pdf
Quoting from that review..:
"While we are talking low frequencies, the synthesised bass from the psychedelic Skylab #1’s
‘River Of Bass’ [AstralWerks ASW 6161-2] roiled into the room, a palpable pressure building about us
and moving body – if not soul – with the efficacy of the biggest active subwoofer, driven by the cleanest
amplifier on this earth. What a sound! The XLF is so much more than a ‘loud speaker’ – it’s a portal
to a new musical experience."

You know, I'm no expert in matters concerning, but it seems to me the wilson is able to woof just fine, VERY LOW!!!

Mvh

 

[A.wayne]

Wow,..... just looked at A-gon. Never seen so many X-2 and Sasha's up for sale.

Are the Sasha owners upgrading to the Alexia and the X-2 owers going to the XLF? Hmmmmmmmmmmmm

Maybe Dave has a hit with that new tweeter!

Could be the new government tax mandate on speakers above 10K ....

 

[GaryProtein]

Who is Doug Schneider anyway ? I have never heard of him when it comes to respectable reviewers (tongue & cheek). Finally JA sums things up after his flawed measurements:

I guess my X-2.2's even measure poorer than the XLF. I love the sound I'm getting from my poor measuring speakers, keeping in mind these guys in the measurement world don't have the equipment/setup to properly measure the speaker to begin with.

There is no question that large speakers cannot be measured the same way as smaller ones. Doing so will only result in graphs that do not reflect actual listening conditions. In order to get an idea of the true response curve, you must do it from a listening position much farther from the speaker than one meter which is where I am told many speakers are measured. Large systems must be measured at least three to four meters (or more in some systems) from the speakers to get any kind of measurements that reflect real-life listening situations.

 

[puroagave]

i think stereophile was compelled to publish the measurements, thats what stereophile does, good or bad. what about the many speakers they've tested that both measure and sound excellent, what's the reader to make of that? JA performed a spatially averaged measurement (arguably the most forgiving and least critical objective test) on two different pairs of XLFs in two different real-world listening enviornments and came up with similar results.

for reasons only known to Dave Wilson and his designer, he didnt attempt a flat anechoic response but something else entirely. unless i missed it i didnt see a mfr response, it would be helpful to understand his design criteria.

 

[Imperial]

HFN measured the XLF at the tweeter axis, at one meter. they measured no lower than 200hz... then they calculated a "theoretical" lowest limit.
And came up wanting? er...they came up with something like 50hz. Okay.
At one meter, on the tweeter axis... that is my gripe with this..

Now, HFN does make a good case for their claim. The say that the high sensitivity (93.8db) usually mean that the LF is limited.
Then they conclude the test with stating that they basically got a boner... and a series of happy endings that has never been reported of, thus far in the speaker industry! At least never in the Magazine the test was conducted in! I'd say the XLF is one amazing transducer!

I'm sure they are as puzzled about their measurements as we are about reading them then finding the XLF to supersede sliced bread! By about 50 slices..

mvh

 

[RBFC]

Logically, it would seem that larger systems must be measured at greater distance (which would simulate actual use), while smaller monitors could be measured at 1-2 meters. Wouldn't one think that the dispersion of some drivers in larger systems would affect the response at such close measurement points? On a 2 meter high speaker, I could see 30-45 degrees off axis for drivers..... certainly not as intended for listening by the manufacturer!

Lee

 

[Imperial]

Well, I don't know if you remember Mr Fremers review of the Proac Future series...
re-acting the episode:
...So then I walked up to the speakers, and I skipped...not that isn't right... err, yes, I trotted and jumped around them listening to them and what did I hear? The sound on their back side, I really did not like how they sounded backwards! Imagine my surprise, they sounded not like from the front! This people need to know!"
So what happened? Proac had to eventually discontinue that series...
The Power of words! It is scary!

Yes it is unfair to bring this up now, but seriously, this letter to D Schneider... Come on...
Do they really measure up? What is the motif?

It's like saying "so I was testing this vinyl rig, looking at the record spinning round and round and round and rou..., and I have to say, this deck catapults the listening to new and dizzying heights in my listening room! I had to sit down! I had to grip my chair, And I very nearly fell of it! Wow! Class A+! Then I tried listening the record turned upside down! And it was like I was hearing a totally different song! Highly recommended! And ehm, I sure hope the measurements match my findings!

Just a bit of fun... ey?

Okay, well yes, the distance sometimes is important in measurements, and indeed the perspective...

Mvh

 

[Revel Salon 2]

that's exactly why I started this tread...if someone likes Wilson fine...I too love Dijonnaise !! by the way,Soudstage network is the only audio web-zine (or any magazine) that measure speakers in an anechoic chamber (NRC in Ottawa Canada)

 

[LL21]

Yup, I have done that + 0.5 dB midrange units and +1 dB for the tweeters. My room being on the smaller end needed more bass trapping (well damped) hence the need for the boost in the mids and treble.

Good to know!

 

[LL21]

Hello Myles

I think you are missing the point. Those speakers are not neutral but voiced. If you happen to agree with Dave Wilson on how a speaker should sound then all is good. From a flat landers point of view a 200K speaker with on and off axis curves like that is an abysmal engineering failure. Hey no lie lie hear I am a flat lander. Speakers should in my point of view be flat for a large portion of their in room response. It's contrary to my idea of what a good speaker should be.

Now that doesn't mean it can't sound good but it will color every bit of music played through it.

Rob

Logically, it would seem that larger systems must be measured at greater distance (which would simulate actual use), while smaller monitors could be measured at 1-2 meters. Wouldn't one think that the dispersion of some drivers in larger systems would affect the response at such close measurement points? On a 2 meter high speaker, I could see 30-45 degrees off axis for drivers..... certainly not as intended for listening by the manufacturer!

Lee

Setting aside whether any published measurements were truly indicative of the actual listening experience at the listening position, isnt the point of Wilson's design that they are highly adjustable to allow for the many differences of every room and every listening position...and furthermore to be adjustable within that specific room to be flat, or 'tailored to taste'?

 

[andromedaaudio]

Logically, it would seem that larger systems must be measured at greater distance (which would simulate actual use), while smaller monitors could be measured at 1-2 meters. Wouldn't one think that the dispersion of some drivers in larger systems would affect the response at such close measurement points? On a 2 meter high speaker, I could see 30-45 degrees off axis for drivers..... certainly not as intended for listening by the manufacturer!

Lee

That is very true , i dont read from what distance the speaker was measured in the hifi news test , as far as the xlf measurement is concerned i would say measure from 3-4 meters and the response might be beautifully flat , there are way too much uncertainties to make a final conclusion .
If one designs a speaker to be flat at the listening spot /height from lets say 4 meters for example , measuring at 2 meters or even worse 1 meter will give you great anomalies especially around the crossover area .
Also the way the mids are beamed /set up makes a great difference , i would not have posted the graph though as a magazine , as i am sure the XLF is perfectly capable of getting a much flatter response by design

 

[microstrip]

Hello Myles

I think you are missing the point. Those speakers are not neutral but voiced. If you happen to agree with Dave Wilson on how a speaker should sound then all is good. From a flat landers point of view a 200K speaker with on and off axis curves like that is an abysmal engineering failure. Hey no lie lie hear I am a flat lander. Speakers should in my point of view be flat for a large portion of their in room response. It's contrary to my idea of what a good speaker should be.

Now that doesn't mean it can't sound good but it will color every bit of music played through it.

Rob

Most great speakers are "voiced". Even the famous Quad electrostatics were voiced - I remember Peter Walker explaining in an interview how he did it, and the different options he took for the ESL57 and ESL63. If you look at the example of the "good measuring speaker" presented in the triggering Soundstage letter (the Magico M5) it is clearly voiced.

Can you tell us which speakers you have owned or listened you consider that are not "voiced"?

BTW, if people would spend some time looking at ALL the published measurements, including the room averaged, they would find that most flat speakers have horrible in room measurements and the "abysmal engineering failure" symptom disappears in most rooms. I would say that most people voice their speakers for anechoic chambers, happily some great designers voice their speakers for the audiophile listening rooms.

 

[microstrip]

That is very true , i dont read from what distance the speaker was measured in the hifi news test , as far as the xlf measurement is concerned i would say measure from 3-4 meters and the response might be beautifully flat , there are way too much uncertainties to make a final conclusion .
If one designs a speaker to be flat at the listening spot /height from lets say 4 meters for example , measuring at 1,5 meters or even worse 1 meter will give you great anomalies especially around the crossover area .
Also the way the mids are beamed /set up makes a great difference , i would not have posted the graph though as magazine , as i am sure the XLF is perfectly capable of getting a much flatter response by design

You just have to look for the measurements of HifiCritic and compare them with the Stereophile ones of the same speakers. Sometimes you will thing they are not the same speaker.

 

[A.wayne]

Measurement was done at 2.4M ...

 

[A.wayne]

You just have to look for the measurements of HifiCritic and compare them with the Stereophile ones of the same speakers. Sometimes you will thing they are not the same speaker.

Any links ...?

 

[andromedaaudio]

okay that explains a lot , so i would say far to close for a giant speaker like that ,you need distance for all those drivers to blend in properly , and the microphone height ???
Does any body sit 2,4 meters away from a big speaker like that , i m sure not many , well maybe in hong kong.
I think wilson can answer that question about optimum listening height /distance in general for the X series

 

[JackD201]

IIRC HifiCritic is subscription based.