Wilson Audio Alexia 2 vs Sonus Faber Lilium

[Semaj]

Hello folks,
I'm interested in any experience and thoughts regarding how Wilson Audio Alexia 2 compares to Sonus Faber Lilium. I currently own Sasha series one and it's time for an upgrade. My amplification is a pair of Pass Labs XA 180.8s and I listen mostly to streaming through my digital set up of MSB Premier DAC, Powerbase and Digital Director. Cables are Audioquest all around (with silver conductors). I listen to mostly jazz and rock. Feedback regarding sound stage, tone, and "presence" and musicality would be most helpful. Thx.

 

[Gregm]

I am familiar with both models above, albeit, with totally different systems. However, before I respond with my (subjective) favourite, what is it about the Sasha that no longer satisfies you?

 

[Semaj]

I am familiar with both models above, albeit, with totally different systems. However, before I respond with my (subjective) favourite, what is it about the Sasha that no longer satisfies you?

Well, a) it's time for an upgrade - I've had the Sashas for a long time, b) I've been working towards creating a bigger soundstage and have hit the limit short of obtaining bigger speakers, and 3) if possible I would prefer a speaker that is more "musical" i.e. is more listenable on less than sterling recordings.

 

[Gregm]

b) I've been working towards creating a bigger soundstage and have hit the limit short of obtaining bigger speakers,

The bigger soundstage depends as much on the speakers themselves, as it does on their positoning, the room, and the resolution of the system.
That said, the Wilsons will probably throw the bigger perceived soundstage.

and 3) if possible I would prefer a speaker that is more "musical" i.e. is more listenable on less than sterling recordings.

That would no doubt be the SF.
Keep in mind that this is an excellent speaker -- both are.

Sorry to confuse the issue.
Do you have another medium (CD, files, vinyl...) with which to test your current set-up and perhaps measure the inroom frequency response? It might help identify which points are essential for your choice of next speakers.

 

[Semaj]

The bigger soundstage depends as much on the speakers themselves, as it does on their positoning, the room, and the resolution of the system.
That said, the Wilsons will probably throw the bigger perceived soundstage.


That would no doubt be the SF.
Keep in mind that this is an excellent speaker -- both are.

Sorry to confuse the issue.
Do you have another medium (CD, files, vinyl...) with which to test your current set-up and perhaps measure the inroom frequency response? It might help identify which points are essential for your choice of next speakers.

I've been working on my dedicated room for 10 years, it's well treated and works very well (with a 110hz base bump, well managed). I've had an in-room frequency response analysis. Are you saying, everything being equal, that the Wilson will throw a larger sound stage than the SF? Was that your experience listening to the 2 systems? I firmly believe that either speaker will "work" in my room, I'm just not sure which ones will get me closer to my goals - previously stated.

 

[craigr]

Comparing Wilson with Sonus Faber is almost like comparing apples and oranges.. both fruit (speakers), but totally different in taste and esthetics. I say this based upon (a) I own SF Il Cremonese; (b) just recently auditioned Liliums and (c) spent 6 hours today listening to Wilson Alexia (driven by the same amps as I have).

Wilson's sound is extremely "detailed", some call it analytical. It is certainly not "warm." They must be positioned particularly carefully and the listener must be very close to exactly in the sweet spot to appreciate their sound stage.SF do need to be positioned properly, but there is more "leeway". I feel that in comparison to SF, Wilson's strength is precision not tonal accuracy. I find that they become "tiring" after several hours.

SF names their speakers after famous violins or the artisans that created the violins. In contrast to Wilson (who strives to have the enclosure contribute absolutely nothing to the sound), SF builds their speakers out of wood and purposely tunes the cabinets to create the tonal qualities associated with a fine violin. (This is definitely not to say SF speakers skimp on other instruments; French horns have their mellow sound, trumpets their brassiness, tuba their grump and you can hear and nearly feels the reeds vibrating in oboes, bassoons and clarinets. The skin of the drum, the resonance of the tympani are clearly discernible.)

I find that the sound of SF is more musical, more engaging and less fatiguing, even when using the same preamp and amp.

I suspect that this impression is dependent on the type of music you prefer (I listen to classical) and I would definitely say that SF speakers are not the best for heavy metal or rock (consider instead Magico, Rockport or perhaps Wilsons).

I personally have found solid state amps to help bring out the best in both brands. At the moment, I use a tube preamp to the solid state amps and find that combination excellent with SF. Today, the Wilsons were powered by SS amp and preamp.

Both are approximately 91 sensitivity so not much power is required.

I strongly urge to hear both, hopefully in a well conditioned room and properly positioned. They really are quite different.

Hope this helps.

PS: I didn't address the appearance: Wilson is industrial; SF is fine furniture. That can make a difference for some.

 

[Gregm]

I've been working on my dedicated room for 10 years, it's well treated and works very well (with a 110hz base bump, well managed).

Coincidentally, I have a similarly based bump at 107Hz!

I've had an in-room frequency response analysis. Are you saying, everything being equal, that the Wilson will throw a larger sound stage than the SF? Was that your experience listening to the 2 systems? I firmly believe that either speaker will "work" in my room, I'm just not sure which ones will get me closer to my goals - previously stated.

Yes, I believe that the Wilson will give you a larger and, subjectively, a more pronounced and focused soundstage.
However, as mentioned above, you might find the Wilsons' slightly pronounced high frequencies tiring after a while; you could, perhaps, tame this with less toe-in (it works well with jazz, however )

As also noted above, the Wilsons are industrial, but you're used to that with your Sasha'a. OTOH, the SF are a delight to look at. Both products' build quality is outstanding, of course.
Good luck, the fun is in the pursuit!

 

[sbnx]

There is a big difference between the Sasha 1 and the speakers that came after it. The tweeer went from the metal inverted dome to the textile soft dome. Many believe this toned down some of the analytical nature and listener fatigue of the former Wilson models.

LIke others I suggest you listen to both speakers. They are both pretty expensive. There are several dealers thta carry both brands. You could find one of those and fly in for a day to audition them. The few hundred dollar plane ticket is not much compared to the price of the speakers you are considering.

 

[Semaj]

Comparing Wilson with Sonus Faber is almost like comparing apples and oranges.. both fruit (speakers), but totally different in taste and esthetics. I say this based upon (a) I own SF Il Cremonese; (b) just recently auditioned Liliums and (c) spent 6 hours today listening to Wilson Alexia (driven by the same amps as I have).

Wilson's sound is extremely "detailed", some call it analytical. It is certainly not "warm." They must be positioned particularly carefully and the listener must be very close to exactly in the sweet spot to appreciate their sound stage.SF do need to be positioned properly, but there is more "leeway". I feel that in comparison to SF, Wilson's strength is precision not tonal accuracy. I find that they become "tiring" after several hours.

SF names their speakers after famous violins or the artisans that created the violins. In contrast to Wilson (who strives to have the enclosure contribute absolutely nothing to the sound), SF builds their speakers out of wood and purposely tunes the cabinets to create the tonal qualities associated with a fine violin. (This is definitely not to say SF speakers skimp on other instruments; French horns have their mellow sound, trumpets their brassiness, tuba their grump and you can hear and nearly feels the reeds vibrating in oboes, bassoons and clarinets. The skin of the drum, the resonance of the tympani are clearly discernible.)

I find that the sound of SF is more musical, more engaging and less fatiguing, even when using the same preamp and amp.

I suspect that this impression is dependent on the type of music you prefer (I listen to classical) and I would definitely say that SF speakers are not the best for heavy metal or rock (consider instead Magico, Rockport or perhaps Wilsons).

I personally have found solid state amps to help bring out the best in both brands. At the moment, I use a tube preamp to the solid state amps and find that combination excellent with SF. Today, the Wilsons were powered by SS amp and preamp.

Both are approximately 91 sensitivity so not much power is required.

I strongly urge to hear both, hopefully in a well conditioned room and properly positioned. They really are quite different.

Hope this helps.

PS: I didn't address the appearance: Wilson is industrial; SF is fine furniture. That can make a difference for some.

Hello Craigr,

Thank you for taking the time you did to convey your thoughts. In deed they were helpful and are much appreciated!

Yes, I agree the best way forward would be to fly to a dealer to hear both speakers in the same room with the same electronics. Unfortunately this will not be possible for some time and I have a line on both speakers for good prices and this necessitates acting quite quickly - not ideal, I know.

Your general characterization of both speaker manufacturers is consistent with everything I've read in the audiophile mags over the many years (40 plus) I've been into this hobby.

Perhaps I could ask you a couple of questions that arise from your feedback foe me:
Did you find you experienced listener fatigue when you were listing for 6 hours to Wilson Alexia (I assume that was the latest, V, model??)?
What electronics were you listening to them through? Which electronics do you listen through with you Il Cremonese?
Of the 2, which produced the bigger sound stage? I assume that the Wilsons had more precise imaging, yes?
How would you say the Liliums differed from your Il Cremoneses?

BTW, I listen to mostly jazz, folk, world and etc. types of music. Very rarely to rock. Michael Fremer in his review of the Aida said he listens to "a lot of rock" and seemed very satisfied with how they faired with that music, albeit with less "slam". I can live with less slam for the amount of music I listen to that contains it.

Thank you in advance.

 

[Semaj]

There is a big difference between the Sasha 1 and the speakers that came after it. The tweeer went from the metal inverted dome to the textile soft dome. Many believe this toned down some of the analytical nature and listener fatigue of the former Wilson models.

LIke others I suggest you listen to both speakers. They are both pretty expensive. There are several dealers thta carry both brands. You could find one of those and fly in for a day to audition them. The few hundred dollar plane ticket is not much compared to the price of the speakers you are considering.

sbnx,
Thank you for reminding me that the tweeter in the new Wilsons is made of fabric and is less fatiguing. That is a helpful reminder that had slipped my mind.

 

[rangda]

The tweeer went from the metal inverted dome to the textile soft dome. Many believe this toned down some of the analytical nature and listener fatigue of the former Wilson models.

I owned Watt/Puppy 6's for 24 years then upgraded to Alexia 2's. The textile tweeter is much more forgiving than the old metal tweeter. The metal tweeter could be reigned in with a combination of toe-in and side wall treatment at the first reflection points. But it could be harsh if you were not careful. I find the current tweeter less harsh, more "real", without any real loss of detail. I could sit in front of either for hours on end, but I enjoy a fast, detailed sound so YMMV.

Modern Wilsons are more refined than in the metal tweeter era, but they still very much have the highly detailed, precise sound. If you didn't find the older models musical you probably won't find the newer ones musical either.

 

[ricjor1]

I want to listen to Sonus Faber Lilium speakers; unfortunately there isn't a dealer in Texas that has them available for audition.

​

 

[craigr]

Semaj:

To answer your questions:

(1) The Wilson's were the new "V" version (so had the fabric tweeter). The preamp and amps were D'Agostino Momentum MxV (I was there to compare the Stereo250 vs the mono blocks amps). The DAC was the Rossini Apex. Cables were Nordost Odin. Shunyata Everest power conditioner. Streamer was dCS's mosaic app which is used to stream and control the Rossini. Qobuz was the source of the stream.

(2) At home, my system uses a VAC MASTER preamp and the D'Agostino Momentum MxV stereo amp. All my cables are Shunyata (Omega interconnects and Sigma power cables). I have the Rossini Apex DAC controlled with the Mosaic app. I have a network drive but can also stream from Qobuz and have vinyl. My speakers are the Il Cremonese.

(3) I did find that the Wilson's in that set up were fatiguing after the 6 hours. They are very articulate, very precise, but not as "musical" as my Il Cremonese. The Wilson's seem more clinical.

(4) I did NOT find that the Wilson's had significantly better imaging than the Il Cremonese when used with the D'Agostino equipment compared to my system. That said, I DID find that the mono blocks provided a wider and deeper sound stage, were more articulate and dynamic than the Stereo amp but not by a wide margin (10-20% depending on the music).

(5) The Liliums have more bass and can articulate the lowest frequencies (slightly) better than the Il Cremonese. They also have some "bass/room control" that MAY be useful depending on your room. I am not sure that they are worth 25% more, but that could be dependent on the room size, acoustics and the type of music and the volume you like to listen to.

Hope this helps.
Craig

 

[Semaj]

Semaj:

To answer your questions:

(1) The Wilson's were the new "V" version (so had the fabric tweeter). The preamp and amps were D'Agostino Momentum MxV (I was there to compare the Stereo250 vs the mono blocks amps). The DAC was the Rossini Apex. Cables were Nordost Odin. Shunyata Everest power conditioner. Streamer was dCS's mosaic app which is used to stream and control the Rossini. Qobuz was the source of the stream.

(2) At home, my system uses a VAC MASTER preamp and the D'Agostino Momentum MxV stereo amp. All my cables are Shunyata (Omega interconnects and Sigma power cables). I have the Rossini Apex DAC controlled with the Mosaic app. I have a network drive but can also stream from Qobuz and have vinyl. My speakers are the Il Cremonese.

(3) I did find that the Wilson's in that set up were fatiguing after the 6 hours. They are very articulate, very precise, but not as "musical" as my Il Cremonese. The Wilson's seem more clinical.

(4) I did NOT find that the Wilson's had significantly better imaging than the Il Cremonese when used with the D'Agostino equipment compared to my system. That said, I DID find that the mono blocks provided a wider and deeper sound stage, were more articulate and dynamic than the Stereo amp but not by a wide margin (10-20% depending on the music).

(5) The Liliums have more bass and can articulate the lowest frequencies (slightly) better than the Il Cremonese. They also have some "bass/room control" that MAY be useful depending on your room. I am not sure that they are worth 25% more, but that could be dependent on the room size, acoustics and the type of music and the volume you like to listen to.

Hope this helps.
Craig

Thx for all that craigr! Again, very helpful.
Jim

 

[ricjor1]

Semaj:

To answer your questions:

(1) The Wilson's were the new "V" version (so had the fabric tweeter). The preamp and amps were D'Agostino Momentum MxV (I was there to compare the Stereo250 vs the mono blocks amps). The DAC was the Rossini Apex. Cables were Nordost Odin. Shunyata Everest power conditioner. Streamer was dCS's mosaic app which is used to stream and control the Rossini. Qobuz was the source of the stream.

(2) At home, my system uses a VAC MASTER preamp and the D'Agostino Momentum MxV stereo amp. All my cables are Shunyata (Omega interconnects and Sigma power cables). I have the Rossini Apex DAC controlled with the Mosaic app. I have a network drive but can also stream from Qobuz and have vinyl. My speakers are the Il Cremonese.

(3) I did find that the Wilson's in that set up were fatiguing after the 6 hours. They are very articulate, very precise, but not as "musical" as my Il Cremonese. The Wilson's seem more clinical.

(4) I did NOT find that the Wilson's had significantly better imaging than the Il Cremonese when used with the D'Agostino equipment compared to my system. That said, I DID find that the mono blocks provided a wider and deeper sound stage, were more articulate and dynamic than the Stereo amp but not by a wide margin (10-20% depending on the music).

(5) The Liliums have more bass and can articulate the lowest frequencies (slightly) better than the Il Cremonese. They also have some "bass/room control" that MAY be useful depending on your room. I am not sure that they are worth 25% more, but that could be dependent on the room size, acoustics and the type of music and the volume you like to listen to.

Hope this helps.
Craig

Craig,

I sent you a PM.

 

[Dishman442]

There is a big difference between the Sasha 1 and the speakers that came after it. The tweeer went from the metal inverted dome to the textile soft dome. Many believe this toned down some of the analytical nature and listener fatigue of the former Wilson models.

LIke others I suggest you listen to both speakers. They are both pretty expensive. There are several dealers thta carry both brands. You could find one of those and fly in for a day to audition them. The few hundred dollar plane ticket is not much compared to the price of the speakers you are considering.

Agreed regarding new tweeter. I liked Wilson for decades but couldn’t live with them due to fatigue issues. With the new tweeters, all is forgiven. I’ve owned the Sasha DAWs for about 6 months. They are more detailed than the Sonus Faber, but I can listen for hours,(Tube pre, mono SS amps) with great soundstage in sub optimal room conditions.

 

[Semaj]

Craig,

I sent you a PM.

Super helpful. Thx ricjor!

 

[Jleeck]

Hello folks,
I'm interested in any experience and thoughts regarding how Wilson Audio Alexia 2 compares to Sonus Faber Lilium. I currently own Sasha series one and it's time for an upgrade. My amplification is a pair of Pass Labs XA 180.8s and I listen mostly to streaming through my digital set up of MSB Premier DAC, Powerbase and Digital Director. Cables are Audioquest all around (with silver conductors). I listen to mostly jazz and rock. Feedback regarding sound stage, tone, and "presence" and musicality would be most helpful. Thx.

Hi, I have both the Lilium and Alexia. They are quite different. The SF is more musical, natural. The Alexia is more accurate. If you're after tone, and musicality, SF. If mostly for rock and jazz, I'd go with Alexia. There is more slam and it goes deeper. Hope this helps. J

 

[Semaj]

Hi, I have both the Lilium and Alexia. They are quite different. The SF is more musical, natural. The Alexia is more accurate. If you're after tone, and musicality, SF. If mostly for rock and jazz, I'd go with Alexia. There is more slam and it goes deeper. Hope this helps. J

Jleeck, thank you so much for chiming in on this thread!!

Can I ask you to tell me what electronics you are using in each of the systems that the respective speakers are a part of?

Also:
If you were to listen to rock(ish) music, say Led Zeppelin, Beatles White album rockers, Steve Ray Vaughn type blues in the Lilium system would be be unsatisfying or just lacking in comparison to the system with the Alexias in it?? Is there slam in the Lilium system, however lacking compared to the Alexias? How would you compare the sound stages in the two systems? Are the Liliums considerably easier to drive? I suppose the rooms the systems are in are different enough that it will effect all of these SQ parameters, but your feedback will likely be helpful none the less.

Your experience with these two speaker systems is extremely helpful to me. Much appreciated.
Jim

 

[Jleeck]

Jleeck, thank you so much for chiming in on this thread!!

Can I ask you to tell me what electronics you are using in each of the systems that the respective speakers are a part of?

Also:
If you were to listen to rock(ish) music, say Led Zeppelin, Beatles White album rockers, Steve Ray Vaughn type blues in the Lilium system would be be unsatisfying or just lacking in comparison to the system with the Alexias in it?? Is there slam in the Lilium system, however lacking compared to the Alexias? How would you compare the sound stages in the two systems? Are the Liliums considerably easier to drive? I suppose the rooms the systems are in are different enough that it will effect all of these SQ parameters, but your feedback will likely be helpful none the less.

Your experience with these two speaker systems is extremely helpful to me. Much appreciated.
Jim

Hi Jim

I have tried the following amps for my Lilium:
ML33H + ML320S
Sony TA-NR1 (class A 100w mono locks)
Luxman M-700u (120W class AB, just acquired)
Cary 805 AE (can't drive)

As for the Alexia, I have only used Aesthetix Atlas (power) + Denafrips Athena (pre) due to logistics (carrying the 33H around the house was not feasible).

But I will try them with the 33H and Sony mono blocks soon, as I have moved to a new location recently.

Based on my own experience so far, the Wilson's are less fussy, it just sang with the first amp combo I hooked them up to. But I still need to experiment more with my other amps.

The Liliums are more fussy and need current, I find that even the 33H was just adequate. But when they sing, the imaging is ethereal. The sweet spot is not very big though, could be the height of HF/MF drivers that are above a couch seated position. However, when they are placed properly they image like mini monitors.

I once mistakenly hooked up a DAC source at full volume through the 33H and the Liliums just handled all that 150W without a sweat. That's when I realised how much current it could handle. And the 33H are by no means a weak amp!

My subjective opinion is that the Alexias are probably easier to drive and enjoy than the Liliums. But YMMV.
Hope this helps.
J