Wilson Audio Chronosonic XVX First Impressions

I just spent over six hours today listening to my friend's new Wilson Audio Chronosonic XVX loudspeakers. Consistent with being blown away by the Master Chronosonic + Master Subsonic system at Maier Shadi's demo in Santa Monica, and consistent with a couple of reports by people who auditioned at Maier's both the Master Chronosonic and later the XVX and preferred the XVX, I am here to report officially that I think the XVX is now my favorite conventional cone driver speaker system. I think I prefer the XVX even to my longtime favorite dynamic driver loudspeaker, the mighty Rockport Arrakis.

Prior to the XVX, my friend had the Alexx. The height alone of the XVX over the Alexx affords the system the height and scale and grandeur I always notice and appreciate from very tall loudspeakers.

I don't know why the XVX is an order of magnitude better -- next level better -- than the Alexx. But I am certain that it is.

I think the XVX is the first dynamic driver speaker of which I was very aware that you can hear seemingly almost everything at fairly low listening volumes. It doesn't need to be played loudly to be heard comfortably.

In much the same way that people like to applaud their digital playback systems by saying "it sounds like analog," dynamic driver loudspeaker aficionados like to say their cone speakers have "electrostatic-like transparency." Believe me, if most dynamic driver speakers had "electrostatic-like transparency" we would not need electrostatic speakers.

As somebody who loves electrostatic speakers I have always been aware that speakers of other topologies are one or two steps less transparent than electrostatic speakers. I feel like the XVX truly has "electrostatic-like transparency" -- at least credibly so, and more so than any other cone speaker I've ever heard.

Just like I felt about the Master Chronosonic the XVX gives one the sense of unlimited dynamic capability. There is a limitlessness and an effortlessness to the sound that I do not hear from other box speakers. Other heroically inert box speakers sound tightly wrapped or button-downed by comparison -- like some portion of the sound is trapped in the box and having trouble freeing itself. The XVX sounds open somehow -- a sonic presentation I associate with planar speakers, not with big box speakers.

I know, I know, I know. I am thinking and saying the same things you are: these are meaningless statements as you can't compare loudspeakers in different systems from fault-prone memory; you will never be able to hear an XVX versus a Rockport Arrakis, or an XVX versus a VSA Ultra 11, in the same room with the same associated components at the same time, etc., etc. I know, and I agree with you.

All I am saying is that if you put a gun to my head and told me I had to buy a dynamic driver loudspeaker system for my personal system and cost was not a factor. . . I would say take the gun away from my head. Then I would tell you I will order XVX + Master Subsonics.

Without intending to be coy, I couch this is terms of "the XVX is the box speaker I would I buy if I had to buy a box speaker for myself" rather than "the XVX is the best box speaker I've ever heard," because I cannot hear the Von Schweikert Audio Ultra 11 and the Evolution Acoustics MM7 and the Rockport Arrakis and the YG XV in the same room in the same system as the XVX + Subsonics. So it just does not make any sense to declare, and it is analytically defective to declare, that the XVX is the best speaker I have ever heard.

My view that if I had to buy a box speaker I would buy the XVX + Subsonics is a combination of what I heard from the XVX, what I vaguely remember from hearing these other other speakers in other systems, and my slight prejudice against ceramic drivers which I would be worried I might find uncomfortable over a long period of time. (I would worry the same about beryllium drivers and about diamond encrusted drivers.)

I have owned only planar loudspeakers my entire life. I literally couldn't bear to listen to Wilson Audio speakers with metal dome tweeters. I have never been a big fan of Wilson Audio speakers in general. But I thought I heard magic from Maier's demo of the Master Chronosonic, and my experience today proves that that inkling was correct.

I don't know how or what Daryl Wilson did to achieve it, but I am reporting that to my ears the XVX is a very, very special speaker. It is a stunning achievement in dynamic driver loudspeaker design specifically, and in loudspeaker design in general.

PS: Assuming they physically fit in Michael Fremer's listening room, I have no doubt that Michael will upgrade his Alexx to XVX. He might go in not wanting to upgrade, but after hearing these there is no way he's going to be happy without the XVX.

Wilson-XVX.jpg
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't remember seeing you there last night. The YG system I heard last night (for at least the fourth time) was definitely not "grossly" under-driven.

It is, Einstein can't drive YG. I have heard the hybrid on analysis omega, they couldn't drive them, and YG are difficult to drive as well. Just a poor match. I have heard Nagra, boulder 2160, Viola Symphony, Luxman, Burmester 909 and 911, and Plinius on YG, in compares, and know what drive and power can do for the speaker and what it can't. Einstein on YG is quite thoughtless
 
  • Like
Reactions: jeff1225
I don't remember seeing you there last night. The YG system I heard last night (for at least the fourth time) was definitely not "grossly" under-driven.
I don’t think it is necessarily underdriven, I just don’t think the Einstein hybrids sound all that good...definitely not compared to their OTLs, which be amazing on something like Living Voice Avatar OBX-RWs.
 
I think it is this amp -- 140 watts into 4 ohms:


View attachment 73183
Ron,
It was demonstrated to all of us testing amps with Keith's YG's that they need significant power (400 watts minimum into 4 ohms) to develop any sound stage. The Sonja has almost the identical set of specifications, it's simply illogical to believe that they are sufficiently driven by 140 watts into 4 ohms.

I've come to realize this is the reason I've always hated the multiple YG models he's had over the years, they were constantly starved of power.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Reactions: Al M. and bonzo75
I just spent over six hours today listening to my friend's new Wilson Audio Chronosonic XVX loudspeakers. Consistent with being blown away by the Master Chronosonic + Master Subsonic system at Maier Shadi's demo in Santa Monica, and consistent with a couple of reports by people who auditioned at Maier's both the Master Chronosonic and later the XVX and preferred the XVX, I am here to report officially that I think the XVX is now my favorite conventional cone driver speaker system. I think I prefer the XVX even to my longtime favorite dynamic driver loudspeaker, the mighty Rockport Arrakis.

Prior to the XVX, my friend had the Alexx. The height alone of the XVX over the Alexx affords the system the height and scale and grandeur I always notice and appreciate from very tall loudspeakers.

I don't know why the XVX is an order of magnitude better -- next level better -- than the Alexx. But I am certain that it is.

I think the XVX is the first dynamic driver speaker of which I was very aware that you can hear seemingly almost everything at fairly low listening volumes. It doesn't need to be played loudly to be heard comfortably.

In much the same way that people like to applaud their digital playback systems by saying "it sounds like analog," dynamic driver loudspeaker aficionados like to say their cone speakers have "electrostatic-like transparency." Believe me, if most dynamic driver speakers had "electrostatic-like transparency" we would not need electrostatic speakers.

As somebody who loves electrostatic speakers I have always been aware that speakers of other topologies are one or two steps less transparent than electrostatic speakers. I feel like the XVX truly has "electrostatic-like transparency" -- at least credibly so, and more so than any other cone speaker I've ever heard.

Just like I felt about the Master Chronosonic the XVX gives one the sense of unlimited dynamic capability. There is a limitlessness and an effortlessness to the sound that I do not hear from other box speakers. Other heroically inert box speakers sound tightly wrapped or button-downed by comparison -- like some portion of the sound is trapped in the box and having trouble freeing itself. The XVX sounds open somehow -- a sonic presentation I associate with planar speakers, not with big box speakers.

I know, I know, I know. I am thinking and saying the same things you are: these are meaningless statements as you can't compare loudspeakers in different systems from fault-prone memory; you will never be able to hear an XVX versus a Rockport Arrakis, or an XVX versus a VSA Ultra 11, in the same room with the same associated components at the same time, etc., etc. I know, and I agree with you.

All I am saying is that if you put a gun to my head and told me I had to buy a dynamic driver loudspeaker system for my personal system and cost was not a factor. . . I would say take the gun away from my head. Then I would tell you I will order XVX + Master Subsonics.

Without intending to be coy, I couch this is terms of "the XVX is the box speaker I would I buy if I had to buy a box speaker for myself" rather than "the XVX is the best box speaker I've ever heard," because I cannot hear the Von Schweikert Audio Ultra 11 and the Evolution Acoustics MM7 and the Rockport Arrakis and the YG XV in the same room in the same system as the XVX + Subsonics. So it just does not make any sense to declare, and it is analytically defective to declare, that the XVX is the best speaker I have ever heard.

My view that if I had to buy a box speaker I would buy the XVX + Subsonics is a combination of what I heard from the XVX, what I vaguely remember from hearing these other other speakers in other systems, and my slight prejudice against ceramic drivers which I would be worried I might find uncomfortable over a long period of time. (I would worry the same about beryllium drivers and about diamond encrusted drivers.)

I have owned only planar loudspeakers my entire life. I literally couldn't bear to listen to Wilson Audio speakers with metal dome tweeters. I have never been a big fan of Wilson Audio speakers in general. But I thought I heard magic from Maier's demo of the Master Chronosonic, and my experience today proves that that inkling was correct.

I don't know how or what Daryl Wilson did to achieve it, but I am reporting that to my ears the XVX is a very, very special speaker. It is a stunning achievement in dynamic driver loudspeaker design specifically, and in loudspeaker design in general.

PS: Assuming they physically fit in Michael Fremer's listening room, I have no doubt that Michael will upgrade his Alexx to XVX. He might go in not wanting to upgrade, but after hearing these there is no way he's going to be happy without the XVX.
I have a pair here for review and believe it or not, the XVXes work better in my room than the Alexx, which work well enough! It may look unworkable, but it WORKS. To the point where my wife came down for a listen and said "YOU HAVE TO FIND A WAY TO BUY THESE".... that doesn't often happen....
 

Attachments

  • IMG_7087.JPG
    IMG_7087.JPG
    694.1 KB · Views: 124
I just spent over six hours today listening to my friend's new Wilson Audio Chronosonic XVX loudspeakers. Consistent with being blown away by the Master Chronosonic + Master Subsonic system at Maier Shadi's demo in Santa Monica, and consistent with a couple of reports by people who auditioned at Maier's both the Master Chronosonic and later the XVX and preferred the XVX, I am here to report officially that I think the XVX is now my favorite conventional cone driver speaker system. I think I prefer the XVX even to my longtime favorite dynamic driver loudspeaker, the mighty Rockport Arrakis.

Prior to the XVX, my friend had the Alexx. The height alone of the XVX over the Alexx affords the system the height and scale and grandeur I always notice and appreciate from very tall loudspeakers.

I don't know why the XVX is an order of magnitude better -- next level better -- than the Alexx. But I am certain that it is.

I think the XVX is the first dynamic driver speaker of which I was very aware that you can hear seemingly almost everything at fairly low listening volumes. It doesn't need to be played loudly to be heard comfortably.

In much the same way that people like to applaud their digital playback systems by saying "it sounds like analog," dynamic driver loudspeaker aficionados like to say their cone speakers have "electrostatic-like transparency." Believe me, if most dynamic driver speakers had "electrostatic-like transparency" we would not need electrostatic speakers.

As somebody who loves electrostatic speakers I have always been aware that speakers of other topologies are one or two steps less transparent than electrostatic speakers. I feel like the XVX truly has "electrostatic-like transparency" -- at least credibly so, and more so than any other cone speaker I've ever heard.

Just like I felt about the Master Chronosonic the XVX gives one the sense of unlimited dynamic capability. There is a limitlessness and an effortlessness to the sound that I do not hear from other box speakers. Other heroically inert box speakers sound tightly wrapped or button-downed by comparison -- like some portion of the sound is trapped in the box and having trouble freeing itself. The XVX sounds open somehow -- a sonic presentation I associate with planar speakers, not with big box speakers.

I know, I know, I know. I am thinking and saying the same things you are: these are meaningless statements as you can't compare loudspeakers in different systems from fault-prone memory; you will never be able to hear an XVX versus a Rockport Arrakis, or an XVX versus a VSA Ultra 11, in the same room with the same associated components at the same time, etc., etc. I know, and I agree with you.

All I am saying is that if you put a gun to my head and told me I had to buy a dynamic driver loudspeaker system for my personal system and cost was not a factor. . . I would say take the gun away from my head. Then I would tell you I will order XVX + Master Subsonics.

Without intending to be coy, I couch this is terms of "the XVX is the box speaker I would I buy if I had to buy a box speaker for myself" rather than "the XVX is the best box speaker I've ever heard," because I cannot hear the Von Schweikert Audio Ultra 11 and the Evolution Acoustics MM7 and the Rockport Arrakis and the YG XV in the same room in the same system as the XVX + Subsonics. So it just does not make any sense to declare, and it is analytically defective to declare, that the XVX is the best speaker I have ever heard.

My view that if I had to buy a box speaker I would buy the XVX + Subsonics is a combination of what I heard from the XVX, what I vaguely remember from hearing these other other speakers in other systems, and my slight prejudice against ceramic drivers which I would be worried I might find uncomfortable over a long period of time. (I would worry the same about beryllium drivers and about diamond encrusted drivers.)

I have owned only planar loudspeakers my entire life. I literally couldn't bear to listen to Wilson Audio speakers with metal dome tweeters. I have never been a big fan of Wilson Audio speakers in general. But I thought I heard magic from Maier's demo of the Master Chronosonic, and my experience today proves that that inkling was correct.

I don't know how or what Daryl Wilson did to achieve it, but I am reporting that to my ears the XVX is a very, very special speaker. It is a stunning achievement in dynamic driver loudspeaker design specifically, and in loudspeaker design in general.

PS: Assuming they physically fit in Michael Fremer's listening room, I have no doubt that Michael will upgrade his Alexx to XVX. He might go in not wanting to upgrade, but after hearing these there is no way he's going to be happy without the XVX.
 
I have a pair here for review and believe it or not, the XVXes work better in my room than the Alexx, which work well enough! It may look unworkable, but it WORKS. To the point where my wife came down for a listen and said "YOU HAVE TO FIND A WAY TO BUY THESE".... that doesn't often happen....
Some of the magic here is the new alnico magnet midrange driver that they've been working on for 5 years. Dave had hoped it would be ready for the WAMM but it was not....I agree with Ron that the metal dome tweeter was always an issue. However, I've always felt that everything else about the Wilson performance was what i was looking for so i listened 'around' that tweeter. Wilson switched away from it with the XLF and that was some years ago. I'd live happily ever after with the Alexx....until these arrived.
 
  • Like
Reactions: goodsource
I have a pair here for review and believe it or not, the XVXes work better in my room than the Alexx, which work well enough! It may look unworkable, but it WORKS. To the point where my wife came down for a listen and said "YOU HAVE TO FIND A WAY TO BUY THESE".... that doesn't often happen....
Michael,
What preamp are you using with the Dartz?
 
I have a pair here for review and believe it or not, the XVXes work better in my room than the Alexx, which work well enough! It may look unworkable, but it WORKS. To the point where my wife came down for a listen and said "YOU HAVE TO FIND A WAY TO BUY THESE".... that doesn't often happen....
That Agnes Obel album must sound pretty good on those XVXes
 
Some of the magic here is the new alnico magnet midrange driver that they've been working on for 5 years. Dave had hoped it would be ready for the WAMM but it was not....I agree with Ron that the metal dome tweeter was always an issue. However, I've always felt that everything else about the Wilson performance was what i was looking for so i listened 'around' that tweeter. Wilson switched away from it with the XLF and that was some years ago. I'd live happily ever after with the Alexx....until these arrived.
I went from X2 to XLF, with a meanwhile period with the SF Aida. I could easily live with the Wilson successive metal dome tweeters, but they significantly limited the matching equipment. Electronics and cables were always carefully chosen to complement their caracteristics, and in practice it was not an issue when listening. The XLF is a different speaker - it is not critical and sounds great with most of the equipment I try on them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Al M. and jeff1225
Some of the magic here is the new alnico magnet midrange driver that they've been working on for 5 years. Dave had hoped it would be ready for the WAMM but it was not....I agree with Ron that the metal dome tweeter was always an issue. However, I've always felt that everything else about the Wilson performance was what i was looking for so i listened 'around' that tweeter. Wilson switched away from it with the XLF and that was some years ago. I'd live happily ever after with the Alexx....until these arrived.
Look forward to your further impressions of how/why the XVX is near-universally impressing those who are listening to it. As a new owner of XLFs, I am only just beginning to appreciate its finer attributes, and look forward to reading more about how the XVX specifically moves the ball forward from there...enjoy!
 
I just spent over six hours today listening to my friend's new Wilson Audio Chronosonic XVX loudspeakers. Consistent with being blown away by the Master Chronosonic + Master Subsonic system at Maier Shadi's demo in Santa Monica, and consistent with a couple of reports by people who auditioned at Maier's both the Master Chronosonic and later the XVX and preferred the XVX, I am here to report officially that I think the XVX is now my favorite conventional cone driver speaker system. I think I prefer the XVX even to my longtime favorite dynamic driver loudspeaker, the mighty Rockport Arrakis.

Prior to the XVX, my friend had the Alexx. The height alone of the XVX over the Alexx affords the system the height and scale and grandeur I always notice and appreciate from very tall loudspeakers.

I don't know why the XVX is an order of magnitude better -- next level better -- than the Alexx. But I am certain that it is.

I think the XVX is the first dynamic driver speaker of which I was very aware that you can hear seemingly almost everything at fairly low listening volumes. It doesn't need to be played loudly to be heard comfortably.

In much the same way that people like to applaud their digital playback systems by saying "it sounds like analog," dynamic driver loudspeaker aficionados like to say their cone speakers have "electrostatic-like transparency." Believe me, if most dynamic driver speakers had "electrostatic-like transparency" we would not need electrostatic speakers.

As somebody who loves electrostatic speakers I have always been aware that speakers of other topologies are one or two steps less transparent than electrostatic speakers. I feel like the XVX truly has "electrostatic-like transparency" -- at least credibly so, and more so than any other cone speaker I've ever heard.

Just like I felt about the Master Chronosonic the XVX gives one the sense of unlimited dynamic capability. There is a limitlessness and an effortlessness to the sound that I do not hear from other box speakers. Other heroically inert box speakers sound tightly wrapped or button-downed by comparison -- like some portion of the sound is trapped in the box and having trouble freeing itself. The XVX sounds open somehow -- a sonic presentation I associate with planar speakers, not with big box speakers.

I know, I know, I know. I am thinking and saying the same things you are: these are meaningless statements as you can't compare loudspeakers in different systems from fault-prone memory; you will never be able to hear an XVX versus a Rockport Arrakis, or an XVX versus a VSA Ultra 11, in the same room with the same associated components at the same time, etc., etc. I know, and I agree with you.

All I am saying is that if you put a gun to my head and told me I had to buy a dynamic driver loudspeaker system for my personal system and cost was not a factor. . . I would say take the gun away from my head. Then I would tell you I will order XVX + Master Subsonics.

Without intending to be coy, I couch this is terms of "the XVX is the box speaker I would I buy if I had to buy a box speaker for myself" rather than "the XVX is the best box speaker I've ever heard," because I cannot hear the Von Schweikert Audio Ultra 11 and the Evolution Acoustics MM7 and the Rockport Arrakis and the YG XV in the same room in the same system as the XVX + Subsonics. So it just does not make any sense to declare, and it is analytically defective to declare, that the XVX is the best speaker I have ever heard.

My view that if I had to buy a box speaker I would buy the XVX + Subsonics is a combination of what I heard from the XVX, what I vaguely remember from hearing these other other speakers in other systems, and my slight prejudice against ceramic drivers which I would be worried I might find uncomfortable over a long period of time. (I would worry the same about beryllium drivers and about diamond encrusted drivers.)

I have owned only planar loudspeakers my entire life. I literally couldn't bear to listen to Wilson Audio speakers with metal dome tweeters. I have never been a big fan of Wilson Audio speakers in general. But I thought I heard magic from Maier's demo of the Master Chronosonic, and my experience today proves that that inkling was correct.

I don't know how or what Daryl Wilson did to achieve it, but I am reporting that to my ears the XVX is a very, very special speaker. It is a stunning achievement in dynamic driver loudspeaker design specifically, and in loudspeaker design in general.

PS: Assuming they physically fit in Michael Fremer's listening room, I have no doubt that Michael will upgrade his Alexx to XVX. He might go in not wanting to upgrade, but after hearing these there is no way he's going to be happy without the XVX.
I just spent 6 minutes being so glad I did not spend that amount of money on speakers.
 
So, they likely could sound even better if drivable by a top SET!
If they are full range, which they are and produce very low octave bass, then the bass section will require the 100 watt minimum, or a similar amp used by high end subwoofers.
SET amplifiers require a narrow design range of bass drivers. Wilsons are normally not that type of design, however, the midrange and up may benefit.
 
I have a pair here for review and believe it or not, the XVXes work better in my room than the Alexx, which work well enough! It may look unworkable, but it WORKS. To the point where my wife came down for a listen and said "YOU HAVE TO FIND A WAY TO BUY THESE".... that doesn't often happen....

Thanks for the report. BTW, your wife sounds like an angel :)
 
I have a pair here for review and believe it or not, the XVXes work better in my room than the Alexx, which work well enough! It may look unworkable, but it WORKS. To the point where my wife came down for a listen and said "YOU HAVE TO FIND A WAY TO BUY THESE".... that doesn't often happen....

i did not see the AF0 in the picture.:) was it hiding?

and did your wife comment about that?
 
I have a pair here for review and believe it or not, the XVXes work better in my room than the Alexx, which work well enough! It may look unworkable, but it WORKS. To the point where my wife came down for a listen and said "YOU HAVE TO FIND A WAY TO BUY THESE".... that doesn't often happen....

I am very happy for you that they work in your room! It's great that your wife loves them, too!
 
Some of the magic here is the new alnico magnet midrange driver that they've been working on for 5 years. Dave had hoped it would be ready for the WAMM but it was not....I agree with Ron that the metal dome tweeter was always an issue. However, I've always felt that everything else about the Wilson performance was what i was looking for so i listened 'around' that tweeter. Wilson switched away from it with the XLF and that was some years ago. I'd live happily ever after with the Alexx....until these arrived.

Wonder if the tech will trickle down to the Alexx Series X or Gen 2? Perhaps in 2021.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tima
Ron,
It was demonstrated to all of us testing amps with Keith's YG's that they need significant power (400 watts minimum into 4 ohms) to develop any sound stage. The Sonja has almost the identical set of specifications, it's simply illogical to believe that they are sufficiently driven by 140 watts into 4 ohms.

I've come to realize this is the reason I've always hated the multiple YG models he's had over the years, they were constantly starved of power.
Haileys ain't XVs. XVs can sound good with a 140 watt hybrid tube amp.

But it is a valid point, the XVs sound far better with more power, like 1,650 watts into 4 ohms. They use it all.

In a comparison with the XVX, the speakers should be on similar amplification -- both on a hybrid tube amp or both on a high power SS. Based on what I heard at the Audio Salon XVX demo it would be a fun shootout, the Wilson XVX are terrific. But my money would be on the YG XV.
 

About us

  • What’s Best Forum is THE forum for high end audio, product reviews, advice and sharing experiences on the best of everything else. This is THE place where audiophiles and audio companies discuss vintage, contemporary and new audio products, music servers, music streamers, computer audio, digital-to-analog converters, turntables, phono stages, cartridges, reel-to-reel tape machines, speakers, headphones and tube and solid-state amplification. Founded in 2010 What’s Best Forum invites intelligent and courteous people of all interests and backgrounds to describe and discuss the best of everything. From beginners to life-long hobbyists to industry professionals, we enjoy learning about new things and meeting new people, and participating in spirited debates.

Quick Navigation

User Menu

Steve Williams
Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator
Ron Resnick
Site Co-Owner | Administrator
Julian (The Fixer)
Website Build | Marketing Managersing