Not a bad gig, if you can get it - lol...just playin' with you, Gary
Did I remember to say that you don't get paid, but you have to pay to get my job?
Wilson Gets Another Cover!!!!
- Thread starter Gregadd
- Start date
Did I remember to say that you don't get paid, but you have to pay to get my job?
Did I remember to say that you don't get paid, but you have to pay to get my job?
Yeah in this industry, you gotta' pay to play!
I don't see how in the hell a small business can start up in this industry without some serious capital and be competitive.
It's very, very, very difficult to stand on one's own, by one's own convictions and tastes, especially if it goes against the prevailing wisdom. How many analysts picked the Patriots to go and win the Super Bowl this year? I watch the NFL network and ESPN football coverage A LOT, and it was at least 9/10. And how many people bought homes and condos at the peak of the market, instead of shorting real estate? Way too many - because everyone big investor was doing it. And how many people bought internet stocks at the peak of the market, with CNBC TV personalities yapping them up daily 24 by 7?
Robert Harley picks a Wilson, then Fremer a few months later, then Art Dudley a year later, then Marc Mickelson 6 months later... (Feel free to modify your order, as this is just an example.) As long as they have time to check what the other guy did, they are comfortable picking Wilson. How wrong can you go with a Wilson, if the other gurus are dancing to the Wilsons? (Also, using Wilson as an example only - substitute another such as Magico, etc.)
But, if you were to let them pick simultaneously, or close to it, instead of sequentially, you are likely to get different - and more meaningful - results. The best example of this - and most meaningful to audiophiles - is when these gurus go to audio shows. Sure they still sometimes have a chance to compare notes, but not with everyone due to the short time frame required to get something out on the website before the competition does. (Valin will always pick Magico, as he gets them free for life, and say they were a little colored due to the small hotel room to cover his behind, so he keeps the next model coming.) Many others , though, who have different incentives, end up picking a wide diversity of speakers because they need to make a fast decision to publish the story. Looking at the best of show results across magazines and websites, there is actually very little agreement between the reviewers.
If there is agreement from guys who made the decisions independently of each other, that is the best of show winner, and a great system.
IMHO it's down to their longevity and the consistent quality of the product. Genesis had great coverage in the early 90's - until the company stumbled and couldn't afford to send products to review and then finally went bankrupt in 2000. After an absence of two years, and then bought by an unknown, unproven industry outsider (me) some reviewers still think that it's made in China. I still can't afford to send products to review.
On a serious note, can you invite influential audio people to your house to generate some buzz? Can you do something unusual that will attract positive publicity to your speakers?
As I said above, the gurus will always go with the safe choice - because another guru alredy thinks it is very good.
Thanks, Caesar. I'll have to find the first guru who will go against convention
But seriously, the Pacific Northwest Audio Society has a pair of my speakers (and my amps, and my cables) and slowly, I am making headway. But this is the Wilson forum, and I don't want to be rude.
Thanks, Caesar. I'll have to find the first guru who will go against convention
But seriously, the Pacific Northwest Audio Society has a pair of my speakers (and my amps, and my cables) and slowly, I am making headway. But this is the Wilson forum, and I don't want to be rude.
How about passing it to all of the major audio societies in the country?
Last edited:
That would be even more expensive than sending them for review. Seriously - we shipped a pair and the shippers dropped them from quite a height upside down. The cabinet was dented, the magnets on the woofers bent the baskets, the transformer ripped off its mount. We were well insured, so the insurance company paid for it. It took me an evening to replace the drivers and I gave it to the club - the dent on the cabinet is still there, but I fixed it myself, and it sounds pretty good.
Hi Gary, without wanting to be seen contradicting you, Stereophile has reviewed some of your speakers, and we even featureed Genesis on the cover of our February 2006 issue. See, for example, http://www.stereophile.com/floorloudspeakers/206gen/index.html .
Best wishes - John
John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile
Thanks, John. Yes, we were reviewed and featured on the cover of both Stereophile and Stereophile Guide to Home Theater 5 years ago. Can't afford to send stuff out to review much anymore. You know what they say - the way to end up with a small fortune in this industry is to start with a large one.
Did I remember to say that you don't get paid, but you have to pay to get my job?
'K, the queue for Gary's job starts behind me!
I do classical recordings and the Sophia 2s did a remarkable job of reproducing the session details perfectly. I am sure the Sophia 3 is an improvement. A superb speaker.
@John Atkinson and others:
Generally speaking, it's been years since I've taken reviews seriously, because they do not appear honest to me anymore - no one has the guts to point out directly out loud the clear shortcomings of gear, and reviewers (for the most part) dance around the issues with fancy language - truly disappointing, in my view. What I still do find interesting and welcome is JA's measurements, which can easily expose some shortcomings (and positive aspects alike), so here are some questions:
Generally speaking, it's been years since I've taken reviews seriously, because they do not appear honest to me anymore - no one has the guts to point out directly out loud the clear shortcomings of gear, and reviewers (for the most part) dance around the issues with fancy language - truly disappointing, in my view. What I still do find interesting and welcome is JA's measurements, which can easily expose some shortcomings (and positive aspects alike), so here are some questions:
- Does Stereophile really have an anechoic chamber to measure frequency response?
- I vaguely recall the Q5 being too heavy to measure anywhere but outdoors - is this true? Can you really take meaningful measurements with so much background noise outdoors? Or I am completely twisting the facts here? Apologies if so
- Specific to the Sophia 3: I couldn't help but notice that you claim the midrange driver is wired in opposite phase. Why do manufacturers do that, and what does it say about their competence? What's the specific audible effect of such a design? Why wouldn't they design with all drivers in phase?
- Sophia 3: There we have that dip around 2-3kHz again (also seen in the Maxx 2 and possibly elsewhere; at least the Sasha is much better) - it's been discussed here that sometimes this is a desirable design decision. The dip, is mentioned, was worse with the grills on. JA - wasn't this worth a damning comment by the reviewer, or was he unable to identify that dip?
- Sophia 3 and Sasha: AD's room has a major dip around 150Hz as your measurements show... Why isn't he mentioning this in his reviews? It's so deep that it's impossible not to perceive it. Is his room really worthy of reviews with such anomalies? Is AD specifically avoiding discussing this because he knows his room's limitations? If so, what does this say about the overall quality of the reviews?
Last edited:
No, I use quasi-anechoic techniques - MLSSA from DRA Labs, Fuzzmeasure from SMUGSoftware - for both farfield and nearfield measurements. The advantages and disadvantages of quasi-anechoic techniques are discussed in the articles on speaker measurements you can find at http://www.stereophile.com/reference/99/index.html , http://www.stereophile.com/reference/100/index.html , and http://www.stereophile.com/reference/103/index.html .
Yes. See http://www.stereophile.com/stephenmejias/lets_get_physical_the_magico_q5/index.html .
Yes. First, MLS techniques are inherently immune to the effects of noise. Second, both Michael Fremer and I live in suburban neighborhoods where, other than distant traffic rumble, there is not much noise. Third, by averaging multiple measurements, I can lower the measurement's noisefloor. (Each doubling of the number of data captures increases the uncorrelated noise level by 3dB but the correlated signal by 6dB, thus dropping the noise contribution by 3dB.) The only real problem with outdoors measurements (other than rain, etc) is wind, which, if excessive, very slightly changes the effective distance between the speaker and the mike. If you then average multiple readings, the response appears to roll off a little above 15kHz or so, dure to the path length being slightly different for each measurement. This was not a problem with the Q5 measurements.
It demonstrates that they understand that the polarity of the driver wiring cannot be considered without also taking into account the phase shift of the crossover. It demonstrates competent design.
The negative polarity of the midrange unit ensures that when the phase response is also considered, the outputs of the drive-units sum in phase in the crossover region to give a flat amplitide response on the intended axis.
Because then the drive-units would not sum in-phase and you would get a large and very audible suckout in the crossover region. Pathologically poor design.
More replies in next post.
John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile
Last edited:
If you look at the Sophia's response - fig.5 in the Stereophile review - you can see that between 900Hz and 10kHz, the dips are balanced by similar-amplitude peaks. My experience has been that it becomes much harder to perceive a particular dip in a response like this than when you have a flat response disturbed by a single suckout.
I listened at length to both Wilson speakers in Art's room and no, that dip is not nearly as easy to perceive as you seem to think. As I explain in the review, I suspect it is because it primarily due to interference with the floorbounce, which is something the human brain, unlike the microphone tends to accommodate. (As John Dunlavy pointed out to me 15 years ago when I discussed this subject with him, there is always a floor present when we perceive sound.)
Yes.
Not as far as I am aware.
In my informed opinion, Art's reviews are reliable, repeatable, and his conclusions transportable.
John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile
Similar threads
 | Steve Williams Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator |  | Ron Resnick Site Co-Owner | Administrator |  | Julian (The Fixer) Website Build | Marketing Managersing |