A brutal review of the Wilson Maxx

Khrys, Am I to understand that technology can't be developed despite less than ideal circumstances or that technology can't be improved by better testing procedures? Instead of asking for a guess as to the results of an experiment after being subjected to non-specific paramters, why not offer the answer? While your at it perhaps you can offer why it may be germaine to this discussion? I'll admit it, I'm confused. Are you suggesting that one might extrapolate a serious medical diagnosis by observing confusion between a second year student and a philospher and, that's the best part? If your response depends on some sort of personal attack, you needn't bother.

Khrys- I don't feel that you are comparible to a sophist or a speaker philosopher. A bit grandiose! WE are discussing being able to agree upon a standard evaluation of speaker frequency responses across speakers that could be included in reviews as a basis for comparison. Very straight forward; you talk of cigar filled space stations and sophists. Pretty ridiculous.

Anechoic chmabers are usuful because they can be reproduced as testing sites across geography. Your listening room cannot.

Khrys - if you mean sophist in the modern, derogatory sense, ok. But most posts are not even worthy of sophistry, they are simply naive and sophomoric.

How is the Steinway? I never tire of mine.

Scott
(a cretinous audiofool)

Unsound, no personal attack meant. Of course technology can be improved by better testing procedures which is why I think 2005 computer models have suplanted 1940 anechoic chambers.

Rysa4, I agree that a "standard" of reference is useful but the fact that no two anechoic chambers are alike precludes them from being it. The volume of an anechoic chamber alone will dramatically alter the measurements of any given speaker and that is only one of many non-controlled variables in the equation. It seems that some anechoic chambers are more anechoic than others. Imagine that.

Scott, my posts are often meant to be humorous sophistry but I would be flattered to have them mistaken as the naivety of a sophomore. And the 'M' is in fine voice.

To all: If you could choose ANY speaker system with only one "reference" would you use its anechoic frequency response or the ears of a trusted listener?

Anechoic chambers while useful for finding problems are not useful in telling sound quality because 40% of the sound you hear is the sound reflected to you from the off axes signals. Because of this, the speaker that reflects with the most natural sound wins by a long shot. Case in point is Dunlevy. These speakers measure great in an anechoic chamber but the reason they don't sound good in a real room is their off axes reflected sound was + or - 12 db.