The brightness of the Watt comes from its tweeter's dome break-up that is too close to the audioband. It is not brightness, it is simply distortion. Some, may find it exciting.
Just got the new SP with the Revel review. Objectively, I see no comparison between the two speakers. Under JA measurements, the Salon are light years ahead of the Wilson. The rest are just subjective opinions. |
Sorry, I meant the Revel studio 2. I would assume that the Salon would be even better. |
Call me a bat but the Watt sound to me exactly like they measure. I believe that the word bright should be change to harsh. In regards to the break-ups, you need to keep in mind that when these get agitated, distortion levels of the entire tweeter rises. That is where the harshness come from. |
It is all in your head I am afraid it is on paper as well. I must be very lucky I guess that for Watt owners, hearing loss is a bliss. BTW, let it be known who started the insults trend (See Jkalman usual condescending posts above). I really do not mind it but soon you will run away crying about the Wilson bashing again. So, as they say, if you live in a glass house, you should not throw stones. |
While at it, you should add the Magico V3 to the list. |
Very typical response. All open for a discussion I'm not above admitting I am wrong; I'm only human but then again, not really I'm sorry if you have bored me in the past Make up your mind. In the mean time, go listen to any decent violin or soprano recording and see how much of it you can take on your Watt. Then try the same on the Salon or even better the V3. And yes, I know that a violin high note is only around 3.5K but its harmonics easily excites the break-up modes of the Watt. What you should hear is clear audible grain riding the entire treble. It would get worst as you increase the volume. Anyway, I am probably boring you again by now
|
to others it is refreshingly free of distortion But it is not. If some prefer the sound of distortion, what exactly are we talking about? Subjective opinions with no merits behind them. And if you have to completely twist your system and room around a product with such deficiencies, why not start with something that actually work to begin with. |
I am not sure how me pointing out to what I hear as harshness and grain (Plus hollowness, lack of body, artificial upper midrange and lumpy bass) will make you hear it as well. Obviously, you purchase these speakers cause you liked the way they sound. I have said, time and again, that the WP sounds to me exactly like they measure. They always did. Way before I saw any measurements on them. I would also argue, that to an experience listener, it makes more sense for any speaker to sound more like it measure then not. Perhaps, in a way of comparison, once you hear a better implemented design, you will hear what I am talking about. Then again, perhaps not. WP8 have many audible issues that can be measured and explained. I happened to hear most of these issues when I listen to them. Telling me that all these issues, that are clearly visible in the data measured by different sources, are not audible is not a serious argument. Perhaps you do not hear them. But I sure do. |
I would not mind but I am not trying to start a pissing match here. There are quite a few loudspeakers I would rather listen to then the W/P. I am also more than willing to accept that some may not like what I like. |
Jkalman,
You are giving your in-room measurement too much weight. These measurements below 600 Hz have little to do with the speakers and a lot to do with the room. Above, although you are measuring room reflections as well, you can tell more about the speakers behavior. The differences are not as subtle as you may think. The steady decline of the W/P trebles, starting at 4K, will dramatically change the overall balance of sound. In general, even under rough measurement like what you have here, you can see that the Salon, are smoother and better behaved overall. |
Jk,
Sorry for referring to your conclusions based on the in-room measurements you supplied. If you are aware of their shortcoming, why are you posting them? Anyway, back to the subject, the Ultima tweeter is not shelved. It has a rise response, starting at 10K. It is a big difference then shelving (You can also see the nice impedance of the Revel tweeter in comparison to the w/p, although, the delayed energy, seen in the cumulative spectral-decay plot is concerning). In regards to your comment on the w/p mids shelving , it is anything but useful. Remember, wrong on wrong is still not right. In regards to my sole intentions, yes, you are partially right, I cannot stand the fact that the most successful high-end speaker ever is a practical joke. It says something about this hobby, which I am a part of. I see it as my duty, and a service to the audiophile community, to expose the nakedness of the king. |
You keep mumbling and I will keep telling you that there is very little value in assessing speakers based on their in-room measurements. Particularly youre in-room measurements which are not even averaging/sampling approximates area measurements.Also, since we all know you are a good reader, I suggest you read some books about loudspeakers design. You may understand why Wilson depress midrange is simply bad XO design and nothing else. Wilson, apparently never heard of the 6db baffle step issue. Speaker building 101. |
Jkalman
I was expecting them to be A LOT better A LOT better?? Are you for real? What more do you need a BJ? Here is a speaker that goes a full octave above and below the WP, doing it in a smooth and linear fashion with a step response that makes the WP look like an Aztec pyramid and you are not impressed. Why am I not surprise? Anyway, these measurements, read objectively, should put many myths to sleep. Especially in regards the bass performance of the properly design loudspeaker. |
Poor Jkalman, such a pure soul getting bullying by some people. Your passive aggressive style is very touching. But we have hope for you. Although it is difficult for you to admit, you finally made a good decision. Congratulation on the Salon 2 (Which BTW, climb above 6K even more then the V3). |
JK-Please keep in mind that whenever you are going to bring up the V3, you will have to reckon with me. Not sure what you have against these speakers, but if you want to trash them, at least try and keep it real. As I mention before, even JA pointed out to the top octave shelved up of the Ultima Studio2 (Same tweeter arrangement as the Salon 2). Buying or not buying a speaker based on that alone, is silly. Especially from one who has defended the W/P -/+ 10db FR and admittedly, miss their 6 db midrange shelved up!! That is all in the same paragraph complaining about the V3 extra 2 db abouve6.5K. Come on, get real. And then again, if you can correct it all with a good PEQ, does it really matter what speakers you end up having? BTW, if you are at all really interested in a serious evaluation between the 2 speakers, you can start by reading RH of TAS comparison between them. Take at as you wish but at least it is coming from a person that actually spent significant time with both speakers. (http://www.avguide.com/news/2008/01/30/robert-harley-compares-the-outstanding-revel-ultima-salon2-and-the-magico-v3/ ). |
I agree in regards to reviews in general. However, at least RH had both speakers under the same roof. And I would say that just out of curiosity, one may feel the need to investigate more before reaching a conclusion based on debatable 2 db extra output above 6.5K. BTW, this issue is completely irrelevant since the V3 is designed to be listened slightly off-axis. In normal listing position (ears below the tweeters) the tweeters are flat almost out to 40K. |
Man, I wish you keep your post a bit shorter so I can at least make an attempt to follow you. Life is too short and I can only take you in small doses. BTW, if I am the reason you do not buy or audition the V3, I guess I am doing something right
|
As I mentioned before, many times, there is more to loudspeakers design/performance then a flat freq. My issue with the W/P are much more fundamental than just a bad freq. plot. JK - If you had some basic understanding of how loudspeakers should be design, you would understand my points. It is your single minded approach to the subject that makes this discussion useless. We obviously looking at different truths here. One that you can correct with a PEQ, and I cant (I bet you also put Ketchup on your well done stake...). For the record, I find nothing wrong with your new loudspeakers. They are, as I said before, a huge improvement from where you are coming. The fact that you are not recognizing that, is pretty sad. It also, of course, throws your freq. response argument against the V3 out the window. |
Well, if that is the case, why are you constantly bringing them up? After the hole you have dug for yourself, what are the chances you will admit to anything positive about them. I guess there will be no V3 for Jkalman. Ok, we got it. No can you please move on
|
Reprehensible ?? Please
Anyway, thank you for throwing me a bone (Magicos look good...). I feel so much better now. So, can we please move on? |
