I have W/P 6s and have listened to the 7s at shows and dealers.
The 6s' weakest points (in my opinion) are that the tweeter is a little hot and the puppies have a little midbass prominence but don't go all the way down. The hot tweeter is usually addressed by adjusting toe-in -- the speaker is fairly sensitive to placement. The side benefit is that people who like sharp, analytical speakers can get what they like here. I find that I like the small midbass prominence, as you noted, too. I am supplementing the puppies with two subwoofers, so the 6s' lack of very low bass is not an issue with my set up.
The 7s use an improved enclosure material, which I have read permits some tweaking of the crossover to smooth out the tweeter. Apparently, this also supports other changes in the crossover and puppy driver systems to smooth out the midbass prominence and extend the low end. The result seems to be a flatter and more extended speaker frequency response. The speaker is less sensitive to placement, and perhaps a little more forgiving of upstream components. To me, the sound is a little less intense as an experience. To exaggerate for illustration, the sound is a little less "West Coast" and a little more Boston. Relative to other speakers I listened to, the W/P 7s are still colorful and dynamic (just not quite so much as the 6s). These attributes, plus the beautiful fit & finish and high efficiency (especially if you are thinking about tube amplification), keep the design attractive. Whether it costs too much is up to your personal wallet.
I am not currently a fan of either as I have listened to both on several occasions but the 7's are much better IMO than the 6's. Primarily in dynamics and better defined bass and high end extension.
You've apprently listened to both of them. Why don't you tell US which is the better speaker? I don't understand what the point of asking "which speaker is better?" among two speakers you've auditioned. All you will get is other peoples opinions, which are completely arbitrary and irrelevent to your own.
Which one do you like better? Is it a toss up? If so - then pick on price, availablility, support, etc.
Choose the speaker for your room. The 7s sound like what you need or just enjoy your 6s & add a subwoofer. I have the 7s & a sub z& find the benefits but is not a must. I want the Maxx IIs & in my room it would work great but you need the room. I have heard them in a small room & was not impressed.
Well I went to listen to the JM Lab Utopia. I can not beleive the raving about this speaker. The man used exactly the same electronics as me so that factor was excluded. The JM Lab even had less bass tha my Puppy 6. Also the mids were coloured and slow. What a disappointment compared to the newer series which I like very much. Given the size of the speaker I can not understand how such a big speaker can have almost no bass response. The man luckily used a Velodyne DD18 as a sub to compensate the bass and then the sound was OK, but at what price. The JM lab definately is off the list.
Then I listened to the Maxx. Now we are talking. Fast, detailed, powerful music with an authority that only few speakers have. This is for me the way to go. I did not hear better speakers yet. I also listened to Maxx 2 and found the Maxx 2 to be very good to, even better timing.
The Puppy 7 is now also off the list. To much money more and it does not sound better tha the 6 to my opinion.
The only way to go is the Maxx or Maxx 2. Since the Maxx 2 is newer I probably get Maxx 2.
What amp did you use with the Utopia ?
I used the Krell 700CX / KCT / KPS28C combination. The combination works well and the Krell should have more than enough bass. I have this combination to and did not yet find better products.
Peter, I owned the MAXX 1's and drove them with the set up you have except I had 750 mono's and the Krell can easily control the bass of of the MAXX. I downsized to monitors and sub because it sounded better than MAXX in my room. However, I am trying the Zu Audio Definitions 1.5 and for the money, they easily compete with my MAXX and easily with the Watt/PUppy 7's. The bass is actually better than I had from my MAXX. The bass is just as tight, and fast as the MAXX, but I can hear a lower octave. The midrange and tweeter are extremely musical and detailed. Before you spend $40k on MAXX twos, try the no risk Zu 60 day trial period on the Definitions which cost only $9k.You would only be out the shipping both ways; a small price to pay to save thousands. When the Zu men came to Scottsdale to set up my pair they also brought a pair to replace a pair of Wilson Alexandria's for a guy a few miles from me. He is much happier with his Zu Definitions than his $125k Wilson speaker. This is an extremely dynamic, musical speaker that offers tremendous value for the dollar that must be heard to be believed. You surely won't need the Krell 700 as these things have an internal amp (for the bass cones) and can be driven with 15 watts because of the 101db efficiency. Think of the money you will save when you can sell off that hunk of metal heating your room. Hit the link below and scroll down through the article (2nd page) to see the pictures of Archie, who sold his Wilson's for Zu Definitions. I am just trying to save you some money and for falling for all the hype you read in the magazines. I love Dave Wilson; he's the definition of class and his product and marketing is superb, but I don't think his product is $30k better than the Zu. And, I don't think I am alone on this if you read other threads and the reviews on the www.zuaudio.com website. Its your hard earn money, but as one who has been there, I am glad I listened.
Well I finally bought the Puppy 7. In the beginning I thought the bass was better in the 6 but I still put the 7 and put the 6 in the corner. After one week listening to the 7 I put back the 6. Wow this was realy unbeleivable. The bass of the 7 has much more punch end is much faster. The 7 also is much much better in the mids and more open and the stereo image is also much better. Compared to the 7 the bass of the 6 now sounds muddy to me. I could not beleive the difference. It is true that the 7 is a better speaker than the 6. The 6 is still a worldclass speaker but the 7 is better. Now I am curious to listen to the 8, will it still be better. Every time I think it is impossible to improve the Watt / Puppy David wilson improves it again.
I have lived with the Puppy for 7 years now (5.1, 6, 7) and they are realy a work of art. No other speaker which fits in a domestic room brings so much enjoyment. Everybody might have his own opinion but to me the Watt / Puppy is the most enjoyable speaker I ever heard or earned.
Yes they are expensive but so are cars, women and booze. So who cares as long as I can afford it and enjoy it. The speakers bring me much fun in my live and this is priceless. David Wilson improved the magic again.
Peter wrote: "So who cares as long as I can afford it and enjoy it."
I've made the distinction between the abilty to afford and the ability to buy. Afford means to me that it fits in with your larger plan, e.g. retirement funding, etc., and does not impact other important decisions. How much is too much in the larger scheme of life is for each of us to decide. But on another set of boards, you can read tales like I'm 55 with $50 K invested, how can I grow that to be able to retire at 65?
I have to agree on your opinion of the WP7's I just picked up a pair three days ago and I'm amazed at the sound they produce! I owned Martin Logan Odysseys before these and can happily say I'm not disappointed at all. Better bass definition,more detailed and beautiful soundstaging and most of all more dynamic than my Odysseys were. I'm hearing small details on my CD's that I really didn't hear before. Not cheap but worth every penny.