Wilson v Sonus Faber

Any views on Wilson Watt Puppy 6.1 vs. Sonus Faber Amati Homage? (Driven by Mark Levinson equipment) Revived audiophile waking up after 7 year sleep to update system.
Any views on Wilson Watt Puppy 6.1 vs. Sonus Faber Amati Homage? (Driven by Mark Levinson equipment)

The Wilson 7’s were the best of the Watt/Puppy, but I would still favour the Amati’s over them, but not with tubes as they get too lazy sounding with them.

Cheers George
The older Wilson tweeter was terrible, same was true of Thiels. The only time I have heard the Wilsons sound good was on tubes, but they couldnt deliver at higher volumes so George is correct in this regard. My thoughts are that driven by Levinson (model is very important) I would prefer the Sonus Faber. 

Still chuckling over carl's response. I wish I would have had a college professor that affected me so profoundly. 
I did and boy was she a looker.
Although this is a lot of fun, I'm not sure why these threads get started. You get two sides warring and it always comes down to what YOU like best. We all see something different in an ink blot. 
A Ferrari means absolutely nothing to a dead person and all audio equipment sucks as an investment:)
Also why do they get resurrected 2 DECADES after they were started? LOL
@jsautter   Funny that you should bring up the fact that the old Wilson tweeter was terrible ( which I agree with you 100%!). BUT we have to remember who Wilson were attempting to impress as their customer. The older guy with a very flexible wallet. Wilson knew ( know??) that this consumer profile probably has some hearing loss at the higher frequencies, so a tweeter that is hot and rings at high frequencies would be just the ticket. Today, and I'm not sure why, the old Focal tweeter has been replaced with a MUCH better sounding silk dome. Somebody at Wilson must have told Dave that the old tweet was a basic disaster...and he obviously finally listened. ( I suspect I know who, but I have no proof).