Wilson Chronosonic XVX at New York's Innovative Audio

On Friday, January 17 from 5-9pm, Innovative Audio in New York City will debut the Wilson Chronosonic XVX, Wilson's flagship loudspeaker. Peter McGrath of Wilson Audio will present the system with his master recordings, played through D’Agostino Momentum M400 Monoblock Amplifiers and Momentum HD Preamplifier, Berkeley Alpha DAC Reference Series-3, and Transparent Opus cables and power products. Space will be limited, and reservations are required. Please visit innovative.nyc/events for more details and to reserve your seat.

COMMENTS
tonykaz's picture

for an Event limited to a small group of 1% ers.

Hubris on published display

Tony in Venice

Michael Fremer's picture

Everything in high performance audio is for a very small percentage of people who can afford it. Whatever you can afford, I promise you only a tiny percent can afford, so why the outrage?

tonykaz's picture

You are reading into this as outrage.

I am not outraged. I don't see this as outrageous. I see it as what I described it as.

You regularly falsely accuse me.

I am not at all angry, outraged, up-set or otherwise pissed off like you seem to see.

Only an angry outraged person is capable of seeming to recognize outrage in things.

However, you have a reputation of being an acid spitter. A reputation revealed to me by your victims.

I typically avoid your writings and opinions, I'm never coming for you from anxieties.

Tony in Venice

ps. I own a large Vinyl 33.3 library and a largish collection of Phono transducers. I get out and about this country, I'm well traveled and travel with outstanding Audio Gear. I'm a far more experienced gear manufacturer than you seem to have an understanding of ( from the opinions you espouce ). My opinion is that you are a hired promoter of outfits that make niche Audio gear. ( an opinion that I won't go around projecting )

Jim Austin's picture
I've found Innovative Audio remarkably receptive and welcoming to everyone. I've been to a couple of their events, and they're often crowded with regular folks who enjoy listening even if they can't afford the gear being auditioned. Jim Austin, Editor Stereophile
JRT's picture

That alone seems increasingly unusual, but also interesting is that they are located in an "Architects and Designers" building.

http://adbuilding.com/home/

If they are demonstrating good loudspeakers that they have for sale, if this isn't just a one-off show, I hope that they do very well.

Kal Rubinson's picture

"If they are demonstrating good loudspeakers that they have for sale, if this isn't just a one-off show, I hope that they do very well."
It is not a one-off except for the visiting Peter McGrath.

Bogolu Haranath's picture

They are gonna play "It's Good to Be King" by Tom Petty :-) ........

bpw's picture

Those are old Wilson X1 Grand Slamms and Spectral amps, not what is described.

chrisf's picture

Hi guys. It's actually a photo that I took a week or so ago. We had the D'Agostino equipment in another room for a client demo, so we were using the Spectral DMA-400SV system for initial listening and break in. But I installed the D'Agostino HD Pre-amp and M400 amps in there today.

And I assure you those are the Chronosonic XVX! I installed them myself, too! Yeah, they are expensive speakers. But high-end audio isn't elitist, unless you make it so. At Innovative, we don't. We offer these events to the public because we care about high quality music, and we enjoy sharing our passion with our community of like-minded people.

Come join us for our event, and you can see (and hear) them for yourself!

-Chris from Innovative

ps- I sent an update pic to the editor, so hopefully they can swap out the pic and you can see that yes indeed we have the D'Agostino Momentum gear connected now via Transparent Opus. Or just check out our RSVP page at http://innovative.nyc/events and see for yourself!

chrisf's picture

And as Kal noted: nope, this is not a one-off thing. Indeed Peter McGrath isn't always here, so we're happy he can join us for the debut party. But the Chronosonic XVX themselves will be for the foreseeable future!

So come listen to them. And hey, maybe buy a pair? ;-)

-Chris from Innovative

JRT's picture

From the picture of your room, I think those small form factor active bass traps might work well in the corners behind the loudspeakers without being too visually obtrusive.

Those could be a good product to utilize, to demonstrate (can be turned on/off), and to sell. I have no horse in that race, have no affiliation with them, rather just see the item as being a good solution, though not an inexpensive solution.

There are distributors in Petaluma, California, in Montreal, Canada, and in Mexico City, Mexico, but none in or near NYC. At retail, B&H on 34th St., and Markertek in Saugerties both offer those for sale, but neither of them keep any in inventory or on display for demonstration.

http://www.psiaudio.swiss/avaa-c20-active-bass-trap/

https://www.stereophile.com/content/psi-audio-avaa-c20-electronic-bass-trap

https://www.soundonsound.com/reviews/psi-audio-avaa-c20

https://www.gearslutz.com/board/high-end/1045864-psi-audio-avva-c20-post-your-experience-review-3.html

https://www.gearslutz.com/board/studio-building-acoustics/1121565-positive-test-results-psi-avaa-c20-active-bass-trap.html

For scale, depicted below is Bob Katz seated next to a PSI Audio AVAA C20.

drblank's picture

They don't build up just in the corners, That's a myth that most people have been brainwashed into thinking.. they build up against the perimeter of the room and generally need entire walls of low frequency absorption. Remember, low frequencies under around 100hz are ominidirectional. And most rooms have horrible wall construction. If you want to check out your room, get a signal generator that can produce sine waves of 20hz to 100hz in 10hz increments and take a dB meter and measure from the listening positon and then compare to around the room and take measurements of all frequencies at the same SPL from the listening position, and then take measurements about every 2 to 3 feet and map out where the high and low pressure zones are and compare against the listening position.. you'll not only see what frequencies are giving you the problem but where they are located..

May I suggest going to a company called Acoustic Fields website, they build diaphragmatic absorption into the wall cavity where they put a combination of tuned and broadband diaphramatic absorption and it's all designed and built for the room, the application and SPL's that they are dealing with.. they also sell single pre-built units or they sell the build plans for the DIYer so they can save some money.

But those active subwoofers aren't going to give you the attack and decay that the AF designs can do.

You can certainly talk to them and ask them about using subwoofers to go after room mode issues and they can explain why using subs isn't the best way to deal with them. The way AF does it, they can get a flat response curve +/- 1dB. but depending on the room, system, etc. it may require all four walls, ceiling and in VERY high SPL, like in a night club, they might even need the floors treated..

Those active subs will NOT do that. . They are at best, a gimmick. IMO.

It's too bad you can't have two identical rooms one treated with AF's CAW design and another room with those active subs and you'll understand the difference by listening to each room.

If you haven't been in a AF room, I highly recommend you call them and visit a room they've built. I was in one of their test labs about 6 or 7 years ago and It was simply one of the best rooms I've ever been in for 2 channel stereo and it was just a test room when they first got started.. I say with with 100% confidence, they know how to design and treat a room to eliminate the room sound and have a VERY natural listening environment.

Jim Austin's picture

of Chris Forman of Innovative Audio, I have updated the top-image.

Jim Austin, Editor
Stereophile

emmany's picture

What kind of Marketing Gimmick is this ?. The components used in this speaker are Scan-Speak 32W/4878T11 Revelator Woofer + Scan-Speak 28W/4878T-01 Revelator Woofer + Scan-Speak 18M/4631T Revelator 7" Midrange + Scanspeak Illuminator 12MU/8731T-00, 4" Midrange + Scanspeak Revelator Tweeter . Just cant believe someone pays $330,000 for this marketing gimmick . You could rather look into companies like Vivid audio , B&W Nautilus , ATC , Rockport , Magico , PMC , MBL and so on ... who design and manufacture their own drivers and everything else and the sound speaks for itself .

Jim Austin's picture

And who are you? According to your profile, you've had a Stereophile.com account for 22 minutes and 39 seconds. Care to identify yourself and explain how you came to possess such information?

Jim Austin, Editor
Stereophile

drblank's picture

that one has spent north of $500K and they are showing these systems in rooms that have horrific room treatment. I have very disappointed with the lack of understanding or attention to room acoustics and proper room treatment in high end audio magazines/on-line sites.

It just boggles my mind that people with the money simply spend $$ on equipment but their rooms are utter crap. At least 50% of what we are listening to is the sonic signature of the room itself and how it's interacting with the "system".

Jim Austin's picture
I've been in this room at Innovative Audio several times. I've heard, but not confirmed, that it was built around the Wilson Alexandria, either the XLR or an earlier version. When I heard the XLF there a few years back, I was impressed. For what it's worth, the room is, or was at the time, quite extensively treated. Jim Austin, Editor Stereophile
John Atkinson's picture
Jim Austin wrote:
When I heard the XLF there a few years back, I was impressed. For what it's worth, the room is, or was at the time, quite extensively treated.

I measured the in-room response of the Wilson Alexandria XLF in the Innovative room when Michael Fremer reviewed the speaker for Stereophile - see www.stereophile.com/content/wilson-audio-specialties-alexandria-xlf-loudspeaker-measurements. The Innovative listening room did have effective acoustic treatment and the XLFs' response in the room met tight limits - ±1.5dB - above 250Hz.

John Atkinson
Technical Editor, Stereophile

JHL's picture

With rare exception, how a speaker puts sound into a space is less important than how it sounds straight to the ear. First arrival is king and always has been.

Acoustical size and design type are the important loudspeaker factors, and the most important terms for real musicality are rarely raised. It's obvious that the uniform dispersion *of them* relates secondarily, if that.

Then we have the contradiction that objectivism has come to present us with: Its excessive concern with the negative sound of rooms has come full circle to conflict with its new mandate that by way of consistent lateral response, rooms must now contribute sonic realism.

Vertical consistency is left largely unaddressed because it's problematic: Entities provide solutions to the solvable but are predictably mute about the things they cannot fix.

Michael Fremer's picture

That you would post such a comment without having heard the room.

JHL's picture

Listing the drivers in a speaker is a great and wondrous revelation, Jim, and all are duly warned that they and their wholesale cost are all there is to a product like this. Notwithstanding the quality of a couple thousand dollars of ScanSpeak, SEAS, or SB Acoustics raw hardware, the rest of a fine final product brand is gravely suspect. Because. The commentariat hath spoken.

The fact a Wilson is built like a McLaren from top to bottom and from inside to out never factors. To parts-counters it's all spark plugs and tires.

Michael Fremer's picture

That some bozo listed as being in these speakers is 100% wrong. All that's correct is the manufacturer. All of these drivers are 100% proprietary. Just one example for you: the tweeter he claims is used in these speakers is similar only in that they are both domes and use a silk substrate. Otherwise the diameters are different, the motor structure, the flange, the frame, the voice coils are completely different. The same is true of the other drivers as well. Way different and proprietary: for instance the midrange that he so glibly identifies features Alnico magnets used in a proprietary configuration invented by Wilson's chief engineer. I could go on...but the haters will still hate while giving other manufacturers a free pass. For instance, Marten, Galder and others use ceramic drivers from Thiel and co (Accuton). Others source drivers from SEAS. These too are made to spec for the companies by manufacturers that specialize in these things. It's actually a very smart way to do business. For some reason, under their reviews you will not see the same level of bile as here. Why is that? I can answer that question but why bother?

emmany's picture

Hi Jim , Perhaps I did signup here 22 minutes and 39 seconds ago. I'm not here to blow my own horn , You can call up wilson audio and verify the facts of the drivers and then you will see if I'm stating facts or just bashing up a company's reputation . Lets just leave it at that . Cheers, Emmany

Michael Fremer's picture

And learn that everything you have posted about the drivers in these speakers is incorrect other than that Scanspeak manufactures them. The tweeter you see is not even the same size as the one you claim it is. The only similarity between the tweeter you cite and the one in the speaker is that the substrate is silk and the look similar. In fact the one in that speaker is a different size, has a different motor structure, flange, frame, voice coils etc. The tweeter in that speaker was designed by Wilson and built to their specs. The midrange in this speaker is not at all the one you claim it is though superficially it resembles that one. This one uses Alnico magnets in a proprietary configuration invented by Wilson's chief engineer over quite a long period of time. In fact it was originally being developed for the WAMMS but Dave Wilson passed away before it was finished so it debuts here. You might check with Morel about where Magico sources many of its drivers before you post B.S. about them "making them themselves". And while all of Wilson's cabinets are built in house in America, Magico sources its lower end speaker baffles in China. THERE'S NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT! What is wrong, is when a know it all posts misinformation. You could have done some research and probably gotten the facts, but it's easy for a coward hiding in the shadows to come here and post whatever he or she wishes because there are no consequences for you. There are though for those of us who work in this, because we have reputations and credibility to maintain. The same is true of companies. I doubt Wilson will respond to your nonsense and it's possible that my editor who is far more of a gentleman than am I (too much of one in my opinion) that he will object to me calling you a bozo, but that is in fact what you are.

JoeinNC's picture

Um, so unless he has had a Stereophile account for X-amount of time, he's not credible? Valid question as to his credentials, but I don't see how his account status makes or breaks him.

Michael Fremer's picture

Is factually incorrect (other than that Scanspeak builds Wilson's drivers)

tonykaz's picture

Geez, are you certain ? ?

These Scan-Speak Drivers aren't super pricy, probably $4,000 to $5,000 for two full sets.

For all that much money charged, they should at least be gorgeous, shouldn't they??? ( but then, Wilson Loudspeakers have always been sort of ugly )

Tony in Venice

ps. I was a Wilson Dealer in the 1980s

ps. I was understanding that Wilson was using Focal Drivers, when did they change suppliers ? ( not that I really care, one way or another )

ps. Isn't Wilson's magic in the Crossovers ? , not the drivers. Hmm.

emmany's picture

Wilson Audio always used drivers from 3rd part manufacturers like Scanspeak , Focal, Dynaudio etc .
They used the Focal inverted titanium dome for a long time, before they moved on to a soft dome .
The smaller wilsons, used Focal inverted titanium tweeters paired with scanspeak mid and bass drivers .
The larger towers used focal bass and high frequency drivers, the mids were either scanspeak or dynaudio drivers .
Even the Wilson's huge subwoofer from yesteryear, the Wilson XS had a pair of Aura NRT 18" drivers, which costs about $700 on madisound or other vendors today. a single XS costed around $20,000 , and about 20 years ago .If you wanted a crossover, that was an extra $4000.
Dont get me wrong 3rd party manufacturers like scanspeak , focal , morel , accuton , seas and others make top notch drivers at a reasonable cost but fitting these drivers to cabinets and charging customers the price of a house is nothing but a "marketing gimmick" . Cheers.

JHL's picture

Going on endlessly about components is bizarre (as is the odd punctuation and lousy grammar. Jeez, I write poorly but your stuff is illegible.)

You make no effort to comprehend what's actually in such a product, or the costs to build. And you engage in the same, aimless, envious crap as the local commentariat; as if only your lot have a functioning perspective on what matters and what things should cost.

You don't. You're wrong. And if you're that disinterested, just go away. You obviously don't know the subject.

emmany's picture

....and you ooze eloquence . If you don't understand the gist of a matter , perhaps you need to start from the rudiments.Seems like you know the subject thoroughly ...keep blowing that horn.

Michael Fremer's picture

Companies using third party manufacturers can either buy "off the shelf" or have speakers designed to their specifications. The latter is what Wilson does and that's what most companies do. Not that you would know since you are an armchair observer/know it all and nothing more.

Michael Fremer's picture

This is not the 1980s. These drivers are NOT off the shelf. You do realize that other speaker companies (MOST) source their drivers from speaker manufacturers and have them built to their specs. It's a good idea too. The drivers Wilson uses are sourced from Scanspeak but they are all built to their specifications just as Magico's (many not all) are sourced from Morel, just as Marten gets theirs from Thiel and co. All of these companies have them built to their specifications. Very few produce their own drivers though there are a few. And there's no guarantee that produces better results. Focal does manufacture their own drivers and Dave Wilson was friends with the founder of Focal and so got his sourced to his specs from Focal but over time Focal chose not to offer drivers to anyone. Of course you care not one way or another nor do you care about the accuracy of what you post here. You could care less. All you know is that you were a Wilson dealer FORTY YEARS AGO and so remain an expert. Geez are you certain? I am. I am certain you are not.

JRT's picture
emmany wrote:

"...components used in this speaker are Scan-Speak 32W/4878T11 Revelator Woofer + Scan-Speak 28W/4878T-01 Revelator Woofer + Scan-Speak 18M/4631T Revelator 7" Midrange + Scanspeak Illuminator 12MU/8731T-00, 4" Midrange + Scanspeak Revelator Tweeter . Just cant believe someone pays $330,000 for this marketing gimmick."

These are not kits, are not DIY efforts, are not high volume products competing on thin profit margins.

If you are going to take the time to learn the contents of the BOM, then I would suggest that you also take the time to look at BOM/MSRP ratios of different classes of very good performing loudspeakers from successful sources of manufacture.

Above the entry level and below the showpiece/statement/flagship examples you see BOM/MSRP ratios in 1/5 - 1/20 range, and among the showpiece/statement/flagship examples you will see ratios that go well beyond 1/20, sometimes beyond 1/100 when large prices are part of the wow-factor.

Value is highly subjective.

I watched some episodes of Jay Leno's garage on YouTube, and one guest had a large collection of rare and expensive Ferraris. He had made a lot of money selling expensive wristwatches to people who also likely carry a cellphone. The cellphones include GPS receivers. GPS works using a system of clocks of high accuracy and high precision. Your cellphone includes a clock corrected with data received from GPS. The expensive wristwatches are self-winding mechanical devices that do not approach the accuracy and precision provided by the clock in your cellphone. Yet some men are attracted into buying those redundant inferior expensive wristwatches, collected and worn as jewelry, displayed as objects of desire more than utility. I stopped regularly wearing wristwatches back in the 20th century, though for sentimental reasons I do possess an old gold Rolex Oyster that my now deceased Dad bought when serving in the US Army in West Germany circa 1952. It is not something that I am interested in wearing.

Value is highly subjective.

Michael Fremer's picture

These speakers are not "jewelry" nor are they "inferior". They are properly designed, engineered and manufactured as are other "hi-end" brands. But yes, value is highly subjective.

JRT's picture
Fremer wrote:

"These speakers are not "jewelry" nor are they "inferior". They are properly designed, engineered and manufactured as are other "hi-end" brands. But yes, value is highly subjective."

My point of the watches was to illustrate subjective value, not to denigrate these loudspeakers. Thank you for pointing out that so I could further explain.

That said, inferiority or superiority is relative to the competition.

I have never heard these Wilson loudspeakers, and have never head the big MBL 101 Xtreme Radialstrahler system, have never heard the big custom Egglestons in Bob Ludwig's mastering studio at Gateway in Portland Maine. Two of those three are inferior to the others in a given room, but I am rather confident that Ludwig's studio enjoys very well engineered acoustics, and likewise every aspect of the signal chain feeding his loudspeakers.

The acoustics of the listening space matters. In my backyard, free field (no boundary reflections), any of those might be superior to the others with listener sitting on the intersection of the design axii at 4 meters propagation distance. Since they are designed to work well in applications of small room acoustics, they might not sound so good in a backyard. In a large domestic room with reflective boundaries, I suspect the big MBL omnis have some advantage. But I am also confident that Ludwig's studio would be very difficult to beat. The big Wilson's, those probably sound very good in the right room, but might not win a competition against the MBLs in a room with strong latteral reflections.

Inferior relative to what?

Michael Fremer's picture

Room interaction and fitting the correct speaker to the correct room is key. It's one thing that makes reviewing speakers so dicey. I don't have a large room but bit Wilsons work work. When Sonus Faber brought the huge Aida 2s to my room their faces fell. How could this possibly work? But it did very well! This is a useful discussion. Making ignorant claims about what the drivers are in a speaker based on superficial looks is not useful.

Michael Fremer's picture

In that speaker are proprietary and fundamentally different though they look identical on the surface. The tweeter is a different size, has a different voice coil system, motor structure, frame, etc., Wilson has had the same chief engineer since the early 90s who develops the speakers with Dave and now Daryl Wilson. Yes, Scanspeak now builds them just as SEAS does for other companies and Morel does for others (including Magico for some of their drivers) just as Thiel and co does for Marten and Galder and others. VERY FEW companies manufacture their own drivers. Focal and of course MBL does but while your ratios and numbers are very interesting they have absolutely nothing to do with what's going on here.

Michael Fremer's picture

In fact, while the drivers used may look like what you describe, what's behind the cones are proprietary to Wilson and are designed and built to their specifications. Having a speaker building specialist like Scan-Speak build to spec makes sense for many manufacturers. That's why they are in business. Rockport has used Audio Technology drivers. Do you call those speakers "marketing gimmicks"? Wilson does build at their factory "everything else", and in fact just because a company builds its own drivers is no guaranty of good sound.All of these companies produce good sounding speakers systems. Of course the sound "speaks for itself". That's why Wilson is such a successful, long running company. Their speakers sound really good. Calling this a "marketing gimmick" is your problem, not Wilson's. You insult not just Wilson but all of the people worldwide who choose to own them. Success brings out the worst in some people. Your contempt speaks for itself.

emmany's picture

Thank you for making a 'character assessment' , FYI Rockport used the audio technology drivers in the past , NOT anymore .They used it until a point where their level of manufacturing tolerances were so stringent, that they started manufacturing drivers themselves. Rockport manufactures all drivers and Andy Payor fine tuned all the speakers personally . Rockport is not as big as Wilson as a 'company' but they are more respected with the Studio folks and the measurements speaks for itself . Speaking of companies like wilson still in business , its strictly because of the super rich folk who see how many zeros the price tag has . Now to the preamble of your hubris outcry . I only see 2 reasons for it . 1. You are on Wilson's payroll 2. Your arrogance is only surpassed by your ignorance . My calculated guess would be , both of the above.

supamark's picture

you're obviously someone who doesn't understand manufacturing. BOM != COGS. also, Wilson has their drivers specially made for them, you can't just call up Focal/Scan-Speak/whomever and buy those same drivers. The cabinet material is expensive both to make and to work with so add that in, plus the cost of R&D and tooling has to be recoup'd with a very small production run, along with the costs of advertising, the real estate on which they're being built, employee pay/benefits, etc. If you want to make a point, COGS is where it's made (and you don't have access to Wilson's cost of goods and services (COGS) so you're talking out your backside).

You're nothing but a troll and MF was calling you out (as he often does).

Lorton's picture

MF, are you working for Wilson Audio?
You seem to throw a fit whenever someone dares to criticize them.
It may be more difficult to remove posts here than on your blog (I hope).
Take it easy, you don't look so good when you lose it.

JoeinNC's picture

Iff memory serves, MF owns (or has owned) a pair of Wilson Alexxes. Spend six figures on a pair of speakers, and I guess you get defensive about your choices.

Michael Fremer's picture

I don't care if someone doesn't like the speakers I own. I only get defensive when people post lies. That troll posted a series of lies. That's all.

Michael Fremer's picture

I have not "lost it". I tend to get "exercised" when people POST LIES, or giving them the benefit of the doubt "misinformation". I guess you must think I'm on the payroll of "vinyl records" too since I throw a fit when people post nonsense about that too. I would not want a word of what I've posted here to be removed because everything I've posted is factual and true. I have no problem with people criticizing Wilson, not liking the sound or the look or whatever but when they troll here with lies and/or misinformation yes, I get pissed off and it's a look I really like.

Jason Victor Serinus's picture

This declaration is based upon myths and falsehoods that many posting here have not questioned. Just because someone posts a bunch of model numbers does not mean they know what they are talking about.

Scanspeak does manufacture many Wilson drivers, but they are all proprietary designs unique to Wilson. Vern Credille has designed Wilson's drivers, in collaboration with others at Wilson, for close to 30 years. The drivers differ in the different Wilson models, with different motor and magnet designs, among other elements. While the drivers bear a superficial resemblance to stock Scanspeak drivers, they are different. The Scanspeak Revelator tweeter has nothing in common with the Wilson Convergent Synergy tweeter other than the use of silk as the driver substrate. Even the diameters are different. Ditto for the new Wilson QuadraMag midrange - even the magnets are different from the Scanspeak model. Wilson also manufactures several elements of its drivers in-house.

Here's the next untruth. MBL and Bowers and Wilkins make their own drivers; the other companies do not. B&W sources its cabinets elsewhere, while Wilson makes its own. Magico sources all of its drivers from Morel, but they again are custom designs, not off-the-shelf Morel.

In addition, Wilson manufacturers its own caps, while Magico sources them and their crossovers from Mundorf. Does source of manufacture mean that any company's drivers, cabinets, or loudspeakers are superior to any others? Absolutely not. The entire premise of this post is wrong.

Next time someone posts something particular about any company's product, I urge people to contact the company directly and ask if what's been posted is true. That's just what I did.

Bogolu Haranath's picture

"Look beneath the surface .... So, you can judge correctly" ........ John 7:24 :-) ........

Bogolu Haranath's picture

"Appearances are often deceiving" ..... Aesop (6th century B.C) :-) ........

Ortofan's picture

... uncover the specifics of the various components they use, did he do so as Stereophile reviewer JVS or was it done anonymously?

Also, did he reach out to an inside contact (known only to those in the trade), or did he simply speak with someone in the customer service department?

My past attempts to garner any such information typically have been met with a response such as "that's confidential" or "that's proprietary."

Bogolu Haranath's picture

Sorry Ortofan, you are not an 'important person' like JVS ....... JVS, like they say, can get the 'inside scoop' :-) .......

Bogolu Haranath's picture

Revel makes their own speaker drivers ....... Even the top of the line Revel speakers, which were very favorably reviewed by Stereophile and many other audio magazines, don't cost as much as the Wilsons and other speaker brands mentioned above :-) .......

Bogolu Haranath's picture

Like JVS mentioned, B&W also makes their own speaker drivers ....... Even the top of the line B&W speakers, which were favorably reviewed by Stereophile and other audio magazines, don't cost as much as the Wilsons and some other speaker brands mentioned above :-) .........

Bogolu Haranath's picture

One more ...... KEF also makes their own speaker drivers ....... Even the top model KEF speakers, which were favorably reviewed by Stereophile and other audio magazines, don't cost as much as the Wilsons and some other brands mentioned above :-) .........

Michael Fremer's picture

What a "most expensive" comparison means. However a comparison of KEF's most expensive with whatever speaker Wilson sells at that price point would be a legitimate basis of comparison..

Bogolu Haranath's picture

May be you (MF) could do a follow-up review of the Revel Ultima Salon2 ($22,000/pair, Stereophile Class-A full range) ........ Several Stereophile reviewers praised the sound quality of Salon2 ....... After the follow-up review, may be you (MF) could tell us why anybody, with a normal size listening room, should spend 15 times (even if they can afford it) as much for the Wilson XVX :-) ........

Michael Fremer's picture

You are so even keeled! How can I get me some of that?

Bogolu Haranath's picture

Time for JVS and MF to update their Wilsons :-) .......

Bogolu Haranath's picture

They need to provide Eames Lounge Chair and Ottoman ($7,000) as the listening chair :-) .......

Bogolu Haranath's picture

Eames chair and ottoman would also be great for headphone listening (personal audio) :-) ......

JRT's picture

While I don't think your post was intended to have any serious element, it does bring up the fact that such choices in seating can affect what you perceive by placing your ears at suboptimal elevation above the floor (off of the design axis), and/or by placing reflective and semi-absorbtive geometries in close proximity to your ears with reflections interfering with direct sound, obstructions shading indirect late reflections, etc. (much like some sort of altered extension of your HRTF). For casual listening where relaxed comfort is as important as other aspect the suboptimal acoustic influence of the chair would not matter as much, but for comparing and evaluating something with focused listening (eg crossover filter development, evaluating baffle step compensation, etc.) I would suggest using an ergonomic desk chair such as a properly sized Herman Miller Aeron without a head rest, and set to suitable height.

Opinions and interests vary.

Bogolu Haranath's picture

*

Bogolu Haranath's picture
Bogolu Haranath's picture

*

Bogolu Haranath's picture

For those of us who don't do 'crossover filter development, evaluating baffle step compensation, etc.', the bottom picture looks more appealing :-) ........

Bogolu Haranath's picture

Of course, for serious listening (evaluating) to 'loudspeakers' we can't sit like the gentleman in the bottom picture ....... We can sit in a more relaxed position while listening to 'headphones' though :-) ........

Bogolu Haranath's picture

Another company to consider is 'Stressless' ......... They have different types of 'Stressless' furniture :-) .........

Bogolu Haranath's picture

Some of the home theater furniture manufacturers have armchairs and furniture with built-in cupholders :-) ........

Jason Victor Serinus's picture

Perfect for all the anonymous armchair critics who bash what they haven't heard.

Bogolu Haranath's picture

JA1 likes his armchair with a built-in 'cup holder' :-) ........

tonykaz's picture

Truth telling isn't bashing.

This is a marketing discussion and an observation about Marketplace behavior of well financed buyers and the folks that specialize in servicing exclusivity..

We in the USA have the most developed Caste System in the Free world.

Tony in Venice

JHL's picture

...it is about bashing.

Michael Fremer's picture

is bashing

Bogolu Haranath's picture

Next thing we know, JVS is gonna tell us to 'kneel' before and after, listening to the Wilson XVX :-) ......

Bogolu Haranath's picture

That gentleman in the bottom picture sitting and relaxing in that Eames chair is reading 'current events' :-) ......

X