search

Wilson Audio Specialties MAXX loudspeaker Measurements

Sidebar 3: Measurements

Taking account of the system height and the mike position, the MAXX's sensitivity was close to specification: nominally 91dB in the aurally most sensitive range, perhaps 92dB in the mid and lower mid. This sensitivity is well above average, and is comparable with the WATT 5's.

For powerful, current-capable amplifiers, this speaker's high power handling of around 500W peak program means that seriously loud in-room sound levels of 112dB are possible—even a few dB more, if the MAXX is partnered with a still more powerful amp (and discretion is used). Some…

 

Wilson Audio Specialties MAXX loudspeaker Measurements part 2

Fig.5 Wilson MAXX, individual nearfield responses of (from left to right): port and woofers. The respective levels are plotted in the ratio of the square roots of the radiating areas.

With respect to the way in which the speaker's response changes with listening height, the midband region changes quickly off-axis, due to the significant vertical separation between the pair of midrange drivers. Even so, any change was minimal over a ±7.5 degrees window, the worst-case difference being 6dB from 700Hz to 2kHz. The wisdom of the slight mid lift seen on-axis is apparent. For the…

 

Wilson Audio Specialties MAXX loudspeaker Measurements part 3

I donned earplugs and moved to a louder, 100dB continuous level. From 30Hz to 100Hz the distortion average was still -50dB. Excellent! In the upper range, third harmonic remained tidy, averaging -56dB. While second harmonic was a little greater, it was very fair at, typically, -43dB, or almost 0.7%.

Leaving the upper range safe from overload, I drove the bass system to the practical power limit. At 106dB it still averaged 1% of second harmonic and 0.3% of third, both down to 30Hz. At 25Hz I got -32dB (2.4%) of second harmonic and -26dB of third (5%)—only just audible at this low…

 

Philips/Magnavox FD-1000 CD player

What, a high-fidelity product from Magnavox? The company that 20 years ago had a reputation for building massive, polished-console boom-boxes and was scornfully referred to in audiophile circles as "Maggotbox"? Some important things have happened to Magnavox since those days. Mainly, it became a subsidiary of the Dutch Philips company, co-developer of the laser video disc and now the audio Compact Disc. The Magnavox CD players are actually made by Philips for US distribution by Magnavox.

This is the smallest and by all accounts the cutest-looking CD player yet. It has a high degree of…

 

Philips/Magnavox FD-1000 CD player Specifications

Sidebar: Specifications

Description: Single-box CD player with 4x oversampling digital filter and dual 14-bit DACs.
Dimensions: 12½" W by 10½" D by 3" H; 7" H with cover open.
Price: $599 (1984); no longer available (2005).
Manufacturer: Magnavox, North American Philips Consumer Electronics Corp., Knoxville, TN (1984). Philips Electronics, 64 Perimeter Center East, Atlanta GA 30346-6401. Tel: (800) 242-9225, (770) 821-2715. Fax: (770) 821-3126, (2005). Web: www.philipsusa.com.

 

<I>Stereophile</I>'s Writers on an Audio Quest

One Saturday afternoon in August 1990, a number of Stereophile's writers—John Atkinson, Arnis Balgalvis, Robert Deutsch, Larry Greenhill, Robert Harley, J. Gordon Holt, Richard Lehnert, Guy Lemcoe, Lewis Lipnick, Peter Mitchell, Tom Norton, Dick Olsher, Don Scott, and Bill Sommerwerck—gathered together in the magazine's Santa Fe, NM listening room to discuss the "Recommended Components" listing that was due to appear in the October 1990 issue. To add a little Tabasco to the proceedings, JA had invited AudioQuest's main man Bill Low (above) to give a short talk on whatever subject was…

 

<I>Stereophile</I>'s Writers on an Audio Quest Page 2

I give John such a hard time because I love the magazine. If I didn't care, if I was a total cynic, then I'd have nothing to criticize...I do have some very strong feelings about gross incompetence and irresponsibility and the role the reviewer has in being more responsible to his audience, meaning both the manufacturing and consumer community. The amateurishness of the reviewing community has gotten a lot less than it used to be. It doesn't mean that it's all the way there or that reviewers should relax and say, "Well, we're so perfect we don't need to struggle."

The overview that came…

 

<I>Stereophile</I>'s Writers on an Audio Quest Page 3

No cable is that good, no amplifier is perfect, no speaker is perfect. So while there is an absolute reference, nothing ever will be perfect, and in comes the subjectivity in choosing what compromises are more acceptable. But it still doesn't mean that it's totally subjective. To me the speakers that allow me the easiest time to forget the system, which to me is the purpose of a good hi-fi—to see past it and simply enjoy the music—point-source speakers do that the best for me. Planar speakers do it better for others. Most of you probably have an inclination one way or the other, yet as…

 

<I>Stereophile</I>'s Writers on an Audio Quest Page 4

Holt: Huh?

Sommerwerck: If you listen to one speaker which is low impedance and you listen to another speaker which is high impedance, and they sound different with a speaker cable, you tell the readers that. That's a fact. But you don't draw the conclusion that it necessarily sounds different with different speaker impedances because you don't have enough of a database to draw that conclusion.

Olsher: You mean that I cannot offer any conjecture? What's wrong with conjecture?

Sommerwerck: Because you don't want to be making generalities that you don't have evidence for…

 

<I>Stereophile</I>'s Writers on an Audio Quest Page 5

Sommerwerck: Let me just say something on this business: anecdotal listening is unscientific. There's no question about it. [hubbub]

Olsher: I disagree with that.

Sommerwerck: Now, bear with me a moment...

Atkinson: No, you can't get away with saying that...

Olsher: Bill, you can't say that...

Thomas J. Norton: Not here...

Sommerwerck: The point is that you want it both ways, because you said just a few minutes ago it wasn't science. Look, the point that I'm getting at is that every time I sit down to listen, I am aware that I know what component I…

 

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement