Check out the Wilson ad in the June issue (the first one).

Wilson's ad "Extravagant" discussing their metal port:

"Some might conclude.. That Wilson's approach is extravagant"

Wes Phillip's regurgitation- I mean review- a few pages later, discussing the metal port:

"Many critics point to that as excessive, and suggest that the
speaker's price could be made lower if Wilson didn't spec such extravagance into his design"

I do like Wilson speakers, but do you think that they should just buy 3 pages rather than 2 and tell Stereophile to let them write the review?

I saw this too... but I thought nothing of it. So Wes likes the WP8 and Wilson has an ad in Stereophile, what else is new?

I like it too and, if anything, I am more biased than Stereophile. Bias aside, it is one great but expensive speaker. I am driving them with a pair of VTL Sigfrieds. Presently my wire of choice is the top of the line Kubala-Sosna Emotions.

I did a quick Merriam Webster Thesauras search for 'Extravagance':

Synonyms lavishness, prodigality, wastefulness
Related Words bountifulness, generosity, liberality; improvidence, squandering; indulgence, overindulgence, self-indulgence; excess, immoderacy, overkill

So which word would you have had either the ad or the reviewer use instead to convey the thought behind 'extravagance'? Is there one that would read better or be better ad copy?

So it might not be another example of editorial-bending-over-for-manufacturers. It actually might be two creative writers using the same word, for different but appropriate reasons. A coincidence, really.

Relax. There is not collusion behind everything commercial. Have a glass of wine, cue up a nice SACD and sit back and relax and enjoy your Wilsons. It is a rare treat.

Big deal... if you read the review, it was more of a middle of the road type of feel to it anyway. The review wasn't overly positive for the WP8.

I didn't think it could get any lower after they have Class A Recommended components which they describe as the Best of the Best and then they added Class A+.

people still read that rag?
It'll be extinct soon along with edison's cylinders, the grammophone, the megaphone and the quadraphone.

I like it too and, if anything, I am more biased than Stereophile. Bias aside, it is one great but expensive speaker. I am driving them with a pair of VTL Sigfrieds. Presently my wire of choice is the top of the line Kubala-Sosna Emotions.

Excellent and congrats. I am waiting for mine to be delivered and voiced in my listening room. I ordered them around three weeks ago, after pining for them since listening to the W/P7s almost a year and a half ago when demoing the Ayre C-5xe. I'll be driving them with Ayre MX-R monoblocks. For two channel listening I'll be using an Ayre C-5xe for discs and K-1xe preamp as well.

The W/P8s sounded phenomenal with the BAT equipment at HES2007 as well.

Music is about personal tastes and enjoyment, not reviews! A good review is merely icing on the cake if you want resale value later on down the road. ;)

QueueCumber,

You are in for a real treat! I recently replaced my WP7s with the 8s. I think they are much better sounding than the 7s.

QueueCumber,

You are in for a real treat! I recently replaced my WP7s with the 8s. I think they are much better sounding than the 7s.

Yeah, I've already heard the 8s a few times. I'm very excited. :)

I like it too and, if anything, I am more biased than Stereophile. Bias aside, it is one great but expensive speaker. I am driving them with a pair of VTL Sigfrieds. Presently my wire of choice is the top of the line Kubala-Sosna Emotions.

Hi Mark, I tried to PM you but received a message back that your space is at max and must be cleared. So, empty the box! :)

Can you PM me afterwards? Thanks.

I did a quick Merriam Webster Thesauras search for 'Extravagance':

Synonyms lavishness, prodigality, wastefulness
Related Words bountifulness, generosity, liberality; improvidence, squandering; indulgence, overindulgence, self-indulgence; excess, immoderacy, overkill

So which word would you have had either the ad or the reviewer use instead to convey the thought behind 'extravagance'? Is there one that would read better or be better ad copy?

So it might not be another example of editorial-bending-over-for-manufacturers. It actually might be two creative writers using the same word, for different but appropriate reasons. A coincidence, really.

Relax. There is not collusion behind everything commercial. Have a glass of wine, cue up a nice SACD and sit back and relax and enjoy your Wilsons. It is a rare treat.

Although I do try to be kind on the forum, I can't resist:
I suggest you also look up "gullible". ;)
But I will try the wine.

Although I do try to be kind on the forum, I can't resist:
I suggest you also look up "gullible". ;)
But I will try the wine.

So, which one of you is "gullible," since you too are subscribing to a popular, though diametrically opposed, opinion concerning high-end audio journalism magazines? That is the quandary.... :rolleyes:

If you are saying that it is popular, accepted opinion that audio journalists
are lazy and tend to repeat manufacturer propaganda (like I believe Wes Phillips did), then I'm happy and you can call me gullible.

The thing is, I presented evidence for my position. SWC believes that
WP describing a specific part of the speaker, the metal port, using the same
adjective (that is hardly a common term in a review) that was used in their advertisement (from Stereophile's largest advertiser) in the same issue is coincidence. I simply find that ludicrous.

If you are saying that it is popular, accepted opinion that audio journalists are lazy and tend to repeat manufacturer propaganda... SWC believes [it] is coincidence.
The more cynical among us may argue it is neither of the two.

If you are saying that it is popular, accepted opinion that audio journalists
are lazy and tend to repeat manufacturer propaganda (like I believe Wes Phillips did), then I'm happy and you can call me gullible.

That isn't what I am saying.

The more cynical among us may argue it is neither of the two.

That is sort of what I was saying, though in a more facetious manner.

It is "gullible" to prescribe to either point of view without actually knowing if either one is true. No one here knows if either is true or not, so assuming either argument is, or isn't true, is really just a colossal waste of time and energy. Nothing said in this thread, or ever said so far online about this topic, constitutes any burden of proof that there is deception going on, and nothing said constitutes proof that there definitely isn't some kind of conspiracy either. So why take either side? Taking either side is "gullible." Either read the magazine because you like the articles or don't because they bother you. :rolleyes:

Nonsense.

First, where did you come up with deception and conspiracy? I was merely
taking them to task for regurgitation, another form of laziness.

My desire to demand minimal journalistic standards from a review is hardly
an undue request.

Was I in the room at the time WP was being spoon fed the manufacturers propaganda? Nope. The question is, which is by far and away the most likely explanation for what was written?

"The secret to creativity is knowing how to hide your sources." --Albert Einstein

Nonsense.

First, where did you come up with deception and conspiracy? I was merely
taking them to task for regurgitation, another form of laziness.

My desire to demand minimal journalistic standards from a review is hardly
an undue request.

Was I in the room at the time WP was being spoon fed the manufacturers propaganda? Nope. The question is, which is by far and away the most likely explanation for what was written?

"The secret to creativity is knowing how to hide your sources." --Albert Einstein

Show me some real proof that they are being paid off and I will believe it (Your "soon feeding" speculations don't pass any burden of proof). Show me some real proof that they aren't being paid off and I will believe it.

One thing is for certain... You read their review, so Stereophile has been successful in your case. Even if reading it just pissed you off, you are another positive statistic for them. Perhaps you should consider not reading audio component reviews, or audio review magazines if it poisons your attitude towards other people this much. That would be the greatest statement you could make against their magazine. ;)

You seem like you might have a cantankerous nature. That is fine, but I'm not looking to argue, it is a waste of my time, especially on an unprovable topic such as this one. I'm just trying to point out the reasonable and logical way of seeing this situation, but you seem intent on ranting, so good luck with your endeavor. :D

I did a quick Merriam Webster Thesauras search for 'Extravagance':

Synonyms lavishness, prodigality, wastefulness
Related Words bountifulness, generosity, liberality; improvidence, squandering; indulgence, overindulgence, self-indulgence; excess, immoderacy, overkill

So which word would you have had either the ad or the reviewer use instead to convey the thought behind 'extravagance'? Is there one that would read better or be better ad copy?

So it might not be another example of editorial-bending-over-for-manufacturers. It actually might be two creative writers using the same word, for different but appropriate reasons. A coincidence, really.

Relax. There is not collusion behind everything commercial. Have a glass of wine, cue up a nice SACD and sit back and relax and enjoy your Wilsons. It is a rare treat.

Although I do try to be kind on the forum, I can't resist:
I suggest you also look up "gullible". ;)
But I will try the wine.

Your quote above was made as a response to the quote preceding it. Your response might not mention "deception" or "conspiracy" directly, but it strongly suggests that is what you are really trying to say. If it pleases you though, change your mind. Do us all a favor. :rolleyes:

Here you make a statement that they are writing an ad, not a review.

I do like Wilson speakers, but do you think that they should just buy 3 pages rather than 2 and tell Stereophile to let them write the review?

Here again you suggest that the ad was propaganda.

Was I in the room at the time WP was being spoon fed the manufacturers propaganda? Nope. The question is, which is by far and away the most likely explanation for what was written?

Stereophile has unequivocally taken the stance that they do not let advertising influence their reviews at all. Wouldn't that make your statements and responses a claim of deception on their part?

Wouldn't their claims about impartiality (if they aren't really impartial) not only be stealthy, but harmful to the unsuspecting readers, who would be unknowingly manipulated by what they believe is a third party that they can trust, as well? Wouldn't that be conspiracy?

Anyway, nice Einstein quote by and by... Though perhaps you should consider one of his popular aphorisms instead: "Imagination is more important than knowledge."

How many reviews can you find in Stereophile in which the manufacturer of the product under review does not have some sort of advertising arrangement? This of course does not make the argument that reviews are biased, but it does suggest at least that you may have to pay to play.

You post 3 times in a row and I'm "pissed, ranting, and cantankerous"?

Glad you are not "looking to argue", as I would feel bad if you got personal
because you couldn't make a rational argument.

You post 3 times in a row and I'm "pissed, ranting, and cantankerous"?

You said it not me... The only thing I said you were doing, was ranting. The other two I said, you "seem" to be, and "seem" to have in your nature. No need to get all hot and bothered about it, it is just a forum post (or two, or three, etc).

Glad you are not "looking to argue", as I would feel bad if you got personal
because you couldn't make a rational argument.

I wasn't "looking to argue," but I didn't say I wouldn't. You made it too enticing. What can I say, I enjoy easy conquests. :D

I believe in terms of logical fallacies, they call the one you just made, "appeal to people ad hominem" (attacking the person not the argument). Thank you for playing. LOL :D

I like it too and, if anything, I am more biased than Stereophile. Bias aside, it is one great but expensive speaker. I am driving them with a pair of VTL Sigfrieds. Presently my wire of choice is the top of the line Kubala-Sosna Emotions.

I bet your stereo audio cables are more expensive that your top of the line 9" CRT as modded by Mike Parker!!!! If I listened to you and spent buckos upgrading from my "lowly" Dwin 7" CRT to a 9" like your, you still wouldn't stop ribbin' me - you'd be after me to do the Sigfrieds next. It would never stop.

I did notice grellberg did not attempt to answer the questions I proposed. Instead, he calls me gullible for (presumably) blindly believing in the separation of editorial and advertising, as another poster has correctly quoted to be Stereophile's position.

So be it. If taking people at their word means I'm gullible, I'm OK with that.

I find life is easier and less stressful when I simply believe people about subjects that really don't matter. It doesn't change my life if they are right or wrong, and this way, I get to keep charge of my stress level.


BTW, the wine I recommend is Solece by Brian Carter Cellars. www.briancartercellars.com

Gosh, do I feel stupid.

Here I was, trying desperately to fathom why a fellow AVS member would
object so strenuously, so vehemently, and with such disdain. I thought my position was clear, fairly simple in fact. Res ipsa loquitur. Certainly anyone on this forum might read what I wrote and confirm my observation with a few moments looking at the issue in question. Heck, disagree if you want, but what fueled the continuous desperate attempts at one-upmanship and the smart-alecky comments? The juvenile attempts to qualify personal attacks by prefacing them with "you seem to"? Weren't we all in this together? Isn't the goal to have fun?
AJ and Rodney are right; can't we all just get along?

Do us all a favor.
Thank you for playing. LOL
You made it too enticing.
What can I say, I enjoy easy conquests

My heart was heavy. Why was I so quick to think SWC petty and childish?
I racked my brain-SWC appeared to own some gear that WP also liked.
But I could easily rule out him defending his kindred Ayre lover, no one would be that silly as to blindly defend the honor of a writer just because they both found
a certain brand of electronics pleasing. So further I explored.

Then it hit me. There I was on the $20K forum jousting with a person who has never owned any gear in that price range. How could I properly express myself?
How could I share with this person my personal demand for intellectual honesty in a review of gear in this price range, without that person ever having shared in that experience? Can two individuals really communicate, when one is merely a vicarious bystander? And can one really fault that bystander for the appearance of being a pseudointellectual? Yeah, I reject temptation and shout out a resounding NO!

Unfortunately I lack the skills necessary to help SWC understand. I am no teacher. For this I am truly sorry, and will burden you, my faithful readers, no longer.

remember please: challenge the information in the post: not the poster

Can anyone who actually read Wes Phillips' review in its entirety accuse him of being lazy and pandering to advertising copy!?? If anything, the review is incisive in its neutral to negative view on the WP8s with faint praises all over. He basically all but said he prefered the Dynaudio's at a fraction of the WP8's price.

My opinion is on the review, not on the actual speaker as I've never heard a pair of WP8.

[QUOTE=grellberg]If you are saying that it is popular, accepted opinion that audio journalists
are lazy and tend to repeat manufacturer propaganda (like I believe Wes Phillips did), then I'm happy and you can call me gullible...
[QUOTE]

I am going to call you silly. Look, a lot of people don't like Wilsons -moi included.

..
My desire to demand minimal journalistic standards from a review is hardly
an undue request..

Yeah right! Your journalistic standards are people posting their happy threads on this forum after buying a Wilson or any other piece of equipment and you call that the future and Stereophile obsolete. You are clueless.

He basically all but said he prefered the Dynaudio's at a fraction of the WP8's price.

I didn't perceive him to be saying that. He seemed very precise in comparing the two, but I never saw him saying one was better than the other, or that he preferred one to the other completely. He pointed out different areas where one did certain things differently, and did say he preferred how one speaker handled that area. How much of that would change if that null were dealt with in his room? I don't know.

A lot of people seem to think the review was luke warm or cold for the W/P8. I don't feel that way at all after reading it four or five times now. The more I read it, the more it seems like a really great review of the speaker. He seems fair in trying to describe any faults in the speaker. The major one happens to be because of a corrseponding null created by his room's modes. No speaker is perfect and no room is perfect. A good review should tell it like it is. The mixture between WP's subjective review and JA's measurements paints an excellent picture of this speaker IMO.

Ultimately, a subjective opinion, is a subjective opinion. You might not prefer what Wes prefers. What you buy should be determined by your own demos and tests, not on a review. You might find you don't prefer the same things Wes does.

Then it hit me. There I was on the $20K forum jousting with a person who has never owned any gear in that price range. How could I properly express myself?
How could I share with this person my personal demand for intellectual honesty in a review of gear in this price range, without that person ever having shared in that experience? Can two individuals really communicate, when one is merely a vicarious bystander? And can one really fault that bystander for the appearance of being a pseudointellectual? Yeah, I reject temptation and shout out a resounding NO!

Grellberg

welcome to the sad reality of many of the great debates that wage hot and heavy here on the Ultra High End $20K Forum.

To those posting here I can attest to grellberg's credentials and his vast lnowledge in the Mega high end forum.He and I are both friends and neighbors and members of the same audio club. His editorials are wise inasmuch as he used to own a very read stereo magazine. He and I are friends and I can say to all that he is none of the adjectives that many of you are stating. How easy it is to say things hidden behind a computer screen. Grellberg has owned more equipment in this super high end than most could ever imagine. His system is second to none and so when he makes comments IMO it is worth considering (and I own Wilson speakers and have for years). I am not sure if he will offer up what magazine was his but notwithstanding I can say that he knows about ethical journalism. Just my $0.02

We few, we happy few, we band of brothers

How easy it is to say things hidden behind a computer screen.

If you are referring to me... A simple domain search of my website (in my profile) can reveal my personal information. I'm not hiding anything. ;)

If you write something nonsensical, all the background and credentials in the world won't make it sensible. What you own, what you've owned, what you do, what you have done, etc, etc, doesn't mean much if you are saying something illogical (that is called the appeal to authority fallacy). That anyone feels the need to bring that kind of prejudice up, to me is further proof that they are taking a stance they can't defend and have lost the argument. Attacking the person that they are arguing with, in this case, in terms of what equipment they own, is a puerile way of trying to win an argument that has already been lost (fallacy of appeal to people ad hominem). It doesn't even have anything to do with the actual argument (red herring fallacy). Discrediting their argument based on what they own, is referred to as a straw man fallacy. Put all of these things together and you have one very long irrational argument filled with fallacies. It makes that side of the argument look desperate. :)

Everyone makes mistakes. Being able to admit when you make a mistake... That is honorable. I don't hold things against people online, generally. There are a few people who have consistantly delivered misinformation, and/or insults, those people I do avoid and consider misleading sources. :(

BTW, I own some things that cost more than $20K+ that are part of the HT. I've listened to a lot more things worth $20K+ than I will ever own, and not because I can't afford them, since I can. Does it matter? No... :D

OY Vay, you guys are getting sillier by the post.

Remember what they say about arguing on the internet!

OY Vay, you guys are getting sillier by the post.

Remember what they say about arguing on the internet!

Alright, alright! No need to kvetch about it. :)

These Cali Hi-Fi enthusiasts are like the Hell's Angels of audio! I think they are circling the volkswagons as I type. J/K

Are you refering to Fi magazine? That magazine owns everything to the great and well written reviews of Jonathan Valin and a few others (Dick Olsher but not Robert Harley, not Larry Alan Kay). That magazine was doing OK and should still be in business but the owners were fighting and one decided to shut it down. I don't know if it is Jerry Gladstein or Larry Alan Kay who is deaf in one ear, like most people who like Wilson, and liked Wilson very much so:D , as a matter of fact. Jerry liked tubes and a vinyls. I don't recall a Grellberg reviewing any piece of audio equipment in Fi. He is not an audio journalist. He he ever edited a small thing he is just jalous of Stereophile.

I don't know if it is Jerry Gladstein or Larry Alan Kay who is deaf in one ear, like most people who like Wilson, and liked Wilson very much so:D , as a matter of fact.

Ouch! Just because you don't like them, doesn't mean other people are deaf in one ear for preferring their sound. :eek:

I think they must be :D That is my point.

These Cali Hi-Fi enthusiasts are like the Hell's Angels of audio! I think they are circling the volkswagons as I type. J/K

Hmm, maybe a "Flaming Woofer" logo for BADAS. Grellberg finally posts an opnion and gets trolled to death.

this thread is a new low for the AVS over $20k forum