AVS Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 20 of 515 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
11,550 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Here are some review excerpts, a link to the full review,and the Frequency response graph of the $45,000 Wilson Audio MAXX2.


For those who wonder if one can make a qualitative analysis of a loudspeaker from the FR graph, this is must reading :


The excerpts :

Quote:
found the MAXX2's overall timbral balance to be nearly ideal in my well-treated but not entirely dead room—though if I had to pick a nit, I'd say the speaker was slightly warm. Not because there was too much bass or midbass—from the mids down, the MAXX2 was as perfectly balanced a loudspeaker as I've heard in this space—but because the top octaves were not quite as airy and well resolved as I've heard from some other speakers: the Mårten Design Coltrane, which uses a Thiel and Partner (Accuton in the US) inverted-dome diamond tweeter; and the Aerial 20T, which uses a modified Raven Ribbon
Quote:
In my space, the Wilson MAXX2 was easily the best overall loudspeaker I have ever heard, though others may have bested it in specific performance parameters.
Quote:
Slightly more than twice as expensive as the WATT/Puppy 7, the review pair of which I ended up buying, Wilson Audio's MAXX2 is easily worth the difference, and more. If you've got the money—and even if you don't think your space can accommodate a pair of them—don't hesitate. But first, go listen for yourself. I have every confidence you'll agree that, even if it's not the speaker for you, with the MAXX2 Wilson Audio Specialties has hit one out of the park
The link - http://stereophile.com/loudspeakerre...son/index.html


The Specs -
Quote:
Description: Three-way, floorstanding loudspeaker. Drive-units: 1" inverted titanium-dome tweeter, two 7" carbon-fiber/paper-cone midranges, 10.5" carbon-fiber/paper-cone woofer, 13" carbon-fiber/paper-cone woofer. Crossover frequencies: not disclosed. Sensitivity: 92dB/2.83V/m. Impedance: 8 ohms nominal, 3 ohms minimum. Minimum amplifier power: 7Wpc. Frequency response (including port contribution): 20Hz–21kHz, +0/–3dB.
Finally - The response graph :

http://stereophile.com/images/archiv...lmaxx2fig3.jpg


Yes, It measures +7/-10dB over the 20Hz to 21KHz operating range, but WHAT a well written review on a great product.


I am looking forward to Audiogon having them for $20,000 next year. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
90 Posts
Those are some notable measurements.


It will be interesting to see if the same people that trash other speakers for having less than ruler flat frequency responses will heave scorn at these speakers as well.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
41 Posts
The Proac Response 2.5 is a text book example of how a speaker should measure in order to sound musical. A perfectly flat measurement will typically sound rather awful.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,423 Posts
I've heard the Watt Puppy 6, and let's just say that while impressive in some respects, I believe the similarly priced Revel Salons did a better job of conveying accuracy.


There's some guys on the 20,000 forum who swear Wilson is the best thing ever. There is no question that they do some things very well. I wouldn't say a flat freq response has ever been considered its strong suit, however.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,074 Posts
fr graph is only 2 dimensional on macroacoustics


there are microacoustics, transient response, phase shift etc do not depict in fr measurements
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
11,550 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by cpu8088
fr graph is only 2 dimensional on macroacoustics


there are microacoustics, transient response, phase shift etc do not depict in fr measurements
Agreed. Unfortunately, there has been a trend lately to grade speakers from a graph of the FR only. One of the WORST speakers I ever heard was the Energy C-9. Its graph is quite flat across its frequency range, but music was so totally flat and lifeless that I found them to be unlistenable.


The same store had Totem Hawks, which sounded wonderful. I even got the store owner angry when I asked if the Energies were wired out of phase.


Back to the review - The MAXX2's seem to be a great speaker. I hope to see some of those lower prices in the near future like other Wilsons have had in the past.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
30,760 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by craigsub
Yes, It measures +7/-10dB over the 20Hz to 21KHz operating range, but WHAT a well written review on a great product.
Take note that these measurements were made in Fremer's room and not under Stereophile's usual conditions.


Kal
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
11,550 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kal Rubinson
Take note that these measurements were made in Fremer's room and not under Stereophile's usual conditions.


Kal
At 410 pound each, I wonder why ... ;)


This review is the first of a "super-speaker" that made me want to get a pair. Fremer seemed to be having FUN listening to them. Great stuff.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,423 Posts
Actually all it tells you is that's the fr of the combo of speaker and room. Surely from your experimenting with TrueRTA and all that you've seen the effects of the room (although from some of the graph's you've posted it seems that the room you've done you're measuring in is pretty darn free of issues; no weird cancellations or high peaks in the bass, etc; that room is not the norm, however; which is why everyone usually tries to measure either anechoically or quasi-anachoic (Stereophile's normal method of splicing a close-mic'd curve of low freq to the upper freq curve). Kal, I haven't read the article yet, and maybe it explains it, but why weren't these measured using the usual technique?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,653 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by craigsub
At 410 pound each, I wonder why ... ;)


Seriously, The fact they were measured in the listening room is even BETTER. This gives more of a snap shot of what Mr. Fremer was hearing.


This review is the first of a "super-speaker" that made me want to get a pair. Fremer seemed to be having FUN listening to them. Great stuff.
OMG!!! How in the H*** could someone ACTUALLY just "enjoy" listening to those speakers?!? :eek:


LOOK.... just LOOK at the FR of those things! I mean that reviewer either "didn't know what to listen for" or his IQ is under 163 (or was it 165? ;) )!


:p
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
11,550 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Enigma
Actually all it tells you is that's the fr of the combo of speaker and room. Surely from your experimenting with TrueRTA and all that you've seen the effects of the room (although from some of the graph's you've posted it seems that the room you've done you're measuring in is pretty darn free of issues; no weird cancellations or high peaks in the bass, etc; that room is not the norm, however; which is why everyone usually tries to measure either anechoically or quasi-anachoic (Stereophile's normal method of splicing a close-mic'd curve of low freq to the upper freq curve). Kal, I haven't read the article yet, and maybe it explains it, but why weren't these measured using the usual technique?
Hal - The combo of the speaker FR and "room response" IS what we hear. That is why I like to see both (Quasi)anechoic and in room response curves.


And our room is not a "special" room - it took several years of living here before finding the "subwoofer sweet spot" from which the graphs were posted... :)


Here is the nearfield graph on the MAXX2:

http://stereophile.com/images/archiv...lmaxx2fig2.jpg
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
11,550 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kal Rubinson
Take note that these measurements were made in Fremer's room and not under Stereophile's usual conditions.


Kal
Details of the graph from the review as posted in the opening of this thread :

Quote:
Fig.3 Wilson Audio Specialties MAXX2, anechoic response on axis 36" from the floor, corrected for microphone response, with the complex sum of the nearfield midrange, woofer, and port responses, taking into account acoustic phase and distance from the nominal farfield point, plotted below 300Hz.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,423 Posts
Hmm, well that does sound like the usual method. Kal?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,091 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nate Sr.
The Proac Response 2.5 is a text book example of how a speaker should measure in order to sound musical. A perfectly flat measurement will typically sound rather awful.
Actually, that's not true at all. A perfectly flat speaker with good dispersion and low distortion and low energy storage will sound just fantastic. Most FR colorations in most speakers are there to hide the rather awful things they do in other areas. There's nothing wrong with accuracy. It's the other stuff that annoys people, not accuracy. There's no such thing as "too accurate" or "too detailed" and certainly not "too revealing". That's simply a misinterpretation of what you're hearing.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
11,550 Posts
Discussion Starter · #15 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Enigma
Hmm, well that does sound like the usual method. Kal?
Hal - It looks like the nearfield measurements were taken in Mr. Fremer's room, of course, with the intent of "eliminating" room effect. Dismantling the MAXX2 and sending them to the measuring facilitiy would be .... daunting.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,091 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by buddyhinton
It will be interesting to see if the same people that trash other speakers for having less than ruler flat frequency responses will heave scorn at these speakers as well.
I'm sure they sound better than they measure, but that's not saying much :)


Actually, in their defense, the bass peak could be because they couldn't gate out the bass reflections from the floor since the woofers are so close (one might think Wilson would think of that though and tune accordingly) and/or the fact that these speakers are probably tuned for a bigger room than most audio reviewers own. The midrange funkyness very probably has a lot to do with the fact that the microphone should have been at ~48", not 36" which will cause lobing effects which would show up as a pretty serious peak/dip combo. No shortage of bad measurements out there.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
8,123 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alimentall
I'm sure they sound better than they measure, but that's not saying much :)


Actually, in their defense, the bass peak could be because they couldn't gate out the bass reflections from the floor since the woofers are so close (one might think Wilson would think of that though and tune accordingly) and/or the fact that these speakers are probably tuned for a bigger room than most audio reviewers own. The midrange funkyness very probably has a lot to do with the fact that the microphone should have been at ~48", not 36" which will cause lobing effects which would show up as a pretty serious peak/dip combo. No shortage of bad measurements out there.
Joel


You never cease to amaze me how you continue to trash a simply amazing speaker :(
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
11,550 Posts
Discussion Starter · #20 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alimentall
I'm sure they sound better than they measure, but that's not saying much :)


Actually, in their defense, the bass peak could be because they couldn't gate out the bass reflections from the floor since the woofers are so close (one might think Wilson would think of that though and tune accordingly) and/or the fact that these speakers are probably tuned for a bigger room than most audio reviewers own. The midrange funkyness very probably has a lot to do with the fact that the microphone should have been at ~48", not 36" which will cause lobing effects which would show up as a pretty serious peak/dip combo. No shortage of bad measurements out there.


Here is another graph - and the parameters:

http://stereophile.com/images/archiv...lmaxx2fig4.jpg

Quote:
The exact listening axis is very critical with the MAXX32, which is why the speaker array needs to be aimed so carefully at the listener's ears. Fig.4, for example, shows the speaker's response averaged across a 30º horizontal window on the lower-midrange axis, which is 46" from the floor. I chose this axis because it is where the upper-frequency drive-units seem to integrate best (see the step response). However, a large, narrow peak develops between 1.6kHz and 2.1kHz.
 
1 - 20 of 515 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top