And off they go... :shake:
the objective measurements are not great. They don't suck, but they are easily improved upon...
| (http://www.soundstagenetwork.com/measurements/speakers/wilson_wattpuppy8/thd_90db.gif) |
Top curve: frequency response @ 90dB SPL |
Bottom curve: THD+N @ 90dB (50Hz - 10kHz) |
the objective measurements are not great. They don't suck, but they are easily improved upon...
Really? The distortion measurement looks quite clean. What makes you think the HT3 would perform as well under the same conditions? Maybe you have measured the distortion of the HT3? I have never seen a published measurement, so I cannot speculate.
(http://www.soundstagenetwork.com/measurements/speakers/wilson_wattpuppy8/thd_90db.gif)
It takes zero design talent to buy a woofer and a tweeter.
It takes zero design talent to buy a woofer and a tweeter.
Dare I speculate that it takes even less talent to criticize a highly-respected design from a well-regarded loudspeaker manufacturer. This coming from a competing loudspeaker manufacturer. :thumbdown:
here is a FR chart of the HT1 (basically the top half of an HT3) taken from the Salk site (again fwiw)
I should also make it known that I have no bias towards or against Wilson speakers and have never owned a set.
What I do take exception to is having an award winning product bashed by someone in the industry based on 3rd party measurements and hearsay. If he had actually taken the measurements himself and also measured the HT3's under the same conditions and then offered commentary about how they compared objectively, perhaps I would feel differently.
It is what it is. I think a lot of us know what we could do with the ridiculous sums that are laid down for Wilson's stuff and feel some resentment about seeing it squandered.
I feel envy at his business acumen. :lol:
I feel envy at his business acumen. :lol:
And Bose as well.
Steve
I DO agree that there should be an impartial circle to post questions like this in.
Out of respect to Jim Salk and Dave Wilson, I will keep my opinions on this subject muted. I will say this however, the original poster is going to have a difficult time unearthing someone who has actually owned both speakers under question, let alone finding someone who was/is able to accommodate both products in a way that will allow them to sing to their full potential. So far, nearly all of the feedback in this thread is, surprise, surprise, chalk full of bias.
I'm also going to go out on a limb to guess that the original poster is proposing this question because they are narrowing down their search to either a used set of Wilson Watt Pup's, or a brand new pair of Salk HT3's. It's the only way that I can see any logic behind the question. At that point, the value proposition of each product becomes quite linear - thus making for a more interesting comparison.
:D isn't the WP 27,000.00 bucks new ???? :D different ball game here..... :DPat....
:D isn't the WP 27,000.00 bucks new ???? :D different ball game here..... :DPat....
A used pair of Wilson W/P's run in the $14,000. to $15,000.00 range....
Right..... :wink::D isn't the WP 27,000.00 bucks new ???? :D different ball game here..... :DPat....
A used pair of Wilson W/P's run in the $14,000. to $15,000.00 range....
Still more than 2X price of new HT3's and 3X price of used HT3's.
Steve
WhooooooYour right Lyndon.... :lol:
That price is scarier than your avatar, Wolfy! :o
Lyndon
Anyone compared the HT4/Soundscape 12 with Wilson Alexandria X-2? ;)
Steve
Anyone compared the HT4/Soundscape 12 with Wilson Alexandria X-2? ;)
Steve
Here's a comparison.... ;)
Wilson Alexandria X-2.....New Retail.....$128,000.00
Salk HT4/Soundscape 12...New Retail.... A whole lot less... :lol:
Lonewolfy - The price for a used set of Watt Puppy 5.1's starts off around the $5000 mark and tops off around $6,500. The 6.0's hover around $6,000 - $7,000.
Kevin - Bias is still bias :lol: That said, at least you are disclosing your reasons why. :thumb: Heck, I mine as well get mine outta the way in that I feel that measured frequency and distortion plots only tell half a story.
Lonewolfy - The price for a used set of Watt Puppy 5.1's starts off around the $5000 mark and tops off around $6,500. The 6.0's hover around $6,000 - $7,000.
And there is a pair of used Wilson Alexandria X-2 available for $59,950. That's not much more than a luxury SUV. And the shipping is only 2400 lbs.
Kevin, do these babies spec out like they should for the money?
Steve
Wilson Alexandria X-2.....New Retail.....$128,000.00
Salk HT4/Soundscape 12...New Retail.... A whole lot less... :lol:
Kevin - Bias is still bias :lol: That said, at least you are disclosing your reasons why. :thumb: Heck, I mine as well get mine outta the way in that I feel that measured frequency and distortion plots only tell half a story.
Lonewolfy - The price for a used set of Watt Puppy 5.1's starts off around the $5000 mark and tops off around $6,500. The 6.0's hover around $6,000 - $7,000.
That is cool.... I disagree with you. There may be things that the measurements don't show, but if you are going to design a race car, you won't get far with one that does 0-60 in 8 seconds. Sure... the 0-60 doesn't tell the whole story but it if it that slow, it isn't likely to win any races no matter what its other redeeming attributes may be.
Measurements don't always tell the whole story.
Chris. :thumb: You know, I've never heard a set of WP 8's, though I'm sure you have.... and I bet there are pics to prove it, ya speaker whoreeee! :lol:
My analogy is getting picked on. :lol: Ok... how about 12 seconds 0-60?
Does the faster car still handle like a pig? :lol:
Heck, I mine as well get mine outta the way in that I feel that measured frequency and distortion plots only tell half a story.
Just curious if anyone has compared or has comments, as a reference.
Perhaps folks who listened to both the Sasha and HT3 at RMAF could provide commentary on what they heard since the W/P 8 is no more. Pricing and brand names aside, I'd be especially interested in comments from those who weren't biased one way or the other going in.
Bias or not, it would most likely be meaningless, as it's doubtful they were able to hear them in the same room with the same source, amplification and room treatments
Although I agree the rooms are varied and less than ideal, following that train of thought would imply that it's pointless in attending.
Perhaps folks who listened to both the Sasha and HT3 at RMAF could provide commentary on what they heard since the W/P 8 is no more. Pricing and brand names aside, I'd be especially interested in comments from those who weren't biased one way or the other going in.
Perhaps folks who listened to both the Sasha and HT3 at RMAF could provide commentary on what they heard since the W/P 8 is no more. Pricing and brand names aside, I'd be especially interested in comments from those who weren't biased one way or the other going in.
I wouldn't take much stock in what you hear at RMAF. From what I've heard and read, most of the rooms were terrible and were not a good place to showcase all the various speakers.
Oops, srb beat me to it.
KJ - it's cool to attend, but in reality you may be right. I know that's quite the accusation, but think about it: poor room acoustics = poor sound, no matter how good the speaker is. I like to think of RMAF as more of a place to see what's out there, find out pricing and specs and meet the men behind the technology. Never would I base my opinion of a product based solely on any of those events. If I did I'd probably like nothing at those shows.
One in
You are right.. A Honda is every bit as good as a BMW, probably a lot more reliable, and defintlely has a higher residual value.
But the BMW's look soo cool!!
Honda Civiv awesome !! or M3 ....? No debate what most people would want.
I know not a fair comparison, but you know what I mean
BTW I ordered a very cool Salk T shirt, for our NYARrave next week!
Look for it.
Mike
Regarding comparing cars to speakers, a 60,000.00 car is generally as good as, if not better, than a 14,000.00 car, IME, reliability notwithstanding. That is not necessarily true with speakers.
In what way, performance?, definitely not true, comfort?, maybe-maybe not, in the use of expensive exotic materials and more bells and whistles?, yes.
Lin
One in
You are right.. A Honda is every bit as good as a BMW, probably a lot more reliable, and defintlely has a higher residual value.
But the BMW's look soo cool!!
Honda Civiv awesome !! or M3 ....? No debate what most people would want.
I know not a fair comparison, but you know what I mean
BTW I ordered a very cool Salk T shirt, for our NYARrave next week!
Look for it.
Mike
BTW, I am not necessarily a "value-oriented" consumer. I tend to purchase British cars and currently own a Jaguar.
Is it really a Jag-u-were or is it an overpriced Ford Taurus? :scratch:
There's always stuff that sounds good and some really good , if you never been there you clueless about it.
The customs, however, are works of art, IMO, and I obtain a lot of enjoyment from owning and shooting them.
One in
You are right.. A Honda is every bit as good as a BMW, probably a lot more reliable, and defintlely has a higher residual value.
But the BMW's look soo cool!!
Honda Civiv awesome !! or M3 ....? No debate what most people would want.
I know not a fair comparison, but you know what I mean
BTW I ordered a very cool Salk T shirt, for our NYARrave next week!
Look for it.
Mike
Is there anyone who really believes a Honda is as good as a BMW? Personally, I don't.
There's always stuff that sounds good and some really good , if you never been there you clueless about it.
eerrrrr.......Hi,
Looks like I started a mess.
Let me explain.
I am just back from a trip and heard the Sophia II, which I wasn't quite as impressed with, and heard the new Sasha, which was easily one of the best systems I have ever listened to (with Ayre reference pieces). Granted, the Sashas are very expensive.
I have never heard a pair of HT3s but am very interested and understand that they compete with speakers that are multiples of their price. I am also interested in used W/P 6 or 7 - thus the question.
Then......hopefully come away with an idea of what components you might like to try and audition and compare at another time and place. And if you're very fortunate, your own listening room!
Thoughts...
When I read the original post yesterday morning, I didn't expect many responses. After all, how many people have actually taken the time to seriously audition both of these speakers? Not many I would think.
But when I looked today and saw five pages of responses, I had to read them. As I look at it, very few of the responses appear to contribute much to answering the original question. It seems to me the question concerned performance, not value. The original poster can certainly determine that for himself.
I haven't spent any time listening to Watt Puppies, so I can't comment. I can speculate that perhaps the HT3's tweeter would be more extended and perhaps more transparent. And that the HT3 midrange with the W18 might be slightly more detailed. And that the more massive Watt Puppies bass cabinets might have a little less resonance. And that perhaps the HT3 woofer might play a little deeper with less distortion. These speculations are based merely on looking at the drivers.
Since I haven't heard the Watt Puppies, I can't make those statements with any certainty at all. But even so, I would bet those speculative comments, as unfounded as they may be, would be more valuable to the original poster than many of the posts in this thread.
There are many audio sites I used to visit regularly but no longer do. Why? Because too many threads get bogged down in posts totally unrelated to the subject at hand and personal digs that serve no real purpose. I can't easily find the information I am looking for and reading most of the posts is a waste of time. So I tend to stay away (which is a shame).
A site like this is valuable if it serves as a source of pertinent information, advice and camaraderie. We generally have a great group of individuals who frequent this circle and share information with one another and all. Let's keep it that way.
Thanks,
- Jim
Thoughts...
When I read the original post yesterday morning, I didn't expect many responses. After all, how many people have actually taken the time to seriously audition both of these speakers? Not many I would think.
But when I looked today and saw five pages of responses, I had to read them. As I look at it, very few of the responses appear to contribute much to answering the original question. It seems to me the question concerned performance, not value. The original poster can certainly determine that for himself.
I haven't spent any time listening to Watt Puppies, so I can't comment. I can speculate that perhaps the HT3's tweeter would be more extended and perhaps more transparent. And that the HT3 midrange with the W18 might be slightly more detailed. And that the more massive Watt Puppies bass cabinets might have a little less resonance. And that perhaps the HT3 woofer might play a little deeper with less distortion. These speculations are based merely on looking at the drivers.
Since I haven't heard the Watt Puppies, I can't make those statements with any certainty at all. But even so, I would bet those speculative comments, as unfounded as they may be, would be more valuable to the original poster than many of the posts in this thread.
There are many audio sites I used to visit regularly but no longer do. Why? Because too many threads get bogged down in posts totally unrelated to the subject at hand and personal digs that serve no real purpose. I can't easily find the information I am looking for and reading most of the posts is a waste of time. So I tend to stay away (which is a shame).
A site like this is valuable if it serves as a source of pertinent information, advice and camaraderie. We generally have a great group of individuals who frequent this circle and share information with one another and all. Let's keep it that way.
Thanks,
- Jim
Thoughts...
When I read the original post yesterday morning, I didn't expect many responses. After all, how many people have actually taken the time to seriously audition both of these speakers? Not many I would think.
But when I looked today and saw five pages of responses, I had to read them. As I look at it, very few of the responses appear to contribute much to answering the original question. It seems to me the question concerned performance, not value. The original poster can certainly determine that for himself.
I haven't spent any time listening to Watt Puppies, so I can't comment. I can speculate that perhaps the HT3's tweeter would be more extended and perhaps more transparent. And that the HT3 midrange with the W18 might be slightly more detailed. And that the more massive Watt Puppies bass cabinets might have a little less resonance. And that perhaps the HT3 woofer might play a little deeper with less distortion. These speculations are based merely on looking at the drivers.
Since I haven't heard the Watt Puppies, I can't make those statements with any certainty at all. But even so, I would bet those speculative comments, as unfounded as they may be, would be more valuable to the original poster than many of the posts in this thread.
There are many audio sites I used to visit regularly but no longer do. Why? Because too many threads get bogged down in posts totally unrelated to the subject at hand and personal digs that serve no real purpose. I can't easily find the information I am looking for and reading most of the posts is a waste of time. So I tend to stay away (which is a shame).
A site like this is valuable if it serves as a source of pertinent information, advice and camaraderie. We generally have a great group of individuals who frequent this circle and share information with one another and all. Let's keep it that way.
Thanks,
- Jim
The customs, however, are works of art, IMO, and I obtain a lot of enjoyment from owning and shooting them.
As an artist, I'm deeply offended that you shoot works of art! :lol: