Anyone compared the HT3 with Wilson Watt Puppy?

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. Read 14956 times.

Zero

Re: Anyone compared the HT3 with Wilson Watt Puppy?
« Reply #40 on: 31 Oct 2009, 09:47 pm »
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 too, ya speaker whoreeee!  :lol:

Kevin.  hehe Im not sure that race car analogy is too applicable, but I digress. I suppose I take my standpoint because I've heard many so called 'ruler flat' speakers. From studio monitors to regular hi-fi loudspeakers, in all different shapes, sizes, and backed by different design philosophies which all aim to achieve the goal of measured linearity. If you'd look at a frequency plot on most of them, you'd swear the differences in their presentation would be subtle at best. Yet, I've rarely heard a set that sounded alike. I've just come to find that every material used in a speaker sounds like what it is. A soft dome has its sound, a ribbon has its sound, a doper paper woofer has its sound, a magnesium alloy driver has its sound, and so on and so forth. Can you build a speaker that measures incredibly well with those type of high quality drivers? Sure. It happens all the time. But if you stack each of them side by side, will they sound the same? Nope, not in my experience.  The same applies to electronics as well.  Ah well, if we all agreed on this stuff, this hobby would be a lot more boring, and we'd all have a lot more cash in our pockets. What fun would that be?  :lol:

lonewolfny42

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 16918
  • Speakers....What Speakers ?
Re: Anyone compared the HT3 with Wilson Watt Puppy?
« Reply #41 on: 31 Oct 2009, 09:48 pm »
Quote
Measurements don't always tell the whole story.

Right Lin....listening does....and what one is looking for.

I always remember....there is no perfect speaker. :wink:

lonewolfny42

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 16918
  • Speakers....What Speakers ?
Re: Anyone compared the HT3 with Wilson Watt Puppy?
« Reply #42 on: 31 Oct 2009, 09:50 pm »
Quote
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:

....Your right Sean..... :lol:

(always good to have proof... :wink:)

Kevin Haskins

Re: Anyone compared the HT3 with Wilson Watt Puppy?
« Reply #43 on: 31 Oct 2009, 10:08 pm »
My analogy is getting picked on.   :lol:    Ok... how about 12 seconds 0-60?    It matters not what you pick.  The point I'm trying to make, is that yes.... it is one set of measurements but it is telling.   Try to sell a Porsche or a Ferrari that is slow.

One axis of measurement is almost worthless.   Not totally so but part of the reason people don't respect the FR measurements is because they have made faulty assumptions in the past.    The faulty assumption is that one axis of measurement is enough data to classify better/worse.    It isn't.... and it isn't one FR measurement that I'm pointing to.    It is a RANGE of frequency response measurements, on and off-axis, at various points, that characterizes the sound.    And yes.... in blind testing studies the loudspeakers that measure better show with amazing consistency to SOUND better based upon the frequency response measurements alone.   

The non-linear distortion sets your headroom so as long as it is held under a certain threshold, it probably isn't as critical as the on/off-axis measurements.   It will determine your ultimate headroom and it may determine where you can use a particular transducer. 

In terms of sited test, well.... you have to throw the rules out the window.   More expensive speakers or brands with better reputations do better in sited test.   Bigger loudspeakers do better than smaller ones on average.    In other words, a lot of what determines how a loudspeaker sounds, depends upon how you think it is going to sound.   If it is from Best Buy, and your comparing it against the Wilson Watt Puppies, I'd be my hard earned money that people will choose the Wilson even if the Best Buy loudspeaker measures better, and performs better in the blind testing.     

That is just the way it is.... we are human creatures with human bias and much of that bias comes out in our preferences.   

Jon L

Re: Anyone compared the HT3 with Wilson Watt Puppy?
« Reply #44 on: 31 Oct 2009, 10:14 pm »
I don't see how any mere mortal speakers can compete when Wilson speakers use "Material X" and "Material M" in construction?  :green:

Jokes aside, I'd love to take a look at those Wilson top-secret potted crossovers..

DMurphy

  • Industry Participant
  • Posts: 1486
    • SalkSound
Re: Anyone compared the HT3 with Wilson Watt Puppy?
« Reply #45 on: 31 Oct 2009, 11:53 pm »
My analogy is getting picked on.   :lol:    Ok... how about 12 seconds 0-60?   

Does the faster car still handle like a pig?  :lol:

What was the question?  I think it was about a puppy, but I'm not sure.   Anyhow, I haven't heard one, and certainly won't comment on the quality of Wilson products.  But the measurements were taken by probably the most authoritative testing center around--the Canadian NRC.  They have a genuine anechoic chamber and measure further back than most designers can (although software does allow you to simulate whatever listening distance you think is appropriate). I would very much like to have them measure some Salk products, but I don't know quite how to go about it.  Until that happens, you can't really compare their plots with mine. 

topround

Re: Anyone compared the HT3 with Wilson Watt Puppy?
« Reply #46 on: 1 Nov 2009, 12:12 am »
I think if the Wilsons were offered in Bubinga they would sound better.

It just has to be.

I too think the Wilsons are overpriced, and I have a good friend with a pair of Maxx 3's.
Wilsons are bought usually by people who have lot's of disposable income and probably not a lot of time to listen to them.
I also think a lot of Ferrari's spend most of their time in a garage.
But that is how it is.
Which one is better, I would venture to guess the Wilson owners could care less what you guys think. Their speakers cost more than your car, and that may be what matters most to them, but to be fair they are also paired with gear that is very expensive as well. So usually their speaker cables cost more than a pair of HT3's. Does this matter ?..NO, but you have to understand there is a segment of this hobby that has to do with showmanship.
How many people here on this website go thru so much gear having the latest and greatest, most of these people have no ear. Going thru all that expensive gear proves it.  They know who they are. How many people go thru amp after amp, and they keep the same cables. Amazes me.

Just enjoy what you have, I drive a Chevy, I probably drive a lot better than a lot of Porsche drivers out there, but that is what I do...drive.
But they have the Porsches, don't be jealous, work hard to get one if that is what you want, if not then don't worry, be secure in what you have.

Now a Bubinga Porsche...that is what I want.
Besides a used Wilson will ALWAYS get a good return on its investment.
Not trying to knock Salks, but sweliing a relatively unkown speaker, no matter how good is very difficult..look at the SP Techs.!

And Frank is an idiot to say what he just said about another audio professional.

Mike


Nuance

Re: Anyone compared the HT3 with Wilson Watt Puppy?
« Reply #47 on: 1 Nov 2009, 12:14 am »
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. 

Don't get out of the way, else I'll have to as well, because I completely agree with your statement.  I, of course, love Salk speakers, but you're dead right about FR and distortion plots only telling part of the story.

I auditioned the Wilson Watt Puppy 7's a while back and honestly didn't know where all the praise was coming from.  I didn't like them much at all.  However, it could have been the room.  The dealer should have had them in the larger room up stairs.  Also, I have never heard the HT3's or HT4's, so I cannot comment.  But I have heard lower cost speakers that I liked a lot better than the Wilson's.  But at the end of the day none were compared in the same room at level matched conditions, so its probably moot. 

Zero, you have the opportunity to audition a lot of speakers in your own home; you're one lucky dude!

Dennis,

I bet if you and Jim asked them they'd do it.  Or maybe you'd have to pay them...?  I dunno.  It would be pretty cool to get someone like the NRC to measure Salk speakers, though. 

DMurphy

  • Industry Participant
  • Posts: 1486
    • SalkSound
Re: Anyone compared the HT3 with Wilson Watt Puppy?
« Reply #48 on: 1 Nov 2009, 12:32 am »

[/quote]

Dennis,

I bet if you and Jim asked them they'd do it.  Or maybe you'd have to pay them...?  I dunno.  It would be pretty cool to get someone like the NRC to measure Salk speakers, though.
[/quote]

I'll look into it.  This would just be for my own edification, to validate (or invalidate) my measurements. 

oneinthepipe

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1381
  • Trainee
    • Salk Signature Sound/Audio by Van Alstine two-channel system
Re: Anyone compared the HT3 with Wilson Watt Puppy?
« Reply #49 on: 1 Nov 2009, 12:34 am »
I heard a pair of Wilson something or other stand-mount speakers at RMAF.  I don't care to debate whether or not a listener can tell much about a system's sound in a hotel room.  I didn't think that the speakers/system was anything special.  I asked about the speaker price.  The dealer/representative told me "sixteen nine".  OK, fair enough for a 1600.00 speaker, I thought fleetingly, but almost immediately realized that the speakers were sixteen THOUSAND dollars.  Holy Bubinga, Cold Cut Man. 

Regarding comparing cars to speakers, an 60000.00 MSRP car is generally as "good" as, if not "better", than a 14000.00 MSRP car, IME, reliability and intended specific use notwithstanding.  That is not necessarily true with speakers.

Bigfish

Re: Anyone compared the HT3 with Wilson Watt Puppy?
« Reply #50 on: 1 Nov 2009, 12:36 am »
Just curious if anyone has compared or has comments, as a reference.

Mr. Bill:

Why? 

Ken

KJ

Re: Anyone compared the HT3 with Wilson Watt Puppy?
« Reply #51 on: 1 Nov 2009, 12:44 am »
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.

topround

Re: Anyone compared the HT3 with Wilson Watt Puppy?
« Reply #52 on: 1 Nov 2009, 12:48 am »
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

srb

Re: Anyone compared the HT3 with Wilson Watt Puppy?
« Reply #53 on: 1 Nov 2009, 01:27 am »
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.
 
Steve

KJ

Re: Anyone compared the HT3 with Wilson Watt Puppy?
« Reply #54 on: 1 Nov 2009, 01:35 am »
Quote
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.   :wink:  That said, I'm still interested in people's thoughts.

srb

Re: Anyone compared the HT3 with Wilson Watt Puppy?
« Reply #55 on: 1 Nov 2009, 01:47 am »
Although I agree the rooms are varied and less than ideal, following that train of thought would imply that it's pointless in attending.

That's what you inferred.  I am sure it was a fun, informative and worthwhile show to attend.  People can give you their impressions, it's just not possible to make valid comparisons.
 
Steve

Nuance

Re: Anyone compared the HT3 with Wilson Watt Puppy?
« Reply #56 on: 1 Nov 2009, 01:51 am »
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.

topround

Re: Anyone compared the HT3 with Wilson Watt Puppy?
« Reply #57 on: 1 Nov 2009, 01:52 am »
Marbles,
You have the BEST avatars aa
Love the blonde....my weakness is blondes...I mean Bubinga :duh:

ecramer

  • Volunteer
  • Posts: 3121
  • In time whats deserved always get served.
Re: Anyone compared the HT3 with Wilson Watt Puppy?
« Reply #58 on: 1 Nov 2009, 02:20 am »
There's always stuff that sounds good and some really good , if you never been there you clueless  about it.

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.

srb

Re: Anyone compared the HT3 with Wilson Watt Puppy?
« Reply #59 on: 1 Nov 2009, 02:25 am »
It's just that spending enough time in this forum, I have heard people say that:
 
"This [CD player, DAC, Preamp, Amplifier, Cable, Sound Treatment, etc.] made more than a subtle difference in my system, improving the [bass, midrange, treble, clarity, soundstage, imaging, etc.]".
 
And that's just a single component.  Change all the components and add the variability of the rooms, people in them, speaker placement and the demo music being played, and I would surely have a difficult time making any comparisons.
 
But I could certainly come away with general impressions.  Room A system sounded extremely full and dynamic.  Room B system had a definite lack of bass and tonal coherence.
 
I agree with Nuance.  You get to see the new equipment, get a real close look at the fit and finish, talk to designers and industry insiders and meet some new audio friends.
 
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!
 
Steve