Wilson Maxx 2. vs. Magico S5 mk2

[RichardAusten]

I'm assuming since some are arguing and agreeing, date matters, you are saying every time a company puts out a new speaker it's better than the one before it. Well, I don't agree with that, at all. Listening is subjective so there's no way "new is always better" is a hard fast rule. Surely, someone has an older model that is close to their heart and you wouldn't trade for the latest model?

One example for me personally, I happen to feel the Revel Performa 3 series done nothing to improve on the P2 series. It sounds very different to be sure but I personally prefer the P2 series.

I would add the older Reference 3a Models sounded considerably better than the new ones with the BE tweeters as it seems they are responding to the "IN" tweeter but the character of the speaker has been lost now IMO. Further the Paradigm 100V2 was solid speaker and replaced by the 100V3. At that time they also brought out their Signature floorstander - but the 100V3 sounded pretty crappy versus the older model and crappy against the Sig. What I was told is that they needed more of a "spread" between 100V2 and the 4 times the price Sig and that the 100V2 was already 95% the sound.

A lot of folks were asking a dealer friend of mind who carries and still carries the brand and he too noted that the 100V2 was definitely the one to get. The 100V3 had an audible echo effect - it didn't seem to last long and a V4 and now I believe a V5 and V6 have come out.

Also some companies come out with an amp or speaker every 4 years due to what we refer to as the press cycle as well as product life-cycle. Big sales fro new products - a plateau and then the drop. New product - begin again - not necessarily any real reason. I had a Rotel preamp - 4 years later a new one comes out with a new name badge and different looking case - everything else is exactly the same.

And further to your point sometimes the best designer at the company leaves and the new product is made by an inferior talent. OR the company decides to sell their product to attract more customers and chooses something that looks cool at the expense of something that sounds good.

As for Magico and Wilson - I have had one good session with the Sophia II but have yet to like any of their big expensive speakers. Magico is the reverse - I enjoyed ond of their biggest most expensive speakers but didn't at all like their standmount and not for silly money they charged for it (approaching $30k). It's a lot of impressive engineering, a lot of money - I''m not convinced by the sound - and yes I can afford to pay cash for any Magico so it's not about that.

[enatai252]

I would add the older Reference 3a Models sounded considerably better than the new ones with the BE tweeters as it seems they are responding to the "IN" tweeter but the character of the speaker has been lost now IMO. .

+1

I have listened to and enjoyed a lot of different brands over the last 25 years in this hobby and the one constant I have found is that the BE tweeters drive me out of the room. YMMV. I know the BE tweeter specs look good on paper with the increased rigidity and extended frequency range but they do not sound natural to me and while running out of the room is a slight exaggeration, they do fatigue me quickly even when listening to my analog source. I speak from experience and was drawn in and purchased a pair of S5s but had to replace quickly after extended listening. There are clearly some who love these speakers and I expect they value different attributes than I did or they are partnered with different gear and likely provide a great listening experience so my opinion should not dissuade them. Each of us has our own bias and listening preference and speakers more than any other component are impacted by the room and electronic pairing. So its impossible to claim one absolute truth - just personal opinions. Some here can spend pages proclaiming why they are right - not sure why they spend so much time worrying that others prefer a different brand. If you are truly happy with your choice, than why worry....just listen to your brand and be happy.

WRT the OP - I think there are better examples from each of those brands available today. I suggest you can take some of the opinions offered in this thread but the best thing to do is go listen.

[Mechnutt]

I'm curious on the bass comments regarding Wilson. Most of my auditions have been with D'Agostino amplification and equally level digital sources. Bass is one area I find the Wilson, in general, lacking. The midrange seems always prominent.

1. Do today's Wilson compare to the Max is bass or did Wilson back off in that area?

2. Perhaps, though the two brands are typically together, maybe there's better synergy amplification for Wilson?

One demo was playing Patricia Barber's Modern Cool, an album I'm very familiar with and on all high end systems I've heard the album the bass reproduction is very good, on the Wilson/Agostino combo this album didn't sound that way. The bass was almost nonexistent When we left we all sort of agreed there must have been a problem, hard to guess as to what it could have been without knowing more about the system in that room.

I'm sincerely looking for Wilson user/dealer comments. I've never heard Wilson do much in bass. And, regarding live, they don't even come close to something like MBL. So if Wilson users are getting room shaking bass from timpani, how are you doing it?

Mr P, I heard the Wilson Alexia's at a local music shop with $50K worth of electronics. I was blown away by the deep powerful bass. Awesome sounding speaker, very musical. It does have a midbass hump however. The dealer said that they are purposely voiced that way.

[Sharp 2160]

Always a surprise how such big speakers like the Alex or even the XLF (and I bet the WAMM as well) have such poor bass performance (I prefer the Sophia bass). The “jump” is cool, for about 10 sec... A good scapegoat; blaming poor set-up for poor design.

I think you are rationalizing. I have owned Watt/Puppy 7's along with Sophia's for surround channels and am familiar with Wilson speakers and their bass response. I have had both the WP/7's and then Maxx 3's in the same room on the same electronics. There is a HUGE difference in bass response and realism in reproduction. I had a long conversation with Daryl Wilson about the differences between the XLF, Maxx 3 and the other smaller speakers in the line. They all reproduce bass well, it's just that the three you shun (WAMM, XLF, and Alexx reproduce it better and with authority.

[Mechnutt]

Just playing the spoiler here. I am not sure why people ask which speaker is better. Speakers are the most subjective part of audio. You can certainly describe what a given speaker sounds like, and what you like and don't like about it, especially in your own system but to compare comparably priced speakers and say one is better than the other (given that both speakers are good performers) is like comparing apples to oranges as we all have our own likes and dislikes. It is so subjective, more so with speakers and source components than any other gear.

[a.wayne]

+1

I have listened to and enjoyed a lot of different brands over the last 25 years in this hobby and the one constant I have found is that the BE tweeters drive me out of the room. YMMV. I know the BE tweeter specs look good on paper with the increased rigidity and extended frequency range but they do not sound natural to me and while running out of the room is a slight exaggeration, they do fatigue me quickly even when listening to my analog source. I speak from experience and was drawn in and purchased a pair of S5s but had to replace quickly after extended listening. There are clearly some who love these speakers and I expect they value different attributes than I did or they are partnered with different gear and likely provide a great listening experience so my opinion should not dissuade them. Each of us has our own bias and listening preference and speakers more than any other component are impacted by the room and electronic pairing. So its impossible to claim one absolute truth - just personal opinions. Some here can spend pages proclaiming why they are right - not sure why they spend so much time worrying that others prefer a different brand. If you are truly happy with your choice, than why worry....just listen to your brand and be happy.

WRT the OP - I think there are better examples from each of those brands available today. I suggest you can take some of the opinions offered in this thread but the best thing to do is go listen.

BE or not , i never saw the big deal with the reference 3a loudspeakers , kinda like the Vandy 2c , both have their followings , well at least the Vandy is inexpensive..

Meh ....!


Regards

[a.wayne]

I think you are rationalizing. I have owned Watt/Puppy 7's (see attached photos) along with Sophia's for surround channels and am familiar with Wilson speakers and their bass response. I have had both the WP/7's and then Maxx 3's in the same room on the same electronics. There is a HUGE difference in bass response and realism in reproduction. I had a long conversation with Daryl Wilson about the differences between the XLF, Maxx 3 and the other smaller speakers in the line. They all reproduce bass well, it's just that the three you shun (WAMM, XLF, and Alexx reproduce it better and with authority.

I have heard XLF's and X1's on numerous occasions now and have never heard an issue with bass on these models , on the other smaller models over the years , yes , some to the point of pain ..

The Alexx i heard recently was IMO way out of wack on the bass , but was fantastic on chorale and classical music , i believed Peter voiced them this way..


Regards

[Jim Smith]

I have heard XLF's and X1's on numerous occasions now and have never heard an issue with bass on these models , on the other smaller models over the years , yes , some to the point of pain ..

The Alexx i heard recently was IMO way out of wack on the bass , but was fantastic on chorale and classical music , i believed Peter voiced them this way..


Regards

At any or of these demos, did they tell you where the seat for the best (smoothest) bass was located?

IMO, that is ALWAYS the first step in set-up & evaluation.

It's hard to say what speakers have the best bass if we have no idea where the best seat for the bass is located. There is typically a fairly well-defined area for the best (smoothest) bass in most rooms. Especially at shows & dealer showrooms. Or even worse, if the speakers were not even set-up with that critical consideration foremost in mind for the best installation/demo...

WAY more important than moving speakers around without first locating the virtual Anchor Point for all adjustments.

Sad that it's rarely mentioned or considered.

[Joe P]

[LVB]

I think you are rationalizing. I have owned Watt/Puppy 7's along with Sophia's for surround channels and am familiar with Wilson speakers and their bass response. I have had both the WP/7's and then Maxx 3's in the same room on the same electronics. There is a HUGE difference in bass response and realism in reproduction. I had a long conversation with Daryl Wilson about the differences between the XLF, Maxx 3 and the other smaller speakers in the line. They all reproduce bass well, it's just that the three you shun (WAMM, XLF, and Alexx reproduce it better and with authority.

When it comes to bass perception, it all depends where you’re coming from. When people talk about bass “authority”, I do wonder where such a trait exists in un-amplified music (maybe Organ music ). I never walked out of a classical concert, or a jazz club feeling the bass was “authoritative”. I mean who would want that?? If arenas PA bass (more like midbass) is your idea of good bass (and I don’t mean it in a bad way), then yes Wilson's bass is plenty good.

But perception aside, I put the Maxx 3 (black) and the S5 (colors) JA gated measurements one on top of the other (I would say that the Maxx 3 bass is the least of its problems).

[a.wayne]

At any or of these demos, did they tell you where the seat for the best (smoothest) bass was located?

No , but i changed position multiple times looking for it .......

It's hard to say what speakers have the best bass if we have no idea where the best seat for the bass is located. There is typically a fairly well-defined area for the best (smoothest) bass

Agree that is so for any specific room , the best location for Bass is very specific and it's usually not the same for mid-range and sound-stage presence, hence why i prefer 4 tower systems when doing SOTA attempts.

in most rooms. Especially at shows & dealer showrooms. Or even worse, if the speakers were not even set-up with that critical consideration foremost in mind for the best installation/demo...

This was an WA demo setup in a Big hotel room played into the short wall , setup was by Peter McGarth from WA and yes i acknowledge it was not the best or even a treated dealer room, but this room was chosen specific for this event and with time to make it right.

Aside, the Bass was still out of wack and obviously adjusted for Peter's bespoke classical recordings where it sounded really well and painfully bumpy on anything else..



Regards ...

[a.wayne]

BTW, to those Never hearing Bass Authority at a Symphony or a Jazz club , take your hearing aid and ears next time ...

[LVB]

Aside, the Bass was still out of wack and obviously adjusted for Peter's bespoke classical recordings where it sounded really well and painfully bumpy on anything else..

Now why would the bass be good on classical, but bumpy on everything else? Was the system tweaked, so to create an “authoritative” bass where one does not exist and by that ruin the ones that are recorded with normal or “authoritative” bass?

take your hearing aid and ears next time ...

Glad you got your ears attached, but what good would the ears be without a mind to assess what it is they are hearing...

[Joe P]

[a.wayne]

Really nice setup Joe ......

[LVB]

Says a lot about the people who buy these...

[enatai252]

Says a lot about the people who buy these...

I think your comments say more about you. You have a Magico bias which is not in itself an bad thing. I don’t like Magico but don’t feel a need to go to Magico forum and reiterate my opinion as I don’t need to convince anyone I am right. But you also for some reason get really worked up about certain other brands...a sign of insecurity and one of your defects and your comments have troll attributes. If you don’t like Wilson than stop listening to it....pretty simple. I suggest you go back to the Magico forum which you pretty much solely comment in and also continually repeat yourself in. Take your charts so you can reread to convince yourself which does not require actual listening. The arrogance of the comment above is astounding. I am not going to argue with you as it’s pointless and I am not here to change you mind but did want to give you my free advice. How you take it will again reflect on you



Cheers


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Sharp 2160]

I believe he's just trying to prove HIS point which is normal for audio forums. I guess acoustic bass and timpani drums in an orchestral piece aren't to be considered in my earlier post about "authoritative bass reproduction". Most members here post their systems LVB does not? Also graphs are just that, a measurement. We don't listen to measurements, is this Stereo Review all over again with Julian Hirsch? There is a reason many people use the moniker of, "trust your ears".

[LVB]

I think your comments say more about you...

Yes, I guess a bit harsh, but we were past good manners when I was offered hearing aids few posts ago (didn't see you come to my rescue). Sorry, but this is a ridicules setup by any standard, start with the tile floor or the glass wall (why so many amps, what a waste). How about the wheels under the speakers and subs. You think the bass will be good here?

[still-one]

Yes, I guess a bit harsh, but we were past good manners when I was offered hearing aids few posts ago (didn't see you come to my rescue). Sorry, but this is a ridicules setup by any standard, start with the tile floor or the glass wall (why so many amps, what a waste). How about the wheels under the speakers and subs. You think the bass will be good here?

It is probably a surround system since you cannot bi-amp Wilson's under normal circumstances.

[a.wayne]

I believe he's just trying to prove HIS point which is normal for audio forums. I guess acoustic bass and timpani drums in an orchestral piece aren't to be considered in my earlier post about "authoritative bass reproduction". Most members here post their systems LVB does not? Also graphs are just that, a measurement. We don't listen to measurements, is this Stereo Review all over again with Julian Hirsch? There is a reason many people use the moniker of, "trust your ears".

I dont think he has ever been to a Symphony, to make a silly statement like that ....

[a.wayne]

It is probably a surround system since you cannot bi-amp Wilson's under normal circumstances.

Regardless Jim , what need was there to criticize the system or the Post ,, IMO , the response was way out of line , which Audiophile dont enjoy looking at audio bling ...



Regards

[The Sandman]

Is that the special 2 amplifiers per channel setup (one for the positive half of the signal, one for the negative)?

[still-one]

Regardless Jim , what need was there to criticize the system or the Post ,, IMO , the response was way out of line , which Audiophile dont enjoy looking at audio bling ...



Regards

I was just answering why there was so much amplification. For the most part I am done with any Magico and Wilson debate. Others can spend their time on such a pointless debate.

[RichardAusten]

Regardless Jim , what need was there to criticize the system or the Post ,, IMO , the response was way out of line , which Audiophile dont enjoy looking at audio bling ...



Regards

Wait, What? Those words coming from you?

[XV-1]

Says a lot about the people who buy these...

Sure you not Bodhi?

[kzhtoo]

Sure you not Bodhi?

I now think you are Bodhi.

[a.wayne]

Wait, What? Those words coming from you?

You posted without saying AN , Hacked ..?


Post up a pic of your setup , less see how he takes it , if the same , I promise not to comment ..

Sure you not Bodhi?

wait .. what ...! Lol

[LVB]

You posted without saying AN , Hacked ..?


Post up a pic of your setup , less see how he takes it , if the same , I promise not to comment ..




wait .. what ...! Lol

The forum bully is on a rampage.

I have noticed, time and time again, that once I bring some tangible data to a discussion, certain members here just go haywire. From that point the discussion derails quickly (Hard not to bite into these provocations, sorry). Here is another one:

Sure you not Bodhi?

I guess I hit a nerve, that is good, you may want to rethink your Avatar pic, it is 2018 after all.

[Mordante]

I disagree. Most sound awful. We do have an outdoor arena in Tampa, old Massey Hall in Toronto and a few others, which actually are pretty good, but Amalea arena and others around here suck. When you hear unamplified in a small intimate setting or a live orchestra, there is nothing better - and that, IMO, should be the benchmark.

YMMV.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

However many people don't like that kind of music.

To be honest I want a sound to that is pleasing to my ear. Trying to get realistic orchestra sound in an average living room is not feasible. An orchestra can go from 60db to over 100db. in seconds that is not something most people want in the home. Also the whole acoustics in such a room are nigh impossible to create in the average room.

A large living room is maybe 40m2.

Most music I listen to includes electrical amplified instruments, guitar bass, etc. So there is no original sound.