Wilson driver material not acceptable for high end speakers today

Coppy said:
Yep... time to close this one. No value to anyone here.
Click to expand...

On the contrary, I think the original post raises an interesting question, can loudspeakers using older technology in their cone materials sonically compete with the latest technology cone materials? Seems like a topic worthy of discussion.

IMO, all other things being equal, I would give the advantage to the companies using the latest technology with their cone materials. However, as we know, all things are not equal and the execution can be just as important as using the latest cutting edge materials in the design.

Ken
 
There are multiple ways to skin a cat. Do you listen to speaker material or the sounds the speakers make? (Disclosure: I own Magicos, but I like Wilsons too - a lot.)
 
I wasn't going to reply again but... my objection wasn't to the materials subject but really to the initial post by someone who has probably not heard and Wilson or Magico speakers, let alone owned them. And, yes, I'm a long time multiple Wilson owner. Magico makes fine, good sounding products as do others using all kinds of materials. Don't like Wilson's drivers... don't buy them.

I can't speak for Wilson, but their product development seems to focus on cabinet, time delay and crossover technology. They buy and often heavily modify speakers from companies that make a business of manufacturing them. Wilson has samples of many other speakers in the factory to sample. David, Darrell and their substantial technical and sales staffs spend time in the field at dealers hearing all the technology available and have seen no reason to change for the sake of change or for marketing benefit. That's the "way they roll" as the expression goes.

Enjoy the music...
 
BlueFox said:
If you want great, clear, accurate, audible music then you are “listening to SS gear driven by digital source material”.

Welcome to the 21st Century. :)
Click to expand...

I have both digital and analog in my system. The only thing that matters Bud is that you are happy with your sound.
 
Interesting thread. I was just reading on another forum where they were trashing Poly and other types of drivers because there are still 70 year old or more paper driver speakers working. So in that thread, they were seeking out paper cones as opposed to other more modern types.
 
I must confess that i´m a fan of paper cones. In some way i find other materials are not so accurate when it comes to the timbre of the instruments, especially the human voice.


But there are exceptions. I have no doubts that i could happy live with Marten loudspeakers and their ceramic ? drivers.
 
Really boils down to is it better or different. I am particularly happy with what I hear, and no regrets!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
 
Using paper drivers is perfectly fine as long as it reflects in the pricing.

Sasha DAW is only $37,900.
 
Shadowfax said:
Interesting thread. I was just reading on another forum where they were trashing Poly and other types of drivers because there are still 70 year old or more paper driver speakers working. So in that thread, they were seeking out paper cones as opposed to other more modern types.
Click to expand...

It goes to show you how everyone’s taste/preference is different. Maybe it’s not necessarily the composition of the drivers, but the execution of them. I think it all comes down to personal taste.
 
Other manufacturers use “older tech” yet their sound is also fabulous e.g. Avangartde (horns and paper woofers). I’ve heard some speakers with so call “state of the art materials” that sound dreadful.

Lets move on...

And, to be fully transparent, I own Wilsons. And, I’ve own Maggies, B&W, Spendors, Revel Salons and Perdormas and a lot other brands.

At at the end of the day, it’s not about the driver material but the full implementation of the product: cabinet; drivers; crossover;...etc.
 
Most any speaker with higher efficiency uses paper and it typically lasts longer, especially those with accordion surrounds. Paper is still widely used by many. And, I admit, it's debateable but many listeners still prefer silk dome tweeters over anything else.

skytop said:
I passed on the Wilson Sasha 2 and the new DAW because Wilson uses paper and doped silk for drivers and the tweeter.
Paper is not durable. Paper flexes and deforms.
Other high end speaker makers are using modern far superior cone materials. Wilson is building speakers like biplanes were built with paper, wood and dope in the 1915. At Wilson's price point, they are responsible to deliver far more appropriate technology.

Sasha DAW Drivers


  • Woofer:8 inches (20.32 cm)
  • Material: Paper Cone
  • Tweeter: 1 inch, Dome (2.54 cm)
  • Material: Doped Silk Fabric
  • Midrange: 5 3/4 inches (14.61 cm)
  • Material: Paper Pulp
  • Frequency Response: 31 Hz – 21 kHz: +/- 3 dB, RAR (Room Average Response)
  • Nominal Impedance: 4 ohms / 2.53 ohms minimum @ 139 Hz
  • Sensitivity: 87 dB @ 1W @ 1m @ 1 kHz
Click to expand...
 
Paul said:
Well , at least OP did a great job bring every one in ;)
Click to expand...

LOL. Yes he did. Actually, this is a good subject. I have to admit I sometimes wonder how long my Magico drivers will last. I hope forever, but being new technology/material I do have a little apprehension.
 
BlueFox said:
LOL. Yes he did. Actually, this is a good subject. I have to admit I sometimes wonder how long my Magico drivers will last. I hope forever, but being new technology/material I do have a little apprehension.
Click to expand...

Unless you fry the drivers, they should last a long time.
 
I wonder what the Op thinks about electrostatics ? ................. if he ever returns to the thread.
 
I'm surprised that more speaker manufacturers aren't using additive manufacturing techniques, irrespective of the materials used. Just seems to make sense to me.
Tom
 
getting back to point, while I've listened to many a Wilson that I've enjoyed (sonically) the majority of their lineup turns me off(visually).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top