Jump to content

I heard a pair of Wilson Audio Sophia's yesterday...


etc6849

Recommended Posts

I heard a pair of Wilson Audio Sophia's (~$18,000) yesterday hooked to a ~$7000 amp and pre-amp. While they sounded very nice for their size, I really couldn't help but think my La Scala II setup sounds better. The speakers had some dynamics (probably due to the insane amps hooked to them), but they came up a little short as drums didn't sound as real to me.

Bass definitely sounds better on my system. I do use Audyssey Multi EQ XT32 for room correction that individually calibrates my dual RT-12d subs, main LS II's and rear LS II's. I also use an ATI AT2007 amp that provides ample power for transients (probably 10x more than the LS II's require). However, my entire system was far less than a pair of these speakers, including my PJ and screen.

Where did the high-end audio industry go so wrong? Why are people paying this kind of money for speakers with only a single 10" woofer that can't come close to the level of performance I'm used to from my craigslist speakers? Why are these high-end companies so hesitant on using horn technology? Is it because designers truly believe we need tweeters that can go above 30 kHz?There's even B&W 800 series speakers with tweeters capable of 70 kHz?!? Are even the designers this clueless about how we actually hear?

Edited by etc6849
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where did the high-end audio industry go so wrong?

It did not go wrong, it just went more "high $$$ end".

Why are people paying this kind of money for speakers with only a single 10" woofer that can't come close to the level of performance I'm used to from my craigslist speakers?

Because they can. It is all relevant. As long as there is a niche(rich) market for this high end gear, the elite will still buy it.

Me, I am happy with my craigslist, audiogon, ebay, usaudiomart, and klipch forum purchases.

Why are these high-end companies so hesitant on using horn technology?

There are some of these high-end companies using horn technologies, but object to the comparisons with our "lowly" Klipsch speakers.

http://www.higherfi.com/spkrlist/speakerlist.php

Bill

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also frequent high end audio stores when I am in a location that has one. I love the look of some of the speakers and the exotic finishes. Sound wise, I leave the store feeling very happy with what I have. PWK built solid speakers based on horn technology. His vision for sound was solid in the past and is still relevant today. For the price point of the different Klipsch speakers, their competitors at best can only be a lateral move if you are lucky.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm only left with the feeling that this is why folks aren't interested in audio anymore. There's no place a consumer can go where I live and see products a middle class person can afford that actually impress (let's face it, nothing in the regular best buy stores impress, except they match amazon on their blu-ray prices which is nice).

Maybe this is why everyone listens to compressed music tracks that hardly have any dynamics (e.g. the loudness wars): because their speakers are poorly designed and there's no other choice readily available for a reasonable price. Worse yet, the closest speaker store to a majority of American's like me are those Bose stores.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've come up with a theory about at least some of the folks who prefer some of the so-called high end, high $$$ stuff. They really hate live music. They raise constant complaints about listener "fatigue", "brightness", etc.of any horn loaded speaker. Their ears are way too sensitive for great dynamics and the accurate reproduction of live sound!! I've heard some of the high $$$ stuff they extoll and, to my ears, it sounds artificially laid back, plush and not "live". I'll take my Klipsch Heritage and my KLF-30's any day. On the other hand, there's some really high dollar horn speakers out there like Tannoy which I'd love to hear and would likely want to own if I could afford them. Oh well.To each his own.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where did the high-end audio industry go so wrong? Why are people paying this kind of money for speakers with only a single 10" woofer that can't come close to the level of performance I'm used to from my craigslist speakers? Why are these high-end companies so hesitant on using horn technology? Is it because designers truly believe we need tweeters that can go above 30 kHz? There's even B&W 800 series speakers with tweeters capable of 70 kHz?!? Are even the designers this clueless about how we actually hear?

Actually I still share many of these thoughts myself.

Once you leave behind the notion that what you are trying to do is to reproduce sound recorded by microphones as accurately as possible, I believe that many of these "excesses" arise. Another notion is that smaller loudspeakers are better. Both of these subjects lead us to where we are today in the hi-fi world.

The man behind the creation of La Scalas said that his goal was accurate reproduction...as accurate as he could achieve at the price points that regular people might afford. He said there are certain forms of distortion (AM and FM) present on most loudspeakers (in fact, all direct radiating loudspeakers) and power compression/dynamically limited SPL evident in the balance of exotic loudspeakers (i.e., electrostatics, Magnepans, etc.) that are very audible.

It's amazing to me how much folks don't use their ears, and how they don't try to first find speakers that can accurately reproduce live music.

Chris

Edited by Chris A
Link to comment
Share on other sites

no offense intended to the OP or klipsch in general, as i am a long time klipsch owner & fan & personally prefer most of their speakers. BUT my first observation to the comparison of what the OP heard & his la scalas is: of course the bass wasnt as good as la scallas, its a 10" woofer in a sealed or bass reflex cabinet vs a 15" woofer in a folded horn. that should be obvious. myself & other klipsch owners, just like any owner of another brand speaker or make of car etc, are somewhat biased, you are used to the sound you hear from the horns & are comparing your used prices with new "high end" stuff. so yes, dollar for dollar you like your speakers better. however, i bet the high $$ speakers you heard had much more accurate mid bass & the highs were very smooth etc etc. they dont require hundreds or thousands of dollars of upgrades & mods like so many klipsch speakers can & do. plus the cabinets were probably real solid wood, not mdf with a micro thin veneer. the crossovers are most likely made with the high dollar components, not the cheapest available & needing upgrades to better quality. all things to consider that make the higher $$ speakers cost more & arguably sound better/different.

agian, i am a very happy owner of numerous klipsch speakers, however i can & do appreciate the other brands that are out there. i understand why some things cost more than others. main example, i just bought some k-horns, thought for sure they would be the holy grail of speakers & i would be 100% pleased with them... welll sorry to say, i am not. they no doubt have their strong points but can have a very harsh midrange & tweeter. its no secret, in fact many people/companies make a living selling things to fix or address this very common issue. how are $9,000 speaker so inadequite in these areas? i've heard the adages that they are so revealing that unless your recording is perfect they sound like crap or the room or the gear etc etc... well, why is it that other brands can sound so good with less than perfect recordings & rooms etc? seems to me that should be an attribute of speakers if they can still sound excellent on poor recordings or less than perfect gear. if i pay thousands of dollars for a "flagship" speaker but need to spend thousands more in mods & upgrades or buy ridiculous priced tube amps, then how good are they really?

i know some will take that the wrong way, just pointing out how i see it & that you need to compare apples to apples when you try to discount other makes of things. of course a $250,000 porsche can be smoked in the quarter mile by a 20,000 muscle car, but dont forget about the handling, braking, styleing & technology that goes into that porsche, not to mention the lifestyle it represents for the limited few that can afford it. its all relative.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

no offense intended to the OP or klipsch in general, as i am a long time klipsch owner & fan & personally prefer most of their speakers. BUT my first observation to the comparison of what the OP heard & his la scalas is: of course the bass wasnt as good as la scallas, its a 10" woofer in a sealed or bass reflex cabinet vs a 15" woofer in a folded horn. that should be obvious. myself & other klipsch owners, just like any owner of another brand speaker or make of car etc, are somewhat biased, you are used to the sound you hear from the horns & are comparing your used prices with new "high end" stuff. so yes, dollar for dollar you like your speakers better. however, i bet the high $$ speakers you heard had much more accurate mid bass & the highs were very smooth etc etc. they dont require hundreds or thousands of dollars of upgrades & mods like so many klipsch speakers can & do. plus the cabinets were probably real solid wood, not mdf with a micro thin veneer. the crossovers are most likely made with the high dollar components, not the cheapest available & needing upgrades to better quality. all things to consider that make the higher $$ speakers cost more & arguably sound better/different.

agian, i am a very happy owner of numerous klipsch speakers, however i can & do appreciate the other brands that are out there. i understand why some things cost more than others. main example, i just bought some k-horns, thought for sure they would be the holy grail of speakers & i would be 100% pleased with them... welll sorry to say, i am not. they no doubt have their strong points but can have a very harsh midrange & tweeter. its no secret, in fact many people/companies make a living selling things to fix or address this very common issue. how are $9,000 speaker so inadequite in these areas? i've heard the adages that they are so revealing that unless your recording is perfect they sound like crap or the room or the gear etc etc... well, why is it that other brands can sound so good with less than perfect recordings & rooms etc? seems to me that should be an attribute of speakers if they can still sound excellent on poor recordings or less than perfect gear. if i pay thousands of dollars for a "flagship" speaker but need to spend thousands more in mods & upgrades or buy ridiculous priced tube amps, then how good are they really?

i know some will take that the wrong way, just pointing out how i see it & that you need to compare apples to apples when you try to discount other makes of things. of course a $250,000 porsche can be smoked in the quarter mile by a 20,000 muscle car, but dont forget about the handling, braking, styleing & technology that goes into that porsche, not to mention the lifestyle it represents for the limited few that can afford it. its all relative.

GOOD POST!!!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seems to me that should be an attribute of speakers if they can still sound excellent on poor recordings or less than perfect gear. if i pay thousands of dollars for a "flagship" speaker but need to spend thousands more in mods & upgrades or buy ridiculous priced tube amps, then how good are they really? .

This argument makes no sense to me - poor recordings sound bad. To suggest that the loudspeakers as the one element in the reproduction chain should "correct bad recordings" is odd. Perhaps what you need is a really good mixing console. Good loudspeakers reveal poor recordings even more than poor loudspeakers do.

Khorns are extremely efficient, and they reveal the limitations of amplifiers in their low power output regions most strongly. That is why Khorns sound so good when they are driven with really good low power amplifiers that have very low higher order harmonics, such as some tube amplifiers, but also FET amplifiers like First Watt. This is physics. Khorns are approximately 100x more efficient than a loudspeaker having a sensitivity of 88-90 dB/Watt-meter.

Your other comments about the "imperfections of the Khorn" actually touch on several discussion areas. Note that if you want to hear a 21st century Khorn - it exists: it's called a Klipsch Jubilee.

Chris

Edited by Chris A
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seems to me that should be an attribute of speakers if they can still sound excellent on poor recordings or less than perfect gear. if i pay thousands of dollars for a "flagship" speaker but need to spend thousands more in mods & upgrades or buy ridiculous priced tube amps, then how good are they really? .

This argument makes no sense to me - poor recordings sound bad. To suggest that the loudspeakers as the one element in the reproduction chain should "correct bad recordings" is odd. Perhaps what you need is a really good mixing console. Good loudspeakers reveal poor recordings even more than poor loudspeakers do.

duely noted. however to say poor recordings sound bad is kind of one sided. my point is that "most" recordings are decent & sound decent on other speakers, why do only PERFECT recordings sound good on k-horns? & even then, some very good recordings sound "bad." i have probably 200+ cd's. most all of them have sounded pretty decent for the most part on my mid level klipsch (forte, epic, kg etc) & other brands. but some sound almost unlistenable on the k-horns. they sound fine on epics which have close to the same efficiency rating. so to make a blanket statement that "k-horns are efficient" as the sole reason for the issues i mention doesnt excuse it away. numerous people will admit/acknowledge that the mid horns & even the tweeters are inferior in the upper end heritage speakers. terms like harsh. edgey, not time aligned, etc etc are constantly used. otherwise there wouldnt be fastrac, ALK & crites etc etc.

again, just my .02 about comparing other "high $$$" speakers to klipsch. take it for what its worth... .02.

Edited by klipschfancf4
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are some of these high-end companies using horn technologies, but object to the comparisons with our "lowly" Klipsch speakers. http://www.higherfi....speakerlist.php Bill

Wow. One million dollars!! for Cessaro Horn acoustics array of horns and subs that would be absolutely blown away by Klipsch top Theater speaker, the MCM and the new Klipsh horn sub. With amplifiers and digital Xovers, I'm sure the whole setup would be less than $20,000, which means you could buy 50 Klipsch theater systems to ouperform that offering.

I can't imagine rich people are that stupid, unless they just inherited their money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Duly noted. however to say poor recordings sound bad is kind of one sided. My point is that "most" recordings are decent & sound decent on other speakers, why do only PERFECT recordings sound good on k-horns? & even then, some very good recordings sound "bad." i have probably 200+ CD's. most all of them have sounded pretty decent for the most part on my mid level Klipsch (Forte, Epic, KG, etc) & other brands. but some sound almost unlistenable on the k-horns. They sound fine on Epics which have close to the same efficiency rating. So to make a blanket statement that "K-horns are efficient" as the sole reason for the issues i mention doesn't excuse it away. Numerous people will admit/acknowledge that the mid horns & even the tweeters are inferior in the upper end heritage speakers. Terms like harsh, edgy, not time aligned, etc., etc are constantly used. Otherwise there wouldn't be Fastrac, ALK & Crites etc., etc.

Again, just my $.02 about comparing other "high $$$" speakers to Klipsch...

Take it for what its worth... $02.

I suppose that you don't want me to say any more using this last phrase. Suffice it to say that all of what you say can be addressed, point by point. But you apparently don't want me to do that, so I won't. If there is anyone else here that does want an explanation for any point, I'd be happy to discuss it.

Chris

Edited by Chris A
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There really are a lot of poor recordings. It's not the fault of our sensitive speakers. I also highly doubt these $18k little speakers have a better mid-range than what I have now. You're making a lot of assumptions without ever hearing my system. Also, the crossover on my LS II's is nice. I know Klipsch made some changes to the crossover for the LS II.

There is almost certainly updates needed if you pick up any 20+ year old speaker from craigslist (especially replacing caps in the crossover), which is why I bought 2006 versions. A lot of things do deteriorate over time and require maintenance or refurbishment. Without a doubt, Klipsch made several improvements in the LS II's that would be costly to make to an LS version (1" thick mdf is used which does not resonate like the original 3/4" plywood sides and using real wood would be a mistake), so I can't argue with that. I don't own any vintage heritage stuff either to compare them to.

I will say that my LS II's sound very smooth and everyone who's heard them really likes them. They are NOT harsh like some claim the reference series is. If you read some of the reviews, it's not just me who thinks this, but professional audiophile reviewers with decades of experience: http://www.tubeaudio.be/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/30786_eprint.pdf

no offense intended to the OP or klipsch in general, as i am a long time klipsch owner & fan & personally prefer most of their speakers. BUT my first observation to the comparison of what the OP heard & his la scalas is: of course the bass wasnt as good as la scallas, its a 10" woofer in a sealed or bass reflex cabinet vs a 15" woofer in a folded horn. that should be obvious. myself & other klipsch owners, just like any owner of another brand speaker or make of car etc, are somewhat biased, you are used to the sound you hear from the horns & are comparing your used prices with new "high end" stuff. so yes, dollar for dollar you like your speakers better. however, i bet the high $$ speakers you heard had much more accurate mid bass & the highs were very smooth etc etc. they dont require hundreds or thousands of dollars of upgrades & mods like so many klipsch speakers can & do. plus the cabinets were probably real solid wood, not mdf with a micro thin veneer. the crossovers are most likely made with the high dollar components, not the cheapest available & needing upgrades to better quality. all things to consider that make the higher $$ speakers cost more & arguably sound better/different.

GOOD POST!!!

Edited by etc6849
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You quoted the wrong guy. I just said good post. Few valid points on better crossover components used and better build quality. Now don't get me wrong I ain't got the change for Wilson anything. But you can't deny that the build quality on them is far superior to reference and heritage line. Now palladium may be different story for sure. But I have never seen them in person so can't comment. I have seen and heard every speaker Wilson has to offer. They are built like tanks!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Accuracy? The OP mentions drums sounded less accurate to him. MDF is dimensionally more stable than solid wood. Built like is way less important than sound like.

The La Scala lacks about one octave of audible bass.

As a percussionist yourself, what do drums sound like when you remove the lowest audible octave? Does it sound like the original live performance?

I find that this octave is critical for percussion and string bass reproduction.

Chris

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where did the high-end audio industry go so wrong?

It did not go wrong, it just went more "high $$$ end".

Why are people paying this kind of money for speakers with only a single 10" woofer that can't come close to the level of performance I'm used to from my craigslist speakers?

Because they can. It is all relevant. As long as there is a niche(rich) market for this high end gear, the elite will still buy it.

Me, I am happy with my craigslist, audiogon, ebay, usaudiomart, and klipch forum purchases.

Why are these high-end companies so hesitant on using horn technology?

There are some of these high-end companies using horn technologies, but object to the comparisons with our "lowly" Klipsch speakers.

http://www.higherfi.com/spkrlist/speakerlist.php

Bill

That is quite the store, however if I ran into a couple of those designs in a dark room id shoot it.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...