Here we go again: Alexandria XLF

[Steve Williams]

Hi Jack, i wonder about changing tweeters in this case...for an upgrade..absolutely. But the XLF is a different speaker whose balance will presumably be very different as well...difficult to offer a new tweeter on a speaker with a totally different volume, bass response. Plus the 2 speakers will be sold simultaneously...so 'cannibalizing' the parts of one speaker vs a different model seems strange to do...no?

Bear in mind Lloyd that Wilson does use topology of its X-2 on other speakers right down to Sophias so possibly in the future Dave might go with the new tweeter

 

[LL21]

Hi Steve,

Fair enough. I do like silk domes having lived with them for years (Guarneri and SF STradivari). I am very, very curious whether the XLF will prove to be the child of pure innovation...or pure economics. Was 200K about driving technology forward...or simply about the margin? I suspect discerning audiophiles will make that call very shortly. It wont matter as long as the market buys the speakers (whether because they're better sounding...or because they're better trophies to own)...in any event, very curious. Given DW's long, long, long-standing experience with the ultra highend, i am hopeful he was driven to create a better speaker that the mkt could afford to buy.

 

[marty]

I found this thread interesting but disturbing at the same time. My first reaction was to note the continued and almost vitriolic animosity for a man whose passion has both facilitated the performance of reproduced music over several decades, and who has created a successful business in doing so. How can you not give kudos to these efforts? Now, while some of you have admitted that your animosity reflects the fact the his products are expensive and not affordable to you, it seems that this sentiment is a mirroed reflection of our general culture and our times. We are increasingly becoming a society of haves and have nots and we are losing the middle class. So it doesn't surprise me that some of appear to be of the Occupy Wall Street mindset. Hey, I share your pain. I work hard and I'd love to be able to buy a 200K speaker but just simply cannot. However I'm not sure I would be so quick to condemn Dave Wilson, who, according to just about anybody that knows what drives the guy, appears to be on a genuine quest to improve music reproduction. To begrudge him for being successful, or for charging more than you think he should charge, seems like a cheap shot and one that is out of context to his company's mission. Also keep in mind that he could easily outsource his speaker building to China or other ex-US companies which in all liklihood would lower the retail cost. But he doesn't. The reasons why are known only to him I suppose, but somewhere you have to suspect that he's genuinely obsessed with quality and quality control about his products. Why not applaud him for that at least? That said, the thing that really makes me wonder why so many of you are angry at the guy, is because his efforts over the years have been a big part of the tidal movement we have seen to bring excellent sound to the masses at very moderate prices. His technology always trickles down to lower priced models, as expensive as those may be. But he does it, and that's the point. The audiophile now has a plethora of really modest priced equipment they could only dream about years ago; Oppo CD players, Magenplanar and PSB speakers, decent cabling from many sources, modest priced and superb amplifiers, etc, etc, etc. Now, Dave Wilson was not necessarily directly responsible for those products, but the idea that his high priced technologies are eventually applied to lower priced products certainly contributed to an industry phenomenon where that very trend became the norm, and thus allowed the wealth of great mid-priced gear we know today. Most folks would readily agree that the top end of the Wilson line provides very little additonal sonic benefit for a disproportional degree of improvement over lower priced models. In my view, there is something still pretty special about the Sasha that even the high priced spread can't touch. And let's be honest. How many people really need a speaker that is that much better than the Sophia 3? I heard these last year in Berkeley with Spectral gear and was mightily impressed. No way Dave could have ever made those more affordable speakers without trickle down technology from the high priced spread and the things he learned along the way. All this praise suggests by no means there aren't things to criticize about the man or the company. In fact, I'l go farther. When the Alexandia was released, I considered it almost criminal that a 150K speaker had essentially no useful bass down to 20Hz, which is why so many owners have found that supplementing these speakers with JL audio or other subwoofers finally took the speaker to where it should have been on the first place. But hey, nobody's perfect. And I'll bet you Dave would be quick to say that even he is still learning. But for goodness sake, give the man his due. He is in the pantheon of speaker designers for a reason. If you don't appreciate his passion and drive to advance our field, and if you think he's "in it for the money?, then we will just respectfully have to agree to disagree. Its easy to be jealous that we do not or cannot afford his products, but there are tons of other things out there that we can. But let's not lose sight of the big picture. The guy is an asset to our hobby because of his love for music. And if you don't think so, can you tell me of anyone else who can build a 200K speak that nobody else has yet heard, and which is capable of generating 7 pages of notes on this forum? Show the guy some love for Christ's sake. After all, tis the season.

 

[LL21]

Hi Marty,

Thanks for standing up for DW...he has for many years blazed his own trail of speaker production to create some truly legendary products. I have tremendous respect for him. I am also very happy for him as a commercial success as well. Speaking only for myself, I express my curiosity about whether the X2 XLF will be as good as it should be for 200K, that is all. Based on the fact that he is keeping the X2s2 in place, i imagine he must be confident it is markedly better. i also wonder whether the XLF will have more and better bass...or simply more 'tuneable' bass given ability to do front or rear porting.

 

[FrantzM]

Hi

I see no problem in a person trying to maximize his profits or returns in his business. That is capitalism and that is OK. Criticism and competition are also what make a person, product or company successful. Dave has blazed his trail and has made his money and I am fine with that. He will continue to make speakers and they , also will be purchased by those who can or want to. I don't see myself acquiring any speaker in that price range by the way.
The problem ,as I see it , at least as an audiophile is the tendency to equate the price of an item with its performance. manufacturers who after all are business person, in it to make money have noticed it and using such psychology as a marketing tool, in that sense it is to me very proper for the consumer, potential or not to wonder , ponder and ask questions, tough questions about the Price to performance ratio of any product. Competition, price competition allow us better products and Dave as any manufacturer has felt the pressure of competition: He had to basically ditch the WP8 when there were a slew of competing products in that product price Range which threatened or bested the WP8 at a lesser price. He din't change it for the love of Audiophiles or music. Pure simple competitive pressure. He is after making money which I find correct and laudable but so are the criticisms when they are rational , respectful and inquisitive. Especially when the price to performance ration is doubtful, reduced or unacceptable for the potential acquirer . SO dave has been criticized, so have others s and that's to me , good for the Industry. I have the same problem with others manufacturers when their "advance" is often a substantial increase in price for smallish increments, touted as the next Coming... Rockport comes to mind with the Arrakis Active costing 60K more than its predecessor (or something close ) for active subwoofers. I also tend to think that these expensive designs for various reasons take the focus away from other designs that could be superior for a less stratospheric price. Thus my loathing of the "for the price" expression. I also would have preferred more objective data. Something we audiophiles, regularly reject, to back up these so-called improvements. The dearth (and rejection) of objective data in my opinion encourage this flight toward higher prices to the detriment of true advance in the field of Music reproduction.
If the XLF truly surpasses an X-2 with Two Gothams in the bass , it would an accomplishment .. Does it , Can it? I don't know (would be surprised it it did) but pondering about it is not showing any disrespect to Dave.. It is pushing him to do better next time and hopefully at a less enthralled price, beause it should be known there are out there designs that cost less and that can compete with his or other products or any others and of that the audiophile must be conscious, informed and aware. This would and does advance the Industry and that is what I as an audiophile, am most concerned about

 

[microstrip]

I found this thread interesting but disturbing at the same time (...) The guy is an asset to our hobby because of his love for music. And if you don't think so, can you tell me of anyone else who can build a 200K speak that nobody else has yet heard, and which is capable of generating 7 pages of notes on this forum? Show the guy some love for Christ's sake. After all, tis the season.

Marty,

I fully support your views.

BTW, I would love that the next time I wipe the MAXX3 that are now standing in my room with the soft genuine Wilson cloth, the Genius of the Wilsons would be unleashed through the bass port and would tell me "as you kindly rubbed my lodging I am going to transform it in the new Alexandria XLF"

 

[LL21]

Hey Micro,

Let us know if it works! If it does, i am buying 2 of those cloths!

 

[DaveyF]

hi

i see no problem in a person trying to maximize his profits or returns in his business. That is capitalism and that is ok. Criticism and competition are also what make a person, product or company successful. Dave has blazed his trail and has made his money and i am fine with that. He will continue to make speakers and they , also will be purchased by those who can or want to. I don't see myself acquiring any speaker in that price range by the way.
The problem ,as i see it , at least as an audiophile is the tendency to equate the price of an item with its performance. Manufacturers who after all are business person, in it to make money have noticed it and using such psychology as a marketing tool, in that sense it is to me very proper for the consumer, potential or not to wonder , ponder and ask questions, tough questions about the price to performance ratio of any product. Competition, price competition allow us better products and dave as any manufacturer has felt the pressure of competition: He had to basically ditch the wp8 when there were a slew of competing products in that product price range which threatened or bested the wp8 at a lesser price. He din't change it for the love of audiophiles or music. Pure simple competitive pressure. He is after making money which i find correct and laudable but so are the criticisms when they are rational , respectful and inquisitive. Especially when the price to performance ration is doubtful, reduced or unacceptable for the potential acquirer . So dave has been criticized, so have others s and that's to me , good for the industry. I have the same problem with others manufacturers when their "advance" is often a substantial increase in price for smallish increments, touted as the next coming... Rockport comes to mind with the arrakis active costing 60k more than its predecessor (or something close ) for active subwoofers. I also tend to think that these expensive designs for various reasons take the focus away from other designs that could be superior for a less stratospheric price. Thus my loathing of the "for the price" expression. I also would have preferred more objective data. Something we audiophiles, regularly reject, to back up these so-called improvements. The dearth (and rejection) of objective data in my opinion encourage this flight toward higher prices to the detriment of true advance in the field of music reproduction.
If the xlf truly surpasses an x-2 with two gothams in the bass , it would an accomplishment .. Does it , can it? I don't know (would be surprised it it did) but pondering about it is not showing any disrespect to dave.. It is pushing him to do better next time and hopefully at a less enthralled price, beause it should be known there are out there designs that cost less and that can compete with his or other products or any others and of that the audiophile must be conscious, informed and aware. This would and does advance the industry and that is what i as an audiophile, am most concerned about

+1
Great post Frantz!

 

[mauidan]

Over a year ago, Caesar started a thread here in the WBF Wilson forum titled:

“Other than your ears, what influenced you most to buy aWilson?”

http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showthread.php?1186-Other-than-your-ears-what-influenced-you-most-to-buy-a-Wilson

FrantzM posted:

"Not a Wilson owner and not planning to be one either .. I never liked the Wilson brand of sound ... I still don't care much about it,except for the X-2 however is a different Wilson and a superior speaker no doubt. From what I have been told so is the MAXX-3 ... I did recently hear the Sophia and was not moved that much There are serious contenders in this pricerange IMO, I don't see how I would take a Sophia over my former Magnepan MG20.1 or the Von Schweikert Audio UniField 3 and many others .. The Sasha , I havent heard..."

I posted:

The question is "Other than your ears, what influenced you most to buy a Wilson?"

If you're Not a Wilson owner and not planning to be one either, I'm wondering why did you feel the need to comment?

He never answered my question.

I don’t understand why a person who has already said they’re not a Wilson owner and not planning to be one, and doesn’t liked the Wilson brand of sound, continues to feel the need to post his closed minded opinions about the product, brand and designer here in the Wilson forum.

I'm sure that comments like FrantzM's, is one of the reasons Debby spends more time on this Wilson forum: http://www.audioaficionado.org/wilson-audio/, than WBF.

 

[mep]

I previously posted that I have great respect for David Wilson even though I have never owned a Wilson speaker. Part of the reason that Wilson speakers are expensive is they are made in the U.S. and Dave pays his people a living wage. They are not made in some sweatshop factory in China where people are locked in factory dorms at night. The man has a passion for quality and his speakers reflect that passion.

 

[MylesBAstor]

I previously posted that I have great respect for David Wilson even though I have never owned a Wilson speaker. Part of the reason that Wilson speakers are expensive is they are made in the U.S. and Dave pays his people a living wage. They are not made in some sweatshop factory in China where people are locked in factory dorms at night. The man has a passion for quality and his speakers reflect that passion.

And made with counterfeit parts. I've had manufacturers tell me how they spec'd out gear, the unit comes with "X" high-end capacitor label on it, and it turns out to be a fake. And quality is still a foreign word to them; all they know is mass production like transistor radios.

 

[FrantzM]

Hi

I don't think the provenance of labor of a product is germane to the discussion at hand. The speaker could be made in New Zealnd or in Haiti, of that, the buyer would likely care first for the sound quality. In a rapidly changing world, I would avoid sweeping generalizations. China is giant moving forward and already is producing quality products. The junk to gem ratio may be relatively low but. ..
I 'll drop this aspect for now but in a board with international pretenses indeed with members from all continent, various nationalities and ethnicity. I would avoid country-bashing, in these days of ubiquitous knowledge and access to knowledge. No country has any monopoly on quality .

 

[mauidan]

Hi

I don't think the provenance of labor of a product is germane to the discussion at hand. The speaker could be made in New Zealnd or in Haiti, of that, the buyer would likely care first for the sound quality. In a rapidly changing world, I would avoid sweeping generalizations. China is giant moving forward and already is producing quality products. The junk to gem ratio may be relatively low but. ..
I 'll drop this aspect for now but in a board with international pretenses indeed with members from all continent, various nationalities and ethnicity. I would avoid country-bashing, in these days of ubiquitous knowledge and access to knowledge. No country has any monopoly on quality .

Once again you seek to downplay one of the core values of Wilson Audio.

I'm happy to support a made in the U.S. product, that places a high value on its workers.

 

[mep]

And made with counterfeit parts. I've had manufacturers tell me how they spec'd out gear, the unit comes with "X" high-end capacitor label on it, and it turns out to be a fake. And quality is still a foreign word to them; all they know is mass production like transistor radios.

I read somewhere (I think TAS or SP) about a manufacturer who has their products made in China. They have to watch the factory like a hawk and make them clear out all parts off the floor when they were making a production run of their gear to make sure no counterfeit parts make their way into their products.

And Frantz, the Chinese are notorious for stealing intellectual property through a variety of means. And this isn’t country bashing, it’s just telling the truth. Our computer networks in the U.S. are under constant attack from China as well as some other countries. Go read the charter of the Chinese Institute of Engineers and it tells you everything you need to know about what China expects from Chinese living in the U.S. or anywhere else outside of China.

 

[JackD201]

Hi Jack, i wonder about changing tweeters in this case...for an upgrade..absolutely. But the XLF is a different speaker whose balance will presumably be very different as well...difficult to offer a new tweeter on a speaker with a totally different volume, bass response. Plus the 2 speakers will be sold simultaneously...so 'cannibalizing' the parts of one speaker vs a different model seems strange to do...no?

That's exactly what I'm thinking. The XLF may look like a bigger X-2 but I suspect that the cross overs are very different making it a totally different loudspeaker. Since Wilson uses a single module XO (only one set of binding posts), I expect that just replacing the Ti inverted dome would require a change in the crossover too. Replacing the tweeter in this instance would require quite some redesigning to keep the already very high level of coherency much less add to it.

When I had my own speakers updated, on the surface, it was only the midrange driver changed. Inside, I saw the entire cross-over replaced with my own eyes. What I saw was a totally different crossover circuit with different parts and a totally different lay out. Too bad I was asked not to take pictures of them both. Changing tweeters on an X-2 would likely require the same thing.

Like I said though, if WIlson did the whole enchilada, whether it be from X-2 Series 2 to X-3 that includes the tweeter change THEN the upgrade package will likely be made available. We have to remember that when the Alexandria went from S1 to S2, the work required was so extensive that the speakers had to be shipped back to Utah. What may look like a simple thing like a tweeter change is deceptive. It is not as simple as soldering and bolting on the new pieces of kit. S1 owners usually just traded up for new pairs of X-2s.

 

[LL21]

Hi Jack,

Totally agree...I have researched the upgrade of my X1/Grand Slamms to Series V (close to Alexandria)...and they actually remove the top 3 modules entirely, plus all the internal wiring and basically deliver 3 new modules which are the Alexandria tweeters and midranges (the entire speaker...not just cones, but entire casing, crossovers, internal cabling, everything)..and they also add further damping to the giant bass module which remains. It can be done on site but takes an entire day.

 

[Steve Williams]

when the X2 series ll came out, the hope that the X-2 series l could be field upgradeable to series ll was on every owners'minds however the job was too big and they had to be sent back to Utah for the upgrade

 

[microstrip]

(...) I would avoid country-bashing, in these days of ubiquitous knowledge and access to knowledge. No country has any monopoly on quality .

Quality is not something you can get instantaneously. You need to educate and prepare workers and managers. This education starts at school level and several generations can be needed to establish a culture of quality in a country.

China is a great country, and is developing very fast. Western countries are taking a big part in this development, transferring their technology and labor methods to the chinese factories However, they are still far away from having a culture of quality. Even in academic work, although they have excellent students and some niches of excellence, old habits are still giving trouble to the Government, as shown by this recent article by The Economist.

http://www.economist.com/blogs/asiaview/2010/07/academic_fraud_china

 

[FrantzM]

Quality is not something you can get instantaneously. You need to educate and prepare workers and managers. This education starts at school level and several generations can be needed to establish a culture of quality in a country.

China is a great country, and is developing very fast. Western countries are taking a big part in this development, transferring their technology and labor methods to the chinese factories However, they are still far away from having a culture of quality. Even in academic work, although they have excellent students and some niches of excellence, old habits are still giving trouble to the Government, as shown by this recent article by The Economist.

http://www.economist.com/blogs/asiaview/2010/07/academic_fraud_china

The thread is not about China or World relation. It has taken this turn and I will defend my point of view. 50 years ago "Made in Japan" wasn't a label of quality. Look at it now ask any Merceds or BMW dealer about Lexus ask any car manufacturer about the Prius or Cameras manufacturers about Canon, Nikon, etc or any electronic maker about any Japanese Electronic company ... Western countries are not "helping " China as much as trading with China and from time asking China to come to their rescue USA three years ago and recently the EU. Western countries are not taking part in the development of China as much as having to trade and deal with China. Let's not forget that China is not a country that just came about a few years ago. It was a world power before any of the Western (European) countries came to even be. Its civilization is older than most if not all Western Civilizations.
Not taking China very, very seriously and understanding that they are The emrging world power is really forgetting recent histroy in an almost amusing way ... They are the power to deal with and the " old (bad) habits " will give a lot of trouble but so have our own western bad habits. Think for example about Porcelain where the world "china" is a noun for porcelain ... Think about Silk and so many other forms of exquisite, delicate and complicated crafts China is well known for .. THink about Calligraphy whihc takes almost a spiritual aspect in China and think a lot about this country .. The Very notion of Kung-Fu for example is synonymous with excellence .. Not a martial art per se but to be the best at what you can do .. Whatever it is ... And you really think they can't do Quality? really ... Really!!! This way of thinking about China is a navel-looking perspective, that the present rise of China is proving foolish

Back to the thread about the Alexandria XLF which has a different dome tweeter and whose improvements may or may not be difficult to move to the "normal" X-2 ...

 

[microstrip]

The thread is not about China or World relation. It has taken this turn and I will defend my point of view. 50 years ago "Made in Japan" wasn't a label of quality. Look at it now ask any Merceds or BMW dealer about Lexus ask any car manufacturer about the Prius or Cameras manufacturers about Canon, Nikon, etc or any electronic maker about any Japanese Electronic company (...)

FrantzM,

My main point was only about industrial quality, as it directly applied to Wilson Audio, nothing else. When you pick-up Japan, you are just making my point. Japan was the first Asian industrialized nation, has a long tradition of science and technology, and quality is part of their culture - IMHO you can not compare the quality of their industrial manpower with the current chinese one. But surely things will change in future. As an example, the quality of Chinese tubes was terrible twenty years ago and current ones are quite reliable.