997 gt3 rs 4.0 was limited to 600 units.
most people slept on that release, so were sure to be awake when 991r was announced, hence mass hysteria that ensued.
4.0 is the grandmaster though.
WAMM Master Chronosonic by Wilson Audio
- Thread starter TitaniumTroy
- Start date
997 gt3 rs 4.0 was limited to 600 units.
most people slept on that release, so were sure to be awake when 991r was announced, hence mass hysteria that ensued.
4.0 is the grandmaster though.
I like both the apearance and the sound of the Futura, it is definitely in the running to be my next speaker, yet I've read many Internet posts criticizing it?
Roy Gregory about the WAMM in Audiobeat http://www.theaudiobeat.com/blog/wilson_audio_wamm_mc_1.htm
No speaker system that I have ever heard comes close to re-creating the original event as convincingly as this one.
This is now the second well known reviewer openly repeating this "realism" message.
No speaker system that I have ever heard comes close to re-creating the original event as convincingly as this one.
This is now the second well known reviewer openly repeating this "realism" message.
Yeah this pic does them justice more with dave wilson standing beside them , very cool design , the woofer chambers stretch pretty far behind so quite a big box after all and potentially good " natural " bas 
I personally dont like the bass coming from those little active subwoofer boxes with a big driver in it , havent heard a natural one yet.
One reason could be that the tiny mid is added is to take part of the audio band away from the tweeter , so the tw has it a little easier , you see it also with the alexx , the former maxx 3 uppermid has now been replaced by a smaller one , my guess is that the new tw that is used in these models needs to be crossed higher , to perform well at high spls , the focal inverted dome can probably be crossed much lower
I personally dont like the bass coming from those little active subwoofer boxes with a big driver in it , havent heard a natural one yet.
One reason could be that the tiny mid is added is to take part of the audio band away from the tweeter , so the tw has it a little easier , you see it also with the alexx , the former maxx 3 uppermid has now been replaced by a smaller one , my guess is that the new tw that is used in these models needs to be crossed higher , to perform well at high spls , the focal inverted dome can probably be crossed much lower
Last edited:
Does mean the time domain will only be correct at one listening position?
What is the degree of criticality from a perception view point ( i.e. hearing limits)
How does this differ from experience of different listeners viewpoints in a live venue?
What is the degree of criticality from a perception view point ( i.e. hearing limits)
How does this differ from experience of different listeners viewpoints in a live venue?
Taken from the interview , sounds familiar lol
Hard or Soft
Before listening began, there was one question I was dying to pose. If I had $1000 for each time a speaker manufacturer has made a point of contrasting his hard-dome, ultra-hard-dome, or super-ultra-hard-dome tweeter with Wilson's soft, silk-domed tweeters, I'd have enough money to buy a pair of Alexxes. Hence, I asked Dave and Daryl, "How can your tweeters have anywhere near the resolution of hard-dome tweeters that have taken years to develop?"
Dave: "I do find it interesting when people look at things in terms of speed. I've been in this field a long time, since the first solid-state amplifiers came out and were considered better than tubes because they were faster. If someone has a problem with silk-dome tweeters but they play vinyl through vacuum tubes, there's a certain inconsistency there.
"In the final analysis, it's what you like. One of the things about a soft diaphragm is that when it goes into break-up mode, it breaks up softly and gradually, like soft clipping. A rigid diaphragm has some real benefits, especially if it's light, but when it goes into break-up mode, it's harsh.
Hard or Soft
Before listening began, there was one question I was dying to pose. If I had $1000 for each time a speaker manufacturer has made a point of contrasting his hard-dome, ultra-hard-dome, or super-ultra-hard-dome tweeter with Wilson's soft, silk-domed tweeters, I'd have enough money to buy a pair of Alexxes. Hence, I asked Dave and Daryl, "How can your tweeters have anywhere near the resolution of hard-dome tweeters that have taken years to develop?"
Dave: "I do find it interesting when people look at things in terms of speed. I've been in this field a long time, since the first solid-state amplifiers came out and were considered better than tubes because they were faster. If someone has a problem with silk-dome tweeters but they play vinyl through vacuum tubes, there's a certain inconsistency there.
"In the final analysis, it's what you like. One of the things about a soft diaphragm is that when it goes into break-up mode, it breaks up softly and gradually, like soft clipping. A rigid diaphragm has some real benefits, especially if it's light, but when it goes into break-up mode, it's harsh.
I have not heard Wilson's version,but on any good recording the "sweet spot" is expanded, where I can be at either extreme side and still hear the complete recording. I think it is closer to live given the wall of sound created and dynamics.speed,richness,ambient retrieval.nuance are all improved,especially the lower frequencies.
For 650k, shouldn't it? I mean, how many other 650k speakers even exist that Roy has heard. He obviously had the Vox which was only a mere 400k as I recall.
I have the same question actually and when I heard the Alexx, I couldn't help to feel it had a narrower sweet spot than prior Wilsons. Dave Wilson's "obsession about time" in that JS listening summary while still creating a non-time/phase coherent speaker kinda puzzles me as well.
The Audiobeat article answers in part to your question:
A speaker like the Living Voice Vox Olympian captures the sense of presence and energy like no other, but the WAMM MC’s combination of bandwidth, resolution and temporal accuracy re-creates the recorded acoustic with a natural ease that is uncanny and utterly unforced, placing you at (within) the original event. That temporal and spatial precision combined with the system’s overall sensitivity makes for a beautifully scaled and expressive presentation, but the thing that really got to me was this speaker’s natural perspective. Performers weren’t just the size that you expected them to be; they were in exactly the right place too. But more than that, move back in terms of seating position (Dave Wilson's room offers three rows of seats) and the balance between direct and reflected energy alters exactly as it does in the concert hall -- and I’ve never heard a speaker system do that.
Living in a place with severe traffic, bumpy roads and where roads are decent a strictly enforced 100kph limit and ohn no long race tracks, I'll take the speakers. AT least I can floor those!
I believe most of the future WAMM owners have that already covered
At these prices cost effectiveness is not an issue
Dave Wilson take a "bow"
Retirement benefit...............forthcoming
Bit worried its so ugly ...that Steve has to listened in the dark........oops............ouch lol
Pan-galatic goggles anyone ........lol
Pan-galatic goggles anyone ........lol
Most of the WAMM purchasers won't blink at the price just as they didn't blink when they pulled their 918 next to their LaFerrari. It's not an either or proposition.
Similar threads
 | Steve Williams Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator |  | Ron Resnick Site Owner | Administrator |  | Julian (The Fixer) Website Build | Marketing Managersing |