Robert Harley - Wilson Sasha versus Magico V3
hce4 -- Wed, 07/07/2010 - 15:20
Greetings Mr. Harley,
I've just finished reading your recent Wilson Sasha review in TAS and I can tell you were most impressed with this loudspeaker's performance. You also seemed very impressed with the Magico V3 when you reviewed it several years ago.
I'm wondering if you have a preference between these two loudspeakers? If not, what are the fundamental sonic differences between the two? In the Wilson Sasha review, you focus on the bass performance, would you say the Sashas' bass is superior to the Magico's in terms of articulation, resolution, reach, power, and coherence? The midrange performance of the Magico V3 seemed to captivate you, opening a window to the music and at the same time sounding rich and full bodied. You make a similar observation of the Wilson Sasha's midrange with it's richness of timbre and density of tone color. In absolute terms, what would one hear as differences in the midrange between these two speakers? I notice the Wilson to be slightly more forward and possessing the ability to capture slightly more detail and "dynamic contrast" (to use Dave Wilson's terminology). For whatever reason, the Magico's midrange sounds slightly more seductive with a bit more haze that makes the presentation a little less exciting and somewhat recessed. Lastly, the highs seem more full bodied and dynamic on the Wilsons compared to the Magicos, but it seems the Magico's tweeter extends further, sounding a little less "dark" (maybe just more noticeable?).
As for soundstaging, I've found the Wilsons to cast a bigger soundstage with better delineation. The Magicos had better coherence; however, they could not sound as big or effortless as the Wilsons.
I would be most interested in your feedback regarding these two speakers. Has the newer Wilson outclassed the older Magico? Is the choice subjective because their performance is still close, or would you say there's an objective "better speaker"? At the end of the day, which speaker could you see yourself happily living with for a longer period of time?
I'm utilizing a VAC Phi 200 amplifier (stereo 100 watts of tubes), so if you have any idea which speaker would match better, I'm all ears.
Thanks for your time and advice! I welcome comments from all other users as well!
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1999 - 2011 NextScreen. All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
Already off topic, but I understand Mr. Harley that you attended the Magico Q5 debut on the east Coast about two months ago. In just a few words, what was your impression of this new loudspeaker, and what did you hear it doing differently from the V3 and Wilson Sasha? Is TAS planning a review? Thanks!
One additional thought to illecit comments...
Since both the Wilson Sasha and Magico V3 are essentially full range, one would assume that both speakers are capable of handling a wide variety of music. However, do you find either speaker gravitating or simply sounding better with certain genres? I find that because the Wilsons offer more resolution, lesser recordings (especially in pop/rock), sound worse than they would on the Magicos which are slightly more forgiving. More simply, I find the Wilsons more transparent to the source which can offer higher performance with the best recordings and almost lower performance on poorer recordings whereas the Magicos compromise to reach a middle ground.
Also, coming from the Wilson Sophia II's, I'm fearful of losing what the Wilson's do best by going anyplace else (including Magico). To my ears, they handle dynamic contrast and the ability to reveal nuance and spatial detail better than anything else I've heard. They are very realistic. It's almost like the music become a living and breathing whole. It's the resolution, detail and dymanics that give them this quality, but to my ears, Magico might have the upper hand in tonality. I'm obviously being more subjective here, but still interested in everyone's thoughts...
Alan Sircom -
I welcome your comments and thoughts as well. You have reviewed both products for HiFi +. I got the feeling you might prefer the V3 based on reading both reviews...
Thanks!
Throw the Von Schweikert VR-5 Anniversary's in there too.
Good call.
What has always bothered me about Wilson speakers is that to my ears they all sound different. Makes me wonder how they are designed. However there's no denying their commercial success.
I'd say Wilson has a "family house sound" across the board as does Magico. You're wording brings up another thought...
I'd say most people have not heard Wilson speakers performing 100%. They are incredibly difficult to set up (IMO), and fall apart if they are not set up just PERFECTLY. I think this is the main reason you hear people criticizing Wilson's sound "I don't get it". I've gotten the Wilson Sophia II's to sound good in my home, but only after a year of painsteaking tweaking, repositioning, equipment changes and room treatments. Wilson speakers only sound good about half the time I go into one of the best Wilson dealerships on the west coast. I've been to the RMAF twice, both times every Wilson speaker I heard did not sound right (5 different setups/rooms).
I'd say this sensitivity to setup and supporting equipment is what gives Wilson that couple % points over it's competition. We all know getting the last 5-10% out of your system is what makes great systems, and I think that same logic applies to Wilson speakers...
Magico, I think is easier on setup. While I haven't personally set up a pair in my room, I've heard them half a donzen times in different setup positions and the results are generally similar. This is contrasting to Wilson which just don't sound happy or RIGHT unless they are really clicking with the room and the supporting equipment...
(When Wilson does not sound good you can get sound that varies wildly but is generally bright, thin, phasy, incoherent, lacking depth, but most notably the music is just unnatural sounding - something seems wrong, almost artificial. When Wilson speakers click, they disappear and sound natural in the best sense of the words. Magico sounds very natural to my ears over a wider range of good to great setups, but maybe (?) doesn't go that last 5% in resolution and making music seem vividly realistic)
I would second that. Also heard the Sophia in different setups and they never sounded right. Most likely setup and match issues. Eventhough all Wilson products ge amazing reviews I would audition the model of choice at length extensively. Speakers half the price of wilsons have sounded better many times.
I hope Mr. Harley and Mr. Sircom contribute is some form, but I can see the difficulty in publicly claiming a preference since both Magico and Wilson advertise heavily in their magazines. Perhaps taking out personal opinion by stating objective differences in sound between the two brands would be more diplomatic? I hope either of you can provide some constructive feedback, I've spent a lot of time in front of both speakers but haven't had the opportunity to live with both speakes in my home for months as you have. I assume you could draw some conclusions based upon those experiences...
You want them to tell u what to buy or confirm what u want to buy? Read both the reviews, audition the 2 in different setups and buy the one that sounds great to YOUR ears. If you r on ur last two choices Then it shouldn't be that difficult. The problem is when u start with 5 or 10 different choices. Good luck and let us know what you decide and why.
The lights are on but no-ones home.
A recent move has slowed down RH's response time on-line. Patience...
Steven Stone
Contributor to The Absolute Sound, EnjoytheMusic.com, Vintage Guitar Magazine, and other fine publications
For whatever it is worth, I am a long standing admirer of Wilson loudspeakers and have owned aal the versions of the Watt Puppies over time. I changed to a different loudspeaker in my last system which needed to work well within the context of a narrow (16 foot wide) and long (35 foot long) room. After a lot of work with the WP 7's I concluded that there is something going on in the off-axis response of the Wilsons is very different from the on-axis response making the "dialing in" of speaker and listening position is super critical. When dialed in perfectly, they are phenomenally transparent. If the room and dialing in is not perfect, there is considerable smearing. This, when combined with the need for an amplifier that can handle a difficult load makes the Wilsons sound very different with different rooms and electronics.
I switched to a vertical line array with open baffle highs and mid range giving me a wave that propogates in the most room friendly manner, the exact opposite of the wave form I expect being produced by the Wilson tweeter.
-atul
Haven't heard the Sasha yet, but if the V3's you heard had any haze I don't think it was the speaker...
Robert,
Please give us some further insights into the Sasha treble/tweeter performance, as it compares, for example, to the Usher Be-718s which you also liked. I bought some Sashas the other day and they should be arriving shortly, so it will be interesting. My Be-718s were recently upgraded with the "diamond" DMD tweeters, and a very good speaker became even better.
Nick
Nicholas Bedworth
DigitalDirect Media Services, LLC Text/voice 1.808.372.2883 (GMT -10) nicholas [dot] bedworth [at] digitaldirect [dot] com (nicholas.bedworth@digitaldi)
Bump for Mr. Harley and Mr. Sircom...
Bump.
What's the deal? Harley and Sircom are active on many other threads on this website? What a waste of my time.
S'matter, don't trust your own ears?
Of course I do, and I have my preference. Plain and simple, I value realism. Wilson Audio is more realistic to my ears.
But THAT MISSES THE POINT!
The point was to get Harley (and Sircom) to make specific subjective and objective comparisons since they are professional reviewers and have written reviews on BOTH loudspeakers. It could have been an interesting exercise, but they'd rather blow off their readers. WTFE!!!!
Then which did you buy and why?
Goodness. Chill out. They are only 2 people and they have day jobs.
"Of course I do, and I have my preference. Plain and simple, I value realism. Wilson Audio is more realistic to my ears.
But THAT MISSES THE POINT!
The point was to get Harley (and Sircom) to make specific subjective and objective comparisons since they are professional reviewers and have written reviews on BOTH loudspeakers. It could have been an interesting exercise, "
I am not sure what is the point in this still. I prefer the Magico, you prefer the Wilson, so what ? Robert Harley might prefer X and Alan Sircom Y. Does it really matter in any way? You buy what you like best regardless of whatever anyone else says, including professional reviewers. If they both say they prefer the Magico, would that make the Wilson less "realistic" to your ears ? Or do you decide that Harley and Sircom are cloth-eared ?
Post of the day!
For one thing, reviewing is not about stating what you like. Reviewers are supposed to analyze and explain what happens and why, and should be able to compare, reach conclusions, and tell the public about them. The former is called competence, the latter integrity.
Funny, I just heard the Sophia 2s today and I mentioned the "placement" issue I've been reading about in these forums. Surprisingly, the dealer told me that Wilsons are relatively easy to place in rooms compared to other speakers, noting that Mr. Wilson typically places them quite close up against the front wall when he showcases them (and that he designs his speakers to work with room environments).
The Sopia 2s I listened to (at Audio Excellence in Richmond Hill, Ontario) sounded fantastic, with a big wide and deep soundstage. They were positioned about 2" out from the long wall of the room and about 2" from he side walls, with each speaker toed in to almost directly face the listening position. The listening room was actually a 14" by 18" room in the top floor of an old house, with sloped ceilings and french doors on one side (which remained closed during my listening session). There were lots of speakers and audio equipment piled near the Sopias. There were no room treatments to speak of. All in all, a far from pristine listening environment but the Sopia 2s still sounded outstanding. The only thing I could nit pick at would be that the bass sounded a little too full, making it sound a little sluggish in the bottom end compared to the Revel Studio 2s I just auditioned in my house. Overall, though, the Sophia 2s sounded a little more "organic" and warm than the Studio 2s, which sounded a ittle more "clean" (neutral? polite? difficult to describe) than the Sophia 2s.
Both the Wilson Sophia 2s and the Revel Studio 2s are great speakers in my humble opinion!
I've found Wilson speakers to be difficult to place in rooms and generally will not sound very good unless they are well placed in a room. I know Wilson claims their speakers are adjustable and easy to place in rooms, and I'm not sure why they make this claim, but it's probably because they don't want to scare potential customers. Like I said in a previous post, when they are optimally placed in a room, they go that extra couple % points above the competition in creating realism. They are very transparent, they respond to all changes, equipment, placement, cables, etc, which allows you to extract the last ounce of performance...
Henrus, It's obvious they are posting all over this site, just not to this particular thread, so you chill.
This is what I'm looking for Cemil:
"Reviewers are supposed to analyze and explain what happens and why, and should be able to compare, reach conclusions, and tell the public about them. " - fishnchips
Obviously RH and AS have ignored this thread because they a) don't remember how each speaker sounds and therefore are not comfortable discussing differences, or b) would rather blow off readers.
I'm not looking for someone to tell me what to buy and I won't discount another's opinion (but I'd be skeptical of RH's words based on the pictures of his new listening room - that space does not look like it would provide a linear listening room (space more like it), but I haven't heard it so grain of salt, just an observation). That criticism aside, they have reviewed both products and should be able to provide some real feedback on comparing each speaker. For example, "yes hce4, the Wilson speakers might have a touch more resolution because the midrange unit is completely separate from the bass drivers, while the Magico's are not. The pressure of the woofers moving in and out will cause the midrange unit to move ever so slightly when it's not supposed to, and this in part causes the smearing you hear in the Magicos' midrange", or "yes hce4, the Wilsons are more difficult to place into a room because they are ported and the room's nodes influence the drivers more substantially than the Magicos which are sealed and more tolerant of placement", or "no hce4, the Wilsons may technically go deeper in the bass, but that is contingent upon their positioning and reinforcement of the room, whereas the Magicos have less drop off due to their sealed cabinet and are less dependent upon room reinforcement"... You know, real comparisons about the technologies and how they affect the ultimate "sound". This would be telling for readers, not just flowery expressions (a 3d soundstage) which don't tell me anything other than every other variable fell in place to allow the speaker to attain this particular sound. Where's the explantion behind that sound? Gotta give it to Stereophile for doing measurements and explaining why things sound the way they do, TAS is just a flowery subjective opinion...
Your last paragraph makes a lot of sense. However, you still need to draw your own conclusions and not rely on the opinions of others. There is only one person connected with that mag who would give you the opinions you are looking for and I've never seen him post in this forum. Can you say, HP?
I don't think all the other writers can be completely dismissed. Yes HP is HP but some of the other guys have lots of experience and exposure to a lot of audio products. HP alone cannot possibly cover them all. Neither can HP run the magazine on his own now given what level it has reached compared to the early days. Its normal for him to need help with such a big project. One of the other great thing I like about TAS is that their writers have different personalites and tastes....the writers also review things similar in product catagories that they are used to and in similar price ranges. I doubt most people would want JV to review a NAD or Rotel CD player in his solution system...it would just not be fair to any of the components in the system cheap or expensive. If HP is what you want he reviews plenty of stuff...just pick and choose between what he reviews. You cannot possibly expect him to give a word on every product. I also feel that the anger here is because the reviewers being asked are not responding to the posts.... I don't know what the reason is.....may be its political or buisness related...I wouldn't know. What I know is that R.H. has reviewed both the products in question in great detail....describing them in his style (not HP style) and we as intelligent readers can connect the dots on what he thinks.....further more....the ultimate choice if you have come down to the last few products to choose from is YOUR listening preference. What sounds good to you might not be the same for HP, JV, RH anyone.....and I have heard products from all kinds of reviewers...I liked some of them, some were ok, and some simply not good sounding to my ears....... I go like this...
1. Find a reviewer with similar tastes and liking as you in audio products. (generally this also depends on what price range products they review) ex. to be a JV fan you should probably be well heeled like Oprah or Bill gates..lol
2. Narrow down you choices to the final 4 or 5 products (keeping in mind the associated equipment it will be played with).
3. Go Audition (sometimes this is not possible due to location)
4. If you are looking for a product...many people may review it....don't just accept everyones view...first find someone you trust with similar taste as you then go to the next step. The product also must be reviewed with realistic associated equipment...a $500 amp is not reviewed accurately in a million dollar system setup...because thats not how it would be used in a real setting. Good or bad thats not a fair assessment.
other then that.....Im also curious why no reply from the reviewers and the reason behind it....definately interesting..on that point.
Robert- can you comment on the V3 vs. Sasha? I really enjoyed your V3 vs. Salon comparison and am curious why you did not do the same for the Sasha. In fact, I do not believe you compared the Wilson to any speaker at all.
BUYER BEWARE!!!
I would stay AS FAR AWAY AS POSSIBLE from any Magico product other than the Q5. Since Magico purchased an aluminum shop, all of the lesser models are likely to be re-released in aluminum casings and will likely be lower in price just like the aluminum cased Q5 surpassed the birch cased M5 in sound quality according to experts and costs less money. You don't want to wind up like an M5 owner who spent $90K on a speaker to have a better speaker released just a few months later for $30K less.
But if you can't wait and must have a Magico, get the Mini 2. The V3 is a heap of junk compared to that speaker, IMO.
True but I honestly feel they will not reduce the price on other models by 60% like they did between M5 and Q5. In todays world to show an image of being highend people charge $20k+. I will be surprised if they drop prices below 18K max regardless of the cost to build or machine shops purchased
Curious,
What's wrong with an all aluminum version of the Mini (Mini Q) with the new tweeter and modified crossover selling for say $25-30K? Sounds like a new benchmark. Could even compete with the TAD CR-1 I just heard at RMAF. I agree with you that I might wait to buy and at that point the older wood Magicos will be a bargain used.
I think it would be great. I would like to see a product announcement with a date and possibly a price drop on the older models. Why not respect your customer as you release the new product?
That's tough to do in practice. I was at a Wilson dealership when the dealer told my friend who owned the Sophia 2 that a Sophia 3 was going to be announced in a month for less money than his Sophia 2 which he had bought about a year earlier. My friend was very disappointed because he thought the price for his Sophia 2 was going to drop fast. This was as he was auditioning the Sasha which he wanted to buy. Sure enough, the price of the Sophia 2 took a nose dive, and he had a very hard time selling it. The people who wanted a new Wilson speaker just held off buying anything until the 3 was released and they could audition it. Add to that the usual marketing hype that precedes a new model and confusion really sets in. I guess those willing to wait got great deals on used Sophia 2s. Your suggestion of a price drop for the older models is fine, but often the company just drops the old model out of production leaving existing customers enjoying their products but aware that they are no longer worth what they were the day before. I don't know of a perfect solution for this. The existing customer's interests are not necessarily the same as the company's or those of future customers.
I agree it is not easy, especially in industries with fast technological changes. Some of the things that could be done are getting on a regular release schedule to set customer expectations. Also, one can learn a lot from Apple. When they pre-announce a product a few months ahead (and a few months for a fast moving electronic product is very respectable), they drop the price of the older products. During that period the customers are free to decide whether it makes sense to wait and pay more for certain newer features or to buy the current product at a discount.
Magico in their rush to "shock and awe" and/ or through a lack of understanding of game theory has failed here. Everyone knows that they have purchased an aluminum shop. And since their speakers are being praised for a lack of box colorations, all of their speakers will be aluminum enclosed in short order. Only those with oodles of money will not care and buy now. But many others will just wait to buy the "new" Magico or buy speakers from their competitors.
By not pre-announcing the timing of their products, Magico has shot themselves in the foot. It is possible that they do not care - they may be busy building Q5's. But pre-announcing will be advantageous to them. It will show respect for their customers. It's not too late. Even an egomaniac like Steve Jobs back-tracked, apologized, and changed his policies.
Contrary to your suggestion, the loudspeaker industry is not one full of fast technological changes. It could hardly be more different from the computer industry, much less the software side of things. I have never heard of such a thing as a "regular release schedule" unless you mean to include a few certain audio manufacturers who seem to try to regularly churn their customers with new or updated models every year or two. Get it fundamentally right the first time. So no, there is no such thing as a regular release schedule for loudspeakers. And if you think preannouncing products is a good idea for audio manufacturers to do, try it yourself and you'll learn the hard way.
Brian Walsh
Essential Audio ~ Chicago area ~ 773-809-HIFI (4434)