Revel Salons vs. Wilson Sophias

FYI, the tweeter is completely different between the Watt Puppy 7 and the Watt Puppy 8 (as well as the Sophia 2). The crossover was also completely altered (making a Watt Puppy 7 comparison to an 8 or Sophia 2 sort of moot). Also some other changes were made as well. Overall the combination of these changes is a fairly large alteration in the sound character between these speakers. I would recommend listening to them and judging them separately from the Watt Puppy 7 rather than being hasty and assuming they will sound a lot a like. It is possible a lot of the qualities you described and didn't like have been eliminated with a changed tweeter and crossover design. (Though if the original poster is referring to the regular Sophia speakers and not the 2s I don't have experience with those to be of much help, much like I have none with the Revel Salon2 speakers as well).

I don't seem to have those kinds of problems with orchestral music on the 8s and 2s, nor with violins and "fiddles." This was important to me because I love Bela Fleck Bluegrass albums (Mark O'Connor) and I listen to Julia Fischer and Joshua Bell fairly often as well. Perhaps I never got to extensively experience the sizzle on the 7s that people have referred to a lot in the past, which they attributed to the old tweeters used in the W/P 7s. Of course, YMMV. So it is imperative that you demo everything personally before making the decision. Obviously based on what is being said, bringing some orchestral music, including violins and violin sections would be a wise decision.

Here is a side by side comparison of the 7 and the 8:
http://www.wilsonaudio.com/product/watt_puppy_8/innovations/3.php

Cincy,

I am surprised you feel that way about the bass on the Revels though... I thought that was one of the true strengths the Revels had. I have two Sub 30s in my system and they are both fast and tight. They also integrate well with any speakers you are using because of their excellent fine tuning options (phase and level settings, as well as crossovers) and parametric EQ settings. Of course, the Salons don't have that fine tuning option, but they use the same materials.

I'm also surprised at your experience with acoustical ambience using the Wilsons, as in my room (given, it is a dedicated and excellently designed/treated room) you can see right though to original venues, albeit with the obligatory acoustical coupling, especially with surround music. Perhaps this too is a difference between the 7s and the 8s, or perhaps my room makes the difference. I tend to hear more of the speaker itself because of my room.

I didn't hear anywhere near the same midrange transparency from the Revels compared to the 7s. Or top to bottom transparency between the revels and the 8s. Again, YMMV, I guess.

The thought occurred to me Cincy. Did you have a trained Wilson dealer voice those Watt Puppy 7 speakers for your room? They are very specific in terms of their placement needs. I have heard people complain about the tweeters sound on the 7s before, but it sounds like the problems you had might be more complicated. When I placed them myself, the 8s didn't sound so great, but once they were profesionally voiced everything lost the disconnection between frequency ranges and everything integrated well. Even a few inches can change the sound completely!

Unfortunately, my room has two dimensions with a shared multiple (~9' and ~18') so I have a terrible bass reinforcement mode in the high 60 Hz region. I'm still deciding how I will deal with that (likely I'll build a Helmholtz resonator, or buy a Rives PARC).

Jeff, I did not have a Wilson dealer place the WATT/Puppies in my room, but I did follow the Wilson procedure quite carefully myself. The speakers were easy to move around in my room, and I experimented quite extensively with the placement of the speakers. I found that the placement of the speakers significantly affected the bass frequency response, the soundstaging and the imaging. However, as you might expect, the midrange and treble frequency response were not affected to any noticeable degree.

In the end, my biggest problem with the speaker is that it could not be made to sound "natural," in the context of live acoustic music, in my system. My electronics and source components are exceptionally revealing, so my system had the effect of shining a very bright light on the performance attributes of the speaker. My take on the WATT/Puppy 7 is that Wilson achieved excellent dynamics, speed and soundstaging at the expense of flat frequency response and timbral accuracy.

As you suggested earlier, however, this may have no relevance whatsoever to the performance of the WATT/Puppy 8 or any of the other Wilson speaker models, including the Sophia. I would also expect that the 7s might show better with electronics and source components that are more forgiving.

Jeff, I should add that I admire what you have done with your room and your system. I have a lot of respect for your Ayre electronics. I am currently in the process of completing construction on a new two-channel listening room that was designed by Rives, and I like what you have done with yours.

Cincy,

Thanks for the compliments. I'm looking forward to seeing what you are having done in your Rives Audio designed space. I can tell you from my personal experiences with the room so far, that the difference in sound quality is tremendous between the before and after.

I was surprised how an acoustically treated room could change so much in the perceived character of a speaker. Room interference and reflections in the initial 50 ms or so sum up with the direct sound and alter the timbre of the speaker output, creating a hybrid sound of the speaker character and room character. So I got a lot closer to the actual sound of my speakers once I had the room completely treated and finished. I got even closer than ever in the last week while eliminating some of the opposite wall 1st order reflection points and ceiling reflection points that weren't covered properly due to not having found the final speaker and listening position placements.

I just eliminated all of the final 1st reflections that were still lurking in my room last night (there were 1st reflection points on the ceiling that I had yet to put absorption on). It is incredible what a difference in focus and detail something that seemingly simple can have on the music. As I eliminated the reflection spikes in the impulse response one by one, I could hear the fog slowly being lifted from the sound. It is remarkable, and well worth the money (even if it did end up costing me more money because I didn't like what it revealed character-wise about my old speakers...).

Rives' design work is top notch. The cool thing is, at the HE2007 demonstration you could experience that night and day difference first hand between his two demo rooms (one well treated, and the other untreated).

So, whether or not the OP decides to go with Revels or Wilsons, I hope he does look into treating his space acoustically as well. I'm grateful I posted here that fateful day sometime in the last two years about my issues with getting 3D imaging in my system, as following through on the recommendations to treat my listening room have improved my audio listening experiences 100%. For that I am grateful to the people here on these fora.