A brutal review of the Wilson Maxx

Matrix, according to the Hardesty review the Zu cannot possibly reproduce the midrange properly using a 10 inch driver!! Maybe Mr. Hardesty is too hung up on theory and not using his ears enough?

Mr. Fremer, very nice response. But why go to Avery Fisher when you have an excellent orchestra in your home state in a much better-sounding hall down in Newark?

I maintain - hat's off to his boldness - great debate Mr MF et al.

Rcprince, I agree, but again am not defending, just was giving a price comparison as to whats out there is all, so I believe the statement of Overpriced is valid thats all.

FWIW- Mr. Hardesty's "Watch Dog" is NOT a review of the Maxx 2 as some are misinterpreting here. To understand the purpose and intent of his "Watch Dog" articles I suggest you read it in his own words.

http://www.audioperfectionist.com/pages/watchdog.html

He also doesn't accept advertising for his Audio Perfectionist Journals so I'm not sure why some are suggesting he probably tried to get Wilson to advertise, they turned him down, hence the scornful "review" of the Maxx 2. This scenario is not even close.

Whether someone agrees with him or not, he is simply offering his opinion and expertise on what he feels constitutes and accurate reproduction of the recorded signal, NOT live music. He makes his beliefs and philosophies well known and elucidated in his Journals.

If Mr. Fremer and his wife are extremely happy with the sound of the Maxx 2s, then that is all that matters. I think Mr. Hardesty is being critical of Mr. Fremer and Mr. Harley as "reviewers", where he feels they are misleading or leaving out critical information about the Maxx 2s that an "informed" reader should know about.

This hobby is so full of great music and equipment, both of which many talented people devote their lives to, that it is silly to believe there will be an "absolute" that everyone will agree upon. Freedom of choice- with the ability to make informed decisions, and deciding for YOURSELF what sounds good is all that should matter at the end of the day.

You can find a "forum" on just about every product or hobby out there- all with the same differing opinions and "expertise" that banters back and forth here.

If you read all of Hardesty's early journals, you will easily see where he is coming from. He discusses ALL of his positions. The "Watch Dog" is his gripe piece. I think personally a speaker costing this much should be held to a lofty standard and Strereophiles measurements pretty much agree with Hardesty's opinions IMO. By the way, Hardesty has been at this a long, long time. I respect his opinions as I do others. However, he sure gives a more valid reasoning for his position than most any reviewer I've read. At least he has a constant stance and doesn't bounce around.
After reading all of these posts, I'm with a fellow above, I thought "Hi-end" was about reproducing the source as close as possible. If it's as most say, then hell, it doesn't matter what you buy (which it doesn't to me anyway.)
The Wilson speaker isn't accurate---that's an indisputable fact based on its design and measured results. It canot come close to duplicating the incoming signal. If one likes how it sounds and has the money, more power to them and happy listening. That's a chunk of change for something with standard parts and a massive cabinet. I guess some like furniture more.
As to MF, seems a nerve was struck and he doesn't take criticism very well. Someone who defends themself that hard over audio---hmmm. Dare I say insecurity?