After I returned home, I listened to the same recordings on the Falcon "Gold Badge" LS3/5a's that I write about elsewhere in this issue. The presentation of the soundstage on my own recordings was the best I have experienced. The low frequencies were powerful and extended, though without any "boom." The clarity and smoothness of the treble were impressive, with a tremendous ease to the sound.
![rode fuzzmeasure review rode fuzzmeasure review](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/9_rxxdenTaU/maxresdefault.jpg)
In my own auditioning of the Wilson Chronosonic XVXes in MF's room, the balance was indeed as shown by the spatially averaged graph. The Chronosonic XVX's treble is more even than that of the Alexx. Both Wilson speakers output more energy between 1.5kHz and 8kHz than the Sonus Faber. The XVX has less of a dip in the lower midrange than the other two speakers, which I suspect is due to the wide vertical spacing of its two lower-midrange units. With the similar corner placement, all three loudspeakers produce high levels of midbass, though the Sonus Faber does so to a greater extent than the two Wilson models. (Note the expanded vertical scale in this graph compared with fig.2, to make the differences easier to see.)įig.3 Wilson Chronosonic XVX, spatially averaged, 1/6-octave response in MF's listening room (red), of the Wilson Alexx (blue), and of the Sonus Faber Aida (green). Incidentally, looking at the outputs of the left and right speakers at the position of MF's head indicated that the outputs of the two samples in the frequency region where room effects were negligible were very well-matched, to within 0.5dB.įig.3 compares the Chronosonic XVX's spatially averaged response (red trace) with that of MF's long-term reference Wilson Alexx (blue trace) and the Sonus Faber Aida that he reviewed in October 2018. The Wilson's higher-frequency output is generally smooth, with a slight downward slope that will be due to the increased absorption of the room's furnishings at high frequencies and the narrowing of the tweeter's dispersion in the top audio octave. The dip between 130Hz and 230Hz will be due to room effects that have not been eliminated by the spatial averaging. Even though MF had to place the Wilsons close to the corners of his room, which exaggerates the speakers' midbass output, fig.2 indicates that the XVXes' in-room output extends below 20Hz. The saddle centered on 21Hz in the impedance magnitude trace coincides with the tuning frequency of the Wilson speaker's port, which in turn suggests that the XVX is indeed a true full-range loudspeaker. The Chronosonic XVX should be used with amplifiers like MF's darTZeel monoblocks that don't have problems driving loads of 2 ohms and lower.įig.2 Wilson Chronosonic XVX, spatially averaged, 1/6-octave response in MF's listening room (10dB/vertical div.). Using an Excel spreadsheet to calculate the EPDR (footnote 1), the resistive load that gives rise to the same peak dissipation in an amplifier's output devices as the loud speaker, revealed that the XVX is a very demanding load, with EPDR less than 1.1 ohms between 52Hz and 66Hz and between 197Hz and 287Hz, with minimum values of 0.91 ohms at 450Hz and 0.94 ohms at 3250Hz. The magnitude remains between 2 and 4 ohms for almost the entire audioband, with a minimum value of 1.5 ohms between 310Hz and 340Hzroughly consistent with Wilson's specifications. Wilson's specifications describe the loudspeaker's impedance as a nominal 4 ohms with a minimum value of 1.6 ohms at 326Hz, so the sensitivity measured in watts would be expected to be lower than specified.įig.1 shows the Wilson's impedance magnitude (solid trace) and electrical phase angle (dotted trace) measured with Dayton Audio's DATS V2 system. My estimate was numerically the same using Stereophile's usual units: dB per 2.83Vnot per wattmeasured at 1m the units are numerically equivalent only for an 8 ohm load.
![rode fuzzmeasure review rode fuzzmeasure review](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/t7aNvv2IFLw/maxresdefault.jpg)
Wilson specifies the Chronosonic XVX's sensitivity as a high 92dB/W/m. Other than impedance and sensitivity, the only meaningful measurement I could make was the spatially averaged frequency response.
![rode fuzzmeasure review rode fuzzmeasure review](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/E1QtHHTjYf4/maxresdefault.jpg)
The presence of early reflections from the room's boundaries meant that it wasn't possible to perform my usual gated, farfield frequency response measurements. However, with the 685lb Wilson Chronosonic XVX, this wasn't possible: I had to perform the measurements with the loudspeakers set up in Michael's room. We maneuver one speaker onto a dolly and wheel it into his driveway for the measurements. With the large, heavy loudspeakers that Michael Fremer tends to review, I drive to his place with my test equipment.