View Full Version : 2016 WAMM
daytona600
11-10-2016, 18:34
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cJ9gJTYfkrU
If you have a spare $250k lying around
http://i.imgur.com/3aKjhKr.jpg
carruthersesq
11-10-2016, 20:23
They are as ugly as sin Scott.
walpurgis
11-10-2016, 20:26
They are as ugly as sin Scott.
Too right!
Too right!
Yes. He should have stuck with his original design and spent the rest of the time designing an invisibility cloak instead.
Functional, not trying to masquerade as bits of furniture. I like them. They are enormous, though. Wouldn't fit in my room.
I prefer the looks of the originals.
fatmarley
11-10-2016, 21:15
I'd be worried it would try and attack me when I wasn't looking.
Quite like the red ones. Obviously they would need the right setting, so not for many, but one of those warehouse conversion type modern places they would look outstanding
topoxforddoc
11-10-2016, 21:51
They make the original Dalek KEF 105 look sylph like in comparison
walpurgis
11-10-2016, 22:00
How many would you need for a home theatre system? :)
The Black Adder
12-10-2016, 10:16
Yuk!!!
£250k for those? It's things like this that make you realise that there some real tasteless mugs out there.
Money doesn't buy taste, that's most certainly true.
Yuk!!!
£250k for those? It's things like this that make you realise that there some real tasteless mugs out there.
Money doesn't buy taste, that's most certainly true.
It is a loudspeaker, why would aesthetic taste even enter into it?
Not saying it is what I would buy if I had the money, but if I had the money what it looks like wouldn't be a consideration at all. I'd only be interested in its capability to do the job.
Now if it had been styled to look like that, different matter. Then it would be ugly. But it hasn't.
The housing of the individual drivers in their own enclosures and the arrangement of the drivers is dictated by the design. Then if you believe in the Bauhaus dictum: "form follows function", then the styling options are constrained. Yet the original WAMM as shown at the start of the video, also used several drive units each housed in their own enclosure (though it could be argued the electrostatic midrange unit is actually a 3x3 array) and the drive units were similarly arranged, but as a whole it looks a whole lot better to my eyes, and would fit in more easily with domestic décor than the 2016 version.
The newer Wilson speakers do look as if they have been inspired by something from 'Star Wars'.
walpurgis
12-10-2016, 11:44
The red colour accentuates the ugliness in my opinion. Grey or black or even white could look better.
Yes, red is a fairly agressive colour. Interestingly the colours offered: red, white or black, are popular colours for sports cars.
MacDonalds have made the most of the psychological aspect of the colour red - it is an attractive colour, to initially lure people into the eatery, but it is not a restful colour, so eaters aren't encouraged to linger too long after their meal (if that's what you can call MacDonald's fare).
Yes, the whole psychology of the McDonald's layout is to tempt you in then get you to finish up and leave as fast as possible.
I don't like big chunks of red or related colours in interiors. It's oppressive after a while. The trend for having one wall of a living room painted a deep red baffles me.
jollyfix
12-10-2016, 14:02
Even though it doesn't look like one, it reminds me of a lobster tail.
http://i.imgur.com/3aKjhKr.jpg[/QUOTE]
Now if it had been styled to look like that, different matter. Then it would be ugly. But it hasn't.
But it must have been styled to look like that. There's lots of swooping lines that I am guessing aren't the result of some algorithm to produce ideal sound. Surely for $250,000 there is room in the budget to pay someone to make the things look less like a dog's breakfast?
:scratch:
fatmarley
13-10-2016, 06:02
But it must have been styled to look like that. There's lots of swooping lines that I am guessing aren't the result of some algorithm to produce ideal sound. Surely for $250,000 there is room in the budget to pay someone to make the things look less like a dog's breakfast?
:scratch:
Assuming the drivers aren't adjustable (the tweeter looks like it could be) then the front could just be a smooth curve and the sides flat.
Kind of like this but with the curve going the other way and obviously tapered:
http://www.parts-express.com/Data/Default/Images/Catalog/Original/301-980_ALT_0.jpg
Martyn Miles
24-10-2016, 21:09
I think I'll stick with a pair of JBL Control 1s...
Pete The Cat
25-10-2016, 07:36
I always thought these were made by Hasbro. Push the buttons on the side and you get...
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/2e/20/de/2e20de018908a0c6cb390e88d839e651.jpg
Pete
Apropos that hideous looking monstrosity on the first page. It's hideous not because it's red; it's hideous because of what it stands for. I'll leave you all to work out what I mean by that! ;)
Marco.
Tried to work it out. Failed. Please explain.
It's a statement of all that's wrong about high-end audio... Can you work out why that's the case, or do I need to explain that, too? ;)
Marco.
Yes. I think it looks like a pretty clever, capable speaker design. I've no idea about the price, I suspect north of 100K. I have no objection to people spending that kind of money on loudspeakers, it's their money after all.
Now if it was an amplifier at a six figure price then I'd be more inclined to scoff as there is no way even the best amplifier in the world needs to cost that much (a Radford STA25 is a lot cheaper ;)), but loudspeakers can't be faked like an amp can and no compromise loudspeakers are expensive of necessity.
Did you miss the price, daftee:
If you have a spare $250k lying around
So, indeed somewhat "north" of what you thought! ;)
...and that's the point. It doesn't take 'house money' [and out with of London and the south, a quarter of a mil, even if it's dollars, buys you a pretty big detached house] to build a pair of top-notch speakers. Most of that ridiculous price equates to 'badge/product desirability' and 'what the market will stand', which has nothing to do with sonics - and *that* is what I have a major problem with.
High-end audio should be about designing the best products possible, which primarily focus on sonic performance, at realistic prices for genuine enthusiasts, not OTT vulgar ornaments for status symbol-obsessed, social-climbing 'key janglers', with more money than sense!!
:exactly:
Marco.
RothwellAudio
25-10-2016, 13:21
...and that's the point. It doesn't take 'house money' [and out with of London and the south, a quarter of a mil buys you a pretty big house] to build a pair of top-notch speakers. Most of that ridiculous price equates to 'badge/product desirability' and what the market will stand, which has nothing to do with sonics - and *that* is what I have a major problem with.
High-end audio should be about designing the best products possible, which focus mostly on pure sonic performance, at realistic prices for genuine enthusiasts, not OTT vulgar ornaments for status symbol-obsessed, social-climbing 'key janglers', with more money than sense!!
Interestly, Ken Kessler has been arguing the complete opposite for years. It seems to be an endless source of irritation to him that Premier League football players, city bankers, Arab oil billionaires etc. don't have any interest whatsoever in high-end audio. He would like to see loudspeakers like the ones in this post sold in the same kinds of places as luxury cars, diamond-encrusted watches and such. His opinion is that anyone who criticises products like these speakers for being poor value for money must be some kind of commie/lefty/hippy who hates rich people while at the same time envying them.
I disagree with Ken.
And so do I in this instance, although I quite enjoy reading some of Kessler's 'rants', and share his love of La Dolce Vita! :)
Don't get me wrong, I have no problem whatsoever with rich people or how they spend their money; it's just for me that's not what high-end audio should be about. It should be enthusiast-led, not money-led, thus driven by the needs of the former, not the latter.
My answer to Ken would be what's wrong with Arab oil billionaires, and such like, buying a pair of loudspeakers that cost a lot of money for the right reasons, and there I mean sonically [and no matter what anyone says, that *doesn't* take a quarter of a million dollars to achieve] which means that they audition a few different pairs in their systems and choose those they like the sound of most, like any normal audio enthusiast and music lover...
Or perhaps they're in it for something else? ;)
Why must they buy into the sort of ostentatious jewellery pictured at the beginning of this thread, designed mainly to 'impress' for all the wrong reasons? Are all millionaires or billionaires that vulgar and superficial??
Marco.
daytona600
25-10-2016, 14:01
$250k for speakers genesis dragons
ideal for a bond villians man cave
http://www.hifitimereview.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/Genesis-Dragon-1-apertura-con-logo.jpg
It's because hi-fi shows are now full of this sort of shit, that I no longer bother going, or indeed buy any of the mags.
Unlike others, I don't get off on 'drooling over' hi-fi jewellery; my feet are firmly planted in the real world, and as far as hi-fi is concerned that would remain the case even if I won multiple millions on the lottery...
The fact is, money doesn't buy you class, and more importantly, nor should it cause you to abandon overnight the fundamental principles you believe in! In that respect, even if $250k to me were 'peanuts', I wouldn't be buying a pair of 'WAMM' :spew: :nono:
They're almost as vulgar as the new Rolls Royce.
Marco.
I always thought these were made by Hasbro. Push the buttons on the side and you get...
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/2e/20/de/2e20de018908a0c6cb390e88d839e651.jpg
Pete
:lol: That's brilliant!
Okay. First of all developing speakers is like developing a jet fighter. There is a very distant limit to 'absolutely optimum' and there is no limit on how much you could spend getting there. We have yet to see the Bugatti Veyron of speakers.
Second, The WAMM are not pretty, they are form over function. So they don't, for me anyway, fall into the 'male jewellery' category.
Third, if I had that kind of cash for speakers I would probably give them a listen. I like the design and what they are trying to do.
Fair enough, matey, we'll just have to agree to differ.... Give me those twin 15-incher classic blue-fronted JBLs any day, which I'd import from that special place in Japan! That certainly wouldn't be cheap either, but at least they were designed for the right reasons, and for genuine enthusiasts ;)
Marco.
Q
Well, the JBLs in question were designed for pro use. And yes, like you I'm unashamed JBL fanboy so they would more than likely sound better to me just because. Cheaper too!
But spending at that level I would feel obliged to play the field first. :)
Lodgesound
25-10-2016, 20:43
Marco...I have to say that I am SO behind you regarding prices.
The pricing of some of this gear is just getting utterly silly and just smacks of dealer and manufacturer "willy waving".
As you quite correctly say it takes NOWHERE NEAR EVEN APPROACHING house money to get some of the finest sound available in the world today through replay of a recorded medium.
Hi Stewart,
I completely agree, especially with the last bit. The fact is, it doesn't. However, the sort of customers products such as WAMM are aimed at, *need* whatever it is they buy to have a huge price tag, otherwise it doesn't 'feel special'...
If it's too cheap, they're not interested, so that's partly how the $250k price tag was arrived at, which is nothing whatsoever to do with the design of the speaker itself, so you're not paying $250k solely for what matters - and THAT is what rips my knitting! :doh:
I'm not remotely interested in paying for badge or 'prestige value', as it serves no useful purpose in enhancing my enjoyment of recorded music.
And here's the thing, too... I've been to numerous high-end audio shows over the years, and listened to loudspeakers costing into six figures, and not once have I been overly impressed with how they sounded. So all that money for what exactly?
When you reach that exalted price level, with ANY piece of audio equipment, it should represent the pinnacle of excellence: a no-compromise statement of the absolute BEST that's possible to be produced today, acknowledged by all who listen, and so automatically and comprehensively sonically outperforms 'normal' hi-fi equipment, such as what you'd use yourself at home, and make you wet your pants when you hear it!!
Therefore, if I attended a show where WAMM were being demonstrated, and they made my Lockwood Majors sound like speakers on a transistor radio, then maybe I'd be impressed, but somehow I doubt it.... :rolleyes:
Marco.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2026 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.