Wilson LōKē - Wilson's smallest subwoofer

[Charles]

Originally Posted by audioguy3107

I understand both sides of the debate here, it is interesting……..I do agree with Charles’ sentiment above, you do have to look at the system and how everything works together as a whole. If the Loke sounds excellent paired with the Tune Tots, then so be it. The problem here is not that Wilson may have outsourced an amplifier, I think the issue is when you have a highly skilled, advanced technology company like Wilson Audio and find out they’re using something that any random person can buy for a couple hundred bucks on a Parts Express website, it leaves a bad taste in the mouth of someone who just spent 8 grand on a high end subwoofer.

Look, the thing is, if you had subwoofer brand X for a price of even $5000 and someone found that they were using a Parts Express plate amp, pretty much everyone on this forum would think, most likely it sucks, they couldn’t even use a high quality amplifier.

- Buck

Buck, it appears the "mistake" Wilson has made is to use an amplifier clearly identifiable as a "cheap amp". Mac receives criticism for this approach with their transports for their BR players and CD players, though not recently. Also with their products in general.

So the engineer receives criticism for finding a "cheap amp" that meets all the specs and sounds great, but doesn't cost 3K, as it should, but .3K. Thus the price would be 11K and we audiophiles would be satisfied.

Rather, I think Wilson, being the honest manufacturer they are made no attempt to disguise the amp but chose to suffer the inevitable criticism. I have dealt with Wilson for a long time. Along with Mac I find them totally honest and reputable.

I think it reduces to the overall cost of the LoKe and the profit made. I think that the criticism implies that Wilson should have provided a much more expensive conventional amp and held the price at 8.7K. I think Wilson would say, "not possible."

At 12.5K the MC1.25KW is not expensive enough to be competitive sonically with a comparable Dag, Boulder, Esoteric, Accuphase, Constellation, etc. The MC3500 MKII at 15K not expensive enough to compete with a VAC Statement 450 iQ and so on with this line of reasoning, which I think has validity but is also a generalization and generalizations are dangerous when used incorrectly.

However, I love my Mac's, wouldn't trade them, looking forward to my MK II's if they ever arrive, and would feel totally comfortable with a LoKe for the appropriate Wilson.

Best

Charles

__________________________________________________ _
Charles Updated System: Wilson McIntosh Audioquest
New gear on order: McIntosh MC3500 MK II mono power amp, one per channel; custom granite slabs to set my MC3500 MKII’s; 3 AS125 custom made McIntosh amps stands
Most recent updates: Latest is the last one posted: AQ Diamond USB replaces AQ Coffee; Wilson Audio Specialties Alexx replaced by Wilson Audio Specialties XVX Chronosonic; new subwoofer crossover; new Galaxy Grey Thors Hammer; Wilson Pedestals; heating and cooling completely reworked and reinsulated resulting in a much quieter, cooler, and more efficient room (cost about 10,000.00). McIntosh MCT 500 SACD/CD transport. Wilson Audio Acoustic Diode for XVX Chronosonic. WEL Signature digital Coaxial cable for MVP 881/D1100 digital connection replacing the optical connection. New plinth for Thor subwoofer made of X material with the Wilson Acoustic Diodes. Thor is now off my floor.
Amps: McIntosh 1.25KW’s (3) set on floor on custom made granite slabs
Preamp and DAC: McIntosh D1100
Sources: McIntosh MCT500 SACD/CD Transport, MVP881 BR player, MVP851 DVD player, MR87 tuner, Marantz 510LV Laser Disc player, ASUS laptop USB (JRiver Media Center 23)
Speakers: Wilson Audio Specialties XVX Chronosonic; custom made Wilson Acoustic Diodes
Sub-woofer: Wilson Audio Specialties Thor’s Hammer (1) horizontal lie and Wilson Watch Controller (abbr: WC); custom plinth of X material with Wilson Acoustic Diode feet
Cables main system: Audioquest WEL Signature speaker cables and balanced IC (preamp to amps); WEL Signature AES/EBU balanced digital IC for CD playback; WEL Signature digital coaxial cable for MVP 881/D1100 digital connection; Audioquest Diamond optical (1) for tuner, (1) for MVP 851 DVD player, and (1) for LD player for total of (3); Audioquest Diamond USB cable; McIntosh MCT cable for SACD playback; Dragon power cords (5 HC cords and 3 source cords for total of 8); Thunder HC power cord for MR87 tuner
Cables subwoofer system: Audioquest Redwood speaker cable (1); Wolf balanced subwoofer IC from WC to amp; Wind balanced IC from preamp to WC; Hurricane HC (2) and Dragon HC (1) power cords
Power conditioners: Audioquest Niagara 7000 (1) and Niagara 5000 (3); (4) dedicated 20-amp lines with no. 10 wire straight out of fuse box
Isolation: Wilson Pedestals for D1100; MVP881 BR player; MCT500 transport; MR87 tuner; plinth for Thor subwoofer made of X material with the Wilson Acoustic Diodes
Cabinet: Double Custom Woodwork & Design (CWD) solid walnut cabinet on large casters; holds all sources and preamp; also, Niagara 7000; 11 feet minimum distance from speakers
Acoustic Treatments: Room and Echo Tunes
AC: Dedicated to this room only, an ultra-high efficiency and quiet recently installed Ruud split system 3-ton heat pump.

[SCAudiophile]

Originally Posted by Charles

Buck, it appears the "mistake" Wilson has made is to use an amplifier clearly identifiable as a "cheap amp". Mac receives criticism for this approach with their transports for their BR players and CD players, though not recently. Also with their products in general.

So the engineer receives criticism for finding a "cheap amp" that meets all the specs and sounds great, but doesn't cost 3K, as it should, but .3K. Thus the price would be 11K and we audiophiles would be satisfied.

Rather, I think Wilson, being the honest manufacturer they are made no attempt to disguise the amp but chose to suffer the inevitable criticism. I have dealt with Wilson for a long time. Along with Mac I find them totally honest and reputable.

I think it reduces to the overall cost of the LoKe and the profit made. I think that the criticism implies that Wilson should have provided a much more expensive conventional amp and held the price at 8.7K. I think Wilson would say, "not possible."

At 12.5K the MC1.25KW is not expensive enough to be competitive sonically with a comparable Dag, Boulder, Esoteric, Accuphase, Constellation, etc. The MC3500 MKII at 15K not expensive enough to compete with a VAC Statement 450 iQ and so on with this line of reasoning, which I think has validity but is also a generalization and generalizations are dangerous when used incorrectly.

However, I love my Mac's, wouldn't trade them, looking forward to my MK II's if they ever arrive, and would feel totally comfortable with a LoKe for the appropriate Wilson.

Best

Charles

__________________________________________________ _
Charles Updated System: Wilson McIntosh Audioquest
New gear on order: McIntosh MC3500 MK II mono power amp, one per channel; custom granite slabs to set my MC3500 MKII’s; 3 AS125 custom made McIntosh amps stands
Most recent updates: Latest is the last one posted: AQ Diamond USB replaces AQ Coffee; Wilson Audio Specialties Alexx replaced by Wilson Audio Specialties XVX Chronosonic; new subwoofer crossover; new Galaxy Grey Thors Hammer; Wilson Pedestals; heating and cooling completely reworked and reinsulated resulting in a much quieter, cooler, and more efficient room (cost about 10,000.00). McIntosh MCT 500 SACD/CD transport. Wilson Audio Acoustic Diode for XVX Chronosonic. WEL Signature digital Coaxial cable for MVP 881/D1100 digital connection replacing the optical connection. New plinth for Thor subwoofer made of X material with the Wilson Acoustic Diodes. Thor is now off my floor.
Amps: McIntosh 1.25KW’s (3) set on floor on custom made granite slabs
Preamp and DAC: McIntosh D1100
Sources: McIntosh MCT500 SACD/CD Transport, MVP881 BR player, MVP851 DVD player, MR87 tuner, Marantz 510LV Laser Disc player, ASUS laptop USB (JRiver Media Center 23)
Speakers: Wilson Audio Specialties XVX Chronosonic; custom made Wilson Acoustic Diodes
Sub-woofer: Wilson Audio Specialties Thor’s Hammer (1) horizontal lie and Wilson Watch Controller (abbr: WC); custom plinth of X material with Wilson Acoustic Diode feet
Cables main system: Audioquest WEL Signature speaker cables and balanced IC (preamp to amps); WEL Signature AES/EBU balanced digital IC for CD playback; WEL Signature digital coaxial cable for MVP 881/D1100 digital connection; Audioquest Diamond optical (1) for tuner, (1) for MVP 851 DVD player, and (1) for LD player for total of (3); Audioquest Diamond USB cable; McIntosh MCT cable for SACD playback; Dragon power cords (5 HC cords and 3 source cords for total of 8); Thunder HC power cord for MR87 tuner
Cables subwoofer system: Audioquest Redwood speaker cable (1); Wolf balanced subwoofer IC from WC to amp; Wind balanced IC from preamp to WC; Hurricane HC (2) and Dragon HC (1) power cords
Power conditioners: Audioquest Niagara 7000 (1) and Niagara 5000 (3); (4) dedicated 20-amp lines with no. 10 wire straight out of fuse box
Isolation: Wilson Pedestals for D1100; MVP881 BR player; MCT500 transport; MR87 tuner; plinth for Thor subwoofer made of X material with the Wilson Acoustic Diodes
Cabinet: Double Custom Woodwork & Design (CWD) solid walnut cabinet on large casters; holds all sources and preamp; also, Niagara 7000; 11 feet minimum distance from speakers
Acoustic Treatments: Room and Echo Tunes
AC: Dedicated to this room only, an ultra-high efficiency and quiet recently installed Ruud split system 3-ton heat pump.

Originally Posted by audioguy3107

I understand both sides of the debate here, it is interesting……..I do agree with Charles’ sentiment above, you do have to look at the system and how everything works together as a whole. If the Loke sounds excellent paired with the Tune Tots, then so be it. The problem here is not that Wilson may have outsourced an amplifier, I think the issue is when you have a highly skilled, advanced technology company like Wilson Audio and find out they’re using something that any random person can buy for a couple hundred bucks on a Parts Express website, it leaves a bad taste in the mouth of someone who just spent 8 grand on a high end subwoofer.

Look, the thing is, if you had subwoofer brand X for a price of even $5000 and someone found that they were using a Parts Express plate amp, pretty much everyone on this forum would think, most likely it sucks, they couldn’t even use a high quality amplifier.

- Buck

Charles, I appreciate and agree with the brand sentiment and all the good qualitative comments. I believe you are right on most if not all of this.

I am also 100% with Buck on this one from a couple points of view:

- if this would have been a sub from some other brand doing this at such a high price (2X at least compared to truly comparable subs from REL, others), a would lay good odds that there would be far more public outcry against those brands. As it happens, one of the "sacred cows" of the well advertised, outrageously well-marketed brands in the industry has done this and subsequently got caught with their hand a bit too deep in customers' pockets, and instead, there has been more wagon-circling and defending as somehow worthy of the price than the amount of initial public negative comments....

- as far as the honest company comment and "no attempt to disguise", I don't see it that way; sure, they did not rearrange inputs, outputs, etc..but they did remove the OEM markings and substitute Wilson Audio logo branding. Dishonest? No, I definitely would not say that. "Honest & no attempt to disguise"? That's a stretch to be kind...

- the fair pricing argument IMHO is borderline as almost $9K for any sub of this size, single driver, front port, regular cabinet and a paint job with a 500W plate amp will only provide so much capability; competing products are found in the $2K - $4K range (you can by 2 REL Carbon Blacks with some discount and have enough money left over for a couple good REL cables to hook them up for example...)

They are not an amp manufacturer; they and others are bound to leverage proven existing offerings in this regard. No one is surprised by that I'm sure. The issue is the simple application of a logo, some fancy marketing, and attempt to command a blatant "out of competing band" price for a normal subwoofer design using a $300K plate amp (retail price at Parts Express, not the cost/true value of that component) and what looks to be a regular driver possibly also from a similar source....

Personally, I'm glad Wilson is trying to fill out the line with sonically matched (I'm sure the cabinet, port, etc. is tuned to fit the line as you point out) subs to their speaker selection at more price points. That's makes good sense and shows a further dedication to their entry-level to mid-line customers, not just the uber price tag customers.

I think this would all be a moot point if they'd set a reasonable, competitive market, in-band, reasonable price.

[SCAudiophile]

One other set of comments, not on any particular person's post...

I'm sure someone will counter with the concept of Wilson being a premium brand, having known high-quality products, etc....

That argument works up to a certain ceiling of reasonableness though in any pricing model, after which “paying for a name”, a belief, a perception, an image, takes over.

There is also a point after which it is telegraphed quite clearly that a vendor thinks they can attach whatever crazy uplift to a price. Alternatively (if that's not the underlying cause), it speaks volumes to the amount of distributor and dealer margin and marketing budget built in that would make it impossible to offer at a more reasonable price point.

High end audio is replete with many examples like this, including but not limited to fifteen thousand dollar multi-layer paint options, $45K veneer options, etc.. the price of which is simply ludicrous and cannot be rationalized.

[W9TR]

Plate amps are devilishly difficult to design so they don’t vibrate apart in use. Mostly they still do, ask any JL Audio owner. So on one hand it makes sense for Wilson to use a proven product.

On the other hand, I have an expectation as a Wilson customer that they push the envelope of known technology in driver design, cabinet materials, adjustability, fit and finish. It’s what they do.

So I would expect a collaborative effort with a known high end electronics brand to create something unique and clearly better. Instead, the owner will get a Chinese manufactured plate amp with poor quality electronic components sourced from god-knows-where that will fail. Just a matter of time. That’s the issue.

[Charles]

Originally Posted by SCAudiophile

Charles, I appreciate and agree with the brand sentiment and all the good qualitative comments. I believe you are right on most if not all of this.

I am also 100% with Buck on this one from a couple points of view:

- if this would have been a sub from some other brand doing this at such a high price (2X at least compared to truly comparable subs from REL, others), a would lay good odds that there would be far more public outcry against those brands. As it happens, one of the "sacred cows" of the well advertised, outrageously well-marketed brands in the industry has done this and subsequently got caught with their hand a bit too deep in customers' pockets, and instead, there has been more wagon-circling and defending as somehow worthy of the price than the amount of initial public negative comments....

- as far as the honest company comment and "no attempt to disguise", I don't see it that way; sure, they did not rearrange inputs, outputs, etc..but they did remove the OEM markings and substitute Wilson Audio logo branding. Dishonest? No, I definitely would not say that. "Honest & no attempt to disguise"? That's a stretch to be kind...

- the fair pricing argument IMHO is borderline as almost $9K for any sub of this size, single driver, front port, regular cabinet and a paint job with a 500W plate amp will only provide so much capability; competing products are found in the $2K - $4K range (you can by 2 REL Carbon Blacks with some discount and have enough money left over for a couple good REL cables to hook them up for example...)

They are not an amp manufacturer; they and others are bound to leverage proven existing offerings in this regard. No one is surprised by that I'm sure. The issue is the simple application of a logo, some fancy marketing, and attempt to command a blatant "out of competing band" price for a normal subwoofer design using a $300K plate amp (retail price at Parts Express, not the cost/true value of that component) and what looks to be a regular driver possibly also from a similar source....

Personally, I'm glad Wilson is trying to fill out the line with sonically matched (I'm sure the cabinet, port, etc. is tuned to fit the line as you point out) subs to their speaker selection at more price points. That's makes good sense and shows a further dedication to their entry-level to mid-line customers, not just the uber price tag customers.

I think this would all be a moot point if they'd set a reasonable, competitive market, in-band, reasonable price.

Mark and Buck, you guys haven't once mentioned comparable performance. How does the LoKe perform with appropriate Wilson speakers compared to a REL or JL? I have a long time friend at Mac. We constantly talk about other brands. His point and I agree is that for every 1 high end amp (using amps for example), they sell, Mac sells 10 or 20 1.25KW's. The JL Fathom f112V2 (5K) will out sell the Loke by a large margin. So will the S/812 (3.3K).

The Magico ASUB is 7.8K. All three of these subs use class D and are acoustic suspension, thus requiring considerably more power and thus more expensive amps. A 20 amp wall outlet can only produce 1100 watts. It will not support fully the 1800 watt JL which most likely has the most expensive class D amp. The ASUB is 500 watts class D. The Rel 800 watts class D.

I would suggest to you that Wilson will not make more profit off the LoKe, than JL and REL off their respective offerings, probably less profit. The question becomes, especially when you look at the rears of these amps, how expensive are these class D amps in comparison to the class D amp used in the LoKe? I suspect not much difference in parts quality or manufacturing cost. Let's suppose the REL and JL are using custom amps, not used elsewhere. The Dayton amps may outsell them 10 fold, thus allowing Wilson to keep the price down.

I think the much more valid comparison is the Magico ASUB to the LoKe. Wilson like all companies is feeling the effects of inflation. I suspect if the ASUB were offered at present time it would be significantly more expensive.

In the end if you are a Wilson or Magico owner, you have to decide if you want a sub specifically designed for your speaker or a sub designed to work extremely well with a wide variety of speakers, at a significantly lower price point.

Best

Charles

[audioguy3107]

Charles, I would be willing to bet my entire audio system that Magico is not using a Parts Express cheap amplifier in their subwoofer. I will apologize if someone can prove otherwise. Do they use a equivalent amplifier that Pass or McIntosh uses? Of course not…..but Parts Express? Come on.

- Buck

[Charles]

Originally Posted by audioguy3107

Charles, I would be willing to bet my entire audio system that Magico is not using a Parts Express cheap amplifier in their subwoofer. I will apologize if someone can prove otherwise. Do they use a equivalent amplifier that Pass or McIntosh uses? Of course not…..but Parts Express? Come on.

- Buck

Buck, I think we are making progress because now we have established that we are talking about a custom class D amp (Magico) vs what looks to be a very well designed off the shelf proven class D amp (Dayton) and we are discussing Wilson vs Magico (apples to apples, not apples to oranges). If Wilson did their homework and knows the quality of the Magico amp vs the quality of the Dayton amp and that it is comparable, perhaps even better, then the argument against the price of the LoKe becomes much less strong. Again, these extremely high end speaker manufacturers have produced a custom sub to augment their less expensive speakers. For every ASUB Magico sells REL or JL will sell at least 10.

Best

Charles

[Charles]

Thinking about it, knowing Wilson's reputation of modifying stock drivers, it is possible that they modified their class D amp to suit LoKe's needs. Can you prove otherwise? All arguments and proofs are based on assumptions. I am basing mine on my trust in Wilson.

Best

Charles

[crwilli]

It is an expensive sub no matter what is in it.

Who’s going to be first in line to buy one?

[FreddieFerric]

This thread is fun.