From what I have read, it sounds like a direct competitor to the Panorama but it is quite a beat cheaper. I am also wondering if the bass stacks up to the Panorama. I have never had to add a sub to the Panorama because I didn't feel the need to (plus having two small children makes it easier to just have one speaker cabnet).
Any impressions? I told my friend that if the bass wasn't as good as the Panorama, it might put them on equal ground (because he would probably need to spend a bit more on a decent sub with the Martin Logan).
Very curious either way. Thanks in advance!
Also build quality wise, iThe Panorama clearly wins. The Panorama feels and looks expensive. The Vision is nice but I hate piano black and honestly the whole cabinet has that sort of cheap plastic feel to it. The Panorama is polished metal all around and has a metal grill compared to the cloth grill of the Vision. Sound wise (not counting bass), the Vision sounded great but I still feel the Panorama is better (pretty impressive considering it has been out for a few years).
The vision also plays very loud with no distortion that I could detect. It also sounded good with music but didn't have the depth of the Panorama. I could detect some surround but like the Panorama it depends on the layout of the room. I am a 3.1 person normally so the Panorama and even the Vision would fit the bill for me surround wise.
If I wouldn't feel the need to buy a sub for the Vision, it would get a high recommendation from me. Then again maybe someone else would be okay with the bass which would make it a great deal at it's current price. When you factor in a sub (even if you just got with a mid level sub to save money and not a matching Martin Logan one), it is close or equal in price to the Panorama which would make it a deal breaker for me.
I do like the Panorama having competition though and it's great seeing another respected name in speakers bring out another high end soundbar. It's definitely one to consider but once you hear the Panorama, it's hard to go to anything else .
I have listened to the B&W in a Best Buy/Magnolia store and the speaker was impressive. I was unable to observe its surround capabilities because of the physical environment but that would not be a major factor if I was to purchase one. The best price I've seen is just under $2000.00 (new) so I wish that B&W would somewhat reduce that to be more competitive in this segment of the market...
There have been rumors (I think on these forums) that B&W is producing a new surround bar but I've not yet seen any conformation.
Thanks again for your well-documented listening experience with these two speakers.; the data that you have furnished will certainly influence a future purchase.
I was blown away by the B&W but went with the ML. The price difference was substantial and the sound quality was truly superb from both. I didn't feel a need for a sub but already had an inexpensive 12' Polk that i wired to the ML. I have cut out the wall between my living room and den so the ML has to fill a rather large space. The effect of this large area without side walls severely limits the faux surround sound from the ML and the overall sound stage but still fills the area with excellent overall sound quality. at 1100 + 300 for the sub I am thrilled with the sound. the ability to decode, recognize and switch between DSP,DTS and stereo on the fly is a feture I much appreciate when switching from TV to Apple TV to play music. While i find the B&W absolutely awesome I find the highs more pleasing in the ML. The mid range is solid and enjoyable and the added (relatively cheap) sub brings out a deep rumble for movies and base heavy music. The B&W has a superiorfinnish and looks as expensive, and beautiful, as it is but I have read many complaints about the Finnish being very hard to keep clean and fingerprint free. the B&W is also a bulkier piece. I am very happy with the ML and sub and estimate the savings to be about 40% over the B&W alone. I certainly believe the B&W to be a superb unit but I find it had to believe anyone would have buyers remorse over choosing the ML over the B&W. The truth is they are both awesome and if money is no object I would consider aesthetics in choosing one over the other. If money matters you will not be disappointed with the performance of the ML even without a sub.
Found that music and center channel audio was flat out amazing.
However, when listening to movies I found that the soundstage seemed really narrow and any sudo back channel audio was non-existent.
Quickly returned to Best Buy.
(With the addition of the lack of 4K passthrough, which the Magnolia clown said it had - still better than the Frys guy telling me that the Bose had HDMI 2.6.)
Pretty much stuck in 4K hell. Ugh!
|Bowers And Wilkins Panorama Integrated A V Sound System|