B&W 805 advice - Page 6

No, I was responding yet again to another "interesting" geekhd comment. For me, that's always on-topic.

A different Geek here!

A damn fine speaker worthy of audition is exactly what the 805s is!

The 805s sounds different than a Dynaudio or Revel, it is all personal preference!

There is a lot of junk available out there, the 805s are not among them! In the right room they are fantastic! Partner them with a good amp and you should be quite happy.

+1

Guys...Stereophile does not do a 20 Hz to 20 KHz measurements like most reviewers does (like Soundstage).

Stereophile does 10 Hz to 30 KHz sweeps. That is not a "tipped up treble" in the 15 KHz range; this is the resonant frequency of the tweeter. It's probably an aluminum dome which typically resonates around 23 KHz for a 1" tweeter.

Here's the proof:



Do you see the "ripple" between 20 KHz and 30 KHz on the impedance graph? Ripples are an sign of resonant frequencies on an impedance curve. Clearly this is a HF resonant frequency of the tweeter, and NOT something B&W designed; it has to do with the material they used and it is out of their control (aside from using a better material).

A smaller 0.75" tweeter would push the resonance out further though, >30 KHz. But it might not meet the performance goals of B&W on the other hand.

Id say that the true ultimate scam is individuals and claims by individuals that they can microscopically detect vast arrays of differnt sounds in speakers without bias when they are obviously not conducting true double blind tests of equipment. Human placebo effect is reality. It has been proven in multiple studies including the national sound laboratories in Canada where it has been proven that listeners who believe they are listening to higher priced speakers and electronics statistically pick those components as better sounding to what thy have been told are the lower priced samples they listened to even when they were really listening to the cheapervstuff. It has also been proven with double blind tests that by simply changing the volume, and no other audio characteristic on virtually any set of speakers you can suddenly elicit different comments from the test subject regarding, tone, harshness, soundstage, balance, etc

If you know what you are listening to, you already have a preconceived prejudice in your mind if it is not a true double blind test. This applies to audio equipment, video, and a slew of other consumeable items. That is the real scam that sells most multi thousand dollar audio equipment. Let me put a $500 speaker in a Dynaudio box and take a Dynaudio and disguise it as a Polk and most will listen to both and then chirp away about loving the $500 speakers superior tweeters, sound, etc Thats how it is despite the mostly BS claims to the contrary, but when you just laid down $10k for a set of speakers I guess one needs to convince oneself they are hearing a $10k sound. LOL

^^^

while it does apply to many things in audio, it does not to speakers and video...

careful how broadly you paint with that brush... that brush is very useful, but it can also splatter paint all over yourself...

Im a big Bob Ross fan. Nothing wrong with some paint splattered on onself. It lets you know you are having fun. . That said, I do find this thread very interesting and a large clash between two opposing viewpoints. I think that both the chartists and the experience, real world listening guys both make some very good points and that the best way to assess a speaker is probably some middleground between the two. Science definitely needs numbers and charts for advancement and new development of products, but the numbers themselves are not the end all to the final product. If they were, you wuold not have a high end speaker or sub maker in the world actually bother to listen tontheir products as they develop them, but Im pretty sure they all do.

My own opinion, I love the B&w805Ds, a super sounding speaker IMO. And my own subjective take on high end audio - I think the so called warm sound luvas are full of it. Its nothing but a neutered mid and or upper range done by certain manufacturers to placate mostly older high end audio purchasers because thats what their old ears want. And afterall, if you are going to build a $20k speaker, etc, you better make it sound like what the older AV yuppie wants with the loads of disposeable income, because in general it is that older guy who will have the cashola to buy your $20k product. Not the snot nosed 21 yr old just out of school, looking for real job numer one, IMO.

Maybe I just splattered some paint on myself. Bob Ross, you the man!

Your analogy is reasonably accurate but possibly flawed in that some people may prefer one sound quality over the other. This as said previously is easier to do with electronics than with speakers. I used to own a former TOTL Dynaudio monitor, the Contour 1.3 SE. They were absolutely phenomenal speakers to my ears! I would not easily mistake them for inexpensive Polks. My only qualm with them was their low sensitivity, which required a fairly powerful amp to really make them sing.

Anyways, I agree that build quality, craftsmanship and looks can easily play a part in our perceptions of "good" sound.

Hi, I just listened to PSBs CM1, PM1 and 805 diamonds.

I preferred them in the same order. I was surprised to like the 805 because I didn't like the nautilus range some years ago.

I like the fact that it uses a single driver to cover up to 4 kHz and a 1st order cross over, this leads to an emotional sound and communicative atmosphere.

I only experienced something ''similar'' with old SABA or Noresco single drivers in open baffles with SET amplifiers, although a weak comparison because the drivers are modern and have nothing in common with paper drivers except for their useful range. They have a most revealing upper bass, exceptionally realistic presence, not the most detailed upper voice registers and a mellow mid-range.
I need to audition them in my home vs the 7es3. (I preferred 805 over the harb 30.1 and proac)