or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Speakers › B&W Owner's Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

B&W Owner's Thread - Page 403

post #12061 of 17852
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tenkan View Post

I am using the Bryston 6BSST2 with 802D2 and HTM2D2.

Schweet, will you also provide an evaluation of the sonic quality gained?
post #12062 of 17852
Quote:
Originally Posted by dstew100 View Post

Each skewl of amplifier belief is well represented in this thread...
"skewl amp same" - Amps not clipping, able to drive the load(ohms) of the speakers they are connected to, of reasonable quality, not designed to intentionally colour the sound, are sonically equivalent.
"skewl amp diff" - Those that believe the above sentence is incorrect.
One of these groups has backed up their position with widely accepted objective testing practices used across most industries. The other group talks allot and offers zero objective data that I am able to find, and I've looked far and wide. If objective data exists, please point me to it.
Some benefits to the higher priced amps
a) Better warranty sometimes
b) Bling (aesthetics or name or price bragging rights)
c) Personal preference about manufacture/distributor place/practices/people for variety of reasons
d) Members of "skewl amps diff" do get to enjoy their amp more because they believe it sounds better, I enjoy my lower priced amp more for a related reason.
e) Family heirlooms (That Mcintosh is really going to last, not that it's value catches up over that time)
f) There are other non-sonic reasons
Truly balanced systems offer a slight, real sonic gain, but that takes much more than just a balanced amp and the law of diminishing returns is in full effect if you are putting that together. Suggest you have a treated room and optimal measured speaker placement first and your great grandkids are well provided for.
I think the ATI seams of reasonable value when compared to the higher priced amps, but not when you look at the other offerings from Outlaw, Emotiva, Pro World like crown, and I'm sure I'm missing some. I personally don't throw them or parasound a bone for only charging 50%-100% more than what you can get the equivalent or better sonic quality for just because they aren't charging 6, 10, 20, or more times the cost.
B&W are not high efficiency speakers so you can really put some watts into them to get higher volume levels. If you are trying to get to reference with them you are going to need watts to get there cleanly (amp not distorting). You can determine how many watts is needed for your desired volume level, speaker, and room/distance. My external amp improvement occurs when close to reference, I do that once in a blue moon.
Happy Turkey Day!!!

I have to partially agree to what you have said, as of my research and my endless experience with audio equipment i have found that amplifiers obviously make a difference but the biggest ones are between receivers and dedicated amps. Out of hundreds of amps i have tested i found receivers were no match for properly built dedicated equipment and merely suited those who needed a all in one box, not saying they are bad at all though as people misconceive that and they can sound great when matched with the right equipment. As said however they cannot compete and the saying "if its heavy its good quality" theory seems to correlate to the reason why, the quality of the equipment and the room given by not having to put everything into one box allows the manufacturer to increase the capability and quality of the components going into it. This is IMO the major reason for the difference, in order to have big power you have to have big electrical components, headroom has always been my understanding for better sound quality, even though speakers only require a certain amount they always do much better with headroom and i can tell you why. The headroom theory is that of the same when trying to pull a trailer load with a truck fitted with a engine rated just enough too, the truck has enough power to get the job done and rightly so that may be all the job needs but if you fit the trailer with a truck far more powerful than the job may actually need you will obviously do it much easier. There's less strain on the engine leaving a longer life span, better ride and strain making it more responsive and easier to get the job done.

Now lets look at Dedicated gear vs very expensive gear like classe' , DCS, Mcintosh etc, now i have listened to all three of their latest stuff and tbh the gap is smaller than that between receivers and dedicated gear. But there is still a difference and this is something that i will explain why is still important in the audio industry. Now don't take this offensively dstew but i think you may be a little biased as you probably cannot manage that level of equipment in your lifestyle and i don't disagree with why as i cannot as well and many others i seen in the same positions try and convince themselves they have all they need and reassure themselves by this conclusion. I am however not one that can do that and trust my research and experience by what i believe, iv never had something that wasn't that great that i could self convince myself was better which is some ways is a curse but mostly a god given tool for which i love. Unbiased i guess you could say. Now as i said this difference between the high end equipment is smaller but still there is a difference that is perceivable and not everyone may notice or care to notice and i can understand why due to the high prices usually given when trying to surpass quality that of better priced equipment. But to those who call themselves perfectionists or audiophiles and money is no objective then these level of equipment's suit them well and they will undoubtedly be better its just rather more a icing on the cake matter like all other things in the audio industry with higher quality interconnect's or spikes for floorstanders and dac equipment.

I have in my short time had experience to hundreds of speakers, amplifiers, dacs, preamps, interconnects etc and if it helps people i will state my most opinionated biggest effect of quality between equipment's.
Speakers provide the largest difference in sound output, they are what provide the sound in the first place and every speaker has their own so called taste or coloring, that is probably why i like B&W so much as it tended to favor less to a specific audio band that i have found other speakers lean towards. You cannot make a low end speaker sound better with very expensive equipment it is just not how it works.
Receivers to dedicated equipment provide large difference in audio quality, power and component quality is more important with higher end and harder to drive speakers.
Source equipment is probably just as important as amplifiers because they hold the true original information and need to send it off to the amplifier in its original form as close as possible, i find dedicated Dacs offer the best solution in our time as they give the possibility to remove preamps which people still favor now days but only adds its own coloration to the chain which is not something ideally suited if you are after the cleanest possible transfer.
Lastly everything else, Higher quality cables which salesmen try to pitch off to new comers and i hate but hey they can try. spikes and other theory's like bi wire, quality connectors, interconnects etc they all really follow after all i have said

Good luck smile.gif
Edited by [DANGERDAN] - 11/24/12 at 1:58am
post #12063 of 17852
Quote:
Originally Posted by dstew100 View Post

Schweet, will you also provide an evaluation of the sonic quality gained?

I had a 9.1 system driven by a Denon 4311. One day, the local audio shop had a used Bryston 4BSST at a good price. So, I bought the Bryston and a pair of 805D2s to make an 11.1 system. Later, I decided to buy the Bryston 6BSST2 to use with the 802's and HTM2.

I found the 802's driven by the Denon 4311 a bit bright and forward sounding. Using the Bryston 6BSST2 helped balance the overall frequency response of the system.
post #12064 of 17852
DANGERDAN,
I appreciate your respectful approach in this healthy discussion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by [DANGERDAN] View Post

I have to partially agree to what you have said, as of my research and my endless experience with audio equipment i have found that amplifiers obviously make a difference but the biggest ones are between receivers and dedicated amps.
Can you provide any reference to an amplifier (within my stated criteria) making a provable audio difference? The biggest audio differences are the room (+treatments+layout) then the speakers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by [DANGERDAN] View Post

"if its heavy its good quality" theory seems to correlate to the reason why
Properly designed class A amplifiers will be very heavy, they also double as a space heater. There's good reason to keep them out in the open out of the equipment rack. Ever wonder why a little plate amp on a sub can put out 1000watts? Check out class D and Class H and other amplifier designs of greater efficiency.
Quote:
Originally Posted by [DANGERDAN] View Post

, the quality of the equipment and the room given by not having to put everything into one box allows the manufacturer to increase the capability and quality of the components going into it.
Agreed, however amplifier technology has been completely understood by its designers for a long long time. It is mastered and the devices are not very complicated relatively speaking to say my cell phone, a computer that exists in our blueray players, TVs, vehicles, etc...
Quote:
Originally Posted by [DANGERDAN] View Post

headroom has always been my understanding for better sound quality, even though speakers only require a certain amount they always do much better with headroom and i can tell you why. The headroom theory is that of the same when trying to pull a trailer load with a truck fitted with a engine rated just enough too, the truck has enough power to get the job done and rightly so that may be all the job needs but if you fit the trailer with a truck far more powerful than the job may actually need you will obviously do it much easier. There's less strain on the engine leaving a longer life span, better ride and strain making it more responsive and easier to get the job done.
Unused amplifier headroom makes zero audible difference. If what you are describing as headroom is used during the "peaks"/short louder bursts than that is used and makes an audible difference. The key is to have enough power to cover the peaks without the amplifier distorting. Distortion obviously negatively effects the sound quality. If the amplifier burst cannot be achieved in the correct timeframe the amplifier is not functioning properly (poor design, needs to be serviced, etc). The car engine analogy is not valid IMO.
Quote:
Originally Posted by [DANGERDAN] View Post

Now don't take this offensively dstew but i think you may be a little biased as you probably cannot manage that level of equipment in your lifestyle and i don't disagree with why as i cannot as well and many others i seen in the same positions try and convince themselves they have all they need and reassure themselves by this conclusion. I am however not one that can do that and trust my research and experience by what i believe, iv never had something that wasn't that great that i could self convince myself was better which is some ways is a curse but mostly a god given tool for which i love. Unbiased i guess you could say.
No offense taken, I'm very proud of what I've accomplished and do better than most, this is a B&W thread though so I'm sure I do not do better than most here. To acknowledge your point I run 805S's, want 802's, but they are not in the budget today. They will be one day.

My position is backed up by objective research. It is proven that a human cannot discern an audible difference between amplifiers within the criteria layed out in the double blind tests.

We consumers do have a strong justification bias for our purchases. You are as subject to that bias as well as I. I believe what I believe about amplifiers because of the objective testing performed by the professionals and my personal experience. If a difference cannot be picked out in a double blind test it is not worthy of 2, 6, 10, or 20 times the price for me. I have stated that if I was a rich man, I would still own the Emo.
Quote:
Originally Posted by [DANGERDAN] View Post

Now as i said this difference between the high end equipment is smaller but still there is a difference that is perceivable and not everyone may notice or care to notice and i can understand why due to the high prices usually given when trying to surpass quality that of better priced equipment.
Are you really sure there is a difference in amplifiers(within my stated criteria)? All evidence I have found in my research suggest otherwise.
Quote:
Originally Posted by [DANGERDAN] View Post

with higher quality interconnect's or [snip] dac equipment [snip] amplifiers
Can you hear a difference between properly designed interconnects of correct length? Can you hear a difference between modern DACs? Are you sure? Can you identify that difference in a double blind test?
Quote:
Originally Posted by [DANGERDAN] View Post

You cannot make a low end speaker sound better with very expensive equipment it is just not how it works.
Assuming we are not talking about 5 dollar clock radios here, you only need a good room + treatments. It still want sound as good as our B&W's though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by [DANGERDAN] View Post

is more important with higher end and harder to drive speakers.
Amplifier load capabilities and speaker load are measured; harder to drive speakers require an amplifier which can handle the load/ohm rating. 800 series B&W are fairly inefficient. Do use an appropriate amplifier.
Quote:
Originally Posted by [DANGERDAN] View Post

Higher quality cables which salesmen try to pitch off to new comers and i hate but hey they can try.
Hey we agree here, schweet
Quote:
Originally Posted by [DANGERDAN] View Post

spikes and other theory's like bi wire, quality connectors, interconnects etc they all really follow after all i have said
I spoke too soon, we agree but for different reasons. Do you have expensive cables?
Quote:
Originally Posted by [DANGERDAN] View Post

Good luck smile.gif
Luck? That's so 20th century.wink.gif I'm an engineer and operate based on objective data.

I hope my reply was not offensive in any way. It is certainly not intended to do so. Hopefully one day I will stop derailing this thread but the topic keeps popping up. Let's go enjoy our very nice sound quality.

edit: still learning how to spell
post #12065 of 17852
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tenkan View Post

I found the 802's driven by the Denon 4311 a bit bright and forward sounding. Using the Bryston 6BSST2 helped balance the overall frequency response of the system.
If your amplifier is impacting your frequency response it is not functioning properly. The Audyssey XT32 on your 4311 is very nice. Do you have any measurements to back up this claim? REW is a powerful tool.
post #12066 of 17852
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tenkan View Post

I had a 9.1 system driven by a Denon 4311. One day, the local audio shop had a used Bryston 4BSST at a good price. So, I bought the Bryston and a pair of 805D2s to make an 11.1 system. Later, I decided to buy the Bryston 6BSST2 to use with the 802's and HTM2.
I found the 802's driven by the Denon 4311 a bit bright and forward sounding. Using the Bryston 6BSST2 helped balance the overall frequency response of the system.

So we now know you have 802's and a HTM2 up front and 805's in there somewhere biggrin.gif Care to let us know what your other speakers are that make up the 11.1 and your amps? Looks like you use a 6B and 4B but that only makes for 5 channels, there are still 6 unaccounted for channels along with 7 speakers smile.gif

I also have a 6B and a 4B, two 4B's in fact, all pre squared generation, 1 4B is the original SST design while the 2nd and 6B are from the first SST C series range.
post #12067 of 17852
Quote:
Originally Posted by dstew100 View Post

If your amplifier is impacting your frequency response it is not functioning properly. The Audyssey XT32 on your 4311 is very nice. Do you have any measurements to back up this claim? REW is a powerful tool.

Don't forget about the difference power can make. The Bryston's put out a solid 330+ watts per channel at 8 ohms at clipping and well north of that at 4. The 802's dip down to the 3 ohm and 4 ohm range for a good chunk of their frequency range aparantely so the Denon could very well struggle there, at least at moderately loud levels affecting it's performance which can manifest in an audible degradation.
Edited by Rod#S - 11/24/12 at 11:23am
post #12068 of 17852
Quote:
Originally Posted by dstew100 View Post

I'm an engineer and operate based on objective data.

I'm a musician and operate based on my ability to hear. cool.gif
post #12069 of 17852
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tenkan View Post

I'm a musician and operate based on my ability to hear. cool.gif

And I'm a Finance guy and thus judge by my ability to pay.....biggrin.gif (Well in my case desire to spend - just because one can buy an exotic amp doesn't mean you have to)

So, I'll put it this way. Yep, I think I'd love to own an Aston Martin DB9 or something cool. Honestly though, one canget close to the performance for the price of a V8 Mustang modified for less than 1/6th the price. I gotta think the Mustang is close enough for most of us. But I still would love to own the Aston Martin. Same thing for amplifiers. I think most 800 series owners who have tried a good high current high power amplifier can tell the difference in medium to reference level playback between a mid powered AVR and a high power/high current amplifier. I and my friends can tell in my 11.2 room. However, do we all "need" McIntosh amplifiers? No, would most people want them? I say yes, unless you just can't stand the glass front vintage look. You will never convince me going from an Emotiva XPA-1 to a giant flagship esoteric $25,000 monoblock will ever translate to much, if any noticably superior sound. Good amplifiers - amplify. They do not color or any other way mess with a simple goal of straight line signal amplification.

One other thing. Personally I would prefer spending more for better speakers and wait to upgrade an amp. I would love 802 Diamonds but my room just won't support that big of a speaker and fit my projector screen as well. I need a new home and that certainly is not going to happen anytime soon.
post #12070 of 17852
Hi all,

This is my first post here although I joined a few months back.

I've owned a pair of N804s for the past 12 years and they have been driven by an Accuphase E-407 integrated amp. There's a possibility that I'm bored with the sound but I feel these days it just doesn't have the bass impact and detail I'm looking for. Over the past decade I'm sure B&W's technology has changed and talking to the B&W reps even within the 800 series their sound signature has changed over the past 12 years (I believe primarily the crossovers, the diamond tweeters, etc.).

Unfortunately I've not caught up with B&W's 800 series history. Since the N80x there's been the 80xS, and here it gets confusing. I hear of the 80xD and 80x Diamond.

Q1:
a) Are these distinctly different ranges or are the two synonymous and if they're different how could I distinguish between the two?
b) Probably more precisely (following link is in Japanese), although the translation says it's the 804 Diamond, how can I confirm that this isn't the 804D (if the 804D is different?) :-
http://page11.auctions.yahoo.co.jp/jp/auction/n111738175

Q2: Are the new 800 series as difficult to drive as the old N804s I have right now? I'm intending to continue using my Accuphase E-407 (180w/ch @ 8ohm). As mentioned above, I find that I'm lacking detail and bass impact

Q3: How different has the signature changed by going from the N804 to 804 Diamond?

Further background info :-
1) living room size is approx 22.8sqm
2) I've been listening to higher ended headphones recently (e.g. Stax SR-009/SRM-727A, & Fostex TH-900/HP-A8). Although I understand I may not necessarily get that level of detail from speakers, I'm trying to work out how to improve my speaker setup based on new listening experiences from headphones.

Any advice you're able to provide will be greatly appreciated. Thank you in advance.
post #12071 of 17852
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rod#S View Post

So we now know you have 802's and a HTM2 up front and 805's in there somewhere biggrin.gif Care to let us know what your other speakers are that make up the 11.1 and your amps?

Surrounds, Rears, and Height speakers are driven by a Denon 4520. (I sold the 4311.) The subwoofer amp is a Crown K1. Apart from the B&W Diamonds, I have an assortment of Allison Acoustics and Electro-Voice speakers. The sub is an EV TL880D.

I hope to purchase more B&W speakers in the future so the entire system will be B&W Diamonds.

BTW - I have the same problem as the Finance Guy. It's takes time to save for system components.
post #12072 of 17852
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tenkan View Post

I'm a musician and operate based on my ability to hear. cool.gif
The objective data has proven you don't hear a difference. You can believe you do and you can say you do all you want though. Until you or anyone else can prove it with repeatable objective tests I'll be upgrading system components that do make audible improvements, like B&W.

I too am a musician BTW
post #12073 of 17852
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnakChan View Post
Unfortunately I've not caught up with B&W's 800 series history. Since the N80x there's been the 80xS, and here it gets confusing. I hear of the 80xD and 80x Diamond.
Q1:
a) Are these distinctly different ranges or are the two synonymous and if they're different how could I distinguish between the two?
b) Probably more precisely (following link is in Japanese), although the translation says it's the 804 Diamond, how can I confirm that this isn't the 804D (if the 804D is different?) :-
http://page11.auctions.yahoo.co.jp/jp/auction/n111738175
Q2: Are the new 800 series as difficult to drive as the old N804s I have right now? I'm intending to continue using my Accuphase E-407 (180w/ch @ 8ohm). As mentioned above, I find that I'm lacking detail and bass impact
Q3: How different has the signature changed by going from the N804 to 804 Diamond?
Further background info :-
1) living room size is approx 22.8sqm
2) I've been listening to higher ended headphones recently (e.g. Stax SR-009/SRM-727A, & Fostex TH-900/HP-A8). Although I understand I may not necessarily get that level of detail from speakers, I'm trying to work out how to improve my speaker setup based on new listening experiences from headphones.
Any advice you're able to provide will be greatly appreciated. Thank you in advance.

1a.  They are different ranges with the 80xD series being succeeded by the newer 80xDiamond series (sometimes referred to as 80xD2).

1b.  There was no 804D in the original D series as the 804 and 805 lacked the diamond tweeters.  The only 804D is the 804Diamond.

2.    I do not think there is a significant difference as would be revealed in measurements of sensitivity or impedance but my 800D2s seem easier to drive than their predecessors.  If you are having bass and detail problems, I think the issues lie elsewhere.

3.   Dunno.

post #12074 of 17852
Quote:
Originally Posted by dstew100 View Post

DANGERDAN,
I appreciate your respectful approach in this healthy discussion.
Can you provide any reference to an amplifier (within my stated criteria) making a provable audio difference? The biggest audio differences are the room (+treatments+layout) then the speakers.

Compared to the Receivers ?, well yes i have had perreaux, Rotel, Audiolab, Nad. I currently live with the rotel 1582 and used it as my reference when i compared it against many hi end amplifiers on my little roadie trip around the country, it stood up against very expensive equipment like the classe CA-M600 and Mcintosh finest MC302 and MC452. In the same class as rotel i was able to compare many others which i cannot name anymore as i went through so many, only the important ones that were comparable i would remember i think. As far as receivers go their models change every year it seems but i have had the pleasure to listen from nearly most brands in their flagships like denon, onkyo, yamaha, marantz, sony, pioneer, nad, harmon kardon etc. Denon used to be quite bad in their early days but from what i know as i havn't heard their latest gear they have improved, onkyo, marantz, HK, Nad are my favorites in receivers as they all put effort in their component quality. In saying that again they still do not compare to the dedicated equipment i have listed and would and has always been a great difference in quality, more so when the speaker being driven is very difficult in load like that of the diamond series. More efficient speakers like that of klipsch there is less notability but still a difference none the less.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dstew100 View Post

Properly designed class A amplifiers will be very heavy, they also double as a space heater. There's good reason to keep them out in the open out of the equipment rack. Ever wonder why a little plate amp on a sub can put out 1000watts? Check out class D and Class H and other amplifier designs of greater efficiency.
I'm very familiar with other class's of technology, so much in fact i think the next step in my research would to actually study how to build and design them as i have learnt all i really can from basic online research, in saying that the likes of class D's fit perfectly in our society and produce very good quality for the amount of power given and efficiency from it. Less efficient classes like class A/B, class A will be heavier of course due to their wasted heat requiring larger heatsinks and along with that they usually always have beefier capacitors and power supplies.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dstew100 View Post

Agreed, however amplifier technology has been completely understood by its designers for a long long time. It is mastered and the devices are not very complicated relatively speaking to say my cell phone, a computer that exists in our blueray players, TVs, vehicles, etc...
digital components are very different imo, they can be reduced to nano size and further reduction is increased as time goes by, they clearly have bypassed moores law but lets not sale on that however.
Class D's have always been known of their improvement over time and maybe one day they will surpass that of class A/B technology but its still long away before that ever happens IMO, class D still needs loads of work and even saying that to compare a class D to a properly built class A would require a more complex and expensive design from the class D for it to be comparable. As it goes each class follows suit for different tasks, class D's are designed more for efficiency and cost effective for the buyer where as people who build class A A/B are looking for quality and they will put all their efforts to make the output as high quality as possible using more expensive components and circuitry design.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dstew100 View Post

Unused amplifier headroom makes zero audible difference. If what you are describing as headroom is used during the "peaks"/short louder bursts than that is used and makes an audible difference. The key is to have enough power to cover the peaks without the amplifier distorting. Distortion obviously negatively effects the sound quality. If the amplifier burst cannot be achieved in the correct timeframe the amplifier is not functioning properly (poor design, needs to be serviced, etc). The car engine analogy is not valid IMO.
Without going too much into this one as we clearly have different views i will say that headroom has always proven better in most situations, look at the diamond tweeters for example, the design only increased headroom on its physical capability but resulted in more linear output in the audible frequency range. My headroom theory relates probably more to do with damping factor and distortion, these things impact heavily on headroom especially if a amp is under stress.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dstew100 View Post

No offense taken, I'm very proud of what I've accomplished and do better than most, this is a B&W thread though so I'm sure I do not do better than most here. To acknowledge your point I run 805S's, want 802's, but they are not in the budget today. They will be one day.
My position is backed up by objective research. It is proven that a human cannot discern an audible difference between amplifiers within the criteria layed out in the double blind tests.
We consumers do have a strong justification bias for our purchases. You are as subject to that bias as well as I. I believe what I believe about amplifiers because of the objective testing performed by the professionals and my personal experience. If a difference cannot be picked out in a double blind test it is not worthy of 2, 6, 10, or 20 times the price for me. I have stated that if I was a rich man, I would still own the Emo.
Iv had experience with people finding evidence about people who cant A/B equipment or tell the difference and i always turn back to faulty assumptions or people just not understanding how things work when trying to test for differences, subtle changes cannot be heard by everyone. I for one probably couldn't hear much difference in things when i was younger but that's because i hadn't had much experience, it has come to my knowledge that people don't know what to look for sometimes because they have not learnt how. My friend for example is a very passionate music lover and searches day and night for songs he may like, in his early days however he didn't know much about mp3 bitrates and would have looked passed it probably today if i didn't point out the fact that there was a difference. Showing him the data i had and forms of tests throughout the internet he was amazed and astounded by the major differences there were and ended up realizing how much he was missing out, he has said since then that he can tell almost instantly if a song is 128 or 320kbps but only now because he has been trained to understand. This is why the testing can sometimes fail and results my vary. I also hear the ongoing argument about the golden ear and how some people have higher fidelity hearing, obviously this is hogwash but i do believe people are susceptible to recognise things more as their experience is increased and focus is enhanced.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dstew100 View Post

Are you really sure there is a difference in amplifiers(within my stated criteria)? All evidence I have found in my research suggest otherwise.
Anything within the circuitry has a effect on sound, Capacitors and inductors on a crossover is a good example why. In B&W discussion about crossover design they go on to say how each component has their own unique sound and is something very hard to test which is why they do everything they can to research and study the sounds each capacitor or inductor have to find one that suits the sound they are after.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dstew100 View Post

Can you hear a difference between properly designed interconnects of correct length? Can you hear a difference between modern DACs? Are you sure? Can you identify that difference in a double blind test?
Firstly power cables i find less difference as long as the first rules of physics are followed, having the right sized cable for the situation in comparison has very rarely given me the capability to tell the difference. If you however tried to A/B a tinny thin cable then of course your going to hear a difference but that's because your just not being fair, that's why i laugh when people claim they can hear a difference in bi wire application. They probably don't realise that what they were using before may have not been large enough and then increasing from one to two cables gave the speaker what it needed to transfer the power more efficiently and cleanly. XLR clearly makes a difference but its more to do with its topology than the quality of the components, XLR is a great tool that is not used enough and is missed out by a lot of people who stick with low end gear. Have a look here http://www.roger-russell.com/wire/wire.htm

Dac's now they do make a difference and so they should they are the sole holders of the original information, not only that but the output stage which transforms it into a analogue signal is just not if not more important than the dac conversion itself. If you look at most dedicated dac equipment they are fairly large and if you were to open them and look at their dac chips they would be no bigger than your pinky. This is because the rest of the circuitry is vital to the signal chain in order to fully benefit from a high quality dac like the ESS sabre 9018 Chips or the Wolfson 8741 or Cirrus or some burr browns, go check out pink media forums and look for a guy named john westlake who has designed many famous DAC equipment like Audiolab M-dac/ CDQ and the well known DAC magic etc. You have many other things under DAC conversion that people miss or think is not a concern like digital attenuation and how much that affects audio output, windows uses such horrible algorithm and truncates, quantize the data very badly compared to proper digital attenuated equipment with technology like bit relocation, noise shifting etc.
I could go on but il leave that for further discusion later on.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dstew100 View Post

Assuming we are not talking about 5 dollar clock radios here, you only need a good room + treatments. It still want sound as good as our B&W's though.
No of course not, i was only saying speakers are only as good as they are designed and that trying to make it better with more expensive equipment wont be as beneficial as upgrading the speakers themselves.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dstew100 View Post

Amplifier load capabilities and speaker load are measured; harder to drive speakers require an amplifier which can handle the load/ohm rating. 800 series B&W are fairly inefficient. Do use an appropriate amplifier.
Agreed!
Quote:
Originally Posted by dstew100 View Post

I spoke too soon, we agree but for different reasons. Do you have expensive cables?
I was merely saying all other things like spikes, speaker cables or added things of such have less impact on sound than what i had stated previously. I have expensive enough cables, $200 or so but they cost the price because they are heavy duty in size.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dstew100 View Post

Luck? That's so 20th century.wink.gif I'm an engineer and operate based on objective data.
I hope my reply was not offensive in any way. It is certainly not intended to do so. Hopefully one day I will stop derailing this thread but the topic keeps popping up. Let's go enjoy our very nice sound quality.
edit: still learning how to spell

I have been very happy talking to you and only come to learn instead find with others i may have to argue which i still don't mind because even if i am proven wrong i have learnt and i have the capability to do so as well.
Id also like to state i have listend to hundreds of speakers over the year and il state a few here for you.
B&W 800,802,803,804, CM9,CM8,683
Klipsch RF7II, RF83, RF82II, RF62II
Polk RTI 12, RTIA9, LSI 15
Dynaudio Focus 380,340,260
Paradigm Signiture s6, s8 and some studio series
Kef Q900, R900
And to quickly finish the list just the brands
Wharfedale,Cerwin Vega, Mirage, Mission, ProAc, PSB,

I have owned a few of these like klipsch RF 83 and 683 and rti 12 and some more.
Edited by [DANGERDAN] - 11/24/12 at 5:39pm
post #12075 of 17852
Quote:
Originally Posted by [DANGERDAN] 
digital components are very different imo, they can be reduced to nano size and further reduction is increased as time goes by, they clearly have bypassed moores law but lets not sale on that however.

You seem to be inserting buzzwords at random.

Digital is anything with discreet steps (something which can be completely represented with a number). The second hand on many analog clocks is digital (moving in steps) rather than analog (moving continuously) as the hour and minute hand are (though technically, even then, it depends on the clock).

Moore's law discusses the cost of transistors on printed circuitry. It's not related to a digital-vs-analog discussion.

Class D amplifies (so named because A, B, and C were used) are not digital and not generally using circuitry where print density has been an issue; and so does not relate to either of the above.
Quote:
Class D's have always been known of their improvement over time and maybe one day they will surpass that of class A/B technology but its still long away before that ever happens IMO, class D still needs loads of work and even saying that to compare a class D to a properly built class A would require a more complex and expensive design from the class D for it to be comparable.

I would bet that there is no one who could identify a crown XPS from (insert any non-coloring amp of your choice) in a blind test. I've heard some magnificent gear run on some of the biggest, most expensive, and most highly rated amps in the consumer world; and they didn't sound any better than the Yammy PxxxxS's I'm using at home. (Technically: Class H)
Quote:
Without going too much into this one as we clearly have different views i will say that headroom has always proven better in most situations, look at the diamond tweeters for example, the design only increased headroom on its physical capability but resulted in more linear output in the audible frequency range. My headroom theory relates probably more to do with damping factor and distortion, these things impact heavily on headroom especially if a amp is under stress.

Again, I see many buzz words mixed together in a way that makes no sense.

Diamond was introduced as a dome material because of the high cone breakup frequency (70khz). Though we only hear to 20khz, there are concerns about harmonics causing problems far down the line (a single octave harmonic issue would mean we care about 40Khz)

Headroom is a different issue, and discusses the ability to create transitory spikes in power/SPL.

Damping is a different issue to either of the above and refers to the tendency of a driver (or really, anything) to resist vibration.

I'm sorry, but you don't seem to understand the words you are typing.
post #12076 of 17852
I am new to the website looking for parts for my B&W Matrix 804 (original owner). I think I found what I needed (tweeter grill and ring) but this is a very interesting website. Lots of interesting comments on B&W speakers. Right now they have been transported to the rear of my listening room to do surround sound duty and they are
very good at that.
One thread I landed in was locked and it mentioned a 2 year old that pushed in a cone on Daddy's speakers. A few responses mentioned teaching the child to respect personal items. They could not be parents. A 2 year old still needs to be supervised, that's why they have parents.
Another item is amplification. I like tubes in general and my 804's sounded great with my Quicksilver V-4's. Other general rules for newbies, are they sound best bi-wired (to me at least) and they like to be driven (better louder than softer). Hope everyone had a great Thanksgiving.

John
post #12077 of 17852
Quote:
Originally Posted by JerryLove View Post

You seem to be inserting buzzwords at random.
Digital is anything with discreet steps (something which can be completely represented with a number). The second hand on many analog clocks is digital (moving in steps) rather than analog (moving continuously) as the hour and minute hand are (though technically, even then, it depends on the clock).
Moore's law discusses the cost of transistors on printed circuitry. It's not related to a digital-vs-analog discussion.
Class D amplifies (so named because A, B, and C were used) are not digital and not generally using circuitry where print density has been an issue; and so does not relate to either of the above.
Dstew and i were referring to computer and cellphone technology on that point, not to do with class D or anything audio for that matter, just comparisons on technological advancement. I don't know where i said class D amps were digital, clearly i see you throwing buzzwords in for me lol, as far as i know class D is PWM.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JerryLove View Post

I would bet that there is no one who could identify a crown XPS from (insert any non-coloring amp of your choice) in a blind test. I've heard some magnificent gear run on some of the biggest, most expensive, and most highly rated amps in the consumer world; and they didn't sound any better than the Yammy PxxxxS's I'm using at home. (Technically: Class H)
Well place your bet im discussing with dstew.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JerryLove View Post

Again, I see many buzz words mixed together in a way that makes no sense.
Diamond was introduced as a dome material because of the high cone breakup frequency (70khz). Though we only hear to 20khz, there are concerns about harmonics causing problems far down the line (a single octave harmonic issue would mean we care about 40Khz)
not buzz wording anything mate, was merely stating the fact that B&W tweeter increased its frequency up to yes 70khz and from what i have read and seen they found it produced a nicer output in the audible frequency range and they could not fully explain why but it seemed to them that the more they push the limits the better it was for the outcome. I may not know the full details on the diamond but again was merely stating a example, was not implying anywhere i was god of knowledge.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JerryLove View Post

Headroom is a different issue, and discusses the ability to create transitory spikes in power/SPL.
Damping is a different issue to either of the above and refers to the tendency of a driver (or really, anything) to resist vibration.
I'm sorry, but you don't seem to understand the words you are typing.

You seem to explain all these things as if i don't already know, i may not know everything down to the last detail like a engineer would but yes i know great depth about damping and other things i have said
Damping factor is the ratio of the loudspeaker's impedance to amplifier output impedance.
A speaker system has 3 damping mechanism - Electrical, Magnetic & Acoustic, this is why i am talking about headroom because these all factor in when a amplifier can handle lower impedance and to do that you need more power.. well essentially just more current but you get the idea.

see what im talking about dstew...
Edited by [DANGERDAN] - 11/24/12 at 10:23pm
post #12078 of 17852
[DANGERDAN]

I too am enjoying the discussion. Going to be off the interwebs for a couple days but will check back in Wednesday. I'd recommend you set up and do some blind testing.

Enjoy
post #12079 of 17852
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kal Rubinson View Post

1a.  They are different ranges with the 80xD series being succeeded by the newer 80xDiamond series (sometimes referred to as 80xD2).
1b.  There was no 804D in the original D series as the 804 and 805 lacked the diamond tweeters.  The only 804D is the 804Diamond.
2.    I do not think there is a significant difference as would be revealed in measurements of sensitivity or impedance but my 800D2s seem easier to drive than their predecessors.  If you are having bass and detail problems, I think the issues lie elsewhere.
3.   Dunno.
Thx for answering the questions. Definitely has helped me with further research.
post #12080 of 17852
Quote:
Originally Posted by SeattleHTGuy View Post

And I'm a Finance guy and thus judge by my ability to pay.....biggrin.gif (Well in my case desire to spend - just because one can buy an exotic amp doesn't mean you have to)
So, I'll put it this way. Yep, I think I'd love to own an Aston Martin DB9 or something cool. Honestly though, one canget close to the performance for the price of a V8 Mustang modified for less than 1/6th the price. I gotta think the Mustang is close enough for most of us. But I still would love to own the Aston Martin. Same thing for amplifiers. I think most 800 series owners who have tried a good high current high power amplifier can tell the difference in medium to reference level playback between a mid powered AVR and a high power/high current amplifier. I and my friends can tell in my 11.2 room. However, do we all "need" McIntosh amplifiers? No, would most people want them? I say yes, unless you just can't stand the glass front vintage look. You will never convince me going from an Emotiva XPA-1 to a giant flagship esoteric $25,000 monoblock will ever translate to much, if any noticably superior sound. Good amplifiers - amplify. They do not color or any other way mess with a simple goal of straight line signal amplification.
One other thing. Personally I would prefer spending more for better speakers and wait to upgrade an amp. I would love 802 Diamonds but my room just won't support that big of a speaker and fit my projector screen as well. I need a new home and that certainly is not going to happen anytime soon.

Interesting analogy smile.gif for me I would never settle for the Mustang because no matter waht you do it it's still a Mustang and I would never have it, I would rather do without. for me receivers are the same with respect to amplification. I started with receivers but will never go back. They have come a long way in their digital SSP abilities and can rival many a high end uber priced dedicated surround sound processor but just can't compete in the power department and and onboard power supply. With power amps we are just so spoiled for choice at a lot of price levels from mult-channel amps to mono blocks with many different power ratings to have to use the small amps in receivers with very small power supplies.
post #12081 of 17852
Even with the Roush modifications, a mustang will not handle like an Aston-Martin; and though we can up the fit-and-finish a good deal, we still cannot address poor (IMO) cockpit layout in the Mustang.

If you want an Austin-Martin at a lower price, look at Jaguar. Which, by-the-way, is available with a Bowers and Wilkins sound-system.
Edited by JerryLove - 11/26/12 at 2:29pm
post #12082 of 17852
Quote:
Originally Posted by dstew100 View Post


B&W are not high efficiency speakers so you can really put some watts into them to get higher volume levels.

Both the 800D2 and 802D2 have a measured sensitivity of 90dB/2.83V/m (Stereophile, Home Theater Magazine).

It doesn't take that much power for them to produce 90dB or 93dB or 96dB volume which is very loud.
post #12083 of 17852
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tenkan View Post

Surrounds, Rears, and Height speakers are driven by a Denon 4520. (I sold the 4311.) The subwoofer amp is a Crown K1. Apart from the B&W Diamonds, I have an assortment of Allison Acoustics and Electro-Voice speakers. The sub is an EV TL880D.
I hope to purchase more B&W speakers in the future so the entire system will be B&W Diamonds.
BTW - I have the same problem as the Finance Guy. It's takes time to save for system components.

Cool, thanks. What additional B&W speakers do you intend to purchase down the road? With an 11.1 setup, two of those channels must be heights so you may have to compromise on the diamonds there as B&W currently doesn't make diamond in-ceiling/in-wall speakers. You could of course wall mount 805's. Have you tried using your 805's in multiple positions to experiment where you get the most of out them i.e. side surrounds, rear surrounds and widths?

It certainly does take time to acquire this stuff.
post #12084 of 17852
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rod#S View Post

Cool, thanks. What additional B&W speakers do you intend to purchase down the road? With an 11.1 setup, two of those channels must be heights so you may have to compromise on the diamonds there as B&W currently doesn't make diamond in-ceiling/in-wall speakers. You could of course wall mount 805's. Have you tried using your 805's in multiple positions to experiment where you get the most of out them i.e. side surrounds, rear surrounds and widths?
It certainly does take time to acquire this stuff.

I'm using the 805's for Height. They are sitting on stands. I've not tried using the 805's in other positions. I've not decided if other speakers would be 805's or a combination of 803's and 805's.
post #12085 of 17852
Sweet.... we are on the subject of cars.... love it as i know a hell of a lot more about cars then all of the tech specs on amps and the few extra frequency response from the speaker to speaker in the b&w 800 series range. that being said i love my b&ws in my home theater....


ok cars.... are we talking about handling?? i believe some one was comparing a mustang and an Austin Martin.... well they both suck at handling they are both too heavy.... especially in street trim.... now rip everything out of them drop thousands of dollars in carbon fiber and we will have a different story. really the best bang for the buck in speed and handling is one of those plastic street bikes.

if you are buying an Austin Martin it is not for acceleration and handling... hell.... buy a Mazda meta and do engine work on it and it will tear the mustang and Austin a new one.... but then again.... at the end of the day you still have a Mazda...

Bill
post #12086 of 17852
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tenkan View Post

I'm using the 805's for Height. They are sitting on stands. .

Wow... they are currently my main speakers...
post #12087 of 17852
Quote:
Originally Posted by AcuDefTechGuy View Post


Both the 800D2 and 802D2 have a measured sensitivity of 90dB/2.83V/m (Stereophile, Home Theater Magazine).
It doesn't take that much power for them to produce 90dB or 93dB or 96dB volume which is very loud.

Right but the amp has to be comfortable with the impedance dips to ~ohms at 15 and 45 ohms.

post #12088 of 17852
Quote:
Originally Posted by petetherock View Post

Wow... they are currently my main speakers...

Me too smile.gif
post #12089 of 17852
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tenkan View Post

I'm using the 805's for Height. They are sitting on stands. I've not tried using the 805's in other positions. I've not decided if other speakers would be 805's or a combination of 803's and 805's.

Stands for heigth, wow, are they custom made stands? The tallest stand I've ever come across that could hold a speaker the size and weight of the 805 with any amount of stability would more or less put the 805 at the same height as the 803 probably so a far cry from the height needed for a dedicated height speaker. I would love to ultimately move towards an 11.1 setup but what always concerns me are the widths. With 802's currently as mains which may be relegated to surrounds next Spring if I get 800's I would be concerned that anything other than a 800/802 would show itself in the mix and not blend properly. I suppose having the 802's as surrounds, they could easily be moved up to perform width duty. I would love to be able to experiment which set of speakers becomes the most important, side surrounds, rear surrounds, widths or heigths. With widths being up front and at ear level my gut says they could be most important to what we hear then perhaps followed by the side surrounds. For the heights and rear surrounds it might be a toss up and come down to personal preference as to what type of enveloping sound a person prefers, be that from above or behind.
Edited by Rod#S - 11/25/12 at 4:59pm
post #12090 of 17852
I wish i could find a set of older N802 and try them as fronts .. let alone have 800's for fronts and 802 for sides. but alas Florida is not the place to be to find 802's
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Speakers
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Speakers › B&W Owner's Thread