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

B&W Owner's Thread - Page 429

post #12841 of 17787
Hello!

I just had my B&W Panorama repaired at a authorised service center. I got it back today. When I turned it on, it said K-Lock in the display. I recon this means key lock. The buttons on the front panel does not do anything, the remote control will not work. How do I fix this? I could not find anything about this in the instructions manual. Please help me with this.
post #12842 of 17787
Hi there! Long time lurker...

Just ditched a DefTech Promonitor + Supercube combo for 2 x B&W 684s and an SVS PB-1000. SVS should be here tomorrow, so I'm in the process of tuning the 684s. Bi-amping off of a Marantz SR6006 for now, and Audyssey set the speakers to "Large". While impressive, I'm a bit worried about LFE effects, as the 684s are rated to 44hz or so. (room gain pumping Audyssey measurement, perhaps?)

Should I...
1. Keep as "Large" ?
2. Set to "Small" and use a crossover of 40-50hz?
3. Set to "Small" and use the usual crossover of 80hz?

Probably 70% HT and 30% Music.

Sorry if this has been covered before, but I did exercise a bit of "Search" on this forum and some Google-fu.

Thank you! smile.gif
post #12843 of 17787
Quote:
Originally Posted by pzee View Post

Hi there! Long time lurker...

Just ditched a DefTech Promonitor + Supercube combo for 2 x B&W 684s and an SVS PB-1000. SVS should be here tomorrow, so I'm in the process of tuning the 684s. Bi-amping off of a Marantz SR6006 for now, and Audyssey set the speakers to "Large". While impressive, I'm a bit worried about LFE effects, as the 684s are rated to 44hz or so. (room gain pumping Audyssey measurement, perhaps?)

Should I...
1. Keep as "Large" ?
2. Set to "Small" and use a crossover of 40-50hz?
3. Set to "Small" and use the usual crossover of 80hz?

Probably 70% HT and 30% Music.

Sorry if this has been covered before, but I did exercise a bit of "Search" on this forum and some Google-fu.

Thank you! smile.gif

I would set them to small and set the crossover to 80 Hz.
post #12844 of 17787
+1

Your SVS sub will do a much cleaner (and stronger) job reproducing the low bass than the B&Ws. If you have them set to LARGE, then nothing from your mains will be handled by the subwoofer.
post #12845 of 17787
Thanks much! I figured LFE+Main would let the sub work its magic as well. But - small it is :-). Thanks again.
post #12846 of 17787

Do you agree with this!

 

"If speech needs an 8:1 increase in amplifier power over sine waves, how about music?  Try 50:1 on for size.  The crest factor of music is generally around 20dB where speech is 12dB and sine waves are 3dB.  Remembering that each 3dB increase in crest factor requires the amplifier power to double, this means that a reasonably efficient loudspeaker, say 90dB efficient, needs 50 watts of power to reach musical peaks of 90dB, but only 1 watt to play the same loudness level sine wave.  50 to 1.  Now we should ask ourselves several questions: chief among them would be “what is loud”?  90dB is loud, that’s for sure, but if you’re listening to dynamic music, like orchestral, you can easily reach 100dB peaks when the orchestra plays loudly.

Our musical math would then show us if we need 50 watts to reach 90dB, we need 10 times that amount to reach 100dB!  That’s right, do the math.  For a 90dB pair of loudspeakers to produce 100dB peaks in your room without clipping the amplifier, you need 500 watts of power."

 

http://www.pstracks.com/pauls-posts/music-math/9706/

post #12847 of 17787
Quote:
Originally Posted by wse View Post

Our musical math would then show us if we need 50 watts to reach 90dB, we need 10 times that amount to reach 100dB!  That’s right, do the math.  For a 90dB pair of loudspeakers to produce 100dB peaks in your room without clipping the amplifier, you need 500 watts of power."


Of course that would also require that the speaker produced 70db @1w. I've never seen a mainstream speaker anywhere near that inefficient. The norm seems to be 87-94db @1w.

A "90db pair of speakers" would be a phrase meaning "90db @1w @1m" or "90db @2v @1m"... either of which would require 10w to put out 100db.
post #12848 of 17787
Quote:
Originally Posted by JerryLove View Post Of course that would also require that the speaker produced 70db @1w. I've never seen a mainstream speaker anywhere near that inefficient. The norm seems to be 87-94db @1w.

A "90db pair of speakers" would be a phrase meaning "90db @1w @1m" or "90db @2v @1m"... either of which would require 10w to put out 100db.

 

Cool picture for your avatar is that an 801N

post #12849 of 17787
Quote:
Originally Posted by JerryLove View Post



Of course that would also require that the speaker produced 70db @1w. I've never seen a mainstream speaker anywhere near that inefficient. The norm seems to be 87-94db @1w.

A "90db pair of speakers" would be a phrase meaning "90db @1w @1m" or "90db @2v @1m"... either of which would require 10w to put out 100db.

It's worse than that.

He's claiming that a speaker with a sensitivity of 90 dB will indeed produce 90 dB with one watt if it's playing a sine wave, but in a stunning display of misunderstanding says the same speaker will need 50 times that much power to play music at 90 dB due to crest factor.
post #12850 of 17787

I have a question,

 

Now that I have four 802D surround speakers, I am thinking to place my Classé CA-52 in the back of the room.

 

So here we go, what do you think is best

 

Option 1: 30 feet speaker cables and 6 feet XLR cables

 

or

 

Option 2: 30 feet XLR cables and 7 feet speaker cables

 

I always read that the shorter the speaker cable the better?

post #12851 of 17787
Quote:
Originally Posted by wse View Post

I have a question,

Now that I have 4 802D surround speakers I am thinking to place my Classé CA-52 in the back of the room so here we go, what do you think is best

30 feet speaker cables and 6 feet XLR cables

or

30 feet XLR cables and 7 feet speaker cables

I always read that the shorter the speaker cable the better?

The shorter the cable, the better, in general... But not so's you'd notice it most likely. Technically I suppose if you're in a badly noisy EM environment you might want to keep balanced connections going as far as possible. I suspect that the main issues that should drive your decision though, should be convenience and aesthetics.
post #12852 of 17787
Quote:
Originally Posted by JD in NJ View PostThe shorter the cable, the better, in general... But not so's you'd notice it most likely. Technically I suppose if you're in a badly noisy EM environment you might want to keep balanced connections going as far as possible. I suspect that the main issues that should drive your decision though, should be convenience and aesthetics.

You mean all cables yes?

 

I can do either all cables are under the rug!

post #12853 of 17787
Quote:
Originally Posted by wse View Post

Cool picture for your avatar is that an 801N

Yep. That's one of my 801N's
post #12854 of 17787
Quote:
Originally Posted by JerryLove View Post Yep. That's one of my 801N's

 

Cool do you have pictures of your system!

post #12855 of 17787
Quote:
Originally Posted by wse View Post

Cool do you have pictures of your system!

I do not.

My arrangement is in an almost constant state of change.
post #12856 of 17787
Quote:
Originally Posted by wse View Post

I have a question,

Now that I have four 802D surround speakers, I am thinking to place my Classé CA-52 in the back of the room.

So here we go, what do you think is best

Option 1: 30 feet speaker cables and 6 feet XLR cables

or

Option 2: 30 feet XLR cables and 7 feet speaker cables

I always read that the shorter the speaker cable the better?
I can't get past "Now that I have four 802D surround speakers". biggrin.gif
post #12857 of 17787
I'm planning on replacing my current 5.1 system with B&W in the near future. I'm currently debating which towers I want to use in the front, but I'm leaning either 803 or 804. Center would be the match for whichever towers I choose. For surrounds, I am limited to in-walls due to the nature of my living room. I'm seeing a fair amount of CWM800s on the used market, so I'm wondering if these would be a good match for surround duty, or will the sound characteristics be too different?
post #12858 of 17787
Quote:
Originally Posted by cavalier240 View Post

I'm planning on replacing my current 5.1 system with B&W in the near future. I'm currently debating which towers I want to use in the front, but I'm leaning either 803 or 804. Center would be the match for whichever towers I choose. For surrounds, I am limited to in-walls due to the nature of my living room. I'm seeing a fair amount of CWM800s on the used market, so I'm wondering if these would be a good match for surround duty, or will the sound characteristics be too different?

I had your same question. Upgraded my in wall surrounds and center to B&W. went with 803D for fronts. IMO a big difference from 803D to 804D. Listen to lots of classical and jazz and rock. The 804's lacked the crispness and instrument definition compared to the 803's and missed the attack. With similar midrange driver materials the voicing of the in-walls work to my satisfaction. Another important tool is sufficient power to present the music.
post #12859 of 17787
Quote:
Originally Posted by wse View Post

You mean all cables yes?

I can do either all cables are under the rug!

I guess what I was trying to say is that chances are there won't be any detectable difference in sound regardless of how you wire it... Except in the unlikely event that you have a major problem with interference, say because you live next door to a radio station transmitter and bribed the inspector to let you build closer than is safe. biggrin.gif

If you DO have an interference problem, then XLR balanced connections are highly resistant to signal distortion so that could be a factor, although as I said it seems pretty unlikely.

So most likely there's nothing to choose from, and you should go with what you like best. If you like having your amps up front, go for it. If you like having your amps co-located with your speakers, there's certainly nothing wrong with that.
post #12860 of 17787
Quote:
Originally Posted by JD in NJ View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by wse View Post

You mean all cables yes?

I can do either all cables are under the rug!

I guess what I was trying to say is that chances are there won't be any detectable difference in sound regardless of how you wire it... Except in the unlikely event that you have a major problem with interference, say because you live next door to a radio station transmitter and bribed the inspector to let you build closer than is safe. biggrin.gif

If you DO have an interference problem, then XLR balanced connections are highly resistant to signal distortion so that could be a factor, although as I said it seems pretty unlikely.

So most likely there's nothing to choose from, and you should go with what you like best. If you like having your amps up front, go for it. If you like having your amps co-located with your speakers, there's certainly nothing wrong with that.

Having power amplifiers across the room likely means that they will be on different power lines to distributiin panel. It may help when high power (500W and up) is required. Single wire run is usually limited to 2000W or less.
post #12861 of 17787
Quote:
Originally Posted by wadeh911 View Post

I had your same question. Upgraded my in wall surrounds and center to B&W. went with 803D for fronts. IMO a big difference from 803D to 804D. Listen to lots of classical and jazz and rock. The 804's lacked the crispness and instrument definition compared to the 803's and missed the attack. With similar midrange driver materials the voicing of the in-walls work to my satisfaction. Another important tool is sufficient power to present the music.

Thanks for the response. My main concern is that the CWM800s with the aluminum dome tweeter and kevlar mid/bass may sound fairly different from the towers with the diamond tweeter with kevlar mid and Rohacell bass. It sounds though that you're saying they match close enough for surround duty? All speakers will be driven from a Rotel 1095 (200x5).

I guess I should also mention that when listening to music, I only use 2.1 stereo, so the rears will be off. The inwalls will purely be used when watching tv and movies.
post #12862 of 17787
Quote:
Originally Posted by wse View Post

I have a question,

Now that I have four 802D surround speakers, I am thinking to place my Classé CA-52 in the back of the room.

So here we go, what do you think is best

Option 1: 30 feet speaker cables and 6 feet XLR cables

or

Option 2: 30 feet XLR cables and 7 feet speaker cables

I always read that the shorter the speaker cable the better?

That is easy. You always want longer xlr and shorter speaker cables if that is a choice because balanced/xlr by design negates the wire length as an issue.
post #12863 of 17787
Quote:
Originally Posted by akhter View Post

You always want longer xlr and shorter speaker cables if that is a choice because balanced/xlr by design negates the wire length as an issue.
Yes, and no. Balanced interconnects eliminate ground loop issues, so if you have that option there's no reason not to go with a remote amp location. But if you don't have a balanced system ground loop noise can be an issue, and you're generally better off with keeping all the amps in one spot, so long as the speaker cable length is 50 feet or less.
post #12864 of 17787
Down. this forum goes from dead quiet for a week or so to 20+ posts the next time i check it.....

going to the XLR .... the balanced thing.... i had read, in many spots, that the XLR connections on MOST of the pre amps are not truly balanced anyway. except for a few of the ultra high end think THETA... So over the 10,000 dollar mark.

if that is true... Would using the XLR connections really matter?
post #12865 of 17787
Quote:
Originally Posted by baranowski View PostDown. this forum goes from dead quiet for a week or so to 20+ posts the next time i check it..... going to the XLR .... the balanced thing.... i had read, in many spots, that the XLR connections on MOST of the pre amps are not truly balanced anyway. except for a few of the ultra high end think THETA... So over the 10,000 dollar mark.

if that is true... Would using the XLR connections really matter?

 

The SSP-800 and their amps are truly balanced :)

post #12866 of 17787
Quote:
Originally Posted by baranowski View Post

Down. this forum goes from dead quiet for a week or so to 20+ posts the next time i check it.....

going to the XLR .... the balanced thing.... i had read, in many spots, that the XLR connections on MOST of the pre amps are not truly balanced anyway. except for a few of the ultra high end think THETA... So over the 10,000 dollar mark.

if that is true... Would using the XLR connections really matter?

Because the noise reduction works anyway even if the source uses a transformer or chip to derive a balanced output.  It is the ability of the target device's differential input to reject the common noise.

post #12867 of 17787
Agreed. As long as *any* signal is being sent down (even a neutral one) and as long as the receiving device is balanced, the active cancellation should work.
post #12868 of 17787
So for my DHC80.3 to my 4Bsst2 XLRs will work but to my Shearborn PA5-200 not so much as it is not a balanced amp? I am using RCAs as they are 1 meter or 0.5 meter but I wondered how that would work if was installed in a closet a distance away.

I contacted Sherbourn when I got it and they confirmed for short distances RCA was preferred but I could not understand how they can be used for installer projects in remote locations!?
Edited by jima4a - 2/21/13 at 10:17am
post #12869 of 17787
Quote:
Originally Posted by jima4a View Post

So for my DHC80.3 to my 4Bsst2 XLRs will work but to my Shearborn PA5-200 not so much as it is not a balanced amp? I am using RCAs as they are 1 meter or 0.5 meter but I wondered how that would work if was installed in a closet a distance away.

I contacted Sherbourn when I got it and they confirmed for short distances RCA was preferred but I could not understand how they can be used for installer projects in remote locations!?

Because this is not life or death.  Long RCA runs are generally OK unless you are in an electrically noisy environment or your preamp is a low-voltage weakling.  I can run 10meter RCAs without any problems and could, probably, go longer.  

post #12870 of 17787
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kal Rubinson View Post

Because this is not life or death.  Long RCA runs are generally OK unless you are in an electrically noisy environment or your preamp is a low-voltage weakling.  I can run 10meter RCAs without any problems and could, probably, go longer.  
+1. So long as you don't have conditions that promote a ground loop there's no problem with even running 1000 foot unbalanced lines. It's when you have conditions that would cause a ground loop with unbalanced lines that length causes problems, with the noise level squared for every doubling of the cable length. Ground loops are rendered impossible with correctly configured balanced lines. As for the common mode rejection of balanced lines, that's not a major concern at line level. It is a huge concern when the source is run through high gain stages, and that's why almost all microphones are balanced.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Speakers
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Speakers › B&W Owner's Thread