B&W Owner's Thread - Page 4

I didn't say they sounded like the 802d's, or even equally good. I said they sound 90% as good. in the world of audio, a 10% difference is far from trivial. I most certainly think that it is a mistake for anyone to buy speakers that cost as much as the 600's without auditioning the 600's first, because I have yet to hear anything that offers the same level of quality at the price.

Pulliamm, where do you live in OKC, im from Edmond.

I have an opinion (though not a really strong one) and a bit of experience with that same problem. When I got 700s, I didn't really have room for the unwieldy HTM7 either, and my dealer (who says he hears that issue a lot) recommended the CM C (in neutral black). It was probably the best I could have done at the time in terms of voice matching and cosmetics. Here are pics from back then:





If I were in the same situation now, I'd consider the new CM Centre, although (dammit!) it doesn't come in black, and I don't know if it has a finish to match your 704s. In a pinch, I think a 600-series center would the next best choice for the reason you stated.

Later I ditched the VCR and re-configured (and, yeah, I got a better TV):



(And try to excuse my weak-ass photography.)

I don't agree with you still. It is just your opinion, so stating it as fact is misleading. Frankly, I don't see how you can make a statement such as "they sound 90% as good" if you aren't comparing them on "like" sound qualities, what else can you use as a comparison between the two if not the similarity in sound? In any case, I wouldn't place the difference at 90% or even 80%, IMO it would be a much bigger difference. I appreciate your enthusiasm for the speakers you own, but letting those speakers cloud your sense of reality just so you can justify your purchase decision is a terrible way to boost your own confidence. Besides that, making ridiculous claims about the product is not going to earn you friends on either side of the fence.

For the price the 600s are great speakers, but not 90% comparable to the 803Ds and above IMO.

so you a OSU football fan?

That can go both ways. Especially when you pay ten times the price to boost confidence. One really has to appreciate your enthusiasm when you pay so much, like the speaker company..

It can go any way you like. The difference is, I'm not stating my opinions as fact, while he is stating his as fact. So, be an obnoxious prick if it makes you feel better about yourself (as IMO I don't see any other reason for you to post what you did in the way in which you posted it except to be a jerk), but please don't confuse opinion with fact.

The only one album I could find on CD from this list on Acoustic Sounds was Organ Sensation.

I couldn't find the Hans Theessink album, but I did find the Buster Williams one. I did find Hans Theessink's album Bridges, if that has anything useful for these purposes on it? Any more suggestions. I definitely prefer albums that are SACD hybrid to regular CD, as I can use them to demo and can use them as SACD on my home system.

Thanks again.

I am not going to type IMO over and over again with every new thing I say. It is always implied, just as it is always implied in everything that you or anyone else says. The only "factual" statements are those that directly cite scientific data.
Of course 90% is not a "hard" number. It is just a conventional way of expressing how I think the 600 and 800 series compare. Another way to state it is this: The 600 series has all of the technology and sonic excellence that characterize the "B&W sound". As such, they offer truly outstanding performance/price and are hard to beat for the price. The 700 series is a definite step up, but a lot more expensive. They are a great choice if you can afford it, but not worth going into debt for. The 800's are at another level of refinement beyond the 700's, but not to a degree proportional to the price difference. They are intended for wealthy clients, and that is who should buy them. (IMO! )

Just callin it like i see it. Pulliam might have a point with lower priced speakers comming close to the 10 times expensive models. Maybe not 80-90%, but i would say atleast 75%. Having deep pockets and buying the most expensive speakers dont mean the lesser priced models dont compare. Sometimes the lesser priced sound BETTER. I know this will be impossible for you to accept. More expensive automatically=better.. I know your type

I think you're right about that part, unfortunately.

There's a certain subculture here that always wants to say, "You paid way too much, 'cause you're not smart like me!" and that's a little hard to understand, really. If you own something in the 800 series (or $70,000 Wilsons), I say rock on!

Let me guess, you own some seriously expensive speakers.

I heard the 803S and was not willing to make the jump for another $3500. It was just not that big of an improvement over the 604's. I have to agree with Pulliamm regarding his diminishing returns theory. I believe it gets even worse when you factor in all of the associated improvements you'll need to make to get everything out of a set of $16k speakers....new amp(s) (not going to run 802D's on a Rotel - you need something like a Classe or Bryston for that), improved source (the old Sammy 950 universal player isn't going to cut it anymore), maybe even new cables.

Now all this is not to say that given the resources are available higher end gear isn't a good idea. If I had the dough I'd definately be looking up the food chain. But I don't and generally I believe more folks don't have alot of money to spend on a/v gear. If you have to work within a reasonable budget it's nice to know that a particular model is going to closely approximate one that is much more expensive.

Golly, you must be omniscient.

Some people might think my speakers are expensive, but I'm not sure. I honestly don't know where the median lies among audio enthusiats, but it's certainly higher than that of the Best Buy-browsing mainstream. In any event, there are lots of speakers, hardly exotic, that are waaaaaay more expensive than anything I own or have even considered buying. Sometimes I think some of the most outspoken people here really don't comprehend the breadth of the speaker market; have you ever examined or auditioned top-of-the line offerings from Focal or Sonus Faber or Revel or Vienna Acoustics, just to name a few I know a little bit about? Nice stuff. But expensive in most people's parlance, I think.

Anyway, I'll never begrudge anyone who spends more than I did (or could); there's no jealous envy on my end. As a friend of mine once remarked, "If you got the jack, what's the problem?"

Actually, you don't know me. That you suggest that you do is all a part of you acting like an obnoxious prick. Suggesting that you know my type from reading occasional posts here and there that I post on these fora is good proof that you are a condescending jackass as well. Especially when you start making statements and suggest that your statements were what I have been saying in my posts, which couldn't be farther from the truth. For example, I never said that spending more money means a speaker will sound better. I also never said that more expensive means better. These are little fantasy scenerios you ran in your own head before deciding to post an attack against me, for what reason/reasons, I have no idea. In any case, you end up looking like the jerk IMO, since you decided to make these assumptions about me without any reason or proof that I am that kind of person. Especially since nothing in my posts suggests I am that kind of person, or that I even believe the kind of things you are attributing to me in your post.

People tend to do that a lot on these fora, attack people without any real reason or provocation, or make up some kind of fantasy person in their own head then attack that person without really reading their posts and considering what they are saying. This happpened to me all too recently in a thread about ID speakers where people came into the thread and didn't even read the things I had been saying, but rather attacked me based on what people already attacking me were posting... One guy started attacking me based on the fact that I owned 802D speakers, meanwhile it had never even been a part of the discussion until he brought them up (he came into the post, quoted me with a post that had nothing to do with his actual response, then declared that his $3000 dollar Rocket speakers blow away my 802D speakers - very similar to this post in some ways, except he was a terrible speller and his grammar was atrocious).

The only thing I have said, in a nutshell, is that his opinion might not match up with someone else's opinion, so he shouldn't present his opinion as fact. I dont agree with him concerning the 600 series speakers offering at least 90% of the sound quality of the 802Ds, making me one example of why his opinions aren't fact. You are another example of someone who doesn't agree with his opinion on the topic. I was actually thinking around 70% IMO, but hammering down a hard number on such a thing is silly I think, since there are many variables involved.

BTW here is the original sentence I had issue with:

Well while i did not agree with 90% either, you acted like the true jackass saying you appreciate his enthusiasm but not in so many words said, i paid 10 times as much and their is no way those cheap 705's can close to my expensive 802d's..

Yea im mot saying i know you, but you do seem like a little braggart showoff.

Everyone is aware of the diminishing returns part of the audio market. No one is arguing over that. The only thing I had issue with is stating the 90% as a fact when it is opinion. That number will change from person to person based on several variables, including their experience (inadequate experience with audio equipment and ciritical listening may mean you lack some ability to distinguish finer differences between products). Agreeing with me doesn't mean you disagree with PULLIAMM on his 90% figure. All it means is that you think that number is based in his opinion and that the number likely changes from person to person. That the number is not fact, but relative/subjective.

Yeah, I don't think proclaiming "diminishing return" was a breakthough; I think we all know that, and I think we all agree.

It's metaphorical to try to quantify sound-quality differences as a percentage to begin with, but I agree that "90%" may have been a bit optimistic; that said, the 600s (I auditioned 604s some years ago) are good little speakers and acquit themselves well.

On the other hand (and, in fairness, he did refer only to "sound quality"), the cosmetic differences between 600s and 800s are vast, and while that may not be so importent to lower-end buyers, it's definitely important to higher-end customers. The 800s (especially the 800, 801 and 802, but all of them) are striking pieces, while the 600s are utilitarian vinyl-covered boxes. We'd be remiss to not mention that.

See, again you are living in your own little fantasy world when you read my posts. I do appreciate PULLIAMMs enthusiasm, as I have owned more than one model in the current B&W series and I plan on using their speakers in one room or another in my house for a long time to come. I wouldn't be posting here if I didn't have enthusiasm for B&W in general, and anything that helps the B&W brand means that future speakers I may own will have more R&D put into them, which means they will sound better. At the present time I am considering replacing my in-wall speakers around the house (Niles speakers) with B&W in-wall speakers. These aren't going to be expensive speakers, but they won't be the cheapest models either. I'll just have to see how they sound to me when I go and do some demos before I decide which ones to purchase. No matter what level of enthusiasm I have though, I don't think it is worth hurting the credibility of B&W or B&W owners in general by making statements that are IMO untrue, even if the statements do sell more speakers and help all B&W aficionados out in the long run. At some point down the line another person who bought 600s based on PULLIAMM's statement might be upset when they one day feel the same way I do about the differences between these speakers.

The real killer, the one that destroys your argument against me, is that I don't say that there is a definite better or worse. I don't argue that one is definitely better than the other. I leave that decision to each individual's opinion. This makes your argument against me fall apart, since I would have to be adamant on that particular issue not being left to opinion, but rather assumed as fact (where my facts are the correct ones and that the 802D is better) in order for your argument to be correct about me...

Here was my original post:


You are just a bigot IMO. You see someone who owns something nice, which he enjoys, and you attack him for it. Look at all of the lies and BS you have already made up in order to try and hurt me in some way. It isn't only pathetic, it is shameful. So where is it I say the things you suggest in your post. Here let me remind you of the things you just said in your post:


Did I mention that I own the 802Ds in that post? Nope. Did I mention how much I payed for them? Nope. Since when are we talking about the 705s? We were discussing the 600 series speakers... So where am I showing off and bragging in this thread? You really need to get some psychological help, you are delusional IMO.

Can we all agree on some absolute truths here, and thereby limiting numerous pissing contests?


The "diminishing return" factor is real and often huge in audio gear, but people who have the cash often don't mind spending it. So be it.

Some of those who spend "less" need to feel superior by claiming to have made smarter purchases. Get over it.

Some of those who spend "more" are slaves to conspicuous consumption and view everything in terms of how much it costs first. Get over it.

Short of test data almost everything posted here is someone's opinion, even if they don't type "imo". No need to call people out because they are stating things you don't agree with as fact. They are not. Almost all of us realize that.

It is best to listen to speakers for yourself before making a decsion on what to buy. Surely no one disagrees with that.

It is also OK to buy speakers without listening to them. It doesn't make you an idiot. Some people have other priorities and just want good sound, not necessarily the best possible sound they can afford.

Damn near anything is better than Bose. The horse is dead; the ship has sailed.

Perhaps my favorite: No need to suggest a $4000 set up to the poster who asks "What's the best 5.1 system I can get for $1200". If you don't have some idea that may be useful why suggest something way beyond what the poster says he wants to spend? And don't suggest he spend the $1200 on a center channel then upgrade when he can afford more. Just not helpful.


I'm sure I am missing a bunch, but these seem to jump out day after day. Sorry to hijack thread with my rant (there is another one!).

Well said.








IMO.

I'll agree with a lot of the post, but I don't agree with the "not stating it is your opinion" part of the post. The reason is very simple. New people to these fora don't always know the difference. I certainly didn't know the difference when I was knew here. Perhaps I am an idiot (insert insult here), but I'm not the only idiot out there.

When making claims that a potential B&W customer and/or new forum user might read and misinterpret as fact rather than opinion, it should be stated that it is an opinion, as some people (as you mention later in your post) do buy things without listening. Some people also base their purchases on what people say on these fora as well, so in some cases, like this one, where someone makes a claim that could influence someone and which could later turn out to be wrong in the purchaser's opinion, it is important to make the distinction between opinion and fact.

If I recall correctly, PULLIAMM's post was intended to encourage the person to buy the 600 series because it is 90% or more like the 802Ds. That definitely should be marked as an opinion and it should be marked as egregious and manipulative marketing as well IMO.

In other words. It is obvious to the seasoned poster on these fora that most everything is opinion, but it is not obvious to newer people, and those are the people who we should protect from this potential problem, especially considering that this particular instance is just one of those situations I am referring to in my post.

No, I think droht has a valid point there too. Opinions here are obvious. A statement like "600s sound 90% as good as 800s" is obviously opinion, as it couldn't possibly be anything other than opinion. There's no "sound-goodness" meter, and everyone is fully aware of that.

Consider that others here have some good points, and his were good ones.

I don't agree. To some people it isn't obvious that it is his opinion. Some people do take statements like that as fact. Perhaps to you it is obvious, which I won't argue against. You can be sure that when I see statements of the type made earlier in situations where I feel the statements might be misleading, that I will say something akin to what I said in this thread. Sure, if you are analyzing an argument and are looking for opinions you will notice that it is an opinion, but someone looking to validate a possible future purchase, especially if they are new to these fora, might take it as fact. That is what concerns me, and that is why I won't agree with that part of his post.

BTW, I am not arguing the validity of his point. I just don't agree with him. No point in arguing it further, since I won't change my mind on this topic. Like I said, if I feel there is any potential for a statement of opinion to be misconstrued as fact, I'm going to say something.

As he said in his post "almost all of us realize that." I'm worried about the newbies and other people who don't realize it.

One last go at this. Somebody says, "Speaker X sounds 90% as good as Speaker Y." How could that possibly be interpreted as fact to anyone, neophyte or otherwise? Show me the guy who was duped by that statement.

Besides, "fact" according to whom or what? Do you really think anyone is gonna take that number literally? As in, "Oh my gosh, 90% as good! I wonder if anyone makes a speaker that sounds, say, 93% as good at that price?! Even better!" Give people a little credit; sound quality isn't quantifiable to begin with.

If someone came here and said the B&W 604's sensitivity rating is 90 dB, then that'd be a fact (a fact subject to verification, anyway). If someone claimed the 604s have "average sensitivity," then that'd be a general fact too. But if someone said they're "great value" or "tastefully designed" or "better than Paradigm," then that'd be opinion. Do we really need that labeled?

As George Will once said, everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but they're not entitled to their own facts. We're big boys; we know the difference.

you can find
Hans Theessink's Late Last Night (Call Me, Blue Groove BG-4020).
at
http://www.theessink.com/en/shop/shop.html

I don't know what it sounds like, don't have it myself. I didn't bother searching
out the other suggested titles. IMO when auditioning speakers you should select music you know, is representative of what you listen to, and preferably like. So my suggestion would be to use music you already own.

http://store.acousticsounds.com/sear...ID=855%20&id=0
http://shopping.yahoo.com/p:Call%20M...VjA2FydHByb2Q-

Kal