or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Speakers › Auditioned B&W Speakers--Conclusions?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Auditioned B&W Speakers--Conclusions? - Page 2

post #31 of 438
Quote:
Thats the thing with BW, they're great for people who don't know any better, but they don't hold up too well to the competition... Thats probably why a lot of inexperienced folk seem to like them so much...

Wow, what a load of ........ They are admired by tons of people who have much audio experiance most of these people have gone into places where good auditions can be had and taken the time to compare. You are innacurate and insulting. Kal, A PROFESSIONAL REVIEWER WHO POSTS HERE, has obviously listened, critically, to tons of speakers and guess what he owns. Better luck with your next insult.

Quote:
Not quite different from Bose, which someone mentioned before... Not that they sound as bad as Bose, but, they're reknowned and all but most knowledgeable folks know better...

Well , so much for that insult, it's written so poorly it seems indecyperable, but as for being "renowned" (check spelling), hardly, EXCEPT among those who DO know good audio.
Quote:
Also not to say they're bad value, if some love the sound of a particular speaker (Bose, BW, etc..), I'm sure it offers great value to them...

Yes, do personal auditions.

Quote:
I think the 6s are definitely well below average, while the 7s are average. The 6s have been around a while and B&W seems opposed to updating them too much for fear of overstepping the 7 series (which IMO the CM already does).

If that were the case why did they overstep the 700 series now? As far as being below average, the 602's are on almost everyone's short audition list in their price range.

Quote:
Compared to pretty much everything in the market competing against it, it's hard to give a win to the 6s except for the fact (as shown here) B&W is a flashy name even among a lot of people who don't know a whole lot about audio.

Really? Take a poll of what bookshelf speaker models people here, on this forum, own between $500- $800 and see how many have 602's. I'd bet many. Then go out and poll 100 people ata random and ask how many have heard of B&W speakers. I'd bet very few. Now take a third poll and ask people in the audio industry , reviewers, and people who frequently post here, what they think of the quality of B&W speakers. I'd bet you'd get a lot of very positive responses.
I have heard many speakers over the years that I have prefered to the closest B&W in blind and sighted comparisons, but I have always felt that there were some brands that almost always held their own and never embarresed themselves, and B&W has always one of those brands.
post #32 of 438
Quote:
Well , so much for that insult, it's written so poorly it seems indecyperable, but as for being "renowned" (check spelling), hardly, EXCEPT among those who DO know good audio.

"indecyperable"? You're one to talk about spelling

Quote:
They are admired by tons of people who have much audio experiance

"experiance"? Thats another good one.

Quote:
You are innacurate and insulting.

"innacurate" wow, you're on a roll.

Quote:
QUOTE: Not quite different from Bose, which someone mentioned before... Not that they sound as bad as Bose, but, they're reknowned and all but most knowledgeable folks know better...

Well , so much for that insult,

Its not an insult. BW is akin to BOSE as in its one of the biggest name in audio. As I said, I don't think BW sound like horse **** or anything, BUT, if you take the time to audition speakers, you're bound to find something more enjoyable than BW. I know it was the case for me and was also the experience of a ton of people.

Quote:
Really? Take a poll of what bookshelf speaker models people here, on this forum, own between $500- $800 and see how many have 602's. I'd bet many.

Thats worthless. Take a poll of people owning BOSE and you're bind to see most like'em also. Thats the whole point. They buy the name because of the 'reputation' and think they bought the best thing ever. I know of at least 3 people IRL who bought BW with basically no auditioning. I'd wager its the case for a big percentage of BW owners. Much more so than any other brand name I could think of... Or maybe they get pushed more by shops... I dunno.

Quote:
Then go out and poll 100 people ata random and ask how many have heard of B&W speakers. I'd bet very few.

"ata random"? You should randomly find 100 people who bought BW602s and then check how many have ever heard of Usher, Totem, Monitor Audio, Kef, Boston, Magnepan, etc.. Not a lot I bet.

Quote:
but I have always felt that there were some brands that almost always held their own and never embarresed themselves, and B&W has always one of those brands.

"embarresed"? Like I said, it all depends. I don't think BW are bad per se, BUT, when you compare their offerings to the competition, I find them somewhat lacking. But I'm sure you could do worst...
post #33 of 438
Neither of you can spell!
post #34 of 438
Quote:


Neither of you can spell!

Actually, that was a joke (the "check spelling" comment) because I never use spell check, and then went on to flub it up on purpose....I should have thrown in a "smiley", sorry.

Quote:


Quote:
Really? Take a poll of what bookshelf speaker models people here, on this forum, own between $500- $800 and see how many have 602's. I'd bet many.


Thats worthless. Take a poll of people owning BOSE and you're bind to see most like'em also. Thats the whole point.

I said HERE, ON THIS FORUM, where Bose has no following and B&W has more than it's share.
Quote:


They buy the name because of the 'reputation' and think they bought the best thing ever.

Here, except among newbies and the inexperianced, many know more than the general public.
Quote:


I know of at least 3 people IRL who bought BW with basically no auditioning.

As opposed to how many who have bought Bose, or ID , also with no auditioning, all are equally clueless.
Quote:


I'd wager its the case for a big percentage of BW owners. Much more so than any other brand name I could think of...

I think you're incredably mistaken, look at the number of (and type of) dealers they have and brand name recognition compared to Polk, Definative, JBL, Klipsch, Mirage, Athena, Yamaha, etc
Quote:


Or maybe they get pushed more by shops... I dunno.

Most B&W owners I know put a lot of effort into comparing many differant offerings.
post #35 of 438
Interestingly, I know more shops that are dropping or don't want to carry B&W than the opposite at this point. One went so far as to say that they "carry them at their other store only because the people in that area want them as a status symbol" but they are replacing them with Focal as their low to midrange brand of choice.
post #36 of 438
Thread derailment... IMHO, BW doesn't offer a very good bang for the buck. Their products certainly don't suck, but they don't compare very favorably in the different price ranges I've auditioned. Not to say that they suck, but they've never been amongst "the best", you can usually find something superior for the same price or less.

I also think they're relatively akin to Bose as they seem to benefit from a maybe undeserved reputation. Many seem to know them and put them on their short audition list, yet for me, and YMMV, I don't think they're a MUST audition product...

The BW owners here, on this forum, make up a very, very, very small fraction of BW owners. Most walk in a store with 500$, walk out 20 minutes later with BW... Thats what happened with 2 friends (1 bought without auditioning, then told other they're great so other also bought...) and another who bought a used pair because the other 2 said BW were good Anecdotal evidence I know, but it seems that BW draws more people getting into hifi...

If people had auditioned instead of just buying BW, they probably would have ended up with something else... Which is what I mean by "undeserved reputation". I truly don't think they're better than most other products... I guess it depends on the rep... If you say they offer good products, sure, I'll give you that. BUT, I would object as them being "better than average"... In my experience, it was actually the opposite...

But as I said before, I don't think BW is bad, like I said I thought the 600 and the CM series sounded good, but they were just too expensive compared to the competition. I could have easily lived with the CM1s, but I don't think they offer such a high value at the price they're being sold... YMMV. I know one guy in these forums who thinks the 705s are the best speakers on the planet soo... YMDV (Your mileage definitely varies )
post #37 of 438
Quote:
I think thats a little harsh for the 600s... They don't sound like dog crap, but I'll agree that they don't sound particularly good either. The BWs I auditioned also were pretty much the poorest performers in the price ranges...

Yeah, dog crap is a bit harsh, but I guess I was trying to stress the point: You can do much better for your money, or even way less of your money. The 602 S3s I heard were the worst speaker to my ears that I've auditioned. Most speakers I've auditioned are = or < the 602 S3s on price, some way down in the <$100/speaker range.
post #38 of 438
Lol, look at what this thread has turned into.

Friggin' "audio people".

Yeah, I'm one, too.
post #39 of 438
Quote:


Neither of you can spell!


ROFL!
post #40 of 438
I have A/B'ed the B&W 602s3 and the Paradigm Studio 40 (s.3?)
my conclusion was: yes, the studio 40 sounded better ... but only a bit better (about 5% if I put a numerical value on that)
considering the 40 has 3 drivers vs. the 2 that the 602 has ... it should have walked all over the B&W (and the fact that the 40 is 50% more expensive)

now, that's not to say the studio 40 is NOT good ... it's just that the 602 is PRETTY good.
sure there are better sounding speakers at a cheaper price, but not everyone has "better sounding" as the ONLY consideration. I personally consider aesthetics, brand recognition, etc. with considerable weight when choosing speakers.



edit: I was wrong about the prices. the studio 40s3 was twice the price of the 602. it was the studio 20s3 that was 50% more.
post #41 of 438
Thread Starter 
Ok, there was quite a few things to reply to and I don't have a lot of time right now so I'll try to address them quickly.

The replacement driver for Carver Ribbons that someone asked about is by Bohlender Graebener (RD-48 for AL-III). I do believe there is also someone out there that is selling OEM Carver ribbons for a similar price. I'd still go with BG because they've eliminated some of the flaws that cause the Carver ribbons to go bad (in some conditions like humid areas relatively quickly). They are supposedly a nearly indentical frequency response either way.

I have had a home theatre setup before. I guess I didn't mention it in this thread since I talked about it elsewhere, but I used the Carvers with an Energy RVS Center channel (when guests were present) and Definitive BP-2 bipolars at the sides of the listening couch front-to-back (BP-2s are much brighter than the AL-IIIs, but using them as surrounds in that manner took the edge off and provided a 'reasonable' match for surround duty. There was no way I could put 4+ AL-IIIs in that room even if I wanted to. I used a Definitive PF-1500 sub for the LFE channel and a Denon receiver (pre-outs went to my outboard amps for the Carvers, obviously, but I powerred the center and surrounds off the Denon). Overall, I was pretty satisfied with the sonic performance of the system for both home theater and music. It wasn't a perfect match, but for movies it was virtually unnoticeable, IMO. Running a DTS surround music disc like Alan Parsons spectacular "On-Air" album, you might notice when the guy walked around the room his character changed somewhat, but it was still a satisfying experience. Most of my music listening is 2-channel CD, though so the system was only a secondary home theatre objective. I used it with a Panasonic 57" HDTV rear-CRT projector.

But I recently (last July) moved to the Youngstown vicininty and a new house and the room I had in mind for home theater has the aforementioned bookcases which make it rather unsuitable for use with the Carvers (can you say eye sore?) So I put the Carvers upstairs in the formal living room/music room (3 comfy recliners in a slight semi-circle facing my Roland Digital Piano/Synth (cherrywood cabinet) with the Carvers on either side of it and the equipement rack on the far left side and Definitive Sub on the far right side (in case I want to play pipe organ pedal notes or something from the Roland or want room-shaking bass for some reason while listening to music (the Carvers don't really need it most of the time, especially now that they're on the 2nd floor with a wood-based floor underneath. Actually, the bass acoustics in that room are far better than the old house. They really sound excellent in the bass department now (old house had them in the family room downstairs on a carpeted concrete floor). I used to use the sub much of the time at the old house to get the levels/feel I wanted and that did affect the tightness of the bass a bit, but could then shake the walls if required. Here, the Carvers have little difficulty shaking the walls all by themselves.

Actually, I could put a drop-down screen upstairs that drops above the piano and put the projector on the table/stand that's between the left and center recliner. Mounting surround speakers in that room might be slightly tricky (it's a bilevel with the stairs behind the listening position, but probably doable. I can't get it completely dark upstairs during the day time, though like I can in the family room, however and then I'd have a family room I didn't know what to do with downstairs. Besides the bookshelf/framing the window (blacked out with dark drapes) downstairs looks perfect for a big 100" screen. The bookshelves just limit my speaker options (without making the room look crappy). There's also a nice natural gas retrofitted outboard fireplace in that room, which might be nice for watching sports with in the winter or something.

I'm not really trying to replicate the Carvers for music, but I do think that tone/timbre should be accurate. Tori's voice should sound like Tori's voice even if it's not quite eerily real presence-wise. I didn't really think that would be a huge problem when I sat down to listen to B&W speakers (remember I originally wanted to hear the NHT Classic 3's--someone has informed me, however that I was looking on the wrong side of Dressler road in Canton, so apparently Audio Corner IS still there; the place I was thinking of that went out of business must have had a different name and I confused them). I say I didn't think it would be a huge problem because even my Alpine car stereo can do a credible job with her voice. It's no Carver AL-III, but at least it doesn't sound like she's just getting over a cold, which is what the 600 series made me think. The 700 series was much better, but her voice still sounded 'off' to me, like it was slightly grainy and too dark sounding. I figured maybe my Carvers were too bright, but then the 800 series reproduced the tone exactly as I expected it to sound in the first place. Believe me, I wish I HAD liked the 600s. The 800s were at least acceptable sounding to me. They were no VonSchweikert, though (the one speaker I originally heard I liked better than the Carvers, but at around $14,000 a pair I think, a little out of my price range at the time. That was a box speaker, however so I don't think they're all flawed like some planar fans tend to think.

Even though I like the 'cool' factor of electrostatics, I've thus far hated the sound of Martin Logan electrostatic speakers, even the high-end ones. It's a little hard to explain, really. The ones they had there (didn't check model designation as after I heard them, I didn't really care) did sound better than 700 series tonally (imaging sucked and has always sucked on Martin Logans I've heard, IMO), but definitely sounded worse to my ears than the 800 series and considering even the 803 was less than the Martin Logans, I had zero interest.

Now when I did preview Magnepan 10 years ago, I loved the sound they produced, but they weren't really dynamic enough for me at the time nor could they output the kind of loud deep bass I used to lust for (only a sub could do that really and subs are hard to match to Magnepan from what I've read).

I haven't listened to a whole lot of stuff for a long time, though so that's why I was pretty much open to suggestions as I haven't kept track of who made what since then and I'm not really looking to ride all over Ohio and Pennsylvania to audition every last speaker known to man. I just want something I can "like" doing music and that can do a really good job with home theater.

As for home theater soundtrack quality, I'm not expecting miracles, but I still want clear dialogue and dynamic presentation. While soundtrack quality varied a lot on my old system, I was sure I was hearing what was there. I tend to think a really good quality speaker should reproduce accurately and therefore be good with all kinds of soundtracks. If the soundtrack sucks, I don't want to have to listen to a colored speaker to make it sound better. A good graphical equalizer in the tape loop would be easier to do than try to find speakers that provide euphonic distortions to badly recorded sound and music.

Ok, my reply wasn't at all quick.... I've been here an hour. Hopefully, that clears most of the questions/discussion issues up on my end.
post #42 of 438
Quote:
Originally Posted by MagnumX View Post

The replacement driver for Carver Ribbons that someone asked about is by Bohlender Graebener (RD-48 for AL-III). I do believe there is also someone out there that is selling OEM Carver ribbons for a similar price. I'd still go with BG because they've eliminated some of the flaws that cause the Carver ribbons to go bad (in some conditions like humid areas relatively quickly). They are supposedly a nearly indentical frequency response either way.

Thanks for this. I hadn't heard of these guys before. Interesting looking products.

Have you looked at their stuff for your system? Looks like they make HT friendly gear.

-john
post #43 of 438
Quote:
Originally Posted by ribbit View Post

considering the 40 has 3 drivers vs. the 2 that the 602 has ... it should have walked all over the B&W (and the fact that the 40 is 50% more expensive)

More drivers in no way reflects that the speaker should be better. It's all about implementation when comparing 3 vs 2 drivers in this price point (or 5 vs 7 in higher pricepoints).
post #44 of 438
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grandarf View Post

So while its true they sound inferior to the competition...

You are so full of s**t that your eyeballs are floating. While some individuals may prefer other speakers, none are better (or as good) at or near the price of any of the 600s. (With the single exception of the 705s, which are better in some ways than the 604s at about the same price.)
post #45 of 438
Quote:
Originally Posted by PULLIAMM View Post

You are so full of s**t that your eyeballs are floating. While some individuals may prefer other speakers, none are better (or as good) at or near the price of any of the 600s. (With the single exception of the 705s, which are better in some ways than the 604s at about the same price.)

So it's OK for you to make statements like that, but Grandarf can't? You and he are basically making the same sort of statement, just at opposite ends of the opinion spectrum. The only difference being with him that I don't know if he's being completely serious, but I know you are.

You are truly a troll among trolls, and yet you don't even realize it!
post #46 of 438
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jake Sm View Post

Wow, what a load of ........ They are admired by tons of people who have much audio experiance most of these people have gone into places where good auditions can be had and taken the time to compare. You are innacurate and insulting. Kal, A PROFESSIONAL REVIEWER WHO POSTS HERE, has obviously listened, critically, to tons of speakers and guess what he owns. Better luck with your next insult.

Don't concern yourself too much with anything Grandarf says. He has repeatedly proven himself to be an utter and complete A-hole. Nothing that he says has any merit whatsoever.
post #47 of 438
Quote:
Originally Posted by emorphien View Post

So it's OK for you to make statements like that, but Grandarf can't? You and he are basically making the same sort of statement, just at opposite ends of the opinion spectrum. The only difference being with him that I don't know if he's being completely serious, but I know you are.

You are truly a troll among trolls, and yet you don't even realize it!

Since you are almost as much of a jerk as he is, your opinions are equally worthless.
post #48 of 438
Quote:
Originally Posted by sivadselim View Post

Lol, look at what this thread has turned into.

Friggin' "audio people".

Yeah, I'm one, too.


Curse the demon!
post #49 of 438
I'm sure I'll be sorry for jumping into this thread but.....
Quote:


If people had auditioned instead of just buying BW, they probably would have ended up with something else...

So, what do you say to the many experianced audio enthusiasts here, and elsewhere, that DO spend loads of time critically auditioning many brands and then wind up buying B&W ?
If you believe that somehow the inexperianced go from not even knowing the name B&W to believing they have the best "reputation" in the buisness and then buying them without auditioning because they have, somehow, been instantly brainwashed then I think you are giving too much credit to B&W and/or too little to the consumers.
Having been in audio , in one way or another for many, many years, I can tell you that B&W has a strong following among musicians, pro sound people, and people in the recording industry. However, what still amazes me is how many people who own them who work for audio dealers that don't even carry them. I have friends in this buisness who work at other stores that I've cut deals for so they can get the B&W speakers they prefer, in spite of the fact that they can get MUCH better deals on speakers from the lines they do rep.
To say that they aren't your cup of tea is one thing, as speaker choice is quite personal , but that opinion is swimming upstream from many who feel otherwise, and to make statements that they are not competitive, I believe, ignores much evidence to the contrary.
The sheer fact that people who go into a B&W dealer have taken the effort to look (and listen) beyond the brands that Tweeter, CC, and BB carry, should be an indication that they are a more concerned shopper and are on something of a quest for better audio.
The things that you say about "not taking the time to listen" is how some feel about those who buy Direct Marketed products.
post #50 of 438
Quote:
Originally Posted by emorphien View Post

More drivers in no way reflects that the speaker should be better. It's all about implementation when comparing 3 vs 2 drivers in this price point (or 5 vs 7 in higher pricepoints).

while I agree with the statement. we are not talking about some cheap/crappy manufacturer. this is paradigm, I would think they know how to "implement" their speakers.

they're not even in the same price point, if I were comparing say a 5 driver Yamaha for example to the 2 driver B&W for example and conclude that the yamaha should trample the b&w because it has more drivers, your statement would have better applied.
post #51 of 438
Schadenfreude: My last try... Products can only be judged according to other products in the same price point. Very original car analogy: A 50k car will never be a bad car like a 15k car might be, but at 50k it might still be a bad car, compared to similarly priced cars.

Its the same with speakers. While a 600$ BW well never sound as bad as craptastic 100$ speakers, I don't think they stand up too well to the competition. They're solid speakers, but you endup paying a premium for them. Other brands, on the contrary, seem to offer performance which seems be way above their price. Which for example sell for 600$, and sound a lot more like the CM1 than the 602. Thats where the "BW is inferior" comes from, and thats to my knowledge the reputation BW has in the industry, offering solid products, yet not offering a super value.

If people simply love BW sound, I'm totally fine with that. "Akin to Bose" was because BW somewhat benefits from the name recognition like Bose, which seems to attract a lot of people getting started simply by the name... If someone auditionned and loved the 602 for its sound, thats perfect.

But I think the real test would be a blind test of 20 people vs other brand at the same price... Against the better value speakers, I think the majority would choose non-BW. And vs products costing much less but offering better bang for the buck, then you'd see closer results. Which just illustrates that for the price, they' don' toffer such a good performance... (As opposed to others who do...)

They're decent for the price, but really nothing special. Which seems to be the usual conclusion when people audition. Very rarely (never?) have I seen people doing exhaustive auditions and ending up "out of these X (20, whatever) I've heard in the price range, the BWs are simply a step above everything else"

BW usually doesn't embarrass itself with poor performance, but its never been one to stand out due to its above average performance IMHO.
post #52 of 438
Quote:


I don't think they stand up too well to the competition.

Many others believe they do.
Quote:


They're solid speakers, but you endup paying a premium for them

I, for one, disagree.
Quote:


Other brands, on the contrary, seem to offer performance which seems be way above their price.

In your opinion.
Quote:


Which for example sell for 600$, and sound a lot more like the CM1 than the 602.

Differant speakers, differant design goals, some would rater have the 602's than the CM1's.
Quote:


thats to my knowledge the reputation BW has in the industry, offering solid products, yet not offering a super value.

Well if people take the time to audition comporable speakers and like the B&W best, then it would seem that it's the best value for them.
Quote:


If people simply love BW sound, I'm totally fine with that. "Akin to Bose" was because BW somewhat benefits from the name recognition like Bose, which seems to attract a lot of people getting started simply by the name...

Well you have yet to demonstrate that B&W has any real name recognition among the "uninitiated", at least you'd have to agree that is has far less than many of the mass merchant offerings.
Quote:


If someone auditionned and loved the 602 for its sound, thats perfect

Many have.

Quote:


But I think the real test would be a blind test of 20 people vs other brand at the same price... Against the better value speakers, I think the majority would choose non-BW
And vs products costing much less but offering better bang for the buck, then you'd see closer results. Which just illustrates that for the price, they' don' toffer such a good performance... (As opposed to others who do...)

I would wager that few here have done as much of this as I have over the course of many years, and I can tell you that based on my experiance, they would (and have) stand up nicely. It was the source of much frustration when I worked for a place that didn't carry them.
post #53 of 438
Quote:
Originally Posted by ribbit View Post

while I agree with the statement. we are not talking about some cheap/crappy manufacturer. this is paradigm, I would think they know how to "implement" their speakers.

they're not even in the same price point, if I were comparing say a 5 driver Yamaha for example to the 2 driver B&W for example and conclude that the yamaha should trample the b&w because it has more drivers, your statement would have better applied.

I don't know what the price points are, but there's some slop room. A 3 driver speaker vs a 2 driver speaker at the same or similar price point is no indicator of quality.
post #54 of 438
Given that the original goal was for a bookshelf approach, I think you might want to look into a company called Audio Concepts Inc (or ACI http://www.audioc.com/). They are a mfg-direct seller/maker and produce some outstanding products for the money. Their latest model, the Sapphire XL can probably hang with and might even surpass the B&W N805S, and cost less. Do a search around here and you'll see a bit of discussion on their products. I've owned or heard a number of their models and have always been very impressed. They also have a 30-day in home trial period.
post #55 of 438
Jake: We can go back and forth a long time like this. You say they're competitive, many say they're not, so I guess I guess the truth lies somewhere inbetween.

(that they're not very competitive )
post #56 of 438
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkscherk View Post

Given that the original goal was for a bookshelf approach, I think you might want to look into a company called Audio Concepts Inc (or ACI http://www.audioc.com/). They are a mfg-direct seller/maker and produce some outstanding products for the money. Their latest model, the Sapphire XL can probably hang with and might even surpass the B&W N805S, and cost less. Do a search around here and you'll see a bit of discussion on their products. I've owned or heard a number of their models and have always been very impressed. They also have a 30-day in home trial period.

I'll 2nd the idea that the XLs should be considered.
post #57 of 438
Quote:
Originally Posted by MagnumX View Post

I believe there's an NHT and PSB dealer near Cleveland so it looks like I should plan for another road trip next week and see how their bookshelf systems compare.

Given your comments about the 602 and 705 vs the 805, I think you'll really like the Classic Threes for the price. The PSB Platinum M2s should also fit right in there, but you're back up there in price. As with anything, there's subjective taste here. I have guys that come in and say they like Classic Threes and Fours are better than even the 800 series and I have guys that come in and say the Threes don't hold a candle to the even the 602s (though the Threes measure substantially better).
post #58 of 438
I only have tried one b&w so far, the 603s, and was unimpressed. Is not that they are aweful but for the price and even cheaper you can do so much better. On top of that I received so many awesome looking brochures and dvds with their history and music demos, etc that I couldnt help but wonder who ends up paying for all this...

Regards
post #59 of 438
Does nht make thier own speakers? I could of bought some st4 for $500 and balked. Im so used to titanium tweeters that the nht just did not sound right.
It was not harsh, floaty a good word i think but i think it lacked accuracy for sounding real.
post #60 of 438
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grandarf View Post

Thats the thing with BW, they're great for people who don't know any better, but they don't hold up too well to the competition... Thats probably why a lot of inexperienced folk seem to like them so much... Not quite different from Bose, which someone mentioned before... Not that they sound as bad as Bose, but, they're reknowned and all but most knowledgeable folks know better... Also not to say they're bad value, if some love the sound of a particular speaker (Bose, BW, etc..), I'm sure it offers great value to them...

It's like Harley Davidson. Great name recognition and excellent resale value.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Speakers
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Speakers › Auditioned B&W Speakers--Conclusions?