Comments on new B&W 800 D3

The individual focus of instruments and voices of the D2 series is sharper than the D3 series. I also think the D2 are better looking.

The D3 is less coloured, but sounds more clinical.They  both can create not a lot of stage depth and width like the best can.

A holographic 3 dimensional stage makes listening to music soooo addictive and fun. This level you will never reach with B&W. This was the main reason why I decided in 2006 not to buy the 800D1 anymore.

When you own a 3 dimensional holographic stage you never will go back to a more 2 dimensional stage. You will use your set much more and even longer in 1 time when you gor from 2d to 3D.

In 7 years of time I brought many people from 2D to 3D. Their words says it all: they often talk about an addictive level of sound.

Actually, what I like about the 800 diamonds is that they create an accurate sound stage without exaggerating it like many other speakers do.

On recordings that are produced with 3D effects the 3D effects are all there exactly as intended, and likewise, recordings without much depth or width are presented as such without any false depth or width.

From my own experience though, the listening room itself imposes the greatest limit to faithful stage reproduction and from the many pics of people’s systems that I’ve seen there are very few who have their speakers far enough from room boundaries to create a 3D sound stage.

I'm with you tympani and I think a big part of the reason is the tapered head design
for tweeter and midrange. A most elegant and simple design to remove early reflections. It's hard for me to imagine anything better. I agree as well about room placement being a big problem. Distance to walls is often silly even with very expensive setups. Obviously the client doesn't know good sound (or doesn't care).