B&W 802D vs Wilson WATT Puppy

I aggree the B&W bass is not grate. It just doesn't have the deep bass and seems to have a sweet spot. The whatts is much better in the bass. When I listened to them I though they were even bass heavy but it was ina large wooden room that I'm sure had a sweet spot for bass. Given the 2 I think they are both colored a bit, but the Whatts definally fill the room better and have a fuller sound.

Ben,

The most important thing is for you to decide for your self. Having listened to the WP7 and the 800D and 803D I prefer the B&W sound.

It is about the system and each component in the system creating a synergy. That includes the room.

The WP7 I found muddy and lifeless in the dealers system and room.

Even being a devout B&W fanatic I found the 800D to be over powering in the bass. But still tight and controled. Again at the dealer.

I am suprised at some of the posts as the midrange has always been a B&W strength.

I could use more adjetives(SP) but I think the most important thing is to take the system as a whole.

Decide for your self what you like.

Michael

The used Grand Slamm X-1s was sold to someone who owned a pair of B&W 801 speakers (driven by Levinson 33 amps). I enquired as to the reason for the change and the Wilson dealer advised the main issue for this buyer was poor midrange performance of 801s. An experience I can relate to.

An additional thing to consider- B&Ws are not tube friendly- the 802 in particular will not reproduce bass properly with a tube amp due to the impedance relationship between the amp and speaker in the woofer region.

Wilson, OTOH, have no problem with using either tubes or transistors as far as interface is concerned, although :) they will show you how much better most tube amps are...

Atmasphere I very strongly disagree I listen to 802D's
on a CJ MV 60 & other tube amps it did a fine job there was no lack of bass. And 802D impedance is not difficult. I am disgusted
with all the false information people give on these fourms.