Difference between B&W 800N/SIG and B&W800D

I am always puzzled how one person can think the 800D is fantastic and another thinks it totally sucks.
It would be interesting to hear the HONEST opinions of the engineers at Abbey Road studios.

I think Abbey Road gets them for free, or just for a bargain. I think people should listen and make there own decision. Every speaker had his strong parts and less impressive parts. When I listend to the 802D I heard the sweat high's, and also a better comtrol in the low freq. But still I heard that humm in the low freq. as my old 802N did. And there was something inside me that told me the low freq. are not that natural. I had the feeling that I was listening to a subwoofer. But I still have not heard the 800D, so I cannot give my opinion. I am curious if there are people who bought 800D after they had owned the 800N or Signature.

>>It would be interesting to hear the HONEST opinions of the engineers at Abbey Road studios<<

They probably don't care a whole lot one way or another. The recording studio is where they work. I'd bet that most of them aren't audiophiles and would be happy with just about anything.

I have owned the 800 Sigs and currently own the 800d's. The 800d is a much more amazing speaker than the sigs. It could also be that the new design works better with my "cursed by the gods" room that I have, but they work for me. I am comparing these speakers using all the same equipment. I don't know if Sphere has done the same type comparison. If he listened to two different speakers in two different systems or anything else was changed when the speakers changed, could make all the difference in the world. If it were same for same, Sphere just has different tastes than I do, and/or a better room.

Could you discribe the differences between them?