B&W 803S Speakers

I run the 803's in a 12x19 room that opens into a second room with no problem. Have listened to the 683's but found a very big difference in imaging - 803's image much better in my opinion. I also felt that the bass of the 803's was more realistic - I just did not care for the bass of the 683's. I second the above recomendation as to giving the 805's a listen - very nice speaker. As to whether you need a sub that depends on your music choice and personal tastes - for my tastes the 805's would work just fine without a sub. As between the 805 and the 803 - the 803 is more 'defined' but the 805 is better 'integrated'. Language does not really work very well in describing sound, partly because of individual tastes and partly just due to language limitations and the lack of firm definitions. In other words, the only way to compare speakers is to listen to them in the same room with the same music and with very little delay (less than 1 minute) betwen listening to speaker A vs B. In summary, the 683's lack of imaging would wear on me after a while - the real choice is between the 805 and the 803 - If you want to stay in a lower cost bracket - find a pair of 602's used - a really incredible speaker - in my opinion just a notch under the 805 and 2k less.

Having owned the 803S (and now the 803D), the 803S was as previous posters have said and could be a bit much for that size room.

Whether you decide on the 805 or 683, both contain B&W's aluminum tweeter which is a little forward imo. I found that Audioquest's CV-8 dbs speaker cables is great at 'taming' the tweeter and producing a more relaxed and less forward high end without loosing any detail.

The diamond tweeter is another story and is not forward at all imo.

Just FYI.

Also, you'll need more power to drive the 803S given the Rochell bass drivers unique to the 800 series.

I don't think you would need a sub but I don't like my bass over done. The 805s is pretty balanced but does not go as deep as the 803s. You will just have to use your own ears.

I find B&Ws image best when they are far apart with a lot of toe in ( almost straight at the listener). With the smaller 805s you will be able to place them closer to the wall (8ft apart and two feet from the side walls) with out issues. I would think two feed would not be quite enough room for the 803s to sound their best? Some one who has owned them could tell you better.

PS. Call up B&W as see what they say. I have found they are pretty helpful with questions about room size and what not.

I don't think the 805s would *require* a subwoofer in a 12' x 14' room. However, it depends on what you like. If you do choose to try a subwoofer (ideally a pair - yes, I know it sounds overkill) make sure that you can roll it off at 30 Hz or less.

If you can drop the coin, go for a REL (or 2). For less money, I like (and own) a pair of Martin Logan Dynamos and roll them off around 35 Hz. I have a smaller room than you, too.

Also, check out "the Swarm" by AudioKenesis. I have not heard it, but in theory could be killer. Duke is a great guy, too.

No experience with the 683 but I listened to the 805S in a small room without a sub and it did not seem to need a sub. Very high quality speaker. You may want to listen to the Quad and Revel offerings in that size for the room that you describe.