B&W 'New' 800 Series

I always knew that I could understand audio a lot more easy than all my colleagues. When you train your brains thousands of times the same way for a long time you see and understand patterns in sound.

When I listen to a set and we chance one part I know exactly the difference between the first audition and the second. This is in a few tenths of a second.

What I said it is a way of repeating.

This weekend we were auditioning the Magnepan 3.7 for a client of mine. They used Pass labs XP-10 and the XA-60.5 monos and a Krell SACD player monos.

Before we listend I said I can discribe exactly how the stage and soudn will be.

- instruments and voices are a little to big ( they were)
- Very limited depth and width, based on the crossovers and properteis of the speakers.
- With dynamic speakers the energy of a bass drumm is in the middle of the speakers. With the Magnepan it is difficult to be point out ( it was)
- black level is very limited. The separation of the voices and instruments is very limited. This is based on the poperties of the Pass Labs combo. I ownend and auditioned. Pass Labs is very limited in individual focus of instruments and voices. I have had many conversations about this with Desmond Harington who is the president and creator of Pass labs pre amps.
- the articulation of voices is very limited as we would like, based on the tweeters of the 30.7.

I adviced him to bring in his Primare A33.2 power. Before we replaced the XA60.5 by the 33.2. I said; now we bring in different properties. Voices will become smaller and the individual focus will be a lot more apparent. Stage depth will be less compared to the XA60.5.

It all came out, this makes audio a lot more easy to predict. Beside this to adapt and control.

Bo
You seemed to have contradicted yourself. I thought you really liked Pass Labs for 3D total sound but with the Maggie's in your post, you predicted they wouldn't be good?

When you listen to a set you listen to all parts. All parts togheter inluding the acoustics is what you hear.

The focus is on these parts togheter. Togheter they build the stage and sound you hear.

In the set togheter with the 30.7 it was a very limited endresult.

You need to understand the properties of each part in a set when you want to understand the sound and image you hear.

When I bought the B&W 802N in 1999 I noticed that the speaker was too low in height. In 2 weeks I understood the properties and limitations.

What I did was buying an 8cm thick granite plate in the shape of the speaker. I even put Nautilus 802 and the stripe of the log on the front side. I removed the balls and used dempers.

Now I got a better presentation of the heights. Instruments and voices became more apparent and I created more space around voices and instruments. The low freq. became more tight and I had more layers.

Audio is all about understanding limitations and properties. When you are aware of them you can create much better results.

At the time I played with the 802N and 800S I had many anti-B&W people at my house. Often they said I never auditioned B&W speakers this good.

You cannot solve all limitations. Stage depth is a part where other brands do a better job compared to B&W. I never understood why B&W is not able to bring this to a higher level.

When the stage depth and width of the 800D1 would be great I would have bought them. We don't want to be negative on a brand. We want to be realistic as possible for our clients.

The new D3 series did not convince sofar. But we will listen them again. I still can't find a lot of auditions of the D3 series.

The German magazines don't say anything because they get money for the reviews. This is also a part I hate in audio. I know how it works and what money does.

Never trust a review, just trust your own ears!!

Is the 802 D3 is the finest speaker in B&W product line now. I don't follow this company's news a lot but want to buy a pair of 800D recently. Surprisingly not see 800D on their website. Does someone can confirm?

audio is about facts. Not about the things you would like to hear.

I always knew that I could understand audio a lot more easy than all my colleagues. When you train your brains thousands of times the same way for a long time you see and understand patterns in sound.

Thanks Bo. So in order to arrive at the "FACTS" of audio, all one has to do is listen and train their brains to look for patterns in sound. And you do this by extensive listening thousands of times like you did. And obviously your colleagues did not. Is this right?