Am I the only one who thinks B&W is mid-fi?

Tell me about my preconceptions. What is my reference? And tell me about the 'circumstances' under which I heard them. How were they set up? Because I am wondering how Blackie and I ended with the same conclusions under different, unkown-to-you 'circumstances' and 'preconceptions'.

btw Sorry all for the half-assed comparisons. Disregarding N’s comment, I should have deleted it.

Preconceptions:

When someone listens to my Linn system for the first time they are seldom bolled over by what they hear. It took me a long time to get used to the sound of my system and to learn how to make it sound right(through speaker placement - not tweaks). At first I found myself missing that "hi-fi" sound. A tonal richness and sparkle from every recording. At this point I found myself constantly listening to other speakers for comparison - to try and figure out what I was missing. I began to realize it was my own preconceptions based on brief encounters I had had listening to speakers in hifi showrooms. I had memories of sounds so seductive, warm and rich that I built my expectaitions around these fleeting impressions. After more critical listening I soon discovered that this seduction was entirely superficial and was achieved at the expense of the music. Now when I listen to many other speakers I can hear straight through them. JM Labs, B&W, and Monitor Audio are the guiltiest parties with high credentials that I have had considerable experience with.

There are few speakers that sound as good to me as the Keilidhs for anywhere near the price. Where the Linn's show weakness it tends to be through errors of omission - not addition. For reference and comparison, speakers that to me sound better than the Keilidhs are: Joseph Audio's floorstander, Audio Physic Tempo3, Aerial Acoustics model 7, ProAc's response series, and Linn's higher level speakers.

Listening to my Keilidhs friends have noted how clear and accurate the sound is - even non-audiophiles have commented on the midrange quality, but they are seldom blown away by an all-enveloping soundstage, deep bass, or high frequency sparkle. Linn speakers are often refered to as being 'dry' or having a 'shut in' sound. I can see where these observations are coming from when comparing Linn speakers to many others. With certain recordings this can be the case - although the musical message is always conveyed. If the recording lacks depth and fidelity that is how it will sound. If the recording has presence and tonal richness that is how it will sound. I have done numerous comparisons and have always concluded that while having less dazzle the Linn's sound much more capable, accurate - and ulitimately more enjoyable and better able to convey the message of the music.

Reference: Live, un-amplified musical performance.

Most amplified concerts grossly exagerate certain frequencies, - to make matters worse, they then exagerate the levels of ALL frequencies. I often wonder if most sound guys are half deaf. Most concerts are FAR too loud to be clearly audible - the sounds get so hardened by excessive volume levels (relative to the size of the venue) that music often becomes a hard glaze of indistinguishable noise.

Circumstances: I have a pair Keilidhs run in bi-amped active mode, as well Kabers run passively. Proper set-up and room consideration is essential for either of these speakers to sound right. I have heard these speakers sound both astonishingly good and bad. I don't know how to describe the particulars of every installation and why the results are as they are, but as with any speaker, (and perhaps more so with the Linns), speakers set-up is critical. One example of a situation that may cause Keilidhs to sound slightly muffled or even boomy is if they are situated along the short wall of a room and if they lack sufficient lateral breathing room.
There is a local Linn dealer that just can not figure out how to get the Linns to sound right - It's unfortunate because many people end up buying JM Labs instead.

Blackie, Linn has never claimed that speakers are unimportant - or that they are the least important part of the chain. They just see how pointless it is to begin with a bad signal all the way from the source. "Start as you mean to finish", I think is how Ivor describes it. It's a matter of avoiding the magnification (amplification) of errors, that ultimately will be presented (or blurted out) by the loudspeaker.

With respect to Linn speakers sounding 'murky'. All I can say is I urge you to listen again - and make sure that the system is set up well. Try listening to some natural sounding recordings of chamber music. The Dorian label has some very good uncompressed unadulterated recordings that will reveal the true potentials of Linn's speakers. Then listen to something like Radioheads OK computer and you will be amazed at how different the same speaker can sound. Both recordings are great but are vastly different - and this difference is only appreciable on an accurate system. The more you listen the more you will discover that what you might be calling "murky" or "dark and closed in" (unless the setup is sloppy) is actually the absence of candy-coating in the treble range and the nature of that particular recording. With an open sounding recording I'm sure you would be astonished by the sense of openness and transparency, and with a flat compressed recording you will wonder what the engineers were thinking; but you will always be impressed by the speakers ability to communicate the music. Even with flat sounding recordings such as old jazz classics from the 40's or 50's, (or almost any of REM's recordings) the musical message will be get through as it should. I make these comments with reference to Keilidhs, Kabers, Ninkas, and Katans as these are the ones I have experience with and can vouch for.

Ps: Try listening to Ry Cooders 'Buena Vista Social Club' on a carefully set-up active Ninka or Keilidh system - I'd love to hear your impressions after this ;-)

I spent an afternoon with the current B&W 803's (with a Chord amp and then moved to a larger room with huge Pass Labs monos). I had the same sonic impression as some of the others who found them somewhat veiled (blanket over them--I think some have been saying). They also had to be really pushed by beefy amps to get up and convey much musical emotion. Boom and sizzle? I did not hear any. The 804's and 805's also did not sound that way. Maybe some other B&W's sound that way with bad electronics....

Set up matter a lot, though. Perhaps the 803's weren't set up to their optimum potential.

Other speakers offer much more interesting possibilities to me-and most of these are cheaper: Coincident, Totem, Pro Ac, Ruark, Joseph. Every time I hear models from these makers, they offer some tangible musical merit.

As for Linn, I agree that speakers whose designers play the "grab your attention" game usually sound pretty bad over the long haul. But if a listener needs to be coached to listen a certain way to appreciate a speaker's strengths, I become suspicious. I agree that subtly counts. I agree that the expected result is not always the real result--especially in Audio. But where Linn is concerned, I don't get it. Maybe that makes me a cretin. I don't hear anything worthy of their fame from the Linn setups I've heard. They sound like basic, good quality stuff afraid to make a mistake and in so doing, sound too polite. Too much work to enjoy.

Perhaps, I have yet to hear a properly setup Linn rig. Setup matters, oh yes,...to a certain extent. Perhaps I really am a cretin.

My 2 cents worth:
1. Older B&W's seemed to be "voiced" like what you would expect from a British loudspeaker. They seemed to have a rich, laid back midrange with an acceptable level of clarity and detail.
2. Newer B&W's use metal dome tweeters and kevelar midrange drivers which tend to have less warmth. They require more careful matching of electronics and cables to sound their best. However, the level of clarity and inner detailing has improved and lower priced B&W's seem to offer solid value for the money.
3. The sound of newer B&W's is very dependent on what they are fed with.
4. I own B&W DM602s2 speakers. I "downsized" to these from larger, more expensive speakers. With a solid state integrated amp, they sound like mid-fi. With budget tube separates, the sound is very different and is competitive with high end systems. I prefer the sound of my speakers with tubes vs the sound of Nautilus 804's I heard in a dealer showroom driven by a high power solid state receiver.