B&W 805D2 or Magico Q1?

I have the 805 Nautilus and recently owned the SF Cremona Auditor M. I really tried to like them but stayed with the B&Ws because I connected with them better. My preference is forward soundstaging, bright and sparkly treble. I can only imagine the 805D would be very nice too.

Regarding the other elements presented in this thread, I think it is sad that people tend to talk in near absolutes regarding something that is really a hobby we are all here to enjoy.

Do not want to offend anyone. Just read whole post before jumping. But I dont get it. Dont get this B&W bad feeling among many, supposed to be, higher end aficionados... After having owned them and per instance having listened to the Q5s and other for long periods.

I own TAD R1 now, and before buying them I listend to Magico Q5, TAD CR1 among many other highLy regarded. The speakers I replaced were B&W 800 Di. (so not biased towards any of them anymore), and actually felt the 800s could clearly be improvedi to be in line with rest of my system. So not saying B&W is the best out there... At all. BUT,

Where the Q5s better than the 800s. Overall yes, for sure, but not in every aspect. They lacked the dynamcis, punch and bass extension of the 800s... Although were better in transparency focus and definition, still the 800s sound had something... The others did not. While I would preffer the Q5s if I had to choose, in a price/performance relation, the election is not so clear. I think the 800s are great value. Hard to find something much better overall for the price or even slightly more.

Now the Magico thing is getting a bit boring in my opinion. They are great in some aspects, but by no means the best speaker or game changer at all to my ears (I actually considered buying them and was close, but being aware of their pros and cons, which you get of those as well). .Actually the TAD CR1 monitors were better ALL AROUND when compared to the Q5s. And that includes bass extension, definition, trnasparency, tonal richness and neutrality... To my ears.

I cant imagine how the Q1s may have such great bass at all considering what the Q5s did. I do think they will be very transparent, accurate, neutral and so on, but with limitations that has to be evident also in dynamics and scale.

Now the 805di I have not heard them. i do have a pair of the older 805 as rears for my HT set up. I listened to them in stereo a few times. I think they are very good, moreover for the money, period. If I had to guess, then Q1 will be far more resolving and neutral. You will get much more inner detial, but when it comes to bass extension (not accuracy) and dynamics, I would not bet on it... It then will come down to what one values most, and actually how he/she percieves value. Personally IfmI had to guessmInthink I would preffermthe Q1s but can see others not havingnsuch an electionmso clrearmifmyoumfactor in everything.

Eelii08 - " Do not want to offend anyone"

Whenever someone starts like that, you know where this is going... So here you go;

Look at the CR1 measurements in SP. These speakers, have no bass below 40Hz whatsoever. They also have quite a nasty upper treble grain, which is imposable to get rid of. Audible, and apparently measurable as well (Look at the 6K and up). So if that is what you like, then yes, the Q5 is not for you.

When they came out, about 10 years ago, there were built much better, and cost $14K. It was a pretty good speaker back then.

Hope I did not offend you (-:

You ve got to love this place!

I dont own the CR1 so why would you offend me? And even if I did, they are one of the best speakers I have listened to, and to my taste better than the Q5, so you would not either way.

In general, This hoby is just like real life. Worst thing is when people speak with no knowledge or first hand experience (which of course takes time and effort to get), but just based on what they are told or what they imagine based on who knows what they have in their mind... and still make such strong claims as if they were in posession of the only truth. When if fact most of the times, they have no clue of what they are talking about.,

And In particular, when it comes to your post, the CR1s is a new design that came out in 2010, entirely designed from zero by Andrew Jones. So don't know what you are talking about regarding a CR1 10 years ago, and I doubt you do either..

I had it in my system for quite a while as a trail, and I can tell you they are superb. Also they were flat at 40 and went down to 32 very decently, which for a monitor is quite something... but I guess you won't know that. Oh yes you do. You read it...

Anyway, I do think the Q5 is a good speaker but it has cons like any other design. You eventualy will have to admit it and live with it..., and if you don't, just think it is only my opinion and my taste, and live happy with the thought that finally someone managed to manufacture the perfect box and the absolute best speaker of all times.

Actually I considered it for a while, and was close to goiing for it. Q5 is, as I said very rich and accurate in tone, detailed, what they call now transparent and neutral... but then I found something, that after listening and not just reading (this is important my friend when audio is what we talk about) thought it was better.

So again ,no you did not offend me. i just think you have not listen to the CR1 or if you had, you heard but did not want to listen, or lastly, yes your taste is very different to mine. Although since we both seem to like the Q5 I doubt it is the later....

Same applies to the R1 vs. the MUCH better, and cheaper Model 1. Here is a link to the original:
http://www.pioneerelectronics.com/PUSA/Home/Speakers/TAD+Speakers/TAD-Model+1

and yes, I do believe what I read, especially when it comes to JA measurements. Since my hearing experiences with these loudspeakers, correlate to their measurements, I would have to conclude that there is some "wishful hearing" done here on your part, not mine...