Speculating here, but having owned both Matrix 802s, 804s and Diamond 804s, to include both at the same time (804s), this may be very simply a matter of synergy with your electronics. As a rule B&Ws need power to open up, and (this is the speculating part, as opinion doesn't count on science) I think the newer models may even be more power dependent. If it were possible, I would do the same listening test with a very good high powered amplifier and see what happens. I suspect the N804s would surprise you with the sound quality. Also, the matrix series sound great - just because they are older doesn't mean they are bad. In the right room with the right electronics and music they still produce nice music, which some might prefer. The newer models might have tighter bass or better treble, but in the end these things can be a matter of preference and system synergy.
Difference in B&W sound
Greetings, I have a set of 804n & 803 Matrix2. I'm running a Pioneer Elite 74 Txvi with a parasound 2003 MOD & a Parasound 5250v2. the 804 have a sensitivity of 90db. & the 803s have 89db. The Matrix sound so much better, so why would this be for an older model? Could the 1db. be that much of a difference? I'm confused.
- ...
- 35 posts total
The Parasound 2003 is a high current amp = Continuous Power Output > 200 watts RMS x 3, 20 Hz - 20 kHz, 8 W, all channels driven > 300 watts RMS x 3, 20 Hz - 20 kHz, 4 W, all channels driven Current Capacity 60 amperes peak, per channel Slew Rate > 130 V/μsecond Frequency Response 20 Hz - 20 kHz, +/- 0 dB Power Bandwidth 2 Hz - 150 kHz Total Harmonic Distortion < 0.05% at full power < 0.006% typical levels IM Distortion < 0.03% TIM Unmeasureable Dynamic Headroom > 2 dB Interchannel Crosstalk > 88 dB at 1 kHz > 74 dB at 20 kHz Input Impedance 50 kW per channel Input Sensitivity 1 V for 28.28 V Output, THX Reference Level; 1.5 V for full output S/N Ratio > 98 dB, input shorted, IHF A-weighted Damping Factor > 800 at 20 Hz The 5250 = Continuous RMS Power Output 20 Hz 20 kHz, Five Channels Driven 250 watts x 5, 8 Ω 385 watts x 5, 4 Ω Current Capacity 45 amps peak per channel Frequency Response 20 Hz 50 kHz, +0/-3 dB, 1 watt Dynamic Headroom 1.6 dB Total Harmonic Distortion 0.025% at full rated output 0.02% at average listening levels IM Distortion 0.05 % Transient IM Distortion Not measurable S/N Ratio 114 dB at rated output, IHF A-weighted 106 dB at rated output, unweighted 93 dB at 2.828 V output, IHF A-weighted 84 dB at 2.828 V output, unweighted Input Impedance 33 k Ω Input Sensitivity 1 V in for 28.28 V out, THX standard 1.6 V for full rated output Inter-Channel Crosstalk 85 dB, 1 kHz 73 dB, 10 kHz 67 dB, 20 kHz Damping Factor Over 150 at 20 Hz |
"01-17-15: Jimmy2615 Speculating here, but having owned both Matrix 802s, 804s and Diamond 804s, to include both at the same time (804s), this may be very simply a matter of synergy with your electronics." He's right. The 804's may be revealing more details than the 803's, and are just bringing out the flaws in the other components. I would demo a different amp, if you can. The Parasound you have is OK, but you can do a lot better. Since you already have the equipment, here's something else you can try. Take your Parasound 5250v2 and use 4 channels to power the speakers instead of 2. Sometimes it makes a nice diffrence, but not always. You just have to try it. Make sure you remove the jumpers from the binding posts on the speakers, if you're using them. |
Hi Danmar123 Interesting thread subject and based on two speakers that represent a clear change in direction and sound for the company. I have always owned a set of B&W's since the 70's and various 800 series from the 80's onward. Some comments you can consider. A bit of fun first, facts, some history and opinion. The fun part first. Over there are two birds that look like two ducks. Upon moving closer differences are revealed. They do share genetics, as when you look under the feathers, they both show the same tag. But when they quack they sound different. So what gives? You are not imagining things. Some facts direct from from B&W based on your speakers. 804n 45Hz 20kHz ± 2dB on reference 8 ohms - 3 ohm minimum. 803 Matrix s2 26 hz - 20khz sixth order butterworth with 25 hz cutoff with bass alignment filter. 8 ohms 3.7 ohms minimum. The above tells me that your 803 are closer to full range. They will have a fuller sweeter sound and will go easier on your amplifier. If, I had no idea who and what B&W was I would think that the 803 are a higher pecking order based on specs over the 804. Indeed this is the case. So you are not comparing apples to apples here, no matter what equipment ends up in front of these speakers. In fact two different design speakers under the same brand - more on this in a bit. I owned the 803 s2 for a time back around '94 ? They were very nice, elegant speakers. Here is also a review from Doug Schneider I still remember reading it and it influenced me in getting them. I have also had both model nautilus and matrix series, for a period of time, same room/gear. In this case the 805 model. These graphs 805 Matrix versus 805 Nautilus Stereophile Cabinet Resonances Were lifted from Stereophile and show the results of cabinet resonances (Matrix 805 versus Nautilus 805). A cumulative spectral-decay plot calculated from the output of an accelerometer fastened to the cabinet's side panel. What can be seen is that even though the Nautilus 805 series claimed a Matrix construction, clearly the 805 Matrix and 805 Nautilus are not the same bodied duck. Speaker makers make changes from one declared speaker version to the next version - just like car makers. One needs to realize that the timing for the Matrix to Nautilus also happened when an extra big B&W company change was occurring. The 800 series Matrix line was the last line under the leadership of John Bowers. What followed for B&W was a change of leadership. You can read more about the company changes here Like all businesses with new leaders / management, the (New Guy/Gal) is always anxious to institute immediate changes. They did just that. This resulted in new direction, objectives, and since this business is about speakers - a change in sound. The opinion part. These public chat forums are about opinions and sharing info. IMO - The new leadership took what was a smart "active speaker design" during a time of two channel audio focus, and changed the design to fit in more with the emerging multi channel Home Theater market. More bean counters were introduced. A very smart business move indeed. All B&W owners regardless of what kind of B&W they own should be happy with having such a strong company backing their speakers. 32Hz - 28kHz ±3dB on reference axis This is the frequency response for the flagship 800d as published on the B&W info sheet. The 800 model namesake is no longer a full range speaker on its own. I have seen/heard two rooms with 800d in the past. In both cases a subwoofer/s was used. One was a two channel audio setup. The other was a Home Theater setup. If your thread was in the Home Theater section I would not have included this last bit of info here. As speakers with subs is the norm in HT. But this being an audiophile forum, and this post being in the speaker section, I thought it was relevant to show where the company focus went. Again IMO. So imo assuming both of your speakers are functioning properly you are not imagining things. I also heard big differences in presentation of 2 channel music in my room between nautilus 805 and matrix 805 w/bass alignment filter as designed to be run by John Bowers. Thanks for letting me ramble here. And don't let the gear get in the way of the music. Cheers and good listening. |
- 35 posts total