Difference in B&W sound

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.

Every speaker I have heard with kevlar drivers has sounded too forward and unnatural to me. Some carbon fiber drivers can sound this way to me also.

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.

Thanks Zd & Ct, I first switched the 803 & the 804 to each others locations. without doing a new MACC I played from classical to rock & everything in between. Then I switched to #6 MACC setting, which is completely flat in all respects.I couldn't hear any difference there.
For the most part #s 3, 4 & 5 sounded better on the 803 (to me), Then I asked my Twins to come & take a listen. Played different music in all of the said above sequences, they said the 804 sounded better.
I had to run some errands & when I came back, I switched out the right channel from the both amps, then called in my Son & for the most part with all music He said the 2003 (MOD) which was the left channel sounded better even in #6 which is at FLAT response. That was a relief for me because of the monies for the amp & the MOD, I would have been SICK! I guess it comes w/age, Growing up in the 70s with my love for (rock concerts, Discos) & being a Carpenter. I'll take it all into consideration. Or like Jimmy said: but in the end these things can be a matter of preference and system synergy. Final note; I'm going to leave things as they are for now. I'm in the market for a new Pre. Just waiting for the NEW products to get their upgrades & quirks corrected. AMB Danmar