Bowers & Wilkins 607 S2 Anniversary Edition Review

[restorer-john]

Its $900 retail for a pair, not sure how you get they are double the price. With dealers you can drop it down to a lot more. You can look up open box video on youtube for both of these speakers

Actually more than double the price here. Revel M105s are $2699/2799 here in Australia which is just utterly ridiculous.

The little B&Ws are $999 or less.

 

[boselover61]

Actually more than double the price here. Revel M105s are $2699/2799 here in Australia which is just utterly ridiculous.

View attachment 119439


The little B&Ws are $999 or less.
View attachment 119440

In my post i said revel m16

 

[Vini darko]

Actually more than double the price here. Revel M105s are $2699/2799 here in Australia which is just utterly ridiculous.

View attachment 119439


The little B&Ws are $999 or less.
View attachment 119440

Those kangaroo bucks don't go far

 

[q3cpma]

I don't know if my anecdote can be generalized, but when I worked near St Tropez, that guy who had every Apple gadget (including the watch) and a BMW Serie 1 also had some B&W floorstanders. That's basically my impression of the brand, now.

 

[MZKM]

Is B&W a British equivalent of Klipsch sans the horns?

 

[Helicopter]

What are they gettin' for Focal Aria 906 down under?

 

[Tks]

Oh dear. That horozontal directivity is just ugh. I hope someone at BW gets hit in the feels by this breakdown. Nothing will change though because this recipe sells and money talks.

The only feels they'll be getting is great ones knowing they suckered people with this. People taking pride in their work? This seems almost like a hilarious romantic notion that has long been done away with in most corporate heavy sectors of industry. It's surprising Apple manages to get fine details (though ultimately inconsequential ones) correct as a company of it's size. Every other company simply attempting to pretend they get the fine details, yet fumble on the big ones, and the fine details at the same time.

I just don't understand this race to the bottom. Seems every company is ridden with shareholders and executives looking to increase value of stock by any means in the shortest amount of time (even if that means sinking literally everything the company stood for once).

 

[dfuller]

ATC,PMC and now B&W, our position as a world ‘power’ reflected by our loudspeaker manufacturers!
Keith

In fairness to ATC, the 3 ways I've heard from them have been quite nice. The two ways... not so much.

 

[richard12511]

Disappointing to see such poor performance from a manufacturer with so many resources, though not completely unexpected. Paradigm also went for the boosted treble response, but at least they nailed the directivity.

 

[restorer-john]

In my post i said revel m16

Ah, I was referring to Amir's comparison of his M105s vs the 607S2.

 

[martijn86]

Schadenfreude is the experience of pleasure, joy, or self-satisfaction that comes from learning of or witnessing the troubles, failures, or humiliation of another.

The Dutch word is "Leedvermaak". Leed = suffering, vermaak = entertainment. To be entertained by someone's suffering.

 

[beefkabob]

I read a review of a KEF R3, from a mature experienced listener, and he complained about the dull highs. To paraphrase, he was aware that KEF follows the science in design, but felt that it was still a boring speaker.

Said person brought in a B&W and it “Hurray! Bring back the highs”

My guess is that many well heeled audiophiles were pub/club/rock concert tragics back in golden era of live music, and are now getting on into their 60s or 70s and really do have some high frequency hearing loss.

Possibly it's hearing loss. More likely it's just what they're used to.

 

[beefkabob]

The Dutch word is "Leedvermaak". Leed = suffering, vermaak = entertainment. To be entertained by someone's suffering.

Yeah, yeah, sure sure. But how do I say it in Norwegian and Danish?

 

[LTig]

@amirm We need to have a few more B&Ws reviewed to see if this HF "zing" is indeed part of their deliberate "house sound". I have a pair of their larger and older 602 S2s (Made in the UK before the Sound United buyout) here and they are very well behaved in the HF.

We had the even older 601 (1st series), bought around 1994 for the sleeping room and after changing into a bigger flat in my wifes room, then driven by a Naim Nait 5. When she listened to some studio monitors (Tannoy Reveal 5) she realized that speech intelligibility (opera) was much better, so we sold the B&W and the Naim and she got JBL LSR2325 instead, driven by my then retired old preamp (Audioplan Homogen from 1988) with modded internal amplifier stage.

I think it was a dip in the mids of the 601 which caused the problem with speech intelligibility, either on or off axis. I have no measurements though.

 

[richard12511]

Those 602 S2 belong to the older B&W era which has high order crossovers and a more neutral tuning than their current models, for example the 20 year old 603 S3

View attachment 119425

View attachment 119423
(source: https://www.stereophile.com/content/bowers-wilkins-702-s2-loudspeaker-measurements )

vs the current more expensive 705 S2

View attachment 119426

View attachment 119427
(source: https://www.stereophile.com/content/bw-dm603-s3-loudspeaker-measurements)

B&W changed completely their tuning strategy at some time for whichever reasons but they are not less successful in the market, so I don't think it is not they cannot do better if they would want to, but rather an intentional choice.

Is it possible that B&W has internal blind listening test research that this response is preferred over a more neutral Toole/Harman response? Obviously they're capable of producing a neutral response today, given they were capable of doing it 30 years ago. Honestly makes me wonder.

Anyone that's used to a neutral response(like Amir, or me) is going to dislike it at first. I think to some degree we look for what's closest to what we're used to, and not necessarily what we'd actually prefer long term. I know this is definitely true for myself. I think it would take blind listening tests to say for sure. Makes me want to purchase one and put it up against the M105 with the ABX Comparator with other folks. I wish I had a Best Buy near me that had them. Definitely wouldn't bet on the B&W winning, but as J.P. from Angels in the Outfield would say, "It could happen".

 

[hex168]

I recall the original B&W 801s being quite good in their day. No further comment.

 

[tktran303]

Actually more than double the price here. Revel M105s are $2699/2799 here in Australia which is just utterly ridiculous.

View attachment 119439


The little B&Ws are $999 or less.
View attachment 119440

We’re in the wrong country for Revel, John...

The value equation is upside down, down under.

but sometimes you can take advantage of that
eg. buy Neumann not Genelec...

 

[AndreaT]

Bad, bad, really bad speaker. Thank you Amir for another excellent review to guide us on how to spend our Dollars wisely.

 

[Doodski]

I recall the original B&W 801s being quite good in their day. No further comment.

They where a nice speaker with great mids, good top end and went fairly loud. I popped a woofer in one with a large Luxman 200W/ch. Snapped it off the end stops. Pantera can do that.

 

[Steve Dallas]

What a shame.

Until 2020, a pair of N804 was the main speakers in my media room, and a pair of N805 was the main speakers in my office. I purchased both in 2000 or 2001. I thoroughly enjoyed them for almost 20 years. But, any time I heard newer B&Ws over the period, I thought something was seriously wrong with them due to the obvious hole in the mids and overly present sizzle--even up to the flagships.

My adult son recently purchased a pair of 685 S2 speakers after reading the WhatHiFi review and experiencing my B&Ws for most of his life. Absolutely terrible. I gifted him my "vintage" B&Ws, since he grew up with them and is attached to them. That is a good outcome for them and him, methinks. My pursuit of replacements ended with Revels and BMRs.

B&W once built great speakers for their time, but they have clearly abandoned that pursuit. They have the knowledge and technology, but their priorities are elsewhere.