• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

B&W 800D4 series

bo_knows

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Aug 17, 2020
Messages
798
Likes
788
Location
Dallas, Texas USA

Thank you for the videos but AB-Comparison D3 vs D4[ comparison is worthless if speakers are not in the same/identical position during the recording. Right? Older 802D3 sounded much more focused. The difference was too obvious to be a valid comparison. I doubt there's much difference between models that I could hear over youtube.
 
Last edited:

MarcT

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 14, 2019
Messages
931
Likes
612
Location
East Texas
Thank you for the videos but AB-Comparison D3 vs D4[ comparison is worthless if speakers are not in the same/identical position during the recording. Right? Older 802D3 sounded much more focused. The difference was too obvious to be a valid comparison. I doubt there's much difference between models.
Yes, and they sounded different enough that I wondered if the microphone was even in the same spot for D3 and D4 recordings.
 

ti33er

Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2019
Messages
78
Likes
52
…actually being honest, if I can hear a difference (on my iPhone) the D4 has less of the sSs that I detest on my D3 - will have to listen at a Dealer out of curiosity; and being honest this is where I figured the only ‘upgrade’ would be reducing that 10Khz annoyance ;-)
 

ctrl

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 24, 2020
Messages
1,616
Likes
6,086
Location
.de, DE, DEU
Thank you for the videos but AB-Comparison D3 vs D4[ comparison is worthless if speakers are not in the same/identical position during the recording. Right?
Ideally, the speakers are set up in an A-B-A-B arrangement and the stereo microphones are precisely centered.
Then there will be identical interference for both speakers due to phase shifts (different distances of speakers A-A and B-B from the microphones).
If the listening room is ideally symmetrical, then the interference should affect the recordings almost equally, but in a mirror image - this is not optimal for stereo music (left and right music content is not identical).

But the basic difference in tonality of the speakers should actually still be reproduced reliably.

Update: But such listening comparisons are not scientific experiments, but, for some people, just a fun part of the hobby ;)
 

Kvalsvoll

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Audio Company
Joined
Apr 25, 2019
Messages
878
Likes
1,643
Location
Norway

This was embarrassing, sounds like a clock-radio. I suspect the speakers are better than this, and that this just shows how difficult it is to record speakers to try to give an impression of how they sound.

Yes, the 2. set offsets center towards left, and tonally the 1. set also seems a bit better. But when you compare to the original, those issues becomes insignificant - much of the bass is gone, tonality is colored, highs are colored and lacks resolution, there is no presence of singers or instruments, separation is lost, dynamic impact is gone.

Making a recording like this and have it sound like the original is difficult, and there will always be some difference because there will be contribution from the room, even with the best rooms and speakers.

Nothing of this has anything to do with youtube. It is down to choice of microphones, mic placement, room acoustics - and .. the speakers.
 

Pearljam5000

Master Contributor
Joined
Oct 12, 2020
Messages
5,125
Likes
5,355
This was embarrassing, sounds like a clock-radio. I suspect the speakers are better than this, and that this just shows how difficult it is to record speakers to try to give an impression of how they sound.

Yes, the 2. set offsets center towards left, and tonally the 1. set also seems a bit better. But when you compare to the original, those issues becomes insignificant - much of the bass is gone, tonality is colored, highs are colored and lacks resolution, there is no presence of singers or instruments, separation is lost, dynamic impact is gone.

Making a recording like this and have it sound like the original is difficult, and there will always be some difference because there will be contribution from the room, even with the best rooms and speakers.

Nothing of this has anything to do with youtube. It is down to choice of microphones, mic placement, room acoustics - and .. the speakers.
The best sounding speaker recordings I have ever heard.
 

ctrl

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 24, 2020
Messages
1,616
Likes
6,086
Location
.de, DE, DEU
This was embarrassing, sounds like a clock-radio. I suspect the speakers are better than this, and that this just shows how difficult it is to record speakers to try to give an impression of how they sound...
Very few people who make such recordings have any background in sound engineering, the results are corresponding.

I don't know how the recordings were made, of course, but if I were the owner of a hifi store, I would make sure that the new version of the speaker will sound better in the recordings and would set up and align the microphones accordingly. ;)
 

Art Vandelay

Member
Joined
Apr 29, 2020
Messages
29
Likes
32
I even think the too large mids are on purpose as they increase the directivity at the critical presence region and enhance the euphonic sound power dip there, which can both be advantageous at the typical high end temple too high listening distance and too few absorption.


I think you're partly correct - about the recessed presence region (off axis) being a deliberate deviation from flat, but I also think this design choice sounds more natural with most music, and definitely more forgiving of bad and excessively processed and compressed pop / rock..
B&W also believes that their house sound produces the most natural sounding live classical recordings.

There was also a school of thought back in the 70s / 80's that a single mid driver should cover the full vocal range for best vocal reproduction, so maybe there's something in that too.

From my measurements of the older kevlar mid the distortion was vanishingly low, and ditto the diamond tweeter's, and the new fst mid is just as good or better in that regard but without the breakup at 3-4 kHz.

Fwiw, my old infinity planar speakers produced a really flat textbook response on and off axis at the listening height but sounded too forward in the upper mids on most recordings, whereas my 800D2's definitely sound more natural and also more transparent with audibly less non-linear distortions, and of course can play much much louder - while still sounding pristine and free from dynamic compression.
Given that almost all of the distortion in a playback chain comes from the loudspeakers this must be an important metric for overall subjective performance, and is one of B&W's positive attributes, and more so than ever now with the latest 800D4 series.
 

Kvalsvoll

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Audio Company
Joined
Apr 25, 2019
Messages
878
Likes
1,643
Location
Norway
Very few people who make such recordings have any background in sound engineering, the results are corresponding.

I don't know how the recordings were made, of course, but if I were the owner of a hifi store, I would make sure that the new version of the speaker will sound better in the recordings and would set up and align the microphones accordingly. ;)

Good point, but then there is the issue with time & effort spent - even if you have the knowledge, at some point you have to call it a day, and decide that this is how it is - for good or bad.

Just to achive a representative tonal balance in the recording can be quite tricky - you soon learn that an omni mic is not the best choice, so you opt for something with directivity - then the frequency response of the recording changes, because now the mic responds to the direction of the sound field.
 

Kvalsvoll

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Audio Company
Joined
Apr 25, 2019
Messages
878
Likes
1,643
Location
Norway
The best sounding speaker recordings I have ever heard.

Now this is something quite different - this is so well done, you need the original to be able to tell it is a recording from speaker playback. And none of the speakers fall short with a direct compare to the original. The recording also manages to point out differences between the speakers.

I have seen this before, I believe there is a thread on here as well, I just never got to listen to it.

How? They have a room that is suited for sound reproduction, they took the effort of setting up each speaker set properly, they had the right recording equipment. And those speakers seems to perform quite well, all of them - even if the are indeed different.
 

thewas

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 15, 2020
Messages
6,747
Likes
16,186
B&W also believes that their house sound produces the most natural sounding live classical recordings.
Definetely when they were mixed and mastered with them. ;):D

There was also a school of thought back in the 70s / 80's that a single mid driver should cover the full vocal range for best vocal reproduction, so maybe there's something in that too.
That's imho more a typical audiophile myth and was rather a result of crossover and directivity transitions often not being smooth. On the other hand the relatively high mid lowpass frequency still doesn't allow it to play alone in the mid band if the crossover slope is shallow as in the current B&W models, see the vertical directivity plots as a result and proof.
 

preload

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 19, 2020
Messages
1,554
Likes
1,701
Location
California
On the other hand the relatively high mid lowpass frequency still doesn't allow it to play alone in the mid band if the crossover slope is shallow as in the current B&W models, see the vertical directivity plots as a result and proof.

The formula seems to work. They’ve been combining the 7” fst midrange with the 1” tweeter on top for about 5+ generations over 2 decades. We mock what we do not understand.
 

Art Vandelay

Member
Joined
Apr 29, 2020
Messages
29
Likes
32
That's imho more a typical audiophile myth and was rather a result of crossover and directivity transitions often not being smooth. On the other hand the relatively high mid lowpass frequency still doesn't allow it to play alone in the mid band if the crossover slope is shallow as in the current B&W models, see the vertical directivity plots as a result and proof.


Unlikely a myth because it's not without technical merit. With a wideband mid driver there's a consistency of distortion profile across the vocal range, noting that tweeters, particularly in the old days, were not known for great linearity at the lower limits of their operating range. Also, where high order filters are used, if crossing over in the 1-3kHz range there's a high chance of response irregularities as well as errors between channels unless component tolerance is high and stable, which definitely wasn't the case 40 years ago. The result of which could be vocal coloration as well as a lack of center image stability.

For what it's worth, since the 800D range the M-T filters have been 2nd order, so hardly a shallow slope imho.
 

thewas

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 15, 2020
Messages
6,747
Likes
16,186
The formula seems to work. They’ve been combining the 7” fst midrange with the 1” tweeter on top for about 5+ generations over 2 decades. We mock what we do not understand.
Its not rocket science, we understand its behaviour and the resulting voicing which some people like and some don't.
 

thewas

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 15, 2020
Messages
6,747
Likes
16,186
With a wideband mid driver there's a consistency of distortion profile across the vocal range, noting that tweeters, particularly in the old days, were not known for great linearity at the lower limits of their operating range.
On other hand there is a inconsistency in the directivity and the sound power of a 7" mid crossed so high, which radiates widely the lower frequencies and beams the higher ones.
For what it's worth, since the 800D range the M-T filters have been 2nd order, so hardly a shallow slope imho.
I think the tweeters are crossed with a first oder crossover, anyway the slopes are less step than on most of its competitors which as said shows in its vertical directivity lobing.
 

Art Vandelay

Member
Joined
Apr 29, 2020
Messages
29
Likes
32
On other hand there is a inconsistency in the directivity and the sound power of a 7" mid crossed so high, which radiates widely the lower frequencies and beams the higher ones.

I think the tweeters are crossed with a first order crossover, anyway the slopes are less step than on most of its competitors which as said shows in its vertical directivity lobing.

The change in directivity is definitely something that BW engineers would be aware of, so we can therefore assume that the (slight) loss of off-axis energy at the top of the presence region is either a design attribute or a slight compromise that allows for best overall performance. And maybe it's both.
What we can say is that the effect is not unpleasant subjectively, and in many instances is indeed preferred.

Yep, tweeter HPF is 1st order electrical but the slope is close to 2nd order L-W by measurement - on axis. The engineers have taken into account the natural roll-off of the tweeter / pod.
 

ti33er

Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2019
Messages
78
Likes
52
That on-axis treble gets reflected in 90% of rooms and makes the whole listening experience ’bright’ whether you’re on or off-axis from the speaker …few of us have massive ugly soffits and GIK panels in their Livingroom

it would be nice if Bowers had another set of terminals to the tweeter crossover which gave you the option of a few dB less (for arguably bright rooms) if you plugged your jumpers into those… so I wish… ;-)
 

ctrl

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 24, 2020
Messages
1,616
Likes
6,086
Location
.de, DE, DEU
I just wish either Amir or Erin measures one of this...all of the fuzz, presumptions and speculations we are making up would clear up

Detailed measurements of the 800D3 are available (all images are from there). The D4 should not behave much differently in comparison.

Excellent values for harmonic distortion and intermodulation distortion. The speaker's decay behavior is also impeccable. The maximum achievable sound pressure is excellent. There is not much to write about these points.

The crossover frequency of the woofer and midrange driver is unusually high at 500Hz and the distance from the lower woofer to the midrange driver is quite large, which creates a constriction in the radiation in the vertical direction.
The crossover frequency from midrange to tweeter is very high at 3.5 kHz, but works better than expected in terms of horizontal directivity.


The horizontal directivity taken as a whole is rather poor. I have drawn the course of the -6dB sound pressure limit (deviation in relation to the axis frequency response) here:
1631721083348.png
The 7kHz widening is caused by a dip in the axis frequency response and should not be a problem.

In the frequency range above 1.2kHz, the horizontal radiation is +-45°, which could almost be called narrow.

Quite bad is the abrupt change of the radiation at frequencies below 1.2kHz. Within one octave, the horizontal dispersion changes from +-35° (around 2.5kHz) to +-110° (around 1.2kHz) - but to be completely sure, one would have to look at the individual frequency responses.

The vertical listening area is very limited due to the high crossover frequency. Upwards, clearly less than 10° until the sound pressure deviates more than 6dB from the axis frequency response. Downwards it should be around 10°.
1631721920762.png
It would certainly be very interesting to have a look at the power response and PIR of this speaker.


Contrary to what is discussed here, at least the 800D3 clearly shows the behavior of a loudspeaker that is crossed at both crossover frequencies with fourth-order filters.
Due to the classic BR tuning around 270° phase rotation in the low frequency range (blue marked) and at the crossover frequencies at 500Hz and 3.5kHz each further 360° phase rotation (red and green marked), as one would expect for fourth-order filters.
1631723923001.png

Those who consider a low group delay important will not be satisfied by this speaker. Due to the crossover frequency at 500Hz and fourth-order filter, the group delay in the midrange will be unusually high.
 
Last edited:

richard12511

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Messages
4,335
Likes
6,700
Now this is something quite different - this is so well done, you need the original to be able to tell it is a recording from speaker playback. And none of the speakers fall short with a direct compare to the original. The recording also manages to point out differences between the speakers.

I have seen this before, I believe there is a thread on here as well, I just never got to listen to it.

How? They have a room that is suited for sound reproduction, they took the effort of setting up each speaker set properly, they had the right recording equipment. And those speakers seems to perform quite well, all of them - even if the are indeed different.

They messed up the volume matching, unfortunately. The Grimm LS1be was played ~4dB higher than the D&D 8c, which no doubt contributed to it sounding so much better. Not that it wouldn’t have still won(I really don’t know), but I do think the volume mismatch is responsible for most of the difference.

I believe they corrected this and posted the volume matched audio somewhere on their site. Unfortunately, I haven’t been able to find that audio, and they never responded to my question of where to find it :(.

I’m actually very interested in making recordings like this for my own personal use, to help hear relative difference between some of the speakers I own. I know absolute quality can’t be judged via recording, but I’m only concerned with relative differences in tonality (ex: A has more 1-4kHz energy than B). JBL 708p vs 308p is the comparison I’m most interested in atm, as surprised at how tonally different the sound with near identical waveguide, size, shape, and with similar measurements. What kind of mic do you think would work best for this purpose? Right now, I just a Umik(1 and 2), but I don’t mind spending a bit of money if it would help.
 
Top Bottom