• Welcome to ASR. 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

witwald said:
In contrast to the above example, we look below to the B&W DM6 Monitor Loudspeaker System from 1975. It seems that it could be fruitful to return back to those drawing boards of the 1970s.
Click to expand...

Consider the scale (range) is 50dB on that vintage B&K paper plotter....

Anything would look flat.
 
restorer-john said:
Consider the scale (range) is 50dB on that vintage B&K paper plotter....

Anything would look flat.
Click to expand...
Same 50 dB scale used in the modern model he quoted, so the comparison is fair.
 
restorer-john said:
Nope. It's squashed on the x axis. Stretch it out and compare.
Click to expand...
Here is the overlay of the DM6 from 1975 (below) and the 805D3 from 2017 (above). Both same 50dB on Y axis and 10 Hz to 20 kHz X axis. Even if we ignore the rise in the upper bass of the 805D3 (as JA notes in the review) and focus only on the treble, it is way too hot.

overlay.jpg


https://www.stereophile.com/content/bowers-wilkins-805-d3-loudspeaker-measurements
 
Tonygeno said:
My only response is that just because they are used in a sound studio doesn’t make them accurate. And no, I am not a Master recording engineer, just a classical music lover who has been into audio for over 50 years and has spent quite a bit of time in two of the best concert halls in the world, and knows what the real thing sounds like. That’s all I got to offer.
Click to expand...

You will literally never heard with your speaker setup what you have heard live on the concert hall.
What you will hear, no matter how good your system is, will be a representation of it.
Take into account the circle of confusion. There are microphones involved, the type, array and mic technique employed will alter the real event. Then is the mixing and mastering process (even though when dealing with classical music they usually try to do minimal harm...they still put the fingers on it).

Honestly, I prefer to listen the program on my house with my system than going to the live venue, I just accept the circle of confusion, live with it, and enjoy it as it is.
 
tecnogadget said:
You will literally never heard with your speaker setup what you have heard live on the concert hall.
What you will hear, no matter how good your system is, will be a representation of it.
Take into account the circle of confusion. There are microphones involved, the type, array and mic technique employed will alter the real event. Then is the mixing and mastering process (even though when dealing with classical music they usually try to do minimal harm...they still put the fingers on it).

Honestly, I prefer to listen the program on my house with my system than going to the live venue, I just accept the circle of confusion, live with it, and enjoy it as it is.
Click to expand...
Yeah, got it. But if a loudspeaker has huge peaks in its measurements, how can it possibly begin to accurately represent what's on the recording? Or are we saying, accuracy is of minor importance? This is what I don't understand.
 
Tonygeno said:
A little condescending there, buddy. I repeat, show me measurements from the current crop of B&W that aim for flat response. If they exist, I will retract my previous comment. With such wildly unflat response (based on the measurements I have seen) they must appeal to folks that have no idea what the real thing sounds like.
Click to expand...
check this out:
https://www.whathifi.com/us/reviews/bandw-800-d3

"You can see that the ±3dB variation is caused by roll-off in the low frequencies (below 30Hz). If we restrict the measurement to within the audio band, the trace shows that Newport Test Labs measured the frequency response of the B&W 800 D3 as 20Hz – 20kHz ±2.5dB… obviously an exceptionally flat and linear response. " ;)
 
If you trust What HiFi that is …even with that graph you can see the slightly elevated bass and treble, along with a recessed midrange - D3 are not linear loudspeakers
 
bo_knows said:
And I should trust Stereophile that puts KEF reference 5 in their B category of speakers?
Click to expand...
No, but you can trust their measurements.
 
Koeitje said:
No, but you can trust their measurements.
Click to expand...
And can not trust this measurement? Are we being selective here?

To finish, I don't have a horse in this race, for me, 30K is a tremendous amount of money to be spent on pair of loudspeakers but I have heard them and I was impressed.

1629210107248.png

The B&W 800 D3 returned a flatter, more extended frequency response than any other non-DSP corrected loudspeaker Newport Test Labs has ever measured, and did so whilst maintaining high efficiency. It’s a design that B&W’s engineers are no doubt very proud of… and if I were on B&W’s design team, I would be very proud too.
 
Really precise and trustable measurements of the 800 D3 were made Prof. Anselm Goertz who measures also the studio monitors for Sound & Recording:

1629234142222.png

Source: https://www.fidelity-online.de/bowers-wilkins-800-d3-messungen/

Its on-axis linearity is quite good with ±2,6 dB between 100 Hz und 10 kHz, its harmonic and multi-tone distortion measurements are very good, only its directivities are not great, but to be expected from the engineering choices (driver sizes and baffles, crossover frequencies and steepness):

1629234354517.png


1629234365821.png
 
bo_knows said:
And can not trust this measurement? Are we being selective here?

To finish, I don't have a horse in this race, for me, 30K is a tremendous amount of money to be spent on pair of loudspeakers but I have heard them and I was impressed.

View attachment 148054
The B&W 800 D3 returned a flatter, more extended frequency response than any other non-DSP corrected loudspeaker Newport Test Labs has ever measured, and did so whilst maintaining high efficiency. It’s a design that B&W’s engineers are no doubt very proud of… and if I were on B&W’s design team, I would be very proud too.
Click to expand...

There's nothing that comes out of the so-called "newport test labs" that is, or ever has been, trustworthy, IMO. It's just the "test guy" for the old Australian HiFi. Invented in a vain attempt to legitimize. I got thoroughly sick and tired of Australian HiFi 'reviews' decades ago. Nobody in the actual HiFi business ever took anything in that rag seriously.

We used to get a small number free each month because our group advertised nationwide in the magazine. We couldn't even give them away.
 
ti33er said:
I had my 805D3 measured anechoically independently a few months ago as the treble has always bugged me over the past year I’ve owned them (from new; and no amount of ‘driving them in’ fixes that) - those independent measurements came back spot on as per the above; even with Tweeter direct circumventing the XO entirely the plot was about the same, so it’s the D3 tweeter by default which behaves this way…and that 10Khz lift is very audible (I don’t care what anyone says about it not existing off-axis) which makes most vocals sound sandy i.e. the ‘sSs’ sound

I’ve got an external high end Mills resistor (on a jumper) to lower that 3-4db and it sounds great now with no loss of fidelity to my ears - the 805D3 can sound natural without having to buy a MacIntosh/Tubes …and it sure sounds more refined than when I had a Matched Pair of Tubes in a Nobsound device inline with my DAC

Am very interested too see the new frequency plot of the 805D4 Tweeter
Click to expand...
I’d love to see those measurements.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T
Armageddon Warhead drivers - trust me bro
Replies
4
Views
634
RexrothPigeon
RexrothPigeon
amirm
New JBL Summit Speakers
3 4 5
Replies
81
Views
21K
Flaesh
Flaesh
Punter
Speakers Are The Enemy
2 3 4
Replies
71
Views
9K
Punter
Punter
Nuyes
Neumann KH150 Review
3 4 5
Replies
94
Views
27K
dfuller
D
Back
Top Bottom