• 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

Sorry to butt in, but the saddest thing (for me at least) is that the best active speakers out there seem to be more for the pro market and almost certainly wouldn't be around to compare with the likes of these. It was said that Adam, when they dabbled their toes into the domestic market, were surprised how much more profitable the domestic market could be. Oh for a domestic dealer to stock and dem the larger Genelecs and similar, but a complete system such as that is a fraction of the price of larger N800's plus a chunky posh looking amp, so less profit before overall margins come into it :confused:

Am I the only one who finds the N800 series really ugly?
 
What I find saddening here is all the subjective biased opinions (yet again) on this so called Science Forum. Surely there is enough forums for that sort of crap?

Had the 800N and with big Classe amps and I must say on first listen they seemed really smooth. However working as a producer one thing I started to notice soon on was how they really muffled dynamics. Stuff like how much compression I added to a kick, or how it fit against a bass line. High Frequencies balance against mids also had been more problematic as compared to any other speaker I had used. Only other speakers I found as difficult had been the Wilson Watt Puppies (I forget the generation).

One other thing I have learned over the years is studios will pay (or get paid) hundreds of thousands of dollars to get a room correct but totally miss the point on the monitors. Also the expensive studios often have a lot more to do with which producer and album had been mixed there than accuracy.

Anyways hoping this forum returns to less subjective garble.
 
What I find saddening here is all the subjective biased opinions (yet again) on this so called Science Forum. Surely there is enough forums for that sort of crap?

Had the 800N and with big Classe amps and I must say on first listen they seemed really smooth. However working as a producer one thing I started to notice soon on was how they really muffled dynamics. Stuff like how much compression I added to a kick, or how it fit against a bass line. High Frequencies balance against mids also had been more problematic as compared to any other speaker I had used. Only other speakers I found as difficult had been the Wilson Watt Puppies (I forget the generation).

One other thing I have learned over the years is studios will pay (or get paid) hundreds of thousands of dollars to get a room correct but totally miss the point on the monitors. Also the expensive studios often have a lot more to do with which producer and album had been mixed there than accuracy.

Anyways hoping this forum returns to less subjective garble.
Most people here prefer measurements, still its funny that you complain about subjective opinions and the following part of your post is just that. Or do you think it is better than others subjective opinions?
 
What I find saddening here is all the subjective biased opinions (yet again) on this so called Science Forum. Surely there is enough forums for that sort of crap?

Had the 800N and with big Classe amps and I must say on first listen they seemed really smooth. However working as a producer one thing I started to notice soon on was how they really muffled dynamics. Stuff like how much compression I added to a kick, or how it fit against a bass line. High Frequencies balance against mids also had been more problematic as compared to any other speaker I had used. Only other speakers I found as difficult had been the Wilson Watt Puppies (I forget the generation).

One other thing I have learned over the years is studios will pay (or get paid) hundreds of thousands of dollars to get a room correct but totally miss the point on the monitors. Also the expensive studios often have a lot more to do with which producer and album had been mixed there than accuracy.

Anyways hoping this forum returns to less subjective garble.
It's a science forum but also has room for subjective opinions because we're not robots after all.
 
It's a science forum but also has room for subjective opinions because we're not robots after all.
Speak for yourself! I’m not made of flesh and bones. I’ve been conceived by a 3rd generation IA but my creators missed the Subjetive training neural network. Yes...I’m a forum Bot in disguise :p.
 
@thewas @Pearljam5000
Subjective I wasn't outright saying ban but rather I was just meaning to say that the greatest part of this forum is the objective side. One thing I do find interesting is when objective measurements support subjective. My anecdotal and subjective comment on the 800N was just me trying to tie in how many so called pro studios are not as great as the legends state. But perhaps also tools for the job might also not need to be the most accurate but more fitting to the workflow of the producers.

B&W though on fit an finish had been above average and the weight I can attest to as the FedEX guy left them on our door step in Toronto and we had to carry them up to flights of stairs.

Sure we are not robots but perhaps sheep :D
 
That’s what I thought too and even went so far as to buy a pair of Focal ceiling speakers with their fancy beryllium tweeter. So much for technology, the tweeter wasn’t aimable and sounded horribly rolled off because they were aimed straight down, off axis from the mlp. At least B&W mid-grade ceiling speakers had aimable tweeters.

Perhaps you should compare "real" floorstanding or bookshelf speakers before making assumptions about Focal or other brands. You also need to listen for some time, because (according to B&W) there is evidence to suggest that we get used to the sound of our speakers, and we may even dislike better (more accurate or "revealing") ones at first.

It would also be constructive not to call people "haters" or "mafia" just because they don't agree with you.

I don't agree with the notion that a preference score says everything about how a speaker sounds, but there is merit to a flat frequence response, and even dispersion. It's a starting point for good sound. If there are dips and/or peaks in the frequence response, and uneven dispersion, it will colour the sound.

Here's an example, 804 Diamond. The frequency response is very uneven compared to it's predecessor. These measurements were not available when I listened to it, but the sound was bright and hollow, so much that I had to find out why. The reason made me question B&W, and the direction they were heading. They had simply removed a resistor from the crossover (listed as optional in the service manual), most likely to make it stand out in a direct comparison, but perhaps also because of their focus on "fewer components = better".

As you can see, there's a 10dB difference from 2 kHz to 10 kHz. The horizontal dispersion is quite even, so toeing them out will not solve the problem.


913B804fig4.jpg
 
I guess I should have run over to that location. The sales guy at the Park Lane Magnolia didn't seem to know much of anything. A few years ago, they had a tall dude in there who really knew his stuff.
I saw B&W rep few times at the Grapevine store. Another excellent Magnolia store.
 
What I find saddening here is all the subjective biased opinions (yet again) on this so called Science Forum. Surely there is enough forums for that sort of crap?

Had the 800N and with big Classe amps and I must say on first listen they seemed really smooth. However working as a producer one thing I started to notice soon on was how they really muffled dynamics. Stuff like how much compression I added to a kick, or how it fit against a bass line. High Frequencies balance against mids also had been more problematic as compared to any other speaker I had used. Only other speakers I found as difficult had been the Wilson Watt Puppies (I forget the generation).

One other thing I have learned over the years is studios will pay (or get paid) hundreds of thousands of dollars to get a room correct but totally miss the point on the monitors. Also the expensive studios often have a lot more to do with which producer and album had been mixed there than accuracy.

Anyways hoping this forum returns to less subjective garble. waiting for the measurements from other sources.

What I find saddening here is all the subjective biased opinions (yet again) on this so called Science Forum. Surely there is enough forums for that sort of crap?

Had the 800N and with big Classe amps and I must say on first listen they seemed really smooth. However working as a producer one thing I started to notice soon on was how they really muffled dynamics. Stuff like how much compression I added to a kick, or how it fit against a bass line. High Frequencies balance against mids also had been more problematic as compared to any other speaker I had used. Only other speakers I found as difficult had been the Wilson Watt Puppies (I forget the generation).

One other thing I have learned over the years is studios will pay (or get paid) hundreds of thousands of dollars to get a room correct but totally miss the point on the monitors. Also the expensive studios often have a lot more to do with which producer and album had been mixed there than accuracy.

Anyways hoping this forum returns to less subjective garble.
We are just "killing" time until more measurements show up from the other sources.
 
What I find saddening here is all the subjective biased opinions (yet again) on this so called Science Forum. Surely there is enough forums for that sort of crap?

Had the 800N and with big Classe amps and I must say on first listen they seemed really smooth. However working as a producer one thing I started to notice soon on was how they really muffled dynamics.
Stuff like how much compression I added to a kick, or how it fit against a bass line. High Frequencies balance against mids also had been more problematic as compared to any other speaker I had used. Only other speakers I found as difficult had been the Wilson Watt Puppies (I forget the generation).

One other thing I have learned over the years is studios will pay (or get paid) hundreds of thousands of dollars to get a room correct but totally miss the point on the monitors. Also the expensive studios often have a lot more to do with which producer and album had been mixed there than accuracy.

Anyways hoping this forum returns to less subjective garble.
Well, unless you used scientific measurements to arrive at that conclusion, then what you are saying is also subjective.
 
What I find saddening here is all the subjective biased opinions (yet again) on this so called Science Forum. Surely there is enough forums for that sort of crap?

Had the 800N and with big Classe amps and I must say on first listen they seemed really smooth. However working as a producer
Coupling a subjective opinion with an appeal to authority ("working as a producer") is still a subjective opinion.
 
Perhaps you should compare "real" floorstanding or bookshelf speakers before making assumptions about Focal or other brands.
My comment about the Focal ceiling speakers was in response to another poster's statement that Focal technology is superior to B&W's. I provided example where this simply was not the case. I completely agree that you simply cannot generalize the performance of an individual speaker based on name of the company, considering that each product has different engineering and marketing goals. That applies to B&W, Focal, Revel, etc.

You also need to listen for some time, because (according to B&W) there is evidence to suggest that we get used to the sound of our speakers, and we may even dislike better (more accurate or "revealing") ones at first.
I don't think anyone would disagree with that.
It would also be constructive not to call people "haters" or "mafia" just because they don't agree with you.
I agree, which is why I only use the term "haters" and "mafia" when they are truly applicable. For instance, when there is perpetuation of group think on a forum that has heavily self-selected for Harman-supported and anti-B&W sentiments, the terms are appropriate to provide visibility to what's actually happening. The internet and social media has made possible the rapid growth of extremism in ideas and behaviors, and it's not good for society.

I don't agree with the notion that a preference score says everything about how a speaker sounds,
I think you might have that backwards. The measured preference score (which is based in blinded listening tests under controlled conditions) IS the best objective "measurement" we have of how listeners would rate that speaker's sound quality, on average. Or are you talking about predicted preference scores. It's hard to know what to do with imprecise statements made about published research.
but there is merit to a flat frequence response, and even dispersion. It's a starting point for good sound. If there are dips and/or peaks in the frequence response, and uneven dispersion, it will colour the sound.
Maybe, maybe not. It would depend on the Q and the frequency where the peaks or dips occur and what measurement you're talking about. For instance, a gently rising sound power response in the lowest 2 octaves is preferable to flat down to 20khz (and that would be from Harman research)

Here's an example, 804 Diamond. The frequency response is very uneven compared to it's predecessor. These measurements were not available when I listened to it, but the sound was bright and hollow, so much that I had to find out why. The reason made me question B&W, and the direction they were heading. They had simply removed a resistor from the crossover (listed as optional in the service manual), most likely to make it stand out in a direct comparison, but perhaps also because of their focus on "fewer components = better".

As you can see, there's a 10dB difference from 2 kHz to 10 kHz. The horizontal dispersion is quite even, so toeing them out will not solve the problem.
I have not heard the 804 Diamond myself, but I would comment that the 804 historically is kind of the odd model, since it's not a bookshelf, but it's not a flagship model like the 800-802. I wouldn't be surprised if B&W tuned it to be "different." That being said, I disagree with you that toeing them out would not attenuate the treble peak around 10khz. If you look at the off-axis response provided by Stereophile, you can see easily see that there is a treble rolloff that becomes steeper as you move further off axis, that will result in an actual in-room response that doesn't have an exaggerated 10khz peak. You can't just eyeball the stereophile 30-deg on-axis listening windows and determine how the speaker will sound - it's a common mistake by the "mafia" here (term used appropriately).
 
My ears are usually at 37-39 inches above (depending on chair/sofa) the floor and B&W tweeter is at 46-47 inches if not 48.
In contrast, KEF ref 3 and 5 tweeter sits at 34 inches.

That's much more in line with what I was expecting. I remembered it seeming rather large, though my references have certainly changed over time.
 
Coupling a subjective opinion with an appeal to authority ("working as a producer") is still a subjective opinion.
Yes you are correct and I do not expect anyone to take my comments with any weight. What I would like is a scientific rebuttal if one is available. Also I am not trying to position myself as an authority here but just some observations that I am willing to acknowledge couldn't be done under scientific testing methods.
 
I finally spent an afternoon listening to 801D4's - in a well treated room, and was nothing less than very impressed.
To my ears (which are still pretty good) these speakers project a fantastic natural realism. The sound is just so pure, top to bottom, and if there was any treble emphasis it was so slight it was impossible to detect a common signature from one recording to the next. The crucial presence region which can be problematic with some B&W models was equally 'goldilocks'.
The low frequency performance was really outstanding though, and although any room dominates below about 200 Hz, these speakers weren't emphasizing any part of the bass region, and but they were incredibly dynamic and very pure sounding, even at high levels, - and obviously extended. Kick drums had real impact and snares sounded as close to live as I've heard from a pair of speakers.

Audiophiles will say that great speakers 'disappear', and these definitely fall into that category. They're also speakers that seduce as much as excite, and I tbh, could have sat there all day and night if it was possible.

These are definitely the best iteration of the 800 series I've heard - to match their price tag.
 

Attachments

  • 801d4-4.jpg
    801d4-4.jpg
    98.8 KB · Views: 267
Measurements of the 804 D4 by the German magazine "audio", FWIW:
  • left: FR red = on axis, blue = 30 degree horizontal off axis, green = +10 degree vertical off axis
  • right: FR and distortion at 4 different SPLs
b+w_804-D4_audio.jpg
 
Back
Top Bottom