Is purchasing B&W 702 S2’s a bad idea?

[test1223]

The DI are just a small part of the spinorama, also the Harman score equation doesn't take into consideration the DI curves at all as their correlation was smaller than on other variables, see AES 6190 paper.

If you have a look at a loudspeaker with eq you need to have a look at the di curves. With a loudspeaker where the direct sound is equalized to a flat line, the sound power fr and early reflections fr is 100% correlated to the sound power di and early reflection di.

Both curves the early reflections and sound power are used to estimate the in room response. If I remember correctly, all three curves are highly relevant to calculate the preference score with the multiple regression model.

I beg to disagree there though, look at the normalised directivity plots I posted above, this mess cannot be corrected by EQ.

The listening window fr and the fr of the early reflections is imho the important part to extract form the horizontal plane if this is fine than all other messiness is as important as the messiness by changing the vertical angle, since it only contributes significantly to the sound power fr. These two informations (listening window fr and early reflection fr) are also exactly what the preference score is using.

I see it rather the other way around, the DI can smear/hide many problems and lead to wrong conclusions.

Yes but (with an equalized loudspeaker) it is as of today a good enough "smearing" to be utilized for calculation of the preference score. It has yet to be proven that the extra information can improve the preference score.

 

[cbracer]

Hi. I’m considering purchasing B&W 702 S2 speakers. I heard them at Best Buy recently, then again at a local shop. I kept coming back to them over others. Isn’t hearing them all you need (versus measuring)?

You are hearing what BW wants you to hear in the show room. I fell into a similar trap..... I didn't know any better. A friend once said don't be afraid to buy used good audio gear and pay 1/2 the price for it. So I went and listened to some speakers and liked the way BW sound and looked and etc. Then I found on craigslist a nice pair of 686 for $300. I also purchased an open box CM1 for $750 pair, and compared them in A to B fashion in my house. I needed only 1 position of movement on the base to make the 686 sound like the CM1 at less than half the price so I went that route and got the 686. The CM1 also made the music sound like it was originating from 2 feet behind the wall..... hmmm...... rest assured they will sound different in your room. I enjoyed them a lot for 3 years. Then I found this forum looking for a new D amp. And then I purchased other speakers and discovered what I was missing, the famous BW dip at the cross over. Sure the rest of the frequency range sounded great, and the speakers were the perfect size and I loved the look. Good base, treble but I eventually discovered the parts of music missing in the dip. I still like my BW and own 3 used pairs of 686.... I would love to rework the crossover to minimize it or do EQ settings, but that takes time. If you don't want it to become a hobby get what you like and move on. Be aware that long listening does get tiring if they are too bright, but for a short while they sound great. Measuring and listening to speakers that were measured has broadened my horizon and appreciation of sound, but also became a small time hobby.

 

[thewas]

If you have a look at a loudspeaker with eq you need to have a look at the di curves.

For a quick overview it is OK but it is better to look at the horizontal and vertical directivities individually.

Both curves the early reflections and sound power are used to estimate the in room response. If I remember correctly, all three curves are highly relevant to calculate the preference score with the multiple regression model.

As I wrote above the directivity indexes are not used in the calculation of the Harman preference score as their correlation is lower than of other parameters which were chosen for it.

These two informations (listening window fr and early reflection fr) are also exactly what the preference score is using.

Exactly, not the directivity indexes.

Yes but (with an equalized loudspeaker) it is as of today a good enough "smearing" to be utilized for calculation of the preference score. It has yet to be proven that the extra information can improve the preference score.

See above, they have poorer correlation and were dropped in the model.

 

[Cote Dazur]

Isn’t hearing them all you need (versus measuring)?

As opposed to electronic, amps, dacs, etc... where measurements will tell you almost all you need to know, speakers are transducers, so measurements will not tell you all you need to know, they will guide you, also speakers placement will affect what you hear from your speakers, same with the room they will play in. So choosing speakers involve listening to them, preferably in the room they will play in.
If you like what you have heard so far, chances are, if you are flexible on speaker placement in your listening room, and that your amp can feed them to a sound level you like to listen to your music, that you will be just fine with those B&W.

 

[test1223]

As I wrote above the directivity indexes are not used in the calculation of the Harman preference score as their correlation is lower than of other parameters which were chosen for it.


Exactly, not the directivity indexes.



See above, they have poorer correlation and were dropped in the model.

I can't follow your argument some important connections between the single informations seems to be missing in your reasoning.

We are taking about the ability of a speaker after equalization. The equalization starting point is a linear direct sound frequency response (or something very close to that).

With the precondition of a perfectly equalized speaker (in terms of the direct sound frequency response) the scaling factor is the only difference between the power frequency response and the power DI. Such a constant has no influence on the calculation of the preference score. Both curves provide the same information in this case. Therefore there is no different outcome if you use the (scaled) power di or power frequency response to calculate the preference score.
Both di cuves are therefore the only informations in the spinorama where an equalization is already applied due to its definitions. So with the DI curves you can get an impression how the speaker behaves if it is equalized to a flat direct frequency response.
The DI cuves provide essentially no new information. You can calculate the power DI curve with the direct sound frequency response and the power frequency response. Therefore is no surprise that a good machine learning algorithm doesn't need the di curves if the corresponding none di curves are already included.

For a quick overview it is OK but it is better to look at the horizontal and vertical directivities individually.

Yes the separation of the horizontal and vertical plane can be beneficial, but I don't like the measurements where only one angle is changed. Without adding the measurements of the spinorama you can't say much about a speaker. The separation of the early reflection frequency response into horizontal and vertical adds benefits but you need an area around the reflection points like the measurements of the listening window to get some meaningful measurements. Very often there are complex patterns e.g. like the ones showed in the review of the Wharfedale Diamond 12.1. Especially in the higher frequencies, the crossover frequencies or the baffle step frequency the standard horizontal and vertical measurements lead to a false illusion of exactness, since a smaller change of one angle can lead to bigger difference in the frequency response.

 

[preload]

Hi. I’m considering purchasing B&W 702 S2 speakers. I heard them at Best Buy recently, then again at a local shop. I kept coming back to them over others. Then, while researching them on this forum, I saw a post from someone about having wasted money on them prior to knowing the importance of measurements. That surprised me. Is that a known thing? I’d love to know more so I don’t waste money. Isn’t hearing them all you need (versus measuring)?

I have a pair of older B&W 802D speakers in my living room. I came to this forum, and discovered a very strong group think among individuals who seemingly possess the ability to eyeball loudspeaker measurement charts in a way that allowed them to predict which loudspeakers would sound better. So I decided to purchase a pair of Genelec 8351b loudspeakers ($8,000/pair), which the masses here believe measure "nearly perfectly." However, no matter what I did, including calibration with the Genelec GLM software, acoustically treating my room, and adding an SVS 12" sub, they never could match the B&W's in their ability to make me say "woah that sounded good." Now, granted, they're in a different room. But Genelecs are designed to be listened to in smaller "monitoring" rooms. So there, I just wasted $8,000 so you don't have to.

At the end of the day, you should buy what sounds good to YOU in YOUR room. Don't let people on the internet tell you otherwise.

Oh, and "the science" is far from perfect on being able to correlate loudspeaker measurements with perceived sound quality. Measurements correlate supremely well with SQ with solid-state devices (DAC's, amps, etc.), but the correlation is only "ok" with transducers. The ability to sit behind a computer screen, stare at charts, and predict how a loudspeaker will sound with reasonable accuracy instead of getting into your car and driving to the dealer showroom is a fantasy that some folks think is reality.

If you'd like some unsolicited advice - see if you can find the older 800-series B&W floorstanders used or demo and take a listen. And if you can, take a listen to the other brands others have mentioned - like Revel and Kef. Who knows, you might actually like them better.

 

[BrokenEnglishGuy]

I have a pair of older B&W 802D speakers in my living room. I came to this forum, and discovered a very strong group think among individuals who seemingly possess the ability to eyeball loudspeaker measurement charts in a way that allowed them to predict which loudspeakers would sound better. So I decided to purchase a pair of Genelec 8351b loudspeakers ($8,000/pair), which the masses here believe measure "nearly perfectly." However, no matter what I did, including calibration with the Genelec GLM software, acoustically treating my room, and adding an SVS 12" sub, they never could match the B&W's in their ability to make me say "woah that sounded good." Now, granted, they're in a different room. But Genelecs are designed to be listened to in smaller "monitoring" rooms. So there, I just wasted $8,000 so you don't have to.

At the end of the day, you should buy what sounds good to YOU in YOUR room. Don't let people on the internet tell you otherwise.

Oh, and "the science" is far from perfect on being able to correlate loudspeaker measurements with perceived sound quality. Measurements correlate supremely well with SQ with solid-state devices (DAC's, amps, etc.), but the correlation is only "ok" with transducers. The ability to sit behind a computer screen, stare at charts, and predict how a loudspeaker will sound with reasonable accuracy instead of getting into your car and driving to the dealer showroom is a fantasy that some folks think is reality.

If you'd like some unsolicited advice - see if you can find the older 800-series B&W floorstanders used or demo and take a listen. And if you can, take a listen to the other brands others have mentioned - like Revel and Kef. Who knows, you might actually like them better.

but the 802d is the model who measures well... the problem are the newer models not the older one..

 

[preload]

but the 802d is the model who measures well... the problem are the newer models not the older one..

No, the 802D absolutely does NOT measure well, according to how people on this forum commonly interpret the off-axis FR measurements. You can view the "blinded" interpretations/predictions of the Stereophile measurements by folks on ASR here. Some highlights: "looks pretty poor all around," "beaming like crazy at around 1500 Hz."

Image from Rubinson/Atkinson, Stereophile Dec 11, 2005.

If transposed to the corresponding spinorama measurements, folks here would be aghast at the degree of "directivity error" and jagged on-axis response. From a measurement standpoint, the 802D should sound terrible, and a Genelec 8351B with its perfect spinorama should beat the pants off the 802D....except that it doesn't.

 

[BrokenEnglishGuy]

according to how people on this forum commonly interpret the off-axis FR measurements

That's your opinion and does not correlate with the technical performance of 802D.

 

[Sancus]

I've heard a few B&Ws and they all sound pretty mediocre to me. The treble.always seems poor. I don't know how people got the idea they ever sounded great,.doesn't make any sense at all. This anecdote may seem useless, but it's actually just as useful as all the other random individual sighted listening opinions in this thread, believe it or not.

 

[solderdude]

Hi. I’m considering purchasing B&W 702 S2 speakers ....
I’d love to know more so I don’t waste money. Isn’t hearing them all you need (versus measuring)?

I appreciate any advise you can give!

Try to see if you can audition them at home, in your house, with your music on your gear in your room the way you want to use them in all piece and quiet over a few days.
They could sound very different from what you heard in the shop.

Of course with room correction you can get it more optimal sounding if needed but requires some effort and a digital source + software.
Note... parametric EQ can fix some shortcomings but not all of them and that EQ is really only truly valid at a small listening spot.

 

[Chromatischism]

I’m gonna go out on a limb and flat out say don’t buy them. There are better value better performing speakers. Get one of those, integrate in a system with EQ/room correction capabilities, and then adjust the EQ to YOUR taste.

You can’t fix a bad speaker. You can adjust a good speaker to your liking.

I don’t think the B&W is bad, but it’s not recommendable either.

I agree with this.

Even if they did sound "good" to you during an audition (on whatever material), there is better. I'm in favor of narrowing down speaker choices based on measurements. Why? Because you'll land on better speakers that way rather than spending more time than necessary on the search.

 

[preload]

I've heard a few B&Ws and they all sound pretty mediocre to me. The treble.always seems poor. I don't know how people got the idea they ever sounded great,.doesn't make any sense at all. This anecdote may seem useless, but it's actually just as useful as all the other random individual sighted listening opinions in this thread, believe it or not.

A lot of people don't like B&W's (especially the lower end models), particularly those that frequent ASR. At the same time, a lot of people like them a lot. I don't understand why that's so difficult for people to accept.

 

[thewas]

With the precondition of a perfectly equalized speaker (in terms of the direct sound frequency response) the scaling factor is the only difference between the power frequency response and the power DI. Such a constant has no influence on the calculation of the preference score. Both curves provide the same information in this case. Therefore there is no different outcome if you use the (scaled) power di or power frequency response to calculate the preference score.

Yes, it was more convenient though for the formula to use the PIR directly because it considers also the smoothness of it, something which is done also for the on axis. By the way for the score calculation also the ER curves are used.

Yes the separation of the horizontal and vertical plane can be beneficial, but I don't like the measurements where only one angle is changed. Without adding the measurements of the spinorama you can't say much about a speaker. The separation of the early reflection frequency response into horizontal and vertical adds benefits but you need an area around the reflection points like the measurements of the listening window to get some meaningful measurements. Very often there are complex patterns e.g. like the ones showed in the review of the Wharfedale Diamond 12.1. Especially in the higher frequencies, the crossover frequencies or the baffle step frequency the standard horizontal and vertical measurements lead to a false illusion of exactness, since a smaller change of one angle can lead to bigger difference in the frequency response.

Yes, so we agree that total combined curves > horizontal & vertical plots > directivity indexes for an in depth assessment of a loudspeaker.

 

[preload]

That's your opinion and does not correlate with the technical performance of 802D.

I think a lot of people here would agree that the 802D does NOT measure well. And I have already provided direct links to actual quotes from members. So it's not really an opinion anymore. It's an observation that is verifiable.

 

[BrokenEnglishGuy]

I think a lot of people here would agree that the 802D does NOT measure well. And I have already provided direct links to actual quotes from members. So it's not really an opinion anymore. It's an observation that is verifiable.

And? You wanna a place that everyone thinks the same and aggre with you? Wtf.
You only quoted a few minority from this forum, that does mean nothing.

 

[Shazb0t]

And? You wanna a place that everyone thinks the same and aggre with you? Wtf.
You only quoted a few minority from this forum, that does mean nothing.

The directivity errors exist regardless of how you think. You seem overly agitated regarding others clearly fact based opinions, something to think about.

 

[Koeitje]

No, the 802D absolutely does NOT measure well, according to how people on this forum commonly interpret the off-axis FR measurements. You can view the "blinded" interpretations/predictions of the Stereophile measurements by folks on ASR here. Some highlights: "looks pretty poor all around," "beaming like crazy at around 1500 Hz."

Image from Rubinson/Atkinson, Stereophile Dec 11, 2005.

If transposed to the corresponding spinorama measurements, folks here would be aghast at the degree of "directivity error" and jagged on-axis response. From a measurement standpoint, the 802D should sound terrible, and a Genelec 8351B with its perfect spinorama should beat the pants off the 802D....except that it doesn't.

It doesn't sound great though. I was lucky enough to do a 1 to 1 comparison in the same room with a KEF 207 reference. Was no contest, the KEF was easily the superior speaker.

Seems you were just used to the B&W and didn't do a proper blind test. Plus the room is different. Plus expectations. I can go on and on, but your test simply wasn't good enough to draw a conclusion. Neither was mine, but at least I was in the same room and didn't own or plan to buy any of the speakers.

 

[BrokenEnglishGuy]

The directivity errors exist regardless of how you think. You seem overly agitated regarding others clearly fact based opinions, something to think about.

Every speaker created have directivity errors, regardless what you think ;], there is no perfect directivity speaker.

 

[preload]

It doesn't sound great though. I was lucky enough to do a 1 to 1 comparison in the same room with a KEF 207 reference. Was no contest, the KEF was easily the superior speaker.

I don't doubt what you heard. There are a lot of people (again, particularly on this forum) that don't like the B&W's they heard, for whatever reason. And there are lots of people who DO like B&W. And then there are studios like Abbey Road and Lucasfilm that use 800-series speakers as monitors.

Seems you were just used to the B&W and didn't do a proper blind test. Plus the room is different. Plus expectations. I can go on and on, but your test simply wasn't good enough to draw a conclusion. Neither was mine, but at least I was in the same room and didn't own or plan to buy any of the speakers.

Right, and I know the idea that a B&W speaker can be preferable to a Genelec is not welcomed by many on this forum. So, I expect these types of "oh but you didn't do it blindfolded" responses. Whereas, if someone says they heard Revel XXX or Kef XXX speakers and they sounded good, how often do we see that observation challenged with "oh but you didn't do it blindfolded."