Comparison of B & W 800 D and B & W 800 D3

[TLS Guy]

I think TLS Guy's points do have some merit, although he does deliver them with a dose of audio snobbery. Many classical recordings do have a much wider dynamic range than most pop music recordings, but there is more to it than that. Many classical recordings also have a reference point for their sound, ie they are trying to capture the sound of a certain venue. They are trying to make the music sound lifelike in the sense that is what you would hear in good seats in a concert hall. Pop music, on the other hand, isn't recorded to sound like anything that would be realistically be heard in real life. The 'scene' created by most pop music occurs in a purely psychic space. Mostly it is just recorded so all the notes, lyrics, and sound are heard clearly, and is not trying to recreate a real life acoustic space. As such, there is no reference point for the way it is supposed to sound, at least if you are not the recording engineer.

Yes, you are correct as only the creator of the album knows how it should sound. I know how an orchestras, choirs and natural instruments should sound. That is why before all this computerized measuring, I and others voiced speakers by ear for many years. Included in this thread is one that was voice by ear, and its a very good frequency response curve. I highly doubt you could voice a speaker with pop and rock music.

We are getting a little of topic, but I will say this, that I regard the 20th century and the first part of this as the "Age of Ugliness." That is what I call it. It is by no means confined to the pop culture. We have brutal architecture that Prince Charles is quite rightly always vigorously opposing. We have ugliness right across the artistic spectrum. Adding distortion to a a plucked string especially very ugly saw tooth wave forms is in fact cultural vandalism and without merit.

Now we have opera directors of a left wing bent producing gratuitous brutality to opera sets. I tried watch Tristan und Isolde form the Met recently. The set was ugly and brutal including scenes in the engine room of a war ship! This is absolute rubbish. The loony educated fools who perpetrate this nonsense near to be out on the ears fast.

 

[shadyJ]

We are getting a little of topic, but I will say this, that I regard the 20th century and the first part of this as the "Age of Ugliness." That is what I call it. It is by no means confined to the pop culture. We have brutal architecture that Prince Charles is quite rightly always vigorously opposing. We have ugliness right across the artistic spectrum. Adding distortion to a a plucked string especially very ugly saw tooth wave forms is in fact cultural vandalism and without merit.

Now we have opera directors of a left wing bent producing gratuitous brutality to opera sets. I tried watch Tristan und Isolde form the Met recently. The set was ugly and brutal including scenes in the engine room of a war ship! This is absolute rubbish. The loony educated fools who perpetrate this nonsense near to be out on the ears fast.

Sounds like what you object to is modernism. One definition of modernism is the departure from the romantic era idea that art should be beautiful. I, for one, am glad we have moved past the need for art to be beautiful. Our culture is far richer for it. I get your objection to ugliness, but I think it is shallow. The human experience is not all beautiful, and so the expression of that experience should not be beautiful.

That being said, I think Bauhaus art is garish and uninteresting.

 

[Irvrobinson]

That being said, I think Bauhaus art is garish and uninteresting.

You guys are so deep! Well, something is deep here, that's for sure.

 

[shadyJ]

You guys are so deep! Well, something is deep here, that's for sure.

Come on, do I have to add a winky emoticon after everything I am joking about to suggest it wasn't said in earnest?

 

[TLS Guy]

Sounds like what you object to is modernism. One definition of modernism is the departure from the romantic era idea that art should be beautiful. I, for one, am glad we have moved past the need for art to be beautiful. Our culture is far richer for it. I get your objection to ugliness, but I think it is shallow. The human experience is not all beautiful, and so the expression of that experience should not be beautiful.

That being said, I think Bauhaus art is garish and uninteresting.

No the human experience is not all beautiful, but great artists can express that side of life without wallowing in the muck.

 

[highfigh]

I think TLS Guy's points do have some merit, although he does deliver them with a dose of audio snobbery. Many classical recordings do have a much wider dynamic range than most pop music recordings, but there is more to it than that. Many classical recordings also have a reference point for their sound, ie they are trying to capture the sound of a certain venue. They are trying to make the music sound lifelike in the sense that is what you would hear in good seats in a concert hall. Pop music, on the other hand, isn't recorded to sound like anything that would be realistically be heard in real life. The 'scene' created by most pop music occurs in a purely psychic space. Mostly it is just recorded so all the notes, lyrics, and sound are heard clearly, and is not trying to recreate a real life acoustic space. As such, there is no reference point for the way it is supposed to sound, at least if you are not the recording engineer.

True- I may have had a flashback to my teen years, hearing "Turn that crap down!".

As I wrote, I agree that a lot of Rock and Pop aren't worth listening to and part of that is just me yelling for kids to get off my lawn but some of the music is well-recorded and in the case of some live albums/CDs/BD, the sound IS dynamic and because there's a visual reference, they can place the listener wherever they want.

 

[highfigh]

I don't find that insulting at all, generalizing may be, but not insulting.

It's far from the first time.

 

[PENG]

It's far from the first time.

Got you, but like Shady said, there's lots of truth in what he's saying. I also see your point, hence my comment about generalizing.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Here is the Stereophile 802 D3 measurements. They look pretty similar (maybe a little different) to the other 800/802 D measurements I've seen in the past.

New 802 D3:
http://www.stereophile.com/content/bowers-wilkins-802-d3-diamond-loudspeaker-measurements#djwkYEr3Lg9PVRvC.97

Here is the 800 D2:
http://www.stereophile.com/content/bampw-800-diamond-loudspeaker-measurements#EM7xRZDoXZHbTsMV.97

Here is the 802 D1:
http://www.stereophile.com/content/bw-802d-loudspeaker-measurements#y2mMqeMitPU3kTTI.97



BUT on-axis and off-axis FR don't mean EVERYTHING. After all, the $300 Infinity's on-axis and off-axis measure a lot better.

http://www.stereophile.com/content/infinity-primus-360-loudspeaker-measurements#hZD5DiJtVqPIKACF.97

 

[TLS Guy]

Here is the Stereophile 802 D3 measurements. They look pretty similar (maybe a little different) to the other 800/802 D measurements I've seen in the past.

New 802 D3:
http://www.stereophile.com/content/bowers-wilkins-802-d3-diamond-loudspeaker-measurements#djwkYEr3Lg9PVRvC.97

Here is the 800 D2:
http://www.stereophile.com/content/bampw-800-diamond-loudspeaker-measurements#EM7xRZDoXZHbTsMV.97

Here is the 802 D1:
http://www.stereophile.com/content/bw-802d-loudspeaker-measurements#y2mMqeMitPU3kTTI.97



BUT on-axis and off-axis FR don't mean EVERYTHING. After all, the $300 Infinity's on-axis and off-axis measure a lot better.

http://www.stereophile.com/content/infinity-primus-360-loudspeaker-measurements#hZD5DiJtVqPIKACF.97

The spectral decay measurement is better.

I measured those speakers very carefully last Saturday, and spent a lot of time doing it. I can not confirm John A's 5 db peak centered on 10 KHz.

I did note a slight dip in response centered on 5 KHz. The off axis response was good until 90 degrees off axis. I concur with John A that the off axis response does fall off in the higher frequencies, but still mirrors the on axis response until 90 degrees off axis.

What I heard is much more consistent with my measurements then John A's.

This speakers are not forward like the previous speakers. They are very slightly retiring, which in my view is a good fault. The sound stage is behind the plane of the speakers which is as it should be for a speaker which will be used for classical music.

The bass is much tighter and sounds lower Q than the 800 D.

My impression was of a very pleasant and non fatiguing speaker to listen to.

I still think that they should issue an active version of this speaker.

I will be back in the Twin Cities the weekend after next. My current woofer tester does not work with Windows 10. I have ordered the new just released Dayton tester and will measure the impedance curve and phase angles then.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

The spectral decay measurement is better.

Not much better. I don't think it's "statistically significant" (human variance, etc.). I think overall the D1, D2, and D3 look very similar, at least from the 3 Stereophile's measurements.

I don't see any significant differences in the 3 Stereophile measurements alone to say B&W have "FIXED" anything.

 

[TLS Guy]

Not much better. I don't think "statistically significant" (human variance, etc.). I think overall the D1, D2, and D3 look very similar, at least from the 3 Stereophile's measurements.

I don't see any significant differences in the 3 Stereophile measurements alone to say B&W have "FIXED" anything.

Well I can tell you that they don't sound the same. That midrange driver sounds a lot better and the bass is much improved. Those measurements don't tell you anything much about the quality of the bass.

I can tell you one thing, small changes to speakers can make a totally disproportionate difference to how they sound.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

... the bass is much improved.

Comparing the 802D1 vs 802D3 bass extension on Stereophile, the -3dB for the 802D1 is about 25Hz, while the -3dB for the 802D3 is about 35Hz!

802D1:
http://www.stereophile.com/content/bw-802d-loudspeaker-measurements#cctuv4BMg6ujrLVX.97

802D3:
http://www.stereophile.com/content/bowers-wilkins-802-d3-diamond-loudspeaker-measurements#HM5mlstr9tTWCykB.97

That seems like a significant difference in bass extension!!!!

Perhaps that's why you are feeling the bass is "TIGHTER" ? Because it is A LOT less? A lot less Boomy?

Are you guys seeing the same thing or am I looking at it wrong?

According to B&W, the 802D3 is supposed to be 17Hz-28kHz +/-3dB.

"Frequency Range" is supposed to be 14Hz-35kHz.

http://www.bowers-wilkins.com/Speakers/Home_Audio/800_Series_Diamond/802-D3.html

So they are saying the 802D3's F3 (-3dB) is supposed to be @ 17Hz? When Stereophile shows the F3 to be more like 35Hz?

14Hz? Are they kidding? That's like at -22dB!

 

[shadyJ]

Comparing the 802D1 vs 802D3 bass extension on Stereophile, the -3dB for the 802D1 is about 25Hz, while the -3dB for the 802D3 is about 35Hz!

802D1:
http://www.stereophile.com/content/bw-802d-loudspeaker-measurements#cctuv4BMg6ujrLVX.97

802D3:
http://www.stereophile.com/content/bowers-wilkins-802-d3-diamond-loudspeaker-measurements#HM5mlstr9tTWCykB.97

That seems like a significant difference in bass extension!!!!

Perhaps that's why you are feeling the bass is "TIGHTER" ? Because it is A LOT less? A lot less Boomy?

Are you guys seeing the same thing or am I looking at it wrong?

According to B&W, the 802D3 is supposed to be 17Hz-28kHz +/-3dB.

http://www.bowers-wilkins.com/Speakers/Home_Audio/800_Series_Diamond/802-D3.html

So they are saying the 802D3's F3 (-3dB) is supposed to be @ 17Hz? When Stereophile shows the F3 to be more like 35Hz?

Remember that room gain will shore up the low end, so the D3 will extend deeper in room than what is on that graph. Room gain will also boost the deep end, so that can make the D1 seem very heavy and perhaps bloated if it is not EQ'd. I think you will more likely get a more neutral bass response in room with the D3s than the D1s.

 

[TLS Guy]

Remember that room gain will shore up the low end, so the D3 will extend deeper in room than what is on that graph. Room gain will also boost the deep end, so that can make the D1 seem very heavy and perhaps bloated if it is not EQ'd. I think you will more likely get a more neutral bass response in room with the D3s than the D1s.

Remember it is the 800 D3 I measured and not the 802 D3.

In my measurements the speaker was 5 db down at 20 Hz. B & W claim a 3 db point of 15 Hz for this speaker. I have to take their word for it as in room bass measurement is now to not be the most reliable.

All I do know is that these speakers do not need a sub or subs for sure.

If they made an active version then you could capture the LFE channel like I can.

B & W claim impressively low distortion figures for that speaker. I will se if I can verify that claim next week.

 

[Verdinut]

Yes, you are correct as only the creator of the album knows how it should sound. I know how an orchestras, choirs and natural instruments should sound. That is why before all this computerized measuring, I and others voiced speakers by ear for many years. Included in this thread is one that was voice by ear, and its a very good frequency response curve. I highly doubt you could voice a speaker with pop and rock music.

We are getting a little of topic, but I will say this, that I regard the 20th century and the first part of this as the "Age of Ugliness." That is what I call it. It is by no means confined to the pop culture. We have brutal architecture that Prince Charles is quite rightly always vigorously opposing. We have ugliness right across the artistic spectrum. Adding distortion to a a plucked string especially very ugly saw tooth wave forms is in fact cultural vandalism and without merit.

Now we have opera directors of a left wing bent producing gratuitous brutality to opera sets. I tried watch Tristan und Isolde form the Met recently. The set was ugly and brutal including scenes in the engine room of a war ship! This is absolute rubbish. The loony educated fools who perpetrate this nonsense near to be out on the ears fast.

Greetings!
With regard to opera productions nowadays, I agree with you on the fact that we are more often than otherwise presented with rubbish staging, and as you also most likely know, productions are even worse in Vienna, Munich and many other European opera houses. They think that is the way to attract the young generation, but it's strange, you don't see a lot of young people in audiences. I know cause I also watch operas on the Mezzo channel and on PBS.
I believe that, if opera houses continue to present works with modern settings which have nothing in common with the optics of the composer and the atmosphere of the original story, they will kill opera.
Cheers,

 

[lovinthehd]

Greetings!
With regard to opera productions nowadays, I agree with you on the fact that we are more often than otherwise presented with rubbish staging, and as you also most likely know, productions are even worse in Vienna, Munich and many other European opera houses. They think that is the way to attract the young generation, but it's strange, you don't see a lot of young people in audiences. I know cause I also watch operas on the Mezzo channel and on PBS.
I believe that, if opera houses continue to present works with modern settings which have nothing in common with the optics of the composer and the atmosphere of the original story, they will kill opera.
Cheers,

Has opera ever appealed to many young people? Can't stand most of it still, may have been influenced by my father's tastes in classical music, he disliked most opera, more an instrumental guy.

When you're referring to modern operas' newest productions is this in the vein of movies with updated settings, say of Shakespeare's stories like some of the Romeo & Juliet versions?

 

[Verdinut]

No, I'm not referring to the movies with updated settings. I'm indeed referring to the real thing.
Several years ago, The Met presented Verdi's Rigoletto, which was inspired by Victor Hugo's "Le Roi s'amuse", in a Las Vegas context. The fact is that they've just repeated that ridiculous venture this year with the same opera, a Cadillac on the stage at one point and dressing of the 1930's.
If this silly trend continues, some people will stop going to the opera and go back to listening to their favorite CDs and LPs at home. As a matter of fact, people have started complaining about this. TLS Guy and myself are not the only ones!

Has opera ever appealed to many young people? It has surely appealed to a greater percentage of young people in Europe. It's a question of culture. Most opera composers originated from European countries which have had longer histories than our North American civilization.

I studied classical singing and I sang as a lyric tenor in opera productions as a passionate hobby.
My father was listening every Saturday to Met radio broadcasts, and this how I got to like opera. I eventually found that I had the vocal organ to sing in such art form. My two children, however, were not appealed very much to it.

 

[lovinthehd]

No, I'm not referring to the movies with updated settings. I'm indeed referring to the real thing.
Several years ago, The Met presented Verdi's Rigoletto, which was inspired by Victor Hugo's "Le Roi s'amuse", in a Las Vegas context. The fact is that they've just repeated that ridiculous venture this year with the same opera, a Cadillac on the stage at one point and dressing of the 1930's.
If this silly trend continues, some people will stop going to the opera and go back to listening to their favorite CDs and LPs recordings at home. As a matter of fact, people have started complaining about this. TLS Guy and myself are not the only ones!

Thanks, that's the same concept as I was referring to and that several movies have employed (but not limited to a live stage of course). Good luck with your old music I seriously wonder what those artists would do if they were born today with today's technology, though. Frozen time pieces do have value too of course, but the option can be nice.

 

[Verdinut]

Thanks, that's the same concept as I was referring to and that several movies have employed (but not limited to a live stage of course). Good luck with your old music I seriously wonder what those artists would do if they were born today with today's technology, though. Frozen time pieces do have value too of course, but the option can be nice.

Hi again,
I've just edited my previous text and added some info as to my thoughts about the unpopularity of opera with the young generation.