I have heard 802's and I have to say that for the money, I wasn't impressed at all. B&W like any other speaker has it's advantages and disadvantages in the character of sound.
What's so great about 802s from the design point of view? 3-way ported system with secondary woofer to +6db for the BSC. Good low distortion drivers, well made cabinets, so what else is new.
First, I don't know if the 802 was even set up right and in a proper acoustic space when you listened to it. The best speaker in the world will sound like garbage in a bad acoustic environment. But that is beside the point...
Please remember when discussing these issues; that I have a relatively extensive(
compared to any normal/average audio enthusiast or speaker designer) knowledge of the underlying perceptual research in regards to measured audio signals and their correlation with human hearing preference(s).
Actually, most people have a big mis-understanding of the important parameters, and just listening to something in a non-control situation can give a big mis-impression. I'll tell you that left as is, the 802 is annoying to me. The response is too flat; the treble is annoying as a result on most recordings. A well known issue in perceptual research that can be compensated with a specific shelving filter.
Now, what is special? The lack of any audible resonances and the flat response that is annoying. The lack of audible resonances already places this ahead of the vast majority of commercial and DIY designs. Resonances cause timbre distortion - one of the most offensive problems when it comes down realistic sound reproduction after most other issues have been addressed. You can't distort the timbre of the items being reproduces in a recording and expect any real level of fidelity in that sense. There is much research into resonance audibility and it's audible effects in different environments and on different signals and music. The research even defines the thresholds of audibility by specifying conditions and specific Q, frequency and relative level to main signal.
The over-all neutral response while annoying, is a positive benefit. It means you can slap on a precision EQ and add in the treble compensation and customize the BSC with a couple of shelving filters to one's perfect preference(s). Using this in this manner gives you a monopolar speaker that is far above the class of most commercial and DIY by a vast degree. I have experimented with this specific issue also, in depth.
You can argue why should anyone have to EQ..... but the FACT is that most speakers... the only differentiation of significance is their built-in EQ as chosen by the designer in the crossover design. So it comes to accepting a fixed EQ curve or taking control of the issue yourself.
Can a DIY do such a design or better? Take a look at this. Skip to page 50 for pictures.
Well I did not look, but for the sake of argument, I will presume it's equal to the 802D enclosure system. If it is, congrats for a DIYer for taking the effort -- hardly any ever do.
Plans are not published because in a DIY situation it's very unlikely that most people could manage a project of this scale.
It's not my concern as of why; I only stated that I did not know of any published in plans publicly so that some one can copy them. I agree that most would not be willing, but some probably would.
I never heard Orion myself but people that did described it as the absolute best, live like sounding system out there. Let's remember for a second who Siegfried Linkwitz is.
I've heard extremely expensive speaker systems and I have to say that it's such a subjective matter that comparing one great speaker to another is purely a mater of personal choice.
The Orion is not a monopolar speaker system, and I was limiting this thread to monopolar, as this is the standard preferred speaker for people due to placement limitations. The Orion is more sensitive to placement. It also has more potential for realism in the proper room set up and acoustics - predictable due to it's radiation patterns, low resonance design and coorelation with such attributes to the perceptual texts.
As for the subjective aspect... in a controlled scenario(same acoustics, same recordings, etc.), people almost always (in the upper 90th percentile of confidence) pick the same sound characteristics. This is demonstrated time and time again.
Now, Chris, what do you mean by “his designs too are resonant and color timbre, and can not compare with the highest sound quality monopolar speaker systems.” And which in your opinion are systems highest of the quality? Would you mind elaborating on the subject?
Nothing to elaborate upon. Zaph's designs are typical cabinet system construction with high output cabinet acoustic radiation. Timbre distortion. I don't expect most to even recognize it - but it's very audible - it's something people are used to hearing and just end up accepting it as part of an inseparable aspect of speakers when in fact it's not. When reduced to isolated variables, the effects are all to obvious. I have put much effort in this area, including using different levels of resonance speaker cabinets that are otherwise identical, compared under randomized blinded conditions in real time comparisons using remote control switching and via sem-anechoic chamber recordings with later comparisons on non resonant playback monitors using ABX randomization software. I have subject several people to these as well as myself.
As for the absolute best.. in terms of monopolar the answer is easy:YG Acoustics Anat coupled with it's bass modules. It is the single most linear speaker I know of in the commercial world. Response is better than +/- 1dB across the audio band and it's cabinets are extreme low acoustic output. But these would sound annoying and imperfect also. Simply put, recordings are not good enough to sound great in most cases as-is. You would apply the same EQ as I specified earlier and then these speakers would be ideal so far as monopolar speakers go. The B&W 802D is not as linear, but it's not that far off, and it still has a super low acoustic output cabinet.
Thanks.
Actually, I am pretty sure that if Ryan would want to build his 2-way (which I suspect he will in a future) in to a 3 or 3.5 way system it would probably equal or better 802, at list in the cabinetmaking aspect.
You must be talking about spkr_blder's design. Well, I would have to see 3rd party cabinet vibration analysis as well as a full set of other data to make any kind of guesses here. Until then I have no opinion to state.
If you had an opportunity to try an 802 in the proper acoustic environment along with a DSP equalizer, you would likely not want to leave without the set up.
-Chris
