Info on B&W 802 Series 1

[killdozzer]

I’ve never heard the Matrix. But I recall people (like The Audio Critic) had a lot more respect for them because they measured a lot better than the fancy Diamond series.

I usually read people saying that Diamonds are more "analytical" and Matrix are most often described as something you could listen for a long time. I can't compare, Diamonds are not available even in all those B&M audio stores that still endure in my town.

I'm thinking of a new session for the upcoming weekend, the weather is suppose to be bad so why not... I'll switch between 802 and LS50 for the obvious difference. I want to see what is this sense of a "big" sound I get with some speakers. I'm suspecting it'll mostly have to do with the room and perhaps not the speakers themselves.

I do think 802's are well made, there is something about them. I'm wondering are there any parts that would need replacing regarding the Xover?

 

[Swerd]

I do think 802's are well made, there is something about them. I'm wondering are there any parts that would need replacing regarding the Xover?

When people ask this question, I respond with one of my favorite lines:

If it ain't broke… don't fix it.

I trust that B&W put good quality crossover parts into their 800 series speakers. I believe, without checking, that any capacitors they used were the long-lasting metalized film type, not the electrolytic type that dry out or fail with time.

 

[TLS Guy]

When people ask this question, I respond with one of my favorite lines:

If it ain't broke… don't fix it.

I trust that B&W put good quality crossover parts into their 800 series speakers. I believe, without checking, that any capacitors they used were the long-lasting metalized film type, not the electrolytic type that dry out or fail with time.

Except that if it is the same as the 800 which I expect it is, there will be a gratuitous massive electrolytic cap in series with the woofers, as DC blocking caps. My friend Phil had one of these fail in one of his 200s. This rendered the woofer silent until I removed the offending cap. I don't think there is a need for this cap now, if there ever was. I think those caps were also limiting the low bass out put and will do over time. In this case I see every reason to remove those DC blocking caps.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I usually read people saying that Diamonds are more "analytical" and Matrix are most often described as something you could listen for a long time. I can't compare, Diamonds are not available even in all those B&M audio stores that still endure in my town.

I'm thinking of a new session for the upcoming weekend, the weather is suppose to be bad so why not... I'll switch between 802 and LS50 for the obvious difference. I want to see what is this sense of a "big" sound I get with some speakers. I'm suspecting it'll mostly have to do with the room and perhaps not the speakers themselves.

I do think 802's are well made, there is something about them. I'm wondering are there any parts that would need replacing regarding the Xover?

What I’ve heard over the years was that the Diamond series became inaccurate and bright sounding because of the spike in the treble around 10kHz, whereas the original Matrix was accurate sounding.

As for needing replacement parts, I think that is a risk of very old components, although I’ve heard speakers lasting 40 years.

Personally I would buy only relatively newer components.

 

[Art Vandelay]

I usually read people saying that Diamonds are more "analytical" and Matrix are most often described as something you could listen for a long time. I can't compare, Diamonds are not available even in all those B&M audio stores that still endure in my town.

The opposite is more true actually. The Matrix series was very "analytical" due mostly to the overall tuning with a slight excess of energy in the 3-6kHz region, both on and off axis. The Stereophile review explains...https://www.stereophile.com/floorloudspeakers/506/index.html

 

[TLS Guy]

The opposite is more true actually. The Matrix series was very "analytical" due mostly to the overall tuning with a slight excess of energy in the 3-6kHz region, both on and off axis. The Stereophile review explains...https://www.stereophile.com/floorloudspeakers/506/index.html

View attachment 29261

I was looking for and FR on those, but could not find one. That is exactly how that series of speakers sounded to me. However it is a pretty good FR.

The OP is talking about the series 1 which were sealed and not ported.

Mid and HF would be identical on all the B &W speakers that had that same head unit.

Of note is that there is bass ripple. B & W do seem to do their bass alignments like that and that is actually my biggest criticism. I heard a a recent B & W at Hi Fi Sound in Minneapolis and they are still doing it. I really dislike that alignment. The only B & W speaker I can be certain does not have it are the 800 D3s, as I have measured them.

The slight rise in energy is associated with cone breakup as the speakers start to beam in that area.

But the OP almost certainly has come across a better speaker then he had had before.

 

[TLS Guy]

I usually read people saying that Diamonds are more "analytical" and Matrix are most often described as something you could listen for a long time. I can't compare, Diamonds are not available even in all those B&M audio stores that still endure in my town.

I'm thinking of a new session for the upcoming weekend, the weather is suppose to be bad so why not... I'll switch between 802 and LS50 for the obvious difference. I want to see what is this sense of a "big" sound I get with some speakers. I'm suspecting it'll mostly have to do with the room and perhaps not the speakers themselves.

I do think 802's are well made, there is something about them. I'm wondering are there any parts that would need replacing regarding the Xover?

I did give the LS50 a long listen recently. I gave them a long audition with a Mozart piano concerto. I thought they were far from being a bad speaker. I did however note a definite brittleness to the piano sound which became more irritating with longer listening. Part of this was probably due to the high 3 db point of 79 Hz. That really is too high for listening without a sub. Also the crossover is on the low side. I would have thought a small metal cone like that should be able to get to the 3.5 to 4 KHz range and cover the speech discrimination band and not have to put a crossover well in the speech discrimination band. I know this is possible from my work the the JW driver. With a bit more dedicated work I think that speaker could become a real world beater. It showed a lot of promise but fell short. I felt the design showed a lot of potential for improvement.

 

[Art Vandelay]

I was looking for and FR on those, but could not find one. That is exactly how that series of speakers sounded to me. However it is a pretty good FR.

The OP is talking about the series 1 which were sealed and not ported.

I also owned a pair for a while, and they were a very good speakers in their day.

The slight rise in energy is associated with cone breakup as the speakers start to beam in that area.

But the OP almost certainly has come across a better speaker then he had had before.

I think it's from the tweeter, not the mid, because the off-axis plots show beaming down at 2kHz, and the waterfall is very clean through that crossover region. The tweeter's lobe is also very broad in that 3-6kHz region, compounding the issue a bit, depending on room dimensions and acoustics. Fwiw, my 801FS's shared this trait too.

Back in the early 2000's I was able to listen to N800's and Matrix 801's side-by-side and the N800's were definitely the smoother sounding of the two, even with a higher measured treble energy above 8kHz. and the N800's don't sound substantially different from the 800D / 800D2 imho.

I agree though re woofer-mid integration issue, although it can be ameliorated with positioning and boundary reinforcement, but the problem doesn't seem to exist in the latest D3 series, although there can still a slight tonal imbalance in the upper mids due to the combination of high crossover and the +180 degree time alignment of the tweeter which further reduces off-axis energy in the 2-3kHz region.

 

[killdozzer]

I did give the LS50 a long listen recently. I gave them a long audition with a Mozart piano concerto. I thought they were far from being a bad speaker. I did however note a definite brittleness to the piano sound which became more irritating with longer listening. Part of this was probably due to the high 3 db point of 79 Hz. That really is too high for listening without a sub. Also the crossover is on the low side. I would have thought a small metal cone like that should be able to get to the 3.5 to 4 KHz range and cover the speech discrimination band and not have to put a crossover well in the speech discrimination band. I know this is possible from my work the the JW driver. With a bit more dedicated work I think that speaker could become a real world beater. It showed a lot of promise but fell short. I felt the design showed a lot of potential for improvement.

Would have guessed that from your preferred listening material alone. For me, there's more thrill to the little LS50 than to the 802's. B&W was interesting in its own right, but not my personal choice. The most powerful urge they induce in me is to restore them like some old Cadillacs, not really to listen to them. Funny, I know. I do plan to test the LS50 with a sub, but even now they are a better choice for my music.

The best way to describe my listening experience to someone like you is that 802's Matrix are speakers I'd use to listen Yo-Yo Ma on. In fact, having said that, he'll be on my list for the upcoming weekend listening session. I see them as a cello speaker.

 

[JerryLove]

The best way to describe my listening experience to someone like you is that 802's Matrix are speakers I'd use to listen Yo-Yo Ma on. In fact, having said that, he'll be on my list for the upcoming weekend listening session. I see them as a cello speaker.

Until I saw that used prices had basically doubled since I owned mine: I *strongly* considered building by home theater with 801M2/3's up front and 802M's in every other [non ceiling] location.

 

[killdozzer]

When people ask this question, I respond with one of my favorite lines:

If it ain't broke… don't fix it.

I trust that B&W put good quality crossover parts into their 800 series speakers. I believe, without checking, that any capacitors they used were the long-lasting metalized film type, not the electrolytic type that dry out or fail with time.

yes, but what if it's half way through so it still plays just not quite as it should?

 

[Art Vandelay]

yes, but what if it's half way through so it still plays just not quite as it should?

I would definitely replace the caps and where possible, replace electro's with film types.