Article: Moving To The B&W 802 D4

[MHWilliford]

View full article

[MHWilliford]

29 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Hi @MHWilliford, thanks so much for the guest write-up of your new B&W 802 D4! I'll always have a soft spot for these speakers, as they were my second pair of real high end speakers. I had the Nautilus 802 and loved them. When I moved into a smaller place a couple years after college I had to sell them, in favor of a headphone system. That was a sad day. 

 

I'm happy to read the 802s are an even better speaker today than when I had them. 

It was my pleasure Chris.  Thank you for having me.  I am hoping to acquire the new Arender A15 sometime in the next few months and maybe we can do a guest column on that addition to my system.  It might be particularly interesting to readers in that I will be simultaneously exploring the sonic benefits of transferring streamer/server duties from my PC to the Aurender (are those benefits real to my ears?) as well as pitting the Aurender's internal DAC (which will reportedly allow filter adjustments on both the digital processing and analog output stages) against the DA2 that is built into my McIntosh C2700.  Thank you again for the opportunity, and for building and maintaining this site.

[MHWilliford]

44 minutes ago, botrytis said:

Interesting. I have heard the D3 and D4, side by side, at a local dealer and came away with the D3 was better. I felt the D4, was just too treble forward and piercing, for my ears. The D3 seemed more balanced. This was all done on the same equipment, all McIntosh.

 

That said, everyone has different likes. I am happy the OP likes them.

 

Nice, insightful read.

This is one of the most relevant and objective comments I have ever read in post reactions or discussion forums.  Part of my migration to the 802D4's is that I initially auditioned 802D3's late last summer, just as the D3's were no longer in production or in stock (the pair I listened to were special editions with the high-gloss wood finish, and were not what I wanted from a furniture perspective, otherwise I'd have brought them home with me).  I agree that they combined the silky highs of my previous 804D2's and the very cohesive and present bass of the 802D4's.  Unfortunately for me, buying D3's was not an option.  I also think Bowers & Wilkins did all of us who's spouses weigh-in on speaker aesthetics a big favor by ditching the D3's clunky combined oval-shaped bass grill for the D4's individual grills.  It is a big improvement to my eyes.  But back to the essence of your comment - if I could do a test and potentially opt for the older tweeter tuning, would I?  I might.  I would have to listen to a spectrum of the various genres and listening levels I normally consume, but it is possible.  The fact that I now feel my DAC needs to be optimization may be proof, but then again it may be proof that my amplification and speakers have now significantly exceeded the level of my source (streaming through home PC) and DAC (the C2700's built-in DAC).  This is where I intend to upgrade next.  To that end, do you recall the source and DAC that was used in your listening session?  Thanks so much for the comment - very provocative.

[MHWilliford]

5 minutes ago, botrytis said:

I have a soft spot for stand mount speakers, I am looking forward to hearing the 805 D4's, which I haven't yet.

I did have an opportunity to listen to a pair of 805D4's the day I went in to order my 802's.  They were extremely impressive.  I still can't believe the bass they were able to produce.  I honestly had to ask my dealer if a sub was in play.  Not to say this would make your RELs irrelevant, but for someone who needed to or wanted to go without a sub in even a medium-sized room, I would say go for it.  That said, the tweeters I believe to be identical, though they may be voiced differently.  I understand you caution around edginess, and of course would not make a purchase of this magnitude without an audition.

[MHWilliford]

1 hour ago, botrytis said:

I don't need subs, in my room (my office) with the Revels. They do go plenty deep, but bought the subs, when the Revels were in our front room listening area, which is like 20 ft by 25 ft.  I decided to be selfish and keep them in my office, the subs were moved up with them.

 

The Revels were my most expensive purchase I have done for audio. 

 

 

Just a bit more follow-up on the sound signature of the D4's vs. D2's/D3's.  I was trying to pay particular attention to the high-end and what kind of reaction I was having to the music this morning, and predictably it really varies with music selection and recording quality.  This is why I believe these speakers to be telling monitors.  Examples for consideration:  The Doobie Brothers Toulouse Street album includes tracks that can come forward with some electric guitar brightness in places - not cringe-worthy mind you, but feeling perhaps a little over-emphasized.  Some of the vocals on the other hand came alive as never before.  I found that dialing-in -2dB treble through the C2700 produced a good balance.  Conversely, Ed Harlow's Two Views is just stunning and as near-perfect a recording as I can ever remember listening to with the treble flat.  Likewise Supertramp's Crime of the Century (Qobuz 2014 remaster - 192/24) is stunning, with a great tonal balance achieved at -1dB treble.  Again, the level of overall detail revealed compared with their 804D2 predecessors is exactly what you'd expect jumping two frame sizes and two generations of technology advancement - good and immediately perceivable.  I say all of this to reinforce the conclusions of my review and also recognize your observation regarding D3 vs. D4.  It depends on what you are listening to! :)

[MHWilliford]

Room treatment is worthy for inclusion in the discussion. I feel that more and more people are accepting this as legit.  No rational person can make snake oil claims against room treatment - it is measurable and immediately palpable.  My decidedly non-audiophile wife (except that she endorses my sickness) walked into the room after adding 8 simple 2ftx4ftx2in panels and said "Wow - that's an amazing difference - I'm coming in here to make calls and think."  And she has.  How does this relate to the discussion?  One - room treatments will make a difference in perceived highs "loudness" for the simple reason that fewer reflected sound waves reaching your ears is going to reduce the probability that any given listener reaches their individual overload threshold.  Two - I did not mention this before, but I used to toe my D2's in to intersect at a point about 6 inches behind my head.  This was in the 804D2 instruction manual, and I found it necessary to get the imaging and highs definition that I wanted.  With the 802D4's - no - not necessary at all - very minor if any toe-in has been required, with the upside being the soundstage is much broader, extending well outside the listening triangle.

[MHWilliford]

3 hours ago, Gavin1977 said:

Would be interested to hear comparison against other brands of speakers you’ve owned… did you consider Wilson’s for example?

Hi Gavin - this is a great question, and I went into this upgrade process open-minded and with several contenders - some that I will go so far to say I'd sold myself on in advance before listening, and yet the Bowers & Wilkins 802 D4's came out on top for my taste.  First were the Wilson Audio Sabrina X.  I was ready to make the switch based on reputation, build quality, and so many references to Wilson in other's reference systems. I found that they had a very nice, balanced sound, but were not a big jump in bass performance over the 804D2's and were quite a bit brighter.  Bear in mind, I have hyper-acousis in my left ear, so I am very sensitive to sibilance, even at lower listening levels.  It should also be noted that I am a critical low-level listener.  Rarely do my listening levels exceed 75 dB.  When I listened to the Sabrina X, I also listened to Wilson-Benesch, which I liked quite a bit though I found the value proposition steep for my wallet, and the sound maybe a little lean, but very much a speaker that impressed me and would suit certain ears well.

 

Then there was a brief lay-off in the process due to life's other priorities, but the next demo session was even better in several ways.  Number one, I was pitting 802D3's (the D4's had not yet been announced) against Magico A3's and also Sonus-Faber Olympica-Nova III's.  Again, I was fully-prepared to be won-over and walk out of the store that day with a pair of any of these contenders.  Number two, my son, who is a musician (guitar and viola) and possessing much better hearing than me came along for the trip (we visited some guitar shops as well :) ).  This gave me a neutral reference (he has not yet fallen victim to any serious brand loyalties) to check myself against, and we'd prepared a pretty comprehensive track list of things we'd been listening to on a regular basis that were intended to test upper registers, lower registers, and different genres.  Oh - the third and fourth things about this audition that made it very relevant was the amplification that was used (McIntosh C2700 and MC462) is identical to what I have, and even the listening room was very similar in size and finish - smallish at about 12ft x 12ft, and furnished like a TV room, which is the same as our home listening space.

 

The short story is the 802D3's bested the A3's and the Olympica-Nova III's in bass performance with ease.  My son and I looked at each other with reality-check expressions a couple of times as if to ask each other how there could be such a gap at similar price points, but there clearly was.  The A3 bass was a bit more rounded and would occasionally seem boomy by comparison, which makes no sense given that it is a sealed cabinet design, but this was clearly heard by both my son and me.  The Nova III bass performance was closer to the 802's but ultimately I felt less agile but still a worthy contender.   With regard to highs the Magicos were very nice, maybe just a touch less resolving, but certain to sound better to some sets of ears. The Nova III highs were quite a bit more subtle and just too far back in the sound for me, but again, might be just right to some.  

[MHWilliford]

44 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

One of my favorite speakers of all time. 
 

Lord have Mercy!!!  That is just sick!!!  I can feel the thump looking at them!

[MHWilliford]

1 hour ago, cjf said:

Nice write up.

 

It would be interesting to hear the 802D3 next to the new 802D4's. I'm a B&W fan myself. I owned and very much enjoyed a pair of 803D2's for several years using several different forms of amplification.

 

Before purchasing my current pair of speakers I compared them directly with the 802D3's. I walked into the dealer pretty much convinced that I was going to buy the 802D3's having just owned the 803D2 for several years.

 

It was an interesting experience to ultimately end up being seduced by the Magico S3's instead. For my musical/listening preferences I found the Magico to be a bit more laid back and less forward sounding than the 802D3 was. At first I listen of the D3 this forwardness (to my ears) was very exciting and impressive to hear but ultimately I chickened out getting them in fear of that more forward and exciting sound being too much of a good thing over the long haul and during longer listening sessions (4-6hrs).

 

One of my favorite speakers has always been the 802 from D1 & D2 era so I always enjoying reading others thoughts on the newer generation D3 & D4 models to get an idea on a larger audiences opinion compared to my experiences hearing them.

 

I was going to ask what the Amp was being used but I think you mention MC462 in your reply elsewhere. Seems a popular choice for the B&W's.

Great thoughts - I would love to hear those Magicos of yours.  I love their approach to designing and manufacturing loudspeakers. Yes, in a perfect world I wish I could have listened to the D3 and D4 side by side and picked the one I liked the best.  It may well have been the D3 - BUT - due the timing, the D3 was not really an option (only one set on the floor in the "wrong" finish) and the D4s were not shipping yet. I took the leap of faith that the sound would not be too much different, and mostly, I think that is right.  The D4s do strike me as a bit more forward and bright, but that really is only a problem on certain recordings or genres.  In these cases, about -3dB of treble adjustment puts me in a good place.  I am really excited to try using different combinations of digital and analogue filters once I get my hands on an Aurender A15.

[MHWilliford]

42 minutes ago, mfsoa said:

Although my brother is a dealer, he hasn't been able to put any of the "D4s" out yet. 

 

Congrats on the speakers!!

 

I am very eager to hear the 805s as I am thinking about a change - I've done and enjoyed my time w/ Maggies but my wife loves more traditional room-loading kind of bass. Fortunately I get to hear Sonus Faber, Revel and soon-to-be B&W standmounts.  Those Olympica Nova 1s are puuurrrrty.

 

I spend 0% of my listening time with my face 1 meter directly in front of the tweeter so I don't care how that measures. I'm sure I've lost more HF hearing response than any amount that B&W may have tailored in.

 

Time to have fun and not fuss

Thank you and trust me, after waiting 5 months from order placement, I have been happy to have these beauties in hand!  The 805D4 standmounts lasted one day in my local hifi store (small town of 100k), and they were just extremely impressive.  You wife will love how they look as well!

[MHWilliford]

This is a classic audiophile topic producing a range of opinions that run the full gamut from completely subjective to completely objective.  I do think both speaker break-in and listening-adaptation are involved, science supports the idea that both would be at play.  Now, how much of which is going on - that is harder to quantify since it has been proven in the context of many other audiophile discussion topics that we can not always measure and/or specify what we hear.   All that said, the quandary is this - how do you trust an in-store demo to translate to long-term in-home happiness?  My suggestions, based on 3 major speaker upgrades over 4 decades are as follows:

• Upgrading speakers should be undertaken as a process, not an impulse buy. 
• Start by casually observing as broad a net of speakers as you can reasonably consider.
• If you (or your partner) are influenced by aesthetics, own that from the start - don't waste your time on speakers that are not going to make it in your front door.
• Conversely, do NOT shut-out speakers that you believe to be beyond your budget (I'm talking reasonable flexibility here, not orders of magnitude).  You may be shocked to find that the level of satisfaction you can obtain is worth obtaining.
• Once you have begun to develop what I would reasonably classify as a "crush" on a speaker or speakers (in my most recent upgrade cycle that included Wilson Sabrina X, Magico A3/A5, and Olympica Nova III/V) then you are ready to go audition.
• Try your best to audition where the set-up and room can most closely resemble your own.  We all obsess over how everything else in our system sounds - how can that be ignored when we audition speakers?
• Be sure to cover a very broad spectrum in your auditions.  Instead of listening to 10 tracks for 5 minutes each, listen to 50 for 1 minute of targeted testing.  Know the passages to go to in your favorite music - some that challenge your current speakers, and some that are well-played by your current speakers. 
• The point is not to pitch the candidate speakers softballs - use your time to make sure you are finding real improvement over what you currently have and also to make sure the new speaker can deliver on passages that are already within your current speaker's capabilities.
• When you find the speaker that broadens the spectrum of tracks/passages that sound great AND improves on tracks/passages you already though sounded great on your current speakers, then you are on it.

[MHWilliford]

39 minutes ago, Iving said:

 

in 2011 I got the rotted foam surrounds of my Snell Type A III woofers replaced by an old school guy in Romford (UK) = Dave Smith aka DK loudspeakers. He had quite a reputation as you may see e.g. here - especially for rebuilds and solving problems others wouldn't take on. Old KEF employee it was said. As I took my lower cabinets away with me following repair, he told me to expect the drivers to be stiff for a while - with the barely veiled implication that I would be able to hear what he was talking about. I didn't - but probably because my system was built only very gradually behind these wonderful creations - not because he was wrong. I had/have no reason to be doubtful of someone with his kind of experience.

I too believe break-in is a thing.  It simply makes sense from a mechanical and mechanics of materials perspective.  Now - can we hear it?  That is another discussion and yes - I also believe our hearing does attenuate or "normalize" a specific sound signature over time (this would be the aural equivalent of the way our eyes adjust to a specific color balance), thus our total experience with new speakers in the first weeks and months is very likely a combination of these effects.    

 

B&W state that temperature stabilization is also a thing.  Damping fluids are used in some of the drivers that need to come-up to room temperature and to properly distribute.

[MHWilliford]

20 hours ago, Therandyman said:

I’m just the opposite.  I listened to the 802D4’s but bought the 805D4’s and an SVS 2000 sub.  I love the 805’s with home theater, but for some reason, I can’t get excited over them for two channel stereo.  Maybe it is my McIntosh electronics that are the cause.  Anyway, I am returning the 805’s and replacing them with Klipsch La Scala AL5’s.  If those don’t do the trick, I may next try the 802 D4’s.  From my demo, in a retailer’s un-enhanced listening room, they were fabulous!  I was trying to save space with the 805’s over the 802’s, with the opportunity to upgrade later, but the La Scala’s are even larger than the 802’s!

I certainly understand the desire to have the mini-monitors from a visual impact perspective, but this result is not surprising given my own experience.  My previous speakers, B&W 804D2's were very very sweet.  Excellent highs and midrange, and while the bass was good in many instances, sometimes I found it lacking some punch when I was set-up in larger rooms (much less so in my current 12 x 12 listening room).  To address that, I added a PV1-D, which did help quite a bit, though I found myself constantly fussing with all of the controls - high-pass crossover, polarity, gain, etc.  This sent me to looking at larger speakers, and while the 804's + PV1D woofer area and on-paper performance next to the 802's would seem to be very similar, in practice they are not.  The 802's are substantially better - more cohesive, more realistic, and nothing to fuss with regarding settings.  I suspect the difference is due to the direct integration - i.e. the bass is literally wired into the crossover, and also the cabinet contribution.  The 802's have a much larger "chest cavity" from which to emanate those low notes.  I would strongly urge you to audition them.  As far as the McIntosh factor goes, I run a C2700/MC462 combo and couldn't be more pleased with that tube/solid-state combination.  This is not to say that other brands or McIntosh options could not sound better - I just do not feel any deficiency there (except for the possibility of the C2700's modular DA2 DAC).

[MHWilliford]

On 5/5/2022 at 4:03 PM, Rexp said:

Just trying to help you, if you've not disabled the dsp, its gonna sound off.

 

I don't understand how we can even think about having a serious discussion of speaker evaluation via YouTube.  Host room acoustics, microphone type and placement, and recording type/processing, etc. present endless sound coloration possibilities.  I am not saying YouTube music is useless.  By all means if it sounds good to you, listen and enjoy - but until there is a heck of an effort by some online store to standardize what we hear "virtually", speaker comparison/auditioning on YouTube seems very risky in terms of making a making a major purchase that you will be happy with in your own listening environment.  And yes, the same applies to evaluating recording qualities.

[MHWilliford]

I went through the same 802 vs. 803 thought process, and even though my room is smallish (~13ft x 13ft) decided that since these may well be the last speakers I buy, I did not want to fall short on "integrated" bass.  This was reinforced by the fact that when we "downsize" (kids are out there in the world creating havoc now) I'd like to have a little larger room in our next house to accommodate more people for movies, watching football, etc. (sorry purists - close your ears) - up to 20ft x 20ft or so. I do feel these speakers are a bit big for my room, so depending on your room size, you may want to bias your thoughts accordingly.  I did not know that B&W was doing such a good job with integrating their subs these days, but all things equal, I feel safer with an integrated speaker doing it all.  You also mentioned the 803's smaller turbine head and given how much of what we listen to comes from there, I didn't want to risk not having that full "flagship experience - though I believe Bowers & Wilkens now touts that the 801 midrange driver is even better than the 802 version now, so there's that.

 

I can tell you that I am STILL (one year on) being impressed on a regular basis by the 802's presentation of tracks/albums that I have not previously played on it (many times with no intention of seeing what a track sounded like with the new speakers - instead just being "struck" during casual listening while I work), and a lot of that tends to be enhanced bass presence and resolution.  Sometimes it is soundstage width and general clarity, which I would attribute mostly to the midrange/treble, bearing in mind that I also moved to an Aurender N200 (from my PC running Roon), which did produce it's own incremental improvement in clean, well-resolved presentation.

 

So what would I do if I was doing it all over?  With the very positive reviews the 803's have received, I would certainly think very hard about that option if I knew I was going to stay in this smaller listening room.  That said, I know those bass increments - those presented in the specs that is - between models is small from speaker to speaker as you move up and down the line.  I moved up two steps and two generations (from 804D2 to 802D4) and there is no way I'd want to go back.  Even running the B&W PV1-D, with it's 2x8" drivers and dedicated amplification paired with the 804D2's, there is no comparison.  The 802D4's offer much more cohesive, palpable, believable bass.  I suspect the 803D3's would get you most if not almost all the way there in a small room like mine, but physics being what it is, there has to be a room size where the difference between the 803 and 802 is going to be noticeable depending on your particular program material.  I wish I could tell you about B&W sub integration and that you will never want to fiddle with it once it is set-up, but I am biased based on my PV1-D experience.  Don't get me wrong, it helped, but I did keep the app open most of the time to tweak for this or that source.  With the 802's, I never feel that temptation, only the feeling of "Oh God, that's lovely bass reproduction".  Even now, I am listening to Specchio Veneziano Reali Vivaldi, and the strings realism during low reaches is just so damned pleasing. 

 

I hope this helps and I'm happy to answer more questions.  I'd love to do a write-up about the N200 as well, but I am restoring a '65 Mustang and my writing time has evaporated. :)

 

Mark

[MHWilliford]

I agree with your thinking.  And yes - the speakers are beastly, but they also have such a well-designed caster/support system and packaging that the mass really is quite manageable.  The key point is "easy to add a sub to the 802, not so easy to turn 803's into 802's".  Given your room size, I think the 802 is the right choice, and while I cannot speak to your movie watching preferences - some folks love really emphasized bass effects when watching action films as an example - if what you like is realism, you may be pleasantly surprised by what the 802's muster on their own (mine are powered by an MC462).  Excited to hear about what you choose and how you like it!

[MHWilliford]

Zippy service compared to my wait (ordered in Sep of 21, delivered Feb of 22).  Thank goodness supply-chain issues are easing.  Very excited for you.  The MA9500 looks very substantial as well - eager to hear your impressions.  What is your primary source, and do you run an outboard DAC or will you depend on the DA2 module (as I currently do)?

[MHWilliford]

Having recently gone through a very similar upgrade path, I will strongly second the emotion (thanks Smokey) that you are going to find the 802's extremely revealing, and this will not have the benefit (as I hear it, realizing this is a pure taste issue) of the C2700 tube-based pre-amp.  This means you will hear the best from great recordings and the flaws in poor ones.  You will also hear your source better than ever.  After about 2 years of considering all the pros and cons, I first bought a Weiss 502, thinking the DAC was now the weak link in my system.  After conducting double-blind listening tests (including my son's young musician ears as a check to my 60-something year old sensors) we determined the Weiss was not delivering a consistently discernable difference.  So I went to the next most-likely culprit, my (undedicated) PC running Roon.  I trialed an Aurender N200 and no listening test was even required.  The upgrade in delivered music quality was instantaneously recognizable.  Incidentally, it was recommended by Aurender that I connect to the DA2 via coax vs. USB and that has been absolutely issue-free, whereas the USB drivers for McIntosh can sometimes be testy.  Now I wish I had the Weiss back, as I suspect with the premium source, it would be a great and audible pairing, but that (or perhaps a T+A DAC 200) must wait for next year's budget.

 

I've not really liked Conductor vs. Roon as an HMI.  Musically it is fantastic, just clunkier to operate.  Compromises.  Maybe in the future Aurender will work with Roon - this is rumored but we'll see.  I your case skoor, I would seriously consider a purpose-built, completely dedicated PC (isolated LAN, isolated USB and or COAX, isolated power supplies, etc) running Roon and streaming either Qobuz or Tidal.  This is going to deliver you more musical joy given the construct of your new system.  

 

As far as a DA3 is concerned, I am a little frustrated that McIntosh does not seem to be keeping pace, though they seem to be doing so (at least to a degree) in new standalone products.  Regardless, it seems unlikely to me that a module can deliver all the advantages of a stand-alone DAC, though I would love to be wrong about that and simply upgrade my module as well.

 

Eager to hear more about things once you get up and running!

[MHWilliford]

Sounds good as a starting point. You are going to find that your integrated amp plus the 802’s is well beyond not too shabby. Note the use of the Melco digital server in the setup you reference. Most folks find the digital source does make a difference.  That improvement is something to look forward to, and as you say, constantly evolving, so waiting a while to address your digital source will just provide, better, more affordable options. 

[MHWilliford]

Understanding your connection preferences (though I would advocate for a hard-wired LAN), to achieve sound quality that is in line with the rest of your system, my experience is you will need to move-up to a purpose-built machine (whether by you or others) that will provide:

1) Galvanically isolated LAN (wifi may mitigate this, but is widely debated)

2) Isolated DAC output - especially if USB.

3) Separate power supplies for the CPU, Outputs, etc. - i.e. as many isolated power supplies as you can reasonably afford - this really helps the noise floor and minimizes signal cross-talk between the computer's functions.

4) High-quality, singular clock (does not have to be external, though the ability to be able to move to this in the future might be desirable) to eliminate signal competition between clocks (most PCs, Macs, etc. have several clocks onboard) and ensure highly accurate timing, which effects how accurately digital signals are transmitted.

 

My suggestion is to watch some Hans Beekhuyzen vids on YouTube.  He has an excellent technical grasp, and maintains several systems at different levels.  Based on my own experience of using a nice PC-based streamer/server vs. the Aurender N200, you will want to shoot for something in that neighborhood to maximize the potential of your system.  There are Roon-ready options that fit the bill, and even Aurender is rumored to be Roon compatible in the future.

 

Best -Mark