I wouldn't know if I would call that one of the best rooms or not but it certainly was a good sound! In fact I was positively impressed by the small speaker line they have.
They are certainly expensive for the form and size, but at least they are worth sonically in my opinion!
Those speakers only need a pre signal feed and didn't study that source but pretty sure it was high end and high cost modern media player, was lucky to be alone in shop so had it for myself with high spl demo, but was also honest state i can't afford price tag so got three tracks demoed. The first two tracks was unknown for me so have no reference other that it sounded over average good but third track was high end recording "Bird on a wire" Jennifer Warnes i could reference. When i got home played Bird on a wire and did sense that to get same high quality sound as in shop i had to route left and right signal to my right speaker and position my head at same 30cm distance where speaker was dialed in with a measurement microphone, see below IR/SR my speaker have in that position.
Those Beolab have plenty drivers and advanced beam width control steering so when dialed in to room and set to ego mode they really really good. Here a blog link to "Beam Width Control" B&O Tech: What is “Beam Width Control”? earfluff and eyecandy and here normal company site BeoLab 90 - Bang & Olufsen?s High End Floor Loudspeaker. - Bang & Olufsen.
Attachments
Last edited:
I wonder if B&W has to pay magazines to say these things?
Same type of reviews went down with Diamond series, although to me it sounded poor and probably the reason why you re-did your cross-over network in the first place.
I haven't heard D3 in person, but a big B&W fan friend of mine which I consider highly regarded in the audiophile community, said they sounded very disappointing, alluding, worse than the diamond series.
This translates to my question marks about raving reviews like this one.
I guess I need to hear them for myself!
After all, If I look at how much research is seemed to have been going on with B&W and the serious approach they take to make things very different from normal, D3 seem to represent from what I can see a significant improvement, build quality they describe it as supreme...so for those reasons....I need to listen to them.
Unfortunately there was no presence of B&W at the Chicago audio show, which surprised me very much!
Even Thiel was there, which BTW, god please, anybody stay away from it!!! If Mr. Thiel would come back to life, he would shoot at everybody looking at what they did to his fantastic brand and quality!!
I use the Harbeth P3esr with a sub. very good indeed! what was the small speaker at axpona? SHL5+?
Hard to say what exact model, but it was the small 2 ways they offer now.
It sounded really good. To describe better: it had bigger base than what you think a box that size could produce, but unlike Raidho D1.1 which was terrible in that sense, the bass was accurate and not overwhelming at all.
Speaker maintained a clear presentation, nice soundstage and full harmonic presentation.
I didn't feel it was overly colored either, very realistic presentation given size and price.
Yes, they are expensive for what you bring home in terms of material, nevertheless in terms of quality I feel they were ahead by miles compared to other similar products even priced higher than that.
I really never had a chance to listen to this brand before and I have to say I do like their products so far.
Edit: As a matter of fact, I googled your model and I believe it is exactly what I listened to! So congratulation very nice speaker!!! Do you really need to use a subwoofer? Can you tell me what electronics and cables are you using on the system?
It sounded really good. To describe better: it had bigger base than what you think a box that size could produce, but unlike Raidho D1.1 which was terrible in that sense, the bass was accurate and not overwhelming at all.
Speaker maintained a clear presentation, nice soundstage and full harmonic presentation.
I didn't feel it was overly colored either, very realistic presentation given size and price.
Yes, they are expensive for what you bring home in terms of material, nevertheless in terms of quality I feel they were ahead by miles compared to other similar products even priced higher than that.
I really never had a chance to listen to this brand before and I have to say I do like their products so far.
Edit: As a matter of fact, I googled your model and I believe it is exactly what I listened to! So congratulation very nice speaker!!! Do you really need to use a subwoofer? Can you tell me what electronics and cables are you using on the system?
Looking at the impedance plots is often most interesting to me. Either the midrange is a 3 Ohm unit, or they've added some impedance "equalization" to lower the impedance. Any time a reviewer says a speaker is quite revealing of differences in amplifiers I suspect the speaker is difficult to drive, either coincidentally, or in the case of several Focals, deliberately.
I've not examined the B&W crossover so I could not say.
Best,
Erik
I've not examined the B&W crossover so I could not say.
Best,
Erik
dac: ec designs mosaic t
amp: gaincard lm3875
sounds very good! the subwoofer is hard to integrate as to not affect the delicate prat that the p3esr do say well. very good speakers and im very surprised by how fast, natural, and tonality realistic they are!
thanks for the feedback!
Kal's a nice guy, but I still am not sure how he can like Monitor Audio and B&W speakers at the same time. I could see some one liking one or the other.
Best,
Erik
Best,
Erik
So the one thing that bugs me of the D3 is the tweeter placement. The only other speakers I know which advanced the tweeter in front of the woofers were the mid-range Focal's and they had pretty mediocre phase matching between the tweeter and the midrange.
I would be VERY curious to see a full analysis and breakdown of the D3. I know the impulse response is a little gnarly, but gets explained as being above the listening axis.
I would be VERY curious to see a full analysis and breakdown of the D3. I know the impulse response is a little gnarly, but gets explained as being above the listening axis.
Is the lm3875 a gain clone kit?
I like your dac converter, I am trying to understand what amplifier you have since it doesn't ring up any bell.
What audio cables are you using throughout your system?
I would be curious to see what is your setup with respect to your listening room.
If speakers are placed well you should not feel the need for any subwoofer.
Last, what type of music do you primarily listen to?
I feel subwoofer will in most cases ruin the balance of a delicate speaker. Introducing a subwoofer properly is very tedious and most of the cases impossible to do well.
I like your dac converter, I am trying to understand what amplifier you have since it doesn't ring up any bell.
What audio cables are you using throughout your system?
I would be curious to see what is your setup with respect to your listening room.
If speakers are placed well you should not feel the need for any subwoofer.
Last, what type of music do you primarily listen to?
I feel subwoofer will in most cases ruin the balance of a delicate speaker. Introducing a subwoofer properly is very tedious and most of the cases impossible to do well.
im using BB kit lm8375. its the chip amp kit with snubberized PSU. I will eventually get the ec design equilibirum amps though. this is only temporary. I ordered van den Hul Skyline Hybrid speaker cable and will likely get kimber pbj interconnects.
my room is very small 10x11 and fully treated with lots of bass traps, ect. I listen to lots of electronica, jazz and ambient music. I can live without subwoofer but theres some low bass missing: however, the sealed enclosure allow more bass then the spec suggest. stereophile measurements shows the speakers are only -5db at 50hz and -10db at 40hz and my measurements in my room do suggest that.
I also find that integrating my sealed subwoofer seems very hard. I have it placed at ear height and between the speakers and even then, i find the integration do destroy the delicate balance so I listen without. ill keep on trying but ill likely upgrade to shl5+ or shl5 or c7es3 which doesnt need a subwoofer
Last edited:
This was discussed earlier in the thread because the same applies to the D2 models.
The electrical crossover slopes chosen for M and T necessitate that the tweeter be polarity reversed for phase coherence, but instead of doing that B&W moved the tweeter forward by 1.7 inches which equates to a 0.5 wavelength at the crossover frequency (4kHz).
So the drivers are phase coherent at 4kHz but become increasingly non-coherent above and below the crossover frequency.
This explains the peak at 4kHz and the dips above and below. It also explains why a big suck-out occurs at about 2kHz on FST axis.
This design decision is discussed briefly in the original 800 series Diamond white paper, and the decision is primary based on a desire to maintain driver polarity. Obviously it creates problems which arguably outweigh the advantages. However, one advantage is that the tweeter is unable to generate diffraction interference effects.
In the modifications to my D2 series crossover I've managed to improve the coherent phase bandwidth by adding some passive phase correction to the M and T crossover filters, and the response in now much flatter, and importantly the vertical lobe is much wider too.
Attachments
Last edited:
The polar plot clearly shows what is wrong with this speaker: power response.
High crossover, first order electrical on the tweeter....
It's all about trade-off's and prioritizing aspects of performance.
Art,
The basic problem is the physical size of the midrange, which is too large to be used at 2KHZ without the benefit of a directionally controlled tweeter.
This is not the result of a trade-off, but imo a design error. At the time of the original 802, folks may not have known better, but when the update was made, no such excuse can be made any longer. Knowledge has progressed. The problem is that a speaker with a polar response as the 802's have a built in tone control. By listening even slightly off axis, the FR will be very much non-flat. Power response, important for perceived timbre, will have a dip around 2KHZ. Although this may be euphonic to some, it is not right to have your speakers decide for you which FR corrections you like best.
Using a first order xover is another design mistake, probably induced by the misguided choice for a midrange, thinking that a wider region of overlap might mitigate the directivity issues. It doesn't work very well.
I know of a famous speaker lab where they bought an 802 because of the hype, and they found it to be seriously flawed, mainly because of these reasons.
Vac
Vac
The basic problem is the physical size of the midrange, which is too large to be used at 2KHZ without the benefit of a directionally controlled tweeter.
This is not the result of a trade-off, but imo a design error. At the time of the original 802, folks may not have known better, but when the update was made, no such excuse can be made any longer. Knowledge has progressed. The problem is that a speaker with a polar response as the 802's have a built in tone control. By listening even slightly off axis, the FR will be very much non-flat. Power response, important for perceived timbre, will have a dip around 2KHZ. Although this may be euphonic to some, it is not right to have your speakers decide for you which FR corrections you like best.
Using a first order xover is another design mistake, probably induced by the misguided choice for a midrange, thinking that a wider region of overlap might mitigate the directivity issues. It doesn't work very well.
I know of a famous speaker lab where they bought an 802 because of the hype, and they found it to be seriously flawed, mainly because of these reasons.
Vac
Vac
Is there only one speaker in the world everybody agree with ?
For Instance Troels Gravsen visited the Munich Show... He seems to liked most the Martin Logan Flag Ship and oddly the Living Voice Vox Olympian (because he doesn't seem to be not too much attracted by horn designed as designer himself) !
We should focus ourselves on our rooms : echo, reverbs, room mods : Do you know a speaker below 700/800 which is sounding the same in two rooms ? I don't !
To rephrase someone here : is it finally possible today to make a good speaker without thinking of DSP help and sources marriage (DRC, FIR...) and of course passive correction (I'm not sure either than DCR can solve some Bass issues without bass traps in a rectangular or squared rooms) !
Some tricky designers bet from middle sized rooms to make their ultimate speaker development like the Putzey speaker (can it be good in rooms > to 5mx5m while having yet good impluse rsponse in the bass and low distorsions, I doubt... I listened the Kef Blade II few times ago and was not so impressed, good speaker but not as good as Stereophile says according to me : yes it makes bass but the soundstage is not following... rooms dictates too much or it's not an as good speaker as some write... just for illustration !)
My 2 cents, mostly as a listener having not a clue about real items
PS : btw liked the input of System 7 : even the most involved says it's not so easy to list technicals items to make a good speaker.... An illustration yet ?; Maybe the OBX by Living Voice if believing Troels Gravsen ! A flawed design technically, but sum of trade offs make it a very musical speaker at low-medium spl... ah, like a famous speaker of the BBC !
So any speaker (just one to save them all) than everybody agree ? Or time for the most experienced with multi designs to write a Wiki about measuring and setuping our listening rooms below 700/800 Hz... then only we can talk all togethers with close good rooms setups ?
For Instance Troels Gravsen visited the Munich Show... He seems to liked most the Martin Logan Flag Ship and oddly the Living Voice Vox Olympian (because he doesn't seem to be not too much attracted by horn designed as designer himself) !
We should focus ourselves on our rooms : echo, reverbs, room mods : Do you know a speaker below 700/800 which is sounding the same in two rooms ? I don't !
To rephrase someone here : is it finally possible today to make a good speaker without thinking of DSP help and sources marriage (DRC, FIR...) and of course passive correction (I'm not sure either than DCR can solve some Bass issues without bass traps in a rectangular or squared rooms) !
Some tricky designers bet from middle sized rooms to make their ultimate speaker development like the Putzey speaker (can it be good in rooms > to 5mx5m while having yet good impluse rsponse in the bass and low distorsions, I doubt... I listened the Kef Blade II few times ago and was not so impressed, good speaker but not as good as Stereophile says according to me : yes it makes bass but the soundstage is not following... rooms dictates too much or it's not an as good speaker as some write... just for illustration !)
My 2 cents, mostly as a listener having not a clue about real items
PS : btw liked the input of System 7 : even the most involved says it's not so easy to list technicals items to make a good speaker.... An illustration yet ?; Maybe the OBX by Living Voice if believing Troels Gravsen ! A flawed design technically, but sum of trade offs make it a very musical speaker at low-medium spl... ah, like a famous speaker of the BBC !
So any speaker (just one to save them all) than everybody agree ? Or time for the most experienced with multi designs to write a Wiki about measuring and setuping our listening rooms below 700/800 Hz... then only we can talk all togethers with close good rooms setups ?
Last edited:
Hello Vac and others,
The use of such a large driver, (the FST that is) is largely the result of much of B&W s own publicity of the FST driver. According to B&W's own claims, the FST driver would demonstrate extra-ordinary off axis performance, because of its almost ideal decrease in radiating area, thus behaving like a smaller driver at higher frequencies. The very special cone termination in a high damping, non standard surround would enable this near-ideal cone behaviour..This, incidently ,was also Ted Jordan s'claim with his full range designs. A sort of super-controlled break up.
Alas: off axis measurements of the FST driver, firstly I believe in Hobby Hifi, show the driver unfortunately behaves like any other 6,5 inch driver.. So, no magic. After all the design seems somewhat compromised, seemingly based on assumptions rather than hardcore off-axis measurements.
Good Luck,
Eelco
premsies rather than on measure
The use of such a large driver, (the FST that is) is largely the result of much of B&W s own publicity of the FST driver. According to B&W's own claims, the FST driver would demonstrate extra-ordinary off axis performance, because of its almost ideal decrease in radiating area, thus behaving like a smaller driver at higher frequencies. The very special cone termination in a high damping, non standard surround would enable this near-ideal cone behaviour..This, incidently ,was also Ted Jordan s'claim with his full range designs. A sort of super-controlled break up.
Alas: off axis measurements of the FST driver, firstly I believe in Hobby Hifi, show the driver unfortunately behaves like any other 6,5 inch driver.. So, no magic. After all the design seems somewhat compromised, seemingly based on assumptions rather than hardcore off-axis measurements.
Good Luck,
Eelco
premsies rather than on measure
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.