I own the 801 Matrix Series 3. I still love these speakers. Series 1 and 2 were bright. Series 3 tamed the brightness. Plus the 801 Martrix Series 3 have to be lifted up at least 9" off the floor (with stands). These speakers sound horrible if left on the floor. Thank you Danny for the great analysis.
I have the 801 Series 2's and I've upgraded many of the crossover parts, but still adhering to the original design. I've improved them greatly. I find mine sound best when raised about 3.5 inches..... on nicely finished 4x4's. I have 6.5" stands for when I was using them on slab floor, but now they are on a raised wood floor, and they sound better raised 3.5".
@@dmahan8841 Well you are incorrect. 801 Matrix Series 1 and 2 were bright and had a beaming quality. The Series 3 which I bought in 1993 did not have this brightness. I had previously owned the 801FS in 1986 which was not bright. I was 32 when I purchased the 801FS. I am a very experienced B&W listener. So your age comment is totally siily. Why did you not ask me why I have not purchased the Natilus or Diamond series?
Yeah same here, really interesting what's inside and types of drivers and how the box is constructed with modular design. This one had good bones and you worked your magic on them. Came out a winner 👍
Thank you once again - insightful. Thanks for sending the tube connectors to me over in U.K. i look forward to fitting them to my Bowers and Wilkins 603 S2 Anniversary Edition Speakers. Paul Yates - Yorkshire
@kkrobertson1 As much as I would love to hear the difference... YT is probably not good enough, though. Add to that... what type of audio equipment are people going to be listening with? They're likely not going to be hearing the live in room sound of the speakers.
I had an entire B&W 600 series 1 Home theater back in the day. Metal dome tweeter's were always very fatiguing to my ears, but I didn't know any better. I cringe now thinking back to them and what crossover horror's must have been lurking inside. But, hey they were bulletproof. Those Kevlar drivers were Purdy.
@@user-gf7kj5vj3p I moved on to EPOS silk dome tweeter's and they were like the opposite of the B&W tweeter's. Even with 25.00 crossover's the EPOS tweeter's outperformed the B&W's no contest. I'm sure there are some tamed metal domes out there but I have yet to hear them. Besides after learning from Danny. I'm convinced, I don't know shit and have been listening to 25.00 crossover's my entire audio life. I'll be listening to my 1st real crossover as soon as Danny gets done designing them for me. I'm expecting the clouds to part and Angel's to start singing. For now just trying not to feel so stupid. My apologies to anyone who thought I knew something. I just thought I did. I'm learning just like everyone else.
Replace stock crossover Electolitics with quality copper foil cap and these tweeters will lose that shrill zippy sound and will warm up along with not being sibilant ... than do swap the resistors for better ones , than air core inductors and it will complete the transformation . Unfortunately these tweeters are drying out by now and lose output so finding a way to use new tweeter would be great ...
I'd love to have Danny take a look at my Elac Adanté F61 towers but alas, the original shipping boxes were destroyed accidentally while in storage and I'm on the far left coast. Maybe one day... Great video as always. Danny is easily one of the most adept crossover techs in America and the best I've seen online, bar none. Thanks again for adding some common sense instead of snake oil and making this hobby better and more accessible for everyone.
They actually sounded quite good at time of release also. These were not some subpar speaker by any means. But 30 year old parts are NOT always the exact same they were when new, so age "could" factor in also.
Nice video Danny. Well thought out and just the facts. Sure they are good sounding speakers but they can be great. The tech in the speakes is always top notch. I've often wondered what that "grate" noise was when I listened to them on certian tracks. Now I know. Keep em comming.
Glad to see this, I have a 802 Series 80 which is the previous model. It sounds good, but does have a noticeable lack of clarity at the top. A recap, new resistors, coils and wire has been on my project list for a while. The wire and connectors are really horrible in mine, 20 ga wire at best. Getting that top pod wired would be a challenge because of the swivel. I would send it to you but the freight would be a killer, by the time it is packed it is probably north of 100 lbs.
The 801fc in 1980 had an aftermarket crossover that bypassed the internal. The protection circuit was backed up by 6v camping batteries. Silk dome tweeters. 2 banana inputs.
One thing I remember from “back in the day” is that B&W featured in their advertisements the use of these as mixing monitors in high end recording studios. Never heard a pair sound particularly stellar then, which we tended to attribute to insufficient amplification. Even the latest of the 800 Nautilus derived models leave me with the same impressions- indeed my favourite of that crop remains the smallest 2-ways - I guess the more you ask of the crossover network, the harder it is to get it all right. Nice video, Danny.
Steve Albini, who recorded Nirvana, Robert Plant, Jimmy Page, etc., used B&W Matrix 805s for his mixing and mastering. I heard some of his masters on those speakers and they sounded amazing.
B&W 801's and 802's have always been reference monitors in Abbey Road studios. You'll see them in all the pics and videos shot there. However, engineers working there may choose to use any number of near field monitors as primary mixing monitors.
Excellent vid, Danny. I wish I owned a pair so I could do the upgrade. The Sonicaps and No-rez transformed my Pedest'ale Tower speakers. The sound and form is impressive.
I actually owned them 20 years ago I always liked them for what they are. Pretty tame sounding speakers but virtually no fatigue . They are way to inflated now on the price
Oh this one was SO close! I've had Matrix 801 Series 2's for 25 years, which have the same Mid/Tweet pod, but atop a fat 12" woofer. They are glorious, if flawed, speakers!! I've upgraded many of the parts over the years, but not the design... and I'm still using all the original ferrite core inductors! Most shocking upgrade was changing the 0.5 ohm resistor on the tweeter to a Mills resistor, and it improved the signal to the tweeter so much, I had to increase it to 1.5 ohms to get the tweeter back in line. (by ear... no measurements). If it weren't for the shipping of a 120 lbs, I'd consider a GR upgrade. I think Danny said he did and Active-woofer design for my speaker, but not a fully passive one.
Danny love your work. I did your rf 7ii upgrade and have never been happier. Those speakers are so Much easier to listen too now . I almost dropped lots of $$ on a different part and glad I didn’t. My next pair will be Tyler acoustics.
I remember listening to these and their smaller brother 803 during the same era these were sold. I never liked the sound of their kevlar midrange and alu dome tweeter. I thought the midrange sounded too «dry» and the dome tweeter to «harsh». This upgrade is top notch though and I am sure it will sound smoother and more transparent than before. Another fine job done here Danny!🎉
I have a set of the B&W 801 Matrix Series 2 with a 12” woofer. The entire crossover board was replaced and tied into existing wires to both terminals and speakers. Didn’t realize the terminals were steel; their finish makes them look like copper or brass. Edit: Parts count is closer to yours with 5 inductors and several large capacitors, two sand core resistors, at least two wire-wound. Board seemed fairly full.
Danny , you are a mastermind, i had a pair of 802 gen 1 . I only used them for a couple weeks before i boxed them up and stuck in my room for the unhappy choices in gear . My old Mission and Miller & Kreisel speakers was my favorites . If i did not loose my home in a wildfire back in 2003 i would have a couple dozen pairs of old high end speakers i would have sent to you in these days . God knows your passion and is backing you i feel . You are a mad scientist sir and i give you a low bow . I would love to work for you if you was ever in need of help in your business. . Cheers
So good to see one of my favorite speakers get this level of attention; now, if only we could find someone close to Danny's with B&W 803 series 2 loudspeakers, we could solve another diamond-in-the-rough... I just can't make sense of shipping speakers from Canada, but I'm always hoping these would get to go thru the GR Research treatment. Another great video!!
That 802 is one of the most accurate speakers in the 90s, I only found a little bump at 300 hz like if the cabinet of the woofers needed to be 20 percent bigger but very musical sound, I see you put it to sing even better
Nice result. I would prefer to see it measure at 2 meter for such a large speaker, but the dispersion is so good before and after it probably doesn’t matter much. You would like B&W’s later top end speakers. I owned a pair of 802D’s and they had 100% air core inductors, all Mundorf foil and film caps, and power resistors in aluminum heat sink enclosures that were bolted to the huge aluminum base structure for thermal stability. They definitely stepped up the part quality to the best available in,after years. Your project looks like an amazing value given the modest used market price of this model these days. 👍
I have the B&W DM2000 since 1984 and am constantly blown away by their soundstage, imagining, air and depth. For years I drove them with a Hafler 220 Amp but lately drive them with an Adcom. Wow the Adcom really opened them up. Supposedly they are 'time aligned' and the frequency range plot that came with them was very flat. This video has grabbed my attention. Have you ever analyzed a set of DM2000's? Is there anything I can do to improve them? I am about to modify my 40 year old Hafler 220 with components from Musical Concepts. Thank you.
Looks like the new response is +/- 1 dB, which is very flat and more than good enough to mix/master recordings. They should sound amazing with the upgraded crossover.
If this were 2 years ago, I would have jumped on this, but I bought other speakers. Think about it: you can buy these speakers used for around $2K, and they might need new crossovers, anyway, so get the GR Research re-design instead. You'd get some serious hifi for pretty low bucks compared to what is offered even today.
I have the same speakers, the only difference being the cabinet is black instead of wood grain. They sound great still, but would part with them for the right price. They’re very, very heavy.
Powered speakers typically cannot be upgrades as the crossover is built into the amplifier. Some models do use an amp with a passive crossover but it's pretty uncommon.
I got the smaller version of these. Of course, just speculating, but mine seem to not open up until I play them at a louder volume. Almost feels like I have to push them before they sound good. Is it possible with the original crossover, it is like pushing water through a kinked hose because of the cheese? Thanks
I've owned a pair of 804 Nautilus since new and I wonder if they can be upgraded to match the newer D3 and D4 variants, assuming they're better, of course.
I remember when these were current. Never cared for the sound of the Kevlar midrange or the tweeters on the 801s; had not listened to this model much. Would have been interesting if you could have snapped a few pics of the cabinet inside and added them to the video. Those Kevlar drivers were eye catching back then. Completely different "looking" than anything else out.
Hi there, I enjoy watching your videos keep the good work. When it comes to binding posts it seems like the problem is frequently the magnetic nuts; would it be a good solution to just change those and not the whole binding post?
That was my immediate thought too. It might even be Cu-Ni-Sn, but there's definitely Cu traces under the plating. That's evident from the component side images, where the traces appear brownish through the pale green of the fibreglass substrate.
We be on the same page. Short cables hand wired Hand soldered. Cabinet like a skyscraper. No ports, open baffle from 700hz to 5000hz. Still need ideas and parts. Going to call yall next week. I miss my 'shop',scope etc. But terminal and live at level 2+ pain. Too late to do a channel, carry on
I remember how much I liked this generation of B&W’s . I just don’t feel the same about the newer ones. Not that they’re bad, it’s just a matter of taste
Great video! I just wonder if there is any speaker that you can buy that has a good price no object crossover. It seems that all speakers go on the cheap side when it comes to building crossovers. I know that just by buying better parts from Danny improved my speakers 100%. There was no redesign, just better quality parts. At first I didn't use the tube connectors, but when I did get around to installing them, I could hear more detail and less smearing than I had heard before. The soundstage even had kind of a 3D quality compared to before.
I've often wondered about stacked or just well positioned, tube enclosure speaker cabinets. I mean, you can almost fix all of the box problems by turning a square into a circle. I think B&W makes a version of what I'm thinking already, but I've never had the opportunity to listen to one and probably never will. But at least on paper and in my mind, a bunch of tubular enclosures just make good sense. The only real "if" factor I can foresee is the tubular material itself. Anyway, looking at this just made me think of that, out loud. Cheers 🍻
The new crossover while generating a flatter response also slightly elevates the tweeter's response a bit especially with it's small treble peaks at 5500 and 8500 hz. This means that in typical listening rooms the modified 802 will sound noticeaby brighter with less heaviness in the bass than in stock form. A flat anechoic response typically translates into a somewhat brighter treble in room response. This is normal and I've I heard this effect on the big Dunlavy speakers designed for astonishingly flat anechoic response. They have a subjectively elevated treble unless your room is acoustically very dead. I believe Edgar Villchur of AR said that for a speaker to have a flat response in a typical listening room it needs to be designed with a slight downward trending response into the treble when measured anechoically. Just putting it out there for fans who like the stock 802's rich bass and somewhat polite treble which is what stock 802s and 801s sound like.
Actually a flat response is more accurate and it will have a more rolled off in room response. Voicing it down in the off axis will cause too much of a drop to the in room response. So these will not at all sound bright. The Dunlavy's have a crapload of felt around the drivers to kill any off axis response. So they sound very similar in any room they are in, but you have to stay on axis and keep them pointed at you head for them to work.
@@dannyrichie9743 No the opposite is true for the treble. A room's reverberant qualities always energizes treble frequencies more so than the midrange. You may be thinking of bass frequencies below 100 hz or so as they get boosted by boundary reinforcement (floor and walls). But above above that there is definitely a brightening trend in room unless the room is heavily damped which most people don't have. Anechoic or acoustically dead rooms always sound dimmer at treble frequencies than rooms with any amount of reflective surfaces.
Hey all - great videos & awesome upgrades, Just a suggestion, with mostly black speakers & with a black background, it's sometimes hard to see the layout & dimensions in the videos. Could a spotlight or different color background maybe be used? Maybe the contrast needs adjustment. Thanks
I'm just happy Dan threw in a sheet of Norez AT NO CHARGE... BECAUSE HE CARES that these Puppies play Flat! Flat as the Bonneville Salt Flats which are actually flat! Odd huh?
Although B&W has very good speakers in there range nowadays, i never heard them sing like other brands. The brother of a friend owns a pair 802D . Yes they sound good but i never experienced the goosebumps 😮
You mentioned some challenges installing the no rez. What is the optimal way to apply it? My guess is that large pieces towards the center of the panel is best. Is that correct?
We use it to cover any panel that is also an exterior wall. Covering the center of each panel is a must. Panels are most resonant at the point furthest from each edge or brace.
Using similiar materials in vehicles I would say yes as a general rule you want as large of piece as possible starting from the center of an area. You also want a firm application. Using a roller is best. I have also used car products inside and outside of speakers with reasonably good results. Very much dampens the sound to make the speakers sound bigger and cleaner, albeit everything is a trade off for something. The big question is what is the trade off. Depends on the speaker and the use.
I think Danny was referring to this 802 specifically, as the internal Matrix bracing is very extensive! Look up some old promo pictures. I don't think the cabs need it. They are super solid, and he does not mention the "Fibercrete" midrange enclosure which is extremely dense & heavy.
Nice work Danny. I know you straightened it out in the crossover but thinking about the design of that midrange pod, should they have just made the box longer and add the midrange in there to prevent the wrap around baffle loss at around 1000hz? Would that be a better approach and better for sound rather than making the adjustment in the crossover?
There is always a baffle step loss to contend with. It just happens at lower frequency with a bigger baffle. There is a great benefit to minimum baffle... .the sound is very open and less "boxy".
Hi Danny, did you also measure the speakers with the grilles on? I am curious if that makes a significant difference in the response. With the grilles on, they definitely look much nicer.
Nothing with the woofers, might do a little with the mid, though seeing as they are wire frame it may not have as much as an impact as many solid MDF frames
I listened to these back when they were new at a store. They were good sounding, but the position/room they were in wasn't ideal. That same week, I listened to the Mezzo Utopia Focals in a properly setup room and was blown away. The thing that stands out in these videos is that the measurements crowd would argue that a flat response is all that is needed, because the measurements don't lie. Nothing could be further from the truth, but that contradicts the foundation of their superiority complex. Great video.
Another great video 👍 I'm curious though, you always talk about the quality of parts and steel nuts on the binding posts etc, so better parts = better sound. But how does that relate to active speakers? All that signal has to pass through a board full of cheap steel parts...right? So if that is the case, are passive speakers with really good parts better than any active speakers for clarity and depth? I'm genuinely curious as I make my own speakers and I'm always trying to improve my knowledge.
Everything that you have learned about passive speakers regarding parts quality, also applies to active speakers. Most commercially available active speakers are bottlenecked by crappy amps too.
@@dannyrichie9743 I see, so is it possible to get good results with active speakers or is it always limited to the quality of the dsp board? I've been considering making a new pair of speakers, small ones that I would really struggle to fit a passive crossover into, would it be better to have an external passive crossover or go down the active route instead?
@@dannyrichie9743 personally I prefer passive speakers, and I'm not sure I have the tools to learn to do it properly if it isn't straight forward, maybe in the future, but following your comment I'll probably stick to passive anyway 😆, thanks 👍
@@dannyrichie9743 Worked on these and early KEFs with a similar unnecessary protection circuit in line. Why manufacturers put this junk in the signal path is beyond me. They know its wrong. Great work Danny
@@haycrossaudio5474 They have to weigh up the chances of drivers being destroyed under warranty by idiots with weedy amps. Yes , it's not theoretically good for the sound but studios and headbangers do abuse the speakers. I had a customer who fried 3 pairs of Wharfedale 507's in one day and we had to keep giving him a new pair under warranty. You can go out of business very quickly with people like that. Repaired or not, they're an open box product. The voice coils of the bass drivers were welded to the pole piece, and the plastic cones had melted. The tweeter inductors had melted too. A bad idea? maybe not.
@@dannyrichie9743 do you have a crossover kit available for those i know I'm going to have to rewire the pair I have and add new biding post i have the s2 versions
I am old enough to remember these 802 S2 when they came out they used to cost like a good, well maintained new-ish second hand car. To see what parts were used in the crossover is deeply disappointing and hand-on-heart - disturbing :(
The crossover parts were probably not up to GR standards, but the designs and drivers were very good. My Matrix 805s only have six parts, but are able to deliver a +/- 1.75 dB response(as verified by anechoic charts supplied with my speakers).
Danny, previously you didn't attempt to upgrade the Harbeth P3ESR due to parts count. Why did you redesign this model and not the Harbeths? Pretty sure you could've tried if you wanted to. It's just a 2 way speaker.
He said the same thing about some elac towers I had. Simply replacing the parts was too costly if he just use the original design, which was fine I think in this case he totally redesigned every part of the crossover so he could control that better.
The new parts would take up to much of the inside. The capacitors and AirCore inductors would not fit. He talked about a external crossover, but the parts count would push the price thru the roof.
The reason was there appeared to be a lot of notch filters being used to control the drivers problems. Drivers with that many parts parts often need that many parts to fix all of those issue. In this case the crossover wasn't that complex but they used a lot of parts in two protection circuits that were really not necessary.
@@CashGravel The Elac towers used some really large value caps in the circuit to limit the range of the lower woofers while allowing the upper to play up to the tweeter. Some of those big valued caps (and coils) would still be needed even if I redesigned it. Those big values really add up cost wise even if just using budget level poly caps. I think there were a few 200uF values needed. That really makes the upgrade costly. At some point it makes more sense to just build a new speaker. I tend to use our X Series models as a benchmark too. If it is cheaper to just build out one of those models and the end result is far better than the cost of polishing something that will never reach that performance level, well then, it just isn't worth it.
This is how B&W should have developed the 800 series instead of what they did with the Nautilus series. On the driver side it would have been wonderful if they had developed tweeters with a lower resonance frequency and higher spl capacity allowing it to be crossed over at say 1,5 kHz. What they produce today is sadly low fidelity even in their most expensive models, imagine selling products with a gradual frequency lift of 10 dB from 1 kHz to 10 kHz, costing 30.000 $. Greetings from Denmark
What would really bake someone's noodle is that it would be cheaper to have cheap digital electronic filters made for preamps that feed class-D amplifiers that can easily fit into each speaker with less space than the crossovers, and deliver a cleaner, drift-free, rock-solid cross-over frequency and better audiophile sound than the expensive, large passive filters and expensive "audiophile" 2-channel amplifiers. I still cannot believe there has been no speaker manufacturer to release an affordable, fully-active (with digital cross-overs) and individually amplified drivers from subs to mid-bass to mids to tweeters. It would be the highest quality sound while being very affordable and the speakers would be fully active and amplified. You could even make it so the sound is delivered wirelessly to the speakers over wifi and only needing a single electrical cord to plug into the wall.
Complete systems like that are a hard sell. Most that have been released use cheap D/A converters and amps. So they are bottlenecked pretty hard and far from the top levels of performance. Doing it right with high quality gear gets extremely expensive.
@dannyrichie9743 - If your wattage and noise levels in your class-D amps are at acceptable specs, you won't call the sound you get "bottlenecked". ABX experiments long ago proved "high end" class-AB amps are not any better than well designed, cheap class-D amps. Home Theater seems to always beat the classic music audio standards. Movie sound in general dispenses with the fairy dust witchcraft nonsense of the high-end music equipment hobby and gets down to real world sound production where it counts. Cost efficiency on amplification and signal processing while standardizing the source studio art sound production stage itself with proper mixing, mastering and sound stage controls. There is a reason movie soundtracks obliterate dynamically squeezed music production. Notice how no speaker reviewers talk about SPL, dynamic punch, peak SPL output distortion, etc. Because typically music based hifi audio is overpriced and inferior. Hell, even car audio has better design standards from a signal standpoint due to fully active crossovers, DSPs and individual driver amplification. The 2-channel music hifi hobby is still operating with a 1960s mindset. It's time to modernize. Save money on areas where you get no real audible gain (amplifiers, preamplifier, DACs) and put the money to work getting a perfect crossover network (without the passive limitations of frequency drift at high outputs), higher distortion-free SPL at the listen position, deeper bass response, better cabinet shaping and bracing, etc.
I know quality counts, but for example there are cars that have the best parts and measurements but drive like a tank, great speakers like great cars have a black art involved. just the ingredients in the mix can't always make a high quality sound in the finished product. Bright speakers with a dark source and amp can sound perfect, yet the speakers on their own measure like crap. So as well as good parts and engineering there's a dark art involved in the very best sounding speakers even taking into account we all have differing tastes, designers of certain brands hit the mark time and time again. Are they just fortunate or is it their experience of this dark art? or are the Hifi press just gas lighting?
By far weakest link of B&W was it's cheesy parts quality in their crossovers, I did some older 640i towers and rebuild crossovers with quality parts and what a difference it did make , added some cabinet damping too. These old tweeters are now obsolete and I think your graph shows like they lost some fluid and response is more dull , it would be cool to replace them with some new modern tweeters . I really like the concept of separated cabinets for lows , mids and tweeter suspended above ... maybe Danny could design some nice 3 way and 2 way design with woofer in a box , than mid in its own well dampen box with maybe X static tweeter above the mid in the air or tiny enclosure right above ?
@@dannyrichie9743 But midrange woofer in small box with tweeter on top with air around makes it even less diffraction for amazing imaging and airy soundstage ... that was the whole point of this B&W design ...
Danny - your style is to make the speaker sound as flat as possible on axis. All off axis measurements are less flat than the on axis measurements. Does this imply that you believe that speakers should be toed in to point directly at the listener's head?
This style to me is far more appealing than the wacky Dr Who inspired new style. Im aware the new cab design is integral to its functional performance but still... Speaking of B&W, whats with the whole marketing partnership with McLaren? Klipsch has a similar thing going on with them as well, to me its odd. Odd like the "Harley Davidson" Ford F150 and the "Trek" bicycle edition VW Jetta. Just me??
Soon. A new product line is under development and they are over the top good. They have some of the best imaging and best vocals of any speaker at any price. We are going to get a little further along in development of the whole line before spilling the beans. There is also some proprietary development going into these that take them up another notch or two, and we are shoring up those details still.
Danny, thanks for making these videos. I've learned so much from your explanations and examples. Just wanted to let you know your work is appreciated.
Brilliant work. At such a large manufacturer, it should be like this in the first place
Absolutely. in the same time frame, there are speakers costing a fraction as much (like A/D/S) that had better crossover parts.
Great job Danny! Love these videos, don't forget to show us nerds more internals and drivers! ; )
I own the 801 Matrix Series 3. I still love these speakers. Series 1 and 2 were bright. Series 3 tamed the brightness. Plus the 801 Martrix Series 3 have to be lifted up at least 9" off the floor (with stands). These speakers sound horrible if left on the floor. Thank you Danny for the great analysis.
I have the 801 Series 2's and I've upgraded many of the crossover parts, but still adhering to the original design. I've improved them greatly. I find mine sound best when raised about 3.5 inches..... on nicely finished 4x4's. I have 6.5" stands for when I was using them on slab floor, but now they are on a raised wood floor, and they sound better raised 3.5".
@@dmahan8841 Well you are incorrect. 801 Matrix Series 1 and 2 were bright and had a beaming quality. The Series 3 which I bought in 1993 did not have this brightness. I had previously owned the 801FS in 1986 which was not bright. I was 32 when I purchased the 801FS. I am a very experienced B&W listener. So your age comment is totally siily. Why did you not ask me why I have not purchased the Natilus or Diamond series?
Yeah same here, really interesting what's inside and types of drivers and how the box is constructed with modular design. This one had good bones and you worked your magic on them. Came out a winner 👍
Thank you once again - insightful. Thanks for sending the tube connectors to me over in U.K. i look forward to fitting them to my Bowers and Wilkins 603 S2 Anniversary Edition Speakers. Paul Yates - Yorkshire
It would be nice to hear a before and after for the projects. One thing to see on paper another to hear it live.
And the only way to hear the real difference is to hear it live (and not through a compressed CZcams video).
@@dannyrichie9743 its better than nothing
@kkrobertson1 As much as I would love to hear the difference... YT is probably not good enough, though. Add to that... what type of audio equipment are people going to be listening with? They're likely not going to be hearing the live in room sound of the speakers.
I had an entire B&W 600 series 1 Home theater back in the day. Metal dome tweeter's were always very fatiguing to my ears, but I didn't know any better. I cringe now thinking back to them and what crossover horror's must have been lurking inside. But, hey they were bulletproof. Those Kevlar drivers were Purdy.
I have some metal done tweeters. Titanium. Don't sound hard at all. I have some soft done tweeters that are sibilant
@@user-gf7kj5vj3p I moved on to EPOS silk dome tweeter's and they were like the opposite of the B&W tweeter's. Even with 25.00 crossover's the EPOS tweeter's outperformed the B&W's no contest. I'm sure there are some tamed metal domes out there but I have yet to hear them. Besides after learning from Danny. I'm convinced, I don't know shit and have been listening to 25.00 crossover's my entire audio life. I'll be listening to my 1st real crossover as soon as Danny gets done designing them for me. I'm expecting the clouds to part and Angel's to start singing. For now just trying not to feel so stupid. My apologies to anyone who thought I knew something. I just thought I did. I'm learning just like everyone else.
Replace stock crossover Electolitics with quality copper foil cap and these tweeters will lose that shrill zippy sound and will warm up along with not being sibilant ... than do swap the resistors for better ones , than air core inductors and it will complete the transformation .
Unfortunately these tweeters are drying out by now and lose output so finding a way to use new tweeter would be great ...
Drying out?
You can replace ferrofluid @@kdomster9141
Well worth doing. Lovely looking speakers. Not some cheap tat where upgrade cost more than the worth.
I'd love to have Danny take a look at my Elac Adanté F61 towers but alas, the original shipping boxes were destroyed accidentally while in storage and I'm on the far left coast. Maybe one day...
Great video as always. Danny is easily one of the most adept crossover techs in America and the best I've seen online, bar none. Thanks again for adding some common sense instead of snake oil and making this hobby better and more accessible for everyone.
Absolutely brilliant.
This thing probably sounds amazing now. Wowowowowow
They actually sounded quite good at time of release also. These were not some subpar speaker by any means. But 30 year old parts are NOT always the exact same they were when new, so age "could" factor in also.
@kevintomb OH I'm sure they weren't terrible but with what he did and the quality of everything it's probably insanely good now
@@kevintombI loved these speakers along with the 801s, I couldn't afford either and bought the DM2000, still love them
Nice video Danny. Well thought out and just the facts. Sure they are good sounding speakers but they can be great. The tech in the speakes is always top notch. I've often wondered what that "grate" noise was when I listened to them on certian tracks. Now I know. Keep em comming.
Wow, great job and great video Danny. Would be great to have a pair of 800-series to upgrade! 😉
Fantastic and very interesting. Somebody please send Danny some Jamo Concert VII's.
Glad to see this, I have a 802 Series 80 which is the previous model. It sounds good, but does have a noticeable lack of clarity at the top. A recap, new resistors, coils and wire has been on my project list for a while. The wire and connectors are really horrible in mine, 20 ga wire at best. Getting that top pod wired would be a challenge because of the swivel. I would send it to you but the freight would be a killer, by the time it is packed it is probably north of 100 lbs.
Top modification , amazing
The 801fc in 1980 had an aftermarket crossover that bypassed the internal. The protection circuit was backed up by 6v camping batteries. Silk dome tweeters. 2 banana inputs.
One thing I remember from “back in the day” is that B&W featured in their advertisements the use of these as mixing monitors in high end recording studios. Never heard a pair sound particularly stellar then, which we tended to attribute to insufficient amplification. Even the latest of the 800 Nautilus derived models leave me with the same impressions- indeed my favourite of that crop remains the smallest 2-ways - I guess the more you ask of the crossover network, the harder it is to get it all right.
Nice video, Danny.
Steve Albini, who recorded Nirvana, Robert Plant, Jimmy Page, etc., used B&W Matrix 805s for his mixing and mastering. I heard some of his masters on those speakers and they sounded amazing.
@@ChicagoRob2 Yep, and the 805's were loaded with budget level parts too.
B&W 801's and 802's have always been reference monitors in Abbey Road studios. You'll see them in all the pics and videos shot there. However, engineers working there may choose to use any number of near field monitors as primary mixing monitors.
I believe Lucas Films Studio had the Nautilus 801 or 802 in their studio too.
Excellent vid, Danny. I wish I owned a pair so I could do the upgrade. The Sonicaps and No-rez transformed my Pedest'ale Tower speakers. The sound and form is impressive.
That’s good to hear. So you really did notice a worthwhile significant improvement just like Danny always says?
@stephenyoud6125 yes, the overall effect was a cleaner, clearer, open dynamic that left me smiling.
@@sloboat55 great to hear, I bought the X-VOCE centre kit for my home cinema
I actually owned them 20 years ago I always liked them for what they are. Pretty tame sounding speakers but virtually no fatigue .
They are way to inflated now on the price
Oh this one was SO close! I've had Matrix 801 Series 2's for 25 years, which have the same Mid/Tweet pod, but atop a fat 12" woofer. They are glorious, if flawed, speakers!! I've upgraded many of the parts over the years, but not the design... and I'm still using all the original ferrite core inductors! Most shocking upgrade was changing the 0.5 ohm resistor on the tweeter to a Mills resistor, and it improved the signal to the tweeter so much, I had to increase it to 1.5 ohms to get the tweeter back in line. (by ear... no measurements). If it weren't for the shipping of a 120 lbs, I'd consider a GR upgrade. I think Danny said he did and Active-woofer design for my speaker, but not a fully passive one.
We designed an upgrade for the B&W 801 Series 80 model.
Danny love your work. I did your rf 7ii upgrade and have never been happier. Those speakers are so
Much easier to listen too now . I almost dropped lots of $$ on a different part and glad I didn’t. My next pair will be Tyler acoustics.
The modular design is cool. GR should do something like that...
I remember listening to these and their smaller brother 803 during the same era these were sold. I never liked the sound of their kevlar midrange and alu dome tweeter. I thought the midrange sounded too «dry» and the dome tweeter to «harsh». This upgrade is top notch though and I am sure it will sound smoother and more transparent than before. Another fine job done here Danny!🎉
Some studios use B&W speakers of the similar range hope they are logged on to Danny's site and send them in for upgrade!
Great work Danny,I got a tee shirt I need to get out to you
I have a set of the B&W 801 Matrix Series 2 with a 12” woofer. The entire crossover board was replaced and tied into existing wires to both terminals and speakers. Didn’t realize the terminals were steel; their finish makes them look like copper or brass.
Edit: Parts count is closer to yours with 5 inductors and several large capacitors, two sand core resistors, at least two wire-wound. Board seemed fairly full.
Impressive.
greetings from France! I like these loudspeakers.
Danny , you are a mastermind, i had a pair of 802 gen 1 .
I only used them for a couple weeks before i boxed them up and stuck in my room for the unhappy choices in gear . My old Mission and Miller & Kreisel speakers was my favorites . If i did not loose my home in a wildfire back in 2003 i would have a couple dozen pairs of old high end speakers i would have sent to you in these days . God knows your passion and is backing you i feel . You are a mad scientist sir and i give you a low bow . I would love to work for you if you was ever in need of help in your business. . Cheers
So good to see one of my favorite speakers get this level of attention; now, if only we could find someone close to Danny's with B&W 803 series 2 loudspeakers, we could solve another diamond-in-the-rough... I just can't make sense of shipping speakers from Canada, but I'm always hoping these would get to go thru the GR Research treatment. Another great video!!
Yup, Ebay is now trending B&W 802 searches......................................
That 802 is one of the most accurate speakers in the 90s, I only found a little bump at 300 hz like if the cabinet of the woofers needed to be 20 percent bigger but very musical sound, I see you put it to sing even better
I still have them here... dying to get the upgrade!
Nice result. I would prefer to see it measure at 2 meter for such a large speaker, but the dispersion is so good before and after it probably doesn’t matter much. You would like B&W’s later top end speakers. I owned a pair of 802D’s and they had 100% air core inductors, all Mundorf foil and film caps, and power resistors in aluminum heat sink enclosures that were bolted to the huge aluminum base structure for thermal stability. They definitely stepped up the part quality to the best available in,after years. Your project looks like an amazing value given the modest used market price of this model these days. 👍
After getting the 1 meter measurements I moved out to 56" away to make sure the results were the same.
I had the 801sfrom 1993 ish--2020... best all-around sounding but the hardest speaker to drive (that I have had)
I have the B&W DM2000 since 1984 and am constantly blown away by their soundstage, imagining, air and depth. For years I drove them with a Hafler 220 Amp but lately drive them with an Adcom. Wow the Adcom really opened them up.
Supposedly they are 'time aligned' and the frequency range plot that came with them was very flat.
This video has grabbed my attention. Have you ever analyzed a set of DM2000's?
Is there anything I can do to improve them?
I am about to modify my 40 year old Hafler 220 with components from Musical Concepts.
Thank you.
I would really like to see the entire process.
Hi Danny, that's great re-engineering of a speaker definitely worthy of one of your upgrades. I wonder what's inside a Nautilus?
I’d depends what you match them with and what sound you like warm and dynamic or thin and lifeless like it would be with a level frequency path 😊
Looks like the new response is +/- 1 dB, which is very flat and more than good enough to mix/master recordings. They should sound amazing with the upgraded crossover.
Many classical recordings have been mixed on the 801 (Abbey Road Studios).
If this were 2 years ago, I would have jumped on this, but I bought other speakers. Think about it: you can buy these speakers used for around $2K, and they might need new crossovers, anyway, so get the GR Research re-design instead. You'd get some serious hifi for pretty low bucks compared to what is offered even today.
I have the same speakers, the only difference being the cabinet is black instead of wood grain. They sound great still, but would part with them for the right price. They’re very, very heavy.
Awesome series of videos 😎👍🏼 are powered speakers like the Klipsch Nines , can they be upgraded.
Powered speakers typically cannot be upgrades as the crossover is built into the amplifier. Some models do use an amp with a passive crossover but it's pretty uncommon.
I owned one of those in the 90s. Found them picky with amplification. They didn’t move me.
I got the smaller version of these. Of course, just speculating, but mine seem to not open up until I play them at a louder volume. Almost feels like I have to push them before they sound good. Is it possible with the original crossover, it is like pushing water through a kinked hose because of the cheese? Thanks
I've owned a pair of 804 Nautilus since new and I wonder if they can be upgraded to match the newer D3 and D4 variants, assuming they're better, of course.
I remember when these were current. Never cared for the sound of the Kevlar midrange or the tweeters on the 801s; had not listened to this model much. Would have been interesting if you could have snapped a few pics of the cabinet inside and added them to the video. Those Kevlar drivers were eye catching back then. Completely different "looking" than anything else out.
Hopefully someone sends in the JBL250TI. I'd love to see Danny's measurements/thoughts/upgrades for it.
Hi there, I enjoy watching your videos keep the good work. When it comes to binding posts it seems like the problem is frequently the magnetic nuts; would it be a good solution to just change those and not the whole binding post?
You could and it would be an improvement, or you can just swap all of it out for tube connectors and get a much larger improvement.
Aluminum PCB traces? Had Danny ever heard about tinned copper?
Yes....
That was my immediate thought too. It might even be Cu-Ni-Sn, but there's definitely Cu traces under the plating. That's evident from the component side images, where the traces appear brownish through the pale green of the fibreglass substrate.
Even replacing solder from it and replacing with quality one would make a diff in clarity
I pulled it out and checked it. This one is tinned Copper.
I remember these, they had some good points, but I found them harsh . Your Examination verified what I was hearing years ago, thanks and good work
Great video, when doing measurements you mention you do it at tweeter level, how far out from the front baffle?
One this one we started at 1 meter to get a reference then moved out to 56".
Thank you again . I onestly thought it had the best parts in quality ,in their crossovers. In all those years . 🤔😅
We be on the same page. Short cables hand wired
Hand soldered. Cabinet like a skyscraper. No ports, open baffle from 700hz to 5000hz. Still need ideas and parts. Going to call yall next week. I miss my 'shop',scope etc. But terminal and live at level 2+ pain. Too late to do a channel, carry on
I remember how much I liked this generation of B&W’s . I just don’t feel the same about the newer ones. Not that they’re bad, it’s just a matter of taste
Great video! I just wonder if there is any speaker that you can buy that has a good price no object crossover. It seems that all speakers go on the cheap side when it comes to building crossovers. I know that just by buying better parts from Danny improved my speakers 100%. There was no redesign, just better quality parts. At first I didn't use the tube connectors, but when I did get around to installing them, I could hear more detail and less smearing than I had heard before. The soundstage even had kind of a 3D quality compared to before.
It's funny how a lot of little things add up to not being so little anymore, and thanks for posting the feedback on the tube connectors.
I've often wondered about stacked or just well positioned, tube enclosure speaker cabinets. I mean, you can almost fix all of the box problems by turning a square into a circle. I think B&W makes a version of what I'm thinking already, but I've never had the opportunity to listen to one and probably never will. But at least on paper and in my mind, a bunch of tubular enclosures just make good sense. The only real "if" factor I can foresee is the tubular material itself. Anyway, looking at this just made me think of that, out loud.
Cheers 🍻
Tapered tubes.
@@RennieAsh :
Yes, something like that is what I'm picturing. Just makes perfect sense for an enclosure without the box.
The new crossover while generating a flatter response also slightly elevates the tweeter's response a bit especially with it's small treble peaks at 5500 and 8500 hz. This means that in typical listening rooms the modified 802 will sound noticeaby brighter with less heaviness in the bass than in stock form. A flat anechoic response typically translates into a somewhat brighter treble in room response. This is normal and I've I heard this effect on the big Dunlavy speakers designed for astonishingly flat anechoic response. They have a subjectively elevated treble unless your room is acoustically very dead. I believe Edgar Villchur of AR said that for a speaker to have a flat response in a typical listening room it needs to be designed with a slight downward trending response into the treble when measured anechoically. Just putting it out there for fans who like the stock 802's rich bass and somewhat polite treble which is what stock 802s and 801s sound like.
Actually a flat response is more accurate and it will have a more rolled off in room response. Voicing it down in the off axis will cause too much of a drop to the in room response. So these will not at all sound bright.
The Dunlavy's have a crapload of felt around the drivers to kill any off axis response. So they sound very similar in any room they are in, but you have to stay on axis and keep them pointed at you head for them to work.
@@dannyrichie9743 No the opposite is true for the treble. A room's reverberant qualities always energizes treble frequencies more so than the midrange.
You may be thinking of bass frequencies below 100 hz or so as they get boosted by boundary reinforcement (floor and walls). But above above that there is definitely a brightening trend in room unless the room is heavily damped which most people don't have. Anechoic or acoustically dead rooms always sound dimmer at treble frequencies than rooms with any amount of reflective surfaces.
@@socksumiI would have thought a typical listening room with drapes, furniture, carpets, and sundry other items would such out some of the treble?
Hey all - great videos & awesome upgrades, Just a suggestion, with mostly black speakers & with a black background, it's sometimes hard to see the layout & dimensions in the videos. Could a spotlight or different color background maybe be used? Maybe the contrast needs adjustment. Thanks
Our new room will be better.
I'm just happy Dan threw in a sheet of Norez AT NO CHARGE... BECAUSE HE CARES that these Puppies play Flat! Flat as the Bonneville Salt Flats which are actually flat! Odd huh?
Closed caption thinks this is a BMW speaker. Sounds good. Used ones break down often.
You can purchase these speakers for a great price on the used market, well worth it to upgrade.
Would love a look at the polk reserve r600.
If someone wants to send us one, we will. We've already looked at the L600 but not the R600.
Although B&W has very good speakers in there range nowadays, i never heard them sing like other brands.
The brother of a friend owns a pair 802D . Yes they sound good but i never experienced the goosebumps 😮
You mentioned some challenges installing the no rez. What is the optimal way to apply it? My guess is that large pieces towards the center of the panel is best. Is that correct?
We use it to cover any panel that is also an exterior wall. Covering the center of each panel is a must. Panels are most resonant at the point furthest from each edge or brace.
Using similiar materials in vehicles I would say yes as a general rule you want as large of piece as possible starting from the center of an area. You also want a firm application. Using a roller is best.
I have also used car products inside and outside of speakers with reasonably good results. Very much dampens the sound to make the speakers sound bigger and cleaner, albeit everything is a trade off for something. The big question is what is the trade off. Depends on the speaker and the use.
I think Danny was referring to this 802 specifically, as the internal Matrix bracing is very extensive! Look up some old promo pictures. I don't think the cabs need it. They are super solid, and he does not mention the "Fibercrete" midrange enclosure which is extremely dense & heavy.
What are the chances of you giving the 801 or 802 Series 3 a look? Wouldn't mind taking mine to the next level.
Nice work Danny. I know you straightened it out in the crossover but thinking about the design of that midrange pod, should they have just made the box longer and add the midrange in there to prevent the wrap around baffle loss at around 1000hz? Would that be a better approach and better for sound rather than making the adjustment in the crossover?
Notice how far back the woofer pod is located on top of the lower cabinet for time alignment
@@CashGravel Good point, that comes into play as well.
There is always a baffle step loss to contend with. It just happens at lower frequency with a bigger baffle. There is a great benefit to minimum baffle... .the sound is very open and less "boxy".
@@TheMirolab and yet I’ve heard open baffles that sound absolutely stunning with fairly large baffles. I switched to Maggie’s for now lol
wow. i'd like to hear you state the price just for informational purposes... the 801 was the first hi ender i heard back in the day. i was floored
We'll have the price of the upgrade kit on the website by Monday.
Danny - when optimizing crossover, do you optimize for 1 meter, or for 2.5/3.0m - which maybe more typical listening distance?
for larger speakers like this I refence the level at 1 watt/1 meter them move further away for additional measured responses and design work.
Hi Danny, did you also measure the speakers with the grilles on? I am curious if that makes a significant difference in the response. With the grilles on, they definitely look much nicer.
Nothing with the woofers, might do a little with the mid, though seeing as they are wire frame it may not have as much as an impact as many solid MDF frames
The grills are only removable from the mid and woofer,. Due to the low frequencies and good frame design, they do not affect the sound at all.
I listened to these back when they were new at a store. They were good sounding, but the position/room they were in wasn't ideal. That same week, I listened to the Mezzo Utopia Focals in a properly setup room and was blown away.
The thing that stands out in these videos is that the measurements crowd would argue that a flat response is all that is needed, because the measurements don't lie. Nothing could be further from the truth, but that contradicts the foundation of their superiority complex. Great video.
Some people like colored speakers.
@@ChicagoRob2 Just as well as all speakers are colored. The least colored being a Quad electrostatic, nothing in a box comes close.
Another great video 👍
I'm curious though, you always talk about the quality of parts and steel nuts on the binding posts etc, so better parts = better sound. But how does that relate to active speakers? All that signal has to pass through a board full of cheap steel parts...right? So if that is the case, are passive speakers with really good parts better than any active speakers for clarity and depth? I'm genuinely curious as I make my own speakers and I'm always trying to improve my knowledge.
Everything that you have learned about passive speakers regarding parts quality, also applies to active speakers. Most commercially available active speakers are bottlenecked by crappy amps too.
@@dannyrichie9743 I see, so is it possible to get good results with active speakers or is it always limited to the quality of the dsp board? I've been considering making a new pair of speakers, small ones that I would really struggle to fit a passive crossover into, would it be better to have an external passive crossover or go down the active route instead?
@@damienwright2483 Doing an active system right is a lot more difficult and a lot more expensive.
@@dannyrichie9743 personally I prefer passive speakers, and I'm not sure I have the tools to learn to do it properly if it isn't straight forward, maybe in the future, but following your comment I'll probably stick to passive anyway 😆, thanks 👍
What is the speaker in the background? Looks like m165 and lgk drivers?
Top secrete new model that sets a new standard for vocal accuracy, and imaging. Stay tuned.
Back when b&w speakers were engineered and didn’t have the crossover done by ear
They had their own anechoic chamber in the late 70s.
Was this a Lawrence Dickie design?
How many of those '54 parts' were on the protection circuits?
About half of them.
@@dannyrichie9743 Worked on these and early KEFs with a similar unnecessary protection circuit in line. Why manufacturers put this junk in the signal path is beyond me. They know its wrong. Great work Danny
@@haycrossaudio5474 They have to weigh up the chances of drivers being destroyed under warranty by idiots with weedy amps. Yes , it's not theoretically good for the sound but studios and headbangers do abuse the speakers. I had a customer who fried 3 pairs of Wharfedale 507's in one day and we had to keep giving him a new pair under warranty. You can go out of business very quickly with people like that. Repaired or not, they're an open box product. The voice coils of the bass drivers were welded to the pole piece, and the plastic cones had melted. The tweeter inductors had melted too. A bad idea? maybe not.
One K Hurt. 👌
are the 801s coming out next week
We have worked on that model.
@@dannyrichie9743 do you have a crossover kit available for those i know I'm going to have to rewire the pair I have and add new biding post i have the s2 versions
Surprised you haven’t gotten any Thiel speakers in for examination
We've upgraded a few of their crossovers.
What is that speaker behind you?
Something new that will set new benchmarks.
Fancy putting your music signal through all those components.
Well it's already travelled through thousands of components in the studio, and then your CD player and then your amplifier.
I am old enough to remember these 802 S2 when they came out they used to cost like a good, well maintained new-ish second hand car. To see what parts were used in the crossover is deeply disappointing and hand-on-heart - disturbing :(
The crossover parts were probably not up to GR standards, but the designs and drivers were very good. My Matrix 805s only have six parts, but are able to deliver a +/- 1.75 dB response(as verified by anechoic charts supplied with my speakers).
@@ChicagoRob2 It is hard to say that the parts quality really reached anyone's standards. They used the cheapest parts there was.
Danny, previously you didn't attempt to upgrade the Harbeth P3ESR due to parts count. Why did you redesign this model and not the Harbeths? Pretty sure you could've tried if you wanted to. It's just a 2 way speaker.
He said the same thing about some elac towers I had. Simply replacing the parts was too costly if he just use the original design, which was fine I think in this case he totally redesigned every part of the crossover so he could control that better.
The new parts would take up to much of the inside. The capacitors and AirCore inductors would not fit. He talked about a external crossover, but the parts count would push the price thru the roof.
The reason was there appeared to be a lot of notch filters being used to control the drivers problems. Drivers with that many parts parts often need that many parts to fix all of those issue.
In this case the crossover wasn't that complex but they used a lot of parts in two protection circuits that were really not necessary.
@@CashGravel The Elac towers used some really large value caps in the circuit to limit the range of the lower woofers while allowing the upper to play up to the tweeter. Some of those big valued caps (and coils) would still be needed even if I redesigned it. Those big values really add up cost wise even if just using budget level poly caps. I think there were a few 200uF values needed. That really makes the upgrade costly. At some point it makes more sense to just build a new speaker. I tend to use our X Series models as a benchmark too. If it is cheaper to just build out one of those models and the end result is far better than the cost of polishing something that will never reach that performance level, well then, it just isn't worth it.
@@dannyrichie9743 yes I remember you telling me that. Got lucky and sold them for a good price.
Transistors, diodes and relays on a crossover? Hmmm
This is how B&W should have developed the 800 series instead of what they did with the Nautilus series. On the driver side it would have been wonderful if they had developed tweeters with a lower resonance frequency and higher spl capacity allowing it to be crossed over at say 1,5 kHz. What they produce today is sadly low fidelity even in their most expensive models, imagine selling products with a gradual frequency lift of 10 dB from 1 kHz to 10 kHz, costing 30.000 $. Greetings from Denmark
So the b in B&W is for bs. I rebuilt the crossover at a cost . I loved the difference in the end.
What would really bake someone's noodle is that it would be cheaper to have cheap digital electronic filters made for preamps that feed class-D amplifiers that can easily fit into each speaker with less space than the crossovers, and deliver a cleaner, drift-free, rock-solid cross-over frequency and better audiophile sound than the expensive, large passive filters and expensive "audiophile" 2-channel amplifiers. I still cannot believe there has been no speaker manufacturer to release an affordable, fully-active (with digital cross-overs) and individually amplified drivers from subs to mid-bass to mids to tweeters. It would be the highest quality sound while being very affordable and the speakers would be fully active and amplified. You could even make it so the sound is delivered wirelessly to the speakers over wifi and only needing a single electrical cord to plug into the wall.
Complete systems like that are a hard sell. Most that have been released use cheap D/A converters and amps. So they are bottlenecked pretty hard and far from the top levels of performance. Doing it right with high quality gear gets extremely expensive.
@dannyrichie9743 - If your wattage and noise levels in your class-D amps are at acceptable specs, you won't call the sound you get "bottlenecked". ABX experiments long ago proved "high end" class-AB amps are not any better than well designed, cheap class-D amps. Home Theater seems to always beat the classic music audio standards. Movie sound in general dispenses with the fairy dust witchcraft nonsense of the high-end music equipment hobby and gets down to real world sound production where it counts. Cost efficiency on amplification and signal processing while standardizing the source studio art sound production stage itself with proper mixing, mastering and sound stage controls. There is a reason movie soundtracks obliterate dynamically squeezed music production.
Notice how no speaker reviewers talk about SPL, dynamic punch, peak SPL output distortion, etc. Because typically music based hifi audio is overpriced and inferior. Hell, even car audio has better design standards from a signal standpoint due to fully active crossovers, DSPs and individual driver amplification. The 2-channel music hifi hobby is still operating with a 1960s mindset. It's time to modernize.
Save money on areas where you get no real audible gain (amplifiers, preamplifier, DACs) and put the money to work getting a perfect crossover network (without the passive limitations of frequency drift at high outputs), higher distortion-free SPL at the listen position, deeper bass response, better cabinet shaping and bracing, etc.
@@timothys9288 I am sure you read all of that somewhere on the Internet, but none of it is true.
Does it work on 801 Matrix S3?
Nope, crossovers are specific to each speaker.
I know quality counts, but for example there are cars that have the best parts and measurements but drive like a tank, great speakers like great cars have a black art involved. just the ingredients in the mix can't always make a high quality sound in the finished product. Bright speakers with a dark source and amp can sound perfect, yet the speakers on their own measure like crap. So as well as good parts and engineering there's a dark art involved in the very best sounding speakers even taking into account we all have differing tastes, designers of certain brands hit the mark time and time again. Are they just fortunate or is it their experience of this dark art? or are the Hifi press just gas lighting?
After all, the best way ist, buy a new speaker, send them directly to Danny, and after an possible Upgrade send them to you.
By far weakest link of B&W was it's cheesy parts quality in their crossovers, I did some older 640i towers and rebuild crossovers with quality parts and what a difference it did make , added some cabinet damping too.
These old tweeters are now obsolete and I think your graph shows like they lost some fluid and response is more dull , it would be cool to replace them with some new modern tweeters . I really like the concept of separated cabinets for lows , mids and tweeter suspended above ... maybe Danny could design some nice 3 way and 2 way design with woofer in a box , than mid in its own well dampen box with maybe X static tweeter above the mid in the air or tiny enclosure right above ?
Or I could just shift the mid-bass woofer to one side like the Brute and Bully.... Those worked out great.
@@dannyrichie9743 But midrange woofer in small box with tweeter on top with air around makes it even less diffraction for amazing imaging and airy soundstage ... that was the whole point of this B&W design ...
Danny, great again. Did you design a 3-way or 3,5-way crossover to this speaker?
It is a three way design.
@@dannyrichie9743 oki. Thanks maestro. 👍
Danny - your style is to make the speaker sound as flat as possible on axis. All off axis measurements are less flat than the on axis measurements. Does this imply that you believe that speakers should be toed in to point directly at the listener's head?
I try to make them accurate on and off axis (as much as possible). Toe in has as much to do with room treatment or room acoustics as much as anything.
@@dannyrichie9743 and what’s happening high up? Whether theres still a bit of treble lift or drop off?
This style to me is far more appealing than the wacky Dr Who inspired new style. Im aware the new cab design is integral to its functional performance but still... Speaking of B&W, whats with the whole marketing partnership with McLaren? Klipsch has a similar thing going on with them as well, to me its odd. Odd like the "Harley Davidson" Ford F150 and the "Trek" bicycle edition VW Jetta. Just me??
get roasted b&w
Do some naim speakers
Send one in.
It’s a great speaker
Hi Danny. Can we get any more teasers about the real story here? Those LGK 2.X?’s?
Soon. A new product line is under development and they are over the top good. They have some of the best imaging and best vocals of any speaker at any price. We are going to get a little further along in development of the whole line before spilling the beans. There is also some proprietary development going into these that take them up another notch or two, and we are shoring up those details still.
@@dannyrichie9743 Super excited. From what reviews have said, I think this may be a pairing many have been hoping for.