2. speakers
  3. 1373059564

B&W 800 N & D Series - General Advice Needed

I few years ago, I bought a very well broken in set of 805N. I love them and since then I've tried out many other brands: Harbeth, Dynaudio, Selah, Merlin, Usher, PSB, Focal, Magnepan, Sonus Faber as well as some others. The speakers I come back to again and again are the 805N. The midrange is amazing to me.

So, I took the plunge on some 805D2 new. I was awaiting the same great sound of the 805N but with a more refined tweeter. Initially they were pretty dry sounding. They soundstage did not have the same palpable body of the old 805N. I played the 805D2 day and night for a few months, racking up about 300 hours. I kept waiting for the AHA! moment but it never came. They remained uninvolving and sterile to my ears. Putting the 805N back on the stands was a total relief. it all sounded the way it should again. A warm, full sound with crisp detail and solid imaging.

Now, a set of 802N came up for sale close to me and I jumped on them expecting the same qualities as the 805N but with more information below 60hZ. . The owner told me that despite their age, they have very low hours - about 30-40 he guessed. So, I set them up, got them positioned, stabilized the image. What do I hear...? The same DRY midrange as the 805D2. No sweetness initially. If I turn them up to strong listening levels then they do really come alive but at normal, easy listening levels they are dry like the 805D2 - just not as much. I find myself able to listen to the 802N for extended periods of time because the tweeter seems to be less harsh. The downside to this is that I find film dialogue to be fuzzy - I find myself working to understand the words whereas with the 805N dialogue is self evident.

So, friends, my questions are:

Does B&W really have a very extensive break in, to the point that the "life" that I seek from them really only comes into being after many 100s of hours?

Is the 802N an 805N with more bass or is it voiced differently so that it has a recessed midrange?

Associated equipment:
MAC6700 Integrated 200wpc @ 8ohm
Arcam AVR600
Ayre AX7e
Computer FLAC
SONOS
michaelkingdom

Showing 5 responses by michaelkingdom

michaelkingdom's avatar
michaelkingdom OP
153 posts
 
The Ayre has a bit of a more refined top end but the Mac is just generally more lifelike to me. The sound is grander. I find myself turning the Mac up, sometime too loud, because I want to hear more. On the other hand, the Ayre has a more refined cleanness to it. If I had to choose, I'd go Mac.

Functionally, the MAC6700 is a Swiss army knife. USB, toslink, MM, MC, analog in, tone controls, digital am/fm tuners, hd radio, headphone. This is not a minimalist piece. I must say it is nearly flawlessly executed.

The Ayre is also great (soundwise) but very basic in design. Nothing wrong with simple done perfectly.
michaelkingdom's avatar
michaelkingdom OP
153 posts
 
That may be more the nature of this hobby, rather than a brand attribute. After having listened to 40-50 speakers in my budget range, I actually do really like the B&W sound. My question is more regarding midrange break-in as the 805N is dramatically more descriptive than the other models I have heard.
michaelkingdom's avatar
michaelkingdom OP
153 posts
 
Zd542 - The bass units (4) are all tight - inner and outer rings. The midrange does have a large factory set screw protruding from the back of the marlon head which I have been warned never to touch. The tweeters are firmly set. I opened the bottom xover door and all internal wiring is fresh/undisturbed. They are in phase. I have listened to many speakers in this room and my internal "out of phase" sensor goes off instantly. Thank you for the tips.
michaelkingdom's avatar
michaelkingdom OP
153 posts
 
Audioquest4life - Regarding tube amps, that sounds like a great idea. I had a Cary SLI80 Signature up until recently that I bet would have been a good match. Perhaps I will look to tubes rather than SS or monoblock SS.

It is interesting that your observations of the D series parallel mine. I am so impressed with the 805N that I could not imaging the successor would not be equivalent or greater but that was my observation.

I have been using the B&W jumpers and the 8 ohm taps. The 4 ohm taps seem to dampen the high frequency energy of the sound - not so much that it is not enjoyable but putting them back on 8 ohm is instant gratification. I am using a standard set of Dayton 8ft. cables. Speaker cables is not an area that I have explored yet. Recommendations are very appreciated.

I have quite a few options to play with regarding amplification. I could use the Ayre for the HF and the Mac for the LF or viceversa. I also have a beast of an SS amp - a Behringer EP4000 which despite its lowly status in the audiophile community makes my Magnepans sing better than anything else I have used. It puts out 670w at 8 ohms continuously.

I had a Bryston 4b for a while and I was not drawn to the hardness. However, the details certainly came through well on the 805N.

So, rather than this being a question of Kevlar break-in, you are suggesting it is amplification matching, correct?
michaelkingdom's avatar
michaelkingdom OP
153 posts
 
Djones1915 - I am definitely polygamous when it comes to speakers and I do own quite a few right now. With the excellent resale value, I have found it as good as any place to keep money, certainly better than the stock market!

So, yes, I have a set of Focal Micro Utopia BE. The beryllium tweeter is a solid work of art. I did a comparison between the Harbeth SHL5, Focal Utopia Micro BE and the Dynaudio C1 MK2 Signatures. While categorically the Dynaudios came out the general winner, I LIKED the Harbeth and Focals more and still have them today.

http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?cspkr&1360980222&openmine&zzMichaelkingdom&4&5#Michaelkingdom

The Micros are perfect, neutral, non fatiguing, a few notches more intelligible than the Nautilus tweeter but they just don't make me want to listen to song after song. They don't excite me about listening to music on a regular basis like B&W.

I don't know WHY, I just like the B&W sound. I like other speakers too but why does one have to stop liking the "old speakers" as you move up some invisible empirical ladder? Well, I guess I'm guilty of that too but B&W sounds great to me.
More to discover