What are your general thoughts of B&W speakers

Nice upper mids and highs... but... no bass.

If they are bought out and management fired then it is the beginning of the end for B&W. Like Thiel they will become a lauded name from their past achievements rather than current ones.

Owned B&W’s over the years from Matrix series to 802 N & 802 D2. Sold them on a retail level for the D2 and D3 era paired with all kinds of different gear. My overall assessment is MEH but they do sound good. I’ve tried my best to hold them high regard but there is such a long list of competitors I’d choose over them. They look damn nice though and sell very well to newcomers in this hobby.

I ran B&W DM1800 speakers (with integral stands) as my main speakers for years.  They were great, and I didn't feel the need to upgrade for the longest of times.  B&W peaked with the Series III and pretty much went downhill since then.  Modern B&W are overpriced, don't do bass anything like as well as they should commensurate with price, and are finicky with amplification.  There are so many other alternatives out there, they are, frankly, irrelevant.  They are only front-and-center in so many people's consciousness because of the huge dealer network that they established years ago.  If they had the same number of stores in the US as do Spendor, Proac, PMC or ATC, no one would be talking about them.

B&W was recently sold to a Silicon Valley startup, Eva Automation, and the company has undergone some big changes this year. Classe was shut down and Eva fired long-time B&W President John Henderson which, as rumor has it, ticked off a lot of dealers. I'm not sure where the company is heading at this point.

Cool, as long as you're happy. There's many happy users of the 802Ds. It's a good speaker, for all intense purposes. It not flawless, but what speaker is...

Really enjoying some 805D speakers currently. It's a toss up between them and my Gallo 3.5 - can't decide which I like better! The 805D with a Rel Strata is currently hooked up and sounding outstanding. Very textured, high resolution sound that is not fatiguing in the slightest.

I hold B&W speakers in high regard, i own a pair of 802D's and wouldnt trade them for the world, they are well rounded and reproduce voice perfectly. They can be considered sharp & dry which i would say is correct, thats not a bad thing. Consider what someone sounds like singing/ talking to you from 4 metres away then what it might sound like in your ear 200mm away. the dryness comes from the recording not the speaker. all the sharpness from s' and t's when people announce these sounds are sharp and dry beside your ear but smooth when your a certian distance away from them. when recorded the artist is right infront of the mic so all those details will be picked up. The fact your speakers reproduce that back to you is just a testamant of their accurcy and quality. If you dont hear tat in other speakers you not hearing what your supposed to.

Dryness and harshness is accurate representation not a lack of quality a bad trait. You can EQ out what you dont like, dont blame the speaker because its too good.

Well, I must agree that the B&W 800 series is good bang for the buck overall. Best to go to England and buy them there at half the price over here. Are they the ultimate, no, but there's a lot of happy people who think they are. So who cares what we think, Dinster?

I prefer the old 801 Matrix 2 and even the 3. That was a truly great speaker. But it had a crappy crossover and needed the biggest high current amp you could get your mitts on.

Is the op even here anymore? If so, you might want to look at some tyler acoustics speakers also.

Thought I'd add my tuppence, there is so much B&W "hate" in this thread, I thought it needed some "love". It's the tall poppy syndrome. People love to hate the successful, and give the small guy a chance! B&W have economies of scale that others can only dream of. I currently own 805 signature and 802 diamonds, and after listening to other systems, never fail to come home and be enthralled by my sound. I have never heard 802D's sounding good with Macintosh or Classe amps (i.e.. at the dealership), but that might be my lazy dealer having permanent in wall wiring to distribution points!! and demonstrating in a compromised space.
My theory is get a good item that you believe in and then tweak with, cables, electronics and isolation etc. until you get the sound to your preference. There is no "best" hi-fi. There is, however, a most expensive, and all to often sound and price are equated. Ultimately you must get a sound that you like, and to hell with what everyone else thinks!!! and that's the hard part, we all want affirmation that we did good! There is also the gee wiz factor of having something no one has heard of or something rare, or expensive!
It's hard to evaluate a speaker in isolation, the sound will depend a great deal on what it is connected to, the room etc.etc. You are listening to the system not just the speakers. Unfortunately it is virtually impossible to have home demo's of all the potential speakers in a price range. I do not believe there are many bad speakers in the 10-30k mark, it really comes down to preference. Also beware of "Demo" music, it's designed to impress, listen to real music that you would normally want to listen to.
I think 802's are amazing value for money, and suite my taste perfectly. I am not limited to "audiophile" music, but can enjoy all genres. (very versatile) I like the B&W "house sound" as much as I like the Lyra's "house sound". In summary don't be intimidated by strongly held "opinions", feel free to choose for yourself. At the price, you won't go wrong with the 8 series.

I would agree with that notion...

My general thought is that the 800 series is an excellent-sounding speaker, while their lower CM and 600 lines are bettered by the competition from likes of Paradigm and PSB.

Missioncooner,

"Not my cup of tea" is not bad. Honest at least! What would have been awesome is something like "not my cup of tea because..."

If you asked me what do you think about x product? And I had experience with x product. If I just said its crap, or I don't like it, it doesn't get us very far.

Opinions are like ar*eholes... everyone has one, but nice to get some idea when you have none. To me that's what the 'gon is for.

Sorry to be an arse. I mean it in the best possible way.

Hey Mish, haven't heard from ya for a while! Thought maybe you took up a different hobby. Naw, couldn't be that lucky...lol

Hows this..not my cup of tea,lol

Andyprice44,

All the conflicting views above on what B&W speakers are like can only tell
you that they are transparent, sensitive to set up and upstream electronics.

I do get the feeling that some above posts are not speaking about the 800
series though. The 802D may be easier to use bass wise in a smaller
room, compared to the 801D which is more likely to boom near room
boundaries.

Bare in mind they are demanding speakers to drive and need good amps to
power them. So probably you are looking at SS amplification that doubles
power into load. If driven well they will sing.

Good luck. Let us know how you get on.

Missioncoonery,

At least maybe we have narrowed down which B&W series you are talking about. The budget ones which are now made in china. Then there's the magico dealer... I'm not sure magico even make a speaker as cheap as any B&W reference range? In fact the last magico I heard was a 2 1/2 way floor stander which cost more than 2 x the price of the flagship B&W N801d.

I find it hard to take your opinion seriously because you have given us little or no information as to what your general thoughts are? Well, other than you wouldn't have them even if they were given to you.

Yeah it's a funny line and we all like a laugh, but its empty of anything serious..." like a heart attack".

Remember an established brand means you know they are likely be there in the next five mins.

The Abbey road reference is not to tell you what a great speaker sounds like, but to clarify the fact that the 800 series are used by professionals who could have anything they ask for. Therefore are unlikely to be as bad as you portrait, otherwise the magico's would be there.

"Abbeys heyday was 3 decades ago..."

Like Chadeffect said, you are misinformed. The Berlin Philharmonic orchestra with Sir Simon Rattle, Gergiev and Sir Colin Davis conducting the London Symphony Orchestra, Riccardo Chailly with the Concertgebow of Amsterdam, and more musicians of such caliber have recorded many times recently at Abbey road studios, producing very fine recordings.

Enough said Missioncoomery.

...outside the fact B&W now out sources everythink outside the 800 series to China and Abbey road studios means very little to me as far as what a great speaker sounds like,im as serious as a heart attack.The original poster asked "for general thoughts" for the brand and I gave it,my opinion..Simple enough

Missioncoonery,

" An argument as old and tired as the brand". "Abbeys heyday was 3 decades ago..." My friend you are misinformed.

They main reason Abbey road still exists is because it has everything. It is one of Londons only studios apart from Air that can hold a large symphony orchestra, and is home to some of the finest collections of mics, resources and people.

Dont for a minute underestimate them. Abbey road can have anything they want. Every idiot tries to get their equipment in there.

Nearly every prestige film score recorded in the UK is done there. (Lord of the rings/Harry Potter, Star Wars etc) So all the finest engineers and producers go there because they get the results they need. This includes the monitoring. All you have to do is look in the utility rooms or under the stairs to find any speaker (admittedly many forms of top end B&W speakers).

Do you think that a manufacturer like B&W, with the experience they have could somehow not be able to make speaker systems to compete? They have probably forgotten more than most guys know.

B&W actually build their own drivers. Not OEM guys plonking in other people's parts( aside from caps which are made to their specs by mundorf).

Of course monitoring is a very personal thing, but you cannot be serious if you believe they haven't made a speaker worth auditioning since the 80s. That's just daft.

Mapman.I agree with what your saying.IMO its an old brand with an established name.Doesnt mean anything really to me.My closest B&W dealer reps lots of speakers including Magico.In converstaion I asked him about B&W,his comments were customers come in with a madeup mind and buy them,no salesmanship required,nor typically any other additions."I just keep my mouth shut and sell em what they want hence I stock em".

I own 800 Diamonds at the moment. They sound better and better with every small upgrade. Great speakers.

No doubt a lot of vendors have been nipping at B&W's heels in recent years, but in defense of B&W, they seem to be holding their own pretty well in regards to popularity, at least in the US with the more mainstream and less esoteric remaining B&M shops, despite there being perhaps more formidable alternatives out there these days than ever.

Both local major remaining local audio/video shops in the Baltimore metro area still carry B&W but also seem to carry more alternate brands, like PSB, Totem, QUAD, Polk, Thiel, Vandersteen, and Monitor Audio. B&W has a very solid brand reputation developed over the years in its corner.

Chadeffect..the defense of B&W that" only the best studios use them "is an argument as old and tired as the brand.Doesnt hold water anymore especially considering Abbeys heyday was 3 decades ago and most of the studios today employ them are doing movie tracks..I agree they were and I repeat were a speaker worth additioning back in the 1980s but there are too many speaker builders today that are far superior in every aspect ,in the same price range and dont out sourcing to China,my opinion only.

"You could say the HD800s are tilted upwards towards spacial cues and air. My experience of the MBL."

No doubt, spatial cues and air (when set up properly in the right room, not an easy task with the larger models)a are the main distinguishing characteristic of mbl. Its a subjective love it or hate it kind of thing as is much of home audio.

OHMs are a much better value and more practical for most IMHO. They excel at coherency and delivering weight to the music in an effortless manner along with all the rest, although a fairly hefty amp is still required, at least for the larger models. OHMs are being marketed and distributed in Germany, mbls home turf, these days. I wonder how that is going?

Hi Mapman,

Please don't think I'm am saying the MBL is bad. Although I doubt there is much value for what you get. Placement with omi speakers and dipoles can create problems.

Surely all things being equal, reference speakers should(!) pretty much sound the same. Because hopefully they are not editing what is passing through them.

That being said as I mentioned in my post comparing the Sehneiser HD800 to the Audeze LCD3, you would not confuse these reference headphones sonically. They sound very different.

You would have to be mad to say the HD800s are rubbish and utterly bonkers to say the LCD3 are rubbish. You could say the HD800s are tilted upwards towards spacial cues and air. My experience of the MBL. I have heard the Graz ribboned Apogee Diva sound this way too when the ribbons where not run in.

So I guess once we know a particular trait in a speaker (once placement etc are taken into account) then matching of auxiliary equipment becomes as important.

The B&W 801d and the 802d mated with the big Classe reference 400 monos ( as used in Abbey road studios) sounds balanced. But I have also used the 802d in Studios using Bryston with a much less success. Leaving the 802d sounding strained and metallic.

I have a friend who uses the 802d with 2x CJ 350 SS amps which sound very creamy and smooth. So what we have to say is the B&w D speakers are very transparent and rely heavily on the quality of the amp driving it.

Personally I like B&W speakers. Good honest performance.

Chad,

Ag trios (high efficiency horns) and omni low efficiency mbl are of course
as different as can be, so hard to compare. The sound radiation pattern
of an omni is diffuse pretty much by defnition, but i would say the sound
Set up right is not. I have heard other full range horns but not ag and
compared. Not
nearly as much diffence in sound necessarily as design might lead one to
expect, all things considered.

I heard mbl 111e once set up optimally. I heard weight differences from
rtr, vinyl and digital, but not a lack overall. Specific recording quality of
the
material played seemed to be the main factor, but sohrce device in the
system used anoher to some degree.

No doubt, omnis seem to require lots of power compared to others to
perform best. I have observed that over time with my ohms. Having lots
of "meat on the bones" is one of my favorite terms to describe
them these days using 500 w/ch icepower amps. Larger higher end B&W
speakers i have heard are similar in regards to having good meat on the
bone, at least with the right amps, as mentioned.

Mapman,

I guess deffuse is really what I mean when comparing the MBL to some other designs. Especially if compared to the AG Trio. Not being palpable is my point.

Phasey is probably not the correct term. I associate MBL with that thin but airy sound as if phase or a form of comb filtering causes there not to be weight.

To explain the sonic difference i mean, take the Sehneiser HD800 headphones and compare them to the Audeze LCD3 headphones. The HD800 has a detailed air/thinness where as the LCD3 are rich, very detailed and organic by having much more flesh on the bone. Thicker sounding I guess.

Rhljazz,

The only ionic tweeter I have heard is the acapella. I know of no other tweeter to sound as good. It's so pure. Stunning clarity and extension. But the problem is mating it to the lower drivers.

IMHO the acapella fails because the tweeter is so good. The xover just shows up the difference in speed. Just like the subs on the old hybrid Martin Logan's failed at keeping up with the ESL upper panel.

A speaker is all about balance. So maybe as you say a silk dome sounds better in a speaker, but probably because it mates better with the other drivers.

But here we are again discussing the finer points of exotic tweeters when we have people saying "I wouldn't have em for free..."

For all we know these types of opinions are about the lowest budget B&W when we are talking about the diamond tweeters which are only found in the reference series. To post your opinion you must add which model you are discussing and what you are using it with.

I wasn't attempting to profess the superiority of one type of tweeter over another, only to point out that B&W offer a diamond tweeter that they build themselves and that tweeter has a potential advantage over other types of construction.

Back to your analysis, so how does the ionic tweeter and the silk dome fare in the numbers game? My personal bias is for the silk dome.

"B&W has a "sound" but as to any of the speakers you mention blowing them away, including the phasey or defuse MBL I find hard to believe."

mbls phasey? Hmm, not sure about that. The large holographic presentation might resemble how some recordings made that way sound on more conventional setups, but do mbl speakers or eletronics really introduce phase issues otherwise?

Maybe relatively diffuse sounding compared to others, particularly more directional designs like horns, if not set up well or if the extremely wide and deep soundstage mbls set up right are capable of producing is described as diffused compared to the norm.

How many manufacturers offer diamond tweeters? They are certainly at the fore front of technology.

Perhaps because it is not superior to Berrilum Tweeters. Steve Mowry says in the article "The Whole Truth About Beryllium Diaphragms: -

"For a given geometry the first bending (break-up) frequency is proportional to the material Speed Of Sound, where the speed of sound within a material is defined as the square root of the Young’s Modulus divided by the Mass Density, (m/s); the higher the better. However, the Mass of the diaphragm must also be considered. Then the ratio of the Speed Of Sound to the Mass Density can be used as the materials’ acoustic figure of merit, (m4/kg/s); the higher the better."

After that he shows values of "Acoustic Figure of Merit" for different material (higher the better)in m4/kg/s

Berillum - 6.97
Diamond - 4.92
Aluminum - 1.86
Titanium - 1.13
Steel - 0.63

They can be nice with the right amp and setup but often that is not the case when you hear them. In general, I tend to prefer PSB, Focal and Totem when I hear them these days.

I owned B&W P6s for about 10 years which were a good value in their day.

Missioncoonery,

"General thoughts" on a speaker would assume the speaker is being used with equipment of similar quality. I did not mention room or cables.

So from your comment ( missioncoonery- "Personally I wouldnt take em if free...") we are to deduce you think they are bad. But some of the finest recording studios on the planet would disagree. So now who do we believe? Your opinion or the opinion of gifted professionals?

So with no insight into the way they are being used either you are deaf or the pros are deaf. Ummm... Which amp were you using?

Chadeffect ,I totally disagree with what your saying.."What are your general thoughts of B&W speakers" is what was asked.We dont need to know room size,amps,preamps,cables,treatments etc to give thoughts of the brand.Personally I wouldnt take em if free assuming I couldnt sell them and get what I consider better.The way I read it are comments on the B&W line,pretty simple to access!

Baranowski,

Exactly the point I have made in earlier posts. This thread and others like it are useless without full descriptions of model and amps driving them etc.

I have heard many speaker systems sound bad. Many of those times it was not the speaker that was bad. You are only as good as the weakest link. A great speaker under powered or over damped will sound at best average.

Even the ZR1 would be slow if driven by a blind person, or driven in the snow, or across a ploughed field. Come on people. Lets have proper information.

B&W speakers represent innovation, immaculate contruction, genuine value, and solid performance.

They were the first to use woven Kevlar drivers, adopt computer analysis of their own drivers, and explore different cabinet materials, construction, and shapes. Witness the laminated curved birch cabinet introduced with the N802. That set the industry on its ear. It's probably one of the most copied shapes ever. Most of todays copies do not exhibit the same quality of materials and contruction. Other examples are the matrix cabinet, the dimpled ports, and the tapered tube enclosures. How many manufacturers offer diamond tweeters? They are certainly at the fore front of technology.

B&W are competitive at the various price points in the market. There will be afficiondos and detracters as with any product.

BTW, I own two pairs of B&W, the orignal CM1 with the Phenolic cabinet and full matrix construction and N802's. I also own other brands of speakers that I enjoy as much or more.

This topic has been killed! And yet people still compare crazy speakers to B&W. By Crazy I mean the COST difference between the B&W and WHATEVER.

Look it comes down to this,

What B&W speaker are we speaking of????

What speaker are we comparing to????

What are we using it for? two channel or home theater???

Are we using a sub in either instance????

What equipment is being used????

what type of room is being used??? has it been treated???

All things concidered equil, If you compare Any speaker to a speaker in a much higher price range the more expensive speaker SHOULD sound better.

If you have a pair of $20,000 speakers and want to compare them to a pair of $4,000 pair of B&W, you are being ridiculous! then think about the guy with the 20k speakers, I would imagine he also has two mono amps for them at a cost of 10k a piece. I doubt the 4k B&Ws have that.

If you put ANY higher end speaker with lower quality equipment, Lets say a "best buy" receiver (to exagerate my point), it will sound like crap.

Hey... lets compare a ZR1 Corvette with a Camaro...

Vette is 120k the camaro around 30k....
Will the Vette be faster???? Hell Ya it will.
Will the vette go around the corners faster??? Hell Ya it will.
Is the vette 4 times as much money??? Hell Ya it is.

Now think of this.... How many divers that own the ZR1 vette can drive it to its potential???? I would say less than 1%. Also you would have to rent out a track to even play with it at that level.

It is just stupid to compare these two, Period!

There are good buys ( bang for the buck) in all catigories of speakers, processors and amps...

Buy what speakers you want, buy equipment that complements them.

and just enjoy them.

Bill

I progressively traded up from the 804S to 803D to 803Diamond over a period of 5 years.

I continued to enjoy their unique combination of musicality and looks. I found in particularly the 804/803 visual design is timeless, though I also like the 802/800 avant-garde looks (not as much the 801).

Both the 803D and 803Diamond have been the most satisfying loudspeakers I owned in terms of combination of good tonal balance, bass weight, transparency and smooth sound.
The 804/803 does not necessarily require high powered amplifiers (I successfully drove them to satisfying levels with 60W) – but they demand the highest quality transparent low noise amplifiers you can afford (think Class A).

Their slightly warmish, smooth sound and relatively low cost (at least compared to the boutique brands) tend to result in music/gear lovers pairing them with less ideal front-end equipment. Interestingly, although they are fairly forgiving of less than high-end equipment and top-notch recordings, they reward any upgrade in equipment and increase in recording resolution. They will sound a bit flat if you scrimp on the equipment quality. However they will reward any tweaks to mains conditioning, vibration isolation, cables, synergistic equipment combinations, room position adjustment to millimetres (similar to the care that a Wilson Audio loudspeaker is positioned). That is why most hifi store setups sound less than inspirational.

So any significant weaknesses (other than if you think fanatical setup hygiene is too much hard work)? I will rate the Kevlar midrange as good rather than exceptional. It is not as adept as e.g. a Seas magnesium midrange at micro-dynamics. However it tracks overall macro-dynamics very well without compression and the sharp break-up nodes of the magnesium cone. On balance I think the midrange compromises of a 3 way are well judged. Any significant advance will likely require a 4 way design using a pure pistonic midrange design (as per the Nautilus design) or a significantly more advanced cone material.

I listen to my 803D / 803Diamonds probably around 350 out of 365 days every year. They faithfully provide me listenable and enjoyable music and continue to surprise me on a good recording.

Gwng8,

what amp were you using to drive them? Being devils advocate... Could it have been your source or amp that was clinical?

Which speakers would you say are the opposite of clinical and what did you use to drive them?

I would describe them as clinical (I had CM series). They didn't have the "soul" I was looking for. They are like Volvo, they're safe, they get the job done, but they're kinda plain....IMO.

If you are living somwhere near Pontiac, MI then I would recommend you to give Salksound soundscape 8 an audition - one of the best in $10,000 price range. If not, just call them or email them to find out where you can get an audition near where you leave.

Wow. What a topic to pick when you ask what people think of B&W speakers! This has to be the most "infamous" topic in the speaker forum. Yes, I like B&W. No, they are not the greatest speakers on the planet. They deffently have a "house" sound. But that can just about be said of any speaker system. Going out buying and selling speakers on A-gon at will is not as easy as one of the posters said.

I have listened to alot of different and expensive speakers and yes some sound better than B&W. But the one thing that impresses me is B&W has great value. Alot for the money. This is important to most of us that is unless you already have to much money. Some of you say the speaker sounds like it has a blanket over it. Ok, you like brite sounding speakers. Others say "blows the doors off of B&W" or "blows it away." I'm really leary of people's discriptions when they use terms like this.

There is a reason why B&W sells many thousands of speaker systems and I will tell you right now it is more than just their marketing strategy. Once again. Great speaker, and great value. IMO.

Mpit,

What did you drive your B&Ws with? I know the 801/801d/802ds pretty well. They do need some driving. Bi amping helps depending on the amp.

B&W has a "sound" but as to any of the speakers you mention blowing them away, including the phasey or defuse MBL I find hard to believe. Different yes.

To truly have such a strong opinion of B&W would mean you went to great efforts to maximise on each speakers performance. They are reference speakers and will show up equipment in the chain.

From your post I see no information which leads me to feel you seeked help from the right people set them up. To squeeze the last 10% out of any speaker takes effort and you mention none.

I am not saying they are the greatest speaker ever built, but they are not as you describe either.

Mpit

I like the blanket analogy, the speaker never opens up, the music does not fly out...

we have beaten this horse to death...

:^)

In all honesty The last ten pair of speakers I have owned all blew the doors off the 802's including both the nautilaus and the diamond series.

I think the issue is most people who are just getting into the high end market like to hear the speakers they chhoose before they buy them and most of the time that is just not a viable option. Most of the high end speakers are very hard to find in stores. About 7 years ago I wanted to buy some 802's for the 2nd time and found a dealer about 75 miles from my home who had B&W and Wilson. That was the first time I have ever heard of Wilson. That day I bought a used pair of wat puppy 6's and a new pair of 7's.

Since that time I have owned Merlin, Dali, Eggleston, MBL, Vandersteen, and Sonus etc just to name a few. In my opinion all of those were vastly superior to the B&W. The 802;s were great looking speakers but they always sounded like they had a blanket over them when compared to the others I have owned.

That is what is so great about Audiogon. It gives you a great way to try speakers that in all likely hood you will never hear unless you buy them. If you don't like them you can turn around and sell them without losing an arm and a leg.

I like the b&w 802's. They sounded great to me everytime I've heard them. They always had serious amps hooked to them but they sound great to me. Great bass and what seemed to me as having a good amount of "bloom". I'd like to hear some sonus fabers too though. They just look beautiful!

Your concerns are exactly why I like buying used on Audiogon. As long as you buy your speakers right you can always sell them without losing your ass. If you try something and its not your cup of teas. Sell them and try something else. Until you get them in your room with your equiipment you really don't know what they will sound like.

About ten years ago I started buying B&W including 802, 803 and 805's and others. Then when I started purchasing on audiogon I was opened up to many other speakers that I otherwise would never have had an opportunity to own. If I was looking for a ten thousand dollar speaker it would not be a B&W. It might be a Wilson, Sonus, Eggleston or a whole host of others but it would not be B&W.

The good news is when you decide to sell the B&W they sell quite well. JUst make srue you buy them right.

French-f

I think the answer lies in the fact the B&W appears to be more focussed on HT than on traditional high end audio/stereo. Just my impression. Can you imagine how expensive a 5.1 system is with 802ds all around?

I'm not sure how much you are really missing with the diamond driver. I have 804(s) and 803(d) and there is not a tremendous difference between them (upper-mid to high). The "d" is a bit smoother with nicer space. Program material and amplification matters a lot more. Plus, there have been numerous other improvements in crossover components from the Matrix versions through the Nautilus to the current "d" versions that also make a difference.