802D3 definitely transcends...

[joey_v]

So my friend Kevin and I went to listen to the new 802D3 and back to back'd it against the 802D2.

He owns Focal 1038BE, so I trust his ears.

We demo'd, we came out with the same conclusions:

802D3 is better in terms of a more cohesive reproduction, more density to images and vocalists, more projection into the room, and not as sharp to the ears but with all the detail of the 802D2.

Being the owner of the 802D2, I think I know that speaker well enough... I gave the 802D3 a 20-25% improvement in sound. I wasn't even sure if he was going to like it but he did! He said I was too conservative with my numbers and he suggested something close to the 40% mark of improvement.

I thank Kevin for his time spent with me auditioning what could possibly be my next speakers.

All thanks to AA :banana:

[2fastdriving]

I owned d2's and a I've heard the D3.. I think you are closer to the truth. Yes they are better speakers, but let's not get carried away. I'll hear the 800d3 on Wednesday... Among the First normal human beings to do so, and I'll give you a full report.

[joey_v]

I owned d2's and a I've heard the D3.. I think you are closer to the truth. Yes they are better speakers, but let's not get carried away. I'll hear the 800d3 on Wednesday... Among the First normal human beings to do so, and I'll give you a full report.
I look forward to your assessment!!!

[krustycat]

So my friend Kevin and I went to listen to the new 802D3 and back to back'd it against the 802D2.

He owns Focal 1038BE, so I trust his ears.

We demo'd, we came out with the same conclusions:

802D3 is better in terms of a more cohesive reproduction, more density to images and vocalists, more projection into the room, and not as sharp to the ears but with all the detail of the 802D2.

Being the owner of the 802D2, I think I know that speaker well enough... I gave the 802D3 a 20-25% improvement in sound. I wasn't even sure if he was going to like it but he did! He said I was too conservative with my numbers and he suggested something close to the 40% mark of improvement.

I thank Kevin for his time spent with me auditioning what could possibly be my next speakers.

All thanks to AA :banana:

I listened and compared the 2 speakers at my dealer for several hours and concluded the same.:banana:

Do it, do it!:yes:

And when you do, if you prefer black you'll get if faster.

I chose rosenut, and I have been waiting for 2.5 moths already:tears:

I've got no more nails on my fingers.:D

[audiohippo]

How did you find the bass output of the 802D3 compared to the D2's?

[krustycat]

How did you find the bass output of the 802D3 compared to the D2's?

stronger and more accurate

let me add that the 802 d3 unit I tested had already been running for 2 months

[Jagman]

Listening to these two sets of speakers in an absolute A/B environment was very revealing, but mostly very fun:D
Joey very clearly articulates our thoughts and impressions. I heartily agree with all of them. Along with all of Joeys comments, the biggest improvement to me over the D2's was imaging. The new 802's presented a near 3D soundstage that I've never heard from the D2's. The cabinets disappeared more uniformly with an increased level of lightness.
I am a B&W admirer and former owner, but my most recent decision on a speaker upgrade was to go another direction with the Focals. It's not one I regret. I really really liked the 802 D2's, but there always seemed to be a hint of brightness and a lack of depth. That said, it's been a while since I paid close attention to Bowers speakers. I was reminded just how wonderful these speakers are, in either generation. For me, however, the new 802D3's have truly risen to a new level. For some, this advancement may be too much of a departure from the previous generations sound. To my ears, the new speakers have elevated the sound beyond the D2's, and not by a little.
The stellar imaging and now absence of diamond brightness, has brought these speakers into a new and better realm in my eyes.
But then again, what a pity given the enormous price increase it would be, if they hadn't.

[SMC23]

I've owned 802d2 since they launched in 2010 and now 802d3, and the 802d2 I never felt bright. The revised tweeter over the D1 was more smoother while being revealing. Where I felt the 802d2 lacked was in bass presence, but having dual stereo subs resolved this for me.

I admit the basis of my upgrade for 802d3 was for the looks and the promised improvements as I didn't have the opportunity to audition them before placing my pre-order.

Now that I've had my 802d3 for a few months I can say the soundstage and imaging has definately been positively improved, as well as the upper-mid bass. I don't notice any changes in lower bass as I continue to use stereo subs, which makes sense. To put a percentage on the improvement is impossible. I would say the improvements can be noticeable to an audiophile but my wife and brother who are not do not hear any differences.

[AudioA100]

So my friend Kevin and I went to listen to the new 802D3 and back to back'd it against the 802D2.

He owns Focal 1038BE, so I trust his ears.

We demo'd, we came out with the same conclusions:

802D3 is better in terms of a more cohesive reproduction, more density to images and vocalists, more projection into the room, and not as sharp to the ears but with all the detail of the 802D2.

Being the owner of the 802D2, I think I know that speaker well enough... I gave the 802D3 a 20-25% improvement in sound. I wasn't even sure if he was going to like it but he did! He said I was too conservative with my numbers and he suggested something close to the 40% mark of improvement.

I thank Kevin for his time spent with me auditioning what could possibly be my next speakers.

All thanks to AA :banana:

You didn't mention where did you listen to those speakers?
What amplifier was it when you listened to them?

From other website a user found 802D3 has no enough bass compared to 802D2. It said a lot less. It was using two Macintosh Mc601. I also wonder how you got your 25% improvement conclusion? Most likely people describe with price increase by a percentage but not sound quality. It's even strange if a new generation of speakers has the capability of improving sound quality vs previous generation by 40%, it implies that 802D (d1) delivers only half of sound quality, or the 802N would only get you 35% of the sound quality in comparing to 802D3. That doesn't make sense.

It matches, if you try to rationalize B&W's price increase, but definitely not alongside with sound improvement.:nono:

It mentioned to use 802D3, Macintosh Amp might not be as good as direct-coupled solid states amps. I think it's because 802D3 has even lower impedance than 802D2. Macintosh's fixed impedance output would get in trouble to deal with the new 800 D3s. Unless they try to sell you 1.2kw....:no:

So what did you use for your audition? A Classe?

[Masterlu]

AudioA100... Welcome to AA! :wave:

[vinod_david]

AudioA100, welcome to AA.

[joey_v]

I arbitrarily gave it a number based on my preferences.

The difference between the 802d2 and the 802d3 in a side by side is very very easy to hear. Even my 60 year old dad could hear the difference and Kevin heard the exact same thing.

I put importance on realism, image density and palpability. That's what I put weight on.

The 802d2 on Boulder is the same difference as stock 802d2 to 802d3.

Just imagine what a Boulder will do.


You didn't mention where did you listen to those speakers?
What amplifier was it when you listened to them?

From other website a user found 802D3 has no enough bass compared to 802D2. It said a lot less. It was using two Macintosh Mc601. I also wonder how you got your 25% improvement conclusion? Most likely people describe with price increase by a percentage but not sound quality. It's even strange if a new generation of speakers has the capability of improving sound quality vs previous generation by 40%, it implies that 802D (d1) delivers only half of sound quality, or the 802N would only get you 35% of the sound quality in comparing to 802D3. That doesn't make sense.

It matches, if you try to rationalize B&W's price increase, but definitely not alongside with sound improvement.:nono:

It mentioned to use 802D3, Macintosh Amp might not be as good as direct-coupled solid states amps. I think it's because 802D3 has even lower impedance than 802D2. Macintosh's fixed impedance output would get in trouble to deal with the new 800 D3s. Unless they try to sell you 1.2kw....:no:

So what did you use for your audition? A Classe?

[GreginNH1]

"Even my 60 year old dad could hear the difference and Kevin heard the exact same thing."


So exactly what are you implying here?! :D:D:D

FYI - I'll be 60 in November so I represent that comment!

[AudioA100]

I arbitrarily gave it a number based on my preferences.

The difference between the 802d2 and the 802d3 in a side by side is very very easy to hear. Even my 60 year old dad could hear the difference and Kevin heard the exact same thing.

I put importance on realism, image density and palpability. That's what I put weight on.

The 802d2 on Boulder is the same difference as stock 802d2 to 802d3.

Just imagine what a Boulder will do.

Boulder should be a nice amp to drive the 802d3 although I haven't listened to a Boulder before.

Whether a pair of d2 or d3, high current direct-coupled power amps are required to bring every bit of the bass potential and soundstage to you, so as to have open and spacious high. Hence various results can be misleading with people on the internet saying new d3 has more bass, better soundstage in a dealer's place compared to their own without knowing that he could get a better sound from his 802d2 with an amp better fit with his speakers.

I read the Hifi news of March, a 803d3 can dip to 1.1Ohm at 82hz. Not every amp will get you same good feeling about the sound vs the look. It's not about how much power you have to drive it, it's about how the electronics working behavior of the amp is to handle it. 600W Mc601 isn't good to get deeper bass out of it, a constant current amp, e.g. Krill FBP, designed by Dan d'agostino, or the kind, 100-300w is probably one's better choice.

[Chaybone]

For what it is worth, I recently had the opportunity to first listen to both the 802D3 and 803D3 (which sounded very similar to me) in a relatively large room in a high-end shop and then to face-off the 803D3 vs the Focal 1038BE at the same high-end shop using high-end amps. I went through this face-off since I already owned the 1038BE, which I liked a lot, and was primarily considering the 803D3 from the new B&W line-up based on the size of the room the speakers would be going into which is roughly 18 x 18 with 8' ceilings.

After listening for about an hour using two sample discs of music I know well ranging from classical to folk to jazz to soft and harder rock, my friend and I (who have listened to lots of stereos together over the years) came away with the same conclusions:

High-End: We thought the 1038BE had a slightly more open/engaging high-end but - and it is a big but - that the beryllium tweeter was prone to hitting certain harsh points every so often. Not in every song, mind you, but too much for it to be ignored. Since there was no harshness at all on the 803D3 diamond tweeter we agreed that the B&W tweeter provided an overall better experience.

Mids: Both speakers had nice mids although we both thought the slightly more forward B&W mid was an overall stronger performer (since it somehow seemed better balanced into the overall sound).

Lows: There really was no contest here. The B&Ws were markedly tighter and clearer.

So what did all this mean. It was time to trade in my 1038BEs for a new set of 803D3s. I did and I could not be happier. Don't get me wrong, the Focasl are excellent; they simply are not as tight, balanced, or enjoyable as the B&Ws.

Finally, and for what it is worth, I got a chance to hear the 802D3s vs the 803D3s at another high-end store in a room that had just about the same dimensions as mine. The reason for this "before I pulled the trigger" face-off was to make sure I wasn't making a mistake by moving down from the 802D3s to the 803D3s. Interestingly enough, and in this size room, the 803D3s sounded significantly cleaner and tighter. While I have no doubt that given a larger room I would have loved the 802D3s (and that there would be some advantages over the smaller 803D3s), in the room size I was buying for, the 803D3s were not only less expensive but significantly better sounding. If ever there was a "poster-child example" of needing to avoid buying too much speaker for a given room-size this was it. I share this solely so that anyone choosing between these speakers at least considers their room size and tries to hear each speaker in a comparable setting. I was sure glad I did.

Hoping this helps as you find the right speaker for you (and as I thoroughly enjoy the new B&Ws).

[joey_v]

Hahaha...

Just that 802d3 are awesome

[Masterlu]

Chaybone... Welcome to AA! :wave:

[Patrick Butler]

It is worth noting that despite what appears to be a cruel and unusual load in the measurements section (a unique way of measuring a loudspeaker,) the reviewer had great results using a 35W/70W Marantz integrated amplifier (which sells for a whopping 799 Euro.) Elsewhere in this forum, one owner of 803D3 uses a Luxman 60W integrated. Apparently, he is quite happy with the combination.


Regards,

Patrick
B&W Group North America


Boulder should be a nice amp to drive the 802d3 although I haven't listened to a Boulder before.

Whether a pair of d2 or d3, high current direct-coupled power amps are required to bring every bit of the bass potential and soundstage to you, so as to have open and spacious high. Hence various results can be misleading with people on the internet saying new d3 has more bass, better soundstage in a dealer's place compared to their own without knowing that he could get a better sound from his 802d2 with an amp better fit with his speakers.

I read the Hifi news of March, a 803d3 can dip to 1.1Ohm at 82hz. Not every amp will get you same good feeling about the sound vs the look. It's not about how much power you have to drive it, it's about how the electronics working behavior of the amp is to handle it. 600W Mc601 isn't good to get deeper bass out of it, a constant current amp, e.g. Krill FBP, designed by Dan d'agostino, or the kind, 100-300w is probably one's better choice.