The Absolute Sound October review of 800 D3
 

I was shocked to see incorrect description of the driver construction described by Alan Taffel on the 800D3.

He stated, "As with all D3 series speakers, the 800's 1" tweeter boasts a diamond-coated cone"? Of course this is not true, as the dome is pure synthetic diamond with a platinum coating. Magico for example does use a diamond coated Beryllium tweeter in their latest design, but no diamond coating here on the 800 series.

The other incorrect information published is that if you compare the 802D3 with the 800D3, the most notable change is in the cone construction. He states, "While still comprising of carbon-fiber skins sandwiching a foam core, the cones thickness is variable rather than constant". This is true of all the 800 series woofers with Aerofoil construction that is variable thickness of the cone, thinner at the edges and thicker in the middle. There is a difference between the 800D3 and 802D3 in the motor, basket and dust cap that also uses the Aerofoil design to further reduce distortion which is not explained.

So on two key points on driver construction for the tweeter and bass drivers is not correct.

He did highlight as some others on this forum have personally experienced that a few bass notes where a bit "more plummy than the rest". I believe as others that the 800D3 is more room sensitive than the 802D3, but in the right room there is no doubt in my mind would be the superior speaker.

You would think reviewers would get their facts straight before allowing this to be published or allow B&W to review to make sure at least the technical description is correct before releasing to the public.

Maybe I am expecting too much or being picky but don't think so.

amen good post!

TAS, like most publications, typically provide the manufacturer a pre-publication copy of the review for the express purpose of correcting factual inaccuracies. The goal is to insure that factual errors (as opposed to subjective observations) don't make it into print.

Hi GregGale,

No, you're not being picky (just correct!) As to Metaphacts statement, reviews are typically seen before publication for fact-checking, but not always.

Regards,

Patrick
B&W Group North America

The Absolute Sound review wasn't a particularly useful one for prospective buyers imho. The reviewer wasn't able to reference what he heard to previous models or to other speakers of today in the same class. I've never heard or even heard of Metaphor reference speakers, but by all accounts they're quite old and dated. I find it difficult to believe that they could compete with 800D3's in just about any area of performance.

I agree with Art. After reading the review, first thing I did is google Metaphor speakers mentioned in the review, but had no luck finding any result. It would have been grate to read a comparison of the 800D3 with the Magico
S3 MKII in the same issue. Even a comparison to the Rockport Lyra would not be out of place. They are similar size to the 800D3.

+1.
Very few comparisons in many of the reviews in TAS,which may not be accidental.......

Sadly, TAS is little more than a coffee table rag anymore ......

TAS has a long history of getting facts and details wrong; they have doing this for over a decade. They even have products in their "recommended", "best of", or "awards" articles that have been discontinued from production. Its like no one actually functions in the role of a real editor at the magazine.

Silly me, I bought the PDF, so I can't even use it as that.