Advice needed: B&W 704 vs. Sonus Faber Concerto

[RGA]

Topspeed

"We've tested both speakers with a variety of different recordings (piano, voice, orchestral) and actually liked the Sonus Faber better because of the warmth of the sound."

Call me crazy many do but it sounded as though they liked this one a wee bit better. Often people know what they want and are looking for confirmation just in case. I say go with what sounds best to you --

[theaudiohobby]

I have several recordings that did that on my B&W's and many others I've listened to that don't do it anymore. Quite simply it was the speakers not the recordings. Your mileage may vary.

Your B&W in this case is DM 302, irrespective of how you feel about it, it is 2 lines down from the 700 series, the 300 and 700 series are totally different animals with practically nothing in common, apart from being produced by the same company. And cannot be used as basis for judging the performance of the 704.

[StanleyMuso]

"Your B&W in this case is DM 302, irrespective of how you feel about it, it is 2 lines down from the 700 series, the 300 and 700 series are totally different animals with practically nothing in common, apart from being produced by the same company. And cannot be used as basis for judging the performance of the 704".

Quite right. I was exposed for several years to my son's 601, which frankly, although great for the music he listens to, sucks with classical. I therefore did not expect to end up with B&W for my own system. Each line has its own characteristics.

[RGA]

yes the 302 is not the N805. I have logged many hours on the N805, M805, N801, N802, N803, CDM 1NT, CDM 7NT, CDM 9NT, CDM 1SE, CDM 2SE, 602S3, 602S2, 603S2, DM 302, DM 303, CM2 - and less time but still at least 2 hours on 603S2, 604S2, 604S3, N804, M801 -- and between 1/2hour to2 hours on 601S2, 601S3, DM 305, LM 1, CM 4, Diamond 802, and I'm forgetting the two and half way 600 series speaker I spent a fair amount of time with at the moment.

Before most of the newbies on this forum -- indeed, before the current styling of this forum changed, B&W was the front-runner for me in most price classes and I spent probably the most amount of time in the CDM SE and NT speaker lines(which is the same level as the 700 line which replaced them). The reason was that this was the price range I was in that time. I also had the opportunity to get extensive auditions with the M805 because one of the sales-staff was trading his in and had it for sale. I caught the tail end of the SE range when the new NT range came in -- this was also the period I first heard the Totem Model One. I bought my Arcam amplifier from that dealer.

It was a number of posters on AA that i battled with for quite a long time defending B&W against their attacks -- unfortunately I did not listen to the speakers they were touting as alternatives --- when i did finally I had to eat crow. I had been comparing B&W to relatively easy to beat competitors like M&K, Klipsch and a number of Canadian makers that if I mention them will get them in an uproar so best to leave it. The DM 302 incidentally i compared to many a solid product at that time with PSB, Mission and Acoustic Energy with standmounts I also liked. The DM 302 also sounded smoother than the 601 and 602S2 variants -- these had more ultimate bandwidth and slam but that was it. Every person I know who has owned both speakers has preferred the musical reproduction of the 302 to the 602S2 and the current 303. As do I which is why I regret selling the 302 and probably why it was sold within an hour of me trading it in. After hearing a PSB yesterfday for around the same price as the 302 it literally drove me from the room with it's tin can sounding treble -- no doubt a future award winning speaker if it isn't already. The PSB Alpha B was the one I had in the running with my 302 -- the one I heard may be it's "detailed" replacement if by detail we mean "irritating."

None of this matters -- I'm not telling anyone on any forum they have to agree with me -- it's merely the way I hear it...it's obvious other people don't hear it the way I do...I liked B&W -- I have heard better to my ears since then thus I like B&W less. In fact electrostats have the best chance to get me away from Audio Note if I can hear one that will do certin things I've yet to hear from them -- apparently a Quad 57 owner is reminded of the E's on much program material which may mean I would very much like the Quads -- a few others who've owned the Quads went to the AN E --- so it seems to me that those who've heard both may go either way but the resemblence si certainly there -- and someone said the 57 won;t be like the 63 I loathed so i'm excited to hear the 57. I am also excited to hear the Maggie 3.6 and 20.1 when my dealer brings them in.

[StanleyMuso]

RGA, since the OP seems to have disappeared, I'd like to ask a question of my own, if you don't mind. I can see now that you have had quite a considerable exposure to B&W, so I'd appreciate your opinion. I want to expand my system to a full surround, but don't wish to go to the expense of using all 700 series components. Besides, the 700 series centre speaker is too big for my setup. Would the 600 series for the centre and rears match with my 703 for surround sound?

In addition, in your list of gear I notice you have a Marantz 4300 receiver. What is your experience of it, sound wise and reliability wise? I'm also thinking of getting a Marantz reciever. I already have a Marantz DVD player (DV4300).

Thanks

Stanley

[RGA]

Well I bought the Marantz largely because it was cheap - a close-out last model kinda deal so it ran $300.00Cad. I also wanted a receiver that has preouts to add separate power amplifiers as I am not impressed by receivers in this regard. The Marantz was the only one at the time to have that feature for this price -- it also had the best warranty over Yamaha and Denon -- another plus given the build quality of receivers.

I am not impressed by the two channel sound nor by the atrocious functionality of the remote control (basically it does too much most of it tuff doubt anyone will ever use -- I can only imagine the sea of useless functionality of the the flagship model and the engineering degree required to set the thing to 2 channel.

For home theater -- I have not heard many of the B&W's perform in. I was reasonably impressed by the B&W 600Series 3 and the CDM NT in home theater applications but they were always matched with their appropriate center channel. I do know that the 303 as a rear channel will work in a 600 series set-up well.

It is important to try and match speakers in a home theater -- that does not always mean you have t match with the same brand but in most cases that is probably the case especially with propriatary drivers like B&W. There is no real quasi-B&W to go to.

On the other hand it depends how into movies you are -- there is no law that says you need to match just because it is recommended or that it is the best...I have tons of movies well over 200 DVDs but strangely enough home theater reproduction I just don't care that much about -- i may eventually but it's lower priority for me. You're probably better off asking the home theater lovers. I had a home theater set-up and I had a Laserdisc player at the age of 22. What I really wanted back then was the widescreen the medium had to offer. I don't really care about picture quality all that much and for me the theater is the best experience to watch a movie...people will argue about that but the bottom line is no screen currently available can match the movie theater picture (size matters) and despite the inconsistencies in sound I like the experience because the CD on a stereop can sound and often does sound better than most rock concerts ever will but we go to the rock concert for the experience of it.

I bought the Marantz with the intention of trying out 6.1 as it has improved since my Pro-Logic days. I will get to the H/T set-up one day -- the sepakers I shall buy will be used and all will be the same speakers at the same height (ie six Audio Note AX Twos(or used CDM 2SE which are the most underrated B&W of the lot IMO) and perhaps one or two Rel Storms). This requires more money than I have and a front projection system.

[RGA]

I didn;t want to insult my Marantz -- for the money I paid it has worked it sounded better than I expected it would sound which is a plus and is clear when watching movies in 2 channel -- so for the money it's quite a nice unit.

[StanleyMuso]

Good stereo sound has always been my primary purpose and will continue to be so, but I do want to be able to enjoy surround sound in my lounge. That said, I don't want to invest too much money on the surround side, so I too was thinking of a basic reciever with pre-outs so I could channel the front sounds through my stereo rig. Whatever reciever I buy will never serve duty for stereo sound - I just want it to decode the surround info from the disks and power the centre and rear speakers. The Musical Fidelity will take care of the fronts.

[theaudiohobby]

Besides, the 700 series centre speaker is too big for my setup. Would the 600 series for the centre and rears match with my 703 for surround sound?

The answer to the question especially vis-a-vis the centre is a big fat No, the woofer, tweeter and even the crossover alignment on both lines are sufficiently different for this to be an excercise in frustration, And with MCH music, the issue is compounded as the more adventurous MCH mixes will expose rears with different tonal signatures.

[StanleyMuso]

I didn't realise it was soo critical. I thought if I kept it to the same manufacturerer, with all cones being kevlar and metal tweeters, the sound, even if not totally identical, would be close enough not to matter for film viewing. I may have to re-think my room layout, and have a close listen before making the final decision. I suppose I could always run a totally sepperate system for the surrounds, composed of all stand mounts, centre and sub. But then again, I don't really want to clutter the room with more gear than necessary, nor to spend money unnecessarily. If my first idea worked, I would just have to add three additional speakers, since I already have a sub.

[RGA]

Well first of all all center channels are compromised and you will not get the same sound anyway. If you want something that matches you have to have the exact same speaker -- the ideal is Six 705s all around...the next best is a center channel with the exact same drivers and very very very similar tonal sound. the next best would be a speaker that follows the company house sound -- the 600 series is still a house sound and you won;t know if it will work for you until you try. With all the delay and switching that garbages up the sound of receivers anyway -- you can probably be able to adjust the 600 series center channel to do a rreasonably effective job at integrating with the 700 series. Indeed, the 600 series may have more impact than the 700 series so while not tonally a match could still be more pleasing to the ear. As it stands now the vast majority of info of dialog comes from the center and only when panning will you notice a bit of a hick-up...will it bother you? Probably would not bother me because I'm not nearly as anal about home theater.

You could also run phantom mode where your amp pretends there is a center image -- some set-ups I have heard and I preferred this.

Now this is just my personal opinion on this and i'm not trying to get into a flame war. I personally prefer 2 channel audio and will put the bulk of the money there. Home theater is a very distant second and I've heard uber 300k Professionally done ML set-ups that were truly very good for home theater -- and at the price should be. Not impressed by much else below that price tag to be blunt because the movie experience involves the screen and i figure go ALL the Way opr don't bother -- or go cheap enough to get the FLAVOUR of the experience. But the 300k system is the ONLY one that would keep me out of the Movie theaters. Look at all the people who spent 10K on home theater and still see Star Wars Episode III 5 times in the theater. So me, I would get something cheaper than the Energy Take 5 -- there was a Mission set up fro $500.00 for all the speakers and the sub -- great it's all matched up no brainwork dirt cheap -- and while it won't be as good as a number of more expensive set-ups it will give you the flavour anyway Mission punches above its weight class to start with so it won't likely be embarrassed even agaisnt competitors at triple the money. Indeed Klipsh reference had a sale here which even I considered -- or possibly 3 pairs of Athena AS B1 at about $250.00 each. My concenr is the mid-upper treble which leans sizzly so I could not relax to them I don;t think for longer listening -- but still for the price and the odd movie would be nice enough.

or Athena's H/T package http://www.futureshop.ca/catalog/pro...gon=&langid=EN which is $500.00Cad for the whole package. I have not heard it but given that the Athena IMO blows the doors off the more expensive JBL and Polk and sounds as good if not better than the paradigm Monitor line -- then what the hell you never know for pyrotechnics one does not have a frame of reference anyway and for vocals well that is the area of possible weakness -- but you never know till you try.

[hertz]

This Saturday only I had the opportunity to do an A/B comparison of both the Dynaudio audience 52se with the Linn Katan. The Linn won out in every department. The speakers were driven by bryston monoblocks.