Comparison: 805S to Nautilus 805

**js24** · 03 June 2005, 14:10 Friday

Pieter,
congrats on the new 805S! :T
a couple of questions for ya

do you think the 805S is forward, laid back, or dead neutral?

kinda off the topic, have you done A/B with Angela Hewitt vs. Marray Perahia on the goldberg variation? -i'm a perahia fan

thanks
Jay

**Pieter** · 03 June 2005, 15:37 Friday

Jay,

I haven't purchased the 805S', only demo-ing them. Got a shortlist of a few speakers in the upgrade path, and it's currently the 805S' turn...

To which side the tonality of the 805S’ lean is still a little early for me to say. I know it won’t be laid back, that’s not the common B&W characteristic. Their speakers tend to demand you pay attention to what they’re up to, let’s call it active listening... The 805S’ are definitely easier on the ear than the Nautilus 805s, even when straight out of the box.

I’ve been a B&W fan for quite some time, bought the Matrix 805s back in 1991, currently own the Nautilus 805s (Yes, I am aware of the pattern/rut.), but lately I’m having doubts regarding the certainty of another B&W purchase. Whether I concur with other B&W lovers in that their speakers are neutral/revealing, does not stop certain recordings from sounding more than a tad bright. Yes, it could be the recording. Or, it could be the other components in the chain, etc. And yes, one does make allowance for less than ideal sound. But, an overly bright sound grates and wears you down. No choice but to listen from where you’re out of the tweeter’ direct line of fire.

Regarding the Goldberg Variations, I’m more than your common garden variety Bach fan. I’m a BACH FREAK! I currently own more than 20 different recordings of the Goldbergs. And to place things in perspective, I ain’t that crazy, for there are those that have over 200!

Yes, the Perahia is good. Great sense of rythm, clear voicing of parts, creative ornementation and impeccable technique. It is clear he is enjoying himself.

I haven’t made up my mind on Angela Hewitt yet. Just when I think she tends to the studious, she surprizes me. She does plays the French Suites beautifully

But neither she nor Perahia take the honours when performing the Goldberg Variations on piano. I prefer Andras Schiff ‘s live recording on ECM. Give it a listen, unless you already know it.

**scottielee** · 03 June 2005, 18:18 Friday

hi Pieter and Jay,
on goldberg variations, i have only listened to glenn gould's 1955 and 1981 recordings. if you have also listened to gould, can you comment on how your favorite pianists differ from gould?
my favorite pianist is Evgeny Kissin.

**Pieter** · 03 June 2005, 22:52 Friday

I do not think that there are many pianists that delineate the contrapuntal structure in Bach’s writing to the extent that Glenn Gould was able to. His hardly, if ever, using the sustain pedal, phenomenal technique, fiddling with the piano’s keyboard action to obtain a faster mechanical response and the heavy leaning to a dry acoustic and recording, abetted him in this goal. The result is a recorded performance in which the individual voices and their interplay are more easily discernable.

There’s no denying Gould’s individual vision and extraordinary energy. On the first hearing of any of his Goldbergs one is usually astounded. With time and familiarity the astonishment remains or it is supplanted by abhorrence.

I very much like his 1981 recording. That entry from the Aria into the first variation is shocking in its dynamic contrast and tempo change. Not sure if I like the ’81 version because, or despite of this.

I do have the 1955 recording as well, but am too unfamiliar with it to risk comment. Do miss the repeats though, which are omitted in this version.

The Schiff live ECM recording has buoyancy and life. Unfortunately the recording acoustic is too lively, blurring the individual voices. Pity, for Schiff excels in the delineation of contrapuntal lines.

Perahia is very enjoyable, as mentioned. His sense of structure allows for beautiful and creative ornamentation making every repeat a gem.

Also developing an affinity for Koroliov’s Goldbergs. In fact, for all his Bach.

Tureck may appear at times to verge on the too studied, an overly academic exercise. The upside is that there’s not a note, nor it’s context that has escaped scrutiny, with resulting insight plumbing ideas in the music which other performers could not even have dreamt of. Dismiss her at your own loss.

I’ll leave it at that, before the chaps that really know music and their Bach expose me as a musical dilettante and imposter.

**perato** · 04 June 2005, 00:04 Saturday

Room Acoustics

Pieter, if your room is bright, why don't you treat it? You can measure the frequency response of your system in your room then buy or make appropriate acoustical treatments to flatten the frequency response. There is a fair amount of info available on the web about acoustics, treatments, and how to make acoustical treatments.

**Pieter** · 04 June 2005, 05:09 Saturday

Perato,

The room is an acoustic nightmare. Principal dimensions are 5.36 x 5.00 x 2.75m. The basically square floor plan starts the bass on the wrong footing, creating a very uneven response. This is exacerbated by thick, solid walls of plastered brick, but somewhat alleviated by a fibreboard ceiling that is compliant and flexible to a certain degree. Speaker and listening positioning has been fidgeted with to obtain a listenable sound in the nether regions (well, maybe “nether” is more than a tad away from Hades on the 805s); fair on some recordings, but bloated and overhung on others…

I’ve hung drapes on the primary reflection points and a few other strategically selected spots. This has improved matters some, but I’m left with an untreated band of plaster that runs the perimeter of the room at the juncture of walls and ceiling that is the very mother-in-law of an extended decay in the high frequencies, replete with echoes that are countable, they are so distinct. The flat reflective ceiling stirs the witches’ cauldron too. The floor is at least carpeted, but it’s not plush.

“Well, DO something about it!” you say.

Can’t get really bad on this mother-in-law’s axx. It’s not my place to do as I please, and it’s temporary. I’m left with small tweaks to enhance the acoustics, but that’s about it, for now at least.

Voluminous reading of anything acoustical is tinged by the very fount from which it springs – the WWW. I’m afraid, “A little knowledge is a dangerous thing…” rings very true. Doesn’t stop me from dabbling though! And dreaming of setting up the ideal listening environment. Someday soon….

**Pieter** · 04 June 2005, 10:47 Saturday

It never ceases to amaze me how easily a thread in these forums veers off topic. Not a rebuke, just an observation.

Back to the 805S. Roughly 24hrs on the clock and we’re subjecting it to The Reverse Eastwood:

The Ugly – Not really ugly, but I do like the cabinet groove into which the Nautilus 805’s tweeter is mounted. With the 805S that tweeter perch appears even more precarious. Oh well, function before form.

The Bad – Congested, repressed, suppressed, nasal, closed-in, or boxy; pick your catchword to describe the bottom and very lower mid frequencies. Look, it’s not unlistenable, but is certainly not open and free. YET! I have high hopes and am willing to wager a remarkable improvement with time. My experience with the Nautilus 805s I own allows me to be brash. However, they took about six months to gain agility and freedom in the bottom end.

The Good – Two words, ‘timing’ and ‘phase’. The new crossover and its integration of the new drivers is at first subtle, but with further listening, astounding. The initial transient and subsequent decay of sonic events is streets ahead of the Nautilus 805. You hear that pluck of Andreas Vollenweider’s electro-acoustic harp, the blooming of the note and follow it through to its dying decay in the room’s acoustic. This aids in colouring in the boundaries and extents of the recorded venue. Beautiful. The Nautilus 805 does this too, but not to the same extent, nor with such refined resolution.

Before I’m accused of holding the 805S up as reference, THE SPEAKER, to which other bookshelves should aspire, I’ll add; this is an evaluation by comparison to their previous incarnation, the Nautilus 805 and is subject to my perception and clouded by my personal preference. I know I’m stating the obvious, but at times we loose sight of the subjective nature of this pursuit. (How’s that for pedantic?)

**js24** · 04 June 2005, 13:12 Saturday

Pieter,
yup you win on Bach... hands down :B
good to see some hardcore classic fans here! (classics are the only REAL stuff!, ok don't flame me on this... :wink: )

When I auditioned the 803D a couple of weeks ago (i wrote a lengthy babling in elsewhere here) I felt like vocal sounded a little congested(even compared to my 703s).. and the frequency plot from the stereoplay review (remember that german magazine

) showed that the midband is forward (500-1k) and upper mid to high( until the tweeter comes in) are recessed... I first thought the congestion can be alleviated by biwiring (voodoo?!?) but now I'm thinking it is a falut of the speakers..
hm... that might as well be the same for the 805S (in the lower end that you mentioned).. and I agree with you on the timing and phase improvement on the new 800 series
does that leave us with 802D or higher to truly enjoy music? :evil:

ah.. glenn gould.... wasn't he the MASTER of piano? I'm more familiar with his interpretations of beethoven piano sonatas (i'm more of a beethoven freak

) yet i just don't find myself being fond of the guy.. .he is one hell of arrogant xxx.. but he is that good anyway..

btw, do you guys think Yoyo ma is "the greates cellist alive' (my local classical station is daring to claim this..!! 8O ) i often find him to "light" rarely get me involved in music... his vivaldi interpretations are generally fantastic, yet Bach? I think Rostropovich and Mieski (SP) go deeper (don't flame me you Ma fans...

: ) -IMHO

hey scottie, I think i've visited your system site at the A'gon.. right? good to see you here ! :B

**Pieter** · 04 June 2005, 15:02 Saturday

Jay: classics are the only REAL stuff!, ok don't flame me on this...

You expose your neck, then plead that we mustn’t swing the axe. Don’t toy with fate, Jay.

Jay: hm... that might as well be the same for the 805S (in the lower end that you mentioned)..

My hopes aren’t dashed yet, still a little early in the game.

Jay: does that leave us with 802D or higher to truly enjoy music?

For you Brits, perhaps, seeing as B&W is the epitome of English speaker design. Us South Africans have an alternate choice in the shape and form of the Sonor Audio Capella. A floorstander on the less expensive side of halfway between the B&W 805S and the 804S. It’s the next speaker on my demo list.

I’ve listened to it before, about 3 months ago, but for a very brief period. Actually went to listen to its smaller sibling, the Lira, which is roughly the same price as a set of 805S’. The Liras impressed me with their “organic” sound. If the Nautilus 805s give prominance to the sound of the string vibrating when a guitar is plucked, the Liras lean towards producing the resonance of the guitar body, in a very pleasing and “realistic” manner.

Made the mistake of asking the designer to describe the sound of the Capellas in relation to the Liras...He responded in the only fit manner; fired them up.

The step up from the Nautilus 805s to the Liras were there, but the 805s still did certain things very well, things that would not make me trade them that easily.

But, by Jove! The jump from the Liras to the Capellas is immense. More like a chasm seperating them. The sound is HUGE, but oh so effortless. Listened to Yim Hok Man’s Poems of Thunder (Chinese drumming). Dan, here on the forum, in his audition of the B&W 802D comments on hearing the plastic of the drumhead when struck, and being awed by it. Yup, those Chinese drums were there, “in the room”, shells, membranes and resonating air mass filling their cavities and all. And the amazing thing, everything in proportion, from the lowest lows to the high upper transients. Thought to myself, if these speakers paint such a bold picture, they’ll surely fail at intimate female vocals?! In goes Natalie Merchant’s Ophelia. Stunned! When the song starts and her voice enters, wammy, I hear the acoustic signature of the vocal booth her voice is recorded in. Never heard that before, nor since, not even on the Gallo Reference 3s I listened to the other evening. And the intimate vocals? LOVVVILEE!

So, what am I doing here relating my tales of a B&W 805S audition?

Life’s not that simple. There’s wants, needs, reality and inevitable compromise.

Jay: ah.. glenn gould.... wasn't he the MASTER of piano?

No, the REAL MASTER has been dead a little longer – Franz Liszt

Greatest cellist alive? Playing what or whom?

**scottielee** · 04 June 2005, 23:42 Saturday

hi Pieter, i agree with Jay that you definitely win on bach

decent bass from my signature 805 started to show up after 5 long months or so. the amount and quality of bass are really pleasantly surprising to me when low piano key notes are played. but whenever i am not listening, i am thinking of a sub or bigger speakers...

hi Jay! so nice to see/read you here too! thanks for introducing me to this peaceful and orderly place to get away from b&w haters on audioasylum and audiogon.

best,
scottie

**misterdoggy** · 05 June 2005, 03:09 Sunday

Pieter
What is your opinion of the Bass of the 805s against the bass of the 703 which has a larger box, more speakers etc against the quality of the single 805s. I have 804s' on order and will make a comparison of the 703/805s, but wondered what the general opinion was.
thanks
Bruce

**Pieter** · 05 June 2005, 03:24 Sunday

Scottie: hi Pieter, i agree with Jay that you definitely win on bach

It’s all relative. I’m but a mere lamb. The rams you’ll find at http://www.bach-cantatas.com/

Scottie: decent bass from my signature 805 started to show up after 5 long months or so. the amount and quality of bass are really pleasantly surprising to me when low piano key notes are played.

This has been my experience with the “lesser” Nautilus 805s too. Agility and pace made an unheralded apearance somewhat after 6 months. Was playing a CD I am very familiar with, then suddenly became very aware of the double bass player nimbly sliding up and down some riffs. The sound was really dancing around and the rhythm infectious; got my head swaying and my feet tapping. Great!

Yes, I love that sinking thud and the sound of those long fat strings of the concert grand vibrating so wide and so slow. Beautiful.

Scottie: but whenever i am not listening, i am thinking of a sub or bigger speakers...

Let us not kid ourselves; bookshelves are a compromise. An added sub shortens the gap, but I too am wondering whether that gap is really bridgable...

**Pieter** · 05 June 2005, 03:44 Sunday

Bruce, I’ve never heard the 703s so the only opinion I could express would be drawn from assumption and inference, which can be misleading.

This I’ll say, I don’t expect my Nautilus 805s to produce a 16ft organ pipe properly, let alone a 32ft. But what bass is there is tuneful, rhythmic and fast.

Keep us posted on your upcoming comparison of the 703, 804 and 805.

**misterdoggy** · 05 June 2005, 09:30 Sunday

Pieter,

I forgot to mention that I have a ASW 825 running with. so when I hook up the 805s' they should have a little help. Its a temporary situation until the 804s' I ordered a month and 1/2 ago show up. I'm in France and I bought them in Germany with 30% off, so its worth the wait. They are way over ordered and in Germany there is very little in stock.

I will make the comparison and let you know. I went from the 703, 705, htm7 and Energy 12xl to the 804s, 805s, htm3s and the ASW 825. You would think the sound should be better on an 800 series speaker than a 700 series speaker.

**Pieter** · 05 June 2005, 10:39 Sunday

Bruce, how does that ASW 825 blend in with the 805s? Does it fill in the bottom end nicely and is the transition seamless?

I’d hazard a guess that you’re not satisfied, otherwise, why would you buy the 804S?

Those 804S’ go down lower, but still not LOW. You do however have that FST midrange which shines where it’s suppose to.

On the other hand, the extra split in the frequency range brings added complexity and is difficult to do properly. Then again, harmonic distortion is lowered.

Sorry, just thinking aloud.

Bruce: You would think the sound should be better on an 800 series speaker than a 700 series speaker.

Unfortunately a bookshelf remains just that, a bookshelf. Just depends on whether you can live with the compromises made. Some do, others don't.

Cheerio
Pieter

**misterdoggy** · 05 June 2005, 10:55 Sunday

Its just temporary as the 805s' which will be delivered tuesday ahead of the 804s' I ordered. I have the 703's sold but can wait until the 804s' arrive in a week or 2. Just wondering if I should keep the 703's longer until the 804s' arrive or its probably ok to live with the 805s' until the 804s' come. The 805s' are my "surrounds" and the 804s' are the fronts.

**Pieter** · 05 June 2005, 11:13 Sunday

From my experience over the past few days with the 805S I'd say your'e going to like your new 800 range aquisitions. The new crossovers offer very worthy improvements. I'd say that the cloudiness at the bottom to mid should disappear with time. Fingers crossed.

Perhaps you should keep the 703s for a little longer so you could A/B them with the 804S in order to confirm your correct choice.

**Pieter** · 05 June 2005, 14:04 Sunday

60 Hrs and ticking:

I could be anal retentive and continue analyzing the 805S’ sound till the blaring of the last trumpet, but that’s not what its about now is it!?

Do they make music? Do they draw you in? Do you forget the system and loose yourself in the performance? Do they communicate; strike the various and variant chords of your emotions? Shxt, I must be coming across as the bastard son of a hi-fi reviewer and a pretentious insecure shrink.

Yes. Double yes and…sometimes. ( The speakers, not the progeny.)

Loreena McKennit’s voice on “The Mask and the Mirror” was raising goosebumps, tingling from calves all the way up to the back of my scalp. That voice just kept soaring higher and higher.

The massed violins on Brahms’ Hungarian dances were sweet and playful and the horns in Bruckner’s 5th symphony, blary and blatty.

The electric guitars on Orchestra Baobab’s “Specialist in All Styles” were a treat, never heard them like this before. Man, can those chaps jam. Made me wish I was able to play instead of just listen.

That little laugh at the intro of Luka Bloom’s “Riverside” CD sounds positively mischievous. Wow, can he strum a guitar! His voice betrays an undercurrent of melancholy that touches you. “Breezes soothe our soul”. Oh, that’s what he’s singing. Always a good sign if the vocals become clearer and hence discernable.

The organ on a Bach prelude was nice and reedy and the acoustic spacious. The long pipes were small though, and the weight lacking. How much air does a pair of 6.5” mid-woofs move?

Yello’s “One Second” doesn’t slam and bounce! It does a little bit, but not very hard.

Me like these little speakers. Enjoy my CDs on them more than on my Nautilus 805s.

**Pieter** · 06 June 2005, 05:13 Monday

Stumbled across this during a Googling: “I wanted to show that single-ended amps are not just for horn speakers. One of our design goals was to build an amp that could drive even medium efficiency speakers such as the B&W 805s that I used while testing the performance of my amps.”

Really a review on the deHavilland amp, but it never hurts to know that a designer uses your brand, series and speaker model as aid in her design. Sorta’ like finding out Sandra Bulloc runs the odd errand in the exact same pick-up you’ve got.

Yes, I know it panders to the insecure within and is but a flimsy crutch...still nice though.

Here’s the rest: http://www.dehavillandhifi.com/dehavilland_845.htm

Comparison: 805S to Nautilus 805

Comparison: 805S to Nautilus 805

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment