B&W poor with bad recordings?

[Briz vegas]

This theme keeps reoccurring on the Club B&W section of this site.

Is this a common experience amongst B&W owners? .....and if so what speakers and partnering components are you running. Also, can you describe the sound when all is working well.

The reason that I ask is that I do not have this problem. I can only think of one CD that does not sound good - its an early album by the Ravonettes. Everything else sounds better than it does on other systems.
My collection includes one or two audiophile recordings like Sarah K, a modest selection of classical, blues, world and jazz, and alot of rock and pop stuff. I would put my setup in the top 10% of systemsthat I have heard in terms of the musical enjoyment that it gives.

Thanks to my Naim player the sound is quite similar to analogue setups that I have heard in terms of musical enjoyment and low levels of fatigue. Detail is very good, bass is also very good (if not as powerful as a pair of 15 inch drivers driven actively by 350w – which describes a system I heard on Saturday). Soundstage is not huge but the sound benefits in that it provides more solid imaging and does intimate music better than almost any system I can think of – at least I really enjoy that aspect of the sound.

I can play Robert Johnson from 70 years ago and he sounds less full and immmmediate than say Sarah K in 2003 but the sound is still very listenable and unfatiguing plus you get a good slice of detail that I would not have previously hoped for in such an old recording. I would never think of not playing it or throwing it out.

Am I just more tolerant, enjoying the good and bad recordings, or have I just somehow achieved a great balanced sound that suits my diverse music collection. I suspect there may be an element of both.

[sikoniko]

There are a number of factors that can lead to this. Could be the engineer. Could be the mix. Could be the producer. Phil Spector made his career on the "wall of sound".

Consider the lowest common denominator that music is mixed for: car audio. Most people probably listen to music in a car, where road and other ambient noise is introduced. Only a small population actually upgrade their car audio, and many that do are more interested in bass than other aspects of the audio spectrum.

Then take a home audio system. I started off at an entry-level. Over time, my ears learned how to listen. It also helped that I am a musician. It has been my experience that budget systems introduce coloring and tend to distort earlier as you turn the volume up. This would certainly hide a bad mix. As a system gets upgraded, it is done to remove the coloring and distortion. When your system gets to a level that you start to overcome those, you begin to actually hear the mix. You can notice the signature of the producer. You can identify what you enjoy listening to and what you don't.

When HD first came out, I can remember watching ants crawl across the desert. It was fascinating to see such a beautiful picture that I watched in awe. The same can be said about listening to a nicely mixed song. I find myself listening to genre's I would otherwise not find interest in, just to hear quality.

[beden1]

IMO, the definitive recording to test the weaknesses of your system is by listening to Fresh Air by Quicksilver Messenger Service. This has always been my measuring stick, and tests the mids and highs to the enth degree.

When I was initially setting up my current system, I just wanted to put something together that would sound decent enough. The bug then bit me again, and I began to re-build the system to one that would excel, as opposed to being just OK.

My first effort included a Pioneer Elite receiver powering B&W 703 front speakers. In this set-up while playing the likes of Fresh Air, the sound was unbearable...shrill and distorted. I found that B&W speakers were very accurate, and as a result, were revealing and emphasizing my systems' weaknesses.

I added an outboard Classe amp that did a very good job of toning down and smoothing out the distorted highs.

I then added a Classe pre-amp for stereo, and a good CD player that really put everything together for the 703s to perform at their peak. Listening to Fresh Air at this point made my neck hairs stand up and sent the chills down my spine as I always yearned to experience this song.

I have since changed my fronts to 803Ds, and the saga continues.

[ShadowZA]

Briz, I think that you've got it right. Recordings are what they are and you've gone beyond that in order to enjoy as much as possible in terms of the music that you enjoy. In this way, you're not placing restrictions on yourself. I salute that. ;x(

I, on the other hand, enjoy quality a great deal. Maybe a little too much. Fortunately, those artists whom I enjoy the most, also release good to excellent recordings. Could it be that I enjoy them more because their recordings are good? I admit, the probability exists.

My critical listening time averages 7 hours per week. That's playing redbook CD on the Meridian and excludes movie time. :T

[wettou]

There are a number of factors that can lead to this. Could be the engineer. Could be the mix. Could be the producer. Phil Spector made his career on the "wall of sound". Then take a home audio system. I started off at an entry-level. Over time, my ears learned how to listen. It also helped that I am a musician. It has been my experience that budget systems introduce coloring and tend to distort earlier as you turn the volume up.

When HD first came out, I can remember watching ants crawl across the desert. It was fascinating to see such a beautiful picture that I watched in awe. The same can be said about listening to a nicely mixed song. I find myself listening to genre's I would otherwise not find interest in, just to hear quality.

I thought you were gone 8O

[WI Rotel]

What happens with BW is that they are revealing to a fault. Good recordings sound splendid indeed, however, bad recordings will sound glaringly bad in contrast. The overwhelming majority of pop music recordings particularly rock and roll are pure unadulterated crap and so are many classical recordings. On the other hand many jazz and vocal recordings are particularly good. One of the main reasons is the difficulty of mixing and "mikeing" from large ensambles and live recordings from music venues ( this is particularly true for live classical recordings). The best recordings, as expected, are studio sessions where essentially all parameters can be controlled and adjusted accordingly. A good example: most small ensamble classical recordings are fabulous, most live concert at X recordings are mediocre at best. Another tribute to BW's revealing character is how easy you can tell the quality difference among digital audio formats. For example, one can easily tell the difference between dolby or DTS and uncompressed PCM. In fact, once you get used to fully unfettered High def audio, regular codecs sound "bad" (not really simply not as good) in comparison!
If you want to listen to audio at its very best I recommned you take a gander at Blu Ray BBC Opus Arte recordings, some of them have strange formats like 3.1 or 5.0 and such, but the quality and realism of most of them is simply breathtaking. I dare to say, in some instances they are probably better than being there since its like having the best seat of the house every time! In fact on my system most CD's except a select few sound rather blah again, its due to getting spoiled by the overall superior sound of uncompressed high def recordings. One point to ponder, not all high definition recordings are excellent either, I have a couple of high def music Blue ray classical recordings that are not any better than MP3 not to mention CD!!!!! Plus I have some jazz recordings from Ella that I downloaded from I tunes that are excellent!
The point is, there are many points during pruduction where recordings can go astray and you can get good or bad recordings from any source and in any format!

[sikoniko]

I thought you were gone 8O

I prefer we not focus on me. Sometimes we all make hasty decisions.

[wettou]

I prefer we not focus on me. Sometimes we all make hasty decisions.

No worries mate :B

[beden1]

WI Rotel,

You may be experiencing what I did, in that your receiver's amps could be causing your issues that are being revealed through your B&W speakers.

Even though my receiver was rated at 130 watts per channel, and I had the front speakers bi-amped through the receiver, the end result was hard to listen to through many of my CDs. It may be that the amps in the receiver were clipping?

I don't think the B&W speakers are all that efficient, and maybe they are less efficient at critical moments than their specs would suggest?

With my current set-up however, it is rare that I can't enjoy most CDs, even though as you said, many of the rock n' roll CDs have poorer quality recordings.

[fhsun]

My limited personal experience has showned me that my 683's revealed the weakness of my old receiver that I'm currently making do with as a pre when hooked up to a Rotel amp.

The other day I had the opportunity to listen to the same exact set up but with a Rotel 1069 pre/pro in place of my old receiver and things sounded so much better. More detail, better imaging, sound stage and dynamics. So I feel the speakers revealed the receiver's weakness.

Then the Rotel 1072 CD player also revealed the weakness of my duplicated CD. I heard ambient noise that were not there before when using other low end CD players. At first I thought I was in a noisy room...until I switched to the original CD and all of the sudden the room became more quiet!

Now I get the importance of a balanced system--if one component is so much better than the rest, it can actually reak havoc to the overall sound.

[hifiguymi]

My limited personal experience has showned me that my 683's revealed the weakness of my old receiver that I'm currently making do with as a pre when hooked up to a Rotel amp.

The other day I had the opportunity to listen to the same exact set up but with a Rotel 1069 pre/pro in place of my old receiver and things sounded so much better. More detail, better imaging, sound stage and dynamics. So I feel the speakers revealed the receiver's weakness.

Then the Rotel 1072 CD player also revealed the weakness of my duplicated CD. I heard ambient noise that were not there before when using other low end CD players. At first I thought I was in a noisy room...until I switched to the original CD and all of the sudden the room became more quiet!

Now I get the importance of a balanced system--if one component is so much better than the rest, it can actually reak havoc to the overall sound.

+1

Very good post. When one component out performs all the rest, or one component is lacking, you can end up with a poor end result. The preamp is one of the components that can really effect the overall system performance as you found out.

The quality of recordings varies greatly and a well balanced system that plays good music will show off a bad one very fast. It doesn't have to be a big dollar system just one that sounds "right".

Eric

[DeepEndX]

I believe its a combination of your system that will make bad recording more revealing. B&W's are very revealing speakers and whatever components that you mix and match would make a huge difference. I used to have Conrad Johnson tube preamp and Rotel power amp (very interesting combination), the music was warm, fluid, and thick. The tube preamp would mask all the imperfections from the CD recording. However, once I upgraded to Krell, it would reveal all the imperfections from the recording. The sound is brighter, detailed, and dynamic.

[bigburner]

Briz, you are just plain lucky.

Aussies call Australia "the lucky country". Now we know why.

Nigel.

[fhsun]

The tube preamp would mask all the imperfections from the CD recording. However, once I upgraded to Krell, it would reveal all the imperfections from the recording. The sound is brighter, detailed, and dynamic.

It's like upgrading from SD TV to HD TV!

Yes, you see everything with more details and definitions...but then some of the women that you thought are perfect all of the sudden are not so hot anymore :B

[Briz vegas]

Yeah must be lucky.
ALTHOUGH THIS NEW LAPTOP IS GOING BACK TO THE SHOP _ THIS IS SUPPOSED TO BE LOWER CASE GRRRRRRRR

Ok thats better. I played a CD by Johnny Marr for the first time since I INSTALLED _ ERR ITS DOING IT AGAIN. Since I installed my Frey and its gone from being ho hum to being an engaging listen. The wire is more revealing and more natural sounding than the one that it replaces. Robert Johnson was thin and hard to get on with about 4 upgrades ago - now it is no longer a problem and the sound is much more detailed.

On the other end of the spectrum Sarah K sounds great with a pleasing fullness, everything is very convincing and the fake swamp bugs in the background - well they just sound like fake swamp bugs. At least Ani Difranco uses real bugs if she is looking for an outdoor vibe.

So I have found that pretty much everything improves with an upgrade, particularly as you get closer to your goal, but some things improve more than others.

[sikoniko]

I used to have Conrad Johnson tube preamp and Rotel power amp (very interesting combination), the music was warm, fluid, and thick. The tube preamp would mask all the imperfections from the CD recording. However, once I upgraded to Krell, it would reveal all the imperfections from the recording. The sound is brighter, detailed, and dynamic.

You make an interesting observation, and one that will come to personal taste. If your equipment does color it, does that mean it is doing a bad job? Should the equipment color the sound to make music more listenable, or should you actually hear the source for what it really is?

I think you will find arguements both ways. Though, I believe people will stage the arguement in a way that would say their preferred electronics is not the one doing the coloring, but it is the other.

[Dmantis]

It's all about synergy. When building a system , everything needs to match. B&W speakers will revile anything thats not a good match. It's a double edge sword if you will. But as said above, they will shine when everything is in place. When it's not they sound like poo. Really it's not the speakers, it's the recording, the poor quality preamp or source. It could be bad cables or Interference thats hindering the system. Many factors to consider.

In general B&W speakers are fantastic. But they are not forgiving. I believe they have there place in many peoples homes. If you listen to a lot of not so good recordings, they may not be for you. You may want to consider a speaker that is more forgiving.

So what you hear is true from certain point of view.

[MikeFL52]

I actually don't think this is true that bad recordings will sound any worse with B&W speakers than any other speaker, it is just that the good recordings will sound exceptional and so there is a perceived decrease in the quality of the bad recordings.

I have many CDs from various eras and genres classical to jazz to rock to metal and good and bad recordings of all, but as I have upgraded my speakers, pre/pros, amps and components I have not stopped listening to those poorer recordings, they do not sound any worse than with my earlier equipment. The difference is now that I really appreciate the detail and dynamic range of the good recording.

[gross30]

Even though my equipment is older, (B&W 801 S3, w/Classe 15 mono's) I can definitely tell the difference on poor recordings. IE: Madonna, Steve Earle, Disturbed, Norah Jones, are fantastic recordings. While some other unmentionables are brutal. I don't bother with adjustments through equalization, just can't turn it up as load....lolol

[misterdoggy]

A great system will not make a bad recording better, but only reveal how bad it is.

Just the way it is...

An analogy is that Bluray images on your screen might show more Skin problems on your favorite actress/actor than you might want to know about.

The tecnology is more revealing. The corrections to older recordings lies not in the ability of YOUR system to correct the faults, but in the ability of the sound engineers to remaster the originals the best they can with the files/recordings they have available.

Nothing could make original recordings of Rachmaninoff playing his compositions better, because they didn't have the technology at the time of recording.

However, there are lots of tapes from the 60's onwards with 4 tracks to play with that can be remastered to perfection.

Don't look to your system to solve these problems, the better the system the more revealing the problem and you just have to live with the crappy recording of Rachmaninoff playing if its him you want to hear playing his stuff.

[Russ L]

A great system will not make a bad recording better, but only reveal how bad it is.

Just the way it is...

Exactly. All my CDs sound good on my iMac.

[misterdoggy]

Exactly. All my CDs sound good on my iMac.

Thats not a reason not to own a fine Stereo.

As Great/Good recordings sound unbelievable on a great system.

Better than an IMac

[Russ L]

Exactly. All my CDs sound good on my iMac.

"Good" as in not unlistenable.

[Russ L]

Thats not a reason not to own a fine Stereo.

As Great/Good recordings sound unbelievable on a great system.

Better than an IMac

Once again I agree. I just play my bad Cds on my iMac and the good ones on my 2 channel system.

[Alex999]

What happens with BW is that they are revealing to a fault. Good recordings sound splendid indeed, however, bad recordings will sound glaringly bad in contrast. The overwhelming majority of pop music recordings particularly rock and roll are pure unadulterated crap and so are many classical recordings. On the other hand many jazz and vocal recordings are particularly good. One of the main reasons is the difficulty of mixing and "mikeing" from large ensambles and live recordings from music venues ( this is particularly true for live classical recordings). The best recordings, as expected, are studio sessions where essentially all parameters can be controlled and adjusted accordingly. A good example: most small ensamble classical recordings are fabulous, most live concert at X recordings are mediocre at best. Another tribute to BW's revealing character is how easy you can tell the quality difference among digital audio formats. For example, one can easily tell the difference between dolby or DTS and uncompressed PCM. In fact, once you get used to fully unfettered High def audio, regular codecs sound "bad" (not really simply not as good) in comparison!
If you want to listen to audio at its very best I recommned you take a gander at Blu Ray BBC Opus Arte recordings, some of them have strange formats like 3.1 or 5.0 and such, but the quality and realism of most of them is simply breathtaking. I dare to say, in some instances they are probably better than being there since its like having the best seat of the house every time! In fact on my system most CD's except a select few sound rather blah again, its due to getting spoiled by the overall superior sound of uncompressed high def recordings. One point to ponder, not all high definition recordings are excellent either, I have a couple of high def music Blue ray classical recordings that are not any better than MP3 not to mention CD!!!!! Plus I have some jazz recordings from Ella that I downloaded from I tunes that are excellent!
The point is, there are many points during pruduction where recordings can go astray and you can get good or bad recordings from any source and in any format!

Great post. I could sing this. My thoughts exactly. I listen to jazz and classical music most of the time. When I play e.g. Patricia Barber, Diana Krall, Susie Arioli etc. they sound amazing.

I have few rock and pop CDs but most of them sound so bad that I stopped listening. It just bugs me too much. I like classical music too much so I'm more forgiving when it comes to it, but I agree most of them that weren't recorded in a studio don't sound that great.

I need to find some well recorded classical music. If you guys know where to look I'd appreciate your help. I don't mind paying more as long as the recordings are well mastered and sound great. Thanks.

[Ken49r]

My limited personal experience has showned me that my 683's revealed the weakness of my old receiver that I'm currently making do with as a pre when hooked up to a Rotel amp.

The other day I had the opportunity to listen to the same exact set up but with a Rotel 1069 pre/pro in place of my old receiver and things sounded so much better. More detail, better imaging, sound stage and dynamics. So I feel the speakers revealed the receiver's weakness.

Then the Rotel 1072 CD player also revealed the weakness of my duplicated CD. I heard ambient noise that were not there before when using other low end CD players. At first I thought I was in a noisy room...until I switched to the original CD and all of the sudden the room became more quiet!

Now I get the importance of a balanced system--if one component is so much better than the rest, it can actually reak havoc to the overall sound.

fhsun,

Good post. A balanced system really does make the investment rewarding to the ears.

[Briz vegas]

Maybe we need to stop generalising. What records sound bad on your system? If there are alot then give us your worst five. Lets stick to CDs to keep the level playing field

I have mentioned the Ravonettes Chaingang of love. Thats it for me and I am even thinking that maybe it deserves another spin just to make sure

[emig5m]

Here's one...

Metallica's 2008 release - Death Magnetic. I even read a site that showed the compression clipping on a graph from a audio program. The one mixer guy didn't even want his name in the credits which he said something to this effect - "the recording was brick-walled by the time I received it."

Couldn't really hear the clipping/compression distortion when I first heard it over the radio in a stock car system, but the CD on my home system with the B&Ws was really bad! :E I had actually thought I got a defective disc! Heck, the master for the game Guitar Hero III is suppose to be of higher quality than the CD release! Ouch! :E Heck, even the oldest Metallica album from the 80's Kill Em' All trounces it for sound quality. But, the difference wasn't that noticeable on a stock car system.

Now some recordings that don't have all this new compression going on I can still consider poor. Like if the sound doesn't have good solid clean and strong bass and sounds thin, no good high end response, etc... Doesn't have to have distortion, just lack realism and dynamics. I consider Pink Floyd The Wall and say Nazareth Hair Of The Dog (especially the 30th Anniversary Remaster) excellent even though they're old but say something like Europe or Cutting Crew is on the thin and crappy side. Not really distorted, just highly lacking realism, bass, and dynamics which might make your expensive and high quality gear seem to sound on the less impressive non-realistic side.

I wouldn't really say B&W (or any other high quality speaker) is poor with bad recordings... it's more like bad recordings are just bad recordings. But I think it's more like lesser quality recordings make a higher end speaker system sound less impressive for the price that was paid for them unlike a well done recording which will blow you away from a ordinary run of the mill system. That's my personal experience anyway.

[Opus007]

The worst I have had and have ever heard is Alice Cooper Legends 3 cd set.There is not one recording on the 3 cd's that comes close to being average quality.Made my B&W's sound like tin cans. I was so pissed off I threw the 3 cd's away.I remember back in the 70's when I had the albums and a cheap stereo and all his stuff was awesome.Or maybe I was just too high back then.... :E A total waste of money. :M

[beden1]

The worst I have had and have ever heard is Alice Cooper Legends 3 cd set.There is not one recording on the 3 cd's that comes close to being average quality.Made my B&W's sound like tin cans. I was so pissed off I threw the 3 cd's away.I remember back in the 70's when I had the albums and a cheap stereo and all his stuff was awesome.Or maybe I was just too high back then.... :E A total waste of money. :M

I listen to my old vinyl records sometimes and they just sound better than most of their CD counterparts. I think they screwed up many of these recordings when transfering over to digital.

[Opus007]

I think they screwed up many of these recordings when transfering over to digital.

I completly agree with you on that.

[Briz vegas]

I have a LouReed LEGENDARY 3 CD set, cheap as, but it sounds great. At least 200 of my CDs would have to be pretty ordinary recordings. This is one of a few that stands out. For me if a speaker or gear did not sound good on a cross section of my music I wouldn't buy it.

Mind you I like cheap n nasty films as well. I have "plan 9 from outer space" in my modest collection. I am keen to get that budget film with Beth Orton and Beck, No budget stuff,review says it is thrown together and disjointed but it has that grundgy appeal ..........and yes the appeal might have something to do with Beth.

[WI Rotel]

Great post. I could sing this. My thoughts exactly. I listen to jazz and classical music most of the time. When I play e.g. Patricia Barber, Diana Krall, Susie Arioli etc. they sound amazing.

I have few rock and pop CDs but most of them sound so bad that I stopped listening. It just bugs me too much. I like classical music too much so I'm more forgiving when it comes to it, but I agree most of them that weren't recorded in a studio don't sound that great.

I need to find some well recorded classical music. If you guys know where to look I'd appreciate your help. I don't mind paying more as long as the recordings are well mastered and sound great. Thanks.

Try Archiv from deutsche Gramophon, although I think they are not in production anymore they are still sold. They made to offer fantastic baroque recordings consistently. Again the small ensamble observation applies.
Here's the link:
http://www2.deutschegrammophon.com/c...RIES_ID=ARCPRD :T

[Opus007]

Try Archiv from deutsche Gramophon, although I think they are not in production anymore they are still sold. They made to offer fantastic baroque recordings consistently. Again the small ensamble observation applies.
Here's the link:
http://www2.deutschegrammophon.com/c...RIES_ID=ARCPRD :T

Whats up with the Link.When I click it . it closes my browser with a c+c runtime error????Never mind works now.

[hifiguymi]

The Killers first two discs sound TERRIBLE. I really like the music but I can't listen to them unless it's in the car or for background music. There are others, but those are the first ones that come to mind.

Eric

[bnieman]

Raveonettes

First of all, very interesting post and some great input from everybody.

Briz, I am a huge Raveonettes fan and have seen them live twice. The recordings are pretty lackluster in recording quality and not one does justice to their live show. Live they are a wall of sound with low-end that will make your blood quiver while the mid tones entrance and glue you to the floor. They use highs sparingly for decoration (bells, chimes, etc).

Their first disc, Whip It On is mastered at a volume higher than any other I have heard and it does not have much dynamic range. Regardless, it's probably my favorite CD to listen to in the car on a shitty stereo (as long as it's LOUD).

It would take take quite the engineer to record and master a Raveonettes disc properly.

If you ever have the chance, go check out the Raveonettes live. It's definitely a unique experience, and an awe inspiring one at that.

---

One of my favorite discs on my B&W/Rotel setup is Blonde Redhead - Misery Is A Butterfly.

[Briz vegas]

I think Pretty in Black is OK- no problems. It was a bit harsh and rough when my system was brighter, less natural and less detailed. Now that I have resolved those issues I can happily play that CD from end to end and enjoy it. The difference it sound quality between my two Ravonettes discs is quite significant.

Yes I think they would be well worth catching live. I can hang with the older dudes at the back that should have grown out of new pop music but problably never will. I saw U2 in November 1984 in a Festival Hall, capacity 4000.

I love this series on the tube

http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=NGL5U4HVwX8&feature=channel

http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=LiMWi-cgeqQ&feature=related

[Mitchell]

I remember a conversation about this very issue I posted on several years ago.
When I got my 703's I noticed that rock music I had been listening to for sometimes thirty years sounded suddenly horrible. It revealed all kinds of flaws in music by Zeppelin, Stones etc.
Singers suddenly sounded exactly like a guy in a little booth singing over music.
Classical and jazz in the other hand tended to sound better all around though I cant say why.

[bnieman]

I think Pretty in Black is OK- no problems. It was a bit harsh and rough when my system was brighter, less natural and less detailed. Now that I have resolved those issues I can happily play that CD from end to end and enjoy it. The difference it sound quality between my two Ravonettes discs is quite significant.

Yes I think they would be well worth catching live. I can hang with the older dudes at the back that should have grown out of new pop music but problably never will. I saw U2 in November 1984 in a Festival Hall, capacity 4000.

I love this series on the tube

http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=NGL5U4HVwX8&feature=channel

http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=LiMWi-...eature=related

Thanks for the links! Great songs. If only it was lossless audio... would sound much better on my N805's (just switched from listening to FLAC to the You Tube videos...)

[bnieman]

Oooo.... I did some digging and found the set in 192k mp3s much better than the YouTube quality.

Enjoy! Raveonettes acoustic sounds great on Rotel/B&W

http://media.livedaily.com/podcast/sessions/ldsessions-mp3-raveonettes.mp3

:T

[Miyuki]

If B&Ws were not revealing, there would be a problem. B&Ws tell the truth and nothing but the truth.

[Opus007]

On the cd Led Zepplin 3 ,the song "Since I've Been Loving You" you can hear a squeak from John Bonham's bass drum pedal. Never heard it before the B&W's.Thats how revealing they are.

[wettou]

If B&Ws were not revealing, there would be a problem. B&Ws tell the truth and nothing but the truth.

Yes "the truth will set you free"