Colors and Finishes Preference

[RebelMan]

Which of the three colors and finishes would you choose or have chosen? If you don't care for any or you simply have no preference, please select "NO PREFERENCE". Thanks.

[PewterTA]

Had to choose Piano Gloss Black, since that's what I have... can't offend one's own speakers. ha

Though the Rosenut comes in a very very close 2nd.

[Kal Rubinson]

??? I have Piano Gloss Black for L/C/R and Rosenut for the surrounds. No one notices the surrounds and that's what I wanted.

[alebonau]

if were buying 800 series it would be rose nut. I hope they never get rid of rose nut. the B&Ws look pretty special in that finish

[Freddie40]

if were buying 800 series it would be rose nut. I hope they never get rid of rose nut. the B&Ws look pretty special in that finish

Yes It Does

Dave

[leo2498]

Yes It Does

Dave

+1, I preffer the wood veneer look.

[kcsun]

Rosenut all the way
Love piano black but it would show too many marks in my house!

kc

[RebelMan]

I've always preferred the Cherrywood veneer's smooth and satin finish to the Rosenut's grainy and semi-gloss texture. Once Piano Black Gloss entered the picture I became torn between the two. Though lately I am taking more of a liking to Rosenut than before. I am beginning to realize that my preference has largely been driven by the choice of decor which over the years has changed. Right now Piano Black Gloss fits the room but I'm thinking Rosenut would too.

[jeepers]

Cherrywood for me; it matches with the floor.

[Rod#S]

Of the current production options I'm a rosenut fan. Given the high end nature of the Diamond series and given the size of B&W as a whole and their global access and resources the one thing I find disappointing with their finish choices is the lack of exotic woods. If smaller manufacturers can offer exotic choices I feel B&W should easily be able to accommodate customers with that as well. I know B&W have offered the likes of birds eye maple and tigers eye as limited runs over the years but those types of woods and others should be on tap all the time such as quilted maple, rosewood and especially that insanely beautiful Santos Rosewood offered by Aerial Acoustics. That is simply drool worthy. I would pay extra for that.

[ShadowZA]

Like James, I have always had an affinity for Cherrywood. I do still like it. However, if I were to choose now, Rosenut might very well pip Cherrywood to the post.

[SPACEMANRICK]

You can't go wrong with any of the colors, all three are great. I personally chose the cherry because it most matches the color of the wood floor in my muisc room.

[BVLDARI]

Rosenut all the way
Love piano black but it would show too many marks in my house!

kc

agreed. piano black is too high maintenance for me - although I LOVE the way it looks. But I also LOVE the rosenut and is what came home.

[Kevin D]

Bring back red cherry.... Half my furniture is stained to match my CDM's and I want to upgrade.

Kevin D.

[RebelMan]

Seems others feel similarly to the way I do. That the environment factor's into the equation of which color/finish is chosen. When I replaced a pair of Cherrywood speakers I really wanted to stay within the family but the color just didn't look right, to me or my wife, in our new place. I ended up with Piano Black Gloss but I think Rosenut would have worked nearly as well. Performance aside has anyone swapped their speakers for the color of it?

[RebelMan]

Love piano black but it would show too many marks in my house!

agreed. piano black is too high maintenance for me - although I LOVE the way it looks.

You would think so but I haven't found that to be the case, having lived with the color for a while. I'm not okay with anyone touching my speakers no matter what color they are. So the only time finger prints would happen is if I put them there. I am careful not to, Piano Black Gloss ships with gloves. As for the accumulation of dust, well they all do that. It does show more (on top) with Piano Black Gloss then it does the veneers but if you have Marlan heads then you will be just as susceptible to cleaning maintenance. The dust doesn't really accumulate much on the sides to be noticeable. I rarely have had to deal with it and when it's necessary all it takes is a little puff of air to wipe down. I haven't used the included microfiber wipe for fear of scratches.

[PewterTA]

I just use an air compressor, turned down to blow the majority of dust off mine.... then just use Ostrich Premium feather duster to lightly brush any stubborn dust off them. Always going with the curve of the surface... works perfectly and I have yet to see any marks left ever. Of course using a feather duster is just every so lightly touching the surface and the feathers in the premiums ones are the softest things I've ever touched.

These are the ones I got for mine. Feather Duster Depot

[wkhanna]

So....do you guys give them warm milk & tuck them into bed every night, too?

Sorry, simply could not avoid an envious jab.........

[PewterTA]

Actually they get Chimay Premiere (red label) and I never tuck them into bed... they don't have a bed time.

[wkhanna]

:roflmao:

[PewterTA]

Bill.... just like your NatPs get Orval.............................

[beden1]

Did you upgrade your speakers?

[RebelMan]

Hey beden1, if you are asking me, then yes, I upgraded, from a pair of 800D to a pair of 804D2! 8O Just kidding. :B Sad truth is, though, I did replace them, I had too, we moved and it was becoming increasingly difficult enjoying them in the new place. Why? Well... I'll try to be brief.

In the old place, which measured 12' wide and 18' long, the speakers sat along the short wall. The orientation of the new place put the speakers on the long wall in a room that measured 17' wide and 14.25' long. Funny thing is while the square footage of the new place grew by about 12% the speakers didn't fit in it as well as they did the previous one. This was because, in the old place, the walkway ran behind the listening position, away from where the speakers were. Whereas in the new place, the walkway runs in front of the listening position, adjacent to where the the speakers are.

Maintaining order around the speakers in the old place wasn't much of a concern as they sat in a fairly remote and secure part of the room. Not so in the new place as they sat directly in the line of fire of potential contact and impact of passersby. I was constantly playing speaker police telling people to "Be careful!" "Watch it!" "Look out!" and on and on. I got sick of it. All I did was worry, not about if something would happen but when it would happen. But I was determined to be vigilant about not letting ANYTHING ever happen to these these beauties and so police them I did, day and night. It drove me and my family nuts because I obsessed about it, for six months!

I finally decided that I couldn't continue to live this way. I had two possible solutions to the problem but neither all that appealing. I could either box them up for storage or sell them. I chose the latter. Why? Because it would be several years before our plans to move again would come to fruition. I didn't wan't the speakers to sit around and potentially deteriorate in my garage. I know I could have stored them in a climate control facility but I thought that would be getting a little silly (my wife thought it would be ridiculous). It wasn't like these were family heirlooms or something precious like that. They were awesome speakers and I really enjoyed them but I also realized they were just speakers after all.

I wasn't sure what I was going to do after the 800D sold but I knew that while I couldn't live with them I also knew I couldn't live without something either. I settled on a pair of CM5 for a while given their performance to weight ratio and frankly I would still have them if it weren't for my insatiable appetite for surround-sound. All I had running at the time was a 2.0 channel setup and I thirsted for the return of a 5.1 channel one. The problem with the CM series living in the new place was that there was little space to put the matching surrounds not to mention that neither center channel model was going to cut it with the CM5 either. When the house was being built I actually had plans to put in-walls in the room and prewired for the occasion but I had no idea that the the electrical conduits supplying the house electricity was going to run right behind the wall where the surrounds were to go, until after the fact. In the old place, 3' of the room served the walkway behind the listening position and also allowed room for on-wall speakers the size of the SCMS. Unfortunately, in the new place, there is no space separating the wall from the listening position, leaving me few choices, so I turned to the low profile M1's for surround duty and WAF.

Choosing a pair of M1's for surrounds didn't solve the lingering problem of what to do about the center. As you may recall I watch movies and listen to music 50/50 so I usually don't make system compromises to either, but given the circumstances I needed to. I decided if I were going to step down to the M1 for movies then I would likewise step up to the 804D2 for music. I know what you must be thinking, why didn't I consider the HTM2D2 for a center. Well, it would have been a better match to the 804D2 than either the CMC or CMC2 would have been to the CM5 but I didn't have room for it at the time, an equipment rack stood in the way, and I wasn't about to raise the TV. In addition, the HTM2D2 is designed for the 803D2 not the 804D2 and I wasn't interested in the 803D2 for what should be obvious reasons by now. Finally, a full complement of M1s would create perfect timbre in the soundscape. For a brief while, I seriously considered the 805D2 and matching HTM4D2 but frankly the 805D2 wasn't enough of a step up from the CM5. After I factored the stands into the cost equation and more importantly when I considered that the footprint of the 804D2 was virtually the same as the 805D2 with stands, my mind was made up.

As much as I long for the days of the 800D, I am currently much happier living with the 804D2. While it doesn't have the same sense of scale nor the resolution that the 800D had, the 804D2 is very capable of making great performances sound great. Pushing the 800D out of harms way was simply out of the question, there just wasn't enough room for it to go anywhere. Not only is that a non issue with the 804D2's smaller form factor, doing so takes advantage of the gains that the primary boundary reinforcement has on its small woofers. The 804D2 sounds much larger in scope than its appearance would suggest. In balance with the technical improvements to the tweeter and crossover, the 804D2 is an all-round winner and possibly the new sweet spot of the Diamond series.

[leo2498]

Hey beden1, if you are asking me, then yes, I upgraded, from a pair of 800D to a pair of 804D2! 8O Just kidding. :B Sad truth is, though, I did replace them, I had too, we moved and it was becoming increasingly difficult enjoying them in the new place. Why? Well... I'll try to be brief.

In the old place, which measured 12' wide and 18' long, the speakers sat along the short wall. The orientation of the new place put the speakers on the long wall in a room that measured 17' wide and 14.25' long. Funny thing is while the square footage of the new place grew by about 12% the speakers didn't fit in it as well as they did the previous one. This was because, in the old place, the walkway ran behind the listening position, away from where the speakers were. Whereas in the new place, the walkway runs in front of the listening position, adjacent to where the the speakers are.

Maintaining order around the speakers in the old place wasn't much of a concern as they sat in a fairly remote and secure part of the room. Not so in the new place as they sat directly in the line of fire of potential contact and impact of passersby. I was constantly playing speaker police telling people to "Be careful!" "Watch it!" "Look out!" and on and on. I got sick of it. All I did was worry, not about if something would happen but when it would happen. But I was determined to be vigilant about not letting ANYTHING ever happen to these these beauties and so police them I did, day and night. It drove me and my family nuts because I obsessed about it, for six months!

I finally decided that I couldn't continue to live this way. I had two possible solutions to the problem but neither all that appealing. I could either box them up for storage or sell them. I chose the latter. Why? Because it would be several years before our plans to move again would come to fruition. I didn't wan't the speakers to sit around and potentially deteriorate in my garage. I know I could have stored them in a climate control facility but I thought that would be getting a little silly (my wife thought it would be ridiculous). It wasn't like these were family heirlooms or something precious like that. They were awesome speakers and I really enjoyed them but I also realized they were just speakers after all.

I wasn't sure what I was going to do after the 800D sold but I knew that while I couldn't live with them I also knew I couldn't live without something either. I settled on a pair of CM5 for a while given their performance to weight ratio and frankly I would still have them if it weren't for my insatiable appetite for surround-sound. All I had running at the time was a 2.0 channel setup and I thirsted for the return of a 5.1 channel one. The problem with the CM series living in the new place was that there was little space to put the matching surrounds not to mention that neither center channel model was going to cut it with the CM5 either. When the house was being built I actually had plans to put in-walls in the room and prewired for the occasion but I had no idea that the the electrical conduits supplying the house electricity was going to run right behind the wall where the surrounds were to go, until after the fact. In the old place, 3' of the room served the walkway behind the listening position and also allowed room for on-wall speakers the size of the SCMS. Unfortunately, in the new place, there is no space separating the wall from the listening position, leaving me few choices, so I turned to the low profile M1's for surround duty and WAF.

Choosing a pair of M1's for surrounds didn't solve the lingering problem of what to do about the center. As you may recall I watch movies and listen to music 50/50 so I usually don't make system compromises to either, but given the circumstances I needed to. I decided if I were going to step down to the M1 for movies then I would likewise step up to the 804D2 for music. I know what you must be thinking, why didn't I consider the HTM2D2 for a center. Well, it would have been a better match to the 804D2 than either the CMC or CMC2 would have been to the CM5 but I didn't have room for it at the time, an equipment rack stood in the way, and I wasn't about to raise the TV. In addition, the HTM2D2 is designed for the 803D2 not the 804D2 and I wasn't interested in the 803D2 for what should be obvious reasons by now. Finally, a full complement of M1s would create perfect timbre in the soundscape. For a brief while, I seriously considered the 805D2 and matching HTM4D2 but frankly the 805D2 wasn't enough of a step up from the CM5. After I factored the stands into the cost equation and more importantly when I considered that the footprint of the 804D2 was virtually the same as the 805D2 with stands, my mind was made up.

As much as I long for the days of the 800D, I am currently much happier living with the 804D2. While it doesn't have the same sense of scale nor the resolution that the 800D had, the 804D2 is very capable of making great performances sound great. Pushing the 800D out of harms way was simply out of the question, there just wasn't enough room for it to go anywhere. Not only is that a non issue with the 804D2's smaller form factor, doing so takes advantage of the gains that the primary boundary reinforcement has on its small woofers. The 804D2 sounds much larger in scope than its appearance would suggest. In balance with the technical improvements to the tweeter and crossover, the 804D2 is an all-round winner and possibly the new sweet spot of the Diamond series.

I was to ask the same thing? why you changed the 800 for a 804 but you just read my mind. with your story I have another question, you have tested side by side in your room the 805 vs. the CM5? I was in the same road when I got my surround speaker and with the CM5 I thought that with this I was a step back, so I went for the 805Di(I'm more a music listener so this was a rookie mistake) but for multichannel I think the the 804+htm4+805 di series are a HT winner

BTW what are you using for center?

[RebelMan]

I have another question, you have tested side by side in your room the 805 vs. the CM5?

The CM5 essentially combines an 805S crossover with an 805D2 mid/bass drive unit into a rectangular box. It didn't seem to matter much that it didn't share the tweeter on top and a curved cabinet design given the methods I used to try and neutralize those differences.

The CM5 does not use any internal bracing but it does utilize a thick and solid MDF outer structure. I capitalized on this by tightly coupling the speaker with a mass loaded stand that stood on spikes. This created a transmission line that was capable of pulling the driver induced resonances away from the cabinet walls and towards the ground where the energy could be dissipated. Coupling the 805 in a similar fashion was not as beneficial and most likely the result of the internal matrix bracing breaking up and absorbing some of the internal frequencies.

In the end I found the 805D2 to present cleaner treble, clearer midrange and punchier bass than the CM5 could, even with the tweaks I made. But like the CM5, it was still handicapped in the low-mid bass region and the improvements it brought were not enough to support the premium it demanded along with the matching stands.

For multichannel I think the the 804+htm4+805 di series are a HT winner

BTW what are you using for center?

The 805D2 are better suited for surrounds than the CM5 would be if partnering with the 804D2 as mains. But that was not and is not an option for me given the constraints of the room and the compromises I needed to make with my wife. The plans were to have in-walls, the likes of the CI 700 or the upcoming (at the time) CI 800 series, for the front and back. Those plans got derailed when I found out, too late, that they weren't going to fit the back wall. There is a possibility of revisiting the in-wall solution by placing the surrounds in the celling above the listening spot but I am not sure how effective that is going to be over and above what the M1s are already doing. For now, a pair of 804D2 makes up the 2.0 side and five M1s plus a sub makes up the 5.1 side of my system.

[leo2498]

I see, I thought that you was keeping your CM5. I'm agreed with you if I need to choice between the 804Di and the 805Di the winner always be the 804, if you add the stand the price gap is nothing.

[RebelMan]

The changes took place during the last couple years. I had the CM5 for about a year and then the 804D2 for about a year. The M1's fell in-between this timeframe.

[beden1]

Hey beden1, if you are asking me, then yes, I upgraded, from a pair of 800D to a pair of 804D2! 8O Just kidding. :B Sad truth is, though, I did replace them, I had too, we moved and it was becoming increasingly difficult enjoying them in the new place. Why? Well... I'll try to be brief.

In the old place, which measured 12' wide and 18' long, the speakers sat along the short wall. The orientation of the new place put the speakers on the long wall in a room that measured 17' wide and 14.25' long. Funny thing is while the square footage of the new place grew by about 12% the speakers didn't fit in it as well as they did the previous one. This was because, in the old place, the walkway ran behind the listening position, away from where the speakers were. Whereas in the new place, the walkway runs in front of the listening position, adjacent to where the the speakers are.

Maintaining order around the speakers in the old place wasn't much of a concern as they sat in a fairly remote and secure part of the room. Not so in the new place as they sat directly in the line of fire of potential contact and impact of passersby. I was constantly playing speaker police telling people to "Be careful!" "Watch it!" "Look out!" and on and on. I got sick of it. All I did was worry, not about if something would happen but when it would happen. But I was determined to be vigilant about not letting ANYTHING ever happen to these these beauties and so police them I did, day and night. It drove me and my family nuts because I obsessed about it, for six months!

I finally decided that I couldn't continue to live this way. I had two possible solutions to the problem but neither all that appealing. I could either box them up for storage or sell them. I chose the latter. Why? Because it would be several years before our plans to move again would come to fruition. I didn't wan't the speakers to sit around and potentially deteriorate in my garage. I know I could have stored them in a climate control facility but I thought that would be getting a little silly (my wife thought it would be ridiculous). It wasn't like these were family heirlooms or something precious like that. They were awesome speakers and I really enjoyed them but I also realized they were just speakers after all.

I wasn't sure what I was going to do after the 800D sold but I knew that while I couldn't live with them I also knew I couldn't live without something either. I settled on a pair of CM5 for a while given their performance to weight ratio and frankly I would still have them if it weren't for my insatiable appetite for surround-sound. All I had running at the time was a 2.0 channel setup and I thirsted for the return of a 5.1 channel one. The problem with the CM series living in the new place was that there was little space to put the matching surrounds not to mention that neither center channel model was going to cut it with the CM5 either. When the house was being built I actually had plans to put in-walls in the room and prewired for the occasion but I had no idea that the the electrical conduits supplying the house electricity was going to run right behind the wall where the surrounds were to go, until after the fact. In the old place, 3' of the room served the walkway behind the listening position and also allowed room for on-wall speakers the size of the SCMS. Unfortunately, in the new place, there is no space separating the wall from the listening position, leaving me few choices, so I turned to the low profile M1's for surround duty and WAF.

Choosing a pair of M1's for surrounds didn't solve the lingering problem of what to do about the center. As you may recall I watch movies and listen to music 50/50 so I usually don't make system compromises to either, but given the circumstances I needed to. I decided if I were going to step down to the M1 for movies then I would likewise step up to the 804D2 for music. I know what you must be thinking, why didn't I consider the HTM2D2 for a center. Well, it would have been a better match to the 804D2 than either the CMC or CMC2 would have been to the CM5 but I didn't have room for it at the time, an equipment rack stood in the way, and I wasn't about to raise the TV. In addition, the HTM2D2 is designed for the 803D2 not the 804D2 and I wasn't interested in the 803D2 for what should be obvious reasons by now. Finally, a full complement of M1s would create perfect timbre in the soundscape. For a brief while, I seriously considered the 805D2 and matching HTM4D2 but frankly the 805D2 wasn't enough of a step up from the CM5. After I factored the stands into the cost equation and more importantly when I considered that the footprint of the 804D2 was virtually the same as the 805D2 with stands, my mind was made up.

As much as I long for the days of the 800D, I am currently much happier living with the 804D2. While it doesn't have the same sense of scale nor the resolution that the 800D had, the 804D2 is very capable of making great performances sound great. Pushing the 800D out of harms way was simply out of the question, there just wasn't enough room for it to go anywhere. Not only is that a non issue with the 804D2's smaller form factor, doing so takes advantage of the gains that the primary boundary reinforcement has on its small woofers. The 804D2 sounds much larger in scope than its appearance would suggest. In balance with the technical improvements to the tweeter and crossover, the 804D2 is an all-round winner and possibly the new sweet spot of the Diamond series.

It's been a long time since I've spent much time here. The new format is not as user friendly. Glad to see you're still visiting.

I thought the HTM4Di was the match for the 804Di(s)? The HTM2Di is the match for the 803Di and 802Di? You listed the center speaker as HTM4D2 and fronts as 804D2. I guess I've been away too long, but did B&W upgrade the 804Di again?

Are you using sub woofers to weight the low end along with your 804Di(s)?

It's too bad you had to swap the 800Ds. I know how much you liked them. I have been very pleased with my 804Di(s) and HTM4Di combo for HT. The dialogue is crystal clear. Do you find the highs on the 804Di a bit on the bright side when listening to music?

[RebelMan]

I thought the HTM4Di was the match for the 804Di(s)? The HTM2Di is the match for the 803Di and 802Di? You listed the center speaker as HTM4D2 and fronts as 804D2. I guess I've been away too long, but did B&W upgrade the 804Di again?

References to the second generation diamond models using Di is not the official naming convention adopted by B&W. The first generation diamond models (800D Series) are officially designated with a trailing D and the second generation diamond models (800 Series Diamond) are officially designated with with a trailing D2. Some people prefer or do not see a problem using Di to refer to the second generation diamond models. Eventually, though, Di will need to succumb to D2 if a third generation of diamond models are produced.

Are you using sub woofers to weight the low end along with your 804Di(s)?

Subwoofers are not engaged when using the 804D2s only when using the M1s. I only listen to music with the 804D2s and I only watch movies with the M1s. There is a possibility of replacing the M1s with the CI 800 Series but only if all the M1s can be replaced. At this point I am uncertain about using the CCM8.5 as surrounds.

It's too bad you had to swap the 800Ds. I know how much you liked them. I have been very pleased with my 804Di(s) and HTM4Di combo for HT. The dialogue is crystal clear. Do you find the highs on the 804Di a bit on the bright side when listening to music?

To put it mildly, my wife's interests in this hobby do not align with mine so she is less concerned about such things. Someday, I will have a space where I won't need to make any concessions, until then I must make do the best that I can. Giving up the 800D shouldn't be seen as a step back but rather as a step in the right direction for this place and time. Keeping them wasn't the problem, enjoying them was. Care is still exercised around the area even though the 804D2 has taken residence but I am far more at ease about it and can spend more time listening to them than worrying about protecting them.

Speaking about how they sound, I have not observed any undue brightness with the music I mostly listen too but I have seen occasions where they were a little thin with certain types of genres. It was barely apparent with Classé's SSP-800 but fairly blatant with Classé's CP-800. I also do not listen on axis, do you?

[jeepers]

References to the second generation diamond models using Di is not the official naming convention adopted by B&W. The first generation diamond models (800D Series) are officially designated with a trailing D and the second generation diamond models (800 Series Diamond) are officially designated with with a trailing D2. Some people prefer or do not see a problem using Di to refer to the second generation diamond models. Eventually, though, Di will need to succumb to D2 if a third generation of diamond models are produced.

Really and where do you see the D2 mentioned on the official B&W website ? I am not interested in the parts website. I agree it will be interesting to see how a third generation (if at all) of diamond models will be called on the official website.

[leo2498]

I have seen occasions where they were a little thin with certain types of genres. It was barely apparent with Classé's SSP-800 but fairly blatant with Classé's CP-800. I also do not listen on axis, do you?

when you was talking of "thin", did you mean in the bass region or in general sound? BTW in which genres did you listened it?

[RebelMan]

Really and where do you see the D2 mentioned on the official B&W website ?

In the design drafts, circa 2009, long before Di was tossed around publicly.

[RebelMan]

when you was talking of "thin", did you mean in the bass region or in general sound? BTW in which genres did you listened it?

In general. The music may have been subjected to some loudness compensation techniques that altered the dynamics of the original recording. I noticed it mostly with 80's style Pop. Some of these recordings were "remastered" and reissued, like Anita Baker's Rapture, which sounded thin relative to the original transfers. I routinely listen to Smooth Jazz, but when critiquing a piece of gear I will source a variety of Jazz, R&B, Rock and Pop, with a smattering of Blues, Country and Operatic thrown in for good measure.

[jeepers]

In the design drafts, circa 2009, long before Di was tossed around publicly.

Exactly ...draft and not official.... so you can toss that one as well.

[leo2498]

Exactly ...draft and not official.... so you can toss that one as well.

jajaja I think that this dispute is not getting any beneficial knowledge, in the spare parts B&W named its new tweeter like 800d2 so I think that if this is not the oficial name, why they use this nomination in its spare parts?

[leo2498]

In general. The music may have been subjected to some loudness compensation techniques that altered the dynamics of the original recording. I noticed it mostly with 80's style Pop. Some of these recordings were "remastered" and reissued, like Anita Baker's Rapture, which sounded thin relative to the original transfers. I routinely listen to Smooth Jazz, but when critiquing a piece of gear I will source a variety of Jazz, R&B, Rock and Pop, with a smattering of Blues, Country and Operatic thrown in for good measure.

mmmm I see, I just wondering if it's possible that I missing something so I will auditioning the 802Di again side by side to the 804Di, you has put a doubt in my mind 8O . the last time I did this audition I heard a little difference but I not felt that I missing something.

[jeepers]

jajaja I think that this dispute is not getting any beneficial knowledge, in the spare parts B&W named its new tweeter like 800d2 so I think that if this is not the oficial name, why they use this nomination in its spare parts?

Indeed this is not beneficial at all. The site we are referring to bwgroupsupport.com is the North American Service and Support only site.

This page and the information contained therein is intended for use within North America only. The information here may not reflect the service or support policies for B&W Group products outside of North America.

B&W is a British speaker manufacturer so why '800D Series' and '800 Series Diamond' are not used in NA beats me but maybe it was too difficult to remember.

I don't mind if people use D1 and D2 but don't state that D2 is the official name for the '800 Series Diamond' because it is not.

[RebelMan]

Exactly ...draft and not official...

Final and official drafts.

[jeepers]

Final and official drafts.

It still remains a draft, no matter what you say, and not mentioned whatsoever on the official website.

[RebelMan]

B&W is a British speaker manufacturer so why '800D Series' and '800 Series Diamond' are not used in NA beats me but maybe it was too difficult to remember.

I don't mind if people use D1 and D2 but don't state that D2 is the official name for the '800 Series Diamond' because it is not.

You are missing the point. The new series is the "800 Series Diamond". The name of each model in the new series is used interchangeably with D2. For instance, the 800 Diamond is the 800 D2. Nowhere has Di ever been used in print, online, in correspondence nor in talks with B&W and their personnel. It is incorrect usage and as we have recently seen can be confusing.

[RebelMan]

It still remains a draft, no matter what you say, and not mentioned whatsoever on the official website.

A draft is a drawing and a final draft is a final drawing and again they are official published works. :roll: jeepers

[RebelMan]

mmmm I see, I just wondering if it's possible that I missing something so I will auditioning the 802Di again side by side to the 804Di, you has put a doubt in my mind 8O . the last time I did this audition I heard a little difference but I not felt that I missing something.

You needn't worry, really. It was something I noticed, not necessarily a design flaw with the speaker per say. I was primarily comparing the pre-amp sections of the CP and SSP. Some material sounded better than others which could have been attributed to the recording, the type of music, the electronics, the speakers or any combination thereof. No system is perfect, no matter what it costs, but some systems will play better with certain partners than others will. Without getting into a lot of detail, I found disappointment listening to Billy Ocean on a CP-800 through the 804D2 but was pleased to hear Fleetwood Mac. In both cases I loved the music, but not so much the reproduction of it in one (in a critical test).

[beden1]

Like R2D2, only we had this discussion back when the "new" diamond series was to be launched. I remember it being unanimous here, that the new series be referred to as Di.

[PewterTA]

Well if the first set was D1 then the second has to be D2.... duh! ha ha ha.

[RebelMan]

Like R2D2, only we had this discussion back when the "new" diamond series was to be launched. I remember it being unanimous here, that the new series be referred to as Di.

I believe stuofsci02 first coined the use of Di on these boards. A few days later sc2 suggested we cement the idea but four out of five posts didn't make it unanimous, just ask Briz vegas. Several months later, unaware that an attempt was made to standardize on a name, I suggested D2 be used. By then people had become accustomed to Di. People were also accustom to a flat world and the planet Pluto but look where that went.