Patrick Butler

Hi maximum kahuna, We've been steadily growing for years, so there aren't any concerns about a "sleepy speaker oblivion." As was expressed in an interview with The Guardian last year (parts of which are pure conjecture, mind you) -"...how does a 50-year-old brand become a 75-year-old brand?” That's the real reason. Best Regards, Patrick Butler B&W Group North America

Hi Distinctive, I visited Classé two weeks ago and met with the engineers working on the new HDMI and DSP boards that will be arriving this summer. The HDMI board is already completed (and included in the new Sigma 2200i Integrated that I'm presently listening to) and the DSP board is nearing completion. Buying an Atmos capable DSP is only the first step. Implementing one in a processor is actual work. Who knew? Regards, Patrick Butler B&W Group North America

Hi 17629, We will know more in good time. As a good friend reminded me today, 30 years ago Bowers & Wilkins was sold to an accountant from Canada who doesn't listen to music. That accountant was Joe Atkins, and the company grew to become the largest manufacturer of high performance loudspeakers on the planet. Personally (and my livelihood is dependent upon this all working out) I'm not concerned. Joe Atkins in most concerned about the future success of the brand. So far, he's been right far more often than the competition. Regards, Patrick Butler B&W Group North America

That's the modern world we live in. It's not 1985. Best Regards, Patrick Butler B&W Group North America

Hi Jesus R, Take a look at this , which features videos that show a bit of the manufacturing process. Regards, Patrick B&W Group North America

Feel free to ask as many questions as you like. There are no plans to bring back the 801. Personally I prefer huge bass drivers. They do a great job of cracking the proverbial whip on the bottom end. That said, the market for speakers with really big bass drivers declined precipitously. Thank you HGTV. I've heard 801D, and they are a great speaker. While I've not heard 800D3 (they are not yet shipping) I have heard 802D3 extensively. The bass snap and detail is much better than 801D. Not sure they have quite the gravitas (power/weight) down low, but I'd happily trade that for a superior design in every other regard. Bring on the 800D3! Regards, Patrick B&W Group North America

Hi Brian, While I don't have an exact number, I would expect it to be somewhere between 9-10 ft at a minimum. Beyond that distance you are fine- everything is aligned. Unless you are much closer to the speakers than 9 ft (4 as an example) other things in the setup are likely to dominate the presentation. HTM1D3. I've not heard one. They are currently shipping in small quantities. The drivers are all sourced from the 802D3, and based on what I've heard from the entire series, I have no reason to believe that they HTM1D2 won't crush the HTM2D2 in performance. Best Regards, Patrick B&W Group North America

Mastering is but one part of the process. As an example, Abbey Road does recording, mixing and mastering work, or they can perform just mastering work for an artist/label. Once the performance is on "tape" and mixed, most of the sound of the performance is set, good or bad. I would certainly agree that many classical recordings are not well served by the person placing microphones or mixing. Keith Johnson at Reference Recordings, or the folks at Sound Mirror in Boston (Pentatone, Harmonia Mundi, Reference Recordings) are examples of people serving the music properly with world class recordings. Sound Mirror uses our products, Keith Johnson does not. Sound Mirror, Sterling Sound, or Abbey Road use our products because they are good tools for their jobs as Recording or Mastering engineers. Studio Monitors can just as easily distort a recording as domestic loudspeakers. Regards, Patrick B&W Group North America

Hi semente, Great question! I guess the question would be measure better how? Total harmonic distortion, intermodulation distortion, thermal distortion of the voice coil, distortion caused by internal reflections in the cabinet, distortion caused by diffraction, distortion caused by the resonant frequency of the basket, etc, etc etc. Frequency response is but a single measurement, and where you put the microphone will determine how closely your measurements reflect a product's actual reference response. I often shake my head at some of the measurements that we see published in magazines. As an example, there is no peak in the tweeter's response at 3.5kHz or a dip around 5.5kHz or a peak around 8kHz. Just doesn't exist in the design. Is a flat response the most important goal for our engineers? Categorically not. Important? Yes- but not the most important. The aforementioned 800 Series Matrix measured flatter. However, today's 800 Series (or the last generation for that matter) are much quieter designs with overall lower levels of distortion that sound hugely improved. At the end of the day, all loudspeakers are fundamentally flawed electro-mechanical devices. Our job is to discover how things go wrong, and invent solutions that ameliorate those problems as much as possible. When we finally design a product that adds zero distortion, then we will finally see a product that approaches perfection. Until then, we will continue to have an R&D division 30 persons strong. Regards, Patrick Butler B&W Group North America

Hi Bob, The casters were only intended to facilitate moving the speakers into position. They negatively impact performance, and we have always recommended that spikes be used. The pointy end should be used with carpeted surfaces, and the rubber end with wood, tile or stone surfaces. When adjusting rake (tilting forward or back in the vertical plane) you should always start with making the speakers plumb using a level. I used a standard level that has multiple gauges so it can be used vertically or horizontally. The front baffle can be used to adjust rake forward and back, and the side of the speaker (bass cabinet) can be used for adjusting side to side. Once both channels are plumb, then you can being adjusting them for a given listening height and distance. Imagine a sphere projected 9'10" in front of each speaker. Localized within that sphere is the optimal alignment of all drivers. What you are in essence trying to do is to adjust each channel independently so that both spheres perfectly focus in a listening area. With this in mind, it is time to start listening. Throw on a recording of a woman singing with a bass accompaniment if possible. As you sit in your listening chair move a little to the left and focus on that channel. Move your head slowly up so that you begin to listen above the tweeters axis, and then down through that axis until you are a bit below that midrange axis. You'll hear an area where there is a perfect balance between mid and upper frequencies. You'll notice that it sounds both clear and natural (a balance of upper to mid frequencies. Once you locate that spot, you can adjust the front spikes to shift that area to a height that corresponds with your head. You won't need a large adjustment, so go slowly. Once you've taken care of the left channel, all you need to do is adjust the right channel to match. Also pay attention to the bass. If bass quality is negatively impacted, you might have gone a bit too far in your adjustment. Simply back off a bit and you should find that bass quality returns, and the critical alignment of all other drivers is achieved. That is the simple explanation. Regards, Patrick B&W Group North America

Hi Sam, Apologies for the late reply. Been on the road this week with long days and late nights. The minimum listening distance for 802D2 or 802D3 would be 9' 10". That is where all the drivers align. You can listen further away if wished (and some definitely do,) but considerably closer will result in the drivers not aligning to their full potential. Regards, Patrick B&W Group North America

Hi Sam, Good question. The reference axis for the new 800 Series is dead on, and slightly below the tweeter axis for optimal summing of the tweeter and mid. I always adjust rake to accommodate differing listening distances from the speakers, and listening height. I also find a bit of rake (back) helps to alleviate floor bounce cancellation at a given listening position. I have worked with some products that optimally sum at the tweeter's axis, all the way to designs that only work properly if you are laying on the floor. Regarding toe-in I always use 10 degrees or more. This will depend on distance to side walls, distance apart and distance from the listener. In studios, I see everything from tweeters focusing directly on the listener at the console, to only 20 degrees of toe-in. Circling back to rake, assuming all other parameters of the setup are locked-in (a big assumption,) adjusting spikes for correct rake makes a huge difference. Coincident arrival is of paramount importance. Early 801 had an adjustable mid/tweeter module rotating in the horizontal axis (yaw), but the position of the tweeter relative to the mid was fixed. Regards, Patrick B&W Group North America

Hi cjf, Good question. Let's assume for the moment that you were to high-pass 803D3 and 802D3 at 80Hz. While I don't know the precise points where the woofers crossover to the mids, those points are probably around 300-350 Hz. Those two octaves above 80Hz are then covered by either the 802D3s larger woofers, or the 803D3s comparatively smaller ones. That makes a difference. Then we get to the topic of the mids, where the 802D3 uses a 6" Continuum FST versus the 803D3s 5" Continuum FST. This also makes a difference. Knowing all of this, when I listen to 802/803D3 back to back with male and female vocals, 802D3 sounds noticeably more present and palpable than 803D3. Even if you were to integrate a sub with 803D3, you still have that fundamental difference in upper frequencies (above 80Hz) where the sub is mostly not operating. The good news is that I would happily buy 803D3 over 802D2. The extra gains in clarity and reduction in overall levels of noise far outweigh the extra body you'll get in lower frequencies with 802D2. Regards, Patrick Butler B&W Group North America

Hi RFP, With the exception of the binding posts, the diamond dome and a few crossover components, the other 868 parts are completely new. Our engineers have been working on the project for over 7 years, and the advancements are very real. Regards, Patrick Butler B&W Group North America

The pre-release statement from their website states "For the majority of people, the standard version will be preferable and differences will be difficult to detect. Audiophiles with high-end equipment and an understanding of the mastering process might prefer the alternate version." Good summary. On my portable system for mowing the lawn, the two are indistinguishable. On any number of resolved, full-range systems that I've listened to the two versions on, the Audiophile mastering is clearly superior.