Frequency curve of B&W 802 D2

[satbox]

Hi,

 

I'm looking for the frequency curve of the B&W 802 D2 speakers. Can you help me?

 

What I want to try is to reproduce this curve on my 802 D2 speakers using Acourate...

 

[alandbush]

4 hours ago, satbox said:

Hi,

 

I'm looking for the frequency curve of the B&W 802 D2 speakers. Can you help me?

 

What I want to try is to reproduce this curve on my 802 D2 speakers using Acourate...

 

Read more  

 

Is this of use?

 

Hi FI News review and measurements

 

or perhaps this?

 

Stereophile measurements

[Kal Rubinson]

Neither of those links are for the 802D2.  The HFN is for the 802D3 and the Stereophile link is for the original 802D.

 

 

[semente]

26 minutes ago, Kal Rubinson said:

Neither of those links are for the 802D2.  The HFN is for the 802D3 and the Stereophile link is for the original 802D.

 

 

 

Is this the one?

 

http://i.nextmedia.com.au/avhub/australian-hifi_reviews_2013_2013-01_bw_802_diamond_loudspeakers_review_lowres.pdf

[Kal Rubinson]

1 hour ago, semente said:

 

Is this the one?

 

http://i.nextmedia.com.au/avhub/australian-hifi_reviews_2013_2013-01_bw_802_diamond_loudspeakers_review_lowres.pdf

Yes.  The so-called D2 line was, officially, the Diamond line.

[alandbush]

2 hours ago, Kal Rubinson said:

Neither of those links are for the 802D2.  The HFN is for the 802D3 and the Stereophile link is for the original 802D.

 

 

 

You search for the correct nomenclature via a well known search engine and you trust their findings.  More fool me. ☹️

 

Thanks for noting the error.

 

I wonder just how different they are? Considering they are from the same family and considering the differences in measuring equipment and technique.

[semente]

13 hours ago, satbox said:

Hi,

 

I'm looking for the frequency curve of the B&W 802 D2 speakers. Can you help me?

 

What I want to try is to reproduce this curve on my 802 D2 speakers using Acourate...

 

 

I suggest that you at least flatten the nasty breakup resonance peak at 3.5kHz.

You may also wish to bring down the plateau that sits between 7.5 and 15kHz.

[Kal Rubinson]

5 hours ago, alandbush said:

 

You search for the correct nomenclature via a well known search engine and you trust their findings.  More fool me. ☹️

 

Thanks for noting the error.

 

I wonder just how different they are? Considering they are from the same family and considering the differences in measuring equipment and technique.

First was the 802D.  Then came the 802Diamond which the market unofficially dubbed 802D2.  Finally (so far), B&W acceded to the market and called the current version 802D3.

 

I have reviewed samples in all series.

[satbox]

Thank you for your help!

[RFP]

On 09/07/2017 at 6:20 PM, satbox said:

Hi,

 

I'm looking for the frequency curve of the B&W 802 D2 speakers. Can you help me?

 

What I want to try is to reproduce this curve on my 802 D2 speakers using Acourate...

 

 

Should work fine but best not to beam the speakers directly at the listening position when running the initial measurements for dsp correction. The so-called nasty peak at 3.5kHz isn't actually too nasty and in fact doesn't exist at all at > 30 degrees off axis. If you beam each speaker 20 degrees out from the listening position it should be optimum for the dsp correction.  Also, at that angle the so-called large plateau between 7 and 15kHz doesn't exist to any extent on the listening axis, and in most rooms the treble balance is pretty much spot on. In my own room, the response is essentially flat above 1kHz at the listening position. 

 

[semente]

9 hours ago, RFP said:

 

Should work fine but best not to beam the speakers directly at the listening position when running the initial measurements for dsp correction. The so-called nasty peak at 3.5kHz isn't actually too nasty and in fact doesn't exist at all at > 30 degrees off axis. If you beam each speaker 20 degrees out from the listening position it should be optimum for the dsp correction.  Also, at that angle the so-called large plateau between 7 and 15kHz doesn't exist to any extent on the listening axis, and in most rooms the treble balance is pretty much spot on. In my own room, the response is essentially flat above 1kHz at the listening position. 

 

 

Am I right to assume that you are posting an in-room frequency plot?

How much smoothing did you use?

Besides, the vertical scale in your plot is too wide to be of any relevance (and it's obviously flattering), can you upload one with a 50dB span?

[RFP]

On 24/07/2017 at 7:20 PM, semente said:

 

Am I right to assume that you are posting an in-room frequency plot?

How much smoothing did you use?

Besides, the vertical scale in your plot is too wide to be of any relevance (and it's obviously flattering), can you upload one with a 50dB span?

 

Yes, it as in-room at approx 3m from the speakers and 1/6 smoothing was used. 

 

If you click on the chart you will see that there's 5dB per division on the vertical axis. Above 1kHz the response is within a 3dB envelope which is excellent - regardless of how it's charted. 

 

The main point is that correction is best done  at the listening position and with both speakers set with optimum toe-in, which is 20-30 degrees off axis to the listener. Trying to correct the nearfield response on tweeter axis will not provide the flattest in-room response. 

[satbox]

9 hours ago, RFP said:

The main point is that correction is best done  at the listening position and with both speakers set with optimum toe-in, which is 20-30 degrees off axis to the listener.

Just to be sure to understand (my english is no so good...):

 

When you say "best done  at the listening position and with both speakers set with optimum toe-in, which is 20-30 degrees off axis to the listener", means that the speaker axis are crossing in front of the listening position? If yes, have to tried to "toe-out" the speakers 20-30 degrees off listener axis?