Arranging the Review
I approached Channel Marketeer Nico Bierhoff of SoundUnited whom I first met when arranging the Classe Delta review, and asked if he was interested in an HFA review of the new D4 series. As he confessed, he had already put me down while waiting for review samples to become available. Meanwhile, due to the speaker’s immense bulk and weight, Werner had agreed to do a review of the new 801D, not in his home system, but at the SoundUnited demo facility.
As a reviewer, it is important to have equipment available with which you are intimately familiar, and preferably in a room that you know well. Especially the latter is often underestimated, and that’s why I always prefer to do reviews using my reference system. While I was making plans for a home review, Werner asked if I wanted to come along with him to SoundUnited so that we could join forces. We are attuned to each other and together we can very effectively tweak a system to our mutual satisfaction in such a way that we can draw the right conclusions from it. Of course, each of us is perfectly capable of doing this on his own, but given the limited amount of time that was available to us, it’s more effective and more relaxed with two persons, especially where an unfamiliar environment and heavy speakers are concerned. Nico happily agreed, and thus, this would become my first joint review. Naturally, we would each write our own stories, but our efforts would be 100% coordinated, and I must say, that worked out really well.
Upon arriving at the SoundUnited premises, we were enthusiastically received by Channel Marketeer Nico Bierhoff, Brand Activation Manager Johan Katgert, and Senior Sound Engineer Rainer Finck. Before we started with the job at hand, a pleasant hour of chatter had quickly passed during which the gentlemen explained the proceedings at the facility and we shared many interesting thoughts and stories. During these conversations, I suddenly remembered how I knew Rainer’s name: he was responsible for the modification of the Marantz CD16 to make it the CD16 “Exclusive”! Remember? This was the CD player that challenged the long-standing-favorite, 100-Punkte, Sony XA50ES in one of the major German magazines at the time. But that was only one of a long list of developments for which he was responsible.
System Setup
In advance, it was well discussed what the intention was for the review and we were given a free hand to put the system together and set it up as we wanted. With this in mind, Rainer and Johan had set up the 801 D4s on their built-in positioning wheels. Prior to letting us do our thing, Rainer demoed the system using his preferred computer solution running Roon, connecting via USB cable either to the Classé Delta Pre or the Marantz SA-10 according to taste. The main power amplifiers are the Classé Delta Mono and as a bonus, there was also a Marantz PM-10 integrated amplifier. After a few tracks, Rainer left the room with the message that he was only a couple of doors away in case of questions, and for the afternoon, we would now have a private listening room.
Because Werner and I both like to work with well-known equipment, we have brought various components and cables with us, of which we have also used many. For example, the Grimm MU1 music server and the MolaMola Tambaqui DAC were used together with a Siltech Golden Eagle 110 Double CrownAES/EBU cable and the AudioQuest Fire RCA as an interlink between the Classé Delta Pre and the Delta Mono power amplifiers. It’s hard to conclude which of these changes was the most pivotal but as we added them one by one, each of these components incurred changes that we felt were big improvements over using the supplied components.
What was particularly remarkable was the effect of changing from using the Classé Delta Pre as a DAC and preamp to using the MolaMola Tambaqui as a DAC and feeding its output to the Delta Pre. The latter contains a great DAC, but evidently, it is even better as a preamp. We did listen briefly to the SA-10 as a CD player and as a DAC but this led to a rounder, warmer, and more mellow sound that Werner and I both did not prefer.
Speaker Positioning
When the system played to our satisfaction, we turned our focus to the loudspeaker positions. As positioned now, they were optimized for large audiences. Our objective was to achieve a more focused sound that’s ideal for the middle two seats while minimizing the room interaction. Although the room was carefully treated on all the surface areas with a mixture of diffusion and absorption to achieve what Rainer referred to as an accurately measured result as well as a musically pleasing performance, we felt that the relatively “dead” room made the speakers sound more closed-in than we liked. But this is why we requested to be allowed the freedom to arrange the system as desired and it is where our two-man collaboration would soon pay off.
After moving the speakers around, first after distance measurements using a laser measuring device and then by ear, we arrived at a position where the speakers were slightly more apart from one another, a little closer to the listening position, and with considerably less toe-in. As we soon found, this room has very effective bass damping as well as general damping which can be too much if the speakers are not positioned just so. Either they start sounding muffled, or they start sounding overly lean. The sweet spot between these two extremes turned out to be quite small, just like a lens that has only one spot where the focus is ideal. But even when we had found the ideal positions, we still felt that the speakers were not sounding as crisp and articulate as we would expect them to be.
More for completeness than expecting a huge improvement, I suggested using the speaker’s spikes instead of the wheels. The great thing about these speakers is that both spikes and wheels are incorporated into the base and one can change between them without having to tilt or move the heavy cabinets. This means that once the ideal position has been found, the speakers can be “lifted” in place via the adjustable spikes until the wheels come loose and they stand absolutely rock solid.
To our delight, as I was turning each spike (that seem to have a zillion turns), Werner commented how he heard the bass become tighter and firmer while the focusing and overall stability also improved. Sure, we expected tighter bass but the result was so much more pronounced! Not only did the bass become tighter and more controlled, but the soundstage also became more stable as well as wider and more freely filling the room, while the focus had improved leaps and bounds. This goes to show not only the importance of the room, precise positioning, and floor-coupling but also how sensitive the 801 D4’s are to these variables. Don’t assume that speakers will not benefit from spikes simply because they are super-heavy. Incidentally, in speaking with the gentlemen later, they confirmed the importance of using spike-coupling and indicated that they only used the wheels to aid in our positioning endeavors.
With everything now in focus, the rhythm had also benefited hugely. Now, everything we played sounded beautifully articulate, propulsive, and infectiously communicative. As my foot was tapping and we played some of our collectively well-known tracks, we agreed that we had achieved what we set out to do. More importantly, we agreed that the speakers did indeed perform marvelously.
Next: 801 D4 performance and Conclusion
Thank you for this very interesting review . I used to have 802n in my audio system and then 805 d2 while living abroad .
I did like a lot the B&W family sound .
Like you I have never liked the d3 series as I felt they were to hifi style sounding and did not involved me emotionally.
I had the opportunity a few days ago to listen to the new d4 more specifically the 803d4 and I like a lot what I heard . These speakers have a tremendous potential to deliver good and emotionally involving music .
One point which strike me is that they deliver a very natural midrange with a lot of « meat on the bone « as we said .
This makes reproduction of voices highly emotional.
I now have Martin Logan Montis and even though these speakers have a lot of qualities I have grown tired of the lack of body in the low medium as well as a lack of macro dynamic when compared to electro dynamic speakers .
Your very positive of the 801d4 helps me make the decision to move to the d4 . Thank’s
Hi Jean-Michel, how nice to hear that you are hearing it the same as I did! I also agree on your observations regarding the Martin Logans, although this varies from model to model, and was the least the case with the ESL15’s that I used much to my satisfaction until I got swayed away by Magico.
Hi. Christiaan,
Thank’s for your feedback . Before making the final purchasing decision for the 803d4 , I will have the opportunity to listen to the Stilla Audio Æquo in my system.
I had the opportunity to listen already one time to the Stilla in an unknown to me audio system . I was very pleased by what the Stilla did : extremely good soundstage ( deep , wide and precise ) , very nice top , very dynamic and quite nice bass reproduction for this size speaker .
There is one area where I have questions when compared to the 803 d4 is body in the low midrange . This criteria is for me very important to be emotionally involved .
I felt that the 803d4 was excellent on this point I don’t remember or was especially impressed by the Stilla on this point .
I do hope that the home trial of the Stilla will help me make the right move . Stilla or 803 ?
The Stilla is very interesting, I’ve done a review on this site, have a look. I do think that the 801 D4 is more linear and coherent overall which is only logical given that it does not have any size constraints nor an active/passive setup. On the other hand, the Stilla can work remarkably well in bad rooms and even in asymmetrical setups or close to walls. I’ve not heard the 803 but going from what others say, it could have similar characteristics as the 801 D4, with some constraints in the low bass department, of course.
In fact i went to listen to the Stilla after I did read your thorough and very interesting review of them .
My listening room is our living room and it is 5mx7m , the speakers are 1.5 meter away from the back wall and 1.3 meter away from the side wall .The speakers are 2.4 meter apart and the distance from ear to speaker is about 2.9m . The speaker have enough room to breathe and I think my room is not a complicated room and has the right amount of damping ( carpet and Harwood floor ).
What I did like a lot about the 803D4 is that they really pulled me a lot in the music and took me away from critical listening .
I will see after I listen again to the Stilla in my home .
Thank’s for your helpful feedback and for the very good and informative reviews you are publishing .
You’re very welcome, Jean-Michel! Sounds like you do indeed have good room dimensions and if it is indeed not complicated then you can count yourself blessed:-). Do let us know the results of your Stilla home edition!
Hi Christiaan,
You mentioned the improvement going from wheels tot spikes. Insight and consensus is growing that spikes and cones are not the way to get the most out of loudspeakers as doing so, vibrations will reflect back into the cabinet out of phase with the music. Better results can de obtained by decoupling the loudspeaker from the floor, for instance using IsoAcoustics Gaia feet I use under my Thiel CS6 loudspeakers. I experience the results as nothing short of spectacular! My Focal standmounts in my study are placed on Aurios MIB feet which allow free movement horizontally. This also sounds far better than anything I’ve tried. The resonant frequency of the cabinet on the Aurios feet is only a few Hz, so will not be excited by the music. The idea that a loudspeaker should stand firm, is obsolete … .Perhaps you want to delve into this and test the IsoAcoustics Gaia feet?
Hi John, It’s always great to find a new and good-sounding solution and I like that the audio hobby is never static. But firm speaker coupling is obsolete? I beg to differ. Yes, spikes are not the only solution in existence, and yes, loose coupling can also work but it simply depends on the situation, as well as the emphasis of the individual. The basic principles behind all coupling/decoupling methods have been around for ages and at any point in time there will always be situations that are best resolved using this, that, or the other. I wouldn’t rush to call firm coupling obsolete and a new product the new standard. Not just yet, in any case:-)
I’ve used the IsoAcoustics Gaia feet but found that they reduced the PRaT and the impact and incisiveness in the bass. BTW true decoupling is impossible, you are always making a coupling of some sort. This is true of spikes as well as soft materials as well as ball-bearing horizontal movement coupling.
What I find is that a viscous coupling can work wonders for the midrange and treble (B&W pod coupling) but not for the bass, where spikes produce a more energetic sound, while adding dryness in the midrange and treble. That’s the thing with audio. It’s not black and white and an improvement in one area often goes at the expense of a reduction in another area. It’s the balance that counts. As always, YMMV. So many people, so many opinions.
Hi Christiaan,
I am somewhat disappointed en surprised that you didn’t like the IsoAcoustics Gaia feet , but, of course, it all depends on personal preference, system and so on. Fact is that this feet get rave reviews and prizes everywhere right now.
In my system, I didn’t experience reduction of PRAT with the IsoAcoustics Gaia feet at all. Quite the opposite: fastly played low strings in classical music -for instance, Bach, Brandenburg 3- sound extremley wel resolved and effortless, far better than with the spikes and metal feet I used before. Perhaps musical taste plays a role here and will the effects be perceived differently playing non-classical music.
On a theoretical level, I would say that it is not completely logical that a method of reducing harmful vibrations of a speaker cabinet would work fine for the mid and high frequenties and not so for the low frequenties. Harmfull vibrations are harmful vibrations, one could argue. Why would there be “a transitional frequency” below which the method doesn’t yield improvements?! Fact of the matter is that using spikes, vibrations are reflected back into the cabinet, while these are more or less absorbed by … well, stuff that absorbs.
Let’s conclude the discussion by agreeing that anyone should choose what they like, not bothered by theoretical considerations. My advice would be not to overlook the IsoAcoustics Gaia feet. In forty years, I have not found anything that works better for me.
Hi John, Quite right! I find that the kind of effect that I hear (and to which I am particularly sensitive) when using soft coupling materials is most audible with drums, bass synth, and electronic music in general. I fully agree that benefits can be had by using softer or more elegant materials when it concerns classical music. It’s considered heresy but I would say that there most definitely are systems more suited to electronic or classical music. Ideally, the system does both but usually not to the same degree. No matter how much manufacturers would like us to believe it, true absorption is not possible. It sure may sound that way in comparison to spikes but lossy material coupling also transitions energy, partially dissipated as heat, but mostly just transferred in a modified form. But, like you, I’m not a huge fan of theorizing this way, I rather just use my ears:-). Maybe I was coming on strong but it is not my intention to prescribe a “best method” in any way. All my reviews simply describe how I approach any given situation and of course everyone should make up their own minds. One of my mantras is that there is no such thing as perfection, or the “ideal” solution for everyone.