Wilson Benesch vs B&W

Welcome to the forum.

The speakers on your shortlist are both excellent in their different ways. However, I'm not sure your present system wouldn't be a bit bottom heavy if you introduced either of them.

With your source and amps I think a pair of Naim Allaes or something similar would provide you with a better balanced system.

Alex

Can you or do you want to place the speakers against a wall?

The "legendary" TWRiders in
http://forums.naim-audio.com/eve/forums?a=tpc&s=67019385&f=48019385&m=8181916606

visited a system with WB speakers.

Added later - I did not mention originally that I use WB ACT2s on my Naim system as ACT2s were not part of the question - for the record my pusher (dealer) listened to the system for the first time the other week and was most impressed - hopes of selling me lots of 552 etc were dashed and they went away determined to save up for improvements to their own systems. -words used were "much sweeter than expected - best customer system they had heard etc"

Given that they sold to me, they could not trash it but Icould tell that it was better than they expected.

Derek

[This message was edited by Derek Wright on WEDNESDAY 11 December 2002 at 12:42.]

Willito,

I've been running WB Actors with a mainly Naim system for nearly 2 years - I've tried the Actors with my 52 and a 180, 250, 135s and now my Dynavector HX1.2. Personally I find WB and Naim a good match. The 180, and I guess hence the 200 will drive the Actors (just about), but a lot will depend on what size and properties of the room you are using these in. Any further details?

Depending on where you see the rest of your system going, personally I would be spending the money elsewhere, which I think would bring about much better musical improverments. Can you provide any further details on why you wish to change the speakers you currently have.

Can't really help with B&W - don't really like them.

David

Hi,

For what it´s worth Hifi Choice liked "odd pairing" of the WB Arc with Naim gear: http://www.hifichoice.co.uk/review_print.asp?ID=2235

Cheers,

Steve

Wow! Thanks for the quick response guys!

I will try to answer your various questions. Ultimately, my main objective is musical enjoyment. I have gone about assembling what I have so far in a half-assed fashion, mostly reflecting how much of a novice I am. Now that my interest is well and truly piqued, I am trying to inform myself and make all forthcoming purchases with more of an intermediate term horizon in mind.

The room itself is about 4m x 6m. Placement restrictions include doors opening on to the rest of the flat, wooden wall units, and floor to ceiling windows. That said, I've managed to arrange things reasonably well (how often do I really need to reach anything in those drawers?)given the constraints, but certainly nothing close to acoustically optimal. I am certainly able if necessary able to put the speakers aginst the wall.

I am looking at speaker upgrades next under advice from my primary dealer. Their suggestion is that a solid upgrade in speakers will help my existing system to be more revealing. When queried whether it wouldn't make more sense to upgrade the pre-amp first, they were fairly adamant that an improvement in speakers would be the best next move.

Any views on what would make a more significant impact?

Thank you very much for your insight thus far!

Thanks and regards,
Will

Hi,

I have a system like Derek's and I had a visitor come over the other night for about 5 hours to check it out. He said it was the best sounding naim system he had ever heard by a wide margin, and he has heard other 500-based systems. I was happy, because when I had a CDS2/52/250 Royd Albions he trashed my system on the forum! (but rightfully so) .

Anyone heard or seen the new ACT? It is said to be ***AWESOME***

dave

Not heard the ACT1E, but heard a lot about it - shame they didn't put the ACT2 tweeter in it. I just hope that the ported arrangement does not have the bass quality of the Discovery, which sounded one-note to me.

David

Willito,

My only concern it that for the money that I think you're talking about, you could probably upgrade to a CDSII, and I'm sure this would be a much better upgrade.

You should also be aware that the WB range is being revamped, so don't let them sell any of the speakers to you at full price list values.

So where are the B&W guys?

David

I've had another idea. Buy Wilson Benesch Arcs - lovely little speaker, very revealing, tuneful in the bass despite the ports, and better matched to your system.

Actually, the Arcs will show the benefits of upgrades to at least CDS2, 52, 250 level provided you don't need huge amounts of bass.

If you're going to buy B&Ws you should try the N805 Sigs on HNE granite stands, but I much prefer the WB Arcs (and Shahinian Arcs but that's another story).

Alex

Hi,

I talked to Craig at WB and the tweeter on the new ACT is the same one as the Chimera etc, ie a WB modified Scanspeake super-revelator, apparently slightly superior to the unmodified super revelator. The ports are apparently "silent" and like those in the ACT 2, only much improved. They claim the speaker is more aiuthoritative, more dynamic, tighter, faster, and more accurate and pannel-like than the ACT 2. The price will be like the ACT 2. There is a new and improved Tactic, and the speaker ways 150 lbs, has the internal volume of the act 2, but is the same dimensions as the act 1.



dave

You certainly make them sound good David. Shame they are going for the stubby dimensions though.

David,

I just paraphrased what they said at WB. I think they like the stubby dimensions because it gives a lower center of gravity and makes it a more stable structure. But I think I like the looks of the taller ACT 2 a bit better. The act 1 has, as you said, a distinct stubbiness about it. But the chimera is just to big and expensive for me.

dave

quote:

---

Originally posted by Alex S.:

If you're going to buy B&Ws you should try the N805 Sigs on HNE granite stands, but I much prefer the WB Arcs (and Shahinian Arcs but that's another story).

Alex

---

Hmmm. Not sure about the 805 sigs, at the show they sounded a bit grim if you ask me. But, hey I'm deaf. But I agree with you on the Shahinian Arc's - they are a superbly musical speaker, if a little bright, but fantasticly musical every time I have heard them.

Dev

The lower tweeter may give a better sound to people sitting on regular lounge type chairs.

Re the ACT2s Ifound sound improved when I switched over to a higher type garden chair (bad back issue)

Received wisdom says tweeters should be at ear height

Derek

I was trying to think of the least bad B&W option

Alex

Willito,

I have the following stuff:

CDX/XPS/52/SC/135's/803N

I am very satisfied with my system. I had always like the B&W sound; I had those speakers 20 years ago and after trying a lot of others, I have come back to B&W. It's true that they are very precise speakers, a little bit technical and needs a lot of power but what a sound ..

I have never try them with new Naim series, but with the system I have, they are fantastic.

Have fun.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ross1:
Willito,

I have the following stuff:

CDX/XPS/52/SC/135's/803N

I am very satisfied with my system. I had always like the B&W sound; I had those speakers 20 years ago and after trying a lot of others, I have come back to B&W. It's true that they are very precise speakers, a little bit technical and needs a lot of power but what a sound ..

I have never try them with new Naim series, but with the system I have, they are fantastic.

Have fun.

---

Ross1

I have a pair of 805 Matrix driven by a NAP250 and thinking of upgrading the 250 to a more powerful model (either the NAP300 or 2 mono blocks 135 (used). Could you please if possible tell me how much difference would it make to go this path?

Tuan,

I had the 180 before with the 803, than I switch to the 250. IMO the 180 is not sufficient to drive the 803.
But for my ears, I prefer the 180...Sorry for the 250 owners..
The 250 gives more punch, more bass but I was loosing the treble and mids...
With the 135's, complete difference. The same definition as the 180 for the treble and mids but with the bass and the punch of the 250. Exactly what I was looking for... There are great bargains for the 135's on the market. Let's have a try.
I can't speak for the new series, I have listen to it but have never try them with the B&W. Suppose to be a great improvement...


Ciao

Will,

I am running BW N804s through a CDX/102/HC/180 in a pretty small room. I would strongly suggest you go listen to some better sources andm then decide where you should go next, the 180 will be struggling to drive the BW hard in a large room. Have you heard whata change in source could do to your system, with a more modest upgrade in speakers?

Matthew

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ross1:
Tuan,

I had the 180 before with the 803, than I switch to the 250. IMO the 180 is not sufficient to drive the 803.
But for my ears, I prefer the 180...Sorry for the 250 owners..
The 250 gives more punch, more bass but I was loosing the treble and mids...
With the 135's, complete difference. The same definition as the 180 for the treble and mids but with the bass and the punch of the 250. Exactly what I was looking for... There are great bargains for the 135's on the market. Let's have a try.
I can't speak for the new series, I have listen to it but have never try them with the B&W. Suppose to be a great improvement...


Ciao

---

Thank you Ross1.

Hi everyone,

I would like to thank everyone for their advice. It has been much appreciated!

After much speaker demo-ing (including WB Arcs, Shahinians, and others) I've decided to heed to most common theme in all your responses: namely, focus on the component side first.

At the moment I am giddy from too much port at Christmas lunches and a little bit of horse trading. The latter bit of entertainment will see the CD5 and 102 being swapped for a CDX2 and 282 (plus a second hi-cap) as soon as the goods can be received from Naim in the new year. Only once the new components have burned in, will I once again turn to the task of speakers.

Anyway, thank you very much for your help. I have definitely found my foray into the forum very helpful!

I have two questions on the forum front however.

1. why does everyone write "sistem" not "system"?
2. who (and I think I'm gonna get burned for not knowing this) are the T W Riders?

Yours in naivety and gratitude,
Will

Hi all,

Thank you for all of your advice! It has been most appreciated.

I've decided to heed a consistent theme in your posts, and focus on upgrading certain components first. To this end, I engaged in a little horse trading yesterday that will see my CD5 and 102 upgraded to a CDX2 and 282 in the new year. Once the new components have burnt in, I will start to think about speakers again.

Thanks,
Will

I'm sure you're making the right decision.

There was a time when everyone wrote system except Nuno who wrote sistem. Then Nuno starting writing system so everyone else started writing sistem. I hope this clarifies.

Incidentally, one of Nuno's masterstokes was to describe certain boxes as Naim Amplifires. I think this was his take on uprating the fuses.

Alex

Willito

I'd agree with Alex, I think your decisions on upgrading the elctronics is the way to go.

What were your thoughts on the speakers you heard?

David

Christmas came early this year.

Well, part of my upgrades have arrived. The CDX2 is in place, and though still being burned in, is already showing its strengths over the CD5. The most obvious difference is the step-up in clarity, tightening up the overall presentation and bringing some of the smaller sounds into focus. Once it has had more time to warm up, I will try to give a more comprehensive comparison between the two machines.

Both hi-caps are now here, but unfortunately the 282 isn't. Consequently, while one is helping to power the 112, the other is currently unemployed. It is hard for me to discern their impact at the moment. But, as I still have the CD5 for a few more days, I will try experimenting once they have had a little bit more time to warm up.

All very exciting!

As requested, I will try to give a brief run-down of all the speakers I demo-ed (in no particualr order):

Allae -- Alex S, these were a great suggestion!!! They partnered fantastically in my system. Pending a home dem, I believe these may turn out to be the annointed pair. My once concern is that the dealer suggests they need to be close to the wall. Due to room logistics this could prove to be challenging. Any views? As for the sound, I found them very clear, with a fast bass, and wonderful mid and highs. Sole downside in the dem was they made Cat Stevens sound a little flat and lacking in any warmth to the bass. Dealer assures me that this is a function of the acoustics of their dem room ("bass light"). As noted above, his caveat is that they do need to be in close to the wall to help with their bass. We shall see. In any case, I disagree with the various reviews in the hifi press that I've seen describing them as clinical.

Linn Espeks -- I just didn't like 'em. Though the high end was tuneful, the bass was sloppy. Big and rather ungainly to boot!

Wilson Benesch Orator -- A very nice speaker with a nice fast and tight sound. A little lite on the bass which prompted me to try . . .

WB Actor -- As you know from my opening post, I really liked these speakers. A punchy sound with lots of detail, and very tuneful. Concerns over the dealer led me to another WB stockist where in turn I listened to . . .

WB Arcs -- Another very good suggestion from the Forum, but just didn't work for me. Perhaps I'm letting my eyes dominate my ears, but as they are standmounts, the bass seemed a little constricted. Top end was great though! At the same venue I was able to try their bigger brothers the . . .

WB Discovery -- Optical concerns went out the window. Though standmounts, the bass was powerful, and the overall sound very compelling. At £5500, however, they seemed a little bit too much money for what I am looking for.

Spendor S9 -- A pretty good speaker, but not as impressive (IMHO) as some reviews would lead you to believe. At times I felt like I had a little cotton wool stuffed into the ears. Like the Espeks, a big speaker. Probably more appropriate for when I sell my flat in Islington and move down the road to a loft in Clerkenwell.

Dynaudio (number escapes me) -- Wasn't too impressed at all. But as I listened to them just after the Actors, this is perhaps understandable.

Kef (again, number escapes me) -- A very nice speaker! I quite enjoyed these. Excellent clarity, with a warm, rich sound. Again, at 4Gs, I'd rather spend the money on components.

Nautilus 803s -- I have them on loan at the moment, and they are playing Radiohead in the background. On the whole, they have a pretty good sound, if slightly on the "technical". I guess it's that sound versus music dichotomy. The sound is greater, but the music could sound better (if that makes any sense). From a logistical perspective, they are just too darn big!

Well, those are all the speakers I've tried thus far. The others still up for audition are Vienna Acoustics (whilst I am on holiday in Austria next month) and the Living Voice Avatars. Once again, I will post the results as they come in.

To end this long post on a high note, I had a chance to listen to a bit of a dream system today: CDX2/XPS, 552, 500, Allaes. Absolutely amazing! The depth, the detail, and the overall emotional engagement!!! Radiohead's "No Surprises" had me in all but tears, and Rage Against the Machine's "Killing in the Name Of" had me ready to quit the banking biz and join the barricades! (Alternatively, I guess I could just go see Les Mis.) Though I would have expected the Allaes to have been outclassed by the significant system in front of them, they performed fantastically. As much as anything, this demonstrated to me how capable of a speaker they actually are.

Anyway, sorry about the ramble, but as always, thank you for all your advice!

I look forward to adding more once the 282 is in place, and all the components are at their best!

Merry Christmas and all the best you and your kith and kin,
Will