Recently, with a bit of free time on my hands, I conducted a listening comparison of the three pairs of bookshelf speakers in my possession. My wife joined me in listening and conducted her part of the test blindfolded. :whistler:
We listened to the BX2s, Diamond 10.1s and 685s. The gear we tested these on was as follows:
Source: NAD C515BEE CD player
Amplification: NAD C720BEE stereo receiver
Speaker cable: as supplied by you 8)
We listened to only three songs on each pair of speakers: Ayub Ogada's Kothbiro, Regina Spektor's Us and Snoop Dogg's Gin & Juice. So consider that the test was not exhaustive... LOL
There was some white wine in the mix, too: a Dutoitskloof chardonnay.
Now for the abbreviated results. My wife enjoyed the overall listening experience of the 685s most. And while she appreciated the depth of the soundstage of the BX2s, she preferred the 10.1's reproduction of vocals. When pushed to rank the speakers in terms overall enjoyment (I suppose you can call this a "gut response"), this is what she came up with: 1) 685, 2) BX2s, 3) 10.1s. She initially thought the BX2s (speaker 1 in the listening order) were the 685s, but by the time we actually got around to listening to the 685s, she said she was immediately aware of their superior quality. :BANDW: Oh, yes, she says.
To my ears, the 10.1s confirmed my opinion of them in the company of the other speakers. They [em]are[/em] a really good all-round speaker. Of course, they sounded a little 'small' by comparison, failing to generate the same big sound that I know the BX2s and 685s (even more so) are capable of. But I have to agree with my wife: 10.1's sound stage lacked depth, which occasionally meant that background vocal cues were a little off. This came through rather noticeably when we stacked the 10.1s up against the other two.
The real contest for me, though, was the BX2s up against the 685s. Now I couldn't keep out of my mind past reviews and opinions I've read. The B&W camp obviously favour the 685s, but I've read a fair number of amateur reviewers claiming that the BX2s - although cheaper - can outperform the 685s. Following this test, I have to disagree.
Besides a rather obvious difference in tone and sound presentation (the BX2s being IMO more forward), I think the 685s are the more versatile speaker. The BX2s, from the selection of music we chose (and of course my listening outside of this experiment), performed best with acoustic music. Take Ayub Ogada's Kothbiro, which is mostly vocal and Kenyan harp with additional vocal layering. The BX2s made the plucked instrument sound terrific; totally engaging. The 685s didn't present them with quite as much sparkle, but the sound was much more natural and had a sense of fluid integration.
On the other hand, with the drum programming and samples layered on Snoop's Gin & Juice, the BX2s just didn't seem to present a coherent sound, with the vocals and beats seeming to work at odds with one another.
I am not sure if the results of this experiment come as a surprise. These speakers seemed to have more or less perform to their price point (although the 10.1s are definitely better than their R1000 price tag suggests). And I am not sure it will persuade B&W haters to change their mind or tune - that's not what I was trying to do anyway. I just felt happy to be able to conduct this experiment in the comfort of my home!
We listened to the BX2s, Diamond 10.1s and 685s. The gear we tested these on was as follows:
Source: NAD C515BEE CD player
Amplification: NAD C720BEE stereo receiver
Speaker cable: as supplied by you 8)
We listened to only three songs on each pair of speakers: Ayub Ogada's Kothbiro, Regina Spektor's Us and Snoop Dogg's Gin & Juice. So consider that the test was not exhaustive... LOL
There was some white wine in the mix, too: a Dutoitskloof chardonnay.
Now for the abbreviated results. My wife enjoyed the overall listening experience of the 685s most. And while she appreciated the depth of the soundstage of the BX2s, she preferred the 10.1's reproduction of vocals. When pushed to rank the speakers in terms overall enjoyment (I suppose you can call this a "gut response"), this is what she came up with: 1) 685, 2) BX2s, 3) 10.1s. She initially thought the BX2s (speaker 1 in the listening order) were the 685s, but by the time we actually got around to listening to the 685s, she said she was immediately aware of their superior quality. :BANDW: Oh, yes, she says.
To my ears, the 10.1s confirmed my opinion of them in the company of the other speakers. They [em]are[/em] a really good all-round speaker. Of course, they sounded a little 'small' by comparison, failing to generate the same big sound that I know the BX2s and 685s (even more so) are capable of. But I have to agree with my wife: 10.1's sound stage lacked depth, which occasionally meant that background vocal cues were a little off. This came through rather noticeably when we stacked the 10.1s up against the other two.
The real contest for me, though, was the BX2s up against the 685s. Now I couldn't keep out of my mind past reviews and opinions I've read. The B&W camp obviously favour the 685s, but I've read a fair number of amateur reviewers claiming that the BX2s - although cheaper - can outperform the 685s. Following this test, I have to disagree.
Besides a rather obvious difference in tone and sound presentation (the BX2s being IMO more forward), I think the 685s are the more versatile speaker. The BX2s, from the selection of music we chose (and of course my listening outside of this experiment), performed best with acoustic music. Take Ayub Ogada's Kothbiro, which is mostly vocal and Kenyan harp with additional vocal layering. The BX2s made the plucked instrument sound terrific; totally engaging. The 685s didn't present them with quite as much sparkle, but the sound was much more natural and had a sense of fluid integration.
On the other hand, with the drum programming and samples layered on Snoop's Gin & Juice, the BX2s just didn't seem to present a coherent sound, with the vocals and beats seeming to work at odds with one another.
I am not sure if the results of this experiment come as a surprise. These speakers seemed to have more or less perform to their price point (although the 10.1s are definitely better than their R1000 price tag suggests). And I am not sure it will persuade B&W haters to change their mind or tune - that's not what I was trying to do anyway. I just felt happy to be able to conduct this experiment in the comfort of my home!
