you guys with a cdm-1se, do not waste your time looking at the cdm1-nt. the b&w dealers hate them.it is just a gimmick to get people to trade in ever year, and to charge more money, because fewer are made, and rounder cabinets are harder to build and look better, but do not sound as good.

not good.

Imaging

none that affects me

I HAVE BEEN A BIG FAN OF THE CDM1SE FOR QUITE SOME TIME. I HESITATED ON PURCHASING THE NT SERIES DUE TO THE FACT OF SOME FALSE REVIEWS POSTED HERE. I WENT AHEAD AND PURCHASED THESE AND THEY ARE TRULY A MUCH MORE DETAILED AND EXTREMELY GOOD IMAGING FOR A BOOKSHELF MODEL. CDM1SE ARE AN EXCELLENT PAIR OF SPEAKERS, BUT THEY DID A GREAT JOB ON THIS ONE WITH THE NAUTILUS TWEETER AND IMPROVED MIDRANGE. BIWIRING IS VERY IMPORTANT AS WITH ALL BW SPEAKERS SO REMEMBER TO INVEST IN A PAIR OF THOSE. I AM HAPPY WITH THESE AND I WOULD SUGGEST THESE AS A GREAT ENTRY LEVEL BOOKSHELF SPEAKER. GOOD LUCK AND ENJOY.

Similar Products Used:

cdm1se,rbh661se,602s2 and s1,and too many others in my audio life.

Devil's in the details :-) For both the sound and build quality.

Lacking extended bass - but of course...

Also see my CNT review.

The clarity, details and sense of presence of voices and instruments projected by these gems are so tangible it resembles live performances -- just try a track of Bach Solo Cello suite or Patricia Barbar you will SEE it. Sound stage is properly broad yet focused, and imaging is near perfect dead-on. Many of my favorite recordings (from Miles to Berlioz) I thought I memorized afer many listenings on my previous PSB Goldi's came back to a new life -- subtle sounds of various instruments and voices previously hidden / muddy suddenly opened up, while foreground sound is enhanced with clearer details and touchable texture. B&W has been considered to produce "laid back" sound historically. Now some call these spkrs "bright". If uncanny details in the mid range and airy extended highs are "bright", I'm loving this brighness. These are incredibly well-designed and well-built (thus "honest") spkrs to which you should feed the most well recorded materials and just let them sing. Happy listening.

Similar Products Used:

PSB; Sonus Faber; Canton; Def Tech; Others

try to eliminate all

I have been submiitted a review half year ago, however, I think I should have to re-submit once again. After, I read many recent reviews on 1NT, I felt that, most of the users not satisfied on the low frequency(whatever their rating). At the beginning, I have this feeling too, therefore I try to change some cable throughout my system. Why? I want to extract the best of 1NT. I have two friends they are being used MarantzSR19(Consumer awarded) and Yamaha DSP-AX1(Top rated in Japan) and both speaked to B&W603S2. I found that, they both produce bass not as low and tight(I think it is too slack) as 1NT. Both of my friends not believe that. Since 603S2 was a floorstand speakers with two mid/bass unit and larger cabinet, Whatever the size and specification from B&W, the low frequency should be lower than 1NT. Howver, they both jealous to my CDM1NT. Both of tham applied Taralabs prism bi-wire speaker cable(somethong like Hifi CHoice June2001 recommended product) . The one of SR19 used an apogee wydeye digital cable and DAC inside SR19, and the one of yamaha used an Aparture digital cable AT-2.0 and DAC inside AX1.
Overall rating should be based on its price.

Similar Products Used:

CDM1

Insight, detail, soundstaging.

None

These speakers are truly superior in their price range. After a couple days burn-in, the speakers open up and the treble and mids lose any hint of harshness.

The treble is very clean and detailed, and the overall sound is near-identical to the more expensive Nautilus 805 (just less bass).

Although bass is not very deep, it is always clean and not boomy.

Be warned though, like all audiophile speakers, it exposes poorly recorded material, so test with many CD's when auditioning. Also, try leaving some space behing the speakers for greater soundstaging.

Equipment used:

Arcam A85 integrated amp
Marantz 6000 KI CD player

Bass extension, timbral accuracy, pace

Bass tautness, air on the top

My wife and I finally hit the spot where we could afford to move up from our B&W DM302's in search of our brand of 2-channel nirvana. So down to the local audiophile shop we went.. Many times.

I read many, many reviews on the web (here and other places) and combined with my good experience with our DM302's (they served us for 5 good years) I chose a whole bunch of speakers to test. Through many listening tests I narrowed the field down above.

One day in particular I decided to audition the CDM1NT's vs. the Nautilus 805's. Bolstered by the reviews below, and some What Hi-Fi? fizz, I was really pulling for the CDM1NT's. Equipment used for the review was an Arcam FMJ CD, McCormack DNA-125, McCormack RLD pre, and some ungodly huge MIT cabling. I was listening in a farily large room, with the speakers setup on very heavy stands well out from the walls.

I was initially quite impressed with the CDM's. They have much more Bass extension that I would have imagined, especially given the room size and placement (no wall reinforcement). They sure have much more extension than the 302's; more than their specs seemed to suggest. Midrange was nice (always a B&W hallmark), and top end was very smooth.

Right away, though, the N805's shocked me. With the same drivers, I didn't realize there could be THAT much difference between (essentially) cabinet and x-over design. The N805's were MUCH more taut in the bass department; I didn't notice them digging any deeper, they just had much better slam. The top end on the N805's is much more airy.. The soundstage was much larger.. They seemed to disappear into the music, whereas you remained a bit more aware of the CDM's.

The biggest factor to me was one that seems hard to put my finger on. The N805's had great drive, but were relaxed doing it. The music was simply reproduced without fatigue, the N805's took whatever was pumped into them and conveyed the performance. The CDM's occasionally sounded strained, like they were trying very hard; on the same passages the N805's would just disappear and sing.

To be quite honest, I really wanted to buy the CDM's. The style reminded me of some of my favorite speakers ever (Matrix 805), they are at a killer price point, and some truly excellent drivers. But in the end, I decided to go with the N805's. Yes, they are $800 more.. But that $800 buys a much more refined and muscial speaker. If you can't hear the difference, hook up better electronics.. If you can swing the extra cash, go with the Nautilus; you will not be disappointed.

Similar Products Used:

B&W DM302, Nautilus 805, Thiel CS.5, CS1.5, baby ProAcs, Paradigm Studio (/40 or something?)

Best couple i've ever had!!!

Everything...great sound for a speaker, incredible sound considering it's a bookshelf.

None so far

An excellent speaker with amazing sound for it's size. If you're looking for a bookshelf speaker with floorstander sound, this could be the one you're after. Great smooth sound with clear highs and mids, and impressive bass considering it's a bookshelf. If you have a sub, these would make an excellent pair of mains, though I'm using them as surrounds in an all B&W CDM set-up. Couldn't be happier.

Currently running:

B&W CDM 7NT's - mains
CDM 1NT's - surrounds
CDM CNT - center

Denon AVR-4800 receiver

Similar Products Used:

B&W CDM 7NT's, CNT

Detail, Looks

A little "too" much detail, if you know what I mean

I listened to these compared to my relatively new NHT ST-4s and SB-3s (my rear speakers}. I've never been a huge B&W fan, often disappointed that the sound doesn't live up to the hype, let alone the cost. But these weren't bad. Strangely, B&W's used to sound just plain dead, now they all seem bright. That was the one of two things that kept coming up, although it was relatively mild. In the bass arena, there was no contest, both the SB-3s ($600/pr) and the ST-4s ($1000/pr) walloped the CDM-1s in the bass, both in quality and quantity. In the treble, it was extremely close, and I was back and forth. Although I didn't like the B&W tweeter compared to higher end NHTs, the NT has a minor advantage over the new affordable NHTs, primarily, I think because of the lack of baffle. It was very close, but occasionally I felt as though I could hear the treble splash off of the NHT baffle a bit. I may try a little foam there and see what happens. Imaging was average with the NHTs imaging as widely, but far more deeply. The CDM-1s brought everything way forward in the mix while the SB-3s had more of a layered soundstage. As for the midrange, the B&Ws were EXTREMELY "catchy" kinda like a bubble headed blonde. For awhile, I thought they may be more detailed than the NHTs. Certainly, they had a livelier sound. But after many CDs, I realized that the main issue was they were a little TOO bright in the upper midrange, part of which was an over accentuation or even production of harmonics. I realized this because, although the voice sounded more present along with other instruments, the voices were much harder to understand on the B&Ws than on the little NHTs. With the NHTs, the voice was easy to understand, and, after switching back and forth and adjusting for the volume each time, the NHT's voice portrayal was less "exciting" but far more natural and clearer. By comparison, the B&Ws sounded like the midrange was horn-loaded - fast and dynamic sounding, but also a little smeared and bright. The differences were exacerbated as the volume went up. At low volumes, the B&Ws sounded better, but my the time you hit an average to higher volume, the NHTs clearly handled complex passages more easily. Don't get me wrong, the NHTs aren't perfect either, but are half the price too. I'd wish for just a little more detail in the upper midrange without adding any brightness and just a *smidge* more bass speed. But, the SB-3s are miracle workers in the bass dept, going down to a claimed 39 Hz, so I'm surprised just how fast they are doing that much bass. The CDMs simply could not hang with them in any way down there, although I realize bass quality or quantity is simply unimportant to some people. After much listening, I don't think I'll be changing to B&Ws anytime soon. They were nicer than any B&Ws I've heard for the money, but were still unnaturally bright and didn't have good bass. I think B&W will sell a lot, though as they are very engaging on first listen. I would buy them from a store that gives you a 30-day MBG as you may change your mind after awhile. And the NHTs are exceptional bargains at half the price, they are very competitive with the B&Ws and, to my ears a little better in the mids and a lot better in the bass. At $1200, I think the CDMs are expensive, but they have nice wood finishes if that is important. And they smoke many other speakers I'm sure. But in the end, as long as companies like NHT are building such stellar products at such great prices, B&W will have to continue it's "prestige" marketing and nice looking cabinets. I'd have given them a "4" if they had better bass, which, for the price would be expected, or at least had elsewhere. Also, when compared with the $1000/pr ST-4 towers which more effortlessly beat them out, don't require a stand, have deeper bass, more dynamics and don't need a sub. However, there are people who will like the CDMs for the name or look. And they do sound very good at very low volumes, but would not hold up to most rock, classical or home theater applications. Best used with light jazz and low volumes.

Similar Products Used:

NHT SB-3, ST-4

These speakers are very good. The sound stage they produce is amazing. When set up properly, they can be very dynamic and the sound can have so many details and dimensions. I bi-wire them and the sound quality improves tremendously. I would recommend these speakers for anyone, especially those who always listen to music.