+1 Exactly...
Lifestyle product with limited reach. People with that sort of money and with an interest in audio (those mainly in the far east) would be buying Cessaro, Avantgarde, Wilson, Magico etc and not B&O.
Beolab 50 - addressing the speaker/room interface.
- Thread starter Jonboi
- Start date
+1 Exactly...
Lifestyle product with limited reach. People with that sort of money and with an interest in audio (those mainly in the far east) would be buying Cessaro, Avantgarde, Wilson, Magico etc and not B&O.
Yes, until it goes wrong...
Beobloke
pfm Member
They've been doing TVs with rotating stands for nigh on 30 years. Given that these do not have a reputation for unreliability in any way whatsoever, and the designs are thoroughly tested in B&O's "torture chamber", I would suggest that failure of the Beolab 50 tweeter mechanism isn't likely to be a major concern.
Jonboi
Because Music Matters
And what is all audio gear generally, if not a 'lifestyle' consumer product?.
Whilst it's certainly true that B&O do not market to audiophiles, that does not imply that their products are any the lessor, than those marketed to audiophiles in technical and performance terms.
In terms of R&D facilities and expertise in speakers and acoustics, they are pretty much without peer with the exception perhaps of Harmon International.
Cheers
Werner
pfm Member
The rising tweeters were developed for automotive applications, and have been deployed in e.g. top-end Audis for years. If you can make such a thing work reliably in a car then a living room will not pose any problem.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wzZwJjQelmE
(But strictly speaking that's Harman-B&O, and not Danish-B&O ...)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wzZwJjQelmE
(But strictly speaking that's Harman-B&O, and not Danish-B&O ...)
yuckyamson
pfm Member
Don't forget the Beolab 9's and 3's...
Cheers..
The Beolab 8000's were g-d awful. The Beovox 150's were pretty good....and , as I earlier indicated, they were made in the early 80's. (and, to be clear, they were basically a not-quite-as-good Heybrook HB3's for double the cost).
The 9's and 3's here, well, perhaps they got decent reviews in Whathifi or something but nobody in the hi-fi community took them seriuosly because again, you could get A LOT BETTER for the same money. Or less money.
My point about the 90's (and now 50's) is that I think they compete on a pound-for-pound basis with other things in the same price range. Yes $80,000 USF is a lot, but you'd have to compare that to some other configuration of DAC/Processing/Multiple Amps/Active loudspeakers. ATC 150's + DAC ++? How much is that? Linn Klimax 350's with the new fangled system built in? How much? 70% the price or something? Not far off?
I think these represent a real turn of the company's offerings. They're maintaining hte lifestyle and styling cues, while putting out good quailty high quality sh*t.
It ain't cheap. no doubt, but it also ain't pfaff.
Beobloke
pfm Member
Sorry, but the Beolab 8000s really aren't 'god awful'. Yes, they're limited in bass output but what do you expect from two 4.5" drivers?!
Also, if you're referring to the Beovox M150s then these are three ways that might be considered ostensibly similar to the Heybrook HB3s but their use of a midrange dome would suggest they are somewhat more exotic. In addition, I was actually referring earlier to the larger MS150s which are a four way design using another midrange dome and a studio monitor quality Peerless 10" bass driver. They're quite a step up from the, admittedly fine, HB3s.
https://beocentral.com/beovoxms150
Yank
Bulbous Also Tapered
For the price, I expect a lot more.
Beobloke
pfm Member
I have the other version, based around an Acoustical motor unit, and that's not too shabby either!
https://beocentral.com/beogram3000acoustical
Jonboi
Because Music Matters
I would say that nobody in the HiFi community took the likes of the Beolab 9's and 3's seriously, because all too often B&O gets written off by audiophiles as mere 'lifestyle' products, where supposedly aesthetics are to the fore and performance to the background.
I used to think this way when I owned my Naim system, back in the decade from circa '97 to around 2006 or so.
When I first had a cursory look and listen to Beolab 5's, they did not appear to have any 'PRaT' and I more or less instantly dismissed them as a typical 'lifestyle' system - after all I owned Naim, reputedly one of the best brands money could buy and purchased by serious audiophiles - like me. You'll note the hiFi snobbery, and yes I was guilty as charged.
A couple of years later I had a relaxed and very pleasant conversation whilst interstate with a B&O salesperson, who also happened to be a performing classical musician, and had a very thorough demo of the Lab 5, which also completely changed my opinion of them.
I also on another visit, listened to some of my own CD's, with Lab 3's + a B&O sub, and considered them on resolution and 'PRaT" grounds to be the equal of my then Naim system, which included SBL's.
A decade or so later when I decided that I'd more or less had enough of fiddling with separates and all the HiFi malarky that goes with it, and that it was time to upgrade my system anyway, I considered numerous options in both passive speakers (to match with my digital Sony ES 9000 series amp which is to all intents and purposes a Tact Millennium in a shiny coat) as well as fully active solutions - which for the purposes of integration and neatness, as well as performance became my preferred option.
After exhausting a lot of options and listening to a lot of different kit, I ended up with Beolab 9's. Judging the performance on CD's that I know intimately and on instruments that I play, the performance was ahead of anything else that I heard in a similar price bracket, and the looks and neatness had it's own appeal.
I would put the out and out performance somewhere between a B&W 803 & 802 if we're talking a passive equivalent - closer to the 802 than the 803, but perhaps not quite the sense of scale of the 802; however more than a match on resolution and better again on dynamics/transient response and hence musical involvement.
But for the price, and all the other engineering advantages of going active, they really sold themselves.
True, you might get better performance for less money, (however I couldn't find it) but you won't do it with the same elegant simplicity, timeless style, lack of clutter and a product that is an absolute joy to live with - the ownership satisfaction as well as performance is the best overall experience I've ever had in decades of being involved in HiFi.
Cheers
yuckyamson
pfm Member
I appreciate your perspective.
We shall have to agree to disagree: I didn't find the 5's, 9's, 8000's, or the aforementioned 150s (Which are a large standmount, regardless of how many or how big the drivers were, to the other chap who felt this compromised my comparison to the Heybrook HB3's) to be not very good VFM and really, on the whole, not terribly satisfying as complete systems.
I haven't heard the 90's or the 50's. But from what I've read, and seen, these represent a different magnitude of hi-fi experience to their previous stuff over the past 3 decades.
I don't know why this has become a great debate here: the 8000's were simply overpiced lifestyle products. Nice looking. Great reliability. And no better than a Nakamichi Receiver/CD changer/and some KEF bookshelves for 1/4 the cost. Or less.
I don't think the same can be said for the 90's. that's what I'm saying.
You're not wrong. Possibly slightly upmarket Bose. When we used to get their electronics through our workshop they were full of Philips made pcbs and parts.
Seeing as B&O are reputed to make some of the best HiFi speakers today it would be interesting to see how many on this forum actually owned a pair!
Beobloke
pfm Member
Well I can start the ball rolling with five pairs if that helps - Beovox 5000 Mk3, MS150.2s and Pentas, plus Beolab 6000 and 8000.
And as to the Bose comparison, I am happy to be corrected if wrong but I'm pretty sure they have never been considered as having one of the most advanced loudspeaker research and test facilities in the world.
Tony L
Administrator
I have a feeling B&O started good in the 1960, remained good if expensve for what it was in the '70s, but took a dive off a cliff in the '80s with some hopelessly average and overpriced kit. That is when the form over function accusations turned up. They now seem to be producing interesting if crazy-expensive product. It is good to see. I've a fair bit of respect for the '60s and '70s kit, beautiful styling and some fairly advanced technology in thngs like the parallel-tracking turntables etc.
monya
pfm Member
Nothing wrong with their tv's. I use a Beovision 11 with rotating stand which sits parallel to a wall when off and rotates to a viewing position when activated. Seems sensible to me and sounds a lot better than any other flat screen complete with sound bar. Been to their factory too ( just passing - almost) and their commitment is impressive. Can you tell I'm a fan? No I don't have their audio offerings but the new speakers are serious stuff.
Cereal Killer
432
That about sums it up, I listened to a fair bit of their kit in the 80s/90s which they had a dealership in Yorkshire. Was an interesting place, ground floor was full of B&O kit and sold hi-end European furniture, the upstairs and a big room/hall full of UK kit which knocked the shite out of the B&O stuff.
Are these current models with all the tech as discussed earlier in the post, i.e Beolab 50?
Having the the most advanced loudspeaker research and test facilities in the world doesn't mean you are going to produce the best sounding loudspeakers. A lot of audio companies today like B&O are marketing equipment based on advanced technology and that does not always equate to a realistic reproduction of music.
FWIW quite a lot B&O dealers in the south east have closed up shop and gone.
Beobloke
pfm Member
Sadly not - I can't afford Beolab 90s. On the other hand though, the tweeters in the Beovox 5000s do move and this reminds me - I really must screw them back in again!
