In alt.home-theater.misc Severian wrote:
Laurence Payne wrote:
And do they sound good? The B&O systems I've come across have been
ovbiviously design-led (and I don't mean audio design:-). One has to
suspect they're idiosyncratic for the sake of it, not because an
engineer made a breakthrough that column speakers actually SOUNDED
better?

They are expensive, and they do cost more because they pay a lot of
attention to design and style. I find that enjoyable, as too much audio
gear is absolutely horrendously ugly, which is all the worse as it has
no reason to be. It is possible to design in better looks for not as
much as B&O charges, but almost no one else does so. And B&O's materials
aren't cheap, solid aluminum speaker enclosures, high end finishes, etc.

But I get tired of ignorant knee jerk reactions that are as often
prompted by envy as by objective observation. It took a long time for me
to finally listen to B&O seriously, when I did I bought, and have been
happy with the sound and the reliability.

Agreed. The BeoLab 5 -- the big self-powered ones that look like Daleks, with
on-board room-correction DSP -- were very well reviewed by several sources not prone to
flooby (e.g. The Audio Critic). And B&O claims to use panels of listeners in
its designs, so it can't all be about looks.

B&O was once famous for amazing-looking but just OK sounding turntables, so maybe
that's where the bias comes from.



--
-S
A wise man, therefore, proportions his belief to the evidence. -- David Hume, "On Miracles"
(1748)

Steven Sullivan wrote:
In alt.home-theater.misc Severian wrote:
Laurence Payne wrote:
And do they sound good? The B&O systems I've come across have been
ovbiviously design-led (and I don't mean audio design:-). One has to
suspect they're idiosyncratic for the sake of it, not because an
engineer made a breakthrough that column speakers actually SOUNDED
better?

They are expensive, and they do cost more because they pay a lot of
attention to design and style. I find that enjoyable, as too much audio
gear is absolutely horrendously ugly, which is all the worse as it has
no reason to be. It is possible to design in better looks for not as
much as B&O charges, but almost no one else does so. And B&O's materials
aren't cheap, solid aluminum speaker enclosures, high end finishes, etc.

But I get tired of ignorant knee jerk reactions that are as often
prompted by envy as by objective observation. It took a long time for me
to finally listen to B&O seriously, when I did I bought, and have been
happy with the sound and the reliability.

Agreed. The BeoLab 5 -- the big self-powered ones that look like Daleks, with
on-board room-correction DSP -- were very well reviewed by several sources not prone to
flooby (e.g. The Audio Critic). And B&O claims to use panels of listeners in
its designs, so it can't all be about looks.

B&O was once famous for amazing-looking but just OK sounding turntables, so maybe
that's where the bias comes from.

B&O actually has a listening panel of about a dozen employees, with more
alternates. They pay them to go to about a dozen concerts a year, all
types of music, so that their ears stay attuned to real music, and they
use blind testing methods. Which indicates to me they take such things
as sound quality seriously.

I think a lot of their previous stuff, particularly the non-active
speakers, while good were more limited in the performance/style tradeoff
than the more recent stuff. I agree, I think their gear from back in the
70's and 80's influence the way they are viewed, although their
receiver/amps and such were always quite good, it wasn't until they went
with the active speakers that they got a huge jump in sound quality. I
have a B&O table, works fine for my uses, but you lose a lot of the
tweakability that turntable people value so much. Being a very
conservative company, the are also sometimes slow to adopt new
technology, when the CD came out it took years before they had a CD
player. Being a small company and since they put so much emphasis on
design, I think they want to make sure a piece of new tech will be
around for a while before jumping in. I guess they avoided the whole
Elcasset, Beta, MiniDisk, Digital Cassette fiascos that way.

The newer technology of Class D ICE amps, digital room EQ, and active
speakers, have really boosted their performance, but they are indeed
still pricey. I have a couple of B&O corded phones, overpriced, but they
sound (and the mike picks up more clearly) than any other phone I've
ever had, so I tend to use them for long distance calls and such.

Look like Daleks...LOL! I hadn't actually thought of that, but you're
right! EXTERMINATE!!!

"Mario" wrote in message
...
Hello,

I have a Bang OlufsenTV surround audio system Beosystem

Its a Tv with four column speakers which are powered and aplified as
you know by the bang olufsen beosystems, this speakers are not
connected
normaly to the output of a dolby surround system, but are driven by
the beosystem

Now I have changed TV to a flat screed LCD TV but I would like to
still be able to use the Bang Olufsen column speakers, how can I
achieve this? I need some kind of transducer to drive these speakers
from a standard dolby surround amplifier

Does any one sell a system that will input audio/video sources and
output them in surrond to the Bang Olufsen Beosystem speakers? Or sme
kind of device to put between surround amplifier and each speaker

Thanks,

Mario



Face it pal you have bought a proprietary system that is proprietary for one
simple reason - to keep you tied into the particular manufacture and their
sky high prices forever.

If there was some technical reason for being non standard (like the
excellent Quad electrostatic speakers) then fair enough, otherwise they are
just ripping you off.

Once upon a time (early 70's) B&O were market leaders, but now they just
take the proverbial. Ditch their stuff and buy something that works like it
is supposed to.

btw

The amplification is in one place in most hi-fi system designs with
reason: -

1. Long runs to the speakers are pretty noise immune.
2. All the amplification shares the same power supply.

I am all for decent hi-fi, but unfortunately the industry is still plagued
by absolutely steaming bull****. For example I bought a copy of What Hi-Fi
recently to see what the latest AV amps can do. Amusingly there is a group
test on digital cables. These are typically a meter long and carry a low
rate encoded audio signal from a CD player to the amp. Prices run to £75
and the reviewers can hear differences*! Of course this PC runs a reliable
8mbps link from my local exchange down 5km of decades old, needle thin,
corroded, wet (in places) and badly connected wire in various metals. When
it was analogue it was low bandwidth, high noise with crackles (especially
when it rained). Once on ISDN there was no noise (unchanged bandwidth
unless you linked two channels) and it would run for months without a bit
error. Now it is on ADSL. I just checked and I got less than ten errors in
the last 24 hours including a thunderstorm that would certainly upset the
B&O. Radio 3 sounds the same as FM or satellite...




* really! Once the clock is recovered and data extracted even an
oscilloscope couldn't spot a difference.

R. Mark Clayton wrote:
"Mario" wrote in message
...
Hello,

I have a Bang OlufsenTV surround audio system Beosystem

Its a Tv with four column speakers which are powered and aplified as
you know by the bang olufsen beosystems, this speakers are not
connected
normaly to the output of a dolby surround system, but are driven by
the beosystem

Now I have changed TV to a flat screed LCD TV but I would like to
still be able to use the Bang Olufsen column speakers, how can I
achieve this? I need some kind of transducer to drive these speakers
from a standard dolby surround amplifier

Does any one sell a system that will input audio/video sources and
output them in surrond to the Bang Olufsen Beosystem speakers? Or sme
kind of device to put between surround amplifier and each speaker

Thanks,

Mario



Face it pal you have bought a proprietary system that is proprietary for one
simple reason - to keep you tied into the particular manufacture and their
sky high prices forever.

If there was some technical reason for being non standard (like the
excellent Quad electrostatic speakers) then fair enough, otherwise they are
just ripping you off.

Once upon a time (early 70's) B&O were market leaders, but now they just
take the proverbial. Ditch their stuff and buy something that works like it
is supposed to.

btw

The amplification is in one place in most hi-fi system designs with
reason: -

1. Long runs to the speakers are pretty noise immune.
2. All the amplification shares the same power supply.

I am all for decent hi-fi, but unfortunately the industry is still plagued
by absolutely steaming bull****. For example I bought a copy of What Hi-Fi
recently to see what the latest AV amps can do. Amusingly there is a group
test on digital cables. These are typically a meter long and carry a low
rate encoded audio signal from a CD player to the amp. Prices run to £75
and the reviewers can hear differences*! Of course this PC runs a reliable
8mbps link from my local exchange down 5km of decades old, needle thin,
corroded, wet (in places) and badly connected wire in various metals. When
it was analogue it was low bandwidth, high noise with crackles (especially
when it rained). Once on ISDN there was no noise (unchanged bandwidth
unless you linked two channels) and it would run for months without a bit
error. Now it is on ADSL. I just checked and I got less than ten errors in
the last 24 hours including a thunderstorm that would certainly upset the
B&O. Radio 3 sounds the same as FM or satellite...




* really! Once the clock is recovered and data extracted even an
oscilloscope couldn't spot a difference.



You also are completely ignorant of B&O products. The amplified speakers
have both 5 pin DIN and RCA connectors on them, to allow compatibility
with either format, so are hardly proprietary. As for your comment about
noise, the main reason active speakers haven't been embraced is because
companies want to sell you both an amp and speakers and get you to churn
them more. The performance advantages of active speakers are not minor.

You can easily run long runs of good RCA cable without noise intrusion,
many audiophiles have monoblocks behind each speaker, as long line level
runs don't have the same problems as long speaker runs.

"Severian" wrote in message
m...
R. Mark Clayton wrote:
"Mario" wrote in message
...
Hello,

I have a Bang OlufsenTV surround audio system Beosystem

SNIP
Does any one sell a system that will input audio/video sources and
output them in surrond to the Bang Olufsen Beosystem speakers? Or sme
kind of device to put between surround amplifier and each speaker

Thanks,

Mario



Face it pal you have bought a proprietary system that is proprietary for
one simple reason - to keep you tied into the particular manufacture and
their sky high prices forever.

If there was some technical reason for being non standard (like the
excellent Quad electrostatic speakers) then fair enough, otherwise they
are just ripping you off.

Once upon a time (early 70's) B&O were market leaders, but now they just
take the proverbial. Ditch their stuff and buy something that works like
it is supposed to.

btw

The amplification is in one place in most hi-fi system designs with
reason: -

1. Long runs to the speakers are pretty noise immune.
2. All the amplification shares the same power supply.

I am all for decent hi-fi, but unfortunately the industry is still
plagued by absolutely steaming bull****. For example I bought a copy of
What Hi-Fi recently to see what the latest AV amps can do. Amusingly
there is a group test on digital cables. These are typically a meter
long and carry a low rate encoded audio signal from a CD player to the
amp. Prices run to £75 and the reviewers can hear differences*! Of
course this PC runs a reliable 8mbps link from my local exchange down 5km
of decades old, needle thin, corroded, wet (in places) and badly
connected wire in various metals. When it was analogue it was low
bandwidth, high noise with crackles (especially when it rained). Once on
ISDN there was no noise (unchanged bandwidth unless you linked two
channels) and it would run for months without a bit error. Now it is on
ADSL. I just checked and I got less than ten errors in the last 24 hours
including a thunderstorm that would certainly upset the B&O. Radio 3
sounds the same as FM or satellite...




* really! Once the clock is recovered and data extracted even an
oscilloscope couldn't spot a difference.

You also are completely ignorant of B&O products. The amplified speakers
have both 5 pin DIN and RCA connectors on them, to allow compatibility
with either format, so are hardly proprietary.

Other parts of this thread talked about "5 pin Beolink", which defintiely
sounds proprietary, even if they do use DIN connectors.

As for your comment about noise, the main reason active speakers haven't
been embraced is because companies want to sell you both an amp and
speakers and get you to churn them more.

? Few makers produce amps and speakers for separate sale, and even if they
do only a minority buy both from the same source. I have Mission speakers
and I suppose I could have bought a Mission amp, but I didn't and I have
never seen one outside a catalog. Au contraire of course B&O do pitch to
get you to buy everything from them.

The performance advantages of active speakers are not minor.

You can easily run long runs of good RCA cable without noise intrusion,
many audiophiles have monoblocks behind each speaker, as long line level
runs don't have the same problems as long speaker runs.


Such runs would need to be well shielded.

I suppose that if the speakers are far away in another room (I have some
lightweights direct wired in my conservatory), it may be easier just to send
line level signal and use a local amp.

In the future I suppose speakers will just plug into cat5e or cat 6 cabling
(or wireless) like everything else and simply be told what they are (e.g.
left rear surround), link up and play that.

R. Mark Clayton wrote:
"Severian" wrote in message


Other parts of this thread talked about "5 pin Beolink", which defintiely
sounds proprietary, even if they do use DIN connectors.

B&O have their own, proprietary connector topology for reasons they
obviously think are valid. The Beolink carries left, right, ground, and
power on signals (it really only uses 4 of the 5 pins). You tell the
speaker which to respond to, L or R, with a switch. Simplifies runs when
the speakers are a long way away from the source, one wire to one
speaker, another from that speaker to the next. They are well shielded,
I've never encountered noise or hum using them, and for longer runs they
have what they call Beolink, which is a balanced topology (as everything
should be anyway if performance and noise rejection were priorities). I
have a Beolink run that runs almost 200 feet, on top of several mains
lines and next to a transformer and get no noise or hum. You could
accomplish the same using XLR connectors and a balanced topology as is
done in a lot of pro and studio audio gear.


As for your comment about noise, the main reason active speakers haven't
been embraced is because companies want to sell you both an amp and
speakers and get you to churn them more.

? Few makers produce amps and speakers for separate sale, and even if they
do only a minority buy both from the same source. I have Mission speakers
and I suppose I could have bought a Mission amp, but I didn't and I have
never seen one outside a catalog. Au contraire of course B&O do pitch to
get you to buy everything from them.

I've seen active loudspeakers attempt to make market penetration
numerous times over the past 3 decades I've been paying attention. Each
time they were less than successful not because of the merit of the
products, but it was always hard to get stereo stores to sell them, as
they liked selling amps and speakers separately. And people who didn't
understand the benefits of active crossovers and amps and such also
seemed to like playing the mix and match game. This was, and is, driven
also by the audio press, with lots of lurid prose about the sound of one
amp vs. another, and how this speaker works with this amp and such. The
audiophile rags are particularly egregious about this.

The only two companies who have managed to go with active speakers and
keep them successful are Meridian and B&O, both undoubtedly because they
tend to sell complete systems and have somewhat closed architectures
(although they do integrate with other components). I think that, given
the market, only companies with a whole system approach (Naim used to be
this way as well) can really sell such speakers.


The performance advantages of active speakers are not minor.

You can easily run long runs of good RCA cable without noise intrusion,
many audiophiles have monoblocks behind each speaker, as long line level
runs don't have the same problems as long speaker runs.


Such runs would need to be well shielded.

True, which leaves out many "audiophile" unshielded interconnects.


I suppose that if the speakers are far away in another room (I have some
lightweights direct wired in my conservatory), it may be easier just to send
line level signal and use a local amp.

In the future I suppose speakers will just plug into cat5e or cat 6 cabling
(or wireless) like everything else and simply be told what they are (e.g.
left rear surround), link up and play that.

That would be an ideal way of doing it, going digital would eliminate a
lot of problems with ground loops, noise, shielding and such. We can
hope it'll get here someday, and there will be Luddite audio companies
resisting it even though it is logical and high performance. They'll
also try and sell you special digital interconnects for this that have
all the electrons aligned precisely so as not to interfere with the
digital signal bits.

In alt.home-theater.misc StickThatInYourPipeAndSmokeIt wrote:
On Tue, 2 Sep 2008 17:40:21 +0000 (UTC), Steven Sullivan
wrote:


Agreed. The BeoLab 5 -- the big self-powered ones that look like Daleks, with
on-board room-correction DSP


Bwuaahahahahahha

1 That's it... let a bunch of idiots mutate (read enjunear)the sound you
hear into something else!

You're rather ignorant, aren't you?



--
-S
A wise man, therefore, proportions his belief to the evidence. -- David Hume, "On Miracles"
(1748)

Steven Sullivan wrote:
In alt.home-theater.misc StickThatInYourPipeAndSmokeIt wrote:
On Tue, 2 Sep 2008 17:40:21 +0000 (UTC), Steven Sullivan
wrote:

Agreed. The BeoLab 5 -- the big self-powered ones that look like Daleks, with
on-board room-correction DSP


Bwuaahahahahahha

1 That's it... let a bunch of idiots mutate (read enjunear)the sound you
hear into something else!

You're rather ignorant, aren't you?




I think it goes way beyond ignorant. Ignorant can be cured, massively
stupid and insane can't.

In article ,
Severian wrote:



I think it goes way beyond ignorant. Ignorant can be cured, massively
stupid and insane can't.

AGGRESSIVELY stupid and insane is even worse.

howldog wrote:
On Wed, 03 Sep 2008 04:48:56 -0700, StickThatInYourPipeAndSmokeIt
wrote:

On Tue, 2 Sep 2008 17:40:21 +0000 (UTC), Steven Sullivan
wrote:

Agreed. The BeoLab 5 -- the big self-powered ones that look like Daleks, with
on-board room-correction DSP

Bwuaahahahahahha

1 That's it... let a bunch of idiots mutate (read enjunear)the sound you
hear into something else!


who the **** cares what it originally sounded like? If the speakers
change the sound, and it sounds better to you, then it IS better.

would be nice if you could turn the DSP off, just to hear it without.




Actually, I think you can. The speakers include a microphone on a stalk,
you run a calibration run with the mic close to the speaker, and then
run it with it at a distance, and then the speaker calibrates. And the
DSP is, if I remember correctly, applied only in the bass, so you can
apparently erase the calibration and start over. I know in the room I
heard them in, I would have expected poor bass response, the room was
the type I would have associated with not being good for deep bass but
having a midbass bloom, but the speakers were very flat, no apparent
frequencies boosted over others, and the went low enough to untie your
shoelaces. Extremely tight but went incredibly deep, and were effortless
sounding at spls that were borderline painful.

A lot of people who buy B&O do so for the appearance and lifestyle
attributes, that's their right, if it serves their needs, who am I to
tell them otherwise. But often they put the speakers in places that
audiophiles would call non-optimal. They still sound pretty good, as
good as anything would placed like that, but if you do put the same
effort in placement as an audiophile would with other speakers, my
experience has been that the results are excellent.

The ability of my Beolab 8000's to image, both left and right and depth,
have only been matched to me by dipolars like Magnepan, Quad, and the
old Dahlquist DQ10s. They don't have quite as much depth, some would say
they don't have the exaggerated sense of depth dipolars can have, but
they also don't have the placement issues, much less room sensitive.
Treble clarity, and midrange clarity, are also excellent. I've heard
very expensive monitors that didn't equal them in these regards. For me,
given that I have a problematic room for dipolars, and for largish
speakers in general, and given the extremely small footprint of the
Beolabs, these were ideal speakers for me. They had the depth and
imaging and smoothness I wanted without the room issues. So I actually
spent my own money on them, which is as high a compliment as I can give
them I guess.