Whilst the "Overpriced Junk" notion is OTT,I personally prefer a description of Nouvelle Cuisine viz " the triumph of style over substance",one does have to query the added value of the design aesthetic of B & O products.

For example,the basic BV9 is £14000,and while it does look very impressive,one does have to query whether in performance terms it represents value for money.

Given that a Pioneer 5000 EX Full HD Panel costs £5000,one could assemble a system that would out perform a BV9.

Yes,one would have separates v integrated,but does performance not outweigh convenience?

With conveniance comes cost I suppouse so if you are willing to overlook the "complications" that a component system brings than this is ideal and suits many to a T.

However, if you are like many others who believe in the notion that "less is more" than this is where B&O excels.  The conveniance that B&O offers comes at a considerable cost but one which over time is worth it and when you factor in the benefits of an integrated system the extra ££ becomes irrelvant imo.. the products of yesterday had a long life span as opposed to the Sony and Panasonic and add the fact that people will stay pay considerable money for used B&O makes it a safe "investment".

Well it used to be that way didnt it? 

You could even extend this to cars.

TerryM:

For example,the basic BV9 is £14000,and while it does look very impressive,one does have to query whether in performance terms it represents value for money.

Given that a Pioneer 5000 EX Full HD Panel costs £5000,one could assemble a system that would out perform a BV9.

Yes,one would have separates v integrated,but does performance not outweigh convenience?

I think it depends which products you are comparing really. Eg beolab 5s are actually very good value for money, as in some of the audiences people had with the speakers when they first came out, they were so good, that they were said to be capable of producing the same quality of sound as speakers that cost double the price!! 

Every manufacturer will have "overpriced" products as well as excellent value for money in the market they are selling. Overpriced is a personal decision. Most people on this forum are B&O owners and, as such, have made a decision that paying X pounds more for a product is value for money for them. Why does BMW outsell Ford in the UK? It is more expensive, generally less spec'd and has 'similar' build quality. Yet they still sell. Brand image!

Simplicity, convenience, style, quality, integration... these are all achievable from other companies. BOSE, PHILLIPS & LOEWE spring to mind as obvious comparisons. Do they do it as well? I would argue that they do it better...

Will they last as long, well that comes partly down to the way you treat your products. Yes, better quality plastics etc will outlast cheaper components but my father has owned a Sanyo Tape deck for close to 25 years and it performed perfectly and still does. Is it sonically as good as something 10 times the cost??? Maybe not... technically. But to his ears it is just as good as anything you can buy today.

Value is subjective and is comes down to what suits the individual. If it is not value for money, or too expensive... them buy something else that you are happy with. It is your choice.

We could get on to cables now... but I won't be the one to start THAT conversation!!!!

Barny

TerryM:

Whilst the "Overpriced Junk" notion is OTT,I personally prefer a description of Nouvelle Cuisine viz " the triumph of style over substance",one does have to query the added value of the design aesthetic of B & O products.

For example,the basic BV9 is £14000,and while it does look very impressive,one does have to query whether in performance terms it represents value for money.

Given that a Pioneer 5000 EX Full HD Panel costs £5000,one could assemble a system that would out perform a BV9.

Yes,one would have separates v integrated,but does performance not outweigh convenience?

 I think you have answered your own question.....

form + function = true added value of style

and that is as subjective as what YOU hear from a loudspeaker

This debate whilst very interesting is about such subjective issues that it could (and probably will) go on indefinitely because the components that contribute to "the true added value of style" will be different for different people.... For me the biggest factor can be summed up in one word - enjoyment, and a good deal of that enjoyment comes from the style of the products. My appreciation of B&O has come to me relatively late ( in my 40s).  I used to be of the opinion that B&O was over-priced and under-specced, but as I've got older my appreciation of the sound quality, style, build quality, longevity, low financial rate of depreciation all contribute to my current view that the products are indeed good value.

Cheers

Nigel   

Many thanks for the interesting replies.

To be honest I have been seriously auditioning the BV9,but do have doubts about it's value for money.

The points advanced in the replies are,to my mind,more applicable to B & O's audio products since excellent sound quality does not date.

However,in the arena of picture reproduction,especially with the demise of the mature CRT technology,things are progressing so quickly that one questions the wisdom of a substantial investment at this point in time.

There are already rumours of revised BV7,and BV9,models.At least with a separates system,replacing a panel would be a cheaper,easier option.

Upgraded models will always eventually come...but if you kept waiting for them then you would never actually get one! 

I have been thinking about buying a Serene mobile...but my worry is that mobile technology is and has moved on a lot in the last year or so...and so is the Serene still worth £800? But...i spoke to a chap today who sells and has himself the Samsung version of the Serene...the E910 apparantly iirc...and he sells them for £799.99 with no trouble and will not take a penny less? As i said to him, i would rather buy the B & O version for that price...but on value for the Serene he says that he has a superb mobile that is exclusive to people who can afford it and it is out of reach of those mobile phone enthusiasts who just can't...hence he is prepared to pay the premium to be 'different'. He also absolutely loves its' design..although the novalty of the motorized opening has worn off a bit but it still brings a smile at the right occasion!

TerryM:

Many thanks for the interesting replies.

To be honest I have been seriously auditioning the BV9,but do have doubts about it's value for money.

The points advanced in the replies are,to my mind,more applicable to B & O's audio products since excellent sound quality does not date.

However,in the arena of picture reproduction,especially with the demise of the mature CRT technology,things are progressing so quickly that one questions the wisdom of a substantial investment at this point in time.

There are already rumours of revised BV7,and BV9,models.At least with a separates system,replacing a panel would be a cheaper,easier option.

I think this is a very sensible outlook before purchasing. I have been in a similar position since December with the BeoVision 5. I was looking at all the models from £3,500 for 4/5 year old sets with Panasonic D4/D5 plasma panels up to the recent, albeit shortlived, 1 year old HD ready models with the Panasonic D7 panels at £8,000. I now find myself waiting for the new BeoVision 7-40 model to be released in August. It can be a frustrating process at the best of times, I know this first hand, but it is of course vital to buy the right product at these sorts of prices.

I totally agree with you about the audio side of things being a good investment because yes, the differences (or improvements) are not nearly as significant as those with picture technology. I am a big fan of the BeoVision 9 and I think it does a great job in all areas but would I pay the price for it? No, I would not. Simply because I know it will be out of date within a couple of years. We have seen it happen with the BeoVision 5 and it will be no different with the BeoVision 9. If you are happy to pay the premium for the BeoVision 9 now and could afford to trade it in again in 2 years time for less than £10,000 (perhaps by a long way) to get the then latest TV then do it. However, if you are looking to buy a TV to use for the next 10-15 years before replacing it, then think twice.

Either way you will make a decision and follow your instincts. It is a difficult choice I know. In the end, while I far prefered the unique design of the BeoVision 5 to that of the BeoVision 7, my own instincts and better judgement told me to get a set that is, at the very least, HD ready, whether that is 720 or 1040, so for me, come August I will be comparing an up to date Samsung 1040 LCD panel to a 2 year old (by then) Panasonic 720 D7 plasma panel. We will see which one comes out tops.

I will also be giving serious thought to purchasing a BeoSystem 3 with a separate branded TV, as you too are considering. There is also a part of me that is considering buying an Avant RF 32" DVD to use for a few years while I wait for things in TV world and DVD world to sort themselves out. There is so much going on technologically that it really is such a difficult choice. Ironically, having such a choice makes it so difficult to choose!

All the best, Simon.

I would not buy a pair of Lab 4s as main speakers myself...but they would be fine as speakers for music in small rooms such as a study, kitchen or bathroom imho.

I use my Lab 4s as rear speakers and they are fab for that...but today i was listening to some mid-volume music on Speaker 4 and they sounded great to me. They also cost £1200 less than my Lab 3 front speakers...which is a lot of dosh difference!

joff135:

I would not buy a pair of Lab 4s as main speakers myself...but they would be fine as speakers for music in small rooms such as a study, kitchen or bathroom imho.

I use my Lab 4s as rear speakers and they are fab for that...but today i was listening to some mid-volume music on Speaker 4 and they sounded great to me. They also cost £1200 less than my Lab 3 front speakers...which is a lot of dosh difference!

£1200 less equates to under half the price difference actually...but yes the Lab 3s are a far superior speaker but i didn't want or need two pairs of them as i only needed rear speakers and the Lab 4s are ideal for that job.

I doubt that the sound of the Lab 4s is hugely inferior to your Samson monitors...even though they may not sound as good...and yes i would rather pay the extra £650 to have them in my home...especially since they work with my B & O 5.1 surround sound system.

I can sympathise with both points of view here. I think the BL4 is overpriced and is a poor choice as a main speaker. However I think it is more than adequate for a rear speaker, is discrete and easy to  connect using Powerlink. It is the most cost effective way to get a fully active surround sound system. I have 4000s as my rear speakers and I feel that I paid far too much for them in relation to their use. They are wasted 95% of the time. Shame as they are excellent small speakers.

I think 4s are a perfectly reasonable choice for rears therefore. 

Having given it a bit more thought i would agree that the Lab 4s are a bit overpriced...as we all heard ages ago the Lab 4s were mean't to be released at about £600 but a lot of dealers abroad said that looked too cheap and so the price of them had a 33% increase! I paid £825 with free ceiling mounting brackets and free installation about 6 months ago.

I would of course have bought a pair off Lee at AV Lifestyle who had a few brand new still boxed pairs for sale for £575 iirc...but i had already bought mine. However, the free installation took over 3 hours by the B & O technical guy...so it balances up a bit.   

£300 is however far too low a price...double that to £600 and i would say that was fair...this is B & O afterall!