Actually quite a few interesting things that pop up when one searches for B&O. One impression I'm getting, is that many critical listeners are getting the point of the acoustic lenses. There is also a general movement towards active speakers, and in that department, B&O has the nicest looking speakers around.
This movement is fueled by people wanting to port music from their computers, and wondering what they need to to that well - in audiophile circles they're discovering that they don't need a large sound system if they have active speakers and a good DAC between those and the computer they're using.
I suspect a lot of reviewers get a big surprise when they come to Struer. Many are prejudiced and are apparently expecting to find a place filled with interior decorators and color pickers (I'm exaggerating just a tad). Then they see the collection in the museum, realize how B&O has been driving audio development and get to listen. But occasionally there are reality checks - one batch of reviewers invited to Struer was rightly incensed by the BeoLiving room used as the main demo-room. The hard wood wall behind the speakers were so against the "dead wall" principles of good audio that they couldn't get around to actually listening to the music. (The acoustic lenses of the BL5s ensure that very little sound energy in the mid- and top-frequencies go backwards). It's still form over function to have a wall like that behind the speakers.
I think that a lot of the misperceptions of many audio reviewers are caused by the strange interiors B&O chooses to photograph its components in - for every acoustically "correct" interior, you have dozens with marble floors, concrete walls and enormous plate glass windows. Anyone keen on getting the best possible reproduction of music knows such interiors are simply terrible - and therefore audio reviewers form the incorrect assumption that B&O doesn't know any better.
Good thing you posted it in the general forum, vikinger - that review deserves a bigger audience.