Again, a speakers-question: these days some real 70s nostalgia shows up; it makes me think about the sound of the speakers  from that period, B&O produced some very good hifi speakers in these years (I own a pair of s45-2), how do they compare to the speakers of the 80s and 90s, beolab 8000 vs M100/M120? In other words, is there any progression in soundquality, I always thought the introduction of "active speakers" was more for the benefit of design than it was for sound? 

I don't know if I can be 100% acurate as I mostly got experience with Beovox M150 and Beovox S45-2.

The Beovox S45-2 sound pretty good for their size. No lack of bass or mid/treble freq for instance. Sound is big enough for the smaller systems.

The Beovox M150 wich I use on a daily basis sounds big and clear in all details of the music. Again it was designed with that in mind.

For the sound of today both pairs does not sound dated really. I have heard a 5 minute demonstration of the Beolab 5 speakers and in honesty I was not impressed with the sound being better. 

 

What about the amps too? For example: Is the amp in the Beolab 150 any better or worse than my BM 8000 connected to some Beovox Pentas?

I am glad you asked that question!

I can see that If I upgraded my BeoCenter 7000 and s45-2 combination I would get a more modern and compact system, that would have better connectivity (a real pain woth the BC7000) , be fully linkable, give me more control options and look more modern. That said, I have often wondered how much better it would sound, and reading therough a lot of the posts here It doesn't seem as is if improved SQ alone would justify the expense, but I am willing to be persuaded otherwise.

 

Simon

I'd love to be able to hear a comparrison between the two - I prefer in lots of ways the design of the 70's/80's equipment such as the old beosystem 8000 and M series speakers and did at one point think of changing to that series. The only practical problem I could see would be integrating it with the more modern stuff for surround sound and beolink etc.

 My neighbour has a Beocentre 7007 and MS45-2 (I think) speakers - the sound is very comparable to my BS3000 and BL4000 speakers. Another friend has a Beomaster 5000 fed only with an iPod as it's source and connected to Beovox Pentas - the sound on that is completely different and much fuller with more detail and much stronger bass.

I've heard it said before that the sweetest B&O amps were those built before the active speakers came about, so the BM 4000/4400/6000/8000/5000 are better than a BC9300 for example. To be fair though, if you wanted 150w from a BC9300. you'd just go out and buy some Beolab Pentas, so it's probably an unfair comparison to make really. You'd be a bit daft expecting to get real grunt from some Beovox Pentas using the power amp of a BC9300, in much the same way as it would be daft if you hooked up some Beolab Pentas to a BM8000, negating the power amp in the 8000...which kind of brings me back to the question of what is better amp-wise between Beolab 150 and BM8000?

I don't see how the design would benefit from making the speaker active since you need more room in the speaker.

(Some of) the old speakers, however, in my experience are very good. I have had a number of different models including Beovox 2702, 1802, P30, CX100 and S55.

Of the above I definitely favor the S55's which are used with a Beosystem 8000 in my parents' summerhouse. Unlike many others on the forum I didn't enjoy the sound of the CX's as I found it muffled and badly separated.

I prefer the sound of my BL5000's, though, over all of the above speakers

When it comes to amplifiers, B&O's amplifier from the 70's are state of the art soundwise.
The problem with them today is aging components, especially capacitors of course.
A well serviced Beomaster 2000,2200,...,6000,8000 will cover
the entire audible frequency range plus a little more the exact same
way a new Beocenter will.
Basically, there's only so much for an amplifier to do.
Linearity is good with the 70's amps, not really lacking anything
but there can be a difference in dynamic response.
I would prefer the 70s DC-coupled and discretely built amplifiers
to modern day AC-coupled and often japanese hybrid IC amplifiers any day.
The 70's amps lack of output (series) capacitors alone has a
great influence on the sound reproduction.
Output impedance is low = the amp has better "grip" of the speaker and damping factors are considerably better.

Wattage is not a great issue as a matter of fact - actually only when you like to play at party levels.
A Beomaster 2000 is rated at 40 Watts but given the right speakers it will sound a lot more, the larger speaker the better.
A Beocenter 9000 is rated at 30 Watts but will have a hard time driving larger speakers and you can hear it. It loses its breath so to speak.

Active loudspeakers are built to make sure that the amp and the speaker
are well matched. It may be a good idea but not always.
You can easily find better speakers for a Beolab 150 than the
Penta tower.
Besides, the Beolab 150 is not very different from what you will find in f.e. a Beomaster 8000 and the Penta speaker tower is hard to drive,
very inefficient.
Try using a couple of speakers from the JAMO POWER range of the mid-80's.
The 500 or 555 springs to mind with an efficiency of 0.8 W/96dB/1m,
yes 0.8 Watts is all it takes for normal "livingroom" level.
Connect to a Beomaster 8000 and you will see what it really can do,
you will be surprised, I can tell you that !
My BM8000 drives 2 pairs of the above with ease, that's 4 12" woofers, 4 midrange horns and no less than 20 dome-tweeters.
It's all down to the speakers efficiency.

Given the right speakers, a Beomaster 901 will sound a million.

Martin

Thank's Martin

After I posted my first response I got thinking that we are talking about 30 years old hifi here and the leason here is:

If the amplifier/speakers is fully functional and sounding right then it compares to todays B&O very well. I'm getting alot of Beosystem 6000/8000 research/service done at the moment and few B&O units of that age early '80s still work great/100% right. That goes for speakers too.

Some Beomasters do sound better with other speakers. I will agree with that.

Still its worth the money in the long run though if you know how to get it repaired right.

One way to compare would be to go to your dealer and listen to the newer systems.  

 

I generally think you get much better sound improvements by changing your furniture or carpet that making speaker changes.  That's why for most people you're better just picking a good brand (to guarentee a fairly good standard) and then just choosing what looks best.  That's why I choose B&O over Bose and the 1980s stuff over other periods.  Given a differente taste in decor, it would be 70s

I think the amplifiers are fantastic. My BeoMaster 4400 is arguably the best amp I own, and my other BeoMasters also perform very well, better than any modern stuff I own. Heck my 4400 actually sounds better than the Cyrus amps I tried out a year ago or so. Impressive...

Can't say I've been so impressed with the older speakers though. There's some very good stuff out there, the M150s are good, as well as the Pentas, 5700s and 3800s (I had a pair of these until one got dropped )

I don't think there is anything which sets them apart though! My B&Ws (DM7s) would easily outperform Pentas (unless we start playing at nightclub volumes), and most probably the M150s (which I think are better than the Pentas).

The modern B&O range is generally very very impressive though. BeoLab 9s would be the best speakers B&O have ever made IMO if it wasn't for the BeoLab 5s. The 5s are the only speakers I've ever listened to where I believe I'm hearing *everything* going on in the recording at all frequencies.

If I was to choose a 70s system though, it would be a 4400, BeoGram 4000 and BeoVox 5700s.

Given the fact that in different periods different types of music "emerge"or are popular, perhaps B&O did produce the systems/speakers that were fitting the musical preferences of the time, so they will sound different. I mean, the 70s/80s/90s all had their specific sound, at least in popular music that is. B&O's official statement however always was (and is) is to reproduce music as naturally as posible, according to that statement there is no difference between old and new.

Jazz on the 70s system and techno on the 80s/90s system? Would mean that classical must be played on the 17th century system...

Well that is their aim I believe, to reproduce it as naturally as possible. In the 60s, this wasn't really done very well, although it was good for the time, and the 70s were a step forwards. I don't think there's a 'vast' improvement from the late 70s to 80s or even the 90s in terms of how natural things sound. They definitely managed to get speakers much much smaller and still retain fantastic sound.

It's only in the last 5 or 6 years that I believe speaker technology has really moved along massively.

Alex:

I think the amplifiers are fantastic. My BeoMaster 4400 is arguably the best amp I own, and my other BeoMasters also perform very well, better than any modern stuff I own. Heck my 4400 actually sounds better than the Cyrus amps I tried out a year ago or so. Impressive...

Can't say I've been so impressed with the older speakers though. There's some very good stuff out there, the M150s are good, as well as the Pentas, 5700s and 3800s (I had a pair of these until one got dropped )

I don't think there is anything which sets them apart though! My B&Ws (DM7s) would easily outperform Pentas (unless we start playing at nightclub volumes), and most probably the M150s (which I think are better than the Pentas).

The modern B&O range is generally very very impressive though. BeoLab 9s would be the best speakers B&O have ever made IMO if it wasn't for the BeoLab 5s. The 5s are the only speakers I've ever listened to where I believe I'm hearing *everything* going on in the recording at all frequencies.

If I was to choose a 70s system though, it would be a 4400, BeoGram 4000 and BeoVox 5700s.

 

Are you really sure your 40w speakers with 3 drivers would outperform my 150w rated Pentas with 9 drivers? Bring them round to my house and we'll hook them up to the BM8000 and see which speaker melts first! 

I think my M100s would show a fairly clean pair of heels to most modern B&O speakers. Only suitable for a decent sized room, they have extremely well defined and accurate bass - we had a demo of them against Pentas, and they were appreciably better.

Remember we tend to like the speakers we are used to though - I thought Alex might like the following review from Hi-Fi Choice about his beloved B&W DM7s!

This medium sized stand mounted model gave generally fine lab performance with useful sensitivity and bass extension marred by a somewhat recessed presence which left the mid-treble a little 'exposed'. Sound quality was rated average throughout, with 'boxy' and 'hollow' colorations noted, plus a tendency to emphasise disc surface noise. A competant (sic) rather than inspired performer at its £400 odd price tag.  

 

That would be the mk1 with the (admittedly disastrous) fuse protection in the back. B&W updated them later on to completely change the speaker protection, and also simplified the crossovers. The mk2s were only sold for a brief period, but didn't sell well because of the high US price.

I'd agree about the surface noise issues, the floor moves if I put on a rumbly record, and I do generally tend to get 'rushing' noises which aren't present with other speakers when playing records.

Boxiness/hollowness isn't at all an issue I've found though. They could be a little 'brighter', but overall I find them much more 'neutral' than a lot of other speakers. Tonally they're very well balanced.

The DM7s are beautifully spacious though. Imaging and 'realism' is very close to the current B&W 700 series.

On that note though, I am considering an upgrade to either the top-end of the B&W 680 series or the bottom end of the 700 floorstanders (if I can find some second hand).

As much as the 'smoothness' and imaging of the DM7s really sounds great for choral and jazz stuff, the lack of any real punch can really get to me when it comes to a lot of electronic music, which just ends up sounding a little 'weak'. This is where the B&O speakers would excel over the DM7s, much punchier/faster/more detailed.

Difficult to decide. Smoothness/imaging or punch/dynamics? Stay as I am or upgrade?

One thing that I learned as musician is that a terrible sounding tone can't be fixed regardless of how good the system is.

Bad sounding or different comes down to the actual recording medium which I guess very few thinks about as it seldom comes up.

it took 5 years to find/get repaired my late 70s system: Beogram 8002, Beocord 9000, BM 8000 and the wonderful MS 150 speakers. The sound is astonishingly good. For more modern "stuff" like CDs I use the Beosystem 6500 but... there is no comparison.

 The warmth of the BM8000 is exceptional. It is well worth to find and restore these systems to their old glory. It pays dividends.

Look is still fantastic and if one is not bothered by weight and size... I suggest to seriously invest in a good BM 8000

RR

 

DoubleR:

The warmth of the BM8000 is exceptional. It is well worth to find and restore these systems to their old glory. It pays dividends.

Look is still fantastic and if one is not bothered by weight and size... I suggest to seriously invest in a good BM 8000

RR

 

I second this. My BM8000 is my favourite bit of B&O (and I have lots nowadays). People who are not familiar with B&O products are always drawn to the BM8000 and want to touch it and play with the control wheels (this must be why they damped the volume wheel with oil!).

Alex:

That would be the mk1 with the (admittedly disastrous) fuse protection in the back. B&W updated them later on to completely change the speaker protection, and also simplified the crossovers. The mk2s were only sold for a brief period, but didn't sell well because of the high US price.

I'd agree about the surface noise issues, the floor moves if I put on a rumbly record, and I do generally tend to get 'rushing' noises which aren't present with other speakers when playing records.

Boxiness/hollowness isn't at all an issue I've found though. They could be a little 'brighter', but overall I find them much more 'neutral' than a lot of other speakers. Tonally they're very well balanced.

The DM7s are beautifully spacious though. Imaging and 'realism' is very close to the current B&W 700 series.

Mk2s actually! !981 Hi-Fi Choice. 

Peter:

Mk2s actually! !981 Hi-Fi Choice. 

That surprises me!

Either way, I'm looking to change them at the moment...