So, B&O is suppose to be an international company and we are now living in a global technology age but....

I keep reading these posts of all of the things that people can do with their B&O - and I can not do any of it.  Why?

1)  B&O continues to box itself in with their integrated systems which work poorly with anything else

2) I live in the US and much of what is being developed by others for B&O is not easily (nor inexpensively) available here.

I have a beautiful remote - the Beo4 - and most of the buttons do nothing.  I have a keychain which is not far from useless.  My Beocom6000 interferes with my Bluetooth connectivity (as I have been told and verified with my own experiments).  Yes, I would love to be able to control lights - which everyone is talking about - but there is nothing available for the US market.  I would love to be able to control (or at least turn on) my non-BO TV (buying a $400 adapter from Europe - and hope it works is, in my mind, not a reasonable option).  I need a cheap RadioShack switch to plug in my TV, iTunes, XM-radion, and iPod since my BS3200 (does 3200 stand for how much in $$$ I had to pay) only has 1 AUX input?  Sure the Beosystem4 is great, but why does it only take 1 type of memory card?  I can get an adaptor for <10 euro which I can connect to my USB port which reads 10 different memory card - some of which probably have not even been made.

 I am not talking about radical technology - just simple things which show me that B&O is trying to survive in the 21 century - not the 20th as ALL of their technology is based upon.  From what I can see, there are no good solutions for modern digital music.  AppleTV with iTune ($200-300) is better than anything B&O has for digital media.

 Am I being unreasonable?

 

-michael

Hi Michael,

as someone else living on the 'wrong' side of the pond, I have to admit that we don't get everything here that is available in Europe; but B&O aren't alone in that shortcoming, and consumer electronics isn't the only 'market' where that applies.  Attention US based Big Oil/Big 3 conspiracy theorists:  Ford secretly makes a Focus which gets better than 50mpg!  BMW, a 5-series good for 34.

I don't know that you're being unreasonable, but perhaps disingenuous, or poorly informed.  For instance, your complaint about the Beo4:  because for more than a decade the Beo4 was the only remote control B&O produced (ignore the Beo1), and was intended to operate EVERY product in its line, if you owned any single piece of B&O equipment,  you always ended up with buttons which do nothing.  I, for instance, have owned a BeoSound 9000 since early 1997, fully half od the buttons have been useless for almost the entire time.  Now, having passed through an MX and onto an Avant (and an AppleTV, something that B&O couldn't have dreamt of in 1996), suddenly the Beo4 is getting a real workout.  The trade-off is that I have only one remote with which to clutter my coffee table.  I am willing to make that sacrifice.  Not being able to use it with a non-B&O TV seems a small price to pay, considering the improved range and decreased interference that B&O enjoy in the quiet little corner of the IR spectrum they've settled into.

B&O has never explained the reason for not bringing LC-2 to the US, but we are not without a solution: ask your local B&O shop to explain the Lutron Grafik Eye® system and it's compatibility with  your Beo4. 

I will agree that it would be nice to see more audio inputs on B&O devices, but considering the amazingly compact chassid used for your BS-3200, where would all the sockets go?  And really, do you need separate inputs for your iTunes and your iPod?  ;-) 

Never heard of the BeoSystem 4, but I'm certain that it'll be amazing when it gets here.

 The SD card slot on the BeoSound 4, makes it part of a tightly-knit 3 part ecosystem, along with BeoSound 2 & 3.  The slot asn't intended for general use with a lot of different digital media, the adaptation of MasterLink, and BeoPort (along with the larger display on the BeoSound 4) make clear the path B&O intended to travel for digital music.  And I bet your 10Euro USB adaptor doesn't plug into the front of any Sony/Denon/Yamaha receiver either...bet it plugs into your computer...the one with the BeoPort.
 

I've already let the cat out of the bag, as to my AppleTV, so I won't argue with you there.  But to say that B&O offers 'Nothing' is clearly incorrect.

 

Russ
 

 

Michael,

It sounds like you've picked up some bad habits.

You've essentially asked us to explain why our products are the way they are, when your requests, if granted, would result in a confusing hunk of garbage. A life of living with consumer electronics has made your head spin and now you think that if something doesn't have 10 options when only one is necessary, it's poorly designed. Something that can read 10 different types of flash memory and have even more features than that on board would be the electronic equivalent of the floor of the NYSE. What I'm saying is: our products are fine; redesign the way you use electronics.

You say the BeoCom 6000 interferes with your bluetooth connectivity. What in the world are you doing wandering your house with an earpiece on? My wife would think I'd lost my mind! And here you are anxiously performing "experiments?" I can see it now, me in my bathrobe, down in my basement labritory, "HONEY!!! I KNEW IT!!! IT DOES INTERFERE!!! NOW DO YOU BELIEVE ME!!!?" She'd be packing her bags and going to live with her sister for a while.

And what on earth do you need 10 different memory cards for? How can it be a reasonable request when it makes me laugh so hard? Who keeps media on even half that many different types of flash memory?

As for one AUX input, the only rational reason I've even come up with for having one at all is to plug in something temporarily on the go. iPod: why? iTunes: what, do you mean the entire computer? TV: why? Don't go overboard here. Do you really think your life would be easier if the 3200 had 5 AUX inputs?

If you can already run your computer to your 3200, than save up a few hundred bucks and buy a BeoPort. This will stream your digital music collection (no need now for iPod) and Internet Radio (keep that XM box on the night table). You even get remote control over everything! Sounds a heck of a lot better.

As for plugging your TV in, check out the BeoVision 8. Connect the two with MasterLink and you've got a system with a single remote (now look what all those useless buttons do!) that share a speaker system, and can even talk directly to some non-B&O video peripherals for good measure. If that doesn't sound like AV heaven, than B&O is an odd choice to have invested in.

 And don't go arguing that you can't afford it. You've already spent about $4,000 on an audio system not even counting the speakers. Either you have more money and are Scrooging yourself of a lifetime of brilliant and enjoyable experiences, or you've spent your last few thousand dollars on a danish stereo, and that is probably ill advised! 

Seriously though, and I say this in good humor, the day Bang & Olufsen makes a system as confusing as the one you're asking for is the day they lose me as a customer.  

 

Thank goodness Trip added the smiley face towards the end there.  I thought he was serious for a second.

 By the way Michael, I missed the BeoCom 6000/Bluetooth issue.  What exactly is it interfering with?  I could accept some wi-fi interference as an issue since they work in the same bandwidth.  But in my townhouse row there are 5 wi-fi networks (including mine) and my original BeoCom 6000's (Spring 2000) have never been an issue.  So I'm genuinely curious.

Russ

 

 Can the Beocomm base station change wireless frequencies?

 If you're experiencing interference with a wireless network (and the original post did not mention it, so I mean 'in general'), simply change the wireless hub/router/etc...'s frequency.  Note, the only frequencies that do not overlap are 1,6, and 11.

 

-R 

The BeoCom 6000 automatically channel hops on its own, can't be managed by the user.  My curiosity is piqued because Michael indicates that he's experiencing interference with 'bluetooth', which would be a new issue to my knowledge.

 Russ

TripEnglish:

What I'm saying is: our products are fine; redesign the way you use electronics.

Trip you make some good points, but at the same time this statement goes completely against the design philosophy B&O has been expressing within their catalogs for the past several decades.  The company claims to design electronics and their operation around what the user would intuitively imagine their methods of operation should be - quite the opposite from telling the user that their ideas about how they should be able to operate electronics are wrong, and that the company has chosen the "correct" way, which the user then must adapt to.  I think it's very difficult, if not completely hopeless, to attempt to argue that B&O isn't lacking in design flaws. 

As Russ has commented "Interference with Bluetooth" is difficult to understand particularly as bluetooth devices has a maxmium of 10 metre range and does not share the same frequency spectrum.

camshaft:

The company claims to design electronics and their operation around what the user would intuitively imagine their methods of operation should be - quite the opposite from telling the user that their ideas about how they should be able to operate electronics are wrong....

Camshaft, I am going to disagree with you here.

It appears that a common 'thread' if you will in many of the discussions we have had here of late (notably this one and one concerning the BeoVision 8) have centered around criticism of B&O's products not being 'me too'-sh enough.  Something along the lines of: "Well, Sony/Yamaha/Denon load up their equipment with every imaginable feature and connection.  Why don't B&O?"  But arguing features by critcising user interface design seems at cross purposes.  Certainly during the 90's with systems in the 2500 family (and I include the Century and BeoSound 9000), the design was meant to lead the user toward an understanding of what the device could do.  In the 2000's though, with the BeoSound 1 and BeoCenter 2, I think we would have to agree that the design philosophy is much different.

Nonetheless, the original post in this thread was far more concerned with features and capabilities, not user interaction.  In that light, once again, I have to say that, yes it is correct to think that B&O are carefully considering the practical nedds of its target audience and are intentionally tailoring the features and capabilities that they offer as a result of those careful deliberations.

 A quick search here will certainly show you the photos of a Denon receiver, and the appearance of the face, the rear apron, and one assumes the remote, are horribly intimidating to say the least.  The 'design' philosophy appears to be "put everything on/in there and let the user decide what he'll use and what he won't."  B&O would rather offer a carefully chosen set of abilities, presented in a logical manner.  Is so doing, they quite naturally make choices which go against convention.  It is a natural outgrowth of a strong design ethic, and it is pervasive in B&O's product line.

Does anyone here remeber Apple's 1984 commercial?  For those geeky enough to know what Xerox PARC is, the original Mac UI was not unknown, but to the vast majority of people, the 'Desktop' and 'Mouse' were shockingly different.  By now, in 2008, what percent of computer buyers still yearn for a command-line interface and a dozen slots and bays to fill?  The question answers itself, doesn't it?  Only the true computer geek wants that level of control.

 Ever read stories about Frank Lloyd Wright's interactions with his customers?  Laughable.  What do mere customers know about architecture, what they want, or what is artistically right?

I don't think that I am far off base in speculating that some of the geekiest among us here are not in fact B&O's 'target' market.

Remember that one of their 'Core Identity Components', essentiallity, strongly informs products like BV-8, and BS-3200.

Russ

I thank Russ for his eloquent defense here.

Camshaft, I understand that the statement that you've plucked out is a rather bold one, but Russ' point about Frank Lloyd Wright's interactions with his clients is spot on.

What end users want in terms of features and how they behave with products once they own them is largely influenced not by virgin intuition, but learned user patterns over a lifetime. Given the state of consumer electronics, we can confidently say that most products and their concomitant user patterns are not only dismally confusing, but in some cases outright anxiety inducing.

As representatives of a company which does have a strong design ethic, our role as shop owners & salespeople is different than our counterparts at multi-brand outlets. While they can simply take end user requests and answer their questions within a familiar context, we must advocate on the end-user's behalf, sometimes against their own initial desires, so that they end up with a system that they may never have known they wanted.

When we invite good design into our homes, it has a tendency to change us, and far beyond its intended scope. As you can tell, I am a strong believer in a well considered home and the lifestyle it allows. This is why I take such issue when people recommend "lower cost" alternatives that share none of the aesthetic or operational benefits of their Bang & Olufsen counterparts. We can't be tempted into overvaluing the savings in these alternative purchases. With our lives as busy and complex as they have become, good design is not a luxury and must be sought out at any price point.   

Russ, I appreciate the time you spent typing that, but I wasn't trying to express much of my own opinion.  I was just saying what B&O has claimed in previous years if you look at their old catalogs, and that I think it's quite different from Trip's take on the situation.

As for my own opinion:

I think B&O's target market today is more the type of person who says "I have money to spend, but I don't know anything about this stuff, so just give me something that isn't hard to understand and looks pretty next to the other decor in my home."

Whereas in previous decades, I think the idea was to design products that were both attractive and offered top class performance.  Additionally, the main functions of the products were simple and easy to operate BUT they also had more detailed features available for those who wanted to take advantage of them.  Today though the company has just dumbed down the systems as much as possible, and tried to make "complexity" a bad word.  I wouldn't be surprised if the typical modern B&O customer looked at the company's products from the 70's in complete bewilderment.

My family has, for $400 (which is why I'm more than willing to deal with it not looking as pretty as B&O products), one of the yamaha home theater receivers which has the ton of connections on the back which, as you mention, would intimidate many people not familiar with such systems.  At the same time, with an $80 logitech harmony remote, my mom can press "watch tv" and be done with it.  At the same time, my brother and I, who know the systems much better are free to play with and configure the system however we want.  I don't think removing features that the customer will likely not need is any great feat of design.  If someone came to my home with a roll of ducktape, and started covering connections and buttons on our system that 90% of people don't use, I'd hardly be inclined to shake their hand and say "thank you for turning this monstrosity of complexity into something that makes sense."

I see your point about the computers, but even today, one can still access a command line interface if desired.  With B&O products you're stuck with the dumbed down version though. 

I'm only 22 years old, but I have little interest in any B&O products made after the 90's.  Sure if I won the lottery I'd have a set of beolab 5's, but that's slightly beside the point...

[All opinions expressed within this post are solely the subjective thoughts of the user, and not to be taken as personal statements against others]   

Trip, I understand your perspective, and believe me when I say I appreciate the beauty of the aesthetics and the industrial design.  This is actually my main interest in B&O.  I don't consider any B&O product to be the best performing product in it's field, but it's for the sake of the beauty and design that I'm willing to make some sacrifices.  I love my Pentas, but if it wasn't for the design, I wouldn't be very thrilled about buying speakers with drivers made by cheap oems like ITT and nokia.

My reasoning is that B&O is no longer targeting a market of consumers that understand and want the more detailed complex features.  In my case, I think many of those Denon, Yamaha, Marantz, etc. receivers make quite a bit of sense, as they all tend to follow similar set up principles.  Once you've set up your first, setting up others past that is pretty straightforward.  I know you're a dealer, so I'm sure you know what I mean about having customers who have no idea how any of the products work, and want you to come out to their home just to set them up.

I think that a system that is effectively a network, that has to have its own simplified network language and addressing system such as B&O integrated systems is fine at certain levels, but when it starts getting to the point where you can't install it yorself, but need someone to come along and do that for you, and a system that is 99% incompatible with any other manufacturer out there, at three or four times the price, then B&O should reconsider its philosophy.

I can buy very high quality systems, that plug together very easily, just a few cables, not software changes, which is what the 'options' settings actually are, and I wonder about B&O future.

The instructions and explanations are not at all clear, but the deal breaker for many is the incompatability.

You have to buy all B&O or buy none of it, its that simple.

You can't buy a B&O tv, and hope that it will connect up to some other system, not going to happen, you cannot buy one small part of B&O and build it up, the entry level threshold is very very high, just to get something that produces any sound whatsoever.

Yes you have an immense amount of flexibility, there are umpteen differant combinations you can include, but as for instinctive operation, nope its not there any more and its been gone for a good while now.

 Worse still is that the Japanese are slowly coming to terms with media networking, and integrating their products is dead easy compared to the B&O implementations, true its not as flexible, yet, but they will get there, especially now we can have distributed IT controlled media.

 You would think that B&O would have a screen display configuration by now, where you can drag your connections from socket to socket, which is what happens with electronic patch systems.

You would think that B&O would offer the chance of analogue input to more of its active speakers, or a digital input at the least.

These are not difficult to implement, nor would you describe them as over feature laden.

There are lots of folk out there who have lots of money, but B&O will not get them as customers because they beat their own path in a way that is so exclusive that its costing them a goodly number of buyers.

When you look at past B&O stuff, yes it was very expensive, but, over time you could build up a very nice outfit, and you could set it up yourself, even those of moderate means could find a path to B&O through saving and collecting.

B&O really needs to look at where its going, because it has been boxing itself in for quite a while now, into one propriety system - you can do this when times are good, but when economies change, you need to keep your potential customer base as wide as possible instead B&O has gone the opposite way with prices going up, and convenience going down, and compatability non-existant.

If we have a potential customer here making a statement about why they think B&O is not for them, or that they have been left behind by B&O, then the compnay must take note, B&O are not right, because its the customer that is right - its the customer who has the options, yet B&O seems to forget this.

 

Camshaft, 

With all due respect, your perspective has some growing to do. I think, though, that I thought very much the way you do at your age. It's the solipsism so carefully honed in one's teen years that makes you think that your perspective as a fairly young man who's yet to make his fortune can illuminate the first thing about the honest-to-god grown-up world. I was convinced that any answer I had was certainly the right one, otherwise such a wonderful brain would never have thunk it up.

Take your statement: I think B&O's target market today is more the type of person who says "I have money to spend, but I don't know anything about this stuff, so just give me something that isn't hard to understand and looks pretty next to the other decor in my home."

I don't think I could expect anything more sophisticated from my 22 year old self, so your mentioning your age spared you the rod. But think about it: your own anecdote about your $400 Yamaha actually proves my point. Your mother presses a "watch tv" button, but what else can she do? The native operation principals of the $400 receiver are so poor that an additional device is required to make sense of one single feature for what I imagine to be a fairly intelligent and capable woman! The fact that a $400 receiver requires a complimentary product at a full 25% its own cost to be even barely operated by intelligent adults is nothing to brag about. If I found my mother had purchased a stove which required a separate device that featured a "cook food" button, I don't know what I'd say.

Don't you think that if you were presented with the option of one touch simplicity, total integration, and sound and picture quality that was hard to beat you'd take it? I'd argue that whatever you think now, you'd take that deal in a heartbeat by the time you're thirty. The only problem left is the cost, but that one's easy. Work hard.

Stephen Colbert, beloved American pundit, had a hilarious saying: "I can't prove it... but I can say it!"

I think that a system that is effectively a network, that has to have its own simplified network language and addressing system such as B&O integrated systems is fine at certain levels, but when it starts getting to the point where you can't install it yorself, but need someone to come along and do that for you, and a system that is 99% incompatible with any other manufacturer out there, at three or four times the price, then B&O should reconsider its philosophy.

Where did the 99% figure come from? Is there any evidence outside your imagination to support this figure? And I'd also like to hear your understanding of Bang & Olufsen's philosophy. And it better not be "to make stuff that Casdave thinks is dumb."

I can buy very high quality systems, that plug together very easily, just a few cables, not software changes, which is what the 'options' settings actually are, and I wonder about B&O future.

Plugging and integrating are two diffent things. I can plug my **** into a *********. That doesn't mean it belongs there. When items communicate and work in harmony with a unified operation language I call that integration. Plugging things in an Universal Remoting them is about as appealing as plugging my **** into that ********** I mentioned.

The instructions and explanations are not at all clear, but the deal breaker for many is the incompatability.

Incompatablity with what? Your wallet? 

You have to buy all B&O or buy none of it, its that simple.

Hey, guy using BeoLab 8000s with his Denon receiver and you, guy using a Pioneer monitor with a BeoSystem 3, Casdave says you don't exist. He says it's that simple! What should I tell him? Uh oh. They don't look too happy.

You can't buy a B&O tv, and hope that it will connect up to some other system, not going to happen, you cannot buy one small part of B&O and build it up, the entry level threshold is very very high, just to get something that produces any sound whatsoever.

BeoSound 1. $1,350. Last I check it produces "any sound whatsoever" and then some! If that threshold's too high, stop spending your money on sweets.

Yes you have an immense amount of flexibility, there are umpteen differant combinations you can include, but as for instinctive operation, nope its not there any more and its been gone for a good while now.

Considering how my Beo 4 can operate products that are decades old and my BeoLink 1000 can operate products that just rolled off the assembly line, and that those products date way way back, what on earth are you talking about? I would say "show me a 30 year old Sony product that can be operated with a current Sony remote, but that would imply an operational 30 year old Sony product.

 Worse still is that the Japanese are slowly coming to terms with media networking, and integrating their products is dead easy compared to the B&O implementations, true its not as flexible, yet, but they will get there, especially now we can have distributed IT controlled media.

Don't you dare ever point your finger toward a Japanese product and say "dead easy." I love Japan, but simplicity is not their forte.

 You would think that B&O would have a screen display configuration by now, where you can drag your connections from socket to socket, which is what happens with electronic patch systems.

You mean like the one at the heart of the BeoSystem 3? Hey BeoSystem 3, Casdave says your user assignable socket orientation doesn't exist, what should I tell him. Casdave, the BeoSystem 3 wants to speak with you. It says it has some sockets it would like to assign. 

You would think that B&O would offer the chance of analogue input to more of its active speakers, or a digital input at the least.

Like the digital output from the Beocenter 2 or the BeoSound 9000? Hey... nevermind.

These are not difficult to implement, nor would you describe them as over feature laden.

Already implemented. We're comfortable with them, but we also wish that their existance would be acknowledged once in a while.

There are lots of folk out there who have lots of money, but B&O will not get them as customers because they beat their own path in a way that is so exclusive that its costing them a goodly number of buyers.

If you want 10 different flash media slots in your BeoSound, we're happy to go our seperate ways.

When you look at past B&O stuff, yes it was very expensive, but, over time you could build up a very nice outfit, and you could set it up yourself, even those of moderate means could find a path to B&O through saving and collecting.

Still can. People just don't save and collect like they used to. It's called the collapse of the world economy. Look into it.

B&O really needs to look at where its going, because it has been boxing itself in for quite a while now, into one propriety system - you can do this when times are good, but when economies change, you need to keep your potential customer base as wide as possible instead B&O has gone the opposite way with prices going up, and convenience going down, and compatability non-existant.

I'll be sure to mention this concern at our 83rd anniversary this year. I'll make sure to tell everyone that surviving the great depression, a world war and over 8 decades of market turbulence and fluxuation couldn't possible have prepared us for the wisdom and truth contained in this post. 

If we have a potential customer here making a statement about why they think B&O is not for them, or that they have been left behind by B&O, then the compnay must take note, B&O are not right, because its the customer that is right - its the customer who has the options, yet B&O seems to forget this.

Hey doc, I know you've got a $200,000 medical education and a decade or so in residency and years of experience on top os that and what not, and believe me, it's way cool. But I got to tell you, all these pills and shots, I don't like 'em. I feel left behind. As a customer, I demand my pills in a variety of flavors and colors! Haven't you ever heard of the customer always being ri... (falls over dead after taking skittles instead of medication becuase they tasted better). You're right. Maybe the customers are onto something. Quick! To the socket factory! I have a large order to place!!!

Well Trip,

does a Smiley really cover what could be construed as a patonising response to Camshaft?

I have expressed my reservations about B & O in other threads,so I will not repeat them here.

In answer to your final paragraph,I would suggest that,for a variety of reasons,not enough people(of all ages) are being convinced to follow  B & O's chosen path.

 

 

camshaft:

 I love my Pentas, but if it wasn't for the design, I wouldn't be very thrilled about buying speakers with drivers made by cheap oems like ITT and nokia.

I'll just pick this one - Nokia never made a single speaker. If they're labelled Nokia, it just means that the same drivers have at some point been used in the multitude of brands of TV sets that were at some point of time manufactured by a company owned by Nokia (a brief encounter back in the 80s-90s). The original OEM manufacturer remains unknown. Mind you, this doesn't mean that they should be somehow inferior...

Hi Trip,

What's the point with that post to Camshaft? Must say I don't think you're coming off that well there.

In fact, it makes me want to raise a point. For a while you pretended to be a regular customer, now you have come clean as a dealer. You had your kitten phase where "they" helped keep you informed and now it appears you wish to belittle other members their viewpoints?

Check out this post, from back in February:

http://forum.beoworld.org/forums/post/90219.aspx

Hey guys!

There are some products that seem to grab you right away (the BeoVision 7 for me), and some that you warm up to over time. The BeoVision 8, for me, has taken some getting used to, but I'm speaking purely about looks. Technologically it looks fantastic. I happen to have a local dealer who is only a few paces from a Sony store so I can do the best side by side comparison available, and the BeoVision 8, even at 720p looks significantly better than any Sony, even the 1080p. I think it goes to show how the picture processing, even when scaled down, is really where Bang & Olufsen shine.

 I guess that "local dealer" was your own shop?

Nothing wrong with your expressing your strong belief in B&O - I'd appreciate it more if other members can voice their opinions without being told they are infantile.

 

 

I think Camshaft can take it. The smiley face was quite sincere, as is Camshaft's opinion. I think he sounds like a very mature guy and will likely wind up to be a very thoughtful and successful Bang & Olufsen owner.

Jeez, I'm taking heat for what I think was one of my nicer posts! I really do understand where camshaft is coming from. I was totally sincere in what I said to him in that I held very similar views at his age. I can't help that I'm older now and have a broader understanding of things. I also realize I'm not perfect, but I am a tireless B&O advocate.

As for my status as a dealer. Remember that many dealers start off as fans.

Again, sorry to all the people I offended! The smiley faces aren't just there for show. I think of this forum as a lot like sports. We may fight to the death, and sometimes even fight a little dirty, but we'll all meet up at the pub later. Seriously! I'm not Mr. Hate, I'm Mr. Love!

By the way, Soundproof, I am willing to admit that all of my advocacy for and defense of Bang & Olufsen (in the varity of moods and states of inibriation in which they're pounded out) could certainly make me come off as the guy in the park with the tin foil hat screaming about the cameras the government has put in his head. If that guy is worth ignoring, then I probably am as well.

I think the thread and the debate is a good one. Detailed eloquent posts from both parties.

Both are adults and getting into a debate (with or without a little patronising), we should all be a little thicker skinned.

The forum needs a little fire now and again and I would suggest this one is not at the point of insult.

Keep it going!

10% 

 

 I would say too keep it going, some posts did crack me up.

For one, I think many of us are clearly not the typical B&O customer. I for example, have no clue what 100hz would buy me neither am I planning to get a blueray anytime soon. I also would love to not have to spend 8000 or so $ on a scaler which I feel I can be without.

So I don't have the money but the miss understanding of the underlying technology. I guess that puts me halfway there.

Being in my mid thirties, I actually do have some money to spend. I enjoy tremendously how the B&O stuff I have looks and integrates into the respective rooms. I don't know yet about BV8 and BC2 since I have them only for few weeks only but I am still not tired of the looks of my BS2300 thats is there for more then 10 years. I bought a Yamaha system few years back, with Mini Pod speakers to update the look a bit. Long gone. 

I thought for some time that the BS9000 should have been updated, maybe with a better display but feel since a few weeks that this would degrade the product. Like an old lady that had a facelift. Age gracefully. 

I think key though to B&O happiness is that you go all the way. A TV is a must in my opinion. That they integrated Apple TV was a lucky exception I guess since that is a prime competitor to their own existing and up and coming solution.

Just let that melt in your mouth for a moment. They have an existing media server. They have a new media product coming. And they do go out of their way and support the Apple TV via Beo 4. So to say that they put themselves into a box is definitely not right. I am guessing we do not always understand what other customers want. Neither do we fully understand what is involved. And then sometimes there may also be some stupidity present in Struer. 

I think the BS3 is a prime example. I don't think anyone among us does understand what it would mean for B&O with their limited resources to support all these 3rd party screens and deliver an optimized product that works. When people complained, I do not recall anybody standing up. From a sales prospective, to open up can be very beneficial. As KAWO recently mentioned, the BS3 is a neat little concept. I think we are just asking for the impossible.

 

 

B&O as a brand is a cult, and cults take care of their own. I really think that if you want B&O products to work with 3rd party products, without any issues at all, then you're asking for the wrong thing.

One risk with cults is that they can become so insular that they are bypassed by events, and become irrelevant. I'd think that's B&O's greatest challenge -- to maintain the mantra of greatest possible simplicity, while still meeting the growing demands of today's digital a/v world.

B&O adopted the Bauhaus philosophy when it arose, and it is still a central part of the company's ethos. Ludwig Mies van der Rohe stated the now well known words: Less is more. And that's probably going to remain a central tenet for B&O. And a challenge: how to satisfy customers used to feature creep when your tenet is less is more, in a digital age where everything's possible as far as digital content is concerned?

Still - I think they're doing a great job of it. I have a BV8 that's a sculpture, made to be looked at from the obvious front, but also from the side and back. It's got a great image, and all the connections I require. Not only that, but it "speaks" with another B&O product that is 20 years old, as well as an AppleTV, an STB, a DVD-player and my computer, and together they deliver quite a performance. All the boxes I don't want to see are hidden away, yet controlled with one remote. To me, the BV8 is a stunning television, and I love the fact that it expresses a design line that stretches all the way to my Beosystem 6500. What other company out there does something similar?

When I play a CD through the Beosystem, and to the speakers of the BV8, I'm always surprised by the sound seeming to come from somewhere behind and around the BV8 - its speaker array produces a surprisingly rich sound perspective. Compare that to any other flatscreen's tinny little built-in speakers ... 

Less is more. Particularly when it's done right.

 

Oh boy, look what I’ve gotten myself into.  Trip, I do have quite a thick skin, but some of this requires quite a bit of typing, and I hate typing   But ok, I’ve got a bottle of cream soda on my left, and my first class doesn’t start till later tomorrow, so here we go…  (oh, and you guys can call me Austin by the way, as a camshaft is just a cold steel engine part that serves as my less than creative moniker)

 
Trip, I can wholly agree that my perspective has much growing to do.  But I can only hope that it continues to do so throughout my life and not only to a finite age within, as that would be a very sad day.  You brought in an analysis of me at the personal level, which I don’t believe was necessarily substantiated within the opinions I expressed above.   I suppose it’s not worth trying to defend the issue of my age and also my opinions about B&O in the same breath, so at the high risk of boring many I’ll address the personal aspect first.

 
I feel as if you’ve tried to invalidate my opinions on the basis of my age, and then smooth the sentiment over by saying that it’s understandable because you were once the same way.  It’s further unfair to characterize someone at the personal level based on a couple paragraphs typed on a forum, in addition to condemning his/her opinions as being inherently flawed and immature.  In my own life so far, I have witnessed that the depth of one’s development correlates far more with ones experiences rather than merely the person’s age.  I have recently been fortunate enough to graduate from an Ivy university, and in those 4 years I consider myself to have developed far more than in all previous years of my life combined.  At the summation of all I learned, was Oppenheimer’s great truism:  “No man should escape our universities without knowing how little he knows.”  I never stop questioning and I never stop doubting.  I have learned the fruitlessness of affirmation without evidence.  When I speak of my feelings, thoughts, or opinions I clearly state that they are indeed my own subjective opinions, and not simply just the way things are.  I clearly stated at the end of my post above that what I typed was indeed nothing more than my subjective opinions, yet you accuse me of solipsism.

In regards to the Yamaha receiver, I don’t understand how the Logitech harmony remote is a negative mark against the receiver.  The point is that it controls all the functions of the receiver, in addition to all the functions of our other components.  No matter what my mom wants to do – watch tv, watch a dvd, listen to a cd, etc. – there’s a single button for it.  Interestingly, it also controls our B&O systems with ease.  Why does the fact that it costs 25% of the receiver have anything to do with it?  If it was instead packaged with the receiver, so that the receiver retailed for $500 how would that be different?  If Yamaha was gracious enough to sell the receiver for only $100, does that make the situation worse, since we bought a remote that costs 100% the price of our receiver?  Are you suggesting that a Beo4 is actually a bargain because even though it costs more than our $100 harmony, it accounts for a lower percentage compared to the price of the system?

You may spot the white MCP6500 in the picture below.  When new, it cost $400, or 40% of the price of the beomaster 6500.  Likewise, if I handed it to my mom I doubt she’d know what to make of it.  I don’t think that necessarily means its design was flawed.  At the same time, there was a panel at the bottom to cover the programming features not used as often in an attempt to simplify operation.  It seems to me that today’s design method would be to either remove those additional functions all together, as they unnecessarily complicate things, or to establish a system where the dealer programs it for the user.

To me, developing advanced technologies while keeping their outward presentation simple is a mark of true design.  But this is very different from removing features from or avoiding current technologies and then presenting this as heightened design through simplification.   I like Soundproof’s last line: “Less is more. Particularly when it's done right.”  I like how B&O has previously designed systems in which extra features are hidden from access or sight when they’re not being used, which to me is the “done right” part.  Simply skipping those little adjustments or features in the whole product is different though.  I’m reminded here of Einstein’s quote, “Make things as simple as possible, but no simpler.”

Trip, I remember seeing in the thread about the Denon receiver, you commented on the myriad of different sound processing logos.  How is that different from back in the 80’s though, when there were different versions of dolby noise reduction for tapes?  Dolby A, Dolby B, Dolby C, Dolby S, Dolby SR.  B&O systems still allowed the user to choose which noise reduction they wanted.  On top of that, B&O developed HX-Pro noise reduction, which was then later licensed to Dolby.  If in addition to those many sound processing technologies supported by that Denon receiver, there was a B&O developed processing technology, would that one deserve to be made fun of too?

Originally when I mentioned I was 22, I did so with the intent of showing that even though I’m of the digital generation, I still have an appreciation for the design of B&O and the development of the company.  I actually enjoy listening to LP’s on my dad’s old Beogram 1202 more than listening to mp3’s.  I like walking into an old record store, and flipping through tons of obscure pieces until I find something that interests me.  I like cleaning off the record at home, putting it on the turntable, watching the needle touch down on the grooves, and seeing everything spinning around while I listen to the music.  Do I wish that I could replace all this with just a push of a button?  Of course not.  David Lewis himself said “If our products are fun to use, then we’ve done our job.”  How do you think Peter would respond if he was offered a simple box with no moving parts and just a single button on the front that could replace all of his dozen beograms from various eras?

Trip, I appreciate that you think someday I’ll be a thoughtful and successful B&O owner, but at the same time I already have the B&O system I always wanted – a complete beosystem 4500 with Penta 3’s.  I’m gradually collecting some other things that interest me, such as the components of a white 6500 system, but I really don’t have much of a desire for new products.  I do love to go into the store and look at the pieces though.  I understand when you said you are a tireless B&O advocate, but likewise I am a tireless B&O advocate of what the company was before.  I’m not suggesting either of us should change though.  It is because the company has had advocates from all eras that it has continued to survive until today.

As much as I love B&O products though, they have been quite a stretch for me on a college budget.  Fortunately with the experience I’ve learned from working in labs at school, I’m able to repair, refurbish, and resell many of the older B&O items, and thus enjoy a hobby that pays very little, which is still better than most hobbies, which not only don’t pay at all but instead cost quite a bit.  I’ve included two snapshots of the ping pong table in my basement, which I use as my main work spot and which contains most of the items I’m currently working on:

 

 

 

I’ve only added that to demonstrate that I too am a B&O advocate.  But I’m not simply looking around to where, as you say, I’ll spend a someday fortune – which would be put into far more precious things in life like savings, investments, college money for children, and other spending that would have far more of an impact on the well-being of a potential family.  A B&O sound system is a luxury, and I won't to be the type of customer who will listen to a dealer tell me how much I should be willing to pay for such luxuries, and that I’ll understand why they’re worth it when I’m older.

If some day I no longer have the desire to open electronics and fiddle with what’s inside, to tinker and adjust for no other reason than to see what happens, to build and rebuild, then I would hardly have considered myself to have matured, and I am afraid to imagine myself encouraging younger people who still enjoy the same interests to put them aside and seek a means in which they can thoughtlessly press one button and be done with it all.   If Peter Bang and Sven Olufsen were alive today, I believe the last thing they would tell a customer is that B&O has reached the optimum design.  To believe that a design is optimum is to kill the source of innovation.