in Search
Untitled Page

ARCHIVED FORUM -- April 2007 to March 2012
READ ONLY FORUM

This is the first Archived Forum which was active between 17th April 2007 and 1st March February 2012

 

Latest post 05-07-2008 2:51 PM by mobeyone. 86 replies.
Page 1 of 4 (87 items) 1 2 3 4 Next >
Sort Posts: Previous Next
  • 05-05-2008 5:21 PM

    • Kokomo
    • Top 100 Contributor
      Male
    • Joined on 08-21-2007
    • Spain
    • Posts 618
    • Bronze Member

    B&O TV Why?

    I've had and still have B&O products over the past 25 years and I still love them BUT!

    My TV has been a Beovision 32" for the past 5 years and until this week I thought it was good and have been dismissive of plasma and lcd sets however I recently stayed at my son's home where he has a new Pioneer 42" plasma and on returning home I must admit I'm now totally underwhelmed by my setup! Standard TV and HD pictures via Sky on the Pioneer are both superb and therefore I am now asking myself this question:-  Why on earth would I buy a larger screen from B&O, paying thousands of pounds more, when the Pioneer looks superb and produces great pictures? OK, the sound from the Pioneer is not great but he has a Jamo theatre system connected which produces excellent sound. The total is a fraction of the cost of a B&O setup.

    I love B&O but when I move to a larger flat screen TV I really cannot see me paying thousands more just for the B&O name. Is the convenience of total control of all my stuff via my Beo4 really worth it?   

    Please convince me otherwise! 

  • 05-05-2008 5:53 PM In reply to

    Re: B&O TV Why?

    Get a Beosystem 3 and a Panasonic screen - still integrate with your B&O equipment but get a bigger screen. I must confess to agreeing with you at the moment!
  • 05-05-2008 6:02 PM In reply to

    • Beolab1
    • Top 500 Contributor
      Male
    • Joined on 08-04-2007
    • Hong Kong
    • Posts 232
    • Gold Member

    Re: B&O TV Why?

    I agree that B&O is expensive with its flat screens. Yet I bought a Beovision 7-40 and haven't regretted it for a single minute. I have looked at other brands, but plastic is the main ingredient of many other companies. The B&O quality materials, the beautiful and programmable motorised stand, the electronic curtain, the movement of the dvd drawer, it keeps me amazed.

    I don't think that it's a lot beter in picture quality than other brands, but it most certainly is in sound quality. The Beolab 7-4 with 6 seperate Icepower units has such top quality sound. There is no tv on the market that can beat that. Keep in mind that a Beovision 7-40 is actually four components: lcd screen, dvd player, motorised stand and 6 amplifier loudspeaker.

    And another thing that I appreciate is that B&O is an small independent company that takes good care of the people who work there. Good salaries and benefits. Something that can not be said of all companies.

  • 05-05-2008 6:50 PM In reply to

    • 9 LEE
    • Top 10 Contributor
    • Joined on 02-14-2007
    • Moderator - UK
    • Posts 5,223
    • Founder

    Re: B&O TV Why?

    kokomo, you have a valid point and are asking the same question as thousands of people worldwide.

    I know people who are extremely wealthy and can afford whatever they choose to spend on an AV set-up, but still question wether B&O is good value any more.  In a lot of cases, the answer is no - and they are defecting to other brands.  The trouble is, they are not defecting to an inferior product - just inferior build quality and design, and the worrying thing is that they are happy to live with that.

    What i am saying is that if it's pure image quality you are looking for, you can have it at a fraction of B&O price - and if you want the same sound quality, in a lot of cases you can have it for a fraction of the price. Superior design and build quality can only count for so much, then you think "hang on - is it really worth paying five, seven or ten times as much just for the design?"

    I am positive it's only temporary, but B&O seems to have lost that "magic" that consumers are happy to pay for. The new CEO, with a marketing background, should be able to turn that around - and hopefully he will realise that prices need to be kept in check too.

    Lee 

     

    BeoWorld - Everything Bang & Olufsen

  • 05-05-2008 8:27 PM In reply to

    Re: B&O TV Why?

    I think it really depends. As a retailer, I'd rip my hair out with frustration if I took the position that everyone requires the total multi-disciplinary perfection of a Bang & Olufsen television system. The plain truth is that some people can live with Samsonite, some need at least Tumi, and some like Louis Vuitton or Goyard. The Pioneer is a great screen, and I can find very few faults with it as a monitor. I've always liked the ones I've seen.

    The Bang & Olufsen television system offers a slightly better basic panel, but the real advantage is in the processing of the BeoSystem 3. I think it's difficult to tell the difference standing in front of a panel for a few minutes on the shop floor, but after spending a little time with flesh tone correction, noise reduction, motion processing, the real-time picture controls, and the adaptive response to the brightness and color temperature of ambient light, I have come to expect more from a picture than a Pioneer can possibly deliver. 

    To me, the argument that you can get the same quality in a panel with poorer build quality and cheaper materials, is a contradiction in terms. By definition it is not the same quality! Peter's suggestion to pair a Panasonic monitor is not a bad one, but I think this "overvalues the savings." If you make the tremendous investment in the BeoSystem 3, the BeoLab 7, and possibly some other BeoLabs, you're frankly not in it to save money anyway! In a few years when you've long since recovered from that big credit card payment, do you really want to be left staring at some big Panasonic box on your wall? Of course you don't.

    There is scarcely anything in this world that some man cannot make a little worse and sell a little more cheaply. The person who buys on price alone is this man's lawful prey. - John Ruskin

  • 05-05-2008 9:47 PM In reply to

    • 355f
    • Top 100 Contributor
    • Joined on 04-19-2007
    • Posts 655
    • Bronze Member

    Re: B&O TV Why?

    TripEnglish:

    I think it really depends. As a retailer, I'd rip my hair out with frustration if I took the position that everyone requires the total multi-disciplinary perfection of a Bang & Olufsen television system. The plain truth is that some people can live with Samsonite, some need at least Tumi, and some like Louis Vuitton or Goyard. The Pioneer is a great screen, and I can find very few faults with it as a monitor. I've always liked the ones I've seen.

    The Bang & Olufsen television system offers a slightly better basic panel, but the real advantage is in the processing of the BeoSystem 3. I think it's difficult to tell the difference standing in front of a panel for a few minutes on the shop floor, but after spending a little time with flesh tone correction, noise reduction, motion processing, the real-time picture controls, and the adaptive response to the brightness and color temperature of ambient light, I have come to expect more from a picture than a Pioneer can possibly deliver. 

    To me, the argument that you can get the same quality in a panel with poorer build quality and cheaper materials, is a contradiction in terms. By definition it is not the same quality! Peter's suggestion to pair a Panasonic monitor is not a bad one, but I think this "overvalues the savings." If you make the tremendous investment in the BeoSystem 3, the BeoLab 7, and possibly some other BeoLabs, you're frankly not in it to save money anyway! In a few years when you've long since recovered from that big credit card payment, do you really want to be left staring at some big Panasonic box on your wall? Of course you don't.

    'the Bang & Olufsen television system offers a slighly better basic panel'-  on what basis, technical or otherwise has this assumption been made??

    I run the later BV4 with BS3 and a pioneer and im afraid I have not come to the conclusion that the BV4 offers more from a picture than a pioneer can possibly deliver and neither has anyone who has compared- incuding many in the industry! it comes close but the pioneer was £2100 and the BnO £11,400  If you want a panel that is superior in every way for processing buy a fujitsu.

    If you buy a panasonic screen you are 'left starring at some big panasonic box?? and the BV4 is??? a panasonic box with alum trim. Please tell me how it is technically superior to the panasonic screen- im very intersted to know - and then i can post some pictures of the 2 screens side by side with the casing removed!!

    So long after you have paid for it you think- am i a mug for spending 4 times the price for that!

    It is clear that the vast majority of purchasers no longer feel its worth the B&O premium for products that just offer better build and quality materials. It needs more than that to jusify the price which is now beyond reality and with technology moving so fast this huge investment - within 12 months will not offer a picture quality that can come close to newer technology

  • 05-05-2008 11:40 PM In reply to

    Re: B&O TV Why?

    355f,

    What can I say? If you have to rip the aluminum frame off of my television to conduct a comparison, haven't I already won?

    It seems that most people's arguments against any of our products are thinly veiled gripes that they're financially out of reach. Otherwise, what's the point in wallowing in how much you hate them? It's like striking out with a girl and then saying that she wasn't very attractive to begin with. We all have to protect our pride. 

    Take the aluminum frame behind the front-glass on the BeoVision 7. On the early models, the milling on the aluminum went longways with the piece of metal so that the sides of the frame showed vertical millwork and the top and bottom showed horizontal millwork. David Lewis' vision, however, was that the aluminum panel appear as though it was an entire sheet and not a frame, so Bang & Olufsen spent nearly 3 quarters of a million dollars to put a new machine on the shop floor that could mill the metal with the appropriate markings. Now the entire frame's millwork runs horizontally. Meanwhile, Sony was crapping out another plastic box with loose joints to cover in stickers. Excuse me if I find other brands' lack of attention to detail more of a curse than a blessing. 

    There is scarcely anything in this world that some man cannot make a little worse and sell a little more cheaply. The person who buys on price alone is this man's lawful prey. - John Ruskin

  • 05-06-2008 2:33 AM In reply to

    Re: B&O TV Why?

    the 'you can't afford it so you slag it off' line is just plain silly

    there's loads of people on this site and potential purchasers out there in the big bad world that could easily afford any tv from bno , but they nowdays do their homework , do a bit of research ( isn't the internet wonderful for that !? ) , even have a demo and  make up their own minds

    you don't make money just by throwing it away , ya know 

     ..

    the fact is is that bno tv's let bno down ,  the bv9 , bv4 and bv5 were baiscally 3rd party panels with a pretty box stuck on the front

    you could even open up the frame and see the panasonic label still inside - they didn't even take it off !!

     now that IS taking the piddle.. 

    popgear is grate™

  • 05-06-2008 3:08 AM In reply to

    • 355f
    • Top 100 Contributor
    • Joined on 04-19-2007
    • Posts 655
    • Bronze Member

    Re: B&O TV Why?

    TripEnglish:

    355f,

    What can I say? If you have to rip the aluminum frame off of my television to conduct a comparison, haven't I already won?

    It seems that most people's arguments against any of our products are thinly veiled gripes that they're financially out of reach. Otherwise, what's the point in wallowing in how much you hate them? It's like striking out with a girl and then saying that she wasn't very attractive to begin with. We all have to protect our pride. 

    Take the aluminum frame behind the front-glass on the BeoVision 7. On the early models, the milling on the aluminum went longways with the piece of metal so that the sides of the frame showed vertical millwork and the top and bottom showed horizontal millwork. David Lewis' vision, however, was that the aluminum panel appear as though it was an entire sheet and not a frame, so Bang & Olufsen spent nearly 3 quarters of a million dollars to put a new machine on the shop floor that could mill the metal with the appropriate markings. Now the entire frame's millwork runs horizontally. Meanwhile, Sony was crapping out another plastic box with loose joints to cover in stickers. Excuse me if I find other brands' lack of attention to detail more of a curse than a blessing. 

    well of course the view 'those that have agruments about our products- is because they are financially out of reach is just the kind of attitude that B&O and its dealers tend to have about anyone that puts forward an arugment that has merit. It is of course just the reason why BnO finds itself in its present position. My local dealer had the same view- he went bust last week and several other BnO outlets he owned!

    Keep up this mantra and you can go down with the ship!

    I appreciate Sony choose not to build things using aluminium but thats because they know exactly to what market they want the product to appeal to both in pricing and market segmentation-  Do Bang & Olufsen??

     

    It is not a question of wallowing in how much one hates something!  rather being realistic, informed and accurate as to what one posts on here

  • 05-06-2008 3:31 AM In reply to

    • ed7
    • Top 200 Contributor
    • Joined on 12-06-2007
    • uk
    • Posts 297
    • Bronze Member

    Re: B&O TV Why?

    B&O simply have no shame in charging their customers that amout of money to what tv offers!!!,my last experience with bv7-32 (crap picture) will not be repeated for a long time,i will stay well away from their tv products!!!,personally i will not pay more than 3k for that tv in a good day(new)!!No - thumbs down
  • 05-06-2008 3:38 AM In reply to

    Re: B&O TV Why?

    Out of interest,since it's introduction,how many "improved"panels has the the BV9 had?

    Pity someone who bought the first generation!

    Given the rapid advancement in flat panel technology,does it make sense to buy an ultra expensive TV for it's build quality when 12/24 months down the line it's PQ will probably no longer be competetive?

  • 05-06-2008 3:50 AM In reply to

    Re: B&O TV Why?

    not just that , the connection problems too

    ok , now we've got bs3 and it's amazing 4 hdmi's

    but before that - it was all scart ! 

    popgear is grate™

  • 05-06-2008 4:45 AM In reply to

    • Tom
    • Top 25 Contributor
      Male
    • Joined on 04-16-2007
    • Luxembourg
    • Posts 3,175
    • Bronze Member

    Re: B&O TV Why?

    I agree with kokomo, but I think there is something missing.

    Bang & Olufsen is a luxury brand, I guess that is known. Luis Vuitton is a luxury brand as well. Would anybody complain about a Luis Vuitton bag being overpriced, because you can get a bag for a fraction of the price you have to pay for LV? I guess not.

    Erm

    Music washes away from the soul the dust of everyday life. - Berthold Auerbach

  • 05-06-2008 5:03 AM In reply to

    Re: B&O TV Why?

    I find some of the gripes here hard to understand, and think Tom raises an important point. However, more and more consumers are taking a look at their traditional spending patterns and realizing that it's just silly to spend lots of money just to keep up with the Joneses in a status game, and this new awareness is cutting into the traditional luxury market.

    The only answer is to marry brand status with unequaled quality, and there LV are in a league of their own and blessed since their bags don't contain electronics. B&O works with the shape of the objects, the craftsmanship and materials -- that will work with some products, such as loudspeakers that have longevity, and is proving near disastrous with TVs, which today have a halflife of two months, judging by some comments.

    Last year's brilliant Kuro is this year's gray, washed out image, if one is to go by the comments afforded OLED.

    This is a problem for B&O, as pointed out above, in that they have tended to build products that were supposed to last, and last, and last. That equation does not compute any longer, now that techspeed is reaching Warp levels, and may force B&O to rethink their involvement with televisions entirely.
    Personally I'm of the opinion that people place too great a focus on the number and kind of connections -- often on the basis of ignorance about what connections can or can't do. HDMI in particular is almost laughably misunderstood and taken to be "the" quality connection, when it's nothing of the sort unless your entire chain (including the source) delivers accordingly. HDMI is a hardware locking system designed to prevent unauthorized playback of illegally acquired material, sugared with a false promise of exceptional image quality that it's proving hard to realize. But that's another matter.

    I'm of the opinion that the international A/V industry has done itself an enormous disfavour with the HD-Scam, and that consumers who are now waking up to the fact that there isn't much content for their full-HD screens, and won't be for a long time, have reason to be upset.

    BD sales are falling, not rising after HD-DVD dropped out. Why? Consumers have decided with their eyes, and are finding upscaled DVD most satisfactory; in addition, downloading and streaming of content is where you're supposed to be now. (Look at Apple's recent deal to offer movies on iTunes Store on the same day that they are released on DVD, a deal made with all the major studios).

    Which means you're not very likely to find many sources that will be able to feed a full-HD screen in the future.

    What B&O needs do is make content handily available for its customers, making the most possible use of the opportunities afforded by digital management of same -- and preferably in a package that will make me want the product with a fervour.
     

     

  • 05-06-2008 5:50 AM In reply to

    • Kokomo
    • Top 100 Contributor
      Male
    • Joined on 08-21-2007
    • Spain
    • Posts 618
    • Bronze Member

    Re: B&O TV Why?

    On the Luis Vuitton point, they are certainly in a league of their own when an estimated 75% + of products sold bearing the name are fakes! I don't think the comparison between them and B&O stacks up. LV products are sold almost exclusively for the name alone. With B&O I think yes, the name has impact amongst many people (although far far fewer than would recognise the LV brand) but B&O is household domestic product  which has to fulfill far more needs than mere brand name. The absence in the market of fake B&O TVs (I hope!) means that they are available only to people paying a premium price and it is at that point that the question of  VFM  comes in for many people.

     

  • 05-06-2008 6:05 AM In reply to

    Re: B&O TV Why?

    kokomo:

    On the Luis Vuitton point, they are certainly in a league of their own when an estimated 75% + of products sold bearing the name are fakes! I don't think the comparison between them and B&O stacks up. LV products are sold almost exclusively for the name alone. With B&O I think yes, the name has impact amongst many people (although far far fewer than would recognise the LV brand) but B&O is household domestic product  which has to fulfill far more needs than mere brand name. The absence in the market of fake B&O TVs (I hope!) means that they are available only to people paying a premium price and it is at that point that the question of  VFM  comes in for many people.

    Which is why people learn to distinguish fakes from originals - counting seams, evaluating materials, judging models. Same as us with fake A8s, I guess.

     When a brand finds its wares counterfeited that is usually a sign of brand value - but it's harder to copy B&O products, though some try.

    I don't quite understand your premium price argument, as one clearly pays premium for LV, even LV intended for B&O. True LV attains a quality of manufacture and bespoke skills that express the absolute best available in the higher price categories. Have you seen the bespoke audio-center standing steamer trunk with room for BL3s, a BeoCenter 3200 and CDs? Big Smile Unmatched and unparalleled quality, all around. And a pretty insane idea.

  • 05-06-2008 6:12 AM In reply to

    Re: B&O TV Why?

    Why B&O?

    Because it is a Luxury Brand.  Come on we need a better answer than this.

    This is my answer why I'm not going to buy B&O T.V., but I still love their audio system.

    11 years ago I bought my 1st B&O T.V (MX 7000) for NZD $4800 = EUR $2433.

    11 years later my MX7000 had passed away, so I was looking for a replacement.  Without hesitation, I went to my local B&O shop. The salesman told me for NZD $5500 = EUR $ 2787 you can buy a 23 inch LCD (Beocenter 6) or you can pay NZD $6800 = EUR $3446 for a 32 inch (Beovision 8).

    I was bit shocked at first but soon composed myself. After visited the B&O then I went to few other places and did more research.

    Finally I made my decision. I purchased a Sony 46 inch T.V. for NZD $3200 with 100% satisfaction. I felt sorry, because I betrayed B&O, but I just can’t see myself to spend NZD $5500 for a 23 inch LCD.  Plus compare with the 46 inch the 23 inch is just look like a calculator.

    10 years later, if your B&O T.V have some problems it will cost you a lot of money to fix it.

    Example: If you add the cost of the B&O T.V. and the repair charge. You maybe able to buy 3 x 46 inch LCD televisions with other brands that equal 138 inch Big Smile

  • 05-06-2008 6:45 AM In reply to

    • ed7
    • Top 200 Contributor
    • Joined on 12-06-2007
    • uk
    • Posts 297
    • Bronze Member

    Re: B&O TV Why?

    i got my bv7-32 in oct.2005,no hd  available for the tv from b&o at that time,connect 6k+ tv and guess what no digital tuner i had to connect it to a free view box(free view )was availble in uk in 90s!!!!,dvd does not play very well also cd copid from my pc hit &miss.however i had a very cheap dvd player guess what put b&o dvd to shame yes to shame!!!
  • 05-06-2008 6:55 AM In reply to

    Re: B&O TV Why?

    i do agree the whole freeview omission is symptomatic of bno's bizarre attitude 

    one minute they espouse the all in one concept

     the next they expect you to add everything on - nasty boxes hanging off the back with wires everywhere

    tbh the man reason i won't buy another bno tv is that their so called system integration is a load of old rubbish 

    i found that out when i tried plugging a 3rd party hd recorder into my avant and an unsupported sony freeview box

    now i've got 3 remotes for one tv - not very impressed i have to say !!!

    popgear is grate™

  • 05-06-2008 7:05 AM In reply to

    • beobeo
    • Top 75 Contributor
      Male
    • Joined on 04-16-2007
    • Spain
    • Posts 953
    • Founder

    Re: B&O TV Why?

    If you are happy with a Sony 46 inch that's great. You have not betrayed anybody. You found the product that suits your needs and that's fantastic.

    There's a number of people that think otherwise though. I think we are missing a point in this thread. A Beovision is not just a TV set, is an integration center for linked homes. If anybody just got a TV set in the living room, I definitely understand that swapping it out with a new B&O flat panel will be hard to do given the cost/benifit ratio for B&O's current TV lineup. However, if you have invested in a number of beolabs and linked rooms, then buying a B&O TV set is still the only way of keeping the integration advantage. Something many of us won't be willing to compromise.

    Another point: Sure if you open a BV9 you'll see Panasonic stickers all over the circuit board. Same goes for Pioneer as of 3Q of this year, which will be using the same panasonic panels.

    B&O is a luxury brand that offers design, materials and integration. One should not go for it unless is happy with the three of them, or extremely happy with one of those!

     

     

    Gustavo

  • 05-06-2008 7:09 AM In reply to

    Re: B&O TV Why?

    as long as you don't mind integrating bno's products that is

    problem is their products more often than not aren't really what i'd call either good value for money or even technically impressive and not terribly easy to use ( look at dvd-2 or the hdr models )

    3rd party products don't integrate too well with bno in my experience 

    popgear is grate™

  • 05-06-2008 7:24 AM In reply to

    • Puncher
    • Top 10 Contributor
      Male
    • Joined on 03-27-2007
    • Nr. Durham, NE England.
    • Posts 9,588
    • Founder

    Re: B&O TV Why?

    Not wishing to be dragged into the "value" discussion but as far as integration goes, a friend of mine has a full HD 50" panel, projector, PVR, Astra satellite system, 5.1 surround sound and DVD (don't think I've missed anything), all from different manufacturers. He can switch from any one  source to any other with a single button. Admittedly he can play the audio from his dvd player in the "smallest room" but then it's not something he wants to do (not often anyway)!

    The point being B&O's "integration" isn't required by many and even then a lot of what is required can be done with "normal" equipment.

    If I'm honest I think B&O's communication protocol is showing it's age and an entire rethink is probably needed.

    Generally speaking, you aren't learning much if your lips are moving.

  • 05-06-2008 8:43 AM In reply to

    Re: B&O TV Why?

    beobeo,

              your analysis may well be valid for existing owners,but surely any manufacturer must attract new buyers of it's products if it is to prosper/survive.

    I have raised before the question of why B & O does not devote part of it's attention to making it's products easier to integrate with third party products eg BS3 with a Pioneer Kuro TVs.

    How many potential buyers are being lost to B & O because of it's insistance on severely restricting integration possibilities?

  • 05-06-2008 8:51 AM In reply to

    Re: B&O TV Why?

    well, this has been an on again-off again hot topic that i don't think i ever commented on.
    but, there are some good points here.

    i bought a panasonic 42 for $949 usd.

    as someone mentioned... i could buy multiple off brand tv's (upgrading over time) and still not have spent as much for one b&o. the other point is the rapid advancement of this 
    corner of technology.

    anymore, i look at modern a/v electronics as kitchen appliances (e.g. a blender) they are disposable at these price points. so reg'ing the comment about people complaining because the b&o tv's are financially out of reach: i say: highly unlikely -we are not STUPID - just how much money is
    someone willing to dispose of every +/- 6 months as the tech advances... (would YOU rather spend the mentioned $949 usd or $9494 usd?)

    btw, i love my panasonic (i have 1 panasonic piece and ~75 b&o pieces -so i don't feel like i jumped ship in any way.) when the new ceo hopefully gets things back on track and the b&o tv's provide the same investment return as they did in the days of the mx, etc... well then i will reconsider. btw -i still use and enjoy my near 20 year old mx... suppose anyone will say that about their bv"x" 20 years from now???
    • B&o bottle opener
  • 05-06-2008 10:06 AM In reply to

    Re: B&O TV Why?

    This thread has certainly taken off! The last post about longevity is the important one - B&O are not good at dealing with rapidly moving technologies. Once stable, they source what can be recognised as the best and use that. Unfortunately, this is impossible in this flat screen market as screens are out of date the moment they leave the factory.

    The non fitting of Freeview is however a bit more contentious - pity all those with digital tuners that will need replacing as HD broadcasts come on line. With B&O, one simply replaces the cheap STB with another. Again, once stable, this technology will be fitted. Of course due to pressure, B&O have brought out the DVB-T and at large cost which will now be out of date. I would stick with STB and STB-C for the moment very happily.

Page 1 of 4 (87 items) 1 2 3 4 Next >