I am very interested in the opinions of the select group who frequent this forum. Which of the elite Hi-Fi receivers do we think sound the best?

The contenders would seem to be the following in my humble opinion:

Beolab/Beomaster 5000 - beautifully made and effortless sound - mine sounds a bit bright possibly (maybe needs Frede to have a go at it!)

Beomaster 4400 - of the ones I have, this is my favourite. Lots of power and very sweet sounding. Controls the bass very well which possibly the 5000 doesn't.

Beomaster 8000 - most powerful but I don't use it as much as the 4400. Possibly down to the speakers.

Outsiders could include the 70s BM2000 - I think this sounds wonderful and seems much more balanced than the 3000 which was supposedly as powerful. Also the 80s 6000 which seems very like the 4400.

Maybe I will have to have a test session - I'll have to get my 5000 system back from Bellac sometime! 

I cannot give an unbiased opinion as I haven't heard the 5000 or 8000, but my 4400 really does sound wonderful. I was very suprised when I first tried it. It is very good when it comes to bass. Bit low on the treble side maybe?

francoisvl:

I cannot give an unbiased opinion as I haven't heard the 5000 or 8000, but my 4400 really does sound wonderful. I was very suprised when I first tried it. It is very good when it comes to bass. Bit low on the treble side maybe?

Maybe my BeoMaster 4400 just needs a looking at, but I prefer my 6500! Still surprised me just how good it sounds though, it's more musical than my 6500... Haven't heard an 8000, but the 6000 was very impressive! A friend bought one over in France and bought it back to the UK (cost him €25!). Very easy to listen to, and pretty outstanding weight!

Alex:

Maybe my BeoMaster 4400 just needs a looking at, but I prefer my 6500! Still surprised me just how good it sounds though, it's more musical than my 6500... Haven't heard an 8000, but the 6000 was very impressive! A friend bought one over in France and bought it back to the UK (cost him €25!). Very easy to listen to, and pretty outstanding weight!

Always preferred my 4400 to the 7000 I had. Maybe because I use better speakers - the 7000 used either Pentas - so the power amplifier was not used - or some B&W ones which lacked bass and were poorly positioned.

I had no experience of any of these Peter until Lee, Ed and myself went to visit Frede.
I think you know what I am going to say next!
We were all blown away by the performance of the Beolab/master5000 and their associated speakers.
However, what I haven't mentioned before is the other speakers he demonstrated the same system with. They were slim panel type speakers but on stands and they didn't have conventional drivers in them! I think they were called electro-static or something like that. Non B&O but I can't recall their name. Perhaps Lee or Ed will come in with that.
All the time we were there, I kept thinking "I wish Peter and Martin could see this"
If you do nothing else in your life, Peter, you MUST  pay Frede a visit.

Andy T.

I have a 70s BM2000 and a BM6000 (quadrophonic).  Playing my Beogram CDX and listening through my old pair of Diesis Solitaire loudspeakers, I have to say that the BM2000 sounds the most dynamic and open.  t definitely sounds better than my Aunt's BM3000-2.

I always liked the 9500 but the power amplifier is a hybrid chip affair which does lack what could described as grunt! As with most amplifiers, sounds quite good till you directly compare it. The 7000 was the last of the old type design of amplifier though having had a chat to Tim, it is descended more from the earlier music centres than the elite range. Using the 9500 with Beolab speakers does seem a good idea!

The 6000 quad is an interesting machine but the amplifier in that seems to be inferior to that in the supposedly less powerful 3400. Its design is however superb - just a shame it didn't have a glass top like the later 1700.

lawrencejmcook:

I'd love to hear a BM8000.  If you're reading, Lee, how about a listening evening at your shop?  Everyone could bring their favourite piece of kit.

All my equipment is in Bellac I am afraid. Except for the bits I use!

I'm using a pair of Beovox 5700 which are quite large and are perfectly suited to the 4400 as it has a lot of power. Can really turn it up!

J0hnbarker's willing to bring his 8000 system, I'll bring my BM6000 quad (with remote commander!) and my Beogram CDX as a reference source.  I even have a pair of Beovox P45s - but sadly, just the one pair. Who can bring a Beogram 6000?  Anyone able to bring a Beocord 5000 type 47xx?

The BM3400 is one of the best. so you'd expect the closely related BM2000.

The BM4400 is a silghtly differant sound, and to me its just a matter of personal taste.

 The BM2200 is very nearly as good.

I have a 4400 and a Beocord 5000 T4715 (and it works! - thanks Tim!) Also have 4 Beovox S45s and some quad LPs though my Beogram 6000 is in Bellac. To be honest, my problem will be finding time!

'Best' receiver will always be difficult... partly depending on which inputs you are going to use most. My experience has been with the 6000 (stereo, sloping front), 5000, 5500 & 8000, driving Beovox Cx50 (hard to tell, frankly), Quad ESL63s & IMF Studios.

With the Quad & IMF 'speakers, which are revealing (& in the case of the electrostatics, a difficult load) the 6000 is good, but not the best. The 5000/5500 are very good, roughly as good as Quad 34/405/FM4, but the 8000 seems more 'effortless'.

If using the FM tuner, the 8000 & 5000/5500 are clearly better than the 6000.

I would suggest that if one wants the receiver on display, the 8000 is excellent in every respect, driving any type of 'speaker. But for the most impressive & versatile remote control, with timers & other facilities, the 5000/5500/6500 would be ideal, using the 'pre-out' before the power amplifier to drive monoloc power amplifiers (I use AVI) or a good stereo power amplifier (I have used Quad 405 & 707) to get the best from demanding 'speakers. Or use active 'speakers, of course!

Adam K.

Talking of monoblocs, I so hated the sound of the amp in my BC9500, I bought a pair of Beolab 200s to drive my Diesis Solitaire speakers.  They take a lot of warming up before the sound starts to mellow!

The 5000/5500/6500/7000 use the traditional B&O architecture. The 3500/4500 use a hybrid chip as did the 9500 and the rest of the audio range. The 150/200 was a separate design. Tim has written a good piece about it on Beocentral.

Thank you, Peter.  Very enlightening.

The Beomaster 2000 sounded very good. Change the midrangey X35 speakers to something else and it's a good sound to live with for 3 years. I did that with the whole system 2000. Yes the '80 es version.

The Beomaster 6000 does have power and clear ness. I use Beovox M150 speakers and those are the best pair that I have ever had. Very tight bass and very good details in the sound. Now if the BM and BG could work flawless for 3 years I would be happy.

I have just setup the BM6000 and the M150 speakers. Sounds good but I'm testing the BM as it got home from the repair shop not really finished.

 

 

jandyt:

We were all blown away by the performance of the Beolab/master5000 and their associated speakers.
However, what I haven't mentioned before is the other speakers he demonstrated the same system with. They were slim panel type speakers but on stands and they didn't have conventional drivers in them! I think they were called electro-static or something like that. Non B&O but I can't recall their name. Perhaps Lee or Ed will come in with that.

That would be these speakers: http://www.stereophile.com/floorloudspeakers/720/ 

Not far off mate! Frede confirmed that they were ESL 63 made by Quad. I presume they were from the same era as the Beolab/master5000.

Thanks for the link anyway.

Andy T.

jandyt:

Not far off mate! Frede confirmed that they were ESL 63 made by Quad. I presume they were from the same era as the Beolab/master5000.

Thanks for the link anyway.

Andy T.

Too fast off the gun there, Alex. The ESL 63s debuted in 1981. Great speakers if you're of the "more than enough bass for me" school. Though judging by comments here from people who want to add BL2s to BL5 setups I don't think they would be appreciated!

Placement and pointing is crucial with the ESLs, but the sound is fantastic. You can hear not just the width but also the depth of a soundstage, as well as vertical placement of sources, in ways that really lend enjoyment to the experience. Don't have such speakers myself, but have listened to QUADs. I swear I can hear a low bow on a cello and a higher bow on a violin in quartets, for instance.

http://www.stereophile.com//loudspeakerreviews/416/ 

The number is actually the year of design - though quite why the 63s took so long is anyone's guess! The originals are Quad 57s though they were actually designed before this!! So take the numbers with a pinch of salt.

They are stunning speakers - they are not the balanced excellence of the BL5 - they have all sorts of foibles and faults in an absolute way but they produce a sound that moves you when in the right set up and move you in a way no other speaker I have heard seems to do. Completely hopeless for a sitting room though! So I don't have any! Yet!