I absolutely adore the design of this television. In my opinion, nothing compares. 

Hi from France.

In fact, Beovision 5 has been replaced in Europe by the Beovision 9, which is, in terms of aestetics, very close to its older brother... It looks at least as great, and has super enhanced features compared to it, i.e. the acoustic lens technology, and built-in Beomedia. For a price that is very close to the Beovision 5's, at its release.

Maybe you should re-consider the question!!!!!

Cheers, Laurent.

Hi, I don't particularly like the look of the BeoVision 9 and it is too big for me. I know it is an absolute cracker of a telly, but i'm simply after the good old fashioned B&O form of the BV5.

I too am very fond of the BV5, but I saw the BV9 in the flesh for the first time yesterday, and I must admit that it was even better than on the pictures I had seen. It takes the BV5 even further.

When they discontinue televisions faster than speakers, I think it has something to do with technology. The technology in TVs moves much faster than in speakers. B&O has the ALT unit, but besides that most speakers look the same technology wise as they did ages ago I think.

The BV9 betters the BV5 with a bigger screen, built in harddrive, better connections due to the BS3 and the ALT unit, so it fits perfectly with the BL3/5/9 speaker range.
I've also heard different people say that they didn't like the 50/50 split with the screen/speaker on the BV5.

But if you like the BV5 that much, this is only good news as it makes the used market of the BV5 even cheaper ;o)

I prefer the looks of the BV5 as well as I am less keen on the protruding ALT lens. The BV9 is however far better value for money and a much better set. The BV5 is however aesthetically superior. It fulfills it role as a blank canvas when switched off, the BV9 less so.

The rounded frame of the BV9 should have been kept sharp like on the BV5, and the lens should have been covered some how, because it is ugly IMHO.

philipsmz333:

The rounded frame of the BV9 should have been kept sharp like on the BV5, and the lens should have been covered some how, because it is ugly IMHO.

 Hi philpismz,

 I completely agree with this. When I first saw pictures of the BV9, I thought it looked ok, however when I saw it in the flesh for the first time I really didn't like the design at all. I found the rounded frame not in keeping with the B&O style in general and yes the lense is ugly it should have gone under the speakr cloth. The BV5 has a much more sleek and stylish look, whereas I the BV9 looks cheapened by the metallic sheen and roundness of the fram. The BV9 may have all the technical specs, but I think the design and size of it detract from this too much to consider buying one at the price it retails for. 

philipsmz333:

I absolutely adore the design of this television. In my opinion, nothing compares. 

Bang & Olufsen decided to replace it rather than keep it in the range. They keep speakers in the range for decades. I want to know their rationale for axing this product, because in my opinion it is one of the only televisions that they have designed which is as aesthetically timeless and beautiful. 

Next year, when i can afford to buy one, i suspect it is going to be difficult to find here in Australia, but will it be worth the trouble? Or will it end up breaking on me? From what i already know, it was B&O's first effort using plasma. Is there anyone who can advise on whether or not it is a worthy TV?

The BV5 got axed by the EU RoHS law combined with customer demand for larger flatscreens, leading to the BV9. (Reduction of Hazardous Substances)
I totally agree with your assessment of the 5 - beautiful.

http://www.alliedelec.com/RoHS/rohs_news_1005.asp