I have been reading alot of forums trying to find out about BANG & OLUFSEN because i wanted to get into there line of products.

And there seems to be alot of people bashing the sound quality,saying you are just paying for the looks and just want to impress non audio people. Some even going so far as saying people who buy in to there products are just rich snobs.

Dispite all of the negative comments ,i still bought a used Beomaster 5500 system for $350USD in perfect working condition.

Coming from vintage asian audio products i am no audio expert, but when i first hooked up the Beomaster to my cheep Polk audio bookself speakers and put on some classic rock,i was blown away with the difference in sound quality.

Its seem s like the Beogram 5500 just picked up every detail in the grooves and the bass was acurate and tight and  the highs was cystal clear I can even  seperate the instruments from one another.

Then when popped in a rap cd in to the CD 50 ,it sound almost like it was the  record player playing,so analogue.With out a doubt the best cd player i ever heard.

And the build quality is outstanding,  how everything just flows in perfect symmetry,the materials they use seems of high quality and nice to the touch,like the buttons.And the Remote is the coolest of all how i can be anywhere in the room and have total control with out even see the units.It also weights a ton for being so compact so i am guessing the inside is just as nice as the outside.

Best $350 i ever spent ,not only does it sound great it looks great.Best of both worlds it just begs to be touch and played,it is just a different feeling i get compared to the other vintage audio i have like Pioneers and Sansui .

Anyways just need to get some better speakers and i am set.

Just wondering what you all think of to why people bash the sound.

It is amazing why the attitude persists, and why (for example) there are Bose stores everywhere that do not have the same quality in kit, nor store furnishings, nor staff !

As for your typical outlet for asian hi-fi .... yuck!  Even the Sony brand stores do not compare to B&O.

The only thing locally that comes close to the advice one gets from B&O are the real hi-fi stores which mix and match components -- some here are still going string after 40 years 

So I think the staff in those stores are like hot rod enthusiasts or PC modders. They love the technical challenge of pushing the specification envelope. They probably convince themselves that there are sound differences.  There may even be discernible differences ... but that does not make for better music experiences.

And I think their customers are either of the same ilk, or they get confused or misled by the debate and then want other people to believe that they have bought wisely and cleverly

I have friends in both camps (B&O and purist hi-fi modders) ... and we all remain friends ... we simply agree to disagree

It is difficult for hifi purists to believe that the B&O approach can make life simple to live (let's not mention S/W upgrades), beautiful to observe, and wonderful to listen to.

PS I am glad you have fallen in love with the 5500 -- I still love that design.

edited as I think I leaned dangerously close to "denigrating" as Peter so gently reminded me

Most people knock B&O without hearing it. Because the name starts with a B , they associate it with Bose.

B&O do have a different attitude to many other makes - the products are designed with ease of use in mind as well as design. They are made to fit into a home rather than dictate. The sound quality is good - you can get similar sound for less money but you will lose the convenience of use and the design.

I think some of the Japanese companies produce excellent products - Sony and Panasonic spring to mind. You then have the smaller manufacturers including the British Hi-Fi makes. These can produce excellent products but also make some items that are shoddily made, use poor quality components and are nigh on impossible to set up properly. They are often made for those who like tweaking their products - again fine if that is what you want to do.

At the end of the day, you pay for what you want - I wouldn't criticise anyone in any of the other camps. Unfortunately there are always those who justify their choice by denigrating others.

Peter :

Unfortunately there are always those who justify their choice by denigrating others.

I think your last comment sums it up nicely Peter

Chris.

Peter :

You then have the smaller manufacturers including the British Hi-Fi makes. These can produce excellent products but also make some items that are shoddily made, use poor quality components and are nigh on impossible to set up properly. They are often made for those who like tweaking their products - again fine if that is what you want to do.

Just a thought to reinforce Peter's view.  

I spent some time from the late seventies to the early nineties buying and listening to some of the better British Hi Fi - Linn, SME, Quad, Sugden, Bowers & Wilkins and  Mordaunt-Short to name just a few.  All of these companies' products were at least the equal of B&O in build quality and the quality of components.  In terms of pure engineering design, some of those products were quite beautiful - the SME 3009 for example.

But what came with much of this kit, especially the more esoteric stuff like the Linn Sondek LP12, was a constant concern that the thing wasn't working properly.  The Linn was difficult to set up and to keep working at an optimum level, and even it was working well you were always worrying about it.  My Beogram 4000 that I had prior to the Linn just plugged-in and played.

So for the last 20 years I have ben happy with B&O.  Recently, I have been collecting older kit and it still manages to surprise me just how good some of it is.  For example, I've just bought for 4 GBP from my local tip a pair of restorable Rosewood Beovox S40s which I've just spent the morning listening to on the end of Peter's old Beolab 8000 system.  Despite the bass drivers having virtually no foam surround left at all, and with a 30 year old set of capacitors, they sound really good.  Not impressive in the way that some inaccurate speakers can, but clear, articulate, detailed and, yes, musical.  

My partner's son, who has just bought a very expensive pair of ATCs, could not believe the quality of a 2-way, 30 year old pair of speakers from what is often dismissed as a company who target professional footballers and the more dubious end of the banking profession as their principal market.

Cleve

For some hi-fi nerds -sorry: enthusiasts -it has almost become a religion to dislike B&O. Some of them has never heard a B&O system -some remember they have heard a system, visiting their uncle or grandfather back in the seventies. Some have briefly heard a B&O system in a store, and feel they can judge the sound by that -although they admit, that their own "high-end" equipment is installed and adapted to their own living-room (which look like a recording-studio). And they can spend hours discussing with their friends if these cables sound better than those, and blah, blah...

Some of those enthusiasts will never admit that BL5 is one of the best loudspeakers in the world. And even the fact that Audi, Aston Martin, Mercedes Benz and other premium brands use B&O sound systems in their cars, is not enough to convince them. No -it can't be true according to their view of the world.

But we know better...

This is a totally subjective, biased viewpoint.

I have recently had a fair bit of Arcam stuff coming into my workshop, and I was very happy to have an AVR350 on my table. The audio press has made a lot of positive noise about this one being one of the most naturally musical AV receivers made.

Well, after completing a relatively small repair, I hooked it up to a pair of my BeoVox S45's, and set it to Direct mode, which cuts all all the DSP circuitry, ie plain old unadulterated beautiful stereo.

A-B'ing it with my BeoMaster 3400, I was not impressed - it could not compare with the absolutely natural sound which I have grown to love over 30 years from the BM3400.

So no, no mod-squad AVR fundi can convince me that new is better.

Menahem

When I bought my BM1200 and BG1203 in the early 70's a number of work colleagues and personal friends immediately claimed that it was all over-priced and that their new Japanese systems were better specced etc. In those days there was a tendency to go by nothing more than the manufacturers claimed amp distortion figures (and ignore the potentially more distorting speakers and rest of the system.)

Nearly 40 years on, one friend now bemoans the fact that his Linn and Marantz tin box systems failed in succession (strangely enough both losing a channel.) My 1200 has had a recent overhaul (by Martin).... the system as a whole still has wonderful output that will stand comparison with most mid range priced systems. Few other systems come anywhere near it in the timeless appearance stakes!

(Even in these forums you can find views expressed that B&Os main customers are the rich middle-aged to elderly who don't know what they are spending their money on. One ageist commentator seems not to see that his own regular new B&O purchases undermine his case!)

Graham

Besides the fact that B&O is very good, as well in audio/videoquality as in design. 

Apart from this I think of B&O-owners as a sort of same breed as motorcyclists ("once you've got it, you never go back"). I have to say that I will never ever buy anything else but B&O. 

And a lot of people who say B&O is this or that are a bit jealous and can't buy it. If they could they would have just like us! 

It's the same thing that people say that BMW-drivers are arogant, always drive to fast and so forth (unfortunatly I'm a BMW-driver and can reassure you that i don't do any of the stated :) ). The emotions come more from jealousy then from a good argumentation (because there isn't any good one). 

A mystery.

My own take on this comes down to B&O taking for granted that people know their AV outperforms; combined with the strong "form over function" in their market communication. They've let themselves become an easy target for cheap shot attacks. The "Philips inside" claims, for instance - certainly: but look at the build quality of the B&O cd-players that used those innards, they're still around; and why did B&O use 100Hz Philips screens in their CRTs? Because those were the best available.

B&O communication hasn't stressed the audio and video quality enough. It has to be repeated, and repeated, and repeated - to sink in.

I could link to a dozen reviews and articles from audiophile critics who have been invited to Struer, and who had no idea that the place is an audio engineering paradise, unmatched by just about any other manufacturer. This one from Audioholics provides a revelation for the writer:
http://www.audioholics.com/news/on-location-articles/bang-olufsen-on-location

Here's how that reviewer sums up his detailed, seven-page report from his visit to Struer:

My mental attributions associated with the Bang & Olufsen name were not always flattering and rarely correct before this trip. I had not idea the history of the company and the research they put in behind their speakers. Talking with the Bang & Olufsen staff, I asked, "So, are your products more affordable here in Denmark than in the US?" "No" was the reply. B&O is under no illusions that their products are inexpensive. They know where they stand in the marketplace. But they also have a vision - a vision for a line of products that have a specific look about them and perform well. Bang & Olufsen products are not for everyone, and they know that. But I found it reassuring to know that it was not all smoke and mirrors. There is real technology inside those aluminum tubes. Real research goes into making them. And as long as that is the case, they've earned my respect.

Maybe it's the humility that is much treasured in the region where B&O is located - people don't bang their own drum there, they want others to discover that what they are doing is good.

Case in point - the launch of the BeoLab 5 speakers, which has to be characterized as a failure. These speakers are a revolution in sound reproduction technology, but they were launched into a vacuum, and weren't followed up with statement products that supported them.

Belatedly, seven years later, the audiophile world is discovering what acoustic lenses can do, but other manufacturers are also seeing that working with the room reflections is a cue to excellent sound reproduction, and they're putting serious effort into it. B&O could have owned the territory. (Instead, they've just about done what they could to avoid mentioning the purpose of acoustic lenses ...)

All of this to illustrate a basic point: if the market doesn't understand or get B&O sound quality, it isn't the fault of the market, but of the sender of the message.

There's an upside, though: it's fun to let people listen to one's B&O sound system, they're not expecting to hear what they get to hear.

And here's something funny I saw the other day, someone who would like to swap out these speakers for a pair of BeoLab 5s. That would be a good deal for him/her, and bad for the owner of the BL5s.

That ad is an insult to Beolab 5.

No B&O owners would want to swap out their BL5's for those ugly boxes. The BL5 looks and sounds better.

The owner have probably heard a pair of BL5's after he'd bought those B&W -and realised what a mistake he had made Too bad for him...

I think it's worth pointing out that if you want sound through those B&W speakers, you also need to purchase an amplifier. B&W recommend a set of quite expensive Classé monoblock amp's, with all the extras you require ...

They're not bad speakers, far from it, they're just not as good as BL5s - something you'll find out once you've tried the BL5s, without your judgment being clouded by the audiophile desire to be on one's knees tweaking and adjusting instead of listening.

The most ugly speakers I've ever seen. The zeppelin ipodspeaker from B&W although is one of the most beautifull in it's class, unfortunatly the price tells us that too....

I have to say that it didn't even cross my mind to compare them to the beolab 5. They're of a complete different order. B&O looks a lot more mature and has a better design. 

I noticed a pair of 802s in the paper last month. Basement finishing I think it was...

Anywhoo...

I read a comment somewhere on the internet where an owner of the 802s was saying how he humored a neighbor with a listen of a pair of BeoLab 5s. He said the bass wasn't tight and so forth, can't remember it all.

DozeRockChicago:

Just wondering what you all think of to why people bash the sound.

Because they're dumb.

Is there better? Sure!

B&O is a pricey, but quality product (on the whole). Their products click with some people, and don't with others.

I can think of several products which I would say sound better than an equivalent B&O product. I can also think of many, many more which sound worse. B&O's audio equipment is by far not the most expensive thing out there, and alot of times, it's as good as or better than the more expensive product. Factor in the build quality, Danish (mostly) labor, in-house production, and superior materials, and there you go...

Danes build the finest audio equipment, I think. Danish craftsmanship seems to be always a superior thing. And these companies, like Bang & Olufsen, usually strive for the most neutral, accurate sound quality possible for a given product and it's associated limitations. B&O just makes unique, attractive aesthetics important too.

"Products which I would say sound better" is probably the key phrase here. Each of us hears differently. What sounds more life-like or pleasing to one is not to the other...

Jon

Jon:

And these companies, like Bang & Olufsen, usually strive for the most neutral, accurate sound quality possible for a given product -

You raise an important point. Many want a heavy bass-boost and use playback that has very little to do with accurate reproduction. B&O has the live sound of acoustic instruments as their benchmark.

Which is why many musicians like what they hear from B&O ...

Coming very late to this discussion...  Hi-Fi World reviewed some older B&O products a few months ago; not the usual 'put-down' but quite positive!

Apart from some Beocom phones back in the days, Beolab 5s got me into B&O (I don't have them anymore because of a lack of space presently).

I got interested in them, because it's really hard to find "domesticated" active speakers (as opposed to "powered" speakers). I seriously can't listen to passive speakers without having a fit with all the distortion present right where you don't want it.

Add to that the nicety of well powered amps feeding the active crossover, and the metal disperser making it possible to not make do with just a single seat in the room where the stereo image is good.

When I had my BL5s I also had my AVI ADM9.1s for nearfield monitoring, and these days, this is what I use for critical and pleasurable listening at home.

Most people see good design and think one can't have both good design and good quality. It is possible, as is evident in their speakers in particular.

Often, I have found, the people most adamant that B&O sucks, are the same people recommending BOSE, NAIM, and/or passive speakers in general. The same people who will swear with their life at stake that they can tell the difference between a proper dimensioned £10/set speaker cable and one costing £3000/meter/channel.

It's these people, subscribing to the pseudo-science of cable manufacturers, passive speaker manufacturer's marketing speech, the people who like the sound of NAIM, not realising that the "NAIM sound" is special, but only because they voice their products, in effect distorting everything that goes through it. These people don't understand the principles with active speaker design and all that entails. They don't even understand electricity.
Now, I'm not saying that one should know anything about all that before choosing B&O, but it seems the people who dislike B&O the most could do with a little education.

A small mediocre 2-way active speaker (powered by big enough amps, say, 100W)  costing, say, £1000 will eradicate any passive speaker the same size no matter which one, and no matter if it's powered by  2000W amps, "biamped" - regardless of cost.

It is of course the crossover that makes the difference. If properly implemented, you have to be a real *** to screw it up, and the difference becomes even more evident if you go to 3-way speakers and compare an active design to a passive.

Sorry if this is too much off on a tangent, but naim  and bose ...

What really drives me up a wall is the arrogance that people have with Bose. From both sales persons and owners. They seem to think Bose is the answer to everything. "Oh, you have Yamaha + JBL? Well I have Bose..." La-Tee-Da! Hype!!

I own some bose stuff so I can say this.

evman140:

What really drives me up a wall is the arrogance that people have with Bose. From both sales persons and owners. They seem to think Bose is the answer to everything. "Oh, you have Yamaha + JBL? Well I have Bose..."

Hmm, that sounds like someone going "Oh, you have a Cannondale + Shimano XLR? Well, I have a bike from Tesco ....". They're ignorant, there's not much you can do about that sort of people.

Yes, call me arrogant, elitist, geeky, or whatever - chances are you're right

kimberley:

Coming very late to this discussion...  Hi-Fi World reviewed some older B&O products a few months ago; not the usual 'put-down' but quite positive!

It could be that there are some B&O fans at Hi-Fi World! A certain Mr T. Jarman writes for them as does one of our own - Mr Adam Smith. I am still waiting for the write up of the 8000 system - I think they are waiting until they all have one before extolling its virtues and putting the price up! I also await the 4400 article - I am happy to lend them a 4401!

Electrified:

A small mediocre 2-way active speaker (powered by big enough amps, say, 100W)  costing, say, £1000 will eradicate any passive speaker the same size no matter which one, and no matter if it's powered by  2000W amps, "biamped" - regardless of cost.

I definitely disagree on that.

Being that powered speakers are a "newish" and recent technology (generally speaking), I'll put my "newish" restored BeoVox S45's (see this thread http://forum.beoworld.org/forums/p/5584/40514.aspx ) opposite any modern powered speaker of the same size, and in very short order, your ears will tell you what's what.

I do it all the time with customers, and they are very disappointed when they discover that I can't order them a pair just like mine, because they've been out of production for over 30 years! But that always clinches the order for a restoration of their existing equipment! It really puts them out when they understand that modern digital junk can't hold a candle to a 35 year-old 40Watt system. 

And maybe that's why people can't say a good word about B&O. Because B&O essentially wrote the book about reliability. It's still being proven 60, 40, and 20 years later.

OK, OK, I love B&O, and my restorations are probably among the best in the world   .....  so there!

Maybe HiFi World should get a couple of my restored units in for their tests, and then we'll really see the sparks of jealousy fly among all the B&O haters! A 40 year-old system blowing away their brand-new 1000W digi-garbage.

Menahem

Well I actually sort of agree with both of you! I agree that S45-2s will give any small speaker a very good run for its money, but the S45-2 has a volume of 26 litres compared to 4 litres of the Beolab 4000. A similar sized speaker in the passive range would be the CX100!  And I know which I would choose!

On one side you have the audiophiles and on the other side, there are us, who like a product that is stylish, well designed, made with high quality material and easy to use. IMHO, B&O is integrated to my lifestyle, that will be close to twenty years that I am into "it".

Meantime I also recognize that there will be always something better in term of technical performance, but this is not my priority when purchasing a B&O product as my main concerns are Esthetism, design, ergonomy (ease of use), excellent craftmenship and top quality.

Cheers,