Any comments on the relative picture quality of the Beovision 7 and 9? We are considering a replacement for our Avant.

There is absolutely no comparison between the BeoVision 7 and 9. The 9 wins from every conceivable viewpoint. You will never find a situation where the BeoVision 7 performs better, even with standard definition, regardless of screen size.

I prefer plasma to LCD as I think the colour is better and blacks are more black. The new D9 and D10 screens have been reported to be rather sensitive to burn in though - think logos on the screens - and this might make me a little wary. They have brought in a new feature which tries to wipe the screen using a bright white line that scrolls across the screen but I don't know how well that works.

I wish we had the old forum up so I could post Alex's comments about the BV7 when that came out. No greys for Alex! 

I suppose I would wait for the Full HD BV9 coming in the autumn anyway. I am not sure that full HD is that much of an advantage but would be a bit cheesed off if I had a £16500 TV without it! 

The BV9 uses 10bit colour whereas all the LCD screens use 8 bit I believe. That means many more colour shades - though not as many as a CRT!!

It can only be the BeoVision 9, there is no debate to be had. Go see it for yourself.

i think BV7 and BV9 are, although playing in very high leagues, playing in different leagues. BV7 is a good screen with superb sound (especially with BL7-1/2 when used as a stand alone unit) with all the faults an LCD screen has. BV9 sure is one of the best designed TVs ever made, with an extremly good plasma screen. I've never seen anything like the BV9 before. The only disadvantage is that you have to get a pair of speakers to really enjoy the sound, because the inbuilt speaker is only mono and needs front-speakers.

Thanks for the input.  If we replace the Avant, the new TV would be connected to Beolab 1s in front and 6000s in the rear.

 

 

Depends on what source you are watching. I do not doubt that the BV9 looks fantastic when the source if from full HD, however I recently saw one displaying freeview with it's bulit in tuner and the picture looked terrible. - low resolution on a big, high res screen looks s**t. Also the tuner they chose produces a picture that doesn't fill the screen so there is something wrong with the formatting of freeview. Until all tv is broadcast in HD quality it is not a worthwile investment and you won't enjoy viewing ordinary SD broadcasts. If you have loads of cash to spare and are subscribed to sky HD or if all your other sources are in ful HD already then maybe it's worth considering. I don't think this will exactly be one of the best selling tvs B&O have made. I hope that would be the avant - still the best quality tv out there imo.

I have had three sessions auditioning the BV7 v the BV9.

I have been disappointed with the BV7 both in picture,and sound,quality.

Auditioning both sets with Beolab 9 speakers,playing DVDs,sound quality with the 7 was markedly inferior to that from the 9.

With regard to the Freeview tuner in the BV9,my experience has been that the quality is excellent,and I certainly did not notice any inability to fill the screen.One wonders how good the Freeview reception is at the location where beodude demo'ed the BV9.

I am surprised to read that Panasonic D9,and10,panels are susceptible to screen burn,and image retention.

From other forums it would appear that Panasonic panels,especially the 42",suffer from other issues but are quite robust against either screen burn or image retention.

However,given that B & O's panels are made to their own specification,is it safe to assume that issues with Panasonic's mainstream panels are equally applicable to B & O?

Just for the record, worth pointing out that from a screen and picture/sound quality point of view BV9 is the same as BV4-50 + BS3.

Also I have not seen permanent screen burn on my BV4-50 d9 panel yet (4 months heavy use) , sometimes logos are retained for a while if the same channel has been on for several hours, but these disappear quite quickly.

Cheers

Peter

TerryM:

I have been disappointed with the BV7 both in picture,and sound,quality.

Auditioning both sets with Beolab 9 speakers,playing DVDs,sound quality with the 7 was markedly inferior to that from the 9.

I can't completely agree with this. A few issues:

1) You can't compare a BV9 + BL9 to a BL7-40 with 7.1 (or similar) speaker set up. There is no comparison. You don't even need a demo to realise that. You should compare a BV7-40, 7.4 speaker and BL9s to a BV9 + BL9 set up.

2) The BV9 is based around the latest technology from B&O. The 'old' BV7 is still based around the same chassis developed in 2004, albeit with new codecs and other additions. The forthcoming revised BV7 will ship with a new chassis that, it has been rumoured, will include a cut-down version of the BS3. If this is the case, the new BV7, with improved panel and BS3-based chassis will be more comparable to a current BV9.

3) You can't describe a current BV7 screen as 'disappointing'. Sure, it doesn't compare to a BV4 or BV9 screen, but it's definitely not disappointing. I've had no-one visit my apartment and claim my old 2004-model BV7 has a 'disappointing' screen. In fact, the opposite is the case - most comment that the screen quality, especially with HD, is fantastic.

If you were to make a true comparison, wait for the revised BV7 and then compare like for like. ie BV7, 7.4 + BL9 to BV9 + BL9.

moxxey:

TerryM:

I have been disappointed with the BV7 both in picture,and sound,quality.

Auditioning both sets with Beolab 9 speakers,playing DVDs,sound quality with the 7 was markedly inferior to that from the 9.

I can't completely agree with this. A few issues:

1) You can't compare a BV9 + BL9 to a BL7-40 with 7.1 (or similar) speaker set up. There is no comparison. You don't even need a demo to realise that. You should compare a BV7-40, 7.4 speaker and BL9s to a BV9 + BL9 set up.

I did in fact audition a BV7-40 + 7.4 + BL9 system against a BV9 + BL9.

The sound with the BV9 + BL9 system exhibited greater clarity,and was definitely superior at rendering subtle background sounds such as in the opening sequence to "Gladiator"

2) The BV9 is based around the latest technology from B&O. The 'old' BV7 is still based around the same chassis developed in 2004, albeit with new codecs and other additions. The forthcoming revised BV7 will ship with a new chassis that, it has been rumoured, will include a cut-down version of the BS3. If this is the case, the new BV7, with improved panel and BS3-based chassis will be more comparable to a current BV9.

I appreciate this,but one can only make a judgement on what is currently available.

3) You can't describe a current BV7 screen as 'disappointing'. Sure, it doesn't compare to a BV4 or BV9 screen, but it's definitely not disappointing. I've had no-one visit my apartment and claim my old 2004-model BV7 has a 'disappointing' screen. In fact, the opposite is the case - most comment that the screen quality, especially with HD, is fantastic.

I am primarily concerned with the reproduction of SD content.Whether,or not,the BV7 I saw was not set up correctly,I do not know,but we were all agreed that SD TV broadcasts were inferior on the BV7.

If you were to make a true comparison, wait for the revised BV7 and then compare like for like. ie BV7, 7.4 + BL9 to BV9 + BL9.

I must agree that the BeoVision 7-40 picture quality is dissapointing. I have kept trying to see if I can get myself to like the BV7-40, many times in many different dealers, but I just can't. It is a complete dissapointment. I am holding out to see if the revised model is any better in August. I hope it is, otherwise I am back to square one. I will not compromise and spend this kind of money on a television that does not match performance to price, its as simple as that.

Simon.