General Forum

Re: My problem with B&O

camshaft — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 11:33:28 GMT

Trip you do make some good points. When I mentioned the intuition for controlling products, that wasn't my own idea. I was referring to what I felt B&O tried to convey in their older catalogs.

As for the ping pong table, I myself have a ridiculously busy schedule now too, and only spend several hours a week at it. Fortunately though it's in our basement, which is used mainly for storage, which is why my parents don't mind. My girlfriend lives nearly 3 hours away, and she's actually bothered by it more than my parents. Although I'm glad to be able to say she loves the pentas

One point I don't really understand though - when you mentioned that with the logitech remote, all my mom can do is watch tv, what else would she want to be able to do? I mentioned that one function, but there are buttons for anything else she'd want to do with the tv also - watch a dvd, record a tv show, change channels, etc.

Re: My problem with B&O

jk1002 — Tue, 15 Apr 2008 16:42:13 GMT

If the above is a part of what the brand offers then they lost their plot when they introduced the BC2 MK1.

"Go Go" anyone. In fact, a new sales girl demo'ed it to me years back and we both thought the device was broken since I could not start a DVD using the aluminium keypad. Took me a long time to find out that you had to press Go twice to start.

That said, now it behaves as it should be and this is why I finally bought one.

Re: My problem with B&O

Russ — Tue, 15 Apr 2008 15:34:50 GMT

TripEnglish:
But here's where I'm still right. There is no virgin intuition when it comes to dealing with products. We work off a collection of cognitive models developed over a lifetime of expediting daily tasks. We do not actually see with fresh eyes when confronted with a new piece of equipment, but rather look for familiar cues and affordances to predict its operation.

Trip makes a great point here, one which even I passed over far too easily earlier in a set of remarks about UI vs. feature loading. There is no 'natural language' for user interface design. There are however a common set of presumptions based on 'follow-the-herd' tendencies which appear in every mass market. So for B&O to tell it's customers "No! You're thinking about it wrongly." is, once again, an expected side-effect of a focused vision.

As an example. Try this. Put a BeoSound 9000 on a floor stand with a pair of speakers attached. Fill a room with people who have never seen it, and observe. I, like Trip, and a few others here, have had that opportunity often for lo these many years. Any modern Westerner above the age of 10 will look at the device, and immediately begin to search for the control panel. Having found it they will, invariably proceed to frustrate themselves with their inability to make it change cd's. They may eventually hit upon the method of skipping songs until the sled is simply forced to move. Place an 8 years old in front of the machine, and allow him to watch it move...he will find the CD buttons along the side, because it is more intuitive, more natural. We have become accustomed to the confusing array of buttons, and now menus...we actively seek them out just so that we can get on with the business of figuring them out.

In short my point is this...the commonly derived solution is not necessarily the intuitive one.

Russ

Re: My problem with B&amlp;Oh

Flappo The Grate — Tue, 15 Apr 2008 12:13:27 GMT

yes , it does look a tad 'squashed'

Re: My problem with B&amlp;Oh

TripEnglish — Tue, 15 Apr 2008 12:07:06 GMT

Amen, Beo-Ap.

As for liking the BeoVision 9, it's the Kathy Bates of televisions. The specs are no better than the BeoVision 4 (which is being beaten with the same ugly stick as we speak) or the BeoVision 7 MkIII.

I think that I wouldn't be so hard on it if the BeoVision 5 had never existed. The 9 is an immense technological improvement over the 5, but making it puffier with stranger proportions was unneccesary. However, I agree that the black finish does it the most favors.

Re: My problem with B&O

beo-ap — Tue, 15 Apr 2008 11:48:24 GMT

Interesting conversation. My two cents here:

I have an Avant which by todays "standards" is yesterday's technology, yet I think it produces a fantastic picture and a vast array of connections. When was the Avant designed? In 1995 perhaps. This is At least four years prior to the first TIVO rolling off the assembly line and at least 12 years prior to AppleTV.

Yet, the Avant's software can be updated to control both. Can't say this about any other piece of electronic equipment at hope. Not even about my Windows 95 PC!

I have also purchased a Lintronic box which works flawlessly and extends the power of my entire system. I couldn't say that about any other piece of electronic equipment at home.

So while B&O is not perfect, and we should be willing to criticize the company when it is deficient, we should also acknowledge it's ability to integrate technologies (even with outside help) that were only a fantasy when the equipment was manufactured.

Re: My problem with B&O

Flappo The Grate — Tue, 15 Apr 2008 11:43:28 GMT

i rather like the bv9 - i should think in black it looks sublime

if it had twin digital tuners i'd get one asap ( maybe if you use sky hd that gets round that problem ? )

tech spec wise - it's most impressive !

even the price - which IS a bit steep - is acceptable considering it's got an amazing 4 x hdmi's etc , i can't think of any other tv ( sonys included ) that comes anywhere near that

can you have the speaker thing in the middle in black as well ?

Re: My problem with B&O

TripEnglish — Tue, 15 Apr 2008 11:22:25 GMT

Flappo.

It was only a matter of time.

I don't entirely disagree when it comes to interface design. The last striking interface, in my opinion, was the BeoCenter 9000 and its later iterations. Unlike the frustrating BeoCenter 2 interface, it worked brilliantly and didn't feel at all forced.

However, I think that the future of interface design with B&O (and beyond interface as well) is software. It's so much easier to navigate menus than to push buttons. As we'll see this year, the next audio system will have less buttons that you have fingers on one hand (Sorry Two-Fingers Pete) and is probably as striking an interface as we've ever done.

And to say that everything looks mundane in comparison to everything is a ridiculous brick toss. Only the BeoVision 9 deserves such derision.

Re: My problem with B&O

Flappo The Grate — Tue, 15 Apr 2008 10:43:34 GMT

i'd like to see a return to jensen's design ideas - operational flexibility hidden from the end user BUT available none the less than the current dumbing things down mentality

say what you like , but we'may have moved on dramatically technologically since the 70's , yet we still don't have proper two way remote operation or some of the brilliantly futuristic interfaces pioneered by bno in the 70's and 80's

the beosystem 8000 from the late 70's early 80's was imo the high point of av design , it still looks like something from a star trek set to this day

the current range - apart from the bl5 - looks positively mundane in comparison

Re: My problem with B&O

TripEnglish — Tue, 15 Apr 2008 10:14:19 GMT

I must say Camshaft, I'm enjoying this tremendously!

I can't put aside comparisons completely, because I used to have a "laboratory" much like this until I was in my mid twenties. I didn't build stereos, but I tinkered with electronic keyboards and synthesizers, either altering or repairing them. At that point in my life I expected to be a performing musician and had very little interest in anything but writing music or messing with the equipment. Less than 4 years after this, I had sold off every single one of my keyboards and have stopped performing entirely. I have a single grand piano at which I spend an hour or so a week if I'm lucky.

I look at your ping-pong table and think about all that time I had. No wife. No house. No career. If I had a ping-pong table like yours today you'd see divorce papers on it along with all the other dismantled goodies!

Point being that guys who like to tinker with things and guys who like Bang & Olufsen are often the same people, just at different points in their lives. I feel I have to address this because it seems to undergird your original points, that B&O is for people who aren't as serious about their equipment as they are about their decor.

For all of my railing against Denon, I know perfectly well how they work and could hook one up with no trouble at all. I could also, I imagine, exploit nearly every feature they've packed into the box, I just don't want to. I feel that most of my clientele (almost 8 years worth now) have been more like me in this regard, and less the goofball who wouldn't know is B&W from his BWM.

It's now important that I be able to listen to music while I load the dishwasher or out on the patio while I entertain friends. It's important that on movie night, I don't have more than a button or two in between me and Fay Grim, and it's also important that my wife and my visitors not be confounded by my equipment.

Now to your point about the $400 receiver and the $100 remote. What got my dander up a bit here was not my love of Bang & Olufsen and their hit or miss user interfaces, but my expensive (and currently unused) education in design. My background is in human factors psychology, which deals with how we interact with our environments and the products that populate them. Now you brought up the MCP 6500 as an example of a beautiful controller, but one that was not necessarily the most intuitive. I would first direct your attention to the BeoSound 3200, which makes the MCP 6500 look like an iPod! I would say that David Lewis, to a greater extent than Jacob Jensen, focused less on interface design, than general operational principals and sculptural integrity. Who knows, though. Things were simpler during Jacob's tenure, so we don't know what he would have done.

Anyway, while the 9000 may have the best layout I've ever seen on an audio system, (with buttons that are clearly labeled and intuitively grouped, you are absolutely right that not everyone could walk up to a Bang & Olufsen system and operate it.

But here's where I'm still right. There is no virgin intuition when it comes to dealing with products. We work off a collection of cognitive models developed over a lifetime of expediting daily tasks. We do not actually see with fresh eyes when confronted with a new piece of equipment, but rather look for familiar cues and affordances to predict its operation.

That being said (and hopefully without too much dissent on this point) I would argue that the MCP 6500 is still a superior controller to the third party solution with the "watch tv" button. The reason being is this: If I were charged with designing a product such as an AV receiver, I would be responsible for not only creating a product (assuming this was a one man show!) that performed the required functions, but was also operable by the end user. Now I would have to choose carefully what features I assigned to the device, because I know that difficulty of use grows in proportion to breadth of capability. If I assigned it 8 possible functions, but made only 6 easily accessible by the end user, my superior would rightly inquire as to the purpose of the two inaccessible features. What more could I do than shrug my shoulders?

While the "watch tv" button may allow your mother to "watch tv," it also prevents her from any other operation. By establishing such different thresholds of perception (a customized label on a single button versus a field of anonymous buttons requiring additional orientation), you've made one task artificially easy and the rest artificially difficult.

Undoubtedly there are ways to change source, control each source, change speaker orientation, tweak dsp, etc. But some of those tasks are only operable by a specialist.

I would argue that the MCP 6500 would be a better long term solution in that it may have a slightly steeper learning curve than a "watch tv" button, but with a bit of orientation can lead to a more comprehensive and satisfying operation a the system.

In summation, I'm happy to agree that Bang & Olufsen is not for everyone (in fact it's a point of pride) but to think that our customers are any less sophisticated than an Onkyo user or that our products are somehow incomplete because they don't function like the Onkyo is patently ridiculous. They are simply different and built expertly for a client with an entire different set of interests and requirements. After all, how could a lack 120hz refresh on a BeoVision 7 really be a crucial issue when neither myself nor my clients care about it?

Your turn.

Re: My problem with B&O

Mr10Percent — Tue, 15 Apr 2008 10:10:06 GMT

The point may have moved on, but I have to come to TripEnglish’s defence in that I see his point:-

"The way I like to think of it (in a rather male chauvinist way), is that all these regular sound systems like Denon, iPod etc.. are like young women. They’re great, sexy, nubile sweet little things that will be eager to do anything you ask of them.

As they get older, they become tedious and tiresome.

B&O on the other hand is different in that when they are 20 years older (or at least you are) and you don’t care about playing with every possible bell, whistle and “feature”, they still look stunningly good, still do all that you want and make a great companion for your old age.

Now that’s what B&O is all about!"

10%

Re: My problem with B&O

camshaft — Tue, 15 Apr 2008 09:56:35 GMT

Thanks for the comments everyone. I finished the post around 4 am in the morning, and came down today frightened of what I may have written while half asleep. Trip I was at first disappointed to read you first reply, thinking that there'd be no equivalent response

Re: My problem with B&O

TripEnglish — Tue, 15 Apr 2008 09:24:14 GMT

Indeed it was John. However, I am now working on my magnum opus of responses! Stay tuned.

Re: My problem with B&O

burantek — Tue, 15 Apr 2008 08:09:02 GMT

great post austin. we are a lot alike, but...

in college and not able to play beer pong?

Re: My problem with B&O

soundproof — Tue, 15 Apr 2008 08:03:55 GMT

Yes, and do note that there are four, possibly five ping pong paddles shown in the two photos. Which means someone's an optimist!