General Forum

Re: BL 8000's vs BL 5's

Daniel — Tue, 22 Mar 2011 09:22:46 GMT

valve1:

macjonny1:
Except the BL 8000s are much better looking. Of course that's an opinion...but BL5s belong on the set of Star Trek!
Another good reason to stick with the 8000s is you wont be getting a visit from the style police :)

or the neighbours!

Re: BL 8000's vs BL 5's

macjonny1 — Mon, 21 Mar 2011 22:51:00 GMT

chickenceo:

macjonny1,

What crossover frequency did you set for your amp? I am currently using 100hz for my BL8000 and BL2

Thanks

I believe in the options of my Onkyo I left it at the "THX" setting which is 80hz. Seems to work very well for music and movies.

Re: BL 8000's vs BL 5's

chickenceo — Mon, 21 Mar 2011 22:05:48 GMT

macjonny1,

What crossover frequency did you set for your amp? I am currently using 100hz for my BL8000 and BL2

Thanks

Re: BL 8000's vs BL 5's

Jon — Mon, 21 Mar 2011 17:42:30 GMT

Electrified:

Jon:

Electrified:

The 8000 is a"hybrid" design. It's not a true active.

Electrified, would you mind clarifying what exactly you mean in saying the BL8000 isn't a true active speaker? It uses an electronic line-level X-over, fed into a single, two-channel power amplifier - one channel for the tweeter, and one for the woofers. I assume this is your point of contention - the two-channel amp? While not ideal, that wouldn't disqualify it from being an active speaker. It still has a dedicated, direct connected channel of amplification for each drive unit/set of drive units.

No, an amplifier per unit is indeed what's needed to make a proper active design.

But an active design has more to do with crossovers and the amped units is a necessity following the choice of an active crossover, in that the crossover happens before the amplification at line level.

However, it didn't have each unit amplified as is common, it started out with having two of the units (the bass) amplified by a single unit, utilising a passive crossover for that part.

This from another site (beocentral) - my bolding:

In the earlier models one of the woofers was connected to the bass amplifier output via a simple passive filter so that it functioned as a midrange driver. This made the early Beolab 8000 a 3-way design with an unusual “hybrid passive-active” construction

When it comes to active subs, I need to differentiate between a powered one and an active. Although both will have amplifiers connected (lol), it's the crossover that dictates whether it will be an active or a passive design.

[...]those after No. 10145230, dispensed with the expensive crossover components and had both woofers wired in parallel, making the new models only a 2-way design. At the same time the electronic crossover filter was redesigned to include “adaptive bass linearisation”, a system that gave a bass lift at low listening levels. This was of course “loudness” by another name, although the method of applying it involved a complex electronic circuit that was sensitive to signal level rather than the position of the volume control of the main system. Although these changes increased the showroom impact of the Beolab 8000 at the point of purchase they made it a blunter instrument and less satisfying for the serious listener.

More here:

http://beocentral.com/beolab8000speaker

Okay, I see what you mean. When you said the BL8000 "is" a hybrid, and "it's not" a true active design, it sounded like you were lumping in the most current iteration of the BL8000 (not the 8002) with that categorization as well.

That's interesting, and very odd I think, that B&O rolled the lows out of one of the drive units, instead of the highs out of the other. Sort of an inverted 2.5-way design. All the drawbacks of mid-band comb-filtering and lobing, without any of the advantages of extra radiating surface at low frequencies. Hmmm.

Electrified:

When it comes to active subs, I need to differentiate between a powered one and an active. Although both will have amplifiers connected (lol), it's the crossover that dictates whether it will be an active or a passive design.

Obviously - but that was immaterial to what I was asking. The part of your statement that I didn't understand was this:

Electrified:

If you want deep bass and connect a subwoofer to it, the sub will be making use of a passive crossover, whereas the rest of the speaker units employ active crossovers.

Why wouldn't you be able to use an active subwoofer with BL8000's? I don't get it...

Jon

Re: BL 8000's vs BL 5's

koning — Mon, 21 Mar 2011 15:21:47 GMT

I'm wondering if b&o will come with a new loudspeaker to fill the gap between the beolab 3 and beolab 9?

Re: BL 8000's vs BL 5's

valve1 — Mon, 21 Mar 2011 15:17:28 GMT

macjonny1:
Except the BL 8000s are much better looking. Of course that's an opinion...but BL5s belong on the set of Star Trek!

Another good reason to stick with the 8000s is you wont be getting a visit from the style police :)

Re: BL 8000's vs BL 5's

macjonny1 — Mon, 21 Mar 2011 14:41:59 GMT

Well do keep in mind I will gladly trade mine for BL9s or BL5s!!!

My bass/crossover is managed by my receiver and sent to my B&W subwoofer, so all is fine with Bass control.

Re: BL 8000's vs BL 5's

Electrified — Mon, 21 Mar 2011 14:33:17 GMT

macjonny1:
BL8000 can be wall-mounted FYI

LOL, just in case they aren't booming enough with uncontrollable bass

Re: BL 8000's vs BL 5's

macjonny1 — Mon, 21 Mar 2011 14:21:52 GMT

BL8000 can be wall-mounted FYI, and are 15cm wide vs 40cm wide. That's a big difference, esp. multiplied 2. I can imagine it quite easily.

Electrified:

You say you "need" slim speakers, but the BL9s doesn't take up much more space than the 8000s, and I can't imagine a room where you could fit 8000s and not fit 9s.

Re: BL 8000's vs BL 5's

Electrified — Mon, 21 Mar 2011 13:11:29 GMT

I don't know exactly when. There's a serial number somewhere in that link

Apparently, the 8002s are the ones with ICE amps, and they came to market in 2010 according to Beocentral.

Therefore it is a safe bet that the downgrade to two-way came long before the adaption of ICE amps, since the 8000s have been in production since 1992.

You say you "need" slim speakers, but the BL9s doesn't take up much more space than the 8000s, and I can't imagine a room where you could fit 8000s and not fit 9s.

Re: BL 8000's vs BL 5's

KMA — Mon, 21 Mar 2011 13:03:00 GMT

Electrified:

This from another site (beocentral) - my bolding:

In the earlier models one of the woofers was connected to the bass amplifier output via a simple passive filter so that it functioned as a midrange driver. This made the early Beolab 8000 a 3-way design with an unusual “hybrid passive-active” construction

When it comes to active subs, I need to differentiate between a powered one and an active. Although both will have amplifiers connected (lol), it's the crossover that dictates whether it will be an active or a passive design.

[...]those after No. 10145230, dispensed with the expensive crossover components and had both woofers wired in parallel, making the new models only a 2-way design. At the same time the electronic crossover filter was redesigned to include “adaptive bass linearisation”, a system that gave a bass lift at low listening levels. This was of course “loudness” by another name, although the method of applying it involved a complex electronic circuit that was sensitive to signal level rather than the position of the volume control of the main system. Although these changes increased the showroom impact of the Beolab 8000 at the point of purchase they made it a blunter instrument and less satisfying for the serious listener.

So in effect, in terms of audio performance, B&O have downgraded the Beolab 8000 (8002) since their release? Was the change to 2-way done at the same time when B&O switched the amps to Ice-Power? I used to own these speakers back in the '90s, and have now been considering them again, as I need slim speakers as fronts in my setup. I really liked the sound back in the day... but this information (new to me) got me hesitating about choosing them today.

Re: BL 8000's vs BL 5's

Electrified — Mon, 21 Mar 2011 12:51:46 GMT

Peter :

I do agree with you (I think!) I despise the inclusion of what is effectively an automatic loudness circuit in B&O speakers. I hate booming bass - I do understand that it makes the product more attractive in a showroom setting but I want a flat response and the ability to alter this to my taste.

It does seem a shame that B&O manage to initiate a standard which involves active amplication of their speakers and then hobble them to a certain extent. However I am sure they have worked out wjhat sells - so maybe it is not their fault - but ours!

I just think that at that time, they were finding their feet and wasn't quite confident with active design yet. Never underestimate incompetence, lol.

I cannot fault their BL9s or 5s at all (re audio quality and from a technical standpoint). They certainly have the tech down these days.

Re: BL 8000's vs BL 5's

Peter — Mon, 21 Mar 2011 12:42:58 GMT

I do agree with you (I think!) I despise the inclusion of what is effectively an automatic loudness circuit in B&O speakers. I hate booming bass - I do understand that it makes the product more attractive in a showroom setting but I want a flat response and the ability to alter this to my taste.

It does seem a shame that B&O manage to initiate a standard which involves active amplication of their speakers and then hobble them to a certain extent. However I am sure they have worked out wjhat sells - so maybe it is not their fault - but ours!

Re: BL 8000's vs BL 5's

Electrified — Mon, 21 Mar 2011 10:33:12 GMT

Peter :
One could argue that the present design is fully active as the feed to the woofers is the same whereas the original was a hybrid. One could also argue that the earlier design was actually preferable in some ways but as few people can actually tell the difference, we are maybe discussing angels on pins.

No we're not. The "fix" was to remove the passive crossover and completely nix the function of one of the units so it became more "booming" (i.e. less accurate) on the shop floor. As if passive crossovers weren't bad enough, let's "make up" for that by producing a booming speaker.

If those are angels on pins, I seriously can't see any reasons to even think about BL5s. Those things are crucial reasons to why the Beolab 5s are so good speakers.

For instance, whereas the BL5s attenuate the amplified signal, the BL8000s relies on attenuation of the "line level" signal. That alone makes it some bastardized hybrid design, reducing the signal/noise ratio at low levels.

[clarification: I mean that the signal for the 8000 is attenuated before everything, including the crossover, and the BL5s are attenuated after the crossover and after the preamplification, but before the power amps, if that makes sense]

Peter :
In any case, the Beolab 5 is so superior as to make this conversation irrelevant! I wish I could justify spending that amount of speakers as they really are superb. But as I listen to so little these days, I will stick with what I have!

It's not a moot point. He has the BL8000s and by explaining its design shortcomings comparitively one can also tell why it is a better speaker, why the BL5s are superior in every conceivable way instead of relying on feelings or looks (same thing, but you get the idea).

Edit:

Anyway, I don't know if he has some early ones or a later edition. With the information I have given and the things I've explained, it should be clear what's what, nothing less and nothing more. He can take what he wants from it, if anything. If not, it's no skin off my nose.

Re: BL 8000's vs BL 5's

Peter — Mon, 21 Mar 2011 10:25:37 GMT

One could argue that the present design is fully active as the feed to the woofers is the same whereas the original was a hybrid. One could also argue that the earlier design was actually preferable in some ways but as few people can actually tell the difference, we are maybe discussing angels on pins.

In any case, the Beolab 5 is so superior as to make this conversation irrelevant! I wish I could justify spending that amount of speakers as they really are superb. But as I listen to so little these days, I will stick with what I have!