Vintage Products

Re: BM 3000-2 or 3500/4500?

Evan — Wed, 14 Dec 2011 13:36:56 GMT

Hi JS,

Follow Burantek's advice. The 4500 will be perfect for the Lab 3's. I have a pair of S45-2's with my 3000-2 and I wouldn't have it any other way.

Re: BM 3000-2 or 3500/4500?

burantek — Wed, 14 Dec 2011 09:23:13 GMT

js:
I need to drive a pair of Beolab 3

That makes all the difference in the world.

Personally, I would never compromise the wonderful warmth of the 3000 by using it simply as a source for active speakers.

Also, a BM4500 (or complete BS4500) wallmounted with a pair of BL3 would be visually outstanding.

Buy the BM4500, and a pair of single fret S45 for the 3000, problem solved!

Re: BM 3000-2 or 3500/4500?

js — Wed, 14 Dec 2011 05:02:08 GMT

Hi Evan, many thanks for your comments.

Evan:

I would buy both!

Well, I am thinking about that as well I have a fully restored 3000-2, but I wonder whether a 4500 would be better for my purpose. Actually I need to drive a pair of Beolab 3 and I have two options with the 3000-2:
- either take the pre-amp signal (a renowned fellow Beoworlder modified my 3000-2 to create a pre-amp out)
- or use attenuated speaker cables from Sounds Heavenly

Now I wonder whether I would get a more transparent sound with the Power Link sockets of a more recent 4500 instead?

Thanks again, js

Re: BM 3000-2 or 3500/4500?

Evan — Tue, 13 Dec 2011 21:42:31 GMT

Rich:
User Evan has both. Try sending him a PM. I'm surprised he hasn't chimed in.

I'm here, I'm here. I've been at the race shop all day long, just glanced over the forums now.

In outright sound quality, the 3000-2 would be my pick. Things like transparency are more dependant on the speaker in your system.

Like Rich suggests, the details of the system are really a deciding factor here. My 4500 is pushing a highly integrated multi-amp setup with almost 30 drivers - it is a very versatile machine. The 4500 can be used with a remote and has datalink for controlling sources as well.

If you are listening directly to the amplifier, the 3000-2 wins but the 4500 isn't far behind. In short, I would buy both!

Re: BM 3000-2 or 3500/4500?

Rich — Tue, 13 Dec 2011 21:04:10 GMT

User Evan has both. Try sending him a PM. I'm surprised he hasn't chimed in.

I have a question: do you just want a receiver, or are you looking for a full system eventually?

Re: BM 3000-2 or 3500/4500?

js — Tue, 13 Dec 2011 13:27:07 GMT

Thanks dmacri.

Does anyone have experience with the 1970's 3000-2 and 1990's 3500/4500 and can anyone tell which sounds best?

Thanks, js

Re: BM 3000-2 or 3500/4500?

dmacri — Mon, 12 Dec 2011 18:23:55 GMT

Ok, I probably can't answer your question, but I can offer a little insight. I have a Beocenter 3500, which is related to the Beomaster 3000 and it is a quality performer. I also have a Beomaster 5000, which I find very similar in sound quality, but has more convenience features - making it my preference. You will have to answer that same question, putting the weight on what you find most important. You probably can't go wrong with either one. Good luck.

Re: BM 3000-2 or 3500/4500?

js — Mon, 12 Dec 2011 03:45:26 GMT

I edited my original post to simplify my question. I hope it is clearer this way

Many thanks, js

1970's 3000-2 vs. 1990's 3500/4500

js — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 11:16:05 GMT

EDIT

I have the choice between two receivers for one of my setups:
- a fully restored Beomaster 3000-2; or
- a more recent Beomaster 3500/4500.

As I cannot compare side-by-side before deciding: in your experience, which one will sound best? Not in terms of power, but purely in terms of sound quality (definition, transparency)? The old star or the more recent entry model?

Thanks, js