Coolskin:

I skipped reading all posts before this one.

 

i think that says it all , really

Justin:

The problem I have in putting the £7k of cash on the table for say a new BV7-40 is that I know that in 6 months its out of date..

This is something I hear over and over again on the Apple forums and simply cannot understand. Every electronic purchase is generally 'out of date' in 6 months. Buy a MacBook Pro, it will be updated in 6 months. Wait 6 months, it will be updated again. Buy a Sony TV, wait 6 months, see an update. Loop around.

B&O technology generally has a longer life span. For instance, I'm sure if someone bought a BV7-40 MKIII now, you probably won't see an update this year. Even a 100Hz update wouldn't worry me - it's not going to make much difference with HD as it's already outstanding. Also, B&O technology generally has a fairly decent trade-in value. Buy a BV7-40 MKIII now and perhaps consider trading it in in 3 years. Try doing that with a Pioneer Kuro.

As I've said so many times, my BV7-40 MKIII is outstanding with a true HD source, excellent with upscaled SD (on a HD channel), decent with most SD but average with fast-moving SD such as football. That's the only downside. However, that applies to LCD technology generally and I have friends with Samsung's and Sony's that are way worse than my B&O BV7-40 MKIII, with SD-based football.

Another option would be a second-hand 1-year old BV7-32. Superb (not oustanding) picture with HD and better than the BV7-40 MKIII with SD-based football (as the 1080p screen makes the pixelisation even worse). You could probably pick up a 1-year old BV7-32 for around £4800. Bear in mind that price includes the superb BL7.1.

Bingo:

Unless B&O lowers their prices, it is not worth buying a new B&O flatpanel television. They are extremely overpriced for what they offer and the technical value is short with the fast improvements in AV-technology.

Sorry, Bingo, I just had to fish this one up. So, what you are saying is that it's OK - for B&O - to make products which offer 'short technological value' so far as the price is lower? Let's be a bit more constructive/challenging, shouldn't we? I mean this reminds me of a standard seller v. buyer issue of which you will hear from many a sales rep in most of the companies: the customer would buy, if we just give him a discount. Needless to say, you will hear it no matter the price you ask them to sell a product at.

But one certainly can't disagree with the views that the customers will vote with there feet. The time will show.

Personally, i think it is, thats my opinion and there are quite a few consumers who do also. 

Im becoming a little confused at the comments on Beoworld.  It appears much of this relates to the price of Bang - Yet i have never known it to be cheap.

 The reality is that Bangvisions are very good televisions.  They do offer a great picture - one that other manufacturers with LCD are just starting to reach.  The sound is fantastic - they incorporate active speakers and offer differing placement and colour options. Something that other manufacturers just dont do.

The way in which the picture quality is reached is a combination of several differing aspects of technology - incorporating advanced algorythms to give the picture smooth motion, clear images with real depth (with a real contrast element - giveing an enhanced 3dimensional feel to the picture).  The colours are natural and balanced with minimal screen flashing from whites.  Also contrast screens and anti-reflective elements are incorporated to enhance the picture under all circumstances.  Bangvisions also use light sensors to ajust the picture in its entirety to give a natural and realisitc picture.

All of this comes at a price.  Just like buying a MB or BMW etc.  Of course there are others on the market that dont use aluminium in the design, or incorporate glass and have far more connection portals. There is plenty of choice on the market when it comes to televisions, some good, some great and some fantastic.  Sometimes we have to save a little harder for the things we really desire.

I dont have a late model Bangvision myself, but i wouldnt hesitate in buying one when i can afford it. But if it didnt suit my lifestyle then i wouldnt.  But i wouldnt get bitter about it being too expensive- maybe i just have to work a little harder and focus a little more...

Have a great day.

I too skipped most of the posts on this thread (as I do most Beovision threads) to add my opinion which is this----

When my Avant 32" dies, I will definately get .....................

 

 

........an Avant 32".

Andy T.

Jandyt:

I too skipped most of the posts on this thread (as I do most Beovision threads) to add my opinion which is this----

When my Avant 32" dies, I will definately get .....................

 

 

........an Avant 32".

Andy T.

Good lad - you know it makes sense

I am in full agreement with Moxxey's post. We bought the 7-40 Mark III around the same time and it is interesting to note how we both had teething problems at the beginning and complained strongly about certain footage we saw. Instinctively, we felt worried that we had perhaps made the wrong decision in those early days. However, and this is a very big and significant 'however,' we have now had time to settle down with our new televisions and having viewed a diverse range of broadcasts (including DVDs) started to fully appreciate the quality of this set.

It was a learning curve and an interesting one at that. It all comes down to the quality of broadcasts. Everything that Moxxey states in his post is accurate so there is little point in me repeating it although I would add that I personally feel a high quality HD broadcast picture easily out does that of the picture on an Avant, which I bought for my Mum earlier last year (the 32 RF DVD 100hz version.) This isn't really all that relevent but since comparisons have been mentioned in previous posts I include my own opinion based on my comparisons between the two. I have never bought or even seen a picture on a BV3 so I cannot comment about that.

I adore my new television and feel completely satisfied now with my purchase. This is what always amazes me about B&O; their equipment always grows on me when I often dismiss it so early on. Clearly this says a lot about the thought and design that goes into their products. As for the 7-2 speaker, I love it. Its a fantastic design that compliments the television and creates a very nice looking overall 'package.' Of course the output quality is incredible and I recently mentioned to my dealer that I was amazed at how it seemed to play perfect 5.1 surround sound with a particular movie I watched. I found this hard to believe since it is the only speaker I use in my set up. During initiaI consulations I was advised not to go for a full surround set up due to the acoustics of the flat, which is in a 1800s Methodist Chapel so straight edges, walls, ceilings and symmetry in general is all over the place, albeit part of the appeal even if not best suited for surround sound.

When I was looking at televisions it was always going to be B&O for me and it always will be. I am loyal to the brand that I have come to love and appreciate over the years but its more than that, I truly love their products too. Other manufactured sets do nothing for me at all, not even a little bit, because it is the design concept I buy into (and want) more than it is picture or sound quality. When I was ready to make my purchase it came down to the BV7-40 or the BV5 and design wise my preference was always for the BV5. I would still say this now as I think the BV5 looks a lot better as a corner TV on a stand (which is the placement option for me) than the BV7 does; it also would compliment my artwork and furnishings a little better although at the end of the day there isn't a lot in it and I am edging on being a perfectionist. Besides which, whenever I was in my dealer I often chatted to customers and asked them which set they prefered between the two from a design viewpoint. Interestingly, the BV7-40 was by far the more popular of the two. It was also interesting to note that women prefered the 7-40. I couldn't find one who liked the BV5. Strange, but true. I finally chose the BV7-40 because it was much more future proof and I knew I would get a far better trade in later on if I wanted to change, and I will, to a BV9 or whatever it is available several years from now and if I consider it to be an affordable and worthwhile purchase at the time.

So there you have it. These are the facts about this television. You need to see it with a high quality HD signal and then make a decision whether it is the television to buy, or not as the case may be. It is a fantastic set, no question about that at all. If you are going to watch only SD then do not buy this television. That is a no brainer. If you are going watch digital then do. If you are going to watch HD digital then definitly do. As Moxxey has also stated in previous posts, BluRay is simply stunning.

Arguments for changing technologies are neither valid nor important considerations for me anymore. All technology outdates extremely quickly. There is no way to stay current and B&Os attempt to future proof products as best they can is second to none. This set does justify its asking price, which is something I was not saying originally.

I really love my TV.

Off topic, but I also want to say how much I have come to love using the Beo5. This is a really great remote and I would not go back to a Beo4 now. I am used to this and love the design. I now operate it with one hand, quickly, easily and without needing to look at it, including the text labels on the screen as well as the buttons. Again, I am beginning to realise that B&O really have spent time on the design to achieve this useability. We criticise B&O for many things, myself included, but I think they are still well ahead of their game and of the competition. You get a lot when you buy into B&O and its easy to take it all for granted. Nobody else does what they do as well as they do it. They are true innovators in their field. Years of research, development and experience is more than evident.

Simon.

Coolskin:

Bingo:

I believe every word you say, Coolskin, but would you buy it again, the same size for the same price now?

Some may say that I'm crazy...

YES I would buy it without hesitation. 

 

Ofcourse not!!. If it offers enough value for you, then it is OK :-)

I've been a pretty aggressive supporter of Bang & Olufsen's video portfolio as of late, but I have to say that there are some more sensible points of view on this thread than the brick throwing of threads past. 

That being said, I'd still buy one, but I'd also understand someone who wouldn't.

In one sense the "spec junky" argument is a bit oversimplified. Though I'm not one myself, I can't really call anyone who cares about the maths a "spec junky" because these days the technology is moving so rapidly it will make your head spin! Plainly, if you look at the past 6-7 years of B&O's flat panel video side, they've come as far as almost anyone, but the issue remains that B&O and everyone else have miles left to go. It's not what Pioneer or Sharp or anyone else are doing here today that worry me, but what we'll all be doing in 5 years time. About then we'll start seeing OLEDs coming on line in sizes suitable for actual television viewing. What will happen then? To me it's not the piddling advances of right now, but how long we have to go before we've exploited this HD technology enough to live with it a while (which, knowing technology, may not happen as it has in the past).

That brings me to why I would absolutely buy a B&O television. Because we may never catch a break like we did in the decades where audio and video moved by centimeters and you could really make a wise long term investment in technology. I think that the idea of investing in longlasting technology is more or less gone, so I have to look past the circuitry and capability and think, "So self, when this big glass rectangle is hopelessly obsolete and can't connect HDMI 14.5, will I still like it?" I think that, though there are no guarantees, B&O has shown a consistent track record of building TVs that are coveted long after they're technologically irrelevant. It's like marrying a woman who has more than looks because you know you'll be together when she's not turning heads the way she used to. Now, if you don't mind buying a new set every 3-5 years to stay current, that's fine, but they're still not cheap, so the idea of getting your money's worth out of a BeoVision 7 (my personal favorite) seems more likely than a string of Pioneers and Sonys. And let's not forget that B&O takes excellent care to allow you to retire your AV gear to other rooms and still keep it on the network so as to get more than a single generation's use out of it.

I hope that makes sense. I know we're talking big bucks, but then again it's all expensive for "what it is."     

Dude1:

Personally, i think it is, thats my opinion and there are quite a few consumers who do also. 

Im becoming a little confused at the comments on Beoworld.  It appears much of this relates to the price of Bang - Yet i have never known it to be cheap.

 The reality is that Bangvisions are very good televisions.  They do offer a great picture - one that other manufacturers with LCD are just starting to reach.  The sound is fantastic - they incorporate active speakers and offer differing placement and colour options. Something that other manufacturers just dont do.

The way in which the picture quality is reached is a combination of several differing aspects of technology - incorporating advanced algorythms to give the picture smooth motion, clear images with real depth (with a real contrast element - giveing an enhanced 3dimensional feel to the picture).  The colours are natural and balanced with minimal screen flashing from whites.  Also contrast screens and anti-reflective elements are incorporated to enhance the picture under all circumstances.  Bangvisions also use light sensors to ajust the picture in its entirety to give a natural and realisitc picture.

All of this comes at a price.  Just like buying a MB or BMW etc.  Of course there are others on the market that dont use aluminium in the design, or incorporate glass and have far more connection portals. There is plenty of choice on the market when it comes to televisions, some good, some great and some fantastic.  Sometimes we have to save a little harder for the things we really desire.

I dont have a late model Bangvision myself, but i wouldnt hesitate in buying one when i can afford it. But if it didnt suit my lifestyle then i wouldnt.  But i wouldnt get bitter about it being too expensive- maybe i just have to work a little harder and focus a little more...

Have a great day.

 

What I find most interesting, and I find it quite widespread on this site- is that the individuals who support the latest products and BnO as a company the most- dont actually own the latest stuff!- they have avants, bs9000 ect- in the days when BnO was in its better days.

I doubt they would be so supotive if they had bought the later gear!

if i was going to buy a new tv - it might be a bv7 40

but unfortunately i'd have to use it with all my sony pvr gear as the bno alternative is overpriced and technically inept 

not having a built in dvb option is inexcusable in this day and age - analogue simply sin't worth recording

the whole thing would look an unsightly mess - a lot like my avant and the two freeview boxes that are attached to it looks now :( 

 that's what annoys me about bno - their implementation of 3rd party products and their total lack of giving me a viable bno alternative

However, the Beovision 3 did go some way by accident or design to incorporate a cabinet in which you could hide VHSs and DVD players. What I have never understood is why the Beovision 3 did not have freeview in-built for the UK market.

 

It is not just B&O that make it awkward to integrate other components. In the mid 90s my friend's brother had a fairly high end Pioneer stack system - I don't know the model number. However, the CD drive had a four disc casette that you took out, filled with CDs and slotted back in. This system was connected up with IDEesque cables and the only composite connectors available were for the LD (aux option).

Helpful!

355f:

I doubt they would be so supotive if they had bought the later gear!

I don't care much for Sony, Apple, B&O or similar. They are corporations who are out to make a profit for their shareholders. I buy my products for functionality, design, support and ability to interact, wherever I source the hardware.

I think the people with the older equipment who are 'supportive' also live in a bygone area where things were less competitive, less consumer orientated and where they could keep their goods for years without worrying or thinking about having to upgrade.

Some really thought provoking threads here.

To clarify my point about the cost of B&O - for me I do not have a problem in spending £7k on a B&O TV - I already have spent not far off that when I bought my BV3 with all the bells and whistles.

I also don't have a problem with B&O pricing their BV7 at the same level - as long as I'm getting something for what I guess is called the "B&O premium".

Now when I bought my BV3 and compared it to every other TV on the market - I believed it was the best. Just by looking at the product, the TV picture, the sound quality, the motorised stand - it had (and still does have IMHO) a wow factor.

Now the change to flat panels creates a problem for B&O. First of all, people require it to be flat. That so far seems to have constrained the design team to produce TVs that are not dissimilar to other LCDs in the market. Hence I believe this effects the ability for ME (not B&O) to get my wallet out and hand over £7k as I'm not sure the TV merits the B&O premium anymore - its differential from Sony or a Panasonic is less pronounced. Please note the distinction between me and B&O - B&O can charge what they like, and as people say, the Wayne Rooneys will still buy them. But wait - I am able to hand over £7k, but not necessarily willing (in truth I'm not sure and may well be soon but this is not my argument!) so B&O are potentially losing a £7k sale. OK its not from Wayne Rooney, but I'm sure a B&O dealer would be happy for anyone to walk in their store and hand over £7k.

Re the issue of technology movement, first of all, my background in AV was originally as a Linn collector - I had a full Linn setup with pre/powers/CD/DAC. I changed as I got fed up of the boxes, after seeing a red BV3 in a dealer window, sold the lot, and bought BV3, BL8k/6k/BS3k.

Now I know the sound quality was not quite up to that of Linn - but I didn't care - I loved the convenience, lack of ugly boxes and beautiful products. And actually I believe B&O is higher up in the sound quality stakes than it was when I first entered - I think the BL9s are stunning, and feel the product I'd jump at (that may never arrive now) would have been a Beosound 5. The BS3000 looks great, but sound quality is not the detail of my Linn source.

My issue is that the BV7 is also not necessarily as good as the latest lasar TV or 8000p screen that Panny have just announced, but unlike the BS3000, it doesn't have other features still make me love it and through ££££s to my dealer. 

Where am I going with this, and I guess my thread. I guess its really where are B&O going. Do they know how to keep delivering goods that people like me will pay a premium for. As we move to people wanting flat panels and compressed music on an ipod will B&O still have a niche (other than with Wayne and the WAGs).

Justin
 

To me, B&O has represented functional sculptures. Their products were works of art that also performed within a/v.

Through the years I've bought quite a number of their artistic expressions. I'm sitting in my office looking at a Beosystem 6500 and a BeoVIsion 8 on a floor stand. They look as if they were made for one another -- and I wasn't in a second's doubt when I saw a BV8, I was going to own one of those.

I feel the BV7 has a similar expressive touch. What I do appreciate is the craftsmanship and daring shapes that B&O give their products. I have BL3 and BL5 speakers, as well as BL4000. I love the remotes (maybe with the exception of the Beo5, and Beo1 is a fun joke.)

Here's B&O's challenge, as I see it: when I was looking for a large flatscreen, I just couldn't go for the BV4. It's similar to other flatscreens out there (yes, metal, etc.), but still similar. It wasn't a functional sculpture -- and I went for another flatscreen, which wasn't as clearly evident of craftsmanship, but which was functionally superior.

B&O can compensate for not being on the cutting edge of technology through "I've got to have that sculptural design" - but they can't build me-too products that are functionally inferior and expect people to keep paying through the nose for them. Just not feasible.

The company really has to revisit its strengths - not just audio as expressed through its acoustic lens speakers, but also its ability to find shapes we can't be without.

I don't really care about HDMI, Full-HD and all that nonsense. (Nonsense, because we rarely have signals that require the new formats; and because these new formats have often been created to force us to bin perfectly good components for the wrong reasons.)

I do want my premium a/v components to be expressive of a desire to challenge the ordinary through quirky but functional and surprising audio visual solutions -- and B&O needs to sit down and think about that, again.
And they should accept that some of their products are a lot better than the others, and play to their strengths.


 

it doesn't help when bno tv's are basically rebadged panasonics and samsungs

with ic's as cheap as they are now - i'm sure for £50 you could get all the super duper algorithm watchamacallit a/v twaddle on one easily obtained oem chip

once upon a time bno were expensive but in many ways cutting edge

now they're just expensive 

Flappo

You are undermining your own argument by not engaging with what everyone is saying.

B&O  didn't  made their own tubes in CRT days, and they have always cost a lot more than the competition. So the current situation doesn't change anything in that respect.

I currently have a soft-spot for CRT that means I won't be going to flat panel for a while but when I do the reason for not going B&O would principally be that I don't have that kind of money. There is no doubt that the external design of B&O TV's are way ahead of a generic flat panel and there will always be people willing to pay a premium for that, rather than choosing an anyonymous box that any number of people have in their living rooms. People can make different choices from the ones you make without being wrong.

 

Simon

 

wirralsimon:

Flappo

You are undermining your own argument by not engaging with what everyone is saying.

B&O  didn't  made their own tubes in CRT days, and they have always cost a lot more than the competition. So the current situation doesn't change anything in that respect.

I currently have a soft-spot for CRT that means I won't be going to flat panel for a while but when I do the reason for not going B&O would principally be that I don't have that kind of money. There is no doubt that the external design of B&O TV's are way ahead of a generic flat panel and there will always be people willing to pay a premium for that, rather than choosing an anyonymous box that any number of people have in their living rooms. People can make different choices from the ones you make without being wrong.

 

Simon

 

Hang on Simon,

You might want to engage with what Flappo is saying! And you might be undermining your own argument by not doing so. When B&O made CRT TVs they used the best tubes and pushed up to date connectivity options, and many felt that the high price was justified because they were getting the best performing and looking set on the market. I think the point Flappo is making is that today B&O are not using the best panels and not pushing the most up to date connectivity, so whilst you might be getting a great looking set, it is not necesarily the best performing, therefore some might question whether the high price is justified.

I've no axe to grind here. I just bought a 100HZ RF 28in Avant, and that was an upgrade for me from a Sony. Like Andy mentioned in another post - if my Avant were to blow up, I'd replace it.....with another Avant!

Flappo, I have to agree with Simon here...you are undermining your credibility, if not your argument by making statements like 'basicall rebadged" and "I'm sure for 50 quid" (and OK, I can't find the correct6 currency symbol on my US keyboard.) 

 Since there are only a handful of companies capable of manufacturing the raw panels, everybody is selling rebadged panels, even Sony, and especially Pioneer...heck at one time Fujitsu (who invented Plasma displays) was selling 50" panasonic panels.  Imagine...so my point is that part of the expense inherent in B&O telvisions is in fact their constant demand of 'first choice raw panels from their suppliers, for which choice they pay a premium, and the supporting electronics, and in some cases the additional manufacturing steps and processes.

 The '50 quid' remark is similar to the fallacious arguement leveled at pharmaceutical companies that the 'pills only cost 12 pence to make'.  The isuue is that while the 2nd pill only cost 12 pence the first pill cost 45million Pounds Sterling.  Similarly the 'super duper algorithim whatchamacallit av twaddle' as you so blithely refer to it, cost years of time and money to research and develop.  We put the lie to your argument by simply asking 'If it is so cheap, and easy Flappo, why are Sony and Samsung not doing all of the same things in their sets?'  The simple answer is that it isn't cheap or simple, and the costs would inevitably rise.

 

Russ

The Beonic Man:

I am in full agreement with Moxxey's post. We bought the 7-40 Mark III around the same time and it is interesting to note how we both had teething problems at the beginning and complained strongly about certain footage we saw. Instinctively, we felt worried that we had perhaps made the wrong decision in those early days. However, and this is a very big and significant 'however,' we have now had time to settle down with our new televisions and having viewed a diverse range of broadcasts (including DVDs) started to fully appreciate the quality of this set.

It was a learning curve and an interesting one at that. It all comes down to the quality of broadcasts. Everything that Moxxey states in his post is accurate so there is little point in me repeating it although I would add that I personally feel a high quality HD broadcast picture easily out does that of the picture on an Avant, which I bought for my Mum earlier last year (the 32 RF DVD 100hz version.) This isn't really all that relevent but since comparisons have been mentioned in previous posts I include my own opinion based on my comparisons between the two. I have never bought or even seen a picture on a BV3 so I cannot comment about that.

I adore my new television and feel completely satisfied now with my purchase. This is what always amazes me about B&O; their equipment always grows on me when I often dismiss it so early on. Clearly this says a lot about the thought and design that goes into their products. As for the 7-2 speaker, I love it. Its a fantastic design that compliments the television and creates a very nice looking overall 'package.' Of course the output quality is incredible and I recently mentioned to my dealer that I was amazed at how it seemed to play perfect 5.1 surround sound with a particular movie I watched. I found this hard to believe since it is the only speaker I use in my set up. During initiaI consulations I was advised not to go for a full surround set up due to the acoustics of the flat, which is in a 1800s Methodist Chapel so straight edges, walls, ceilings and symmetry in general is all over the place, albeit part of the appeal even if not best suited for surround sound.

When I was looking at televisions it was always going to be B&O for me and it always will be. I am loyal to the brand that I have come to love and appreciate over the years but its more than that, I truly love their products too. Other manufactured sets do nothing for me at all, not even a little bit, because it is the design concept I buy into (and want) more than it is picture or sound quality. When I was ready to make my purchase it came down to the BV7-40 or the BV5 and design wise my preference was always for the BV5. I would still say this now as I think the BV5 looks a lot better as a corner TV on a stand (which is the placement option for me) than the BV7 does; it also would compliment my artwork and furnishings a little better although at the end of the day there isn't a lot in it and I am edging on being a perfectionist. Besides which, whenever I was in my dealer I often chatted to customers and asked them which set they prefered between the two from a design viewpoint. Interestingly, the BV7-40 was by far the more popular of the two. It was also interesting to note that women prefered the 7-40. I couldn't find one who liked the BV5. Strange, but true. I finally chose the BV7-40 because it was much more future proof and I knew I would get a far better trade in later on if I wanted to change, and I will, to a BV9 or whatever it is available several years from now and if I consider it to be an affordable and worthwhile purchase at the time.

So there you have it. These are the facts about this television. You need to see it with a high quality HD signal and then make a decision whether it is the television to buy, or not as the case may be. It is a fantastic set, no question about that at all. If you are going to watch only SD then do not buy this television. That is a no brainer. If you are going watch digital then do. If you are going to watch HD digital then definitly do. As Moxxey has also stated in previous posts, BluRay is simply stunning.

Arguments for changing technologies are neither valid nor important considerations for me anymore. All technology outdates extremely quickly. There is no way to stay current and B&Os attempt to future proof products as best they can is second to none. This set does justify its asking price, which is something I was not saying originally.

I really love my TV.

Off topic, but I also want to say how much I have come to love using the Beo5. This is a really great remote and I would not go back to a Beo4 now. I am used to this and love the design. I now operate it with one hand, quickly, easily and without needing to look at it, including the text labels on the screen as well as the buttons. Again, I am beginning to realise that B&O really have spent time on the design to achieve this useability. We criticise B&O for many things, myself included, but I think they are still well ahead of their game and of the competition. You get a lot when you buy into B&O and its easy to take it all for granted. Nobody else does what they do as well as they do it. They are true innovators in their field. Years of research, development and experience is more than evident.

Simon.

Coolskin:

I skipped reading all posts before this one.

 

OT. I often skip long posts, anybody else? I'm sure a lot of effort goes into them but I don't have the time for a long read. I dive in and out of the forum several times a day. 

 

I will simply add what I always say - it's each to their own!

Some users bleat on about how Bang & Olufsen should follow Apple.... why?!

Apple make a handy little gadget called an iPod, as far as I'm concerned, and Bang & Olufsen make a decent rival called the BeoSound 6 - and how many people really give a toss about whether it can store 100,000,000 hours of music or video?!! I certainly don't.

For me, Bang & Olufsen is as much about design as it is function, and this is why some of us are completely satisfied with our BeoVision 7's, no matter how "not quite perfect" the picture is. I have mine to impress people, and they aren't all Electrical Engineers who can spot an errant pixel, so they are swept away by it.

I live in what is essentially a tiny batchelor pad, and the BeoVision 7 has pride of place. If I want to watch a Blu-Ray disc, I'll watch it on the £1400 Samsung Plasma downstairs, which won't give me as good a picture as the BeoVision 7 with a standard DVD.

If I want to use the internet, I put a laptop on the table and use that. If I wish to watch a film on a big screen, I don't plug a projector into another screen, I go to the cinema. I don't want a screen which does all of the above, and I bet 95% of buyers feel the same - they just want to plug in their Sky box and watch TV!

So, in summary, YES - it's worth buying a Bang & Olufsen television, because everyday you'll look at it and be able to think "it's all mine".....

......a bit like owning an Alfa Romeo - it won't be the best on the road, and it might have a few minor glitches which may irk you now and again.... but who cares when it looks like this.....

  Exactly!

Flappo The Grate:

it doesn't help when bno tv's are basically rebadged panasonics and samsungs

Flappo, I think you're starting to lose all credibility. Time to move on, I think.

Didn't you just say in another thread, yesterday, that you were considering a BV7-40?

j0hnbarker:

because they were getting the best performing and looking set on the market. I think the point Flappo is making is that today B&O are not using the best panels and not pushing the most up to date connectivity..

John, with all due respect I think you need to see a BV7-40 MKIII for yourself, with the right source, before stating they are not using the best panels. Just because they've not implemented a 100Hz panel, it doesn't mean that then panels are not high end. We've already established on here that they only receive A+ LCD panels from Samsung.

I don't see how, from LCD technology, you can get better than the BV7-40 MKIII. I'd love to see a better LCD TV. Yes, they are darned expensive, but they certainly are used the best screens.

Connectivity wise, this TV has everything you need. Yes, I'd agree the BV7-32 is way behind, but then I'd assume that this is going to get a revamp this side of summer. Indeed, it's a necessity.

moxxey:

j0hnbarker:

because they were getting the best performing and looking set on the market. I think the point Flappo is making is that today B&O are not using the best panels and not pushing the most up to date connectivity..

John, with all due respect I think you need to see a BV7-40 MKIII for yourself, with the right source, before stating they are not using the best panels. Just because they've not implemented a 100Hz panel, it doesn't mean that then panels are not high end. We've already established on here that they only receive A+ LCD panels from Samsung.

I don't see how, from LCD technology, you can get better than the BV7-40 MKIII. I'd love to see a better LCD TV. Yes, they are darned expensive, but they certainly are used the best screens.

Connectivity wise, this TV has everything you need. Yes, I'd agree the BV7-32 is way behind, but then I'd assume that this is going to get a revamp this side of summer. Indeed, it's a necessity.

...err, the fact that they haven't 100Hz technology would suggest that they're not using the 'best' panels, and your own admission that the 32in model needs revamping suggests that there may have been more than a grain of truth in what I was saying???

Got to put my cards on the table and say that I'm not in the market for a new B&O TV as a house move recently cleaned me out. Had I spent 5/6/7k-ish on a new B&O TV though, I'd be on here defending it to the hilt. There's a hint of emperor's new clothes about this whole debate, with those that have bought the sets refusing to acknowledge that they might not be the 'best' that this kind of money can buy. Equally though, there have been some very strong criticisms of the set, and I can see why owners would get upset with this. Before any sensitive souls get offended, I've got to say that I'm not suggesting that B&O LCD sets are poor (far from it!), just that this whole debate seems to have polarised opinion to the extent that healthy debate seems to have been the victim...