£5,995 !!!!    In 2005 I wanted a Plasma, just did OK :-)   So what was I to do?   BV4 £12,000  errr nah!    So I went and got a Panasonic £2k, that's better.  Once the 3rd one was delivered I actually got one that worked.  Then I switched it on and sat back.  You have to sit back because if you look too close then you see the picture of the Panasonic Vierra TH37PV500 (best you could get then), was made up of lego images. After about a week I gave up on the Panasonic and every Plasma LCD you cared to show me.  I went back to watching my 1990 MX5500.  Then in 2007, I sold the 1990 MX to an idiot for £300 and got my long awaited 2000 Avant 32 off another idiot for £260 with Beo4!!!  Was wrongly advertised on ebay as a 28inch but the Type No, on the picture of the back panel, gave it away.  Is Black & Mint with curverd screen, non of that Flat Crap (RF version).  Telly is supposed to be curved and supposed to go in the corner of the room, which is why it's curverd, so everyone can see.  Come on, own up, how many of you BV7 owners haven't got your Flat TVs on a wall???  I dust the Panasonic occassionally but only when I'm not watching TV...   on the AVANT... which will NEVER be beaten for picture, sound, looks.

Beosystem 5500, Beovision Avant 32, Beosystem 2000, Beogram 1700, Beovox Penta, Beovox RLs & CXs, 1 wife, two kids and definately no BV7.

Jackplug:

£5,995 !!!!    In 2005 I wanted a Plasma, just did OK :-)   So what was I to do?   BV4 £12,000  errr nah!    So I went and got a Panasonic £2k, that's better.  Once the 3rd one was delivered I actually got one that worked.  Then I switched it on and sat back.  You have to sit back because if you look too close then you see the picture of the Panasonic Vierra TH37PV500 (best you could get then), was made up of lego images. After about a week I gave up on the Panasonic and every Plasma LCD you cared to show me.  I went back to watching my 1990 MX5500.  Then in 2007, I sold the 1990 MX to an idiot for £300 and got my long awaited 2000 Avant 32 off another idiot for £260 with Beo4!!!  Was wrongly advertised on ebay as a 28inch but the Type No, on the picture of the back panel, gave it away.  Is Black & Mint with curverd screen, non of that Flat Crap (RF version).  Telly is supposed to be curved and supposed to go in the corner of the room, which is why it's curverd, so everyone can see.  Come on, own up, how many of you BV7 owners haven't got your Flat TVs on a wall???  I dust the Panasonic occassionally but only when I'm not watching TV...   on the AVANT... which will NEVER be beaten for picture, sound, looks.

Beosystem 5500, Beovision Avant 32, Beosystem 2000, Beogram 1700, Beovox Penta, Beovox RLs & CXs, 1 wife, two kids and definately no BV7.

I beg to differ Jack. I bought an Avant 32 RF DVD (not your preference I know) for my Mum about a year ago, I then bought a 7-40 later in the year for myself. Its the latest version, the Mark III and the picture quality when it displays a high quality digital signal or an HD signal leaves the Avant behind by miles, at least compared to my Mum's Avant, which is the latest one ever made. It was the Manager of the Kingston Upon Thames dealership's personal set. I always used to think the Avant was a great set and it is in many ways but you can see artifacts and slight signs of ghosting and movement problems on it often. It has been setup perfectly by the installers. I cannot see any signs at all of this on my 7-40. The definition, sharpness and detail in general is incredible, BUT, it does always depend on the signal. With a bad signal it will display a bad picture. The 7-40 is not a good set for SD content and here the Avant or any tube TV come to that is a clear winner, but otherwise it knocks the socks off CRT. The 7-40 really does make the Avant look dated and let's face it, it is now. It belongs to a different era, but that is only my personal opinion. I have it mounted on its stand in the corner of my room with the 7-2 speaker and it makes a real statement. I will post some photos soon so check them out and see if your opinion changes.

Simon.

Pioneer quits the plasma business.

 

http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/03/pioneer-says-goodbye-to-plasma-manufacturing/

 

So get your Kuro while you can. 

Engadget has got that a little wrong.

Pioneer is dropping production of the 42" plasmas, and is focusing on 50" and above.. They are also reneging on a deal they did with NEC for a new plasma plant, returning it to NEC. Plasma has a price premium, and it's evidently difficult to make a solid profit when you're the most expensive manufacturer in the category.

Pioneer will also be offering LCD-screens in the lower sizes, and it's these that will be OEM. If anything, it illustrates B&O's woes - people aren't willing to pay a premium for quality, and are opting for de-spec'd tvs.

 

Pioneer Quits Plasma TV Models

David Richards - Tuesday, 26 February 2008

Pioneer Electronics which is reeling from poor plasma sales has decided to stop producing 42" plasma screens. Instead it will buy panels from arch competitor Panasonic, and Hitachi which last month pulled out of the Australian market.

Advertisement

document.getElementById('tblArticleAd').style.display = document.getElementById('spnArticleAd').innerHTML.length==0 ? "none" : "block";

Pioneer is also asking NEC to buy back a plasma plant it bought from NEC 3 years ago for $400 million.

The company that is credited with delivering the best TV in the world will now focus on 50" or larger panels.

Last month research company DisplaySearch reported that Pioneer had witnessed a 39% decline in plasma sales Vs 62% growth in the overall plasma market during the last two quarters.

According to Reuters it would be Pioneer's latest step away from a vertically integrated business model, in which manufacturers conduct production of key parts as well as assembly of finished products, after its decision last year to buy liquid crystal display panels from Sharp Corp to start offering LCD TVs.

Pioneer's plasma business has been struggling to compete with larger rivals with better production efficiency such as Panasonic, Samsung and LG Electronics.

Pioneer has a target to sell 480,000 plasma TVs in this business year, ending on March 31, less than one-tenth of Matsushita's sales target of 5 million units.

Pioneer bought the Kagoshima plant from NEC and now wants NEC to buy it back, the Asahi said.

A Pioneer spokesman said its flat TV strategy will become available when it unveils a mid-term business plan in early March, but nothing specific has been decided.

Shares in Pioneer were up 3.8 percent by early afternoon, outperforming the Tokyo stock market's electrical machinery index IELEC, which rose 2.2 percent.

 

jk1002:

Pioneer quits the plasma business.

 

http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/03/pioneer-says-goodbye-to-plasma-manufacturing/

 

So get your Kuro while you can. 

Yes indeed. And Fujitsu (the creators of plasma) also quit several weeks ago giving their reasons that it is too costly to continue to research, develop and deliver at a price customers are willing to pay, which is not high enough. With Sony having quit a while ago along with mny other manufactures it seems that Pansonic will surely follow suit at some point and plasma as we know it will of had its day. Shame really because its a great technology but it comes at too hefty a price.

Simon. 

they've all probably seen the writing on the digital wall with OLED

from what i've gleaned it will revolutionise the industry 

amazing contrast , very low power useage , 1mm thin screens , flexible screens , wraparound screens , cheap to make , massive screen sizes

bno will have a field day with that methinx !!! 

Flappo The Grate:

bring back jacob jensen !

Please no! He´s stuck in the 80´s!

This report has it all wrong.

Pioneer is discontinuing 42" plasmas, and is focusing on 50" and up in sizes, as that's where the market wants to go. For some reason a comment I wrote yesterday concerning this is in moderation, so I'll just do a quick recap.

Pioneer will, however, begin offering LCD screens with the Pioneer name on them. These will be built by OEM providers (Sharp, which has the best LCD). As Pioneer considers LCD inferior that must have been a toughie, but it's a decision made to get more floorspace in stores.

What's happening is a harbinger, though. Pioneer is having trouble making enough money on their high-end screens, as the market wants them at the cheapest possible price. That doesn't make things any easier for B&O.

From Smarthouse - Engadget dropped the word Models: 

Pioneer Quits Plasma TV Models

David Richards - Tuesday, 26 February 2008

Pioneer Electronics which is reeling from poor plasma sales has decided to stop producing 42" plasma screens. Instead it will buy panels from arch competitor Panasonic, and Hitachi which last month pulled out of the Australian market.

Advertisement

document.getElementById('tblArticleAd').style.display = document.getElementById('spnArticleAd').innerHTML.length==0 ? "none" : "block";

Pioneer is also asking NEC to buy back a plasma plant it bought from NEC 3 years ago for $400 million.

The company that is credited with delivering the best TV in the world will now focus on 50" or larger panels.

 

yep , pioneer are a brilliant company , they make superb stuff

the japanese bang & olufsen ?

my brother has an 8 track pro machine from 1975 in his bedroom that still works - he's a mad elton john fan ( and there's loads of weird old 8 tracks by him )  and it is amazingly well built

i reckon we could use it as a foundation for a house it's so solid ! 

The Beonic Man:

I beg to differ Jack. I bought an Avant 32 RF DVD (not your preference I know) for my Mum about a year ago, I then bought a 7-40 later in the year for myself. Its the latest version, the Mark III and the picture quality when it displays a high quality digital signal or an HD signal leaves the Avant behind by miles..

Simon, I'm past caring. Few people are going to listen. I'm happy with my BV7-40 MKIII, especially with a HD source. If people don't want a BV7, can't afford a BV7 (more likely..) or can't justify a BV7, fair enough. I know I'm happy, so I'm not worried what other people on here think of the TV.

It's like an expensive watch. A lot of people like my Panerai, but few people can ever justify the expense paid. The conversation goes from 'wow, look at that, where did you get that from..?' to 'I wouldn't pay that for a watch, what's wrong with a £200 watch? It tells the time like yours...!'.

soundproof:

Pioneer is discontinuing 42" plasmas, and is focusing on 50" and up in sizes, as that's where the market wants to go..

Are you sure the 'market' demands the larger size? My 40" looks HUGE in my reasonably large sitting room. My mother was discussing a new TV at the weekend and only wants something up to a 32" inch in size. She wants a flat screen and is prepared to pay the money required, but doesn't want anything that will dominate the room.

I certainly don't want a 50". That's another 25cm wider than my existing TV.

No, I'm not sure. But there's a trend where home cinemas are getting flatscreens instead of projectors. (People are finding out what replacing the lamp on a good projector will cost them, repeatedly.) And I think Pioneer reckons that for their high-end screens to find a fit with a market willing to pay the premium, they should be aiming for this segment - which is already moving beyond 50".

moxxey:

soundproof:

Pioneer is discontinuing 42" plasmas, and is focusing on 50" and up in sizes, as that's where the market wants to go..

Are you sure the 'market' demands the larger size? My 40" looks HUGE in my reasonably large sitting room. My mother was discussing a new TV at the weekend and only wants something up to a 32" inch in size. She wants a flat screen and is prepared to pay the money required, but doesn't want anything that will dominate the room.

I certainly don't want a 50". That's another 25cm wider than my existing TV.

Given that the marketing "hype" is for full HD,that the perceived wisdom is that 50" is the minimum screen size necessary to see a benefit from 1080p,and that LCD is the bigger seller at 42",Pioneer's decision makes good business sense.

My lounge is not especially large,and I would agree that my 60" Pioneer did at first dominate the room,but one's eyes/brain soon adapts to it's presence and it rapidly ceases to dominate.

Then one starts to view,and the large screen size rapidly becomes addictive,especially for HD/Blu-ray DVDs.

In a way, a lot of B&O lovers seem to be strangers. A lot of people I have spoken to who have bought a plasma or LCD in the past say that after a while, the size could be one step bigger. But here I read the most, big enough or still huge :-)  

personally i wouldn't bother with a 40" screen for 1080p , my tv has it and it's a total waste of time as 720p looks amazing anyway

i guess you really do need an ENORMOUS tv to really show off 1080p at it's best and has been mentioned not everyone wants one ,we'll have to wait until they're the size of the wall and by then 1080p will be so passe , we'll have 4000p or some other marketing twaddle to rip us all off

oh the joys of technology !! :) 

soundproof:

No, I'm not sure. But there's a trend where home cinemas are getting flatscreens instead of projectors. (People are finding out what replacing the lamp on a good projector will cost them, repeatedly.) And I think Pioneer reckons that for their high-end screens to find a fit with a market willing to pay the premium, they should be aiming for this segment - which is already moving beyond 50".

 

Good point soundproof!

The new Beovision X with a rollable OLED screen and built in center speaker will provide the ultimate solution to the projector/plasma-issue.

http://forum.beoworld.org/forums/permalink/92817/93066/ShowThread.aspx#93066

Xuse the repost

/M 

soundproof:

No, I'm not sure. But there's a trend where home cinemas are getting flatscreens instead of projectors. (People are finding out what replacing the lamp on a good projector will cost them, repeatedly.) And I think Pioneer reckons that for their high-end screens to find a fit with a market willing to pay the premium, they should be aiming for this segment - which is already moving beyond 50".

And that's a fact. B&O saw this coming and moved the BeoVision 4/5 up from 42" to 50" (BV4/9) based on a prognosed market demand. Their big seller, the 7-32, is now trailing behind the 7-40. And this probably shouldn't be mentioned here, but there could be a new 8-37 just around the corner (i.e. this coming Fall). If you move a tv presenter from a 4:3 image to the 16:9 format, his or her head will appear smaller - and picture quality has come a long way over the past few years to further promote bigger images. I guess it will be up to each person, but in my mind the 7-40 mkI and the BV5 mkIII were the first sets that moved the game on and left the Avant behind - even with the obvious drawbacks of a bigger picture (I guess most of us admired the Avant RF 28 when placed next to an RF 32 in a shop, as the smaller tube had an even better picture).

But none of this is valid if you do not have a decent digital feed and RGB or HDMI feed to your telly.

Roger

moxxey:

The Beonic Man:

I beg to differ Jack. I bought an Avant 32 RF DVD (not your preference I know) for my Mum about a year ago, I then bought a 7-40 later in the year for myself. Its the latest version, the Mark III and the picture quality when it displays a high quality digital signal or an HD signal leaves the Avant behind by miles..

Simon, I'm past caring. Few people are going to listen. I'm happy with my BV7-40 MKIII, especially with a HD source. If people don't want a BV7, can't afford a BV7 (more likely..) or can't justify a BV7, fair enough. I know I'm happy, so I'm not worried what other people on here think of the TV.

It's like an expensive watch. A lot of people like my Panerai, but few people can ever justify the expense paid. The conversation goes from 'wow, look at that, where did you get that from..?' to 'I wouldn't pay that for a watch, what's wrong with a £200 watch? It tells the time like yours...!'.

Oh dear…..what a really lame post this is. If you’re  not bothered about what others think of the BV7, then why make multiple posts on here defending the set….unless of course it’s down to the fact that anyone who dares knock the BV7 does so out of jealousy, because they can’t afford one like you can. Sorry, but that’s just facile, mate. Nice one, you’ve got a Panerai. Great. I’m guessing lots of members have nice gear, given the high residual values that even second-life B&O products command, so what exactly are you trying to say? Yet, you also undermine the argument you made comparing the Panerai to a Beovision. True, the Panerai keeps good time like all decent watches do, and the BV7shows a good picture like other decent sets. But surely you bought the Panerai because you were sold on the fact that it was precision made out of the finest components, therefore justifying the premium price? How then does that stack up against the BV7? Not the best panel out there, though admittedly the aluminium extrusion technology that’s behind the manufacture of the casing is second to none – that must be a great one to tell people when they come round to visit.

As you’re past the point of caring, I know you’ll not take any offence to this post. I really am not trying to have a go at you personally for buying a BV7 – that’s your call – but please let’s leave the ‘you can’t afford one, so that’s why you don’t want one’ arguments back in the playground where they belong, as when you get to approximately 12 years old they simply become irksome rather than profound.

 

if you poseurs really want to pose , don't buy bno , buy some high end krell , martin-logan , burmester , mark levinson , wilson audio ,goldmund , koetsu etc

makes bno look quite frankly common , ducky !

Duplicate post

 

 

 

 

Flappo The Grate:

if you poseurs really want to pose , don't buy bno , buy some high end krell , martin-logan , burmester , mark levinson , wilson audio ,goldmund , koetsu etc

makes bno look quite frankly common , ducky !

Duplicate post

j0hnbarker:

Oh dear…..what a really lame post this is.

John, and I concur that your post is equally as 'lame' if you believe that the BV7-40 MKIII isn't a) a quality TV made of some of the best components and b) can be bettered with a HD-sourced signal.

FYI most Panerai's were based until recently on a standard off-the-shelf Swiss ETA movement which was a <$200 component. You could argue that the markup on these watches was excessive. A PAM 111 was over £2500 in the UK, yet was a standard Swiss ETA. Your argument about the finest components doesn't stack up.

My sole reason for mentioning this watch was *only* that many others have exactly the same discussion. It's the same with Leica cameras. Why buy this when a Panasonic, with Leica lens, will do the same job? Can the Leica really justify the cost? Is it really the best on the market? The reason I brought the watch in to the discussion was that people comments on the watch, the build, the style and so on....but then whinge and even laugh when you mention the price. The wonder how on earth it could be justified?

Its the same with B&O equipment such as the BV7. The biggest argument *against* the BV7 is the price. Even you admit this yourself. However, the price is not going to change, dispite all the whinging on here and discussions about it not being the best set on the market.

Just out of interest, apart from the price (!), what improvements would you add to the BV7-40 MKIII, if you were B&O? What could you do better - apart from price - to improve this TV and make it the very best set on the market?

Instead of claiming my post is 'lame', come up with some suggestions what could be done to make it the best TV on the market, in your opinion. Tell us what sets you've seen, with a quality HD signal, that better than BV7?

If your argument is - like others - based again on the price/value, don't bother with this discussion and do not bother buying the set.

moxxey:

j0hnbarker:

Oh dear…..what a really lame post this is.

John, and I concur that your post is equally as 'lame' if you believe that the BV7-40 MKIII isn't a) a quality TV made of some of the best components and b) can be bettered with a HD-sourced signal.

FYI most Panerai's were based until recently on a standard off-the-shelf Swiss ETA movement which was a <$200 component. You could argue that the markup on these watches was excessive. A PAM 111 was over £2500 in the UK, yet was a standard Swiss ETA. Your argument about the finest components doesn't stack up.

My sole reason for mentioning this watch was *only* that many others have exactly the same discussion. It's the same with Leica cameras. Why buy this when a Panasonic, with Leica lens, will do the same job? Can the Leica really justify the cost? Is it really the best on the market? The reason I brought the watch in to the discussion was that people comments on the watch, the build, the style and so on....but then whinge and even laugh when you mention the price. The wonder how on earth it could be justified?

Its the same with B&O equipment such as the BV7. The biggest argument *against* the BV7 is the price. Even you admit this yourself. However, the price is not going to change, dispite all the whinging on here and discussions about it not being the best set on the market.

Just out of interest, apart from the price (!), what improvements would you add to the BV7-40 MKIII, if you were B&O? What could you do better - apart from price - to improve this TV and make it the very best set on the market?

Instead of claiming my post is 'lame', come up with some suggestions what could be done to make it the best TV on the market, in your opinion. Tell us what sets you've seen, with a quality HD signal, that better than BV7?

If your argument is - like others - based again on the price/value, don't bother with this discussion and do not bother buying the set.

Yawn.

Sorry if my use of language was too ‘street’ for you Moxxey, as you obviously seem to have taken umbrage with my use of the term ‘lame’. Having re-read your post again it all becomes clear. I have to admit that I don’t know much about Panerai, and was actually quite shocked to hear that they bought off the shelf movements, but then if you’re happy paying a premium price for one of their watches in full knowledge that the major components are sourced way below that point, then fair enough. Come to think of it, how much does the panel in the BV7 cost B&O? At least you’re consistent with your logic.

What really grated was your glib assertion that a discussion about whether to buy a B&O TV could not contain any serious dissenting voices, as the underlying motive for any criticism of the BV7 must be the envy of those who could not afford one as you can. You may be in such a lofty financial position that you can sail serenely above the masses, untroubled by piffling matters such as price/value when considering whether to buy a B&O TV (hang on, wasn’t this the original topic of this thread), but please don’t throw your toys of the pram with the infantile ‘you don’t like it cos you can’t afford it’ line. In a serious debate where the original poster wondered whether he should keep his 7k in his back pocket for the time being, rather than making the BV7 purchase, is there not room for any of us to question whether he would be getting good value for money? I certainly hope that there is. If you disagree, then fair enough as that’s your call, and I hope you keep on posting about how price/value is of little relevance to this debate.

Incidentally – how would I improve the BV7? Get a better panel. From a better manufacturer. 100Hz technology would also be nice (we’ve been here before, haven’t we?).

 

John,

Who would you suggest make the panels? Considering there are only 4 other companies that mass-manufacture LCD panels for televisions (Sharp, LG/Philips, Chi Mei Optoelectronics, and AU Optronics), and we currently have the most favorable buying position with the brand that makes Sony and Samsung LCDs, I'm just interested in your technical opinion as to what we or any manufacturer could gain from sourcing panels from another manufacturer.

Thanks.