Since you two seem to be talking past each other now, maybe I'll add my two cents to this (since I started this thread 
)...
Puncher seems to think that because "visionclear" is now "just algorithms", there's no guarantee that it's any better than any other TV.
Trip is up to his old tricks... wrapping some good bits of information in his special "Trip-isms" that tends to set some folks off.
To Puncher's point, I'm not sure how the fact that it's algorithms vs. circuits makes much of a difference. In today's digital world, it's all algorithms now. Didn't other high end analog sets once have competing "visionclear-like" circuitry? I seem to recall seeing ads to this effect back before the world went digital. Now, it's competing algorithms... how is that so different? Proprietary circuits vs. proprietary algorithms? Still takes R&D to get it right, probably significant R&D.
Can we always assume that B&O is best? Trip is biased on this point, and everybody that's spent any amount of time on this site should understand this.
I think my BV8-40 has a great picture, and most people who watch my TV agree. In the US, most have never seen a B&O TV or know anything about one (at least in the circles I travel) so I know they're not just saying this because of "marketing", and the comments are normally unsolicited. Maybe they've never seen a properly calibrated TV or maybe B&O's algorithms are superior? I don't really care.
Stan