Bang & Olufsen?

[idc]

The best sound from a TV I have heard was a Bang & Olufsen, circa 1980. I think they got the CRT from Phillips.

 

[Anonymous]

I've not heard them so maybe their stuff sounds great, but every time I glance through their window in Bristol I just think their stuff looks hideous. I'm not normally very hung up on aesthetics, but I guess it just looks ostentatious to me. I can appreciate looks, especially when it's understated class, but I think normally I'm a very function over form kind of guy.

 

[idc]

lydgate:... but every time I glance through their window in Bristol I just think their stuff looks hideous....

If I went past a Bang & Olufsen shop window there would be an ASBO taken out to stop me from licking it. I was once in a famous footballer's house and he had one of these......................

 

[Anonymous]

I love B+O gear....its what started me off into Hi Fi.... seeing my uncles B+O system..... love the looks, but i was swayed by What Hi Fi to get into Cyrus gear....... if i won the lottery i would buy every B+O gear under the sun.....love the looks...... but i also want good sound

 

[Anonymous]

idc:
lydgate:... but every time I glance through their window in Bristol I just think their stuff looks hideous....

If I went past a Bang & Olufsen shop window there would be an ASBO taken out to stop me from licking it. I was once in a famous footballer's house and he had one of these......................

. You should be locked up if you li(c)ke that thing! (only joking!)

 

[idc]

Graham, the house alarm had gone off and I went with the housekeeper when she went to switch it off. Never actually met him. I would wait till no one is about before I lick any B&O windows, I'm not daft!

 

[bemahler1]

Many years ago (1965 to be precise ) just after I had left school, I had a job working in the Gramophone record and hifi shop in Belfast . The ground floor was, as you can guess the record section of shop and the first floor was for hifi. As the shop was the main hifi shop in Belfast, it was full of the best names in hi hifi at that time and B&O dominated the sales floor. Everything in the B&O range was on show and demonstrated to the customers to hear and yes I feel in love with the looks and the sound and still can remember the amazing sound that came forth from this company's wonderful equipment. The point I would like to make is that, in this modern day there are not many company's from that time still producing eye popping equipment that still sounds as good as when I heard it all those years ago and yes it was expensive in those days.

 

[plastic penguin]

Last Saturday we went to our friends 40th birthday bash. Once again, when the evening was winding down, they played some music on the B&O system. It sounded really good; immensely precise, neutral and had all the technical traits one would expect from a hi-fi set-up - this is the first time I've heard it since buying the Leema - and have to confess the overall presentation wasn't completely satisfying.

Even though great in some respects I couldn't engauge with the B&O. Not too sure why, but as Mrs. P put it, you felt kinda detached from the music, whereas, however, with the Leema it draws you into the music.

The main reason for mentioning this is because of Matthew's comments on a different thread, so not sure what one can draw from this. It is purely an observational comment as opposed to a matter-of-fact statement.

Your comments would be appreciated.

 

[chebby]

I've heard plenty of B&O gear over the last 30 years. (As recently as a few months ago.)

A B&O system is still up there in my top five AV/hi-fi 'things to buy' when I win the Lottery jackpot. (Along with a Thorens/SME/Luxman Class A/Harbeth system for my library )

The next biggest problem with B&O (after the price) is the cost of the surrounding decor to do it justice. (Have you seen the price of Eames Lounge chairs lately?)

 

[DandyCobalt]

The next biggest problem with B&O (after the price) is the cost of the surrounding decor to do it justice. (Have you seen the price of Eames Lounge chairs lately?)

Doesn't even have a built-in fridge !!!

Unlike this one ...

http://www.la-z-boy.co.uk/range/20/Gizmo

 

[John Duncan]

Talking of 'built-in', I want a toaster 'n' egg poacher...

 

[moon]

beautiful design.

 

[idc]

Last Saturday we went to our friends 40th birthday bash. Once again, when the evening was winding down, they played some music on the B&O system. It sounded really good; immensely precise, neutral and had all the technical traits one would expect from a hi-fi set-up - this is the first time I've heard it since buying the Leema - and have to confess the overall presentation wasn't completely satisfying.

Even though great in some respects I couldn't engauge with the B&O. Not too sure why, but as Mrs. P put it, you felt kinda detached from the music, whereas, however, with the Leema it draws you into the music.

The main reason for mentioning this is because of Matthew's comments on a different thread, so not sure what one can draw from this. It is purely an observational comment as opposed to a matter-of-fact statement.

Your comments would be appreciated.

I think it is because we are capable of falling for the brand as much as the sound. B&O does not do it for you, Leema does. Since B&O is very designer lead, it polarises people. Oblong boxes, roughly the same size with clear controls are more designer neutral. So big brands looking for volume sales will use that kind of design.

I have seen in the past testing of products to see how brand and the likes of country of origin affects perception. It very much does, there was one with CDPs where the CDPs people thought were Japanese sounded better than others made elsewhere. In fact they had all been made in the same place.

Further evidence for the importance of brand and looks on sound quality is with the different results people get with sighted, blind comparison tests, such as WHFs Big Question. Consistently, sighted testing produces the biggest differences in sound quality between products which are the easiest to tell. Then blind comparison tests find cheap brands capable of performing as well as if not better than more expensive ones. That shows us when you remove image and design sound quality becomes more even between products.

So image and design must be a factor in sound quality. That is further evidenced by your friends loving their B&O which they probably think sounds better than anything else. Which it does, to them, but it is subjective anyway and so no one is wrong, or right when they say things like, "I prefer Leema to B&O" like you do.

 

[busb]

B&O = a triumph of form over function. Hearing a famous footballer owns their gear only reinforces my prejudice. I did own quite a nice B&O FM radio until it was nicked & had one of their parallel tracking TTs on home demo for a while - wasn't impressed & ended up with a Technics SL110, SME & Shure V15 instead. my brother told me (after its return) that, with a little experimentation, he managed to fool the arm into lowering itself onto the platter without a record being present. Never heard back from Seawards though!

Despite my own prejudice, I'm glad that companies like B&O exist who buck the trend. Next time I go to Guildford, I'll pop into the B&O Emporium for a gander. I find comments about their prices a little ironic compared with what one could pay for makes not even most HiFi owners have ever heard of. Even people who aren't interested in HiFi (sadly, most of the population) have heard of them so B&O are obviously doing something right!

 

[Lee H]

Hearing a famous footballer owns their gear only reinforces my prejudice.

That's a bizzare statement.

 

[Paul.]

B&O = a triumph of form over function.

Its the same thing. Form = Function. How you live with a product is part of its function, if B&O is easier to live with than trad hifi, they have met their design breif and created a functionaly superior product. Not everyone wants to live in the sweetspot of a perfect equilateral triangle.

*Rant over*

 

[fr0g]

Hearing a famous footballer owns their gear only reinforces my prejudice.

That's a bizzare statement.

It would be interesting to see how many famous footballers used iPhones, or Rotel/Audiolab gear. Bizarre is one word, more fitting would be "asinine" and "ad hominem"

 

[John Duncan]

Hearing a famous footballer owns their gear only reinforces my prejudice.

Would hearing an ex-group editor of WHF owns them change it?

 

[busb]

Hearing a famous footballer owns their gear only reinforces my prejudice.

That's a bizzare statement.

It would be interesting to see how many famous footballers used iPhones, or Rotel/Audiolab gear. Bizarre is one word, more fitting would be "asinine" and "ad hominem"

I would choose the verb "stereotyping" personally. In my defence, I don't disguise my own prejudices or pretend I don't have any. My original reply also acknowledges some of B&O's positives. Methinks some here protest too much. Just how many here actually own/have owned their equipment (some do/have as stated)? How about requesting HiFi magazines review more of their kit (IIRC, at least WHF does from time to time)?

I do not subscribe to the idea that HiFi equipment's sound is the only basis for purchase, appearance, build quality & reliability are also important. Overdesigned springs to mind. As for B&O R&D being diminished - they have contributed to class D amplification's acceptance. I do find it a wee bit ironic being pulled up for criticising B&O - anyone would think that I'd had a go at Rega for using plastic panels.

 

[Lee H]

I do find it a wee bit ironic being pulled up for criticising B&O - anyone would think that I'd had a go at Rega for using plastic panels.

No, what you implied was that the fact that a footballer owns one helps make up your mind whether you like it or not.

To criticise is fine, but to do so based on the fact the one person from one profession owns it is just bizarre. Many footballers own an Aston, that doesn't stop it being a fine looking car

 

[bob.g]

I've got a Beocenter 9000, and a pair of Beovox 5000 flat panel loudspeakers, bought new more than 20 years ago. They still look and sound fabulous, and visitors often comment on how modern and stunning the Beocenter looks.

Yes, it was expensive, and yes I could have bought something that sounded the same for half the price, but if I'd done that I would have changed that gear ages ago whereas I'd never part with the B&O setup I have now. In my mind it's a brilliant combination of form and function, and I consider it was good value for money.

 

[BenLaw]

I do find it a wee bit ironic being pulled up for criticising B&O - anyone would think that I'd had a go at Rega for using plastic panels.

No, what you implied was that the fact that a footballer owns one helps make up your mind whether you like it or not.

To criticise is fine, but to do so based on the fact the one person from one profession owns it is just bizarre. Many footballers own an Aston, that doesn't stop it being a fine looking car

Whilst accepting it's irrational (although perhaps not bizarre), seeing monosyllabic gum-chewing footballers in post-match interviews wearing Dr Dre headphones means I would hesitate an extra moment before purchasing a pair. I'm sure other people would have precisely the opposite reaction. I think this is all part of branding and celebrity endorsement, it's designed to create an emotional reaction, not really bizarre.

 

[bigboss]

I think it is because we are capable of falling for the brand as much as the sound. B&O does not do it for you, Leema does. Since B&O is very designer lead, it polarises people. Oblong boxes, roughly the same size with clear controls are more designer neutral. So big brands looking for volume sales will use that kind of design.

I have seen in the past testing of products to see how brand and the likes of country of origin affects perception. It very much does, there was one with CDPs where the CDPs people thought were Japanese sounded better than others made elsewhere. In fact they had all been made in the same place.

Further evidence for the importance of brand and looks on sound quality is with the different results people get with sighted, blind comparison tests, such as WHFs Big Question. Consistently, sighted testing produces the biggest differences in sound quality between products which are the easiest to tell. Then blind comparison tests find cheap brands capable of performing as well as if not better than more expensive ones. That shows us when you remove image and design sound quality becomes more even between products.

So image and design must be a factor in sound quality. That is further evidenced by your friends loving their B&O which they probably think sounds better than anything else. Which it does, to them, but it is subjective anyway and so no one is wrong, or right when they say things like, "I prefer Leema to B&O" like you do.

Very well said. :clap:

I totally agree with what you say. That's why even brands like Bose are very successful despite being criticised for its performance. People who buy them find them perfect.

 

[plastic penguin]

I think it is because we are capable of falling for the brand as much as the sound. B&O does not do it for you, Leema does. Since B&O is very designer lead, it polarises people. Oblong boxes, roughly the same size with clear controls are more designer neutral. So big brands looking for volume sales will use that kind of design.

I have seen in the past testing of products to see how brand and the likes of country of origin affects perception. It very much does, there was one with CDPs where the CDPs people thought were Japanese sounded better than others made elsewhere. In fact they had all been made in the same place.

Further evidence for the importance of brand and looks on sound quality is with the different results people get with sighted, blind comparison tests, such as WHFs Big Question. Consistently, sighted testing produces the biggest differences in sound quality between products which are the easiest to tell. Then blind comparison tests find cheap brands capable of performing as well as if not better than more expensive ones. That shows us when you remove image and design sound quality becomes more even between products.

So image and design must be a factor in sound quality. That is further evidenced by your friends loving their B&O which they probably think sounds better than anything else. Which it does, to them, but it is subjective anyway and so no one is wrong, or right when they say things like, "I prefer Leema to B&O" like you do.

Very well said. :clap:

I totally agree with what you say. That's why even brands like Bose are very successful despite being criticised for its performance. People who buy them find them perfect.

Err, doesn't always work like that. Before buying my Alfa I looked at a much younger model than mine, which had the Bose system, and it blew me away. Around the same time the ma-in-law had a Xmas present of a Bose mini surround sound/alarm clock jobbie and was absolutely awful.

That said I think we're all biased: Not just hi-fis and AVs but most things in life. My car is the bees-knees, when others condemn it totally. My daughter is the greatest thing since sliced bread (most of the time), while others may think she's intolerable.

Swings 'n' roundabouts.

The B&O system had everything... almost. It had the precision, detail, great clarity... but it didn't grab me. Perhaps that's why we love hi-fis etc. and this forum. Fantastic mixed bag.

 

[idc]

I do not think it is as simple as like one Bose or B&O, like them all, all of the time. I think our interaction with brands and image changes, though you do get 'fan boys' you become dedicated to one brand so much so you become blinkered. I also think that different people react differently to brnad and image. I think that is why some people even 'fail' sighted tests as they are not affected by the brand or image as others are.

(I have been in Mark Hatley's house and he had a B&O )