ARCHIVED FORUM -- March 2012 to February 2022READ ONLY FORUM
This is the second Archived Forum which was active between 1st March 2012 and 23rd February 2022
Hi
Yes I know I may be classed as heretical for this, but hopefully it will get a decent sensible discussion going......
Please can someone explain why I should buy the Beovison Horizon 40 opposed to say the Sony Bravia 43XD8099?? -- Even with a decent sounder it is still 1/3rd of the price and I would get HDR and Netflix !!
Comments awaited with interest.
Thanks
You have to look at it more like buying a piece of furniture. You get more premium materials and interesting stand and mount options.
If you dont like the droid tv built in just connect apple tv or roku.
Better comparison would be the Samsung Serif TV, which also has some design and comes with a stand. BUt I encourage anyone visiting moma store in Soho Nyc where it is on display, check the frame, its coming apart at the borders and most people here in the forum would complain abput that.
Having had an interest in the Serif and seeing the Ikea like built quality made me appreciate the B&O.
That said, I dont have a dealer close by anymore so its getting tricky spending major money on a TV
I agree with you that the B&O TVs are overpriced. Some of them offer the ability to be the core of an integrated AV and multiroom setup, which has advantages, but I've never been able to rationalize the cost differences. I've always gone with other brands, and have kept my audio for video and audio only setups separate. I use B&O for audio only, and an inexpensive Marantz AVR and an Infinity speaker setup for my video system. When I bought my latest 65 inch Panasonic plasma VT series, allegedly B&O was using the same panel for the Beovision 12. I paid $3k for the Panny, the BV12 was about $20k, and while it did have a center channel and a surround decoder, I have less than $800 in the AVR and speaker bar, which still makes the BV12 very expensive by comparison.
Different people will have different opinions of course, different needs, and priorities. For me, at least, its always been preferable to not go with a BV.
Jeff
I'm afraid I'm recovering from the BeoVirus.
Thanks Jeff. We see to be talking the same language.
This will be the main TV in our lounge, will be used for watch TV (not gaming, web surfing or used as an audio system for our music). It will not be linked to an audio system.
We are after decent picture and decent sound wrapped in something that looks half decent!
jk1002: That said, I dont have a dealer close by anymore so its getting tricky spending major money on a TV
This is my opportunity to say why I won't buy a B&O TV for now. There are too few dealers in North America. Service might be a huge problem.
My comment does not answer the original question. I agree with Jeff. The Horizon used also as an audio system adds extra value.
Once you remove the integration of audio and video setups from the equation, a Beovision makes much less sense unless you truly love the brand and have the money. Plus some of the B&O 4K sets are seriously hampered in my opinion by lacking both HDR and a 4K Netflix app. As for looks, while some of the Beovisions are stunning, basically even most Asian TVs are attractive to me, simple minimal black edges around a screen without a lot of additional window dressing. Quite minimalist.
Service is also a concern considering how B&O is losing dealers in the US at an alarming rate.
garethingram1: We are after decent picture and decent sound wrapped in something that looks half decent!
I freely admit - if this is what you want from a/your tv, you should not buy a BV.
MM
There is a tv - and there is a BV
Millemissen:I freely admit - if this is what you want from a/your tv, you should not buy a BV. MM There is a tv - and there is a BV.
Beosound Stage, Beovision 8-40, Beolit 20, Beosound Explore.
The biggest advantage is that you are in the B&O ecosystem. You have one Beoremote and you can control everything in an easy and elegant way (via PUC even external devices).
Easy integration between audio and video is the next advantage (including multiroom).
The design and the building quality of the televisions is a matter of personal taste, but in general people think just wonderful.
Especially the motorized stand solutions are awesome (a pitty the BV Horizon has not the option).
Is it the money worth? You have to decide for yourself. Is it worth to drive a Porsche when the maximum allowed speed is 55 m/ph?
Everything has already been said. The Horizon price is 3000 euro's, which is about the same as the MX's did cost back in the day. Nothing new, pay for a premium brand, or buy something else. It's the same in a lot of different items, be it cars, or cycling gear. Why would you buy a Rapha jacket, or pay a premium price for an iPhone, why would you want to buy a Audi instead of a VW? The same principle everywhere.
jc:The Horizon price is 3000 euro's, which is about the same as the MX's did cost back in the day.
...but the LX/MX usually cost 40-50% more than the TOTL Sonys etc did – not 100% more, at least in the mid-90s.
I do agree with you though, but I think the price difference today is much bigger today than it used to be. As I remember it, the Avant (crt) was the first really expensive Beovision. But yes, I agree that it's "normal" that a premium product also has a premium pricetag.
Millemissen:I freely admit - if this is what you want from a/your tv, you should not buy a BV.
Why so rude?
A lot depends on how you define a "premium product" doesn't it? Is it design and exclusivity over all, or is it performance first? I'd say without HDR and Netflix the "premium" moniker is a tad harder to rationalize. And I love B&O as much as anyone, but I'm not blind to where they do have faults.
The world has changed a lot since the 80's, especially in consumer's electronics. B&O was, as we know, very late to recognize that. I'm happy that B&O still is in business. Could easily have been otherwise. The Horizon is in itself a good design, as it is. But, with the decline of the importance of TV in the modern way of living, it cannot, and should not be expected to play the role the MX did. I do not know why not all the latest techniques are incorporated in the Horizon. The question is wether that makes a difference in picture quality. Perhaps the picture is already very good, and good enough?
henrik: Millemissen:I freely admit - if this is what you want from a/your tv, you should not buy a BV. Why so rude?
I was not trying to be 'rude' just for the sake of being rude - I just thought that this answer fits well with the tone of the title of this post.
To me it is obvious, that if someone don't want/need, what the core values of a BeoVision are, he should not buy it - period....
....unless being 'member of the club' is worth the additional prize.
If you don't want/need the integration of audio and video, the built-in multichannel preamp and the multiroom capacity, the possibility to control all (even connected) devices with one remote, a speaker system (as good as it can get in a tv), the above average build quality/materials, the placement options....., why the h**k should you want pay the price, that B&O demands for their BV's.
There are a lot of tv's out there, that would meet the required 'decent picture and decent sound wrapped in something that looks half decent!' option at a much lower prize.
henrik: ...but the LX/MX usually cost 40-50% more than the TOTL Sonys etc did
It's true. The 40" tv's costs about 200% more than tv's from another manufactory. The BV14-40 about 500% more. 55" tv's about 100% more, than the premium product of the leading companies.
The difference hurts, but if you wanna have one it is your decision to pay the money or not.
jc: The world has changed a lot since the 80's, especially in consumer's electronics.
You are right, it was so easy in the 80s/90s. There was one standard screen resolution, which has not changed all two years. There were just three possibilities for the incoming signal, no video on demand (streaming), no HDDs, just VCRs with a more or less poor quality and external devices had scart. Everyone was satisfied, because there was nothing else. Smaller companies like B&O had the chance to take a product and had the time to make it in many little ways better (sound/controling/PUC/contrast screen/...)
Today the specifications customers exspect change every half year. There is nearly no time to react. And the "smart tv revolution" is hard for a company like B&O too. An own software platform is not possible because neither e.g. Netflix nor e.g. Amazon would program an own app for, be honest, a handful of customers.So third party devices are going to be needed and with the B&O PUC system there was no problem to integrate them. But more and more devices use bluetoothe remotes, there should be a solution to control them too, otherwise...... Maybe the BR One BT is getting the possibility soon?
The only point I really critisize is that B&O does not give the possibility to use their strengthen to their "entrance customer" products. It is just one socket, the software is allready available in the BV11/14 tv's, why can't the Horizon control the B&O motorized stands? The tv costs 200% more than tv's from other companies(without placement options), the contrast screen should be in the tv (especially with their lack of HDR).
Millemissen: Fair enough, and I agree 100 %. I found your first answer rude, but your explanation was very good. You should have written that in the first place :)
Brigantinus: It's true. The 40" tv's costs about 200% more than tv's from another manufactory. The BV14-40 about 500% more. 55" tv's about 100% more, than the premium product of the leading companies. The difference hurts, but if you wanna have one it is your decision to pay the money or not.
Yes, I agree. In my case, the 500 % factor excludes me (as I can't justify spending that much money on a TV, even if it's a beovision) but I totally respect that others feel differently, and I'm not saying that B&O are doing something wrong. I'm just not part of the target group anymore, and that's my problem – not B&O's. For me personally, Beovisions were worth the (smaller) price premium back in the LX/MX days, but today I find them too expensive (I have a V1, though, but I actually thought the V1 was reasonably priced).
If I remember correctly, the V1 did cost around 3000 euro also? Same price as the Horizon.
jc:If I remember correctly, the V1 did cost around 3000 euro also? Same price as the Horizon.
Beolab 28s Beolab 9s Beolab 12-3s Beolab 1s Beolab 6000s 2 pairs Beolab 4000s Beovision 7-55 Beovision 10-40 Beoplay V1 32 inch Beovision Avant 32 inch Beosound 1 (CD player) Beosound 3000 Beosound 5 Core Essence MKII Beoplay M5
BeoGreg:A B&O tv is always (even the new Horizon) a special experience. A smile on your face every time you look at it even power off, no extra furniture (that can easily cost a lot), no extra remotes, no plastic. Just look at the remote you get with the Horizon, not far away from the best ever remote and a nice feeling in your hands for a few years. Of course we all can buy a plastic tv with plastic remote, a Ikea furniture for players and boxes with more remotes, for less. Not to mention that the picture is perfect and the sound (still) outperforms what's out there without adding more cables/speakers/boxes. It just plays in another league (PUC, Wisa...) and asking what you get for the (huge) extra money means your not ready. A B&O tv is an evidence.
BeoGreg:It just plays in another league (PUC, Wisa...) and asking what you get for the (huge) extra money means your not ready.
But that's not the point, is it? I think all of us agree that the better materials, the integration possibilities etc justifies a higher price. The question (at least to me) is how much higher price it justifies....and that of course varies from person to person. There's nothing wrong or right here, as I see it.
In my case, I gladly spent the 50 % premium when getting my LXs and MXs back in the 90s, but I'm not prepared to pay a, let's say, 400 % premium. ...but that's just me. If I had more money I would maybe feel differently, and on the other hand I gladly paid insane money for my two Gaggenau ovens. Other people are willing to pay a 500 % premium for a Beovision, and that's of course fine by me. I don't judge them, and I also don't judge those who's not even willing to pay 50 % extra for the B&O-ness.
Personally, I think the V1 and Horizon prices are quite ok. I was a bit disappointed though when i saw the Horizon in the store – I really like the design (as I said in another thread, I think it's the most "B&O" design in the current range) but I was not 100 % satisfied with the finish, the edges and corners felt very sharp and I thought the matte screen looked a bit cheap, I would have preferred a glossy screen. I also have an issue with the missing features (although I love all the features it actually has, such as the advanced audio engine). That said, if the Horizon was available in 55" I would probably buy one for my livingroom.
I think my biggest problem with today's Beovision prices is that in my opinion, TV design is not as important now as it was in the CRT days. Back then, David Lewis et al did a wonderful job of hiding the big bulk of the CRT, but today that's not needed since the screen itself is what dominates a current day tv. A couple of years ago, I bought my first non-Beovision ever, a 55" Samsung F8005. My first idea was to buy a BV11-55, but in the end I decided that it was too expensive for me (and I don't need the surround sound possibilities) and went for the Samsung instead. Ok, I hate the remote control (but there is a solution for that...), and I miss the sophistication of the Beovision on-screen menus, but designwise I actually think the Samsung is ok for its price – it's just a big (and glossyI screen, with a really thin metal frame around it. The backside is plastic, but at least an ok kind of plastic, and it's flat and the TV is wall-mounted, so I don't see it.
...but once again: I'm only explaining my personal point-of-view, here.
Of course you could also put your eyes on, what is missing by the BV Horizon..
Most people cry out - no HDR at that prize, no premium-tv, then ;-( ;-(
Those who dig a bit deeper will know, that HDR (WCG, HFR) is far from being mature.
There is no standart yet and the guys in the mastering studios (who make the content) know all the problems - they just don't have the solution (yet).
With the old SDR standart it was easy, but finalizing a new (HDR) standart is complicated.
They want something 'fixed' (that can be used for producing tv's), but also something, that has room for develpoment (in 4-4-6 years we maybe will have displays with support for 10.000 nits).
What you can buy now, is just HDR at the very beginning.
These tv's might seem ok to buy (now at a relatively low prize), when you are willing to buy the next in - say - 1 or 2 years (and have all the audio-stuff seperate).
This however, is not the way, that the clock ticks with B&O.
B&O wants to offer a tv, that has overall and everyday qualities (not just PQ'ies).
Typically they wait a bit with implementing the 'latest, newest' features.
IMO the BV Horizon can offer that (if you are satisfied with the 46").
Otherweise waiting for what comes 2017/18 from the LG/B&O cooperation might be the option.
Livingroom: BL3, BL11, BV11-46 Kitchen: Beosound 1 GVA, Beocom 2 Bathroom: M3 Homeoffice: M3, Beocom 2 Library: Beosound Emerge, Beocom 6000 Bedroom: M5, Essence remote Travel: Beoplay E8 2.0, Beoplay EQ, Beoplay Earset
Millemissen:Of course you could also put your eyes on, what is missing by the BV Horizon.. Most people cry out - no HDR at that prize, no premium-tv, then ;-( ;-( Those who dig a bit deeper will know, that HDR (WCG, HFR) is far from being mature. There is no standart yet and the guys in the mastering studios (who make the content) know all the problems - they just don't have the solution (yet). With the old SDR standart it was easy, but finalizing a new (HDR) standart is complicated. They want something 'fixed' (that can be used for producing tv's), but also something, that has room for develpoment (in 4-4-6 years we maybe will have displays with support for 10.000 nits). What you can buy now, is just HDR at the very beginning. These tv's might seem ok to buy (now at a relatively low prize), when you are willing to buy the next in - say - 1 or 2 years (and have all the audio-stuff seperate). This however, is not the way, that the clock ticks with B&O. B&O wants to offer a tv, that has overall and everyday qualities (not just PQ'ies). Typically they wait a bit with implementing the 'latest, newest' features. IMO the BV Horizon can offer that (if you are satisfied with the 46"). Otherweise waiting for what comes 2017/18 from the LG/B&O cooperation might be the option. MM There is a tv - and there is a BV.
BeoNut since '75
same here, folks! je regrette rien, lol
Wohnzimmer: BeoVision Avant 55", BeoLab 11, 12-2 und 12-3 für 5.1-Sound + appleTV 4K und Philips BluRay-Player; BeoSound 2, BeoSound 3000 (fast nur noch Deko)////Schlafzimmer: BeoEssence MkII, BeoLab 4000 + Samsung 46"-TV////Büro: BLC NL/ML, BeoSound 35, Thorens TD320MkII, Samsung 32"-TV, WesternDigital 4TB-Server////Bad: BeoLab 2000; alles CAT7 verkabelt////Küche: M5 (drahtlos) plus diverse apple-Geräte (imac, macbook, ipads, iphones, timecapsule, watch)