No smaller version of Beolab 90 for many years.

I have been waiting and holding out for a smaller version of Beolab 90s. It's more compact size and affordability yet 80% of performance would be alluring to many here as well as me in the way a Beolab 9/20 is over a Beolab 5 but if we recall BL5 was released in 2002 and we had to wait 5 years for the BL9. It would be foolish of B&O to bring out a smaller version of BL90 so soon until sales of BL90 have been maxed out. My guess is that we will have to wait till 2020 or longer. I feel sad and can't wait that long. 😫😫

Ask Geoff Martin !

He is working now on the future Baby

seethroughyou:

My guess is that we will have to wait till 2020 or longer. I feel sad and can't wait that long

If your hypothesis is true don't be sad - there are some happy BL20 owners - so join them

On the other hand your hypothesis would actual predict a "BL3" equivalent for next year ?

How likely is it that a small BL90 will have the aesthetics of the BL5 or very different sound output? The BL5 has  become the next logical step down from the BL90  in the current range. Everyone raged about how good the BL5 was with its acoustic lens, yet here we are expecting a mini BL90 to have superior qualities!

Graham

EDIT

Lifestyle webpage:

"Bang & Olufsen's current flagship model, and widely regarded to be the best Active Loudspeaker in the world, BeoLab 5 were the first units to incorporate the fantastic Acoustic Lens technology. Boasting a simply colossal 2500w per channel, the BeoLab 5 produce a sound so accurate they'll change the way you listen to music forever."

vikinger:

How likely is it that a small BL90 will have the aesthetics of the BL5 or very different sound output? The BL5 has become the next logical step down from the BL90 in the current range. Everyone raged about how good the BL5 was with its acoustic lens, yet here we are expecting a mini BL90 to have superior qualities!

Graham

EDIT

Lifestyle webpage:

"Bang & Olufsen's current flagship model, and widely regarded to be the best Active Loudspeaker in the world, BeoLab 5 were the first units to incorporate the fantastic Acoustic Lens technology. Boasting a simply colossal 2500w per channel, the BeoLab 5 produce a sound so accurate they'll change the way you listen to music forever."

The BL5 is not at all the next logical step down from BL90. Your statement is based on an assertion that sound quality is dictated to solely by the speaker. Although the speaker produces acoustic energy it is the room that affects many of the parameters that affect sound quality. The speaker and room interaction is the most important aspect in hifi. The BL90 is different from the BL5 in so many technologies of you read the white paper. The BL90 produces an adjustable cardioid radiation using DSP and lateral speakers, the BL5 does not and is omnidirectional. The left BL90 knows what the right BL90 does but the left and right in BL5 do not correct for each other. The BL90 does extensive room correction whereas the BL5 is very limited in bass spectrum. Control of radiation pattern and cross talk room correction is the next step in optimising the room-speaker interaction. Even the average home speakers with room correction produce just as good if not better sound in the sweet spot compared to the BL5 - I've heard this and used to have BL5. Acoustic lens technology is too scattergun and coarse compared to multichannel DSP room correction. The BL5 which I owned was good but even within a few years of owning it I knew it's limitations when i started auditioning studio monitors that were applying room correction. Sadly, the average audiophool obsesses with cables, capacitors, gold, valve amps and fancy drivers when they should be treating the room and correcting the speakers radiation. I loved the BL5 but I will never be going back to an acoustic lens speaker ever again and never spend money on a solution that doesn't incorporate room correction of some sort. I don't want traditional monkey coffins in my lounge hence waiting for an elegant B&O solution but the wait may be a lot longer....

Don't wish your life away. Waiting 'years' for someone else to create something is utter madness. There's hundreds of products on the market that may suit you. If not, find another hobby that brings joy :)

Paul W:

Don't wish your life away. Waiting 'years' for someone else to create something is utter madness. There's hundreds of products on the market that may suit you. If not, find another hobby that brings joy :)

All,

My two cents -

I think this is very true and the same with the thread of BV7-55 / BL7.6 vs Avant 55. Both were the best B&O could make (at a price point) in their respective time. No good lamenting on old equipment capabilities and no good waiting for the future.

Vis-à-vis Beolab 90, I think it will be interesting where B&O go on this. OK couple of basics:- The BL90 has GBP11k in Sales Tax (VAT), it reportedly has over GBP10 in Scan-speak drivers, plus all the other internals and that casting. I'd image that B&O and the Dealer have GBP20-25K to split between them per pair to buy a sandwich and feed all the little Sven and Peters at home. Not a huge amount considering R&D, loans, and the once in a blue-moon sale.

Next, the BL5 for all its goodness, never really sold in huge numbers (like the 6000 or 8000) despite its very competent abilities. One significant reason for this is that at above GBP10k, the competition for this class of loudspeaker becomes very tough. (not to mention B&O has a hard time with the so-called audiophile "my cable is better than yours" brigade - even with the BL90).

So any "Son of BL90" has a difficult thing to become, overcoming an engineering, technical and financial juggling act in doing so.

1. It has to be smaller, compact and more liked for everyone to put in the average home placement.

2. It has to have less drivers and guts to reduce parts-bin costs - diminishing its all-encompassing performance capabilities and size.

3. It has to come in at a sales price-point between the BL20 and BL5 (I would guess GBP12k max for good sales volumes) otherwise, it becomes another 5 and the 20's continue to be the real flagship product.

There are no real bad loudspeakers in the B&O range and I have to think hard of one that is standalone (PL and non-Play Loudspeaker) that was bad. 4k, 6k, 8k, 3's, 5's, 7's, 9's, 12's, 18's, 20's and 90's - they're all good and they're all good for price-point for expected duty. I think we can rejoice in that.

seethroughyou:

vikinger:

 

How likely is it that a small BL90 will have the aesthetics of the BL5 or very different sound output? The BL5 has become the next logical step down from the BL90 in the current range. Everyone raged about how good the BL5 was with its acoustic lens, yet here we are expecting a mini BL90 to have superior qualities!

Graham

EDIT

Lifestyle webpage:

 

"Bang & Olufsen's current flagship model, and widely regarded to be the best Active Loudspeaker in the world, BeoLab 5 were the first units to incorporate the fantastic Acoustic Lens technology. Boasting a simply colossal 2500w per channel, the BeoLab 5 produce a sound so accurate they'll change the way you listen to music forever."

 

The BL5 is not at all the next logical step down from BL90. Your statement is based on an assertion that sound quality is dictated to solely by the speaker. Although the speaker produces acoustic energy it is the room that affects many of the parameters that affect sound quality. The speaker and room interaction is the most important aspect in hifi. The BL90 is different from the BL5 in so many technologies of you read the white paper. The BL90 produces an adjustable cardioid radiation using DSP and lateral speakers, the BL5 does not and is omnidirectional. The left BL90 knows what the right BL90 does but the left and right in BL5 do not correct for each other. The BL90 does extensive room correction whereas the BL5 is very limited in bass spectrum. Control of radiation pattern and cross talk room correction is the next step in optimising the room-speaker interaction. Even the average home speakers with room correction produce just as good if not better sound in the sweet spot compared to the BL5 - I've heard this and used to have BL5. Acoustic lens technology is too scattergun and coarse compared to multichannel DSP room correction. The BL5 which I owned was good but even within a few years of owning it I knew it's limitations when i started auditioning studio monitors that were applying room correction. Sadly, the average audiophool obsesses with cables, capacitors, gold, valve amps and fancy drivers when they should be treating the room and correcting the speakers radiation. I loved the BL5 but I will never be going back to an acoustic lens speaker ever again and never spend money on a solution that doesn't incorporate room correction of some sort. I don't want traditional monkey coffins in my lounge hence waiting for an elegant B&O solution but the wait may be a lot longer....

As it happens my S45 Mk1 passive speakers fit with my room acoustics perfectly, whether driven by a BM2000 or OliveOne. They are high up, out of the way, and will stay that way until the grandchildren can be trusted not to have accidents with the likes of the BL20's. I also have to give my neighbours some consideration.

I have no personal experience of the acoustic lens speakers (i.e. the majority of the current B&O speaker range). It just strikes me as rather odd that a technology that many owners seemed to praise in the past is suddenly condemned as coarse and inadequate!

Graham 

Just because B&O have launched a £50,000 loudspeaker doesn't mean we have seen the end of ALT.

Mr 10Percent:

There are no real bad loudspeakers in the B&O range and I have to think hard of one that is standalone (PL and non-Play Loudspeaker) that was bad. 4k, 6k, 8k, 3's, 5's, 7's, 9's, 12's, 18's, 20's and 90's - they're all good and they're all good for price-point for expected duty. I think we can rejoice in that.

I note the absence of the 4s and agree that they don't make the B&O grade - perhaps we should view them as nascent BeoPlay speakers ?

Duels:

Just because B&O have launched a £50,000 loudspeaker doesn't mean we have seen the end of ALT.

Absolutely true. In fact, I can see why they wouldn't go for lower end versions of the 90 because the 90 isn't suited for a large part of B&Os traditional market. Face it, the 90 is targeted at audiophiles and people seriously willing to listen from a sweet spot. If you try and make it sound really good with room correction, the better the correction the smaller the sweet spot, and B&Os traditional market is people who want good sound but don't want to sit in a vise like position to hear it, but want music around the house and that sounds good all over the room, hence the move to ALT lenses to start with. Granted the 90 can be set to perform more like an ALT system, but why would you spend the kind of money the 90's technology requires to mimic something that can be done much cheaper with a set of ALT lenses?

 

 

vikinger:

 It just strikes me as rather odd that a technology that many owners seemed to praise in the past is suddenly condemned as coarse and inadequate!

That is called progress!

If B&O can built (a) better loudspeaker(s) without the acoustic lens, why shouldn't they?

There is absolutely no reason to condemne the acoustic lens - but maybe they can come up with something better, even with smaller speakers.

MM

Jeff:

Granted the 90 can be set to perform more like an ALT system, but why would you spend the kind of money the 90's technology requires to mimic something that can be done much cheaper with a set of ALT lenses?

It is not only the flexible beam width control, that makes the concept of the 90'es interesting.

(The acoustic lens speakers have a 'fixed' beam width)

It is also the beam direction control and (very important) the room compensation features.

MM

Now we have the situation where some Beoworlders are condemning the ALT technology as being unsatisfactory and superseded by the BL90 technology.

What will this do for sales of the mid-market B&O speakers? I can see the detractors in the audiophile blogs saying that B&O speaker technology was never up to the job...... "even people on Beoworld are saying so....... so, as we thought, ALT was just an overpriced gimmick."

Personally I am sure that the whole range of acoustic lens speakers will be modified in the future to take account of all possible automatic room acoustic corrections using ever improving technologies.

Graham

dup'd

elephant:

Mr 10Percent:

 

There are no real bad loudspeakers in the B&O range and I have to think hard of one that is standalone (PL and non-Play Loudspeaker) that was bad. 4k, 6k, 8k, 3's, 5's, 7's, 9's, 12's, 18's, 20's and 90's - they're all good and they're all good for price-point for expected duty. I think we can rejoice in that.

 

 

I note the absence of the 4s and agree that they don't make the B&O grade - perhaps we should view them as nascent BeoPlay speakers ?

 

not intentional. I think they are all great, some obviously better than others - but all good for what they are

 

vikinger:

Now we have the situation where some Beoworlders are condemning the ALT technology as being unsatisfactory and superseded by the BL90 technology.

What will this do for sales of the mid-market B&O speakers? I can see the detractors in the audiophile blogs saying that B&O speaker technology was never up to the job...... "even people on Beoworld are saying so....... so, as we thought, ALT was just an overpriced gimmick."

Personally I am sure that the whole range of acoustic lens speakers will be modified in the future to take account of all possible automatic room acoustic corrections using ever improving technologies.

Graham

 

the BL5's are great speakers by any measure. The BL90s are to my pleasure better but they are over x3 more expensive. 

There is is a trend to deride Omni sound but it is a very natural sound and good for 99% of the time. Only on critical listening where one is interested in image do they offer a flat soundstage compared to say the 90's.

 

 

Well it just depends on your audience. Impromptu party at my house at the end of a holiday weekend and the BL18s are in their element. In this environment nothing could sound better. Sure in a serious listening contest the BL18s may lose to the 90s or whatever comes next. But this is everyday listening we are talking about. And it's a f***ing blast with the 18s. Back to the music.........

To sound only mildly facetious: the best loudspeakers are those I use every day in my home to enjoy music.

There will obviously be better ones by any standard measure. So I enjoy what I can afford and live with, knowing they're B&O (whatever model they may be) means I am proud to be part of a very special club. 

Now, as Duels said: Back to the music :-)

Well said Sal, well said

I'm with 10% on the 4s.  While they are the bottom of the range, they are perfect in my bedroom.  Any other BL would be over kill.  The strange thing is that I thought the sounded pretty meh in the store, and really bought them more for the size and looks.  However, once I had them setup in the bedroom, they came alive.  Really pleasant.  No one should judge these if they only heard them in the store. 

Í wouldn't normally hijack a thread like this, but I was just listening to them this weekend (lazy holiday morning),  and it reminded me of the huge difference between the store and home experience, and how glad I am that I bought them.  I'll tie this in by saying this supports the BL90 contention that the room is an important part of the sound experience. 

Stan