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
Dear members,
something I wanted to do for long and have now finally been able to conclude - a comparison of pre ABL Beolab 8000s and post ABL Beolab 8000s.
Let me fist say that what I will write are only first impressions and I will do some more tests. Also, sound is always a bit hard to describe, but still I think the subject might be of interest to some and maybe others can add to what I have found and critically reflect or even contradict.
I started with the post ABL version and then listened to the pre ABL version. At first glance, the post ABL version has stronger bass and sounds clearer. So, when directly comparing the two, one could easily conclude that the post ABL version sounds better. To me it was similar to my experience when comparing Beovox 45'2s to Beovox MC 120'2s. I had one pair of each type of speaker attached to my 6000 quad, so could easily switch back and forth between them. Also in this case, I found 45'2s to be clearer and have stronger bass. Not much between them, but in direct comparison it sounds like it.
Another aspect one could add is that the pre ABL lab 8000s sound warmer, less clinical, a bit more analog and maybe even more full (?) - I guess those are the words typically used to describe what I have found. They appear to be better balanced than the post ABL version just like I would say the MC 120'2s are more balanced than the 45'2s (although those are pretty well-balanced, too).
So, which ones do I prefer over the others? Honestly, I can't tell. As mentioned above, post ABL Beolab 8000s can easily appear better sounding at first glance in direct comparison, but the pre ABL version seems to be better balanced and will therefore probably be less tiring to listen to.
I'd be curious finding out what others who have done similar comparisons think about this.
Greetings,
Kai
Thanks very much for posting your impressions. Quite interesting.
Jeff
I'm afraid I'm recovering from the BeoVirus.
I read somewhere a long time ago that the pre ABL "Mk 1" plays basis in one of the two drivers and mid in the other. Treble is og course in the treble part.
This gives us three drivers working their own part og the frequency spectrum.
The later ABL "Mk 2" had another crossover. The drivers now both play bass and treble.
With that in mind it makes sende that you can hear the difference. Three drivers working in collaboration will make a more nuanced sound than the other configuration.
If you introduce sau a BL2 into the setup i think the pre ABL will shine even more since we now have even more drivers working together to give you the most linear sound.
With more compressed music, especially victims of the loudness war, i think the ABL speakers wins at first glance. Limits to and brute mastering that cuts the mid when the bass hits. I think the ABL configuration is good for that. But personalet I will always prefer a soundsystem as true as possible with a more advanced crossover than a system that can reproduce compressed music better.
I hope the above makes sense. English is not my native language.
I may have to look up the crossover design of the pre-ABL speakers, I have heard, like you, that the two woofers cover different ranges as opposed to the post-ABL speakers. Would be interesting to know more.
see HERE
Ban boring signatures!
Thanks Puncher, I've seen that description before, am still somewhat curious as to what kind of passive filter, what slope, what freq, was used. One day when I have time and interest I'll have to look at the service manual. Mine are ABL units made after the change in xover design, I don't think I've ever encountered a pair older than mine so never had the chance to hear one.
Would be interested to hear whether anybody else has compared pre and post ABL Lab 8000s side by side?
Have you tried searching on the old archived forum?