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
Hello,
I want to buy new speakers, which need not be connected to a television.
In my selection are the Beolab 3 or Beolab 12-3 in connect with the Playmaker.
Which Speaker have better Sound ?
Has anyone of you heard the two speakers have a direct comparison?
This to me was unfortunately not possible with any of the vendors.
I like doing both.
I want the speakers on the floor stand (20cm - 30cm away from the wall) place.
Wall mounting is not possible.
On paper, yes should the Beolab 12-3 (pure data to) be better.
Would be nice if I could be your buying decisions to help.
Thanks in advance
BeoLab 12.3 are the best !!
vox: Hello, I want to buy new speakers, which need not be connected to a television. In my selection are the Beolab 3 or Beolab 12-3 in connect with the Playmaker. Which Speaker have better Sound ? Has anyone of you heard the two speakers have a direct comparison? This to me was unfortunately not possible with any of the vendors. I like doing both. I want the speakers on the floor stand (20cm - 30cm away from the wall) place. Wall mounting is not possible. On paper, yes should the Beolab 12-3 (pure data to) be better. Would be nice if I could be your buying decisions to help. Thanks in advance
With respect to measurements, the 12-3 would have to be significantly ahead to make an audible difference.
On the other hand, as you are intending to free stand the speakers, IMV the spherical shape of the Beolab 3 will offer an distinct advantage in terms of being free of a flat baffle, which in the case of the 12-3 will add standing waves reflecting off the baffle to sum with the direct sound output of the main drivers, which will increase the coloration/distortion overall; you would most likely expect a considerably more spacious sound from the Lab 3's with better sound-staging and imaging, simply because of the cabinet shape and the way you intend using it - free standing - as against wall placement where the advantage of the sphere would be ameliorated to a degree by the proximity to the wall.
So, IMHO if you were wall mounting, I'd go the 12-3, but for free space/stand mounting, I would go for the Lab 3.
But as always, things such as the aesthetic look etc will come into it; either way they are both excellent active speakers and I can't imagine many people being unhappy with either of them.
Hope this helps & good luck with the decision
Kind Regards
John...
Well actually the Beolab 12-3 in theory will have a more seamless sound transition between the midrange unit to the treble. A 2 inch driver has way better sound dispersion to match the ALT lenses plus the baffle of the Lab12-3s aren't exactly flat so... What really worries me is the sound transition from the midrange to the bass. I suspect a very high crossover is set between the midrange and rear woofers. Clarity wise in theory the Beolab 12-3 will beat the Beolab 3s for sure. The new ice modules plus a genuine three way design along with four amplifiers? And lets not forget the Beolab 12-3 bass alignment is of the sealed type along with dual 6 inch drivers so bass accuracy and distortion characteristics will be way better than the Beolab 3s. That is why I think the Beolab3s are sure to be phased out soon I hope with a proper bookshelf replacements. BTW I have the Beolab3s but only out of practicality since I use them as computer speakers.
I guess you can extrapolate from here that the treble lenses are not the easiest things to work around with and IMHO not worth it at all. I like the Beolab12-3 solely for the design as for the Beolab12-1..... Ewww.... Ewww.. and Ewww... lol
BeoBoy68: BeoLab 12.3 are the best !!
Really? You have heard them? I am so very tempted to buy but the connectivity issue plus the rear facing bass drivers..... Sigh... I shall wait for new freestanding Beolab loudspeakers. The Lab9s and 5s IMHO.... Not very fresh anymore.
MartinW:I can't see the BeoLab 3's leaving the range for a very long time - they are hugely successful, very popular, sellin extremely well and loved by most people who listen to them - as is Acoustic Lens technology in general, though according to Wonderful Electric everything is due to be replaced soon - i guess that opinion us due to his complete lack of any form of commercial or human understanding.
Well I definitely have no access to B&O's sales records and have no idea that the lab 3s are flying out the doors. But I really wonder logically if the Beolab12-2 or the Beolab12-3 loudspeakers are performing way better than the Beolab 3s then what's the point for it to stay in the range? And the new Ice modules make a huge leap in sound quality IMHO. The Beolab3s have been around for nearly a decade I think.
( Complete lack) lol Is that even possible for anything or anyone to have a complete lack of anything. Explain to me...
In short, WonElec can't absorb why people would like small speakers which can be placed almost anywhere you want without having to drill them into a wall. Speakers on a bookshelf or desk? The ability to move them easily if need be? No, that's way too practical for his imagination. Not to mention not wanting to have some oblong tv-centric "plates" on the wall. No, we can't have that. By the same token, why even have a telly when you can have a 4k (resolution, not price) projector?
Oops, I missed this part:
wonderfulelectric:The Beolab3s have been around for nearly a decade I think.
So freaking what? Very seldomly are speaker technology going through a revolution. Going solid state instead of tube amplification was a revolution, and to a lesser extent, going active was also a revolution, whereas introducing the ALT lens was even lesser of a revolution. In fact, I don't consider that latter part a revolution - more of jump ahead in evolutionary terms.
However, just like microphones, it's not exactly an area where revolutions happens these days. It's more a matter of small steps ahead. They (mics and speakers alike) are working in the physical world and there's only so much you can do when you have to deal with physics.
wonderfulelectric:Explain to me...
MartinW: wonderfulelectric: Explain to me... My point exactly!
wonderfulelectric: Explain to me...
Explain to me...
My point exactly!
Haha, that one had me laughing!!
I also like how he makes this statement without having compared them back to back, or, indeed, without hearing them at all:
wonderfulelectric:And the new Ice modules make a huge leap in sound quality IMHO
I may be an annoying ***, but at least I have some attachment to the real world.
Well I just think the old Lab lens ranges do not blend aesthetically to the newer ranges. I mean it kinda make sense no?
I know how portable the Beolab 3s. I have them. I bought them despite of the sound quality for the price. I like how tiny they are etc... You have no idea how long I hesitated... I figured if I can buy a jacket without hesitation for the same price.... Then I have a serious problem with my priorities. So I finally took a leap of faith and got them.
But on an aesthetic level... It doesn't mesh with the newer range of products. IMHO I think the Beolab 12-2 and Beolab 12-3s are so much more elegant. Love them in white. I will connect them to a high quality airplay streamer though.... the playmaker is definitely a no no because there is no 24bit support and I have a ton of 24bit files. And PS... Yes there is a difference in terms of sound quality even on the Lab3s they sound way less fatigue inducing and more lively at the same time that their 16bit equivalents.
I mean how about a reference level replacement for the Lab4000s? They are just as shiny as the newer range so it makes sense. Priced at Beolab 3s perhaps or more? I will like a round version of the Beolab 12. Thanks! haha... I made it sound as if it is built to order like bags or something.
Electrified:I may be an annoying ***, but at least I have some attachment to the real world.
I don't find you annoying. I think it is funny how I am wonderful electric and you are electrified. I thought that was funny. And what is the *** suppose to mean?
wonderfulelectric: Electrified:I may be an annoying ***, but at least I have some attachment to the real world. I don't find you annoying.
I don't find you annoying.
LOL, well others do.
wonderfulelectric:I think it is funny how I am wonderful electric and you are electrified.
I find it unfortunate (and yeah, a bit funny as well).
wonderfulelectric: And what is the *** suppose to mean?
The three stars are Beoworld auto-censoring words, regardless of them being longer than three letters. I wrote "p.rick" without the period.
Time for the electric chair for these two, otherwise Beoworld itself will be on Death Row.
wonderfulelectric:Well I just think the old Lab lens ranges do not blend aesthetically to the newer ranges. I mean it kinda make sense no?
So what? They seem to blend fine to me. I'm not interested in having slabs of aluminium on the wall, though.
wonderfulelectric:I know how portable the Beolab 3s. I have them. I bought them despite of the sound quality for the price.
You definately are in a minority here. The BL3s sounds great for the price. Obviously, they're not big speakers, but if you want big speaker sound, buy bigger speakers.
wonderfulelectric: I figured if I can buy a jacket without hesitation for the same price.... Then I have a serious problem with my priorities. So I finally took a leap of faith and got them.
Biting my tongue.
wonderfulelectric:But on an aesthetic level... It doesn't mesh with the newer range of products. IMHO I think the Beolab 12-2 and Beolab 12-3s are so much more elegant. Love them in white.
Taste is individual, but compared to the BL3s they seem to be aimed at different usages.
wonderfulelectric:I will connect them to a high quality airplay streamer though.... the playmaker is definitely a no no because there is no 24bit support and I have a ton of 24bit files.
Are you sure it's not capable of streaming 24bit files? Could you point me to where you got that?
In reality, what matters most is that the volume control is 24bit. This is usually acheived by padding the 16bit files so that at lower volumes, you still have more than 16bit resolution. And lower volumes matter when you're running something as powerful as the 9s or 5s (i.e. you seldomly let them run full bore).
wonderfulelectric:And PS... Yes there is a difference in terms of sound quality even on the Lab3s they sound way less fatigue inducing and more lively at the same time that their 16bit equivalents.
Are you seriously trying to teach me the difference between 16bit and 24bit files? Are you?
Anyway, for playback of most files these days, there's no difference, since most music is produced with less than 6db dynamic range (yeah, it sucks). You can pad such a file all you want, it won't make one bit of difference. As usual, I suspect it's the same effect as when you think you can hear a difference between signal cables.
wonderfulelectric:I mean how about a reference level replacement for the Lab4000s?
How about not. I seriously think you should consider how you would place an ALT lens into such a design. And if it's wall mount you're after, the BL12-3s are already there.
wonderfulelectric:They are just as shiny as the newer range so it makes sense.
Ah, yes, it's all about being "shiny".
vikinger: Time for the electric chair for these two, otherwise Beoworld itself will be on Death Row.
I would like to push the button, please
Greetings Millemissen
There is a tv - and there is a BV
Electrified: Are you sure it's not capable of streaming 24bit files? Could you point me to where you got that? In reality, what matters most is that the volume control is 24bit. This is usually acheived by padding the 16bit files so that at lower volumes, you still have more than 16bit resolution. And lower volumes matter when you're running something as powerful as the 9s or 5s (i.e. you seldomly let them run full bore).
Most digital volume controls are now executed in 32 bit and beyond domain. On my mac it's 64 and on my dac it is 80 and apparently one dac does it in 120bit...
Okay I tried streaming through the A9 and it sounds all weird... Like slower... I suppose the wifi module in A9 is based on the playmaker?
It's not all about being shiny. I like the sinuous curves on the Lab12s as I do with the tulip shaped beolab 11. Plus I want it in white or some solid colour. And like I mentioned so many times before ALT lens are not exactly necessary plus I said a redesigned Beolab 4000 like same size but better so ALT lens or not I am sure they can make it work. It's still teeny tiny as compared to most bookshelfs out there. BTW I am starting to notice that the ALT lenses getting less focus than before... Exhibit A the A9 does not sound half shabby without it and brought home the CES and we have the Beolab 15 along with the latest Beovisions and the horrible looking Beolab 12-1. No lenses! And the lenses are really polarizing listeners somewhat some people love them some people hate them. The caveat with the lenses is that sound images are not very precise. And in surround sound mode.... You can't really hear the sound transition from one speaker to the next. A big problem!
And I do really think the Beolab 4s and Beolab 3s can be consolidated to a single product say around $2000 - $2500? They are basically the same size! BTW I like the design of the Beolab 4s better.
Like I said I think the lenses did quite a number to the B&O feng shui lol... Ever since their introduction.... I dunno whether it is linked but it is awfully coincidental that sales start plummeting from 2006 on.... I think many B&O buyers are female though so ( I know from my own experiences almost all women I know likes B&O not the old lens range FYI) .... there you go.. I don't think the lenses appeal to female sensibilities. Plus there really are other ways to achieve ultra wide dispersion now.
And to Vox. I will personally go for the 12-3 if space is not an issue. Get a Pioneer N50 or the Musical Fidelity M1 Clic to go along with it. You get a lot out of those streamers trust me. You get to charge your I devices, listen from USB devices plus it is 24bit compatible with a host of digital inputs and the Pioneer is just a smidgen more pricey. Unless that is you really like the look of the Playmaker a lot which I admit is kinda cute.
But do go have a listen and compare the speakers yourself! IMHO the Beolab 3s sound stressed a little beyond normal listening levels.
wonderfulelectric:Most digital volume controls are now executed in 32 bit and beyond domain. On my mac it's 64 and on my dac it is 80 and apparently one dac does it in 120bit...
Perhaps, but that doesn't mean that any of that is necessary. 24bit is more than you'll ever need for a volume control. Look it up how it works, I can't be bothered to explain this as well to you.
wonderfulelectric:It's not all about being shiny. I like the sinuous curves on the Lab12s as I do with the tulip shaped beolab 11. Plus I want it in white or some solid colour.
Yes, it's all about being shiny.
wonderfulelectric:And like I mentioned so many times before ALT lens are not exactly necessary
Yes, you've said so, but with most things you say, it never seem to correspond with reality or even physics.
wonderfulelectric:plus I said a redesigned Beolab 4000 like same size but better so ALT lens or not I am sure they can make it work
You already have that. It's called the BL12-3/12-2.
wonderfulelectric:It's still teeny tiny as compared to most bookshelfs out there.
What is? The 4000s? They already have the BL3s.
wonderfulelectric:BTW I do am starting to see the ALT lenses getting less focus than before... Exhibit A the A9 does not sound half shabby without it and brought home the CES and we have the Beolab 15 along with the latest Beovisions and the horrible looking Beolab 12-1. No lenses!
LOL, as your evidence, you bring forth the A9 which is hardly reference - it's a glorified boombox - albeit a pretty one, and the BL12-1, which is the lower tier of the BL12-range, which otherwise has the ALT lens. I'm surprised you don't bring in the Beolit 12 as "evidence". As for the BL15/16, we're talking about an in-wall product, not stand-alone speakers.
wonderfulelectric:And I do really think the Beolab 4s and Beolab 3s can be consolidated to a single product say around $2000 - $2500? They are basically the same size! BTW I like the design of the Beolab 4s better.
What are you on about? Consolidating them? Yes, I have an idea, stop making the BL4s and consider that "consolidation". They're very different speakers, you know.
wonderfulelectric:Like I said I think the lenses did quite a number to the B&O feng shui lol... Ever since their introduction.... I dunno whether it is linked but it is awfully coincidental that sales start plummeting from 2006 on.... I think many B&O buyers are female though so.... there you go.. I don't think the lenses appeal to female sensibilities.
Ah, yes, idle speculation as usual.
wonderfulelectric:Plus there really are other ways to achieve ultra wide dispersion now.
Again, we have heard your love for other types of products, but when countered, it turns out you even admit they don't measure as well. You should stop with the wishful thinking.
Electrified:Perhaps, but that doesn't mean that any of that is necessary. 24bit is more than you'll ever need for a volume control. Look it up how it works, I can't be bothered to explain this as well to you.
Erm when you use 24bit volume control on 24bit signals what happens? A reduction in resolution! BTW my dacs have at least resolutions beyond 20bits so yeah higher bit computation helps! Plus when you listen with in really low volumes 24bit volume controls might even start cutting into normal 16bit signals.
Electrified:Again, we have heard your love for other types of products, but when countered, it turns out you even admit they don't measure as well. You should stop with the wishful thinking.
Please go http://www.cotswoldsoundsystems.com/index.php . Measure flat on and off axis. Only concern is distortion which can be reduced by simply crossing the BMR over at higher frequency from 300hz. BTW frequency response flatter than almost all super high end midrange tweeter combo out there and not to mention wide dispersion. Plus BMR can be customized hello! There are lower designs from NXT, good designs from the link and then there are higher end ones that are custom made as used in the Naim Ovators.... Jesus I don't even want to bring BMR up in the risk of.... you know..
Electrified: wonderfulelectric:And I do really think the Beolab 4s and Beolab 3s can be consolidated to a single product say around $2000 - $2500? They are basically the same size! BTW I like the design of the Beolab 4s better.
I own both. I know! I am just saying they can just create a whole new loudspeaker that replace both.
Gosh and I thought I am the one responsible for doing off thread.
wonderfulelectric:Please go http://www.cotswoldsoundsystems.com/index.php . Measure flat on and off axis. Only concern is distortion which can be reduced by simply crossing the BMR over at higher frequency from 300hz.
And as I have already explained, the moment you don't play test tones, but have them play actual sounds and musics, they distort even worse. I'm not going to rehash this argument. You already admitted that they're really not ready for prime time, since they have to overcome the problems of physics when it comes to actually implementing them and have them perform well.
wonderfulelectric:I own both. I know! I am just saying they can just create a whole new loudspeaker that replace both.
I don't care if you own both. That matters not one bit. Why combine a good product with a less good product and call that "progress"? The BL3s are much better speakers than the 4000s, not least because of the ALT lens.
Electrified:And as I have already explained, the moment you don't play test tones, but have them play actual sounds and musics, they distort even worse. I'm not going to rehash this argument. You already admitted that they're really not ready for prime time, since they have to overcome the problems of physics when it comes to actually implementing them and have them perform well.
What are you talking about the technology is indeed new and still in its infancy but almost every single loudspeaker out there that have used this tech have garnered awards or rave reviews. Hello! 4.5inch surface area that covers from the midrange up is more than enough to ensure low distortion. Plus it operates very differently from pistonic drivers and it has minimum phase shifts and cancellations as compared to domes and cones. So there is a lot more going for it than against it.
Electrified:I don't care if you own both. That matters not one bit. Why combine a good product with a less good product and call that "progress"? The BL3s are much better speakers than the 4000s, not least because of the ALT lens.
Well the enclosure volume of the Bl4000s is so much bigger than Bl3 so it is more possible to squeeze better performance out of that given volume. You are really taxing on the main drive unit of the Bl3s a lot to produce so much bass etc... I mean it is common knowledge on this forum that the BL3s do not sound too hot without a sub beyond average volume.
wonderfulelectric:What are you talking about the technology is indeed new and still in its infancy but almost every single loudspeaker out there that have used this tech have garnered awards or rave reviews
Those "rave reviews" are completely irrelevant to me, unless they're backed up with measurements. I couldn't care less about what some HiFi idiot thinks.As to what I'm talking about? I'm talking about it having potential, but that it's not ready for prime time, since real world measurements isn't comparable to the competition. It's not hard to comprehend.If you want to have a lesser experience in order to be at the "cutting edge", be my guest. I, for one, don't care about it, until they can at least match the competition. And not just with new drivers, but I'd actually be interested in how long a flat diaphragm will hold up in the long run.
wonderfulelectric:Well the enclosure volume of the Bl4000s is so much bigger than Bl3 so it is more possible to squeeze better performance out of that given volume. You are really taxing on the main drive unit of the Bl3s a lot to produce so much bass etc... I mean it is common knowledge on this forum that the BL3s do not sound too hot without a sub beyond average volume.
I'd trade bottom end for accuracy any day.
Electrified:As to what I'm talking about? I'm talking about it having potential, but that it's not ready for prime time, since real world measurements isn't comparable to the competition. It's not hard to comprehend.If you want to have a lesser experience in order to be at the "cutting edge", be my guest. I, for one, don't care about it, until they can at least match the competition. And not just with new drivers, but I'd actually be interested in how long a flat diaphragm will hold up in the long run.
Have you taken a look at the measurement graphs on the link and offsite from independent reviewers who took measurements of the cheapest BMR implementation as used in Cambridge audio Minx? It is freaking flat throughout the midrange! You can't really get that pretty much on anything else and let's no forget the Standard affordable 4.5" BMR that is offered by Cotsworld is flat off and on axis from 150hz up to beyond 20khz like flat flat... http://www.cotswoldsoundsystems.com/specifications/CSS_Specification_Sheet_BMR85DD_N4Y_r1.pdf
Where else can you get that?
Electrified:I'd trade bottom end for accuracy any day.
I know bass accuracy, I have ATC monitors.... And lab3s are not anywhere near accurate or distortionless.... distortion full more like it... You can't cheat physics with that small a driver with that small an enclosure and the bass radiators used to boost the bass? Bass when it is pure is not supposed to boom but to be felt.
Oh never mind you think the Lab3s should never be phased out. I say it is time. We both have our own reasons. I want new exciting products! I think new B&O speakers have the potential to rock big time. The B&O decline is forcing the R&D team to wake up big time!
Anyway... The thread starter wanted to know which is better I will say go for the Beolab 12-3s. BL3s are more for applications where space is limited and obviously that is not a problem for him. The bass alignment in the Lab12s are sealed and offers many times the surface area for bass reproduction so...If clarity throughout the range is concerned that it is the 12s for sure! Plus the 12-3s I will most probably get. ... So that's my recommendation
wonderfulelectric: Have you taken a look at the measurement graphs on the link and offsite from independent reviewers who took measurements of the cheapest BMR implementation as used in Cambridge audio Minx? It is freaking flat throughout the midrange! You can't really get that pretty much on anything else and let's no forget the Standard affordable 4.5" BMR that is offered by Cotsworld is flat off and on axis from 150hz up to beyond 20khz like flat flat... http://www.cotswoldsoundsystems.com/specifications/CSS_Specification_Sheet_BMR85DD_N4Y_r1.pdf Where else can you get that?
Still not able to comprehend the basics, I see.
wonderfulelectric: know bass accuracy, I have ATC monitors
I was talking about overall accuracy, not solely accuracy in the deep end. You were saying that the BL3s couldn't go as deep as the BL4000s, because it had a larger box. My point was that the 4000s are not as accurate as the BL3s, and hence I prefer the latter.
wonderfulelectric:And lab3s are not anywhere near accurate or distortionless.... distortion full more like it
I'm sorry, but once again you show your complete ignorance of the subject at hand. It's like your very intelligent comment that "Apple runs on mac". FFS, WonElec.
wonderfulelectric:You can't cheat physics with that small a driver with that small an enclosure and the bass radiators used to boost the bass? Bass when it is pure is not supposed to boom but to be felt.
Yet again, here we are. You think that "being felt" is opposed to "boom". You can damn well have booming bass, while it being felt. Look at most PA setups, or go to any club, and you will get just that. You can have loads af accurate bass, yet not feel it. Think good headphones, and there you are.
wonderfulelectric:Oh never mind you think the Lab3s should never be phased out
That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying they shouldn't make them bigger, that they shouldn't compromise in order to satisfy the fashionistas, and that making a compromise between a lesser and the BL3s is making a worse product than the BL3s.
wonderfulelectric: I say it is time. We both have our own reasons. I want new exciting products!
I know you want new and exciting products. You're all about new and shiny, regardless of it actually being better. THe BL15/16/Amp1 is new and shiny, there's the BL12-3s, the BL12-2s, the BL12-1s, the A9, the Beolit 12, yet you're arguing they're bringing nothing new to market. They have good speakers all around. The BL5 is a near perfect speaker, as is the BL9 (depending on venue), and it's a matter of refining that, in my book.
But to you, unless it's completely new, and visibly different, it's no good.
This time, I think I'll take a break from your stupidity. I really can't deal with the stupidity and ignorance anymore.
Electrified:I was talking about overall accuracy, not solely accuracy in the deep end. You were saying that the BL3s couldn't go as deep as the BL4000s, because it had a larger box. My point was that the 4000s are not as accurate as the BL3s, and hence I prefer the latter.
I am talking about a Lab3 that is supposedly as big as the lab 4000s... Are we on the same page?
I like the lab 9s and 5s when they first came out. I thought how bold?! But now the novelty wears off....
Anyway let's not derail and leave the Beoworlders in peace. You will get an update about my design for the A9. And I will not buy the Beolit 12 .... Not a picnic or outdoor person here.
To start with - I do not have Lab 3:s (perhaps in the future..). But I do have Lab 12-3´s and several pairs of Lab 4000´s all wall mounted. To my taste Lab 12-3´s were so thin in bass that I needed to get a Lab 11 to fulfil the scene. With the Lab 4000´s I have never felt deficiency in bass.
I was able to to compare Lab 12-3´s with ceiling mounted RL 60.2's in the same room and the latter was a clear winner. Lab 12-3's supported by a Lab 11 were a winner with a very tiny margin. Bang for the buckwise - somewhat ridiculous.
I'm sorry I can not help you exactly but look at the Lab 4000's as well- If their look satisfies your eye. They can be floor mounted as well.
Beosound Stage, Beovision 8-40, Beolit 20, Beosound Explore.
Chris Townsend:I recently listened to the 12-1 and then listened to the same track on 4000's. The 12-1 were markedly better in every respect. Maybe the settings weren't correct?
Oh thanks for the input! That's nice to know.
Sigh if only I get them for my wall hung IMac. I checked and it's too tall so I have to stick with the Lab3s instead. That's why I suggest a round version of it. Way bolder and better proportioned. Round lenses, meets round perforated midrange speaker vents meets around exterior meets the sinuous curved panels. That will be a stunner! Especially in white, black or even red. Like futuristic chinese lanterns. Imagine having them in the corridors of a chic boutique hotel. The lit lenses will enhance the overall look too. For this design they can probably use a way bigger coscone say 9" and 3" midrange driver.
It really makes perfect sense that the 12-1 outperforms the Beolab4000s. The 4000s are supposed to be phased out soon remember? It's mentioned in my thread and also implied in the product description on this site.
Oh I just realized that you listened to the 12-1 and not the 12-2 well... I suppose the 12-2 will only be better. So it's all good news.
Mico: To start with - I do not have Lab 3:s (perhaps in the future..). But I do have Lab 12-3´s and several pairs of Lab 4000´s all wall mounted. To my taste Lab 12-3´s were so thin in bass that I needed to get a Lab 11 to fulfil the scene. With the Lab 4000´s I have never felt deficiency in bass. I was able to to compare Lab 12-3´s with ceiling mounted RL 60.2's in the same room and the latter was a clear winner. Lab 12-3's supported by a Lab 11 were a winner with a very tiny margin. Bang for the buckwise - somewhat ridiculous. I'm sorry I can not help you exactly but look at the Lab 4000's as well- If their look satisfies your eye. They can be floor mounted as well.
Oh you have the 12-3s already! That's quick so they require a subwoofer?.... Okay... I guess I might need to wait for a new floorstander. I mean the range is meant to be slim and wall hung anyway. Perhaps you were used to the humped bass provided by the Lab4000's bass port?
I was just about ready to order a pair of 12-3s to replace my 4000s as rears. Based on your opinion I may need to rethink that idea. Thanks for the input.
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