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
For nearly 14 years I have been an avid B&o fan starting with a Beosound 9000 and Lab 1 & 2s and then moved to Beolab 5s in 2004. I saved for a whole year and was on the bread and water to save for my Lab5s and was blown away. I bought a Beoeound 5 and that was the beginning of the big disappointment. Since my Bs5 purchase I have grown to despise it with its silly dial and its sluggish pointer and limited functionality. I felt a sense of relief when I eBay'd it a few weeks ago. I contacted B&o about upgrading the DAC in my lab5 and never heard back and given their terrible customer service with this and the never appearing ALAC I am now going to part with my beloved Lab5s. B&o where are the new 24bit/192 kHz DACs do i can listen to Studio Master downloads, the amazing streamer, the next reference speaker....? Why have you neglected your audio? Why are you persisting with the Bs5 when it was already out of date in 2009? Why is your build quality so poor compared to your products from the 80s and 90s? Are you coming up with a slick computer audio solution? Why is your software so terrible when small firms like Naim, Linn, Cambridge Audio are constantly refining their apps to control their streamers? It seems as if B&o are punch drunk, lost at sea, on screen saver mode....I haven't bought anything of inspiration since 2004. Is this the end, please say it isn't. Please don't let 2013 be another damp squib of a year!
.
Present: BL90, Core, BL6000, CD7000, Beogram 7000, Essence Remote.
Past: BL1, BL2, BL8000, BS9000, BL5, BC2, BS5, BV5, BV4-50, Beosystem 3, BL3, DVD1, Beoremote 4, Moment.
Great first post!
Your sentiments do strike a chord with me.
Living Room: Beosystem 4, Beolab 7-2 (Center), Beolab 9 (Fronts), Beolab 8000 (Rears), no Subwoofer. Screen: Sony KD-85XH9096Dining Room: Beosound Essence MK II with Beolab 4000 on stands, fed by Amazon Echo Show 8Home Cinema: Beosystem 4, Beolab 7-4 (Center), Beolab 1 (Fronts), Beolab 4000 (Rears). Projector: Sony VPL-HW55Home Office: Beosystem 3, Beolab 7-4, Beolab 5000, Screen: Sony KD-55XH9005 on Beovision 7-40 stand, ML to Beosound 9000 MK3 and Beosound 5/Beomaster 5 (1 TB SSD version)Bedroom: Sony KD-65XH9077, Beosound Essence MK II with Beolab 6002 and Beolab 11 (all white, wall-mounted)
In storage: Beolab 5000/Beomaster 5000 (1960s).
I thought about this for a moment. Moments of B&O awesomeness in my life:
1st I bought a BS2300 with BL2500 in 1998.
2nd Moment of awesomeness I bought BL3 and BL2 in 2006 and attached it to my BS2300
I also have BS9000 an BC2 and BV8 but simplicity of Bs2300 and sound of BL3/BL2 did it for me.
I think B&O needs to focus on Beoplay to support margin/cash flow revenue/ and then bring back the old standards.
People buy LP's again no kidding.
P.s. Note that all my stuff still works. I used up 5 non b&O MP3 players or so in between.
Man, I'm glad this is my first time playing with and discovering all the "OLD" B&O stuff, because I'm having such enjoyment with it all and see nothing in the current line-up that grabs my attention. My addiction has now saddled me with two Beolink 7000s, a Beomaster 7000, Beolab 4ks and a Beosystem 2500 with Beolab 2500 speakers. I also might have a Beocord 7000 and a pair of RL6000s on the way from the same seller that sold me the BM7000 and second BL7000 since that BL7000 has some problems.
Now, I can't keep ALL of it, and I don't even have room for all of it right now... but enjoying products from B&O's arguably best period in history is not something I'm regretting! All that's pretty much left for me to play with is a BS9000 (which I keep convincing myself out of since I don't listen to CDs), MAYBE a pair of BeoLab 1s and a pair of BeoLab 5s.
And let me also say that there is something uniquely awesome about acquiring this older equipment and unlike my Apple addiction, knowing that it's not terribly likely that B&O is likely to one up any of these products in a meaningful way ever again. Not like Apple where something better and newer is flashed in front of you every 8-12 months and you're left with something that feels antiquated... No, these were B&Os best years. That said, B&O are faced with a challenge in keeping up with the modern ways in which people consume their music and video. Products like the original BeoPlay and the BS5/5e/PlayMaker are just their best attempts at trying to keep up with all this. You can't really blame them for trying to adapt to what people are using today.
Anyway, I've got plenty to keep me busy living in the 1990s and early 2000s. This stuff is AMAZING. :)
Try 1965: 48 years collecting and enjoying Bang & Olufsen.
I purchased a Beosound 4 a few years ago, with a spare glass lid, and it continues to play my 2G MP3 SD cards fine. But try to load a CD and be quick, or count your fingers. Dr. Joseph-Ignace Guillotin would be proud to use this product, so it's back to the store for repairs again.
However, I am glad B&O remains in business. Economic times remain tough for the manufacturer, worldwide.
It is a good thing that I have a back-up BS 3200. The BS 4 can go in for a needed repair.
One word sexy. Forget digital. Go back to the beogram 7000. It's a win win!! Music files have a place. On your phone. & that's it!!!!! WOOF WOOF!!!
High quality music files certainly have a place in a good home-stereosystem!
A phone is for telephone-calls and texting!!
That's it!!!
Grrr! Millemissen
There is a tv - and there is a BV
Millemissen: High quality music files certainly have a place in a good home-stereosystem! A phone is for telephone-calls and texting!! That's it!!! Grrr! Millemissen
10 years ago maybe.
I enjoy some of the nicest music listening moments whilst out walking and using my phone. With the hopefully imminent arrival of some nice new shiny B&O headphones, the summer is looking even brighter. I don't think a fat middle aged man walking through Northumberland, rocking some bright white "Beats" earphones is a particularly good picture
Beosound Stage, Beovision 8-40, Beolit 20, Beosound Explore.
To be honest, if one has a Beocenter 9500, active speakers and a link system including a Beoport attached to a decent computer with your music files on it, what else could one want? Superb looks and ergonomics, a huge library of music available via a touch screen phone or iPod etc, two way communication with the rest of your music collection and great sound.
For your info, the Beoport is being removed from the product list as is the Beolink converter so if you want either, now is the time to get one. The Beoport in particular is a complete bargain - full access to you music through any ML system.
Peter
Also I would like to contact sometimes to word. I do not ask for excuse there my English well is I try to translate it with the Translater and hope that it is still clear. I think that I can call myself absolute B&o fan. Luckily I have a woman (whom I have exchanged) them this insanity tolerates. She means our flat looks like a B&o business. In 1997 I have bought to myself my first B&o arrangement for my 40th birthday. I was it an Ouverture later against a BS3200 exchanged. Whenever I saw this arrangement in films and the SHEET in 8000 beat faster my heart before enthusiasm. It was and is for me still what the special. Later I armed - in the appendix one sees my devices. The Beolab 5 was for me also the last big highlight in 2008. Still today new visitors whether it UFOs or fountains ask me are. If I put them in the ears mostly fly away to them and they have totally been surprised. And I them to me only a few years them to me "nicely look" had to go. The biggest disappointment was beocom5. Only after some updates it was usable as a phone. And with the Beo 6 I have even annoyance, constantly it does not function, display or other innards are changed. If I today a B&o store enter only disappointment spreads. Nothing makes be beating my heart more or to want to have my desire this. It is a pity... now I think of having reached a final state and will please me probably only in my old devices. For me the BS 9000 is not still a piece of art what I would like to miss. I would never have thought that B&o takes such a development.
BeoVision 7-40 HD-Modul, BeoViision 11-40, BeoVision 8 32" white + Floor Stand, 2x Apple TV 4 mit Kodi, DVD2, HDR2, BeoSound 9000 MKIII White Edition, 2x BeoSound Moment + Floor Stand, 2x BeoSound Stage, BeoSound Core, BeoSound 35 brass, BeoSound 1 MKII + Floor Stand, 2x BeoSound 3, BeoSound 6, BeoSound 3200, BeoSound Essence , BeoPlay A9 Nordic Sky twilight, BeoPlay A8 MKII white + Floor Stand, BeoPlay A2 grey, 2x BeoPlay A3 white/bright blue, BeoPlay A1, 2x BeoPlay S3 white, Beolit 12 (White Edition), Beogram TX2, BeoLab 5, BeoLab 3, BeoLab 7-4, BeoLab 8000 MKII, Beolab 11, 2x BeoLab 3500, 4x LC2, 4x Beo4 - MK1-3, BeoRemonte One BT, 2x BeoRemonte Halo, Audio Terminal, Beolink 1000, BeoLink 7000, 2x EarSet A8, 3x A9 Keyring, EarSet 2, Form2, BeoPlay H6, 3x BeoTime, Beowatch, 2x Lightmanager Pro+ B&o Version, 4x BeoCom5, Beoline2, 3x Speakerphone, BeoTalk 1200, 5x Cabinets, MLGW, BLGW,
The BL5 will not take 24bit/192 Khz files of which i have a few and intend to buy a lot more in fact if i could replace my pre-exiting CD quality to this. Can i hear the difference between CD quality? Yes absolutely and my wife who mostly listens to her Roberts Radio in the kitchen who came and auditioned streamers with me a few back can also tell. Not only can you hear the difference you also get a spatial representation of the room it was recorded in with the echoes coming off the walls from the instrument and then into the microphone. One can hear the sustain pedal of the piano creaking, the thump of the high treble keys on the felt, the resonance of the sound board on the violin, sheets of music being turned...so yes one can hear them more clearly and my word it is definitely worth it...!
Studiomaster:
http://www.linnrecords.com/linn-what-is-a-studio-master.aspx
There are a few others that do this like Naim etc..and would 100% recommend them but sadly none of B&o stuff can manage this. A high quality streamer with an awesome DAC in the quality casing of old B&O would do the trick!
Peter:he Beoport is being removed from the product list as is the Beolink converter
The B&O product list is getting worryingly short. !
Some interesting threads about 24bit/192Khz music -
http://www.soundonsound.com/forum/showflat.php?Cat=&Number=1019661&page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&fpart=1#1019661&utm_source=supporter_message&utm_medium=email
http://itrax.com/Pages/ArticleDetails.php?aID=32
http://hddaudio.net/viewtopic.php?id=6336&p=7
Some of which openly accuse Linn and others of manipulating the non-studio masters downloads to purposely sound worse, thereby "demonstrating" the clear quality improvement of the studio master downloads.
To truly compare the difference you'd be better off downsampling/dithering the studiomaster file yourself using a good quality audio editor and then doing the comparison. In a blind listening test the smart money is on the "can't hear the difference" result.
Ban boring signatures!
Puncher: In a blind listening test the smart money is on the "can't hear the difference" result.
In a blind listening test the smart money is on the "can't hear the difference" result.
To me, your last sentence is key, and I don't think it can be emphasized enough! I think people who believe that replacing cables, using high end amplifiers, and want high resolution recordings have never heard of the placebo effect.
D
I don't nean to be bossy, but I think B&O are losing their razzle dazzle They really do make beautiful stuff. They should not try and compete so much, but concentrate on what they are brilliant for. Stunning design Silly women pay 4K for a stupid handbag, so why aren't boys alowed to have their toys? . It would make me have a semi nervous break down if thyt ever went broke. It really would. It's a shame every other company is ripping their design philoshopy My two cents worth.....
Puncher: Some interesting threads about 24bit/192Khz music - http://www.soundonsound.com/forum/showflat.php?Cat=&Number=1019661&page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&fpart=1#1019661&utm_source=supporter_message&utm_medium=email http://itrax.com/Pages/ArticleDetails.php?aID=32 http://hddaudio.net/viewtopic.php?id=6336&p=7 Some of which openly accuse Linn and others of manipulating the non-studio masters downloads to purposely sound worse, thereby "demonstrating" the clear quality improvement of the studio master downloads. To truly compare the difference you'd be better off downsampling/dithering the studiomaster file yourself using a good quality audio editor and then doing the comparison. In a blind listening test the smart money is on the "can't hear the difference" result.
It wouldn't surprise me a bit, it sounds a lot like a repeat of the Sony SACD debacle, where a number of people analyzed the SACD high bit rate version and found not so subtle remastering and freq response tailoring. I distrust any and all results from non level matched double blind test. The human ear and mind are just too fallible when it comes to detecting small differences.
People can and should do and buy whatever they think they need, but the Lab 5s are some of the finest speakers in the world, there's no way I would sacrifice them based on some esoteric hypothetical DAC issue were I fortunate enough to owm a pair. It seems to me to be obsessing over 4th or 5th order effects at best.
Philosophically speaking it's the opposite of the B&O approach of buying the gear and then just concentrating on the music rather than worrying about the hardware, but as I said whatever makes you happy is what you should do.
Can I have your Lab 5s though?
Jeff
I'm afraid I'm recovering from the BeoVirus.
Well said, Raueber!
Greetings Millemissen
The question is not do you hear a difference, but rather why? And do you hear the difference after levels are matched and you don't know what's playing? I can set up a test where I guarantee you like low bit rate CD quality over high bit rate just by jacking the level a few tenths of a db up on the CD quality file, the ear responds to things like small loudness differences as quality differences not volume differences.
As pointed out in one of the links in the a previous post, going from the noise floor to the max volume you can tolerate in a home environment takes at most about 12 bits of resolution. 24 bits are of great use in recording so you have some wiggle room for mistakes, setting gain too high, so you don't clip the converter, but have no practical use in the home environment other than parting people from their money.
Differences in room acoustics and speaker quality dwarf any possible differences in DACs and bit rates. And as I said, making different files sound different can be as simple as not baselining them to the same reference loudness, either deliberately or due to sloppy mastering.
Jeff: The question is not do you hear a difference, but rather why?
The question is not do you hear a difference, but rather why?
Agreed - a question you should always ask! For instance, pick any famous recording, say a Beatles album or DSOTM ................. how many times has it been reissued, remastered or re-released on CD? Many of these have very obvious differences when listened to so what changed when the source material is identical?? - of course it is the remixing or remastering. So how then do you compare a "standard" recording to a "HD" recording?? If accounts are true then sites like Linn may not be selling the same master as HD, CD-Quality or mp3 but rather differently mastered versions in which case the differences aren't just the data size and therefore cannot be a valid comparison.
As I suggested, it's probably better to downsample and dither yourself in a good quality audio editor (whilst ensuring matched rms levels) to get a 16bit 44.1KHz version for comparison unless the source can confirm that the various versions of a track are what they claim/you expected.
I listened to the same 2 albums at home on the Bs5 & BL5 set up in the morning. We then went to the dealer and listened to the same tracks same listening distance away from the speakers on what i consider to be far inferior speakers a pair of B&W 805d. In the second listening, the CD rips sounded superior in resolution and detail than the Bs5 and BL5 setup, The resolution and detail was even better on the 24/192kHz version. The test at dealership was done at a lower volume than what i would use at home on the BL5 - i deliberately wanted this as i knew about the psycho-acoustic effects of volume on the auditory processing. The wife plays clarinet and i piano and we both know what they sound like. The tests were done blind switching in A&B fashion with us making notes with pen and pad. We then compared results and it was unequivocal the streamer with inferior speakers played at lower volumes was far superior to my B&O setup. I was gutted but i had to accept it. Furthermore i could flip through album covers on an ipad like i could with the Bs5 but more effectively. If you can't hear the difference that's good for you but let's not start arguing that it is imagined for others. No, i am no audiphool who will pretend to hear a difference when its not there and spend thousands on interconnects but the audition was as big a jump as moving from an ipod with those horrible white headphones to a B&O system. Let's stop making excuses for B&O; it's not doing them any favours. They need to come up with a fantastic streamer using the best DAC chips, focus on a fabulous interface preferably on tablet and even better speakers than the BL5 sharpish. I would settle for an upgrade of the BL5 DAC to accept 24bit/192Khz but we all know that's not going to happen... They need to focus on build quality like they did in the 80s and 90s and do the basic things well rather than trying to do quirky things badly. I love B&O but that audition whipped it to shreds.
Don't know if this have been posted before here on BeoWorld, but I thought it was an interesting read:
http://mixonline.com/recording/mixing/audio_emperors_new_sampling/
Found it on Geoff Martins blog...
24/192 downloads are very silly indeed. Not my words, but those of one who actually works on developing codecs for digital music and video.
http://people.xiph.org/~xiphmont/demo/neil-young.html
I used to push the same idea: BL5s should be upgraded to be able to process these files natively.
One - if xiphmont is correct, there's no point. And he's correct.
Two - A few years ago I downloaded some alleged high-resolution files from HD-Tracks (which I also used to push.) I ran some comparisons, and then started a thread at Computeraudiophile about the trickery I discovered.It may look as if you're getting high-resolution, but most of it is just bumped up from Redbook. The really dishonest ones have ghost-artefacts added to make it appear there's high-frequency content.
Three - If you do want to play back 24/192 from your BL5s, then all you have to do is convert the signal before sending it to the BL5s through the LINE-IN.
Read xiphmont's exposé. Chris Montgomery is a giant among programmers in the field of digital audio, and he's not got any reason to denigrate high-res, unless you're not getting what you think you're getting. Which you're not.
That said - B&O has been a clown's show when it comes to exploiting its advantages. Now, audiophiles are discovering the advantages of active speakers, but B&O is not positioned to be the one reaping the benefits. A shame.
seethroughyou:I listened to the same 2 albums at home on the Bs5 & BL5 set up in the morning. We then went to the dealer and listened to the same tracks same listening distance away from the speakers on what i consider to be far inferior speakers a pair of B&W 805d. In the second listening, the CD rips sounded superior in resolution and detail than the Bs5 and BL5 setup, The resolution and detail was even better on the 24/192kHz version. The test at dealership was done at a lower volume than what i would use at home on the BL5 - i deliberately wanted this as i knew about the psycho-acoustic effects of volume on the auditory processing. The wife plays clarinet and i piano and we both know what they sound like. The tests were done blind switching in A&B fashion with us making notes with pen and pad. We then compared results and it was unequivocal the streamer with inferior speakers played at lower volumes was far superior to my B&O setup. I was gutted but i had to accept it. Furthermore i could flip through album covers on an ipad like i could with the Bs5 but more effectively. If you can't hear the difference that's good for you but let's not start arguing that it is imagined for others. No, i am no audiphool who will pretend to hear a difference when its not there and spend thousands on interconnects but the audition was as big a jump as moving from an ipod with those horrible white headphones to a B&O system. Let's stop making excuses for B&O; it's not doing them any favours. They need to come up with a fantastic streamer using the best DAC chips, focus on a fabulous interface preferably on tablet and even better speakers than the BL5 sharpish. I would settle for an upgrade of the BL5 DAC to accept 24bit/192Khz but we all know that's not going to happen... They need to focus on build quality like they did in the 80s and 90s and do the basic things well rather than trying to do quirky things badly. I love B&O but that audition whipped it to shreds.
I am the same as you,love b&O to bits,but thats why I have a linn klimax ds system for serious music listening,its in a different league,Source first.
There is unfortunately nothing b&o produces that can compete,when they do, I will be the first to buy.
Well, I'm afraid you're going to have to forgive me for not finding your anecdotal listening experience, replete with at least a dozen uncontrolled variables, as convincing evidence that there is a real difference in CD and high resolution audio files that is due to the number of bits and sampling rate and not other more proletarian differences like mastering hijinks. Let alone proof that this is the "beginning of the end" for B&O. Honestly, hyperbole much? If I had a dollar, pound, euro, whatever for every claimed difference that didn't stand up to controlled testing I'd be blessed with a pair of Lab 5's myself.
I get the impression that someone, either a dealer or someone else, has slagged B&O sufficiently that you feel like you've spent a lot of money and been taken advantage of, that's about the only reason I can fathom for your attitude here. I get the feel of a I paid so much for this and it don't even do this kind of thing. So, go ahead and dump them, the worst that'll happen is that someone will get a deal on some used Lab 5's and you will get to play audio files at whatever bit rate makes you happy.
As for not getting into cables making a difference, don't sell yourself short, you may surprise yourself about what you will come to believe!
0 false 18 pt 18 pt 0 0 false false false
Dear Jeff,
Well I do apologise that I didn't have an acoustic laboratory, several hundred subjects and a statistician to do the analysis of which truly sounded more detailed and superior but what i did was iron out as many variables as i could. I know it's not to your high principled satisfaction but it is better than most mere mortals can muster given limitations in time and resources. I am sure your attempts at auditioning hifi must be far superior and methodologically correct so i bow to your dizzying heights of knowledge on this matter.
'mastering hijinks' well if you believe that that is your opinion that i suspect is driven out defensiveness of not wanting to move forward in life or being unable to move forward. I imagine you are the character from whom the thought of the move from vinyl to tape to cd and now to streaming were abhorrent 'hijinks'. Have you got any recent hifi or does your post and the condescending manner in which its written indicate you have a B&O eliminator from 1925 and anyone else that suggests anything different is foolish, duped, gullible and those that you can 'tut tut' to. I digress you do have a CD player I am sure so you are some part a hypocrit as as others would consider your move from vinyl to CD a ‘hijinks’. Sure, some high res material is dodgey but so are a lot of modern CDs where the level has been set higher by the engineers to give an impression it sounds better and labeled ‘remastered’ but I don’t hear you criticising your CD fraternity… A few articles criticising and scorning high resolution written by some audio engineers and music producers who have a lot to lose by changing of the status quo is not evidence for me. A mention of change is immediately met with condescension - if you believe that high resolution material is a big conspiracy then i shall resign you to the same box as the flat earthers, moon landing conspirators, and alien abductees…
You express frustration that people continue to express their concerns that their much loved hifi maker is coming out with drivel and is losing its way. You also comment that the number of times you hear this. Had you perhaps stopped to think that there maybe some merit to this rather than empty doom mongering. My trusted B&O store has just closed and i hear hundreds others are closing, profits are slipping, staff have been laid off in Denmark and around the world. Sorry Jeff, I know you know more than me but aren’t these the first symptoms and signs of a company in decline and in order to prevent it going bust needing to resort to drastic measures. I think B&O’s vision of making high quality unpretentious hifi that can grace ones living-room is a noble vision and quite unique in the world of black boxes overpowering ones living environment so I am genuinely concerned that things are on a terminal decline but I will not pretend like you do that this is just a bit of a market trough and people need to stop exaggerating. Your 1912 Titanic denial of anything could go wrong and scoffing attitude as verging on a little misguided.
You get the impression….blah blah. Well that is one impressive hypothesis but completely unfounded and manufactured in your head. No one slagged off B&O and anyone that did probably wouldn’t have my company for long. When I first went to the audition I did not say what I had or what I believed I simply said I was looking for a streamer that could play my cd-rips and a few high res downloads I had amassed and was also looking for a good interface to control it with from the comfort of my sofa. I then said that I wanted to audition several makes and wanted a few variables controlled as best as possible. They were at all times respectful of my budget and never did I hear them criticize anyone or any brand. They simply invited me in for the whole morning and simply said you’ve got to let your ears do the choosing. They didn’t even take my name or number; deeming that if were interested I could approach them or not. Jeff, if you could get lay that everyone wants too slag off B&O inferiority complex to one side and try to appreciate that not every salesman is out to make a quick buck and some may even be interested in helping you find the solution that is right for you in a respectful, quiet manner and professional manner akin to B&O sales staff.
Yes, you guessed right I am rather disappointed with my Bs5 and quite a few B&Oers here feel the same. I also disappointed with the BL5 with its DAC that can’t be upgraded to handle the music I want to play on it. I was given the impression that upgrading wouldn’t be an issue when I bought it in 2004 but when I contacted B&O I never got a reply and now find out that upgrading the DAC is completely impossible. I put my hands up; it was partly my fault I should have had the foresight not to buy a pair of speakers with inbuilt DACs. I love the ALT and consider it to be far superior to cones in boxes but that’s no good when an increasing proportion of my music is inaccessible. I think it’s ok to be disappointed after having saved up for over a year for my BL5 and placed greater focus on buying a sound system than buying a sofa and a new bathroom. I was a young professional and loved music and wanted the best as I considered it to be. As hard as it might be for you to cognitively process and as bewildering as it may be for you to grasp I am not alone it wanting my music machine to play a variety of formats in the breadth of bit rates and sampling frequencies that is common place in the digital music scene.
The second point to be made and a very important one is that B&O need to find a younger customer base and not rely on stick in mud types like you. Young people want flexibility and today’s generation are listening to more music more of the time as evidenced by millions of commuters plugged into their mobile phones - a proportion want better quality than their mp3 hence lossless and the slowly expanding market of high res material. All my music is in electronic format now and that is the way it is going like it or not. My wife’s school kids have never bought a CD…ripping and downloading is all they know. As much you wish to stick with your format there is a slowly increasing cohort who are mioving. If B&O cant play these formats they will lose business and the market position to those that can. You may deem this evolution of the audio scene to be foolish and in response denigrate others but the world of audio is changing and will not be frozen in red-book 16-bit times as much you wish it or rebel against it.
Coming at it from a slightly different angle hundred of millions of people buying hundreds of plastic discs is not good for the environment when electronic music files are so accessible. I adored my Beosound 9000 in 1999 but I no longer comfortable with the accumulation of more and more plastic.
As we both disapprove of expensive interconnectants I find your attempts to ridicule me about something we both agree on rather bizarre and uncalled for and the whistling face at end of your posting a little passive aggressive and immature.
Reading this gives another aspect on the Red Book-CD/Highres war
http://www.aixrecords.com/articles/real_hd-audio.html
Just a short except:
"CD-Quality" cannot accommodate HD Audio content. It is not, as one digital download site states, "perfect audio". It is limited to 44.1 kHz/16-bit PCM, 2-channel stereo. This translates to 20-20 kHz and 96 dB [optimistically].
Real life music exceeds these limits. So in order to experience real HD Audio, the source recording has to be made with HD recording equipment AND the musicians need to be present to record their performance. Anything else should not be construed as HD.
Would be nice to have a Bang & Olufsen audio-setup that could match "source recordings"!
Frustrating if design and technical superiourity doesn't always go together, but that's life and in my opinion thesound quality of B&O is still up there with the better of the bunch. Works for me, anyways.B&O never claimed to be the highest of highend and I believe the majority of B&O buyers and B&Os maintargets aren't highend audiophiles.
With B&O, you will own the worlds prettiest sound.Frustrating that producers of highend units can't make decent designs.
Martin
Hej Dillen,
have a look at this thread:
http://archivedforum2.beoworld.org/forums/p/5263/47448.aspx#47448
My last post says the same - B&O sure have the 'prettiest sound'!
bsantini: seethroughyou: I listened to the same 2 albums at home on the Bs5 & BL5 set up in the morning. We then went to the dealer and listened to the same tracks same listening distance away from the speakers .. However Never forget the impact of the room upon listening B
seethroughyou: I listened to the same 2 albums at home on the Bs5 & BL5 set up in the morning. We then went to the dealer and listened to the same tracks same listening distance away from the speakers ..
Very true! Ralf
Please remember that everyone is entitled to their opinion whether you agree with it or not. By all means post counter arguments etc. to support your opinion but try to refrain from personal slight when others oppose your view.
I think brushwoodgreen is perfectly entitled to his view. He clearly has taken the time to listen to music on different systems and has found his BS5 wanting. I am surprised that the BL5s are also found wanting as I have not heard speakers produce better sound - I have heard speakers I prefer but I think that is simply down to taste.
One of the things that's always been interesting to me is how hard people in audio will hold onto their opinions, even when it's proven to them in a controlled test that they are mistaken (and for the record controlled tests are not that difficult to perform, or at least to limit the variables, you just have to want to do so). Something I don't see in, say, the videophile community. Unlike audio, in video there is a set of measured parameters that are precisely defined that people accept and strive towards. You don't get someone saying that a TV set with a 10,000 deg K color temp is more realistic than one at 6500, you don't get someone claiming that they can see blacker than 0 IRE, etc.
But in audio, a person will claim that this cable or that amplifier is night and day different and better, and then spectacularly fail a proper test. Most of the time the response isn't what you'd logically expect, say, finding out that a 500 dollar amp is sonically identical to a 5,000 dollar amp should be cause for happiness, why, you get the same performance for a tenth the price! But in 99 times out of 100 the person will start finding excuses for why this huge difference didn't show up in the test, it's your fault, or the tests, or such a huge difference suddenly becomes a subtle difference only a sensitive person can distinguish and the test obviously obscured such a subtle effect. More than most areas, it seems in audio a person's emotions and self image get all wrapped up in what they think they can perceive, and that the usually more expensive item is superior.
It continues even when a difference is found if the cause of the difference is not what was expected. Say, as in this case, if high res audio was found to sound different because of the issues with subharmonics and ultrasonic stress pointed out in one of the references, and not that it was closer to "real." The real reason is rejected out of hand and usually not even considered, as it once again seems to bang up against emotions and self image. You can explain the logic, the human hearing aspect, the mathematics of sampling theory and such till you are blue in the face to no avail. I don't know how else to explain how someone can jump from one person's experience to this experience marking the "beginning of the end" for a product line. Ultimately all such arguments by people not involved with forcing new formats down the publics throat are all a tempest in a teapot, for all the heat generated.
Not trying to insult anyone (despite the fact that almost universally pointing such things out is perceived as such), just share some observations from years of doing this kind of thing. Full exposure, I used to be a member of the Boston Audio Society, and knew E. Brad Meyer and David Clark and such, though I haven't spoken or communicated with them in years and years.
I really do not understand the complexities of DACs etc and have been reading here about the limitations of the Beolab 5s. Also, I see the statement here regarding studio masters.
My question is this.....I have purchased multiple studio masters from Linn and downloaded them into my Beomaster 5/Beosound 5 which is connected to both a pair of Beolab 1s via a Beovision 10, and a pair of Beolab 9s connected via a Beovision 7-55.
They work fine and I can certainly hear a substantial improvement in quality over the quality of CDs I play in my Beosound 3000 or that have been copied to the BM/BS5.
So what exactly are the B and O products doing with the studio masters I have installed that allows them to play, sound much much better than CDs, but not be studio master quality?
Similarly I have an audio BluRay disc with tracks in 192khz, 24 bit. If I put the disc in my Oppo BluRay player, it plays fine. If I bring up the Audio display in the Oppo menu it shows that it is playing 192khz, 24 bit. So if the Oppo is playing 192khz/24 bit and sending it to the BV7 and then the BV9s, what is the BV7 doing with the input? Is is downgrading the quality?
Thanks in advance.
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
Razlaw: I really do not understand the complexities of DACs etc and have been reading here about the limitations of the Beolab 5s. Also, I see the statement here regarding studio masters. My question is this.....I have purchased multiple studio masters from Linn and downloaded them into my Beomaster 5/Beosound 5 which is connected to both a pair of Beolab 1s via a Beovision 10, and a pair of Beolab 9s connected via a Beovision 7-55. They work fine and I can certainly here a substantial improvement in quality over the quality of CDs I play in my Beosound 3000 or that have been copied to the BM/BS5. So what exactly are the B and O products doing with the studio masters I have installed that allows them to play, sound much much better than CDs, but not be studio master quality? Thanks in advance.
They work fine and I can certainly here a substantial improvement in quality over the quality of CDs I play in my Beosound 3000 or that have been copied to the BM/BS5.
I think the thing is how and where you, or anyone, attributes the difference in sound to. You say it's an improvement in quality, that's fine, to your ears it sounds better. You can't make any judgement about accuracy however unless you also have the real, unadulterated, trusted master to listen to. You might find the CD sounds more like it than the "studio master" audio file you have. You might not. You just don't know in these situations. Plenty of people have compared CDs to original master tapes when the CDs were mastered well and found them to be indistinguishable, so the format is capable of being complely transparent. If done properly, it often is not.
So you have to look at what, really, is causing the difference, especially if the DAC is not handling the file in native resolution. Chances of the CD and this file being mastered the same are about zero. Was more care taken in remastering it? Possibly, even probably, there are a lot of crappy recordings that came off great master tapes. Is it due to bit rate and such? Unlikely. Could it be the CD player in the 3000? Perhaps. Could the rip be odd? Maybe. There's so many possible reasons it's impossible to jump to the conclusion that it's the bit rate of the delivery system.
Or, better yet, you don't have to really worry about why you like it better, just sit back and listen to it and enjoy it! During the endless LP vs. CD wars, the problem was never when someone came in and said "I don't care what the math says, I just like the sound of LP better." The problem and arguments occur when someone comes in and says things like "The LP is more accurate, and if you don't hear that you must either have crap for a system or be deaf!" Which is what usually happens.
Ultimately you like what you like, whether for reasons of actual differences or only imagined ones. Like I said earlier, if you like it fine, in the case of this thread the worst thing that happens is someone gets a used set of Lab 5's and will be happy, and the original poster gets to play whatever resolution audio files float his boat, and will hopefully be happy.
The only thing that matters is that you think it sounds better regardless of the reason.