When I first got my Beovision 3 the ARS wasn't as yet available for it so I bought it without. Much later when B&O had brought the screen out, I saw an ARS on eBay so I bought and fitted it. Must say, I was a bit underwhelmed and couldn't really see much difference! But of course others may disagree as I suppose it all depends on placement of the TV as regards reflections.

I'm not sure also whether or not the coating actually darkens the image somewhat, but this is purely a subjective comment and others may have 'evidence' that it makes no difference whatsoever.

It's a pity you can't view 2 BV10s, one with and one without and do an A/B comparison for yourself!

Finally, I'm sure some members will be able to give a more objective answer especially those with 'links' to dealerships where the benefits or otherwise of ARSs must have been discussed. 

Good luck from an envious person.

I

In my experience, the coating (on the Beovision 1 and 3) is very good, the problem is the screen behind the glass is still shiny!! That's why ultimately the difference is small... it depends on what the panel is like (if it is matte or shiny)

Hi

From a scientific viewpoint, anti reflective coatings have been with us for some time. Looking at lens variety, ie instruments, cameras, spectacle lenses, the difference between coated and uncoated lenses are huge. The specification for the BV10 states 'anti reflection coating on both sides' is important as all the previously mentioned lens systems have multi layer anti refelection coatings of perhaps 6 to 8 layers each a few microns in depth and the BV10 has a single. The point about many coatings is that a single coating only works for a small part of the visible spectrum and a multi layer works over the whole spectrum.

Coatings prevent reflections, and an uncoated screen or lens will reflect 4% of the incident light from each surface. This can be very annoying as glare. If B&O were to visit lens manufacturers and find out how to coat multi layer treatments, then the arguments between yes and no would be more viable. Multi coating on lenses can reduce reflections from a suface from 4% right down to 0.1%. Now that would be spectacular on a tv, although I think the final price of the BV10 would more than double, were the technology to be available for this process to take place.

Brian

KMA wrote:

I am going to purchase the new BeoVision 10, but am having a bit of difficulty in deciding if the optional anti-reflective coating is worth the extra cost (+750 euros).

In the UK the AR screen will be fitted as standard so there will not be an option to not have it.

Opman

Thank you for your thoughts.

Elsewhere Peter recommended AR coating for the BV10, and the new B&O Magazine / Catalogue also explained the benefits with regard to perceived picture quality.

In my country, the AR coating is not standard in the "starting from" pricing. It costs 750 euros extra. However, my dealer made a very good offer, making the decision pretty easy for me.

Going to order one with the floor stand and AR coating tonight, provided that the dealer has reasonably reliable information on the actual delivery time of customer units. I've heard weeks 49 and 50 mentioned thus far.

That would be in time for Xmas 🙂

KMA wrote:

 the new B&O Magazine / Catalogue also explained the benefits with regard to perceived picture quality.

 

Ummmmm, of course it does!!!

For your information - the coating on BeoVision 10 is a multilayer coating and the reflections are reduced from 4.3% to 0.5% - so the difference is quite significant.

Hadn't realised that the wall mounted BV10 at the show had no AR - pleased about this as it was poor for reflections. The floor stand one was much better and had the AR so from that, I would rate it as essential. I had put the reflection down to the atypical surroundings but everything becomes clear! 🙂