It comes as a pair. Not sure about the range

edit - i could've sworn my delaer told me that price is for the pair

The price is for an individual unit. You need at least two (a Transmitter and a Receiver) to have a link setup. Each Transmitter can accommodate up to 7 Receivers. 

I would say that as a retailer I would suggest strongly against the use of the wireless kits except in scenarios where hard-wire is not possible. They are, in no way, a money-saver. For the cost of two units, you could have a two man installation crew hard-wire 2 or 3 link rooms. And while their range is fine, they will almost certainly interfere with other wireless devices or suffer interference from them. I have taken back well over half of the wireless units I've sold and the experience generally leaves a bad taste in everyone's mouth. 

Basically, setting realistic expectations for the performance of the wireless kits means telling the client they probably won't work. Not a great scenario!

I have both wireless and wired link room systems. I fully agree with TE that the wireless units can be very problemmatic, particularly if one has a multiplicity of other wi-fi devices that also operate in the 2.4 Gh range. For example, my BL wireless 1 units originally fought for bandwidth not just with my wireless 802.11g LAN devices but also with my Beocom 6000 phone system, which I would have been most loathe to give up. I would recommend the use of the BL wireless units only to someone with good wireless LAN configuration and troubleshooting experience.

FWIIW, I solved the conflict problems by converting as many as possible of my wireless LAN devices (16 at last count!) to wired Ethernet connections, moving the 802.11n wireless devices to their own dedicated 5 Gh range router, and assigning fixed DHCL addresses to the few remaining 802.11g wireless devices such as older laptops, iPhones, and iPod touches. If this is all Greek to anyone, that person would probably not be a good candidate for a BL Wireless 1 user. It is definitely not a Plug-and-Play device unless you have no other wi-fi devices.

I would, however beg to differ with TE on the matter of price. His contention that a wired solution is less expensive is simply untrue in most cases. I researched this issue extensively before deciding to gamble on using the problem-prone BL Wireless 1 for two of my three link room systems. Given the obscenely high cost of ML cable and connectors and the fact that the required link room ML interface costs exactly as much as a BL wireless 1, the bottom line is that a wired solution is almost always going to be more expensive, even if one does his own cable running and installation.

The only instance in which a wired solution would be cost-effective would be if one uses a current-vintage BL3500, which already has an IR receiver and a ML interface built into the unit, as a link system and keeps the cable runs very short. This is in fact the wired solution that I am using in my third link room system. The other two systems use Wireless 1s in receiver mode with pairs of BL4000s.

One last caveat: all of the BL Wireless 1s being shipped by BOA have the original buggy firmware version. Among other problems, the timer function does not, er, function at all. Neither the local B&O technician, the selling dealer, nor the tech support staff at BOA were of any help whatsoever in getting this problem resolved. I finally contacted Struer myself, and they suggested that I have the firmware upgraded to the second rev. That solved the problem very nicely, no thanks to any B&O personnel on this side of the ocean.

Sounds like the Beolink wireless except for linking the masterlink signal wirelessly is nothing but a cheap "philips type" transmitter/receiver then? But at 15 times the price ofcourse...

I have a wireless trans//receiver at home from Philips, it simply sends my cable receiver to my bedroom where I have a small TV. (you guys perhaps remember I don't have and BEO TV's) 

And this Philips thingy I have has exactly the same problems as Trip is telling us the Beolink wireless has. My wife usually drags her Macbook with her into the bedroom to surf around a bit before going to sleep, and this means almost constant interference with the TV signal.

I can live with it, since my Philips units cost me 50 euro, however at 380 euro a pop? Total of 760 euro for a pair? I would expect flawless technology at it's own bandwidth.

Funny, in Beo's brochures they market the beolink wireless as a flawless way of sending your beolink information wirelessly around your house. 

It also depends in what kind of neighbourhood you live. If you see many WLAN routers there might be issues. In my case I had relativly good conditions, just one other router aside from ours to be seen. There were two annoying things even in these good conditions: sometimes if you walk between the signal it would stop and the speakers would switch off and soon after switch on again; the other thing was not related to B&O but to wireless in general: about 200m away there is a tower of a pt-to-pt microwave link that was interfering with the signal (one could hear a regular pulse). In the end I drilled two hole to bring a cable two rooms down the hallway.

That was v1 of the software, there's supposed to be a later version that is a bit more stable. All in all I would agree with the others: Try to get a cable and only if that's not at all possbile try out the wireless.

Cheers,
Frank

Hi:

I have a related question:

I want to get my mother-in-law a couple of Avants - one for her lounge, one for her bedroom. Reason being, I am hoping to get these cheap - as presents, convincing and coercing her into not to get a Bose sound system (the small ones that are seen in the supplements). My plan was to master link the two televisions so she can watch cable (which would be connected to the television downstairs) upstairs.

As I understand it, Beolink wireless is an audio only carrier so the only options available to me are ML cable between the TVs or a non b&o video sending device.

My question is, is there any noticeable difference in picture quality between using ML or a (decent) wireless video sender?  I will get one which uses a different frequency range to her wireless router. I really don't want the hassle (if I can avoid it) of either drilling holes through the ceiling or running and tacking cables up staircases and round doorways so is there any extra functionality to be had from a ML system My  guess is at the present time no, but if I got her to save her money and buy either a new b&o sound system or the Ouerture with the HD (I know that is not how you spell Ouerture, and that it is not one anyway) the options of extra speakers in multipe rooms would be easy to add and the sound quality would be better carried through the cable than wirelessly?

Am I correct?

Thanks

Graham

Hi Graham,just to be clear, ML doesn' handle video at all.  In the scenario you describe, you'd be pulling ML cable and RF cable between the 2 Avants.  Picture is supposed to be pretty good though.

Russ

beobuff wrote:

I would, however beg to differ with TE on the matter of price. His contention that a wired solution is less expensive is simply untrue in most cases. I researched this issue extensively before deciding to gamble on using the problem-prone BL Wireless 1 for two of my three link room systems. Given the obscenely high cost of ML cable and connectors and the fact that the required link room ML interface costs exactly as much as a BL wireless 1, the bottom line is that a wired solution is almost always going to be more expensive, even if one does his own cable running and installation.

The only instance in which a wired solution would be cost-effective would be if one uses a current-vintage BL3500, which already has an IR receiver and a ML interface built into the unit, as a link system and keeps the cable runs very short. This is in fact the wired solution that I am using in my third link room system. The other two systems use Wireless 1s in receiver mode with pairs of BL4000s.

Beobuff, perhaps in your particular case, the wireless kits made financial sense. In general, however, they do not. Unless your dealer is gouging you, ML is not very expensive. Labor is also around $100/hr, so you can have 5 hours of labor for the cost of a single kit. There is also no need for a transmitter, and most link systems do include at least one 3500. Active kits are $150 less than wireless kits. I'm certainly not saying this is always the case, but my experience selling it is that more often then not, the wireless kits do not make financial sense. If their prices were halved we may have another story, but that's not likely to happen.  

beobuff wrote:

I would, however beg to differ with TE on the matter of price. His contention that a wired solution is less expensive is simply untrue in most cases. I researched this issue extensively before deciding to gamble on using the problem-prone BL Wireless 1 for two of my three link room systems. Given the obscenely high cost of ML cable and connectors and the fact that the required link room ML interface costs exactly as much as a BL wireless 1, the bottom line is that a wired solution is almost always going to be more expensive, even if one does his own cable running and installation.

The only instance in which a wired solution would be cost-effective would be if one uses a current-vintage BL3500, which already has an IR receiver and a ML interface built into the unit, as a link system and keeps the cable runs very short. This is in fact the wired solution that I am using in my third link room system. The other two systems use Wireless 1s in receiver mode with pairs of BL4000s.

One last caveat: all of the BL Wireless 1s being shipped by BOA have the original buggy firmware version. Among other problems, the timer function does not, er, function at all. Neither the local B&O technician, the selling dealer, nor the tech support staff at BOA were of any help whatsoever in getting this problem resolved. I finally contacted Struer myself, and they suggested that I have the firmware upgraded to the second rev. That solved the problem very nicely, no thanks to any B&O personnel on this side of the ocean.

I have to disagree with you here Buff...loathe though I am to stick up for Trip.  😕  Remember that in order for the Wireless to work one needs to purchase a pair of them...so, let's say in my case that I want to add a link room upstairs in my Townhouse running from my BeoSound 9000 and Avant in the living room.  I'll need a 10m ML cable and one small junction box (a bit under $100USD) and an ML-Active kit ($400 or so).  In the case of the BL-1 Wireless I'll need one for a Transmitter ($500) and one with an IR eye as a receiver ($600).  If I do the work myself, as you suggest, then I get away for roughly half the cost in equipment.  The key is to not forget the 'transmitter' when doing the math.

As to your support issue, it is a shame that you couldn't get the proper help here in the US.  I have found it odd that BOA didn't bother to update the units in the warehouse when they could have; they always seem to manage to update the TV products.  On a positive note, from this month, all products in the US are being 'built to order' in DK and shipped when ordered, so perhaps the issue with 'old New Stock' is a thing of the past.