I would take the BV9, just for the look of it, and the superiour sound.

I have a BV9 in the living room and a BV10-40 fitted to the wall in the bedroom. I chose the BV10 for space economy. For picture and sound quality I would opt for the BV9 anytime.

Martin

BeoVision 9 without doubt

I seem to recall the 9 had one serious problem , the built in recorder could only record one channel at a time .

Ie; you could only record what you were watching. Did they ever sort that out ?

The picture quality of the BV9 is very good. The new 7-55 mkII is the first LCD from B&O that is close to plasma when it comes to overall picture quality (movements, artifacts etc).

The only downsides are the weight of the set (125 kg, so moving it is a hassle), the power consumption ( 0.5 kW/hr) / heat generated and the fact that it comes with a center-channel-only-speaker (you will have to add at least two front speakers, of course adding to the cost of the set).

Roger

I would take BV9 any time, except for the earlier HDReady version. The image quality and center speaker sound is so cool. And today you could get a set at a very reasonable price.

Flappo wrote:

I seem to recall the 9 had one serious problem 

And it only has a mono centre speaker and, frankly, is incredibly large/heavy.

I wanted a BV9, but a few of these surface-level reasons made it impractical. The BV9 is already large, I'd have to use speakers too, and I simply do not have the space.

BV10-46 is more practical. Picture is excellent and I like the ability to swap out the frets. I don't really like the BV9 silly ALT either.

I agree with Moxxey, BV10 all the way!!!   Yes that ALT tweeter looked like a big 'zit' on the speaker.   BV10 is bang up to date!

Admittedly it was 4 years ago when I auditioned a BV9,but the major thing that concerned me was the reflectivity of the screen.I had to ask the dealer to turn off all their lights near the TV as it was so bad.

Was this corrected in subsequent versions?