Hi Chicken

No i wont be attaching the BL2. I'm sure the bass would well and truely be enough. Can you use the BL2 on the rears? (BL4000's)

Hmm, I am using a non-B&O amp, so I am able to set the crossover for each speakers separately. But I am not sure about Beosystem though.

Congrat on getting the BeoLab 5. I wanted them sooo much but just have to save up first. 😎

ollie75 wrote:

Hi Chicken

No i wont be attaching the BL2. I'm sure the bass would well and truely be enough. Can you use the BL2 on the rears? (BL4000's)

Yes, you can add your BL2 to your BL4000s. Just connect the "surround" Powerlink to BL2 and BL2 PL out to BL4000 PL.

Now you have  "3-way surround speakers". Works great in my main setup.

Stefan

Electrified wrote:

The 8000 is  a"hybrid" design. It's not a true active.

Electrified, would you mind clarifying what exactly you mean in saying the BL8000 isn't a true active speaker? It uses an electronic line-level X-over, fed into a single, two-channel power amplifier - one channel for the tweeter, and one for the woofers. I assume this is your point of contention - the two-channel amp? While not ideal, that wouldn't disqualify it from being an active speaker. It still has a dedicated, direct connected channel of amplification for each drive unit/set of drive units.

Electrified wrote:

If you want deep bass and connect a subwoofer to it, the sub will be making use of a passive crossover, whereas the rest of the speaker units employ active crossovers.

Why wouldn't you be able to use an active subwoofer with BL8000's? I don't get it...😕

Electrified wrote:

I  just did some reading up on the BL8000s, and it seems they "actively" bodged some things in it to make it function. Not to make it sound better and more accurate but band-aided it to a) give it more bottom at the cost of precision and in effect making it into a two-way speaker, and b) put some electronic circuit into it so it would last a bit longer.

Yes, they used to be a 2.5-way design. B&O later changed them to a simpler 2-way setup, wherein both midbass drivers shared the same operating passband. I don't know how much precision this cost the BL8000, but I'd say it likely contributed to increased lobing and comb-filtering effects.

Jon

Jon wrote:

Electrified wrote:

The 8000 is  a"hybrid" design. It's not a true active.

Electrified, would you mind clarifying what exactly you mean in saying the BL8000 isn't a true active speaker? It uses an electronic line-level X-over, fed into a single, two-channel power amplifier - one channel for the tweeter, and one for the woofers. I assume this is your point of contention - the two-channel amp? While not ideal, that wouldn't disqualify it from being an active speaker. It still has a dedicated, direct connected channel of amplification for each drive unit/set of drive units.

No, an amplifier per unit is indeed what's needed to make a proper active design.

But an active design has more to do with crossovers and the amped units is a necessity following the choice of an active crossover, in that the crossover happens before the amplification at line level.

However, it didn't have each unit amplified as is common, it started out with having two of the units (the bass) amplified by a single unit, utilising a passive crossover for that part.

This from another site (beocentral) - my bolding:

In the earlier models one of the woofers was connected to the bass amplifier output via a simple passive filter so that it functioned as a midrange driver. This made the early Beolab 8000 a 3-way design with an unusual “hybrid passive-active” construction

When it comes to active subs, I need to differentiate between a powered one and an active. Although both will have amplifiers connected (lol), it's the crossover that dictates whether it will be an active or a passive design.

[...]those after No. 10145230, dispensed with the expensive crossover components and had both woofers wired in parallel, making the new models only a 2-way design. At the same time the electronic crossover filter was redesigned to include “adaptive bass linearisation”, a system that gave a bass lift at low listening levels. This was of course “loudness” by another name, although the method of applying it involved a complex electronic circuit that was sensitive to signal level rather than the position of the volume control of the main system. Although these changes increased the showroom impact of the Beolab 8000 at the point of purchase they made it a blunter instrument and less satisfying for the serious listener.

More here:

One could argue that the present design is fully active as the feed to the woofers is the same whereas the original was a hybrid. One could also argue that the earlier design was actually preferable in some ways but as few people can actually tell the difference, we are maybe discussing angels on pins.

In any case, the Beolab 5 is so superior as to make this conversation irrelevant! I wish I could justify spending that amount of speakers as they really are superb. But as I listen to so little these days, I will stick with what I have!

Peter wrote:

One could argue that the present design is fully active as the feed to the woofers is the same whereas the original was a hybrid. One could also argue that the earlier design was actually preferable in some ways but as few people can actually tell the difference, we are maybe discussing angels on pins.

No we're not. The "fix" was to remove the passive crossover and completely nix the function of one of the units so it became more "booming" (i.e. less accurate) on the shop floor. As if passive crossovers weren't bad enough, let's "make up" for that by producing a booming speaker.

If those are angels on pins, I seriously can't see any reasons to even think about BL5s. Those things are crucial reasons to why the Beolab 5s are so good speakers.

For instance, whereas the BL5s attenuate the amplified signal, the BL8000s relies on attenuation of the "line level" signal. That alone makes it some bastardized hybrid design, reducing the signal/noise ratio at low levels.

[clarification: I mean that the signal for the 8000 is attenuated before everything, including the crossover, and the BL5s are attenuated after the crossover and after the preamplification, but before the power amps, if that makes sense]

Peter wrote:

In any case, the Beolab 5 is so superior as to make this conversation irrelevant! I wish I could justify spending that amount of speakers as they really are superb. But as I listen to so little these days, I will stick with what I have!

It's not a moot point. He has the BL8000s and by explaining its design shortcomings comparitively one can also tell why it is a better speaker, why the BL5s are superior in every conceivable way instead of relying on feelings or looks (same thing, but you get the idea).

Edit:

Anyway, I don't know if he has some early ones or a later edition. With the information I have given and the things I've explained, it should be clear what's what, nothing less and nothing more. He can take what he wants from it, if anything. If not, it's no skin off my nose.

I do agree with you (I think!) I despise the inclusion of what is effectively an automatic loudness circuit in B&O speakers. I hate booming bass - I do understand that it makes the product more attractive in a showroom setting but I want a flat response and the ability to alter this to my taste.

It does seem a shame that B&O manage to initiate a standard which involves active amplication of their speakers and then hobble them to a certain extent. However I am sure they have worked out wjhat sells - so maybe it is not their fault - but ours! 😐

Peter wrote:

I do agree with you (I think!) I despise the inclusion of what is effectively an automatic loudness circuit in B&O speakers. I hate booming bass - I do understand that it makes the product more attractive in a showroom setting but I want a flat response and the ability to alter this to my taste.

It does seem a shame that B&O manage to initiate a standard which involves active amplication of their speakers and then hobble them to a certain extent. However I am sure they have worked out wjhat sells - so maybe it is not their fault - but ours! 😐

I just think that at that time, they were finding their feet and wasn't quite confident with active design yet.  Never underestimate incompetence, lol.

I cannot fault their BL9s or 5s at all (re audio quality and from a technical standpoint). They certainly have the tech down these days.

Electrified wrote:

This from another site (beocentral) - my bolding:

In the earlier models one of the woofers was connected to the bass amplifier output via a simple passive filter so that it functioned as a midrange driver. This made the early Beolab 8000 a 3-way design with an unusual “hybrid passive-active” construction

When it comes to active subs, I need to differentiate between a powered one and an active. Although both will have amplifiers connected (lol), it's the crossover that dictates whether it will be an active or a passive design.

[...]those after No. 10145230, dispensed with the expensive crossover components and had both woofers wired in parallel, making the new models only a 2-way design. At the same time the electronic crossover filter was redesigned to include “adaptive bass linearisation”, a system that gave a bass lift at low listening levels. This was of course “loudness” by another name, although the method of applying it involved a complex electronic circuit that was sensitive to signal level rather than the position of the volume control of the main system. Although these changes increased the showroom impact of the Beolab 8000 at the point of purchase they made it a blunter instrument and less satisfying for the serious listener.

So in effect, in terms of audio performance, B&O have downgraded the Beolab 8000 (8002) since their release? Was the change to 2-way done at the same time when B&O switched the amps to Ice-Power? I used to own these speakers back in the '90s, and have now been considering them again, as I need slim speakers as fronts in my setup. I really liked the sound back in the day... but this information (new to me) got me hesitating about choosing them today.