I am with jandyt on this one. Many here choose other devices to go along with their B&O. Plasma Blueray DVD. Worth to discuss.

joeyboygolf:

My personal thoughts on this matter are,thus.

If you want to go, go now. Don't keep bleating about it. I don't see the point!

I'm with you on this, Graham.
It does seem a little odd Barry, that you are asking a site full of B&O fans how to get rid of B&O!😮 😕🤔

Andy T.

i couldn't agree more. sell everything now. we buy.

avforums should be helpful , they have loads of boffins over there that could help you

http://www.avforums.com/forums/index.php

i agree aboot the problems with connecting bno to the real world , we used to have the DIN connection to RCA phono hassle , not sure if that's still applicable ? 

plus i know what you mean aboot broken promises - i was told my avant would have a built in hard disk recorder in a years time  - of course that never materialised ! 

I think it's perfectly legitimate to ask questions about how one should integrate B&O and non-B&O equipment in a forum such as this one -- given the large number of members, we can rest assured that someone will have come across the particular problem one is facing.

In my instance, it's a response to the complete disregard shown by B&O to the possibilities in Mac OSX - I was simply forced to go non-B&O because of the omission of a few minor things in B&O's equipment, I don't like using converters and want as direct a link as possible for my audio bitstreams. And B&O should embrace Mac software options, instead of ignoring them.

As to Barry's query. I've tested a number of universal players, and you have a number of good options you can consider:

1. The Arcam you mention.

2. Linn's Movie or Universal (UniDisk) players. The latter I found to work excellently with my various BL speakers and it does a very respectable upscaling of DVDs. (As does the Arcam.)

3. Rotel's various multiformat disc players.

You should be aware that all of these have announced they will launch HDMI 1.3 compatible versions of their players, and that all are delayed with their launches. Does HDMI 1.3 matter? Well, it does do wonders with the sound, and to me that remains a chief reason to stick with B&O speakers - which means you want to feed them with the best possible signal.

Why don't I have any of the above players, if I have tested them?

I found that a Mac Mini does everything they do - and as far as DVD upscaling is concerned, better.
The Mini's DVI out connects to my screen with a DVI-to-HMDI converter cable. (No loss of quality - DVI is the HDMI video protocol.)
The Mini's Toslink optical connects to an inexpensive stand-alone processor and converts all audio formats. (Not SACD, but I got brilliant 24bit/96kHz multichannel sound out of the Joseph Losey version of Don Giovanni, re-released with a remastered soundtrack!)

In addition, the Mini lets me access my expanding digital storage music library at a price that makes a joke out of Linn's Klassik box (or whatever they call it). They want about ten times as much to do what a Mini and a stand alone server does just as well. 

What you then require is a way of connecting your speakers to the processor. I'm of the high-end hifi is full of BS school, and believe that today's well built inexpensive processors do just as good a job as a super-expensive one from McIntosh, Primare or others.

I'm using RCA-to-RCA in to the BL5s, and RCA-to-PL converters to the rear BL3s. (For two-channel music I use the direct digital signal to the BL5s and let their internal processors handle the conversion to analog from digital.)
The processor allows me to drop the center channel - any acoustic lens enabled front speaker pair lets you do that without any loss of essential centre channel information (others may not agree, I'm superhappy with this solution.)

Downside - you'll need more than one remote controller, or else have to get a universal remote.

Things are changing "fast" in high-end av/audio, and you may find that the equipment you get can't handle a particular format.
The Mini's disc player is too noisy to be used for direct playback. So either put the music in iTunes or else copy a DVD to the harddisk before playback. (You can use it, but in sections where the soundtrack is low you'll notice the spinning disc.)

Why didn't I get a BeoCenter 2? It's beautiful, and does most of the things I need a unit to do, but I'd still need the Mini, and with that I get a full-fledged media center, a/v playback unit that I can hide away. And the BC2 doesn't have Digital IN, which is a dealbreaker for me.

Send me a PM, Barry, if you need any more detailed info.



 

Soundproof,

Thanks for your comments. I will print you message out so that I can reflect on what you have said more seriously. I think what drew me to the arcam is twofold

(a) I have owned it in the past (along with quad) and like it.

(b) The unit had 5.1 connectivity at pre-amp output stage allowing me to maintain connection with my speakers through RCA. As I have 8000 and 4000 they will be open to line input or RCA to powerlink conversion. It was a very flexible unit which allowed passive speakers and still retain scart for sd purposes.

I asked because I don't know the unit and wanted to know the downsides. Your message suggests that remote controls is what it comes down to.

Thanks again. I may PM you later. 

joeyboygolf:

My personal thoughts on this matter are,thus.

If you want to go, go now. Don't keep bleating about it. I don't see the point!

I am surprised at this statement.

I don't know why!

As Jandyt says, this is a B&O enthusiasts site and you have made it clear that you will be ditching all your B&O in the fullness of time.

If you want a separates system with all the latest bells and whistles (skip fodder in 6 months?) and a coffee table littered with remote controls (or one japcrap plastic universal thingy with hundreds of buttons) then you are in the wrong place.

B&O design integrated systems which are designed to work together for the benefit of the majority. They will readily admit to never being cutting edge in all disciplines. I am happy with this philosophy.

If you wish to go on another voyage then don't expect me to be particularly interested.

This also applies to the endless discussions re the price of B&O equipment, both audio and video. It has always been expensive and no more so now than when I first purchased a Beomaster 1900 in 1979 or a Beocenter 9000 in 1986.

joeyboygolf

Don't understand your comments at all! However I will not try and convince you of my argument any more. 

Two small points though. One is repetition -- ALL my a-v equipment is B&O not just some of it and if I choose to go in a different direction it doesn't mean that I don't enjoy B&O.

Second is that you have got to be looking through the wrong coloured glasses if you think that Arcam produces equipment of the sort that you describe. I am all in favour of speaking in favour of B&O's positives and negatives but you are fooling yourself if you believe that it is THAT good.

I will take your message as an invitation to leave the forum and will do so from now on.