I am all for rethinking the design paradigm, new fresh, bold. However, I can't agree more with Tim. There was something about the mechanical magic that is lost.

It's not just B&O, in some perhaps lesser way this happens with others. Consider the original Ipods with the wheel as compared to the almost complete absense of anything mechanical on an Ipod Touch. And that which is "mechanical" ie. buttons are certainly not very interesting.

Things mechanical add complexity I know. But look at the button placement of a BM3000. Buttons were magically hidden, and that lid mechanism was so very fluid. It was just plain elegant. I actually began to miss the magical mechanisms with the BM4500. Consider also the BC9500: no buttons except those hidden behind the glass. But the mechannical magic was in the doors.

I will admit to being an admirer of the mechanical (and electronic) magic of the BS5.

I was thinking the same thing... but on the other hand, what's there to move if it was going to? Maybe a compartment that opens that you plug your iPhone/iPad into?

That's the problem with digital media - no moving parts. The positive side is that there is less to break over time.

Although I do agree, there doesn't seem to be the need for movable parts in a digital age. No physical media, no movable parts.

However there is the movable acoustic lenses in the Audis, AMG's, Astons and now BMW.

I would like to see a home speaker between the BL9 and BL5 with a retractable hidden acoustic lens. The lens i'm sure we all agree is a huge benifit in sound but a large proportion of people don't like the architectual look. As a piece of furniture when not in use it would look more pleasing to the eye if the lens was hidden. I'm sure many wives of B&O customers would prefer this!

Well, I'm not the wife of a B&O customer. I am the customer himself. The magical retractable lens. That's the kind of thinking that I we need. Form and function. Or is it function and form. Uh oh...😮

I'm sure many of you read about Steve Jobs' views on focus groups, in fact it may have been discussed somewhere else in the forum. I'm curious, as to how important focus groups were to Jacob Jensen or David Lewis? I don't mean in terms of testing the sound of a loudspeaker for example, but of the pure design aspect of some of their work. Are some of the less stunning designs a result of focus group-think?

Every time I open my Serene I think about this.

I think B&O found a new way of doing things with the BeoSound 5. Like Hungedu mentioned above, making digital media physical can be difficult. Even though the BS5 isn't motorized, they wanted the user to be able to interact with it and the media. The magic here is in the lever and wheels, perhaps a new way forward.

IMO, the magic now happens in the software side of things - ever since home media went 95% digital, B&O have had to re-focus their efforts on the software back-end of their products. How can a BeoSound 5 be mechanical? It practically is as it stands, just mostly on a screen...

The BeoVision 10 is no less 'mechanical' than most of B&O's other TVs. BeoVision 5, 4, 6, 3, 1, LX, MX, all of these TVs only had moving bases. Heck the Avant only had a motorised base too unless you loaded in a DVD, which wasn't exactly all that exciting as it was.

But it would still be a cool mechanical feature, if the wall bracket also was moveble with the remote.😐

I know that you can buy it aftermaket, like at STB. But what happent with the inovation at Bang & Olufsen. And by the way, the bracket that STB makes is 12 cm thick.... not a cool thing for a thin TV like the BV10, to hang 17 cm out from the wall, and it dont use the Motorized stand plug, so you can not remote it with Beo4... only the Beo5

You seem to have forgotten that BV 4-103 masterpiece...

Cheaper and faster to market is the primary reason.

Bang is now a business, not run by purists as of old.