Looking at the specs, the new BeoLab 10 offers exactly the same performance as BeoLab 7-4, in a different design..once again, I wish B&O had spent more time working on performance than simply on a new design.

The purpose of BeoLab 10 or 7-4 is to work with BeoVisions 4 or 7 and a set of ALT fitted speakers, = BeoLabs 5 or 9, that means, with no need for a subwoofer, so B&O should have made a center speaker going as low as Lab 9 or 5, with an ALT for the tweeter, that's it. 45 Hz is still not low enough.

Put the Lab 10 below a BV7 on its floor stand and you have the new AV9000..David Lewis's nostalgy? Or loss of creativity?

Just my 2 cents..

I think it looks ok, but then I always liked the AV9000.

I would have liked them to produce a centre (mono) ALT version of the 7.1/7.2 as I particularly like the style of this speaker and think the BV7 looks much better with it than with the 7.4

 Adrian.

I don't see why this would be impossible : place the ALT in the middle of the BL7.1/2, and the mediums just right and left of the ALT tweeter (not at the extremities of course) and I think you get a good mono-ALT BL7.1!

Concerning your previous post Alex, I'm not sure that bl7.4 is perfect, maybe B&O should have made a better bl10, if you read the topic concerning BL5 in fantom mode (great inputs from Dave Moulton inside!)

Sorry, double post!

The problem with doing such a thing is that you end up with an effect called comb filtering. While this is most obvious when it occurs in the highest frequencies (covered by the tweeter), it's still very noticeable in the higher mids. It's not much of a problem once you get lower down in the sound spectrum. Placing two drive cones within say, 15 cm of each other means you're going to end up with peaks and 'gaps' in the uppermost frequencies the midrange units would normally cover when you sit off-axis as a result of comb filtering.

It would be much less of a problem when the speakers are placed close together at midrange frequencies (placing tweeters closer together is more of a problem than placing them apart), but would still result in noticeable issues.

I read the BL5 phantom centre channel topic considerably, and whilst the BeoLab 5 may be better suited as a centre channel, without quartering a BeoLab 5 and using the front half of the upper bass/midrange/treble assembly (the subwoofer is definitely not needed), there's no real way of getting something as well suited under a plasma screen without it looking dreadful. In order to be perfectly suited to the sound of the BeoLab 5s, the centre channel must sound identical (down to a reasonable frequency), and as a result, the midrange/tweeter assembly would have to be constructed in an almost identical fashion.