It is amazing why the attitude persists, and why (for example) there are Bose stores everywhere that do not have the same quality in kit, nor store furnishings, nor staff !

As for your typical outlet for asian hi-fi .... yuck!  Even the Sony brand stores do not compare to B&O.

The only thing locally that comes close to the advice one gets from B&O are the real hi-fi stores which mix and match components -- some here are still going string after 40 years 

So I think the staff in those stores are like hot rod enthusiasts or PC modders. They love the technical challenge of pushing the specification envelope. They probably convince themselves that there are sound differences.  There may even be discernible differences ... but that does not make for better music experiences.

And I think their customers are either of the same ilk, or they get confused or misled by the debate and then want other people to believe that they have bought wisely and cleverly

I have friends in both camps (B&O and purist hi-fi modders) ... and we all remain friends ... we simply agree to disagree

It is difficult for hifi purists to believe that the B&O approach can make life simple to live (let's not mention S/W upgrades), beautiful to observe, and wonderful to listen to.

PS I am glad you have fallen in love with the 5500 -- I still love that design.

edited as I think I leaned dangerously close to "denigrating" as Peter so gently reminded me

Most people knock B&O without hearing it. Because the name starts with a B , they associate it with Bose.

B&O do have a different attitude to many other makes - the products are designed with ease of use in mind as well as design. They are made to fit into a home rather than dictate. The sound quality is good - you can get similar sound for less money but you will lose the convenience of use and the design.

I think some of the Japanese companies produce excellent products - Sony and Panasonic spring to mind. You then have the smaller manufacturers including the British Hi-Fi makes. These can produce excellent products but also make some items that are shoddily made, use poor quality components and are nigh on impossible to set up properly. They are often made for those who like tweaking their products - again fine if that is what you want to do.

At the end of the day, you pay for what you want - I wouldn't criticise anyone in any of the other camps. Unfortunately there are always those who justify their choice by denigrating others.

Peter wrote:

Unfortunately there are always those who justify their choice by denigrating others.

I think your last comment sums it up nicely Peter🙂

Chris.

Peter wrote:

You then have the smaller manufacturers including the British Hi-Fi makes. These can produce excellent products but also make some items that are shoddily made, use poor quality components and are nigh on impossible to set up properly. They are often made for those who like tweaking their products - again fine if that is what you want to do.

Just a thought to reinforce Peter's view.  

I spent some time from the late seventies to the early nineties buying and listening to some of the better British Hi Fi - Linn, SME, Quad, Sugden, Bowers & Wilkins and  Mordaunt-Short to name just a few.  All of these companies' products were at least the equal of B&O in build quality and the quality of components.  In terms of pure engineering design, some of those products were quite beautiful - the SME 3009 for example.

But what came with much of this kit, especially the more esoteric stuff like the Linn Sondek LP12, was a constant concern that the thing wasn't working properly.  The Linn was difficult to set up and to keep working at an optimum level, and even it was working well you were always worrying about it.  My Beogram 4000 that I had prior to the Linn just plugged-in and played.

So for the last 20 years I have ben happy with B&O.  Recently, I have been collecting older kit and it still manages to surprise me just how good some of it is.  For example, I've just bought for 4 GBP from my local tip a pair of restorable Rosewood Beovox S40s which I've just spent the morning listening to on the end of Peter's old Beolab 8000 system.  Despite the bass drivers having virtually no foam surround left at all, and with a 30 year old set of capacitors, they sound really good.  Not impressive in the way that some inaccurate speakers can, but clear, articulate, detailed and, yes, musical.  

My partner's son, who has just bought a very expensive pair of ATCs, could not believe the quality of a 2-way, 30 year old pair of speakers from what is often dismissed as a company who target professional footballers and the more dubious end of the banking profession as their principal market.

Cleve

For some hi-fi nerds -sorry: enthusiasts 😕 -it has almost become a religion to dislike B&O. Some of them has never heard a B&O system -some remember they have heard a system, visiting their uncle or grandfather back in the seventies. Some have briefly heard a B&O system in a store, and feel they can judge the sound by that -although they admit, that their own "high-end" equipment is installed and adapted to their own living-room (which look like a recording-studio). And they can spend hours discussing with their friends if these cables sound better than those, and blah, blah...

Some of those enthusiasts will never admit that BL5 is one of the best loudspeakers in the world. And even the fact that Audi, Aston Martin, Mercedes Benz and other premium brands use B&O sound systems in their cars, is not enough to convince them. No -it can't be true according to their view of the world.

But we know better...🙂

This is a totally subjective, biased viewpoint.

I have recently had a fair bit of Arcam stuff coming into my workshop, and I was very happy to have an AVR350 on my table. The audio press has made a lot of positive noise about this one being one of the most naturally musical AV receivers made.

Well, after completing a relatively small repair, I hooked it up to a pair of my BeoVox S45's, and set it to Direct mode, which cuts all all the DSP circuitry, ie plain old unadulterated beautiful stereo.

A-B'ing it with my BeoMaster 3400, I was not impressed - it could not compare with the absolutely natural sound which I have grown to love over 30 years from the BM3400.

So no, no mod-squad AVR fundi can convince me that new is better.

Menahem

When I bought my BM1200 and BG1203 in the early 70's a number of work colleagues and personal friends immediately claimed that it was all over-priced and that their new Japanese systems were better specced etc. In those days there was a tendency to go by nothing more than the manufacturers claimed amp distortion figures (and ignore the potentially more distorting speakers and rest of the system.)

Nearly 40 years on, one friend now bemoans the fact that his Linn and Marantz tin box systems failed in succession (strangely enough both losing a channel.) My 1200 has had a recent overhaul (by Martin).... the system as a whole still has wonderful output that will stand comparison with most mid range priced systems. Few other systems come anywhere near it in the timeless appearance stakes!

(Even in these forums you can find views expressed that B&Os main customers are the rich middle-aged to elderly who don't know what they are spending their money on. One ageist commentator seems not to see that his own regular new B&O purchases undermine his case!)

Graham

Besides the fact that B&O is very good, as well in audio/videoquality as in design. 

Apart from this I think of B&O-owners as a sort of same breed as motorcyclists ("once you've got it, you never go back"). I have to say that I will never ever buy anything else but B&O. 

And a lot of people who say B&O is this or that are a bit jealous and can't buy it. If they could they would have just like us! 

It's the same thing that people say that BMW-drivers are arogant, always drive to fast and so forth (unfortunatly I'm a BMW-driver and can reassure you that i don't do any of the stated :) ). The emotions come more from jealousy then from a good argumentation (because there isn't any good one). 

A mystery.

My own take on this comes down to B&O taking for granted that people know their AV outperforms; combined with the strong "form over function" in their market communication. They've let themselves become an easy target for cheap shot attacks. The "Philips inside" claims, for instance - certainly: but look at the build quality of the B&O cd-players that used those innards, they're still around; and why did B&O use 100Hz Philips screens in their CRTs? Because those were the best available.

B&O communication hasn't stressed the audio and video quality enough. It has to be repeated, and repeated, and repeated - to sink in.

I could link to a dozen reviews and articles from audiophile critics who have been invited to Struer, and who had no idea that the place is an audio engineering paradise, unmatched by just about any other manufacturer. This one from Audioholics provides a revelation for the writer: