Bang & Olufsen Beosound Balance Review

[Ste_S]

We have one Homepod Mini and it sounds absurdly good for something so tiny. A pair would be great for our upstairs system if we didn't already have a Denon CEOL Piccolo and 2 old MA7s for that. Like you, I get the feeling that a big change is happening, and I wonder if "serious" stereo systems will become even more niche than they already are.

I'm in my early 50s, and I grew up with trad hi-fi, all my friends and family had one. Now, no one does. The people who are more 'serious' about music all have Sonos systems, whilst the rest have Bluetooth speakers.

With dsp, room correction, spatial audio* etc improving, the direction of travel is only going to push more towards wireless smart speakers.

*I've got four HomePod Mini's, I'd love if Apple allowed you to pair more than two for spatial audio.

 

[Deluxillo]

Here is my take on the EQ.
Please report your findings, positive or negative!

For the score rational your journey starts here
Explanation for the sub score
The following EQs are “anechoic” EQs to get the speaker right before room integration.
If you able to implement these EQs you must add EQ at LF for room integration, that is usually not optional… see hints there.

The raw data with corrected ER and PIR:

Score no EQ: -0.3
With Sub: 1.9


Spinorama with no EQ:

• Make noise: check
• Tons of resonances: check

View attachment 392010

Directivity:
Try to be Omni directional?
View attachment 392018View attachment 392024
EQ design:
I have generated two EQs. The APO config files are attached.

• The first one, labelled, LW is targeted at making the LW flat
• The second, labelled Score, starts with the first one and adds the score as an optimization variable.
• The EQs are designed in the context of regular stereo use i.e. domestic environment, no warranty is provided for a near field use in a studio environment although the LW might be better suited for this purpose.

Score EQ LW: 2.4
with sub: 4.0

Score EQ Score: 4.9
with sub: 62.

B&O Balance APO EQ LW 96000Hz
September132024-143954

Preamp: -3.90 dB

Filter 1: ON PK Fc 0.1 Hz Gain 0.00 dB Q 0.12
Filter 2: ON PK Fc 110.0 Hz Gain -4.62 dB Q 0.84
Filter 3: ON PK Fc 236.8 Hz Gain 3.06 dB Q 2.58
Filter 4: ON PK Fc 371.4 Hz Gain -1.43 dB Q 3.29
Filter 5: ON PK Fc 806.2 Hz Gain -4.39 dB Q 1.96
Filter 6: ON PK Fc 1515.9 Hz Gain -7.70 dB Q 2.79
Filter 7: ON PK Fc 3440.4 Hz Gain -8.88 dB Q 2.20
Filter 8: ON PK Fc 5703.6 Hz Gain -3.17 dB Q 5.13
Filter 9: ON PK Fc 6978.2 Hz Gain 5.61 dB Q 3.74
Filter 10: ON PK Fc 13519.1 Hz Gain -3.10 dB Q 1.99

B&O Balance APO EQ Score 96000Hz
September132024-143954

Preamp: -1.60 dB

Filter 1: ON PK Fc 0.1 Hz Gain 0.00 dB Q 0.13
Filter 2: ON PK Fc 114.5 Hz Gain -3.98 dB Q 0.55
Filter 3: ON PK Fc 233.8 Hz Gain 4.14 dB Q 2.25
Filter 4: ON PK Fc 412.5 Hz Gain -0.69 dB Q 4.47
Filter 5: ON PK Fc 785.8 Hz Gain -4.74 dB Q 1.54
Filter 6: ON PK Fc 1547.0 Hz Gain -7.05 dB Q 2.91
Filter 7: ON PK Fc 3488.8 Hz Gain -9.22 dB Q 2.07
Filter 8: ON PK Fc 5442.8 Hz Gain -3.25 dB Q 1.70
Filter 9: ON PK Fc 7088.7 Hz Gain 4.25 dB Q 2.89
Filter 10: ON PK Fc 10316.3 Hz Gain -6.33 dB Q 0.88

View attachment 392015

Spinorama EQ LW
View attachment 392011

Spinorama EQ Score
View attachment 392012

Zoom PIR-LW-ON
View attachment 392014

Regression - Tonal
View attachment 392013
rest of the figures attached FYI

Newb here. I dont get this:

• The second, labelled Score, starts with the first one and adds the score as an optimization variable.

What does that means?

 

[Maiky76]

It means the first EQ labelled LW is trying to make the LW (Listening Window as defined by CEA2034 some explanation here and the document here) flat, that's about it.
The LW is chosen because it correlates very well with the perceived "sound quality" of the speaker.

The second one, labelled Score, adds (= includes) the predicted Preference Rating that is described here and is a metric used to predict "how good the speaker will sound" as an optimization objective. That is to say that the Score EQ is trying to get the LW flat and maximize the predicted Preference Rating.

These two objectives (flat LW and Score) are more often than not somewhat conflicting mainly because of the directivity of the speaker, my algorithm is designed to maximize both, which is not trivial... Case in point this B&O speaker.

In my signature you'll find a set of scripts to process the data measured by @amirm, calculate the CEA2034 and calculate the predicted Preference Rating, but nothing regarding the EQ.

In any case, if you want to further your understanding, I would recommend you to read the documents linked in both my original post and this one.

 

[musicforcities]

Appreciate the effort on the review…but…

I doubt anyone who gets this will eq it as you do. lol. Or at all.

to my mind these sorts of devices are somewhere between old school boom boxes and Bose stuff from he 79 and 80s. Or I suppose lots of bang and oilfsen stuff from then too.

They are not really trying to create objectively clean audii. They are sound field effect machines. lifestyle audio distortion pods creating “big” sound.


Measuring them seems futile.

But very interesting

Thanks!

 

[aoaaron]

I own a couple of B&O A5s.

The comments in this thread are hilarious. Critiquing a speaker without using it or hearing one. I've heard this speaker in store and it's very, very nice as a lifestyle speaker. I think its A5 smaller brother which is much cheaper gets the job done whilst being portable and having a phone charger for less money but the Balance's are trust power houses in the bluetooth/lifestyle space.

For reference, I own a Perlisten S series 7.3.6 with a Trinnov altitude 16 so I'm all for hi-fi and being a bit snobbish when it comes to EQ/dispersion patterns.

However the B&O lifestyle speakers (not the beolab ones) seem to do something really intriguing - most people who buy it are really happy with them. The balance is feature rich and for its form factor, has a bass extension and quality which beats most bookshelves. Add ontop the ability for it to be ran in a stereo pair or alone and still be a good useful speaker, Airplay, wireless capabilities, the ability to integrate with the Beosound theatre and be used as a surround or FR/FL speaker and you have an interesting piece of tech.

I'm looking at buying one but not for RRP. I feel £1.5k is fairly reasonable for one. I'd like the one with the marble or brown oak base.

The A5 is my most used speaker now as it can just be left on all the time on airplay in my hallway and lounge with minimal fiddling. I can pick it up and move it to the gym with no issues.

People really need to listen and use some of these products first IMO. It's a really good speaker for what it is and in my experience destroys the Diavlet, Sonos and HomePod equivalents.

 

[Ktacos]

The comments in this thread are hilarious. Critiquing a speaker without using it or hearing one.

If you're trying to convince people that it's sane to spend $1300 (A5) or $3200 (Balance) on what are effectively little portable bluetooth speakers, well I wish you the best of luck, you're really gonna need it. Doesn't matter how these things sound, most peoples priorities simply do not have room for products like these. If I had the expendable income to drop $3200 on a bluetooth speaker, there's a million other things I'd rather spend it on. I could help out a lot of people in my life with that kind of money. Gotta be some sort of consumer brain rot going on for people to buy these things.

 

[aoaaron]

If you're trying to convince people that it's sane to spend $1300 (A5) or $3200 (Balance) on what are effectively little portable bluetooth speakers, well I wish you the best of luck, you're really gonna need it. Doesn't matter how these things sound, most peoples priorities simply do not have room for products like these. If I had the expendable income to drop $3200 on a bluetooth speaker, there's a million other things I'd rather spend it on. I could help out a lot of people in my life with that kind of money. Gotta be some sort of consumer brain rot going on for people to buy these things.

If you can't afford it, that's fine.
However you need to appreciate some people do shop at these price points, and those that do will want a well balanced bluetooth speaker which does somethings better than the competition whilst looking nice as a priority.
Money is all relative and so are budgets. $15k to one person might be a months wage, to another it might be half a year's wage.

There's no consumer brain rot. Someone who is buying a $1k to $2k bluetooth speaker probably already has a nice car, a nice house, a cinema room, an office, a gym, a nicely decorated cinema or lounge for it to go in.

Just as some people can empathise and see how people who can't afford this level of kit might find it hard to stomach - those who can't afford it should be able to appreciate the mindset and opinions of those who can.

 

[Ktacos]

Money is all relative and so are budgets. $15k to one person might be a months wage, to another it might be half a year's wage.

I think they are terrible purchases regardless of your income level. You're not going to convince me to feel good about what other people are buying. Like I said, good luck.

 

[aoaaron]

I think they are terrible purchases regardless of your income level. You're not going to convince me to feel good about what other people are buying. Like I said, good luck.

That's ashame. It's nice to appreciate what others are buying and be happy for them IMO.

The Beosound A5 is a great bluetooth wireless speaker which actually looks nice an interior design. In my testing, it sounded significantly better than the Sonos ERA 300 which required being plugged in. It also had the ability to be used with, or without the cable. - and could be used in stereo with a second but also be paired with a Beosound theatre for up to a 16 channel home cinema system. For that versatility, combined with the looks and ability to change the panel to four different finish options - and commitment from B&O to support the product cradle to cradle (this means if new bluetooth codecs come out, it should theoretically be a simple swap out), it serves a clear purpose for someone within that budget wanting all of those features.

The Balance, which I don't own, as many of the positives of the A5 but has far superior bass performance and likely max SPL. IT's also by nature more omnidirectional which means for less critical listening but multiple people (for example in a large lounge for entertaining), its going to be a fairly versatile means of filling the room with nice sound without being visually intrusive at all. If I could afford one, I'd get one but it's so expensive that I need to wait for a good deal. Even then, I find it hard to justify against an A5 (which can be had in discount sometimes) which probably has 60-70% of the sound quality for 35% of the price and has a mobile phone charger, can be used wirelessly and transported a lot easier.

I remember when I was shopping at the budget end of the systems For a Denon or Yamaha receiver. I'd look at people owning Trinnovs and I'd never critique them. I'd appreciate they were shopping at a different level to me and wish them the best. This extends to cars, houses, kitchen worktops, gym equipment, TVs, holiday homes - I think it's always important to appreciate what others have, not hate but aspire to whatever our individual dreams are.

 

[Miguelón]

People really need to listen and use some of these products first IMO. It's a really good speaker for what it is and in my experience destroys the Diavlet, Sonos and HomePod equivalents.

I think you should join a forum called “AudioSCIENCEreview” and expect some science in it. If not, we can suggest @amirm to move the name to “AudioSENSATIONreview”…

Audition is more tricky than simply “listen” and believe the nice words and design from a brand, whichever it is.

 

[Old_School_Brad]

I think you should join a forum called “AudioSCIENCEreview” and expect some science in it. If not, we can suggest @amirm to move the name to “AudioSENSATIONreview”…

Audition is more tricky than simply “listen” and believe the nice words and design from a brand, whichever it is.

I believe there's a valid point, as some have observed, that traditional measurement methods may not fully capture the performance of these omnidirectional speakers. With that in mind, I feel your comment might be a bit too straightforward. In this particular product niche, I’m not sure the usual suite of measurements gives us the full picture. However, I’m open to being corrected.

 

[Ktacos]

That's ashame. It's nice to appreciate what others are buying and be happy for them IMO.

Getting excited about others consumption of luxury goods is like the definition of consumer brain rot lol.

 

[Keith_W]

I think they are terrible purchases regardless of your income level. You're not going to convince me to feel good about what other people are buying. Like I said, good luck.

I think you have an excessively narrow point of view. For many consumers, sound reproduction is probably not the top priority. They are not willing to sacrifice aesthetics for sound. Ask yourself this: which do you think your wife would object to more? Speakers that do not sound good? Or an ugly monstrosity in your living room?

 

[Ktacos]

which do you think your wife would object to more? Speakers that do not sound good? Or an ugly monstrosity in your living room?

I'm not a boomer and myself and my partner consider the whole WAF to be really cringy and generally indicative of a poorly balanced relationship. My gf is invested in music and it's reproduction. She's so used to having good neutral playback that she can usually point out problems as quickly as I can. I've even shown her this review and asked her to guess the price, she was shocked and stated that she doesn't understand what consumer is buying that sort of "crap".

Ya'll seriously need to get with the times and ditch the whole WAF thing. It's embarassing.

The answer is in fact that she would be more annoyed with poor sound. I know this for a fact, because these sat in the living room without complaint for quite awhile and my word did they sound good.

They measure super well, in room.

The B&O bluetooth speakers are stupidly priced, no debate needed. Considering these things I made cost a mere fraction of the Balance reviewed.

I think you have an excessively narrow point of view. For many consumers, sound reproduction is probably not the top priority.

Not really narrow, just educated and experienced enough to understand the limitations of what a bluetooth speaker can be and how compromised the overall package is. Diminishing returns happen quick in this product class. You're right, most people want looks, and there's a gajillion other products in the category that will deliver more than adequate sound and have good looks to go with it that don't cost $3200. I stand by my opinion that folks perspective is so out of whack they think any bluetooth speaker is worth $3200. Are people suggesting there's an income level one can achieve to where they throw away common sense and technical understanding? I hope I never get to that.

 

[Miguelón]

I believe there's a valid point, as some have observed, that traditional measurement methods may not fully capture the performance of these omnidirectional speakers. With that in mind, I feel your comment might be a bit too straightforward. In this particular product niche, I’m not sure the usual suite of measurements gives us the full picture. However, I’m open to being corrected.

I agree in part and excise me for my comment, but this particular brand “abuse” a lot of its claims of good sound but really offering a totally overpriced product product to its category.

And I had one of their products from another time in which they were quite well built, a Beo Sound Ouverture and Beo Lab Penta.

Not very sure if omnidirectional speakers should not be measured in the same way as others: audio studies show better preference to speaker offering flat on axis anechoic response and smooth directivity. Only issue is to determine what “on axis” really is…

I tried one of the B&O new gadgets at home, don’t remember the name, was made like a picnic basket. For the price sounded terrible “bass boosted” and confuse mids. It looked nice thiugh…

 

[Tezzahappy]

I have owned many well known HiFi equipment over time including Audio Note, Naim, Audiolab, Quad, Wadia,, MLogan, MarkL and the list goes on. What did I learn ? Doesn't matter about the watts, dealers saying no tone controls makes it better, if the price is what your happy to pay just like artwork in a gallery, then pay it.

If your own ears think its great sounding, job done.

I am always amazed how engineers have to measure frequency response to tell them and us what our ears should or should be saying is good. Don't you trust your own hearing ?

If a cheap fosi amp on cheap speakers sound great to you, then you should accept it and do not constantly wait for others to tell you that the system you are listening to is great or not.

As for B&O Balance, I found them to sound really good to my ears. The music was clear and made my toes tap. Price and aesthetics are within my budget.

Listen to your own ears and the music, not the equipment and someone else presenting a frequency graph.

I have stopped listening to dealers and reading reviews by magazines who rely on those manufacturers for advertising a long time ago.

As for the future, I do believe traditional HiFi separates will disappear and one box, or one speaker streaming solutions will be the normal. So the manufacturers are all starting to make/create systems that are functional and stylish. NAIM is definitely one of them. Guess what, B&O having been doing that for years.

 

[Sokel]

Are people suggesting there's an income level one can achieve to where they throw away common sense and technical understanding? I hope I never get to that.

Yes,the exact same way you ditch your phone and get a personal assistant.
Freedom comes in many forms.

 

[milosz]

If you are going by "what sounds best to you" as a criterion, it's very difficult to go somewhere and hear the complete, assembled system that one might wish to purchase. Another factor is that the human brain - which is where hearing takes place - changes quite a bit from moment to moment and preferences can be changed by mood, health, age and training.

So, if one is just going to select which equipment to purchase just by "it sounds good to me" subjectivism, how do you select what to buy from the 1000's of pieces of equipment available, new and used? Measurements and tests can help here. I think it's scientifically provable by well designed listening tests that many HiFi myths and woo are just nonsense. Knowledge helps one avoid being taken to the cleaners.

It should be noted that ALL equipment is evaluated by engineers using frequency graphs. Nothing is designed and built from start to finish by some old codger who just magically knows what "sounds right."

 

[Old_School_Brad]

I agree in part and excise me for my comment, but this particular brand “abuse” a lot of its claims of good sound but really offering a totally overpriced product product to its category.

And I had one of their products from another time in which they were quite well built, a Beo Sound Ouverture and Beo Lab Penta.

Not very sure if omnidirectional speakers should not be measured in the same way as others: audio studies show better preference to speaker offering flat on axis anechoic response and smooth directivity. Only issue is to determine what “on axis” really is…

I tried one of the B&O new gadgets at home, don’t remember the name, was made like a picnic basket. For the price sounded terrible “bass boosted” and confuse mids. It looked nice thiugh…

I understand what you’re trying to express -that you feel it’s too expensive. Honestly, you could apply that argument to dismiss the value of 75% or more of all audio-related products. When it comes to this kind of thing, I try not to focus on price because, really, what defines an "expensive" speaker? The same way you’d ask what makes a watch, motorcycle, car, or yacht "expensive."

It’s all subjective and relative, so debating the cost of these things often feels unproductive, especially when they fall into the category of hobbies, pleasure, and leisure.

You’ve also hit on the core issue with traditional measurement methods (and with the Klippel NFS, it’s probably more about the algorithms). These speakers weren’t designed in the traditional way -neither in terms of construction nor DSP. They’re engineered to project sound in all directions and make it sound convincing, which I think is a remarkable achievement. When factors like SPL, low-frequency extension, and linearity are maintained to a reasonable degree, I find it even more impressive.
I think credit is definitely due for the effort that goes into creating a device like this.

 

[Miguelón]

I understand what you’re trying to express -that you feel it’s too expensive. Honestly, you could apply that argument to dismiss the value of 75% or more of all audio-related products. When it comes to this kind of thing, I try not to focus on price because, really, what defines an "expensive" speaker? The same way you’d ask what makes a watch, motorcycle, car, or yacht "expensive."

It’s all subjective and relative, so debating the cost of these things often feels unproductive, especially when they fall into the category of hobbies, pleasure, and leisure.

You’ve also hit on the core issue with traditional measurement methods (and with the Klippel NFS, it’s probably more about the algorithms). These speakers weren’t designed in the traditional way -neither in terms of construction nor DSP. They’re engineered to project sound in all directions and make it sound convincing, which I think is a remarkable achievement. When factors like SPL, low-frequency extension, and linearity are maintained to a reasonable degree, I find it even more impressive.
I think credit is definitely due for the effort that goes into creating a device like this.

To get a 360 degree sound they simply put 2 drivers of 5 inches, 3 inches, 2 inches and surprisingly only one tweeter…

Probably they just overlap the transition frequencies by 180 degrees disposition of 2 inches, same on 3 inches but displaced 90 degrees or something and again repeat to the 5 inch woofer.

The tweeter is alone, because is impossible to offer wide dispersion with a 3/4 inch. So the ensemble has a preference directivity.

Of course that have DSP, forced to 26 Hz according to specs the only way is throwing a lot of extra power to the 2 5 inch drivers (note 2x 200 watts on the technical specifications), but even with that one has to flat the super bump on around 100 Hz or so that is created with energy trying to rise the 30 Hz zone.

And also they should correct the messy response all these drivers cause in such a small place.

The result is predictable BAD response in ALL directions.

Overprice in Bang Olufsen is simply given by their decorative design and marketing, 3000€ is enough to have a full range good system with a true 12 inch subwoofer and a good streamer.

Take a look of these 160.000€ speakers (one unit, the pair? Not specified, above some money one doesn’t care )…

Beolab 90 - Altavoz avanzado con potencia de 8.200W | B&O

Probablemente el altavoz digital más avanzado del mundo. Altavoces estéreo insignia de Bang & Olufsen que se adaptan a la perfección a su hogar.

www.bang-olufsen.com