Beolab 28

[Axo1989]

Only the One series on wood veneer which will never happened.

Haha, or maybe CNC-machined from solid timber. That would be fun. I don’t mind the ‘raw’ finish (in the right setting) but they don’t offer that on the Ones for no reason I can fathom.

Personally I think the co-axial driver and waveguide blended form is a thing of sublime beauty. Then they let the CAD intern design the rest of the box. A crime, really.

 

[echopraxia]

If you don’t value the aesthetics, haptics and UX then that statement could make sense, otherwise it’s nonsense. Those aspects can’t be duplicated in real life for $825.

I value all of those things; I just happen to personally find B&O’s design extremely unappealing and ugly to me personally, as I’ve explained above. But “beauty is in the eye of the beholder”, and so there’s nothing wrong with having a different opinion here on the aesthetics.

But, what is not merely opinion, is the fact that B&O speakers are not worth even a tiny fraction of their price in terms of acoustic performance. This is not nonsense; it’s simply a factual statement of reality.

The fact that I find B&O ugly and others (like Genelec) beautiful is just a lucky coincidence on my part; my aesthetic preference doesn’t always line up with speakers that are actually worth the price (and therefore don’t need aesthetic excuses or other justifications), but when they do it’s certainly convenient.

In contrast though, I do for example find some high end Focal, Sonus Fabre, and Magico speakers to be some of the most beautiful designs out there, even though their acoustic performance (while definitely not bad) is not as good as my 8361A’s (for example) or Salon2’s, despite the latter products from Revel and Genelec costing much less.

 

[Axo1989]

I value all of those things; I just happen to personally find B&O’s design extremely unappealing and ugly to me personally, as I’ve explained above. But “beauty is in the eye of the beholder”, and so there’s nothing wrong with having a different opinion here on the aesthetics.

But, what is not merely opinion, is the fact that B&O speakers are not worth even a tiny fraction of their price in terms of acoustic performance. This is not nonsense; it’s simply a factual statement of reality.

The fact that I find B&O ugly and others (like Genelec) beautiful is just a lucky coincidence on my part; my aesthetic preference doesn’t always line up with speakers that are actually worth the price (and therefore don’t need aesthetic excuses or other justifications), but when they do it’s certainly convenient.

In contrast though, I do for example find some high end Focal, Sonus Fabre, and Magico speakers to be some of the most beautiful designs out there, even though their acoustic performance (while definitely not bad) is not as good as my 8361A’s (for example) or Salon2’s, despite the latter products from Revel and Genelec costing much less.

No, I said "the aesthetics" not aesthetics in general. Meaning if you don't value the aesthetics, haptics and UX of the B&O speakers in question. It's immaterial that you may be interested in aesthetics in a general sense. You stated that you place a negative value on the aesthetics of B&O speakers (you didn't mention haptics or UX iirc). With that your value declaration makes some sense. But the calculus for others in this thread who value these things won't match.

As to the contribution of sound quality, we have anecdotes of your sighted listening in unspecified rooms over an unspecified timeframe. No mention of A/B comparison even. Given your sighted response ("hideously distasteful" etc) no-one would rule out negative sighted bias. So you may confidently include them in your own value calculation, but no-one else can. What "is not merely opinion" really is. Even relating measured sonics to price in % terms is an unlikely equation. You haven't, for example, stated which $825/pair Genelecs you are comparing the Beolab 28 to.

 

[oivavoi]

But, what is not merely opinion, is the fact that B&O speakers are not worth even a tiny fraction of their price in terms of acoustic performance. This is not nonsense; it’s simply a factual statement of reality.

What's this statement based on? The polars of Beolab 50 and Beolab 90 are among the best there is (particularly in narrow mode). I still haven't seen any polars for the 28's, but it probably is decent, given that they have been made according to the same principles. Then there's subjective preference (which is of course based on lots of things in addition to sound). My own sighted listening has made me prefer quite firmly the Beolab 50/90/28 over the Genelec setups I have listened to in stereo so far (not head to head though). Of course I have no idea of knowing whether I would have said the same thing with a blindfold on, but then neither does anybody else - until someone does real blind testing.

The question of "price per acoustic performance" does not have a definite answer. Can one get a sound which is as good for less money? Yes. But that applies to almost everything - a pair of the most expensive Genelecs is also over-priced compared to a setup with good-measuring budget monitors crossed over to multiple subwoofers that are managed with DRC. OR compared to basically any decent multichannel rig with ok-ish monitors. But not everybody wants to have four subwoofers in one's living room, or do the hassle with DRC and measurements, or have five to seven speakers placed around the room. If that's out of the question, the price for decent sound starts going up. Still, the rule of diminishing returns kicks in pretty early in audio.

 

[echopraxia]

No, I said "the aesthetics" not aesthetics in general. Meaning if you don't value the aesthetics, haptics and UX of the B&O speakers in question. It's immaterial that you may be interested in aesthetics in a general sense. You stated that you place a negative value on the aesthetics of B&O speakers (you didn't mention haptics or UX iirc). With that your value declaration makes some sense. But the calculus for others in this thread who value these things won't match.

As to the contribution of sound quality, we have anecdotes of your sighted listening in unspecified rooms over an unspecified timeframe. No mention of A/B comparison even. Given your sighted response ("hideously distasteful" etc) no-one would rule out negative sighted bias. So you may confidently include them in your own value calculation, but no-one else can. What "is not merely opinion" really is. Even relating measured sonics to price in % terms is an unlikely equation. You haven't, for example, stated which $825/pair Genelecs you are comparing the Beolab 28 to.

I don’t know where you’re getting this $825 figure. I said I find my $8k/pair Genelec 8351B to sound much better than the $80k/pair Beolab 90, at 1/10th the price.

As for how I concluded in the Beolab’s good but unexceptional (vs Genelec) subjective performance? Like everyone else here, it’s from subjective listening. So my opinion is no more or less valuable there than yours. You don’t have to trust my opinion any more than I have to trust yours.

But what is fact is that the Beolab 90 cost $80k/pair with relatively little objective data to back it up. What can it do that a set of Genelec 8361A’s for a fraction of price can’t?

The burden of proof is not on me to demonstrate whether or not the $80k Beolab 90 is absurdly overpriced (not counting aesthetically motivated money-disposal). That lies on the manufacturer. Where are the measurements? Genelec publishes them, and we have high quality third party measurements from several other sources now as well. If they exist for the Beolab 90, they’re hard to find because the only ones I see are of useless resolution and test conditions.

You can take or leave my subjective listening opinion, just like I can take or leave yours. That’s fine. But what remains is that makers of these absurdly expensive speakers still do not publish measurements, while some more affordable ones do.

It’s no surprise why, I suppose: B&O doesn’t necessarily even want the approval of audiophiles, as much as they want to promote a brand image of prestigious luxury and eclectic aesthetic. And so long as that works for them, that’s fine. But I do not like that business model, or the kind of products it often yields.

Disagree? Prove me wrong: Let’s see the measurements and the blind tests. Until then, it’s just subjective opinion vs opinion. And you should know that is going to lead exactly to nowhere.

 

[jhaider]

But what is fact is that the Beolab 90 cost $80k/pair with relatively little objective data to back it up. What can it do that a set of Genelec 8361A’s for a fraction of price can’t?

Provide multiple midrange/treble coverage pattern options.

Also, see data here: https://www.stereophile.com/content/bang-olufsen-beolab-90-loudspeaker-measurements

 

[thewas]

Provide multiple midrange/treble coverage pattern options.

Also, see data here: https://www.stereophile.com/content/bang-olufsen-beolab-90-loudspeaker-measurements

Some more here https://www.tonmeister.ca/wordpress/2015/11/04/bo-tech-intuitive-directivity-plots/

 

[Axo1989]

I don’t know where you’re getting this $825 figure. I said I find my $8k/pair Genelec 8351B to sound much better than the $80k/pair Beolab 90, at 1/10th the price.

As for how I concluded in the Beolab’s good but unexceptional (vs Genelec) subjective performance? Like everyone else here, it’s from subjective listening. So my opinion is no more or less valuable there than yours. You don’t have to trust my opinion any more than I have to trust yours.

But what is fact is that the Beolab 90 cost $80k/pair with relatively little objective data to back it up. What can it do that a set of Genelec 8361A’s for a fraction of price can’t?

The burden of proof is not on me to demonstrate whether or not the $80k Beolab 90 is absurdly overpriced (not counting aesthetically motivated money-disposal). That lies on the manufacturer. Where are the measurements? Genelec publishes them, and we have high quality third party measurements from several other sources now as well. If they exist for the Beolab 90, they’re hard to find because the only ones I see are of useless resolution and test conditions.

You can take or leave my subjective listening opinion, just like I can take or leave yours. That’s fine. But what remains is that makers of these absurdly expensive speakers still do not publish measurements, while some more affordable ones do.

It’s no surprise why, I suppose: B&O doesn’t necessarily even want the approval of audiophiles, as much as they want to promote a brand image of prestigious luxury and eclectic aesthetic. And so long as that works for them, that’s fine. But I do not like that business model, or the kind of products it often yields.

Disagree? Prove me wrong: Let’s see the measurements and the blind tests. Until then, it’s just subjective opinion vs opinion. And you should know that is going to lead exactly to nowhere.

That's a fair bit of flouncing for someone who's climbing down from "fact" to "subjective v subjective". Make sure you keep a firm grip on the ladder.

This is a thread about the Beolab 28 which sells for $16,500, and $825 is 5% of that, the latter being what you reckon the price of B&O speakers should be. Are you having trouble remembering your own argument? I haven't made any personal observation on how they sound, as I haven't heard them. I just thought your price was nonsense.

 

[echopraxia]

Provide multiple midrange/treble coverage pattern options.

Also, see data here: https://www.stereophile.com/content/bang-olufsen-beolab-90-loudspeaker-measurements

That’s a fair point — different coverage pattern options is a genuinely unique feature from these.

That said, I would suggest anyone considering these to try a good multichannel system first in contrast; I find the enveloping “omni” effect of multichannel speakers (even with very simple stereo upmixing) can’t be matched by any stereo pair, even by omni speakers. And even a full surround system of e.g. 8351/8361’s is still much less expensive than a Beolab 90, for example.

But of course, I do realize that personal taste here may vary, and some may not want or be able to setup multiple channels of high quality speakers, may not prefer the aesthetic, etc.

Some more here https://www.tonmeister.ca/wordpress/2015/11/04/bo-tech-intuitive-directivity-plots/

Much more useful, thank you. The non-omni beam modes here look pretty good.

That's a fair bit of flouncing for someone who's climbing down from "fact" to "subjective v subjective". Make sure you keep a firm grip on the ladder.

This is a thread about the Beolab 28 which sells for $16,500, and $825 is 5% of that, the latter being what you reckon the price of B&O speakers should be. Are you having trouble remembering your own argument? I haven't made any personal observation on how they sound, as I haven't heard them. I just thought your price was nonsense.

Your posts are unnecessarily rude for someone who clearly isn’t even reading what I’m saying. You are putting words in my mouth by fabricating number claims I never made, by disingenuously applying ratios to deliberately wrong denominators.

I‘ve heard a variety of B&O speakers, and they didn’t impress me. There’s nothing to be gained from slinging insults at (and trying to put words in the mouth of) someone on the internet whose opinions offend you, unless your goal is to gain internet troll points

The “fact” is, the Beolab 90 etc. is absurdly overpriced (not counting aesthetic concerns (*)) when identical or superior performance can be achieved for a fraction of the price by other speakers. I’ve said it before and I’m saying it now, no “climbing down” required.

(*) One potential exception I do acknowledge is what @jhaider mentioned (notably absent from your ad-hominem-fest), i.e. multiple directivity modes from a single speaker. That is a genuinely unique enough feature that you could argue that it justifies the price, if you wanted to argue that.

 

[Purité Audio]

I spent quite a bit of time with the 8c’s, including trying to broker a way of actually retailing them, I thought them extremely fine, especially in their ‘narrow’ mode.
Keith

 

[NiagaraPete]

We (sales staff) use to call B & O "Bang & Awfulsound. I'm gathering the stuff now sounds better? It always looked nice.

 

[Axo1989]

Your posts are unnecessarily rude for someone who clearly isn’t even reading what I’m saying. You are putting words in my mouth by fabricating number claims I never made, by disingenuously applying ratios to deliberately wrong denominators.

I‘ve heard a variety of B&O speakers, and they didn’t impress me. There’s nothing to be gained from slinging insults at (and trying to put words in the mouth of) someone on the internet whose opinions offend you, unless your goal is to gain internet troll points

I'm sorry if you thought the ladder analogy was rude, I should learn to use emoji. But you were actually claiming your value assessment was a "simply a factual statement of reality" (which value judgements aren't by definition) and based that on subjective sonics in any case. Ad hominem is an attack on the person, I just took issue with your arguments, including the one that "B&O speakers sound good, and would be a very decent value purchase only if they cost about 5% of what they ask for them" (note that you said "only"). That literally means a pair of Beolab 28 (the subject of this thread) should be offered for about $825.

If I've used the wrong denominator, it's only because you did. So I said that was nonsense, unless you ignore aesthetics, haptics and UX, and assuming your subjective listening was meaningful (which it could be for you, but not to others). I had a look to see what Genelec offered at that price, but obviously they don't. Now I'm guessing you used the number rhetorically, or you didn't mean this particular speaker, or you forgot what you actually said, and it's fine to just say so.

For example, instead of the first sentence quoted (which is what I call flouncing) simply say "I didn't literally mean 5% in relation to the Belab 28, I really meant the 90, and maybe 10%" or something similar. With respect to the 90, you said you listened, but it doesn't look like you did much research into any measurements you were concerned weren't offered. Or even understood the feature set. So I've assumed you are passionate, but not informed.