https://www.bowerswilkins.com/en-gb
Anyone noticed this announcement? Thoughts?
This topic has been closed for further comments. You can use the search bar to find a similar topic, or create a new one by clicking Create Topic at the top of the page.
Page 2 / 2
Perhaps it's a bit unfair, but it's almost like comparing a 2009 RR to a 2019 Honda. Yes, it costs more and perhaps has some luxury features. It may turn a few more heads. But it doesn't have some of the basic features, like navigation, that the Honda does.
The B&W feels a tad unfinished to me. As if there were a lot of features they wanted to add, and maybe will add later, but decided to get this out now as if they were under a time crunch.
More like the garbage bin.
+7
Those are some fugly components. Even priced right, they look more fit for planet Mars.
Love how all the mags are touting this as a “Sonos competitor”. Kinda like Rolls Royce is a “Honda competitor”, lol. Totally different market.
Bluesound maybe. Was reading a comment on another forum from a member who had “upgraded” from Sonos to Bluesound for the “Hi-Rez” non-issue. “Now that I have a mesh WiFi, it’s working perfectly, without dropouts”. Ummmm... 😃
Bluesound maybe. Was reading a comment on another forum from a member who had “upgraded” from Sonos to Bluesound for the “Hi-Rez” non-issue. “Now that I have a mesh WiFi, it’s working perfectly, without dropouts”. Ummmm... 😃
Not for long . . . 😉
I see that link claims that Sony is barred from running the ad in the UK, but not barred in the US. It is therefore surprising to see B&W UK doing something similar on their UK website.
No, the "best way to deliver it pictorially" would be to tell the truth.
But if one had to sell the high price point, would the truth help? That is what I was saying; given this situation, the jaggies can't be beat for a cool way of misleading the gullible. Who says that marketing is always ethical?
And it isn't just b&w, the entire HD audio industry is based on this messaging to the misled.
Marketing may not be "ethical", but there are standards they need to hold to. If only other agencies would do what the Advertising Standards Authority did to Sony:
https://www.truthinadvertising.org/sony-high-resolution-audio/
But if one had to sell the high price point, would the truth help?
Why even mention it at all? State what your bit rate is and let the consumer decide whether they want to pay for the higher bit rate or not. As far as selling to a higher price point, you do that by claiming better build quality, or more stylish and exclusive, and better features (if you have them). There is nothing untruthful about that, as it's either a fact or a matter of opinion.
Assuming Sonos is the "leading wireless speaker brand" (and a lawyer would have a hard time proving otherwise) they might even consider it defamatory.
No, the "best way to deliver it pictorially" would be to tell the truth.
But if one had to sell the high price point, would the truth help? That is what I was saying; given this situation, the jaggies can't be beat for a cool way of misleading the gullible. Who says that marketing is always ethical?
And it isn't just b&w, the entire HD audio industry is based on this messaging to the misled.
If there were still around Nyquist & Shannon would not be pleased.
Erm...twice the number of steps?:-).
The point I made was that while the message is fallacious; the messaging is the best way to deliver it pictorially because people understand it from where it is valid, for pixels in video.
No, the "best way to deliver it pictorially" would be to tell the truth. Like extending the dynamic range of a smooth sine wave into the inaudible part of the spectrum. Audio has absolutely no relation to pixels in video, and stair steps (as the Sony case explicitly states) are a lie meant to mislead the consumer. They shouldn't be confused with an attempt to ease the understanding of the layman customer.
Erm...twice the number of steps?:-).
The point I made was that while the message is fallacious; the messaging is the best way to deliver it pictorially because people understand it from where it is valid, for pixels in video.
IMO the messaging is misleading -- what exactly is "twice the fidelity" anyway? See https://people.xiph.org/~xiphmont/demo/neil-young.html#toc_sfam
Other observations:
The control of these units seems to be via a bit of a mish-mash of apps. The B&W app appears to be mainly for setup and grouping, with some basic playback control. Sources evidently need a native app -- Spotify, Roon, etc. or something which will send via AirPlay or Bluetooth. Presumably radio has to be delivered by AirPlay/BT as well.
Incidentally the B&W app says it requires "iOS V11.4 or later, or Android V8.1 or later" by contrast with Sonos' continued support of older OSes (notwithstanding recent grumps about the oldest being abandoned).
Other observations:
The control of these units seems to be via a bit of a mish-mash of apps. The B&W app appears to be mainly for setup and grouping, with some basic playback control. Sources evidently need a native app -- Spotify, Roon, etc. or something which will send via AirPlay or Bluetooth. Presumably radio has to be delivered by AirPlay/BT as well.
Incidentally the B&W app says it requires "iOS V11.4 or later, or Android V8.1 or later" by contrast with Sonos' continued support of older OSes (notwithstanding recent grumps about the oldest being abandoned).
I suspect that the stair step jaggies are used to convey the message because there is no better way to do so, never mind that the means and the message are not based in science. And I doubt that this will cost them any loss of credibility with their target market - audiophiles, including those on a budget.
It's disappointing that B&W's marketing department apparently became unmoored from the science (in particular Nyquist-Shannon) and used the long-discredited 'stair-step'/'jaggies' pictures to support their claim of "96/24 Bit Audio Resolution streaming with twice the fidelity than the leading wireless speaker brand for the purest and clearest audio experience".
I used to appreciate B&W loudspeakers many years ago, and owned a series of mid-priced models, but IMO the above undermines their credibility by playing to the gallery of the audiophile faithful.
I used to appreciate B&W loudspeakers many years ago, and owned a series of mid-priced models, but IMO the above undermines their credibility by playing to the gallery of the audiophile faithful.
Ridiculous prices that are needed to support low volume sales/brand marketing. Justifiable only if it offers music play with stability that is orders of magnitude higher than Sonos, close to a wired legacy style system, because at those prices any music stuttering and stopping will be unacceptable. Since that isn't feasible, I can't see many switch from high end wired kit to this.
It's way too early to make much of a judgement call on this. The biggest thing you could really say for sure is that it's priced way too high for a lot of people. On the other hand, it's going to pull in a ton of audiophile types, or perhaps just want to get the most expensive thing possible.
- The B&W line does have bluetooth though, which will make a lot of people happy. It apparently only has Spotify and Apple music services currently, so you'll likely need that bluetooth, airplay, or your local libraries. It seems to use Roon for local files, and mentions Spotify Connect. I wonder if the app can actually control the music source or if your expected to use the services app.
- It does a higher bit rate than Sonos does. That will compel a lot of folks, while others will talk about how the higher bit rate makes no difference to the human ear.
- No mention of voice services.
- Their soundbar can't be paired with surround speakers currently. They also chose to do an optical connection instead of HDMI-ARC, and do not support DTX. The manual says 'dolby surround', so not sure if that includes DD+.
- They say that there is zero latency, but they don't specifically talk about latency from video sources, whether it's in multiroom sync or not. Also didn't see anything about whether it uses 5.0 or 2.4 GHz for it's multroom connections.
- It looks like the control app is Android or iOS, no desktop support.
- I personally don't like the look of the speakers, but that's subjective. I can see where others may prefer the look.
Maybe it's interesting not so much as a competitor but in comparison of the feature decisions that were made, and now they compare to Sonos.
- The B&W line does have bluetooth though, which will make a lot of people happy. It apparently only has Spotify and Apple music services currently, so you'll likely need that bluetooth, airplay, or your local libraries. It seems to use Roon for local files, and mentions Spotify Connect. I wonder if the app can actually control the music source or if your expected to use the services app.
- It does a higher bit rate than Sonos does. That will compel a lot of folks, while others will talk about how the higher bit rate makes no difference to the human ear.
- No mention of voice services.
- Their soundbar can't be paired with surround speakers currently. They also chose to do an optical connection instead of HDMI-ARC, and do not support DTX. The manual says 'dolby surround', so not sure if that includes DD+.
- They say that there is zero latency, but they don't specifically talk about latency from video sources, whether it's in multiroom sync or not. Also didn't see anything about whether it uses 5.0 or 2.4 GHz for it's multroom connections.
- It looks like the control app is Android or iOS, no desktop support.
- I personally don't like the look of the speakers, but that's subjective. I can see where others may prefer the look.
Maybe it's interesting not so much as a competitor but in comparison of the feature decisions that were made, and now they compare to Sonos.
Page 2 / 2
Enter your E-mail address. We'll send you an e-mail with instructions to reset your password.