AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Speakers › The Downfall Of Bose...
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Downfall Of Bose... - Page 2

post #31 of 380
9/6/10 at 1:14pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by badassfajita View Post

I used to be part of the masses of members here that thought that Bose was crap and should be on the nightly news as a scam.

Then it hit me.

Bose = pure genious.

Only a very small population are audio geeks like us. What DO people want in their homes? Big towers with 12" woofers?? Nope. Small, out of sight speakers that give better sound than a TV. And they deliver 100%. They are not out to destroy the conventional speaker company. Instead, they have chosen to give people what they want. Pure genious IMO.

I want and have 12" woofers

but I 100% agree with your post....although my friend who has a bose HT setup. heard mine and definitely feels a little inferior. He also now understands what clean SPL/dynamics sounds like compared to high distortion SPL of his setup. The worst or funny part is that he paid more for his then I did, Its a big eye opener for anyone.

Ignorance is truely bliss!
Reply
Reply
post #32 of 380
9/6/10 at 1:34pm
When I saw the title of the thread I had a small hope that maybe Bose wasn't doing so well and their marketing based on lies and bulls**t and crappy products wasn't working out anymore.

That hope was quickly extinguished Everyone here should be on a mission to save their friends who don't know better from Bose.
Reply
Reply
post #33 of 380
9/6/10 at 1:40pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bravo1 View Post

But never coming up with an improved version of their own product, they are losing repeat buyers by not giving a people a reason to upgrade. Right now I wouldn't be surprised if they sell more wave radio's and sound dock's than they actually sell speakers. The 901's probably rarely sell but they most likely keep it around for history more than anything.

That may be true but I think for most of the people who buy Bose, they don't think about upgrading. They're the type of people who just buy something and then keep it for a long time until decoration, rather than sound, becomes the basis for buying something else. Or because the speakers break (in which case they just go out and buy another Bose system).

They still make 901's? I remember back in high school one of my friends bought a pair of those. We ended up turning them so the multiple speakers faced us instead of the wall because otherwise it sounded too dull.
Reply
Reply
post #34 of 380
9/6/10 at 1:52pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by monkuboy View Post

That may be true but I think for most of the people who buy Bose, they don't think about upgrading. They're the type of people who just buy something and then keep it for a long time until decoration, rather than sound, becomes the basis for buying something else. Or because the speakers break (in which case they just go out and buy another Bose system).

They still make 901's? I remember back in high school one of my friends bought a pair of those. We ended up turning them so the multiple speakers faced us instead of the wall because otherwise it sounded too dull.

Which, interestingly enough, is the Bose 802 configuration.

I do have to admit that I used to think that the Acoustic Wave Cannon was pretty cool. It looked like a sub weapon. Then I discovered the specs, a rare sighting in the Bose world. 84dB 1w@1m, 109dB max output, however a not terribly shabby for pro sound +/-3db of 25-125Hz.
Reply
Reply
post #35 of 380
9/7/10 at 1:44am
Quote:
Originally Posted by jumpnblues View Post

...Whatever happened to Bose? I can remember when the 901 series speakers (among some others) were very highly thought of by the audiophile community in general.
I've been out of touch with the audiophile world since the late '70s.

They were never held in much regard by audiophiles. Sounded awful then (901s), still sound awful today.

These days as stated, they are more into marketing and product placement than real quality product (for sensible money).
Reply
Reply
post #36 of 380
9/7/10 at 5:36am
i find this thread interesting, as I (sort of) asked this question in another post.

This past weekend I tried an experiment of replacing my "vintage" Bose 301s with a "cheapo" set of Sony speakers (SS-U310). Much to my surprise, the Sony set sounded much better!

I only add this comment, as I am a "dinosaur" from the old days when "Bose" was the name to have in your stereo system. But, as I posted in another thread, this simple experiment has taught me to listen with my ears, and not my wallet.

As to the downfall of Bose, I think many of the posts hit the cause, profit. So, it's not a question of "downfall", just a question of market segment focus and product life cycle. Bose speakers are no different than Ralph Lauren clothing. I remember when RL was the high end, only available in the best clothing stores; now you can find the "name" in a convenience store. It is simply a marketing plan to wring every dollar of return out of an investment in branding.
Reply
Reply
post #37 of 380
9/7/10 at 7:34am
Thread Starter 
"[...Everyone here should be on a mission to save their friends who don't know better from Bose....]"


Yep. And I want to just say thanks to all on this forum that have "steered me straight" after a long hiatus from audiophile-dom. I've learned a tremendous amount in a very short period of time.


Tom
Reply
Reply
post #38 of 380
9/7/10 at 11:08am
I despise BOSE based on the lack of integrity, for using cheap quality parts in an expensive package.

The lack of any reputable magazine showing true industry standard measurements in which a majority of the competitors use to market themselves on is degrading as well.

Bose would be comparable to say BMW or Mercedes telling you its as good as Lamborghini or Ferrari with out telling you anything about the car other than the aesthetics...and that you should just trust that they have and give you all the performance you want, vs what you really want based on performance standards and realistic expectations.

Point in fact, BOSE curtails the truth about their products by attempting to discredit industry standards on performance rating, and that all those numbers and measurements offer no benefit to the customers decision making when choosing a product and will have no impact on performance with in your listening environment. That is what I call lying.

EDIT: Dr.Bose should be commended on his attempts to try radical new ideas in the companies infancy, but he shouldn't be proud of his company's current stance, rather he should be ashamed of it as it stands today...I doubt this as he is most likely money whore who stands to profit on the ignorance of peoples money and persuasion.
Reply
Reply
post #39 of 380
9/7/10 at 11:23am
Quote:
Originally Posted by zieglj01 View Post

They are more into marketing - while others are more into research
and quality. Bose has the money to make one of the best speakers
in the world - they just seem to not want to do it. They have stood
by their name while others want to make a better name.

While they might be capable of making one of the best speakers in the world, they are selling the living sh*t out of what they do make. You're right, it's marketing. They are marketing what a lot (gulp) of people want. Lesser informed (although that may be harsh, it's true) people want cute, little cubes tucked out of the way and they want everythng to work flawlessly with no laptop sized remote and they want the entire family to be able to use it.

I was just in the only non-big box hifi(?) shop left in town last week. They used to have Paradigm and Anthem. Now they sell Integra, Denon, Def Tec and Bose.

I was questioning the salesman about the huge Bose display and how they seem to push them the most. He said that they were now basically a TV store and some (most) people want the most unobtrusive, little speakers to accompany their new flat panel. He did say they still did custom installs and had the other brands to offer to more discerning customers.
Reply
Reply
post #40 of 380
9/7/10 at 11:33am
My personal favorite explanation of the Bose phenomena:

http://zhome.com/ZCMnL/PICS/stereo/bosefaq.htm
Reply
Reply
post #41 of 380
9/7/10 at 11:59am
Quote:
Originally Posted by khellandros66 View Post

The lack of any reputable magazine showing true industry standard measurements in which a majority of the competitors use to market themselves on is degrading as well.

Didn't Bose sue somebody a long time ago, Consumer Reports I think it was, for giving them a negative review/test? I vaguely seem to remember something about this.
Reply
Reply
post #42 of 380
9/7/10 at 12:10pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by zieglj01 View Post

They are more into marketing - while others are more into research
and quality. Bose has the money to make one of the best speakers
in the world - they just seem to not want to do it. They have stood
by their name while others want to make a better name.


Here is the catch....there is NO best speaker in the world since everyone has different ears, different rooms, different budgets, different priorities.

Speaker design is simply about compromises...pick your compromise and go from
there.

BOSE actually does do some serious R&D stuff. They actually findout what sounds good to the untrained/uneducated masses with almost a zero foot print and will be liked by non-audiophiles that takes some research.


I think its funny that people really believe that making the "best" speaker is best for any company. The "best" speaker in any category is a company's worst nightmare since it seldom can be reproduced at a low cost and it can seldom be sold in large volumes. The bottom line for any company is to make a profit. The bottom line is not to make the best speaker.

BOSE is in the audio business. They are not in the audiophile business and that is okay for most people consider looks more important that the relative SQ of any system.
Reply
Reply
post #43 of 380
9/7/10 at 12:11pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by khellandros66 View Post

Bose would be comparable to say BMW or Mercedes telling you its as good as Lamborghini or Ferrari with out telling you anything about the car other than the aesthetics..

That's awfully generous. I would have used Yugo instead of BMW/Mercedes.
Reply
Reply
post #44 of 380
9/7/10 at 12:12pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by khellandros66 View Post

....I hate, I hate, I hate.......


Feel better? tomorrow you might want to try only one cup of coffee
Reply
Reply
post #45 of 380
9/7/10 at 12:39pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by penngray View Post

Here is the catch....there is NO best speaker in the world ...

Apparently zieglj01 is already well aware of this plain old common sense fact, as well evidenced by how he actually phrased it, which is quoted in bold and underlined below:

Quote:
Originally Posted by zieglj01 View Post

Bose has the money to make one of the best speakers in the world ...
Reply
Reply
post #46 of 380
9/7/10 at 2:47pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by penngray View Post

Here is the catch....there is NO best speaker in the world since everyone has different ears, different rooms, different budgets, different priorities.

Speaker design is simply about compromises...pick your compromise and go from
there.

BOSE actually does do some serious R&D stuff. They actually findout what sounds good to the untrained/uneducated masses with almost a zero foot print and will be liked by non-audiophiles that takes some research.


I think its funny that people really believe that making the "best" speaker is best for any company. The "best" speaker in any category is a company's worst nightmare since it seldom can be reproduced at a low cost and it can seldom be sold in large volumes. The bottom line for any company is to make a profit. The bottom line is not to make the best speaker.

BOSE is in the audio business. They are not in the audiophile business and that is okay for most people consider looks more important that the relative SQ of any system.

Actually, aiming to produce the best is good for any company. It's the research and technology that trickles down from the top which drives innovation throughout a product line. Bose is the poster child for stagnation and touting long established technologies as their own major innovation (line source, transmission line, bandpass, etc). They state that their "certified listeners" are required to regularly attend live performances. To what end, so that they can better figure out how to be the antithesis? Sure, they're in the audio business, so are the "white van" companies. I can't help but feel bad for people when they spend their hard earned money and get so little in return.
Reply
Reply
post #47 of 380
9/7/10 at 2:51pm
Wow, you people obviously have nothing better to do with your time than bitch about something you care nothing about!
Reply
Reply
post #48 of 380
9/7/10 at 3:46pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigsky HiFi View Post

Wow, you people obviously have nothing better to do with your time than bitch about something you care nothing about!

How do you figure that it's "something you care nothing about"? It's something that I've had to steer people away from for well over 20 years. I wish that I could just say, "Yeah, go ahead and get that Bose system.", with a clear conscience.
Reply
Reply
post #49 of 380
9/7/10 at 3:54pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by vraxoin View Post

Actually, aiming to produce the best is good for any company. It's the research and technology that trickles down from the top which drives innovation throughout a product line. Bose is the poster child for stagnation and touting long established technologies as their own major innovation (line source, transmission line, bandpass, etc). They state that their "certified listeners" are required to regularly attend live performances. To what end, so that they can better figure out how to be the antithesis? Sure, they're in the audio business, so are the "white van" companies. I can't help but feel bad for people when they spend their hard earned money and get so little in return.

Who determines what is "best"?

Hell, I would say the majority of popular brands talked about daily on here actually suck and are no better then BOSE when it comes to properly designed Home Theater setups. (meaning everyone has different priorities and objectives to be met)

As for not getting their money, do you know the satisfaction report for BOSE is pretty high so why do you feel bad for any BOSE owners? You feel bad for their audio ignorance? Don't, Most people deem speakers to be something they wish they didnt see. Most people prefer a "certain" sound that is far from accurate. Most people do not care about audio equipment period, they want something that just works and is out of the way. BOSE researched this and know what sells. The deem that as the best product for the MASS MARKET.

Again, this is has nothing to do with audiophile opinion and if people are going to argue about BOSE SQ and be pendatic about it maybe they should look at their own inaccurate/compromised solutions. You can not argue about BOSE's inaccuracies while ignoring all the in house things people do wrong daily.

Do I like BOSE products? Of course not but they are not selling to my niche either so Im not going to tell them how to run their business. They obviously know better then what "audiophiles" think.
Reply
Reply
post #50 of 380
9/7/10 at 3:58pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by penngray View Post

Here is the catch....there is NO best speaker in the world since everyone has different ears, different rooms, different budgets, different priorities.

Speaker design is simply about compromises...pick your compromise and go from
there.

BOSE actually does do some serious R&D stuff. They actually findout what sounds good to the untrained/uneducated masses with almost a zero foot print and will be liked by non-audiophiles that takes some research.


I think its funny that people really believe that making the "best" speaker is best for any company. The "best" speaker in any category is a company's worst nightmare since it seldom can be reproduced at a low cost and it can seldom be sold in large volumes. The bottom line for any company is to make a profit. The bottom line is not to make the best speaker.

BOSE is in the audio business. They are not in the audiophile business and that is okay for most people consider looks more important that the relative SQ of any system.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigsky HiFi View Post

Wow, you people obviously have nothing better to do with your time than bitch about something you care nothing about!



two best posts in this thread...
Reply
Reply
post #51 of 380
9/7/10 at 4:29pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by penngray View Post

why is it such a downfall?

Its more about business survival and profit then what audiophiles want. Audiophiles represent probably less then 3% of the market. That means only 1 in 33 people going into best buy will consider the bose products completely overpriced. The others will consider them premium sound systems and many will "want" them because they seem to sound great and they are hidden. Remember speakers and audio equipment is a negative in most rooms. They are not considered furniture and should be hidden at all times...just ask high end interior decorators. I know we care little about them but most people are going to listen to them before they listen to any audiophile.


Waf is a huge factor here and with marketing anything can be sold even when its not techinically superior. Success in business even the audio business is not predicated on having the best sq at all.

Why do we even care about bose? Their products fit a specific requirement.

+1
Reply
Reply
post #52 of 380
9/7/10 at 6:19pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark russ View Post

Didn't Bose sue somebody a long time ago, Consumer Reports I think it was, for giving them a negative review/test? I vaguely seem to remember something about this.

Yes, after the original 901 made a splash in the audiophile world, Consumer Reports tested it and gave it a negative review. CR said it made a violin sound as wide as the room and the sound wandered about the room.

Amar Bose sued CR, and as I remember the suit dragged on for some time (through some appeals I believe). But eventually Bose lost.

It wasn't too long after that Bose decided it's destiny was not in the audiophile world, but in the mass market. Which they went after, and have been hugely successful. I'm sure among all this audiophile bashing of this company, Dr. Bose is laughing all the way to the bank.
Reply
Reply
post #53 of 380
9/7/10 at 6:39pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevensctt View Post

I guess I don't understand begrudging or bashing a company for the success and profitability of their brand, be it Bose, McD, CocaCola, etc. On the contrary, it should be admired and studied (which they are).

Profits are not bad.

Greed is, while providing crap products. Everytime I hear a Bose speaker, I know exactly what I'm NOT hearing, the entire audio range.
Reply
Reply
post #54 of 380
9/7/10 at 8:45pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by pjg66 View Post

Yes, after the original 901 made a splash in the audiophile world, Consumer Reports tested it and gave it a negative review. CR said it made a violin sound as wide as the room and the sound wandered about the room.

Amar Bose sued CR, and as I remember the suit dragged on for some time (through some appeals I believe). But eventually Bose lost.

It wasn't too long after that Bose decided it's destiny was not in the audiophile world, but in the mass market. Which they went after, and have been hugely successful. I'm sure among all this audiophile bashing of this company, Dr. Bose is laughing all the way to the bank.

Of course he is. He's one of the richest people in the world. Nobody is saying that Bose doesn't make money. Many of us just don't like how the money is made. I'd be embarrassed to have my name on a company like that. Let me ask, if a friend purchased THIS for, let's say, $2000, after they were told that it was top-of-the-line, the best, would you really be OK with that? Of course that system has the advantage of integrated DVD playback versus a similar Bose system where you would still have to have another dreaded box sitting around, but it's still a reasonable comparison.
Reply
Reply
post #55 of 380
9/7/10 at 9:13pm
Really?
Reply
Reply
post #56 of 380
9/7/10 at 9:25pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigsky HiFi View Post

Really?

Yes?
Reply
Reply
post #57 of 380
9/7/10 at 11:59pm
I'll preface this by saying that I would not buy Bose, particularly for home audio, and that I have encouraged family members not to buy it (unfortunately to no avail).

But, I do think it's a mistake to attribute all of Bose's success to marketing. The Bose products I have heard have uniformly exhibited a sound that is difficult to describe, but is in all cases "pleasant." They don't sound like anything I would want to buy, because they don't come even close to presenting accurate, full range sound. But they never sound "bad" in the sense of presenting any objectionable or fatiguing noises.

I think they have quite purposely set out to produce pleasant (a better word might be "euphonic") products that will appeal to people who care more about having unobtrusive and pleasant equipment than any of the attributes that audiophiles care about. The fact of the matter is that most people (and in particular most potential Bose customers) don't care much about reproducing sounds below 40Hz, or about spooky realism. It seems to me that this is because many people fundamentally do not view audio (either music or home theater) as much other than background. What they really want is something that doesn't take up much space, doesn't produce obtrusive noises (good or bad), but that will produce "rich" and "warm" sounds.

I suppose that it does bother me that in some ways they try to pass off what they're doing as something other than what it actually is. But I don't think they're simply foisting a bad product through marketing. They're just making a product that is entirely un-suited to use by someone who wants a system to create audio as a focal-point, rather than background.
Reply
Reply
post #58 of 380
9/8/10 at 1:13am
Did you see that? His eyelid twitched!
Now hand me back that bat...
Reply
Reply
post #59 of 380
9/8/10 at 2:21am
Quote:
Originally Posted by steelyken View Post

Did you see that? His eyelid twitched!
Now hand me back that bat...

Ahh, with the cactus picture I see that you are hinting at this being a prickly subject.
Reply
Reply
post #60 of 380
9/8/10 at 2:49am
Quote:
Originally Posted by manchambo View Post

I'll preface this by saying that I would not buy Bose, particularly for home audio, and that I have encouraged family members not to buy it (unfortunately to no avail).

But, I do think it's a mistake to attribute all of Bose's success to marketing. The Bose products I have heard have uniformly exhibited a sound that is difficult to describe, but is in all cases "pleasant." They don't sound like anything I would want to buy, because they don't come even close to presenting accurate, full range sound. But they never sound "bad" in the sense of presenting any objectionable or fatiguing noises.

I think they have quite purposely set out to produce pleasant (a better word might be "euphonic") products that will appeal to people who care more about having unobtrusive and pleasant equipment than any of the attributes that audiophiles care about. The fact of the matter is that most people (and in particular most potential Bose customers) don't care much about reproducing sounds below 40Hz, or about spooky realism. It seems to me that this is because many people fundamentally do not view audio (either music or home theater) as much other than background. What they really want is something that doesn't take up much space, doesn't produce obtrusive noises (good or bad), but that will produce "rich" and "warm" sounds.

I suppose that it does bother me that in some ways they try to pass off what they're doing as something other than what it actually is. But I don't think they're simply foisting a bad product through marketing. They're just making a product that is entirely un-suited to use by someone who wants a system to create audio as a focal-point, rather than background.

It sounds bad when I don't hear the 2sd, 3rd, 4th harmonics.
It is true some, or maybe many, don't care all that much about music and only want a table radio. But that's not me, I like sitting in the sweet spot, and listening as if I were in a concert hall.

Quote:
Yes, after the original 901 made a splash in the audiophile world, Consumer Reports tested it and gave it a negative review. CR said it made a violin sound as wide as the room and the sound wandered about the room.

I thought they were crap from the start. One of the bar/restaurants I used to go to quite often had the 901s. I never thought they were as good as my JBL L55s, and those were not JBL's top-o-line, either. Plus the 901s had to be placed an exact distance from the wall and ceiling. And they looked really stupid hanging there.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Speakers

AVS Top Picks

AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Speakers › The Downfall Of Bose...