or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Speakers › I don't get the Bose hatred
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

I don't get the Bose hatred - Page 4

post #91 of 227
Quote:
Originally Posted by eljaycanuck View Post

The problem with Bose:

Thanks for posting that link. I was chatting with the guy at the stereo shop today and he pointed me to this review--more details, similar conclusion: BOSE Acoustimass - Better Profits Through Marketing. (The original at Intellexual.Net is no longer up so the preceding link points to it on the Internet Archive.)
post #92 of 227
I would bet bose has really good margins despite the fact that their stores are often on prime retail real estate. They make good money on brand cache and acoustics ignorance and thats about it.

The true outrage should be against selling massively overpriced interconnects.... Which even Best Buy or Radio shack are routinely doing.
post #93 of 227
Quote:
Originally Posted by blazar View Post

The true outrage should be against selling massively overpriced interconnects.... Which even Best Buy or Radio shack are routinely doing.
If the average consumer took the time to do the research and know what they should pay for audio goods, high priced interconnects, along with high priced cables, isolation devices, and perhaps even Bose wouldn't sell, and they'd all go away. I don't see many marketeers losing sleep over that potentiality. rolleyes.gif
post #94 of 227
I'm sure, that if I took a piece of my dogs poo, shined it up and put it on ebay, someone would buy it! rolleyes.gif

That's Boses' philosophy. smile.gif
post #95 of 227
It is because BOSE is a $1,000 iPhone compared to a $500 Galaxy S4. The Galaxy is a little better in every way, and costs 1/2 as much. The iPhone is pretty and good enough for most people.
post #96 of 227
Quote:
Originally Posted by losservatore View Post

Im wondering how much money bose spend on advertising.eek.gif


bose youtube channel

https://www.youtube.com/user/Bose?feature=watch


I think that there is no other competition in marketing for bose, they really know how to do it.

and yet they have never let an independent source have any of their products to review. Says something.
post #97 of 227
Consumer Reports has reviewed their products over the years.
post #98 of 227
There's plenty of information online about why Bose has a long history of sucking.

Here's a few things:
1. Cheap materials, especially woofer materials.
2. Overpriced
3. In the retail world, they don't let their systems be auditioned near any other audio systems. (IIRC)
4. They are all marketing hype.
post #99 of 227
Quote:
Originally Posted by lespurgeon View Post

It is because BOSE is a $1,000 iPhone compared to a $500 Galaxy S4. The Galaxy is a little better in every way, and costs 1/2 as much. The iPhone is pretty and good enough for most people.

Agreed! smile.gif

Sent from my galaxy rugby pro, via the internet! biggrin.gif
post #100 of 227
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chu Gai View Post

Consumer Reports has reviewed their products over the years.

They also had a lawsuit brought against them by Bose when they were given a bad review.
post #101 of 227
Quote:
Originally Posted by simp1yamazn View Post

They also had a lawsuit brought against them by Bose when they were given a bad review.
Which Bose eventually lost. While Bose claims to achieve better sound through research their marketing department has a hundred times the budget of the engineering department, and they employ more lawyers than engineers.
post #102 of 227
More than once, I've had disagreements at work with young people. "Bose aren't very good." Their reply? Angrily, "They sound great!" (Having heard the speakers at BB.)

All I can conclude is that people can hear but they don't know how to listen. As long as the highs are high and the lows go BOOM BOOM BOOM - it's "good." confused.gif
post #103 of 227
Maybe it's your approach that elicits a hostile reaction? What sort of suggestions do you offer that meet the requirements they feel are important in their decision making process?
post #104 of 227
On the soundbar forum, there was a posting about the Bose cinemate soundbar sounding pretty good. I asked the op what the driver configuration was and he said he didn't know and sure enough, Bose doesn't post that info anywhere. A day later, a Bose employee posted and ask " why does it matter if the guy says it sounds good!" . So no only does Bose not post specs, but the won't tell you the size, arrangement or materials used for their soundbar drivers!
post #105 of 227
Ask them what other sound systems and brands they've listened to in the $3k price range. Most of the time they won't be able to name more than one (if one at all). You don't know what don't know until you know what you don't know eek.gif
post #106 of 227
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chu Gai View Post

Maybe it's your approach that elicits a hostile reaction? What sort of suggestions do you offer that meet the requirements they feel are important in their decision making process?

Well yeah, I probably shouldn't have posted "angrily" rolleyes.gif that's probably me. But that's basically the extent of the convo - "I've listened to those Bose speakers, they sound great." I don't think they sound very good. "They sound great!" I shut up after that.

These guys like Beats (because you can feel the boom in the bass) and blast music to constant distortion levels on their smartphones. Nuff said.
post #107 of 227
Here's what I could get with 3300... Might compete with Bose, not sure, since Bose are the best speakers ever made...

Philharmonic Audio:

4X Philharmonitor - 1700
MTM center channel - 800

2500 so far.. Need a sub (sorta, not really to compete with Bose)...

HSU VTF3-MK4 - 700

3200...

Pioneer VSX-822 - 200

All right - I'm one hundred over. I think this might compete with Bose in sound, etc... all except in the all important WAF microminiature form factor area.
post #108 of 227
Quote:
Originally Posted by lespurgeon View Post

It is because BOSE is a $1,000 iPhone compared to a $500 Galaxy S4. The Galaxy is a little better in every way, and costs 1/2 as much. The iPhone is pretty and good enough for most people.
No Bose would be more like a Blackberry Bold 9650 at the price of the iPhone 5S.
post #109 of 227
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chevypower View Post

No Bose would be more like a Blackberry Bold 9650 at the price of the iPhone 5S.

I'd pay more for a Motorola micro tac flip phone than I would for a Bose system! That phone was analog!!! biggrin.gifbiggrin.gifbiggrin.gif
Edited by toddt007 - 10/22/13 at 7:56pm
post #110 of 227
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chu Gai View Post

Consumer Reports has reviewed their products over the years.

I like CR for blender reviews, but speakers. They can say I've never been shocked by a BOSE, except when dropping it into the bathtub. If you turn it on, it does make sound. I'd like to see frequency response 20 Hz to 20 kHz. I will not be +/- 3 dB.
post #111 of 227
Quote:
Originally Posted by toddt007 View Post

I'd probably pay more for a Motorola micro tac flip phone than I would for a Bose system! That phone was analog!!! biggrin.gifbiggrin.gifbiggrin.gif

I loved my StarTac - dual band. I was actually trolling a bit with that comment and thought I would get some apple-love-bites. Surprised it was so calm.
post #112 of 227
Quote:
Originally Posted by lespurgeon View Post

I loved my StarTac - dual band. I was actually trolling a bit with that comment and thought I would get some apple-love-bites. Surprised it was so calm.

My first cell phone was a StarTac! That was back in '89. Still have the same cell phone # that I had with that phone!!! eek.gif
post #113 of 227
Quote:
Originally Posted by lespurgeon View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chu Gai View Post

Consumer Reports has reviewed their products over the years.

I like CR for blender reviews, but speakers. They can say I've never been shocked by a BOSE, except when dropping it into the bathtub. If you turn it on, it does make sound. I'd like to see frequency response 20 Hz to 20 kHz. I will not be +/- 3 dB.
CR was mentioned in response to whether there were any independent reviews of their products. As to whether CR's speaker reviews have any merit, Sean Olive of Harman has been working with CR on ways their ratings can be improved upon.

Sure, you won't find specs on Bose and Bose doesn't actively seek reviews because they don't have to. There are no other competitors with the name recognition they have that provide a similar product. Someone earlier mentioned how a particular Philharmionic setup would be superior. But it doesn't have the same form factor, has only infinitemal brand recognition, isn't as slickly packaged, can't be found in stores, and wouldn't be as simple to set up.

Bose started making tiny speakers many years ago to meet the needs of consumers who wanted better sound than their TV's could provide and be unobtrusive. While everyone else was laughing, Bose was carving out their niche and it's a big niche. Their packaging is superb and things are layed out to create postive impressions. Installation is simple.

Bose has world wide brand recognition and spans a wide variety of demographics. They advertise everywhere and across all media. One can berate their emphasis on marketing and adverising, but a lot of people can take a few pages from their approach and learn from it. It's lovely to see all those finishes on Salk speakers but there's no personal emotional involvement. Just pictures with no people enjoying the product. If they're sexy there's no sexy babe around. There's no link between the product and a person or persons.
post #114 of 227
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chu Gai View Post

CR was mentioned in response to whether there were any independent reviews of their products. As to whether CR's speaker reviews have any merit, Sean Olive of Harman has been working with CR on ways their ratings can be improved upon.

Sure, you won't find specs on Bose and Bose doesn't actively seek reviews because they don't have to. There are no other competitors with the name recognition they have that provide a similar product. Someone earlier mentioned how a particular Philharmionic setup would be superior. But it doesn't have the same form factor, has only infinitemal brand recognition, isn't as slickly packaged, can't be found in stores, and wouldn't be as simple to set up.

Bose started making tiny speakers many years ago to meet the needs of consumers who wanted better sound than their TV's could provide and be unobtrusive. While everyone else was laughing, Bose was carving out their niche and it's a big niche. Their packaging is superb and things are layed out to create postive impressions. Installation is simple.

Bose has world wide brand recognition and spans a wide variety of demographics. They advertise everywhere and across all media. One can berate their emphasis on marketing and adverising, but a lot of people can take a few pages from their approach and learn from it. It's lovely to see all those finishes on Salk speakers but there's no personal emotional involvement. Just pictures with no people enjoying the product. If they're sexy there's no sexy babe around. There's no link between the product and a person or persons.

I actually agree completely.

I posted the phils to show the alternative if you're interested in excellent sound and a different decorating dynamic, one that includes large speakers extant. In my mind having a couple of good looking speakers is just as valid as having a couple of tables with pictures on them.

However, if you are successfully marketing a copycat lifestyle where the smaller the entertainment components, the better and people have bought into that and assimilated your name as the premier system for that, then life is good.

Bose has done an excellent job in becoming the name of sound. My problem with it is that it does a horrible job in representing good sound at the price point.

Having a frequency response of +/- 10db over the hearing range, with gaps between 200Hz to 280Hz and over 13k, when you pridefully trumpet your scientific achievements is not only disingenuous, to me it is dishonest.

Now if they were to say to the world "the smallest speakers that give you sound slightly better than most TV speakers", I'd have no problem with them or their pricing. It would then be right in front of consumers and they could decide to pay that premium for the ability to tell their friends that they own little speakers.

I understand that as a company built on the illusion of good sound and the reality of integration into a designer lifestyle, they can't do that, since the cornucopia of money would slow (and no marketing person would willingly do that).

So I do agree. Looking at it as a brutally realistic assessment of the reason for their success, they have feathered their nest with marketing and are sitting pretty in it. They just don't want reality as far as their sound quality performance to remove the twigs that make that nest up, putting the whole in peril because they are found wanting in performance.

In the end, I'm happy with my energy setup, and in some time may upgrade to Phils if someone leaves me a Bose system in their will that I can then flip to someone rabid for image.
post #115 of 227
With the amount of $$ Bose has on hand, you would think they'd dedicate some more of it to R&D. But then, you think, they don't have to. People will purchase regardless of the sound quality. When I used to work at BB I would try to get people to purchase B&W and ML rather than Bose, but they didn't want to 90% of the time.
post #116 of 227
Quote:
Originally Posted by TVMAN1991 View Post

With the amount of $$ Bose has on hand, you would think they'd dedicate some more of it to R&D.
That's because advertising dollars give a higher return on investment than R&D dollars. It may not be a successful business model from the standpoint of producing a better product, but it's a very successful business model as far as generating profits is concerned.
Quote:
When I used to work at BB I would try to get people to purchase B&W and ML rather than Bose, but they didn't want to 90% of the time.
That would be the 'you can fool some of the people all of the time' demographic, the hands-down favorite of ad men.
post #117 of 227
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Fitzmaurice View Post

That's because advertising dollars give a higher return on investment than R&D dollars. It may not be a successful business model from the standpoint of producing a better product, but it's a very successful business model as far as generating profits is concerned.
That would be the 'you can fool some of the people all of the time' demographic, the hands-down favorite of ad men.

Couldn't have said it better myself. You would think though with the "educated internet masses" nowadays people would read that Bose is a waste.
post #118 of 227
Quote:
Originally Posted by TVMAN1991 View Post

Couldn't have said it better myself. You would think though with the "educated internet masses" nowadays people would read that Bose is a waste.

Those same masses are also wearing Beats by Dre. headphones as well. As we all know, Beats are the Bose of headphones. What do these two have in common? Massively successful marketing campaigns and acceptance by the sheeple as cool and "high-end". These are niche products and most people don't have time or concern to research for hours/days which surround sound set is best. As others have noted, aesthetics play a HUGE factor in whether or not these products sell. Don't underestimate the power of the WAF!
post #119 of 227
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cla55clown View Post

Don't underestimate the power of the WAF!
That would be the demographic that owns twenty plus pairs of shoes, not a single one of which actually fits. They don't care if their ears bleed so long as the speakers are, if not totally invisible, at least close to it. rolleyes.gif
post #120 of 227
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Fitzmaurice View Post

That would be the demographic that owns twenty plus pairs of shoes, not a single one of which actually fits. They don't care if their ears bleed so long as the speakers are, if not totally invisible, at least close to it. rolleyes.gif

Which begs the question - why hasn't the flat Nxt speaker taken off?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Speakers
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Speakers › I don't get the Bose hatred