or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Speakers › Bose Response on Frequency
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Bose Response on Frequency - Page 7

post #181 of 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by VirusVooDoo View Post

Their companies' slogan is Better Sound through Research...

I think their slogan outta be changed to "Better Sound through Marketing".
post #182 of 275
Many here take the sensible position that speaker selection is a purely subjective decision and that one should always buy what one prefers.

UNLESS someone prefers Bose evidently. Hypocrisy.
post #183 of 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by VirusVooDoo View Post

That's exactly my point as well as many others. Because the difference between total revenue and total cost (meaning profit) is a lot more than any other companies'. Of course every company are out there to earn a profit in anyway they can, or through mass marketing as in Bose's case. But many equivalent or even better products do not cost as much as Bose's stuff and do not ripped off the consumers as much as Bose as their profits are not as high as Bose's. Those companies are consistently competing against one another through pricing and bring out better products like Klipsch and Boston Acoustics, which keep the price low while having new and improved products. We haven't seen anything new from Bose for quite a while and I don't think their prices are as competitive as these other companies. Their companies' slogan is Better Sound through Research is all crap when they haven't brough out new speakers or even change / improve their current lines of speakers.

---------
first of all, how do you know Bose's profits are higher? Second, the more important number is margin per unit sold, that will tell you the profit made for each unit as opposed to total profit which a company that through sheer volume will earn more of. So, I am not sure at all Bose earns any more per unit than any of the other high-end low volume sellers.

Auto manufacturers sell much higher value items and advertise much more than Bose. How is the advertising done by auto companies diffeent from what Bose does? Are you upset with the late night informercials? Those are usually for their lower priced items like the Wave Radio and Quiet Comfort headsets.

I have not found $for instance the $ 279 Klipsh ipod player to sound better than the 299 Bose, or the $450 Cambridge CD radio to sound better than the $500 Bose Wave. And the $300 Quiet Comfort headsets are far superior to Sony's new $250 active noise cancelling headsets. In this case the prices are comparable (same ball park for similar products), although Bose spends a lot more on advertising and in my opinion the Bose is both a better looking and sounding system.

The sets that people complain about, like the Lifestyle series are seldom advertised via informatials. I've been able to hear all the LS systems at CC to determine if it works for me.

Bose, is a classic American success story. Here is an American company that has withstood competitive pressure to thrive in a very competitive market and guess who slams them most vigorously - Americans! Trust me, all the other competitors are trying every gimmick in their book to sell their systems, but it does not seem to work as well as what Bose does. I see Bose's success in audio as being similar to Apple's iPod.

It appears the main problem that audiophiles or should I say 'Bose vigilante's' on this forum have is that they feel the success of Bose is unjustified and therefore the throngs of Bose customers must be either stupid rich folks (at least not as smart as them) or the 'evil Bose Corporation' is preying on their goodness. Trust me, most Bose customers actually like what they buy and seem happy.

Anyway, it looks like most of the typical anti-Bose myth have been pretty well debunked in this thread by now. To me there appear to be no reason why you should not consider Bose for your audio needs. There are lot's of ways to try them out with little or o risk to you. Bose also happens to have one of the most generous reurn policies, and given their small footprint are pretty easy to load and return if you don't like....

I promise this is my last email on this thread. Glad I was able to stir things up a little here
post #184 of 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by plazman View Post

---------
Anyway, it looks like most of the typical anti-Bose myth have been pretty well debunked in this thread by now. To me there appear to be no reason why you should not consider Bose for your audio needs. There are lot's of ways to try them out with little or o risk to you. Bose also happens to have one of the most generous reurn policies, and given their small footprint are pretty easy to load and return if you don't like....

I know I shouldn't, but I'm going to poke the hornets nest again. I have not seen one single statement in this thread that debunks any of the anti-bose stuff that I have posted here. For one example, I've stated that Bose lost 95% of the blind A/B tests that I ever did with comparable speakers, and it was pointed out that speakers sound different in homes, or whatever. Nevermind the same can be said for the [usually lower priced] alternatives they routinely lost to.

Bottom line is, the sound is subjective, some people will like them and be happy with them, and that's fine. But, the average potential buyers should not allow the incessant marketing and hypothetical claims that the company makes in its ads to alter their perception about their sound quality before they start shopping. They should subjectively listen to them against at least a few offerings from other companies rather than buying into the "If it's Bose, it must be the best" philosophy that exists in the masses who do not spend the time and effort to follow audio. If they do that and they choose the Bose, more power to them, I'm glad they found something that makes them happy. Based on my experience selling this stuff in the mid 90s, I believe the vast majority of prospective buyers would choose other alternatives if they approached buying/auditioning speakers in an open minded manner that most people here (Bose loyalists and haters alike) recommend.
post #185 of 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by VirusVooDoo View Post

That's exactly my point as well as many others. Because the difference between total revenue and total cost (meaning profit) is a lot more than any other companies'. Of course every company are out there to earn a profit in anyway they can, or through mass marketing as in Bose's case. But many equivalent or even better products do not cost as much as Bose's stuff and do not ripped off the consumers as much as Bose as their profits are not as high as Bose's. Those companies are consistently competing against one another through pricing and bring out better products like Klipsch and Boston Acoustics, which keep the price low while having new and improved products. We haven't seen anything new from Bose for quite a while and I don't think their prices are as competitive as these other companies. Their companies' slogan is Better Sound through Research is all crap when they haven't brough out new speakers or even change / improve their current lines of speakers.

I have to say, this is one of the most entertaining threads I have seen in a while and it's a really old one at that. How do you know how much profit there is for any of these companies? Profit is not derived just from the cost to manufacture as compared to the wholesale. There are things like overhead, executive compensation, R & D, and yes, ADVERTISING. Just becuase something is not worth a lot in the sum of the parts does not mean it is cheap to make.
post #186 of 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by jehrico76 View Post

I know I shouldn't, but I'm going to poke the hornets nest again. I have not seen one single statement in this thread that debunks any of the anti-bose stuff that I have posted here. For one example, I've stated that Bose lost 95% of the blind A/B tests that I ever did with comparable speakers, and it was pointed out that speakers sound different in homes, or whatever. Nevermind the same can be said for the [usually lower priced] alternatives they routinely lost to.

Bottom line is, the sound is subjective, some people will like them and be happy with them, and that's fine. But, the average potential buyers should be not allow the incessant marketing and hypothetical claims that the company makes in its ads to alter their perception about their sound quality before they start shopping. They should subjectively listen to them against at least a few offerings from other companies rather than buying into the "If it's Bose, it must be the best" philosophy that exists in the masses who do not spend the time and effort to follow audio. If they do that and they choose the Bose, more power to them, I'm glad they found something that makes them happy. Based on my experience selling this stuff in the mid 90s, I believe the vast majority of prospective buyers would choose other alternatives if they approached buying/auditioning speakers in an open minded manner that most people here (Bose loyalists and haters alike) recommend.

Personally, I have had more or less the opposite experience. I was an AM 10 owner until I decided to upgrade to bigger speakers, but I first listened to a lot of other sat systems from Paradigm, BA, Def Tech, and Klipsch. The only one that sounded big time better than Bose were the BA Micros and that was it. Non of the others were like WOW, I have to get these in my house. The difference was just not that noticeable and all cost between $800 and $1000. BTW, the BA sub with the micros was worse than the Bose Bass Module at high volume. The thing was bottoming out all over the place during Pearl Harbor.
post #187 of 275
"Those companies are consistently competing against one another through pricing and bring out better products like Klipsch and Boston Acoustics, which keep the price low while having new and improved products. "

Klipsch? Improved products? You're kidding, right? They brought out their best product in the late 1940s. Their best products are their oldest, not their newest.
post #188 of 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Brennan View Post

"Those companies are consistently competing against one another through pricing and bring out better products like Klipsch and Boston Acoustics, which keep the price low while having new and improved products. "

Klipsch? Improved products? You're kidding, right? They brought out their best product in the late 1940s. Their best products are their oldest, not their newest.

It's true that Klipsch's top-of-the line Heresy models were unrival by some of the newer stuff they have today. But those are more like high-end home theater design specifically for dedicated home-theater applications, not for standard living room right as they are huge speakers. I was referring to their entry-level, midrange, and somewhat high-end lines such as the Synergy and Reference (not THX2) series.

Anyway, the bottom line is that many times sound-quality is subjective and in the free-world people are free to make any kind of purchase with their own money, even if it is more expensive than comparable products. Those of us who are bothered by Bose is because we feel that quite a few of their products are a bit over-priced and the fact that they use all sorts of marketing strategies and non-conformist behaviors do not make them look any better but rather worse in our eyes.

This is off-topic but I heard the old Altec speakers were really good also. I wonder why they stop making home theater speakers and went into computers, especially when they were highly regarded back in the old days or so I was told by a few people.
post #189 of 275
Virus---Well the Heresy is the bottom of Klipsch's "real" line and IMO (and I've owned them) a pretty wretched speaker with a tinny, upper midrange tonal balance that makes it sound like a skilsaw. The Cornwall and Klipschorn, larger speakers from the line, have a much more robust and pleasing tonal balance and are fine speakers.

As for Altec, the REAL Altec, well IMO nobody made better speakers; before, during or since. I have three sets of vintage Altecs now and another set on the way. Altec was a victim of poor management and corporate raiding and shenanigans. Eventually the conglomerate that owned Altec sold the right to use the name Altec for consumer goods to a car audio company, Sparkomatic, which used the name on crummy home speakers and later computer speakers.

The real Altec carried on making pro-sound gear only but when Telex bought the company that owned Altec (and Altec competitor EV) they killed Altec off and kept EV going, EV (after also dropping out of the consumer market) having invested in the new high power gear needed for new markets while Altec hadn't.

Bill Hanuschek was Altec's last engineering honcho and he bought the Altec production equipment and started a company called Great Plains Audio and now makes brand new "Altec" gear under the GPA name. Bill also repairs most Altec speakers regardless of the age, he makes the parts needed on the original machinery.
post #190 of 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Brennan View Post

Virus---Well the Heresy is the bottom of Klipsch's "real" line and IMO (and I've owned them) a pretty wretched speaker with a tinny, upper midrange tonal balance that makes it sound like a skilsaw. The Cornwall and Klipschorn, larger speakers from the line, have a much more robust and pleasing tonal balance and are fine speakers.

As for Altec, the REAL Altec, well IMO nobody made better speakers; before, during or since. I have three sets of vintage Altecs now and another set on the way. Altec was a victim of poor management and corporate raiding and shenanigans. Eventually the conglomerate that owned Altec sold the right to use the name Altec for consumer goods to a car audio company, Sparkomatic, which used the name on crummy home speakers and later computer speakers.

The real Altec carried on making pro-sound gear only but when Telex bought the company that owned Altec (and Altec competitor EV) they killed Altec off and kept EV going, EV (after also dropping out of the consumer market) having invested in the new high power gear needed for new markets while Altec hadn't.

Bill Hanuschek was Altec's last engineering honcho and he bought the Altec production equipment and started a company called Great Plains Audio and now makes brand new "Altec" gear under the GPA name. Bill also repairs most Altec speakers regardless of the age, he makes the parts needed on the original machinery.

Well I don't know too much about Klipsch's heritage model and Heresy is the only name that comes to my mind when mentioning Klipsch and old/heritage. But my point was never to emphasize about it or any great heritage model from Klipsch.

So you say beside from the cosmetic (the look) the REAL Altec speakers is unrivaled by many products even by today's standards? If that is true, I will have to hunt a pair down or so to satisfy my wants.
post #191 of 275
"So you say beside from the cosmetic (the look) the REAL Altec speakers is unrivaled by many products even by today's standards?"

That's what I think. Note that is my opinion and not an overall statement of fact.

Not all the real Altecs were special, the large ones that were home speakers using Altec's motion picture theater and studio monitor drivers are the ones to get. And many Altec enthusiasts just bring theater speakers into the house; gray utility cabinets, exposed horns and all.

check the old Altec stuff here www.audioheritage.org

Warning, if you dive into this site you might not come out for a couple of days.
post #192 of 275
VirusVoodo:

This is regarding specifications and curves.
As I had written earlier, the frequency response curve is an excellent design tool since it captures one important impact of speaker design. However, since a speaker is not a linear system, there is no guarantee that the speaker will be able to reproduce similar flat curves when a combinations of frequencies are being played at the same time (as in real music). You can not measure that since there are infinite combinations! That is why the religious love for specs and curves is grossly misplaced. You have to listen to speakers; no published spec and curve will capture that.

As a nation obsessed with junk statistics, we feel that be getting a glimpse into some charts and curves is great and gives us a lot of insight. In a lot of ways the marketting departments play with us. For example, the contrast ratios and refresh times of LCD panels are measured differently by all manufacturers, to a point that they are almost meaningless. You have to watch them in person to separate the wheat from the chaff. Similarly for speakers, you have to listen to them, in YOUR own room, with YOUR own ears, to figure out what works and what does not.

We have talked earlier that given Bose' profit margin and knowledge about audio (4-5 decades and counting) it is unlikely that they delibrately chose cheaper materials at a significant loss of audio quality. Their design engineers need to balance long term reliability, audio quality and costs. At their gross margins, raw material costs are the least important variable. It costs a lot more to repair a speaker than make a new one. Similarly, poor audio quality will do a lot of damage to their biggest strength, their Brand Equity. However, a $10 increase in the Cost of Goods bill, will have a very managable impact. They can just increase the MSRP by $10 (which is about 3% for the 301) without a significant loss of market share. Hence it is wrong to claim that they use inexpensive materials, just to boost their profits, without regard to the sound quality.

Bose are not accurate speakers. But they offer a warm, enveloping, out of box simplicity, good performance, for a reasonable price (like the $300 301s), with good warranty (5 years) and good resale value (still worth $100 after 10 years).
post #193 of 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by BayAreaFan View Post

VirusVoodo:

However, a $10 increase in the Cost of Goods bill, will have a very managable impact. They can just increase the MSRP by $10 (which is about 3% for the 301) without a significant loss of market share. Hence it is wrong to claim that they use inexpensive materials, just to boost their profits, without regard to the sound quality.

Just a note here. A $10 increase at wholesale will normally be about $20 at retail or maybe a little less. Most maintained markups are in the 45% area (45% of the total price being the retail MU)
post #194 of 275
I have no idea what Bose' profits are. They're into a whole lot more things than many other companies including headphones, professional sound applications in both the pro music and large venue areas (stadiums, malls, etc.), car audio, radios, etc. As far as nothing new, I'd take issue with that. Peruse their offerings from 5 years ago to today. Yes, their slogan is Better Sound through Research. Don't underestimate Bose' research in either sound or marketing. You ought to see their facility and then come back and say that. Now, if I saw some of the facilities of other speaker vendors (I won't name names) you might see nothing more than a garage with some HS kids putting things together.

Markeing is Research. Get that through your heads. If you want to be successful, then you'll learn how to market. 'Course, your product costs will go up because you've got to amortize and make the marketing profitable. That's just the way it goes.

Now if you want to take issue with Bose and state that their products are overpriced and not proportional to the cost of materials that's one thing. However, before you get out on that limb, you'd better consider a few things. The cost of a speaker is far more than the costs of the parts. You've got to add a bunch of things like...

R&D expenses
Marketing Expenses
Advertising Expenses
Payroll (don't forget about taxes, pensions, 401K's, health insurance, etc.)
Taxes
Accountants
Lawyers
Shipping
Warehousing
Inventorying spare parts
Shipping
Returns
Electricity
Heating
Cooling
Insurance
Workman's Comp.
Packaging

And the list goes on. Don't forget to add those.

I can't debunk your blind tests jericho76 but then you haven't provided any details as to how these were carried out.
post #195 of 275
I went and Listened to the Lifestyle system it was nice so afterwards I told the Represetative what I had and he told me not to change because my system would give me better sound and more versatility and cost half as much.

I have 4 Bose 301's series with a pair of Bose 161's and Bose center channel and Def subwoffer and it costs just around 1,400.

Thats what I would do if your room allows for it.

DD's
post #196 of 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by jehrico76 View Post

...I've stated that Bose lost 95% of the blind A/B tests that I ever did with comparable speakers...Bottom line is, the sound is subjective...

No one can debunk your tests, as they are yours, and as you have noted, the results are subjective. You are to be commended for your endeavor, as few of us have ever expended the effort to attempt a true blind speaker evaluation. But the outcome applies only to you.

Scientific tests would have to be conducted by professionals under carefully controlled, level equalized, double-blind conditions with a large number of isolated subjects. That's impossible for most of us. It has been done by labs, but many "golden-eared audiophiles" have disliked the results, as they have often been used to debunk many of our most cherished audio myths.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jehrico76 View Post

... the average potential buyers should not allow the incessant marketing and hypothetical claims that the company makes in its ads to alter their perception about their sound quality before they start shopping.

I couldn't agree more, at least in theory. Unfortunately, virtually all of us are guilty of this to some degree on audio products. Manufacturers work hard to create an aura about their offerings, and most of us are influenced to some degree. Marketing takes many forms, and includes what we read on the internet and are told by our peers or by a audio boutique salesperson as well as formal advertising. A great deal of our perception of audio products stems from our expectations. We tend to hear what we expect to hear.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jehrico76 View Post

...They should subjectively listen to them against at least a few offerings from other companies rather than buying into the "If it's Bose, it must be the best" philosophy...

Agreed. But the same must be said about the "If it's Bose, it must be bad" counter philosophy that has pervaded this thread.
post #197 of 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macfan424 View Post

Agreed. But the same must be said about the "If it's Bose, it must be bad" counter philosophy that has pervaded this thread.

As much as I dislike Bose, that's a very good point. I should have included that myself in my post above to be fair.
post #198 of 275
How about "If it's Bose, you've been had"
post #199 of 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by lexa695 View Post

Just a note here. A $10 increase at wholesale will normally be about $20 at retail or maybe a little less. Most maintained markups are in the 45% area (45% of the total price being the retail MU)

They do not have to pass it through to retail. No retailer will dump Bose if they squeeze the margins from 45% to 42% of whatever.

Anyway, the point is that in general for most American manufacturers, the cost of the raw materials is not that important. This is especially true in the audio market, where people often spend hundred or even thousands of dollars and a few percentage point changes in pricing is not going to affect demand in any meaningful way.
post #200 of 275
Hi All, I have been thoroughly amused in reading the Bose bashing. They certainly deserve our collective contempt. I had a similar discussion with Bose a while back, early in my A/V learning curve. My first clue that something was fishy, was that the guys in the store giving demo's knew nothing about the system. Easy to write off Good Guys to be ignorant ( "I don't know, I just work here"), but I found the same problem at a Bose outlet in a mall as well, which could only be interpreted as stonewalling to hide something. Coupled with the fact they would not let me play any of my own source material, my curiosity sparked. I spent quite a while trying to squeeze the info our of Bose, from different directions. I finally called them as a potential buyer, and had to give them some of my personal info (making sure I was not an industry spy is what they told me) and they got back in touch with me eventually. I really wanted the info, so I was very polite. What I learned was shocking, and amusing.

Freq response on the Series III Double Cube Speakers is 200-14K Hz ! That is right, an earth shaking two hundred Hertz to an ear splitting fourteen thousand Hertz, and the Acoustamass Module is from 50-400HZ. They run at 6 ohms. I forgot the sensitivity and power handling, but they were not as pathetic (after hearing the freq response, it was hard to pay attention to anything else, as I was fighting back laughter while trying to remain sincere sounding)

This is why they do not publish the specs, they are quite laughable, at any price, especially they price they sell for! True they are mainly targeting idiots, but they assume everyone to be a sucker, and that bothers me. People trust big names. They run a very deceptive campaign, that is much better suited in politics, not the audio industry. This speaker system should only be sold at stores that sell furniture, since so much more attention was paid to the asthetic appeal than the sonic qualities, that in my eyes they are just very expensive decorations. A neat idea, but this little thing called physics gets in the way, which is obviously an ongoing inconvenience for Bose.

My2cents--Sisu1a
post #201 of 275
Great - way to go noob - as your first post you resurrect an 8 month old Bose thread...
post #202 of 275
>Freq response on the Series III Double Cube Speakers is 200-14K Hz ! That is right, an earth shaking two hundred Hertz to an ear splitting fourteen thousand Hertz, and the Acoustamass Module is from 50-400HZ. They run at 6 ohms. I forgot the sensitivity and power handling, but they were not as pathetic (after hearing the freq response, it was hard to pay attention to anything else, as I was fighting back laughter while trying to remain sincere sounding)<<br />
I guess that's why they say "no highs, no lows, must be Bose." That explains it.

>Great - way to go noob - as your first post you resurrect an 8 month old Bose thread...

Hey Sisu1A- welcome to the forum. don't make the mistake thinking that everyone on the forum is a jerk like this guy. Some folks will actually converse with you. For the record, thanks for resurrecting this thread. I had never seen the specs on Bose, just lots of mob-mentality bashing with no figures to back it up. Very revealing once you see that.

Thanks for posting this, now the mob has some weapons!
post #203 of 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by cneely8 View Post

Hey Sisu1A- welcome to the forum. don't make the mistake thinking that everyone on the forum is a jerk like this guy. Some folks will actually converse with you. For the record, thanks for resurrecting this thread. I had never seen the specs on Bose, just lots of mob-mentality bashing with no figures to back it up. Very revealing once you see that.

Thanks for posting this, now the mob has some weapons!

I am surprised that you never came across this info in over a year on this forum. Here is a link with some more info:
http://www.intellexual.net/bose.html#number1

Good thing is that author not just bashes Bose, he also gives you a bunch of alternatives.
post #204 of 275
Thread Starter 
I was thinking about this just today. Bose may be marketing an overpriced, under-achieved product, but at least they don't specify frequency response or anything else.

Many of the HTiB systems I see just say 20-20k and I was wondering how true that could possibly be. A coworker has a $200 Sony system that he swears is just as good as the more expensive units he has never heard of, and produced a spec sheet with figures that apparently don't mean squat!!!

It just can't be possible to reproduce an entire audible range with mid-range sized woofers and no tweeters. It just can't be!!
post #205 of 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by vhato View Post

I was thinking about this just today. Bose may be marketing an overpriced, under-achieved product, but at least they don't specify frequency response or anything else.

Many of the HTiB systems I see just say 20-20k and I was wondering how true that could possibly be.

At least they don't specify it? You mean at least they don't do it and flat-out lie about it, right?

The HTiB that say 20-20K likely don't have +/- 30 dB tacked on the end, or any sort of range. The fact that Bose doesn't specify anything doesn't make them better since their aim is deception. For the high price they ask, they try to make people believe the specs are good (or at least the sound is good).
post #206 of 275
For people who are older and have hearing loss in the upper frequency ranges, the lack of HF response may be an advantage. Bose isn't the only one who is questioning or designing speakers that treat the upper frequency range as largely irrelevent.
post #207 of 275
>I am surprised that you never came across this info in over a year on this forum.

I skip most of the Bose threads, because after reading a few, they were all the same- the subject line grabbed my attention.

>For people who are older

That explains the Bose-Paul harvey sponsorship connection!
post #208 of 275
Quote:
This is why they do not publish the specs, they are quite laughable, at any price, especially they price they sell for! True they are mainly targeting idiots, but they assume everyone to be a sucker, and that bothers me. People trust big names. They run a very deceptive campaign, that is much better suited in politics, not the audio industry. This speaker system should only be sold at stores that sell furniture, since so much more attention was paid to the asthetic appeal than the sonic qualities, that in my eyes they are just very expensive decorations. A neat idea, but this little thing called physics gets in the way, which is obviously an ongoing inconvenience for Bose.

I don't like Bose either and I have sold them in the past (obviously when I was at Tweeter) but before you laugh so hard, get 5 friends a Bose cube system , a set of floorstanding speakers , a pair of Bookshelf speakers with a sub, and some graph paper. Audition all three sets blind with music you are familiar with and draw the FR graph, and pick those you prefer in order and then compare results. Note: no talking or looking over the others shoulders at notes and graphs. The results may surprise you. Of course , now that you've seen the Bose graph, you will be trying to pick out the Bose and then draw the graph you remember seeing.

It should be said that Bose knows enough about what sounds "good" to people to keep them from being returned very often. They do a lot of direct marketing to further reduce direct comparative analysis for those that may hear their shortcomings when compared to differant speakers. Bose does know, where marketing research has shown them, people have less susceptability for noticing losses in certain ranges. No , it doesn't mean it's right, but they are building for the masses.
post #209 of 275
Hello again all, sorry about bringing up such a sore old subject (being a noob and all), but I feel we are doing very important work here. Of course we all know that bose (they don't deserve a capitol letter anymore) blows. But, by keeping threads like this fresh, with accurate information, there are lots of people who are going to read this and thus possibly make an informed decision, which seems like one of the goals of a site like this.

I am very entertained by these threads, probably because I was so close to becoming one of the victims of the bose campaign. The system they offer can look very attractive if you are trying to save space in a setup, like I was in my small studio apt. Luckily I am pretty frugal large about purchases, especially audio equipment, and did more homework. Learning how close I came to terminal buyer's remorse, I was embittered and feel I need to do what I can to help unmask the scheme and help others not to make the mistake of buying one of these crappy systems for what we can all agree is way too much money. What is common knowledge among audiophiles, is not among the general consumers and bose knows this. I feel it is our duty, to keep info fresh and accessible, to keep bose--and any other company who dares--in check. Who knows, if bose gets big enough, they may buy your favorite brand company (you know, if you can't beat'em, buy'em). We should not let our elitism as audiophiles help sell more bose products.

Anyways, I very much appreciate the thorough specs found in the review posted by axs a few posts ago. Thanks, very informative, I will keep it handy for future reference. It was years ago that bose unsuccessfully tried to get me, and I have learned many a thing about the finer points of audio/video since those dark days so lang ago, a great deal from sites like this. Everyone has to start somewhere though.

BTW speaker wise, I am a big fan of Ohm Acoustics, and have Pro-250's (Ohm Walsh Series, Sound Cylinders) for my mains, running the center phantom (the Ohms do a remarkable job of imaging and have no x-overs in the critical freq range, making speech sound absolutely authentic) and Ohm Walsh 2xo's for my rears. I currently just use an integrated amp (Integra DTR 7.4) with 7.1 capability, but just use it in a four channel config (with my phantom center of course), running my current sub high level (Earthquake Magma/S.L.A.P.S. combo in a homemade enclosure, slave powered by a Hsu Research 250 watt plate amp, which has a 24db/octave x-over), which will soon be replaced by a Sunfire True MKII. My video is from an Optoma EP751 projector, ceiling mounted.

Singing off, Sisu1a

Ban bose posting from this site, in bose's wet dreams!!!
post #210 of 275
Quote:


This speaker system should only be sold at stores that sell furniture, since so much more attention was paid to the asthetic appeal than the sonic qualities, that in my eyes they are just very expensive decorations. A neat idea, but this little thing called physics gets in the way, which is obviously an ongoing inconvenience for Bose.

My2cents--Sisu1a

I'm not a bose supporter but I'm always surprised at how the same laws of physics that prevents bose from sounding good does not apply to Orb speakers. Which, in my opinion are also overpriced, but they seem to be the darling of the crowd here.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Speakers
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Speakers › Bose Response on Frequency