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

Bose Response on Frequency - Page 2

post #31 of 275
I haven't ever seen a professional review on the Bose lifestyle systems. do they even submit them for review anymore?
post #32 of 275
Quote:
Originally posted by Tom Brennan
Bose are OK, most of the speakers you guys like would sound just as bad to me as Bose.

Huh?! How could this be?....unless you're basically deaf?

Quote:
Originally posted by Tom Brennan
Actually getting most of the sound from a single driver is a legit idea and has some definate virtues (and faults). There's an entire single-driver cult out there that would sniff at the plastic cone-tragic dome speakers favored by many here.


I'm sorry, but comparing a 30 cent 2.5" driver in a plastic cube to a Lowther (or other equivalent high end full range) dual cone 5, 6 or 8" driver in a properly designed transmission line or horn enclosure, is not even remotely similar. You're comparing apples to green peas, my friend - they're that different.
post #33 of 275
"Huh?! How could this be?....unless you're basically deaf?"

Not deaf, open minded. I've heard some Bose systems sound pretty good and heard "audiophile" speakers that sounded like a Sawzall.


'I'm sorry, but comparing a 30 cent 2.5" driver in a plastic cube to a Lowther (or other equivalent high end full range) dual cone 5, 6 or 8" driver in a properly designed transmission line or horn enclosure, is not even remotely similar"

And how do you know what the Bose driver costs? In any case I've heard some very nice open-baffle single-driver rigs using cheap Radio Shack and Tangband drivers. And heard rigs using more expensive Fostexes and Lowthers in rear-horns that sounded like Skilsaws. A capable designer can get good results with cheap parts. And price doesn't always refelect quality of sound.

Of course I've also heard Fostexes and Lowthers sound good, same with EV SP-8s, JBL LE-8s, Dia-Tones, Corals and Supravoxes. Just a couple of weeks ago I used some Fostex FX-120s in shoeboxes, not bad. Now thay await a proper baffle. I've some little experience with this single-driver thing you see, as do several of my pals.

Why shouldn't a platic cube work well anyway? The cube isn't called upon to do bass and a small plastic enclosure can be quite stiff.
post #34 of 275
Quote:


Originally posted by M NEWMAN
Sorry, but this is a silly comment. Stick a Bose cube in an anechoic chamber, set up the calibrated mic, and have 5 different people come in and run a frequency sweep from 20hz to 20Khz and all 5 will get the exact same result. To confuse proper testing format with ineptitude is foolish at best.

That said, I will agree that there are some cheapo manufacturers out there that flat out lie, but not respectable makes - they might "fudge" just a bit, but their reputations and vision of brand loyalty is too darned important to risk losing market share over a stupid lie.

Wow you assume way to much.

Yes every speaker is tested in an anechoic chamber, oh and the same one at that!

That is what would have to happen for your analogy to work. Most of the time when manufacturers state their measurments for advertising there is nothing there that say's what the graph would look like. That is what we are talking about here the advertised spec's and not how stupid measurments and graphs are anyways (which they are) since none of us live in an anechoic chamber. Some companys will say +-2db (yeah right) at 50hz for example on a $200 pair bookshelf speaker.

Go ahead and buy something like that i'm sure it would be your perfect speaker.
post #35 of 275
Quote:


Originally posted by lexa695
Jeff, what did you pay for them? Was it less than $1000? Yes, your ascends are better. So is your sub, but how much did they cost? I really would like to know.

Quote:


Originally posted by JeffD2.
My last post on this thread, although I always find these Bose threads very entertaining just for the absurdity.

I'll take a mulligan on this one since its not an opinion on sound quality.

I went to the bose checkout for acoustimass 10 on their website.
Cost: $1082.16 shipping and tax included.

Warranty: ONE Year.

My system:
Ascend HTM-200s $652 total. FIVE year warranty.
SVS PB10-ISD $463 total. THREE year warranty.

Total: $1115
Difference: $32.84

Quote:


Originally posted by vhato
After several forgotten weeks I received this reply from Bose reguarding their opinion on Frequency Response.

Customer Service:
Sent 3 emails to Ascend. They were answered same day.
Sent 4 emails to SVS. They were ALL answered in 30 minutes.

Do ya think I got my $32.84 worth? Nuff said.

BTW- Its George Carlin
post #36 of 275
Quote:


Originally posted by lexa695
Wow, I'm stunned the bigger speaker sounds better

That puts you at least 1 up on the average Bose owner.
post #37 of 275
Quote:


Originally posted by Tom Brennan

Why shouldn't a plastic cube work well anyway? The cube isn't called upon to do bass and a small plastic enclosure can be quite stiff.

As you well know, it would be quite possible to design a decent sounding speaker in a small plastic cube. It might be tough to design a great speaker, but not hard to do one that would easily better the performance of a Bose cube.

It is likely that your little cube would not have a cheap 1.75" or 2.5" paper driver.

For an example, consider the small Gallo spheres. Certainly still small, stylish enclosures, and able to produce very respectible sound. Larger than Bose cubes, but still small.

I would be inclined to consider coaxial drivers, so at least there would be a tweeter. If the plastic cube was large enough to handle a 4" coaxial driver, you could make a nice little speaker, that would easily best a Bose throughout its frequency range, particularly on the lower midrange and on highs. It would require far less equalization too.

Or instead of putting two cheap full-range drivers in both the top and bottom of double/swivel cubes, put in a better 3" driver in the bottom and a 1" tweeter in the top, using a very simple crossover. This could produce much better sound.

But I can understand why Bose doesn't go in this direction. If I'm selling tens of thousands of systems and able to manufacture those systems at very low cost, then why put in more expensive parts? That would cut into profit margins.
post #38 of 275
Quote:


Originally posted by JeffD2.
I'll take a mulligan on this one since its not an opinion on sound quality.

I went to the bose checkout for acoustimass 10 on their website.
Cost: $1082.16 shipping and tax included.

Warranty: ONE Year.

My system:
Ascend HTM-200s $652 total. FIVE year warranty.
SVS PB10-ISD $463 total. THREE year warranty.

Total: $1115
Difference: $32.84


Customer Service:
Sent 3 emails to Ascend. They were answered same day.
Sent 4 emails to SVS. They were ALL answered in 30 minutes.

Do ya think I got my $32.84 worth? Nuff said.

BTW- Its George Carlin

Let's not even discuss that this does NOT qualify as a sat system but:

The Acsends avg about $300 a pair, so are you using a 4.1 system? I would have figured at least a 6.1 at this stage for most people here. A cheapo center channel goes for about $75 and the better ones are about $200 to $300, so are you using a Sony center for the extra $52? Oh BTW, I call Bose tech support and get my answers in about 5 minutes.
Thanks for the tip on Carlins name. I suck at spelling. Also I didn't pay tax or shipping and speaker warranties are near useless. My 9 year old has my old Panasonic speakers that are about 20 years old. They still work fine. I have never had a warranty issue with a speaker.
post #39 of 275
Quote:


Originally posted by Tom Brennan

Not deaf, open minded. I've heard some Bose systems sound pretty good and heard "audiophile" speakers that sounded like a Sawzall.

Don't you think you're exaggerating a WEE bit here?! The only time I've ever heard ANY speaker sound like a sawzall, audiophile or otherwise, was when I plugged it directly into a wall oulet. Sounds just like one, for about a hlf a second before it smokes....
Besides, "some Bose systems" do sound "pretty good", they just don't sound "very" good...ever.


Quote:


Originally posted by Tom Brennan
And how do you know what the Bose driver costs?

From being in the speaker building biz for a few years - I'm very well aware of actual material costs associated with speakers. I can easily obtain as good or much better drivers than what Bose sticks in those cubes for around 30 cents each in reasonable quantities. I'm probably being too generous here - Bose' actual driver costs might be far less in the massive quantities they build in.


Quote:


Originally posted by Tom Brennan

In any case I've heard some very nice open-baffle single-driver rigs using cheap Radio Shack and Tangband drivers. And heard rigs using more expensive Fostexes and Lowthers in rear-horns that sounded like Skilsaws. A capable designer can get good results with cheap parts. And price doesn't always refelect quality of sound. Of course I've also heard Fostexes and Lowthers sound good, same with EV SP-8s, JBL LE-8s, Dia-Tones, Corals and Supravoxes. Just a couple of weeks ago I used some Fostex FX-120s in shoeboxes, not bad. Now thay await a proper baffle. I've some little experience with this single-driver thing you see, as do several of my pals.


I think I'm beginning to understand your angle here. If you're basically trying to say that it's possible to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear as an analogy, then I agree. I do it all the time. You're quite correct that really good results can be achieved from some truly humble drivers. It's also a lot of fun to do this.


Quote:


Originally posted by Tom Brennan
Why shouldn't a platic cube work well anyway? The cube isn't called upon to do bass and a small plastic enclosure can be quite stiff.

No disagreement, but the point is that Bose' cubes are anything but "quite stiff".
post #40 of 275
Quote:


Originally posted by blkwrxwgn
Wow you assume way to much.

Well, when you throw out a blanket statement like you did with zero stipulations about how you arrived at your premise, what else are we supposed to do?

Quote:


Originally posted by blkwrxwgn
Yes every speaker is tested in an anechoic chamber, oh and the same one at that!
That is what would have to happen for your analogy to work. Most of the time when manufacturers state their measurments for advertising there is nothing there that say's what the graph would look like. That is what we are talking about here the advertised spec's and not how stupid measurments and graphs are anyways (which they are) since none of us live in an anechoic chamber. Some companys will say +-2db (yeah right) at 50hz for example on a $200 pair bookshelf speaker.

Don't be so simplistic. You're acting as if measuring a speaker's performance characteristics is some form of black magic. It isn't. In fact, the vast majority of the bigger and higher end makes either do make measurements in an anechoic chamber or they use FFT along with other specific tests in a controlled environment that mimics the result found in anechoic chambers very accurately. This isn't difficult, and it's not prone to much variability when executed properly. Hence, mainstream makes are generally pretty darn close to their advertised specs. However, as I said before, there is sometimes a "little" fudging going on....mostly in the form of "smoothing" the response graph. This does NOT, however, make the information useless, but rather still gives a very good idea of performance capabilies for comparison.
Also, I have heard and tested (and built) MANY bookshelf speakers that will do 50Hz + or - 2 db. That's not difficult at all. 40 Hz is waaaayyyyyyy tougher (and nearly impossible, which is why you don't see them).


Quote:


Originally posted by blkwrxwgn
Go ahead and buy something like that i'm sure it would be your perfect speaker.

Please don't assume I'm some dolt.
post #41 of 275
Quote:


Originally posted by M NEWMAN

No disagreement, but the point is that Bose' cubes are anything but "quite stiff".

Mike, do you care to qualify this? They are anything but quite stiff as compared to what? Upon reading this, you encouraged me to get out a step stool and examine the cubes. I would dare say I think they would crack before they flexed.
post #42 of 275
Quote:


Originally posted by johnu
That puts you at least 1 up on the average Bose owner.

I have spent enough time listening to high end speakers to know that a sat system could never even hold a candle to most audiophile speakers. Everytime I walk into audio breakthroughs, they are playing the high end stuff in a listening room. As soon as I hear it I want to buy what ever it is they are using to play the music, and then I see the price . In any case, anyone who thinks a small cube is going to sound like a 3 or 4 way speakers is kidding themselves. Lets just say the Bose solution works for me and the wife.
post #43 of 275
Quote:


Originally posted by lexa695
The Acsends avg about $300 a pair, so are you using a 4.1 system? I would have figured at least a 6.1 at this stage for most people here. A cheapo center channel goes for about $75 and the better ones are about $200 to $300, so are you using a Sony center for the extra $52?

HTM-200 x 5 = $608 + $44 shipping = $652
post #44 of 275
Quote:


Originally posted by ClutchBrake
HTM-200 x 5 = $608 + $44 shipping = $652

OK, I was going off the price per pair. I didn't use the calulator, but these still wouldn't have worked for me. I would have bought Klipsch speakers if my wife didn't insist on a sat setup. Hey, it got me a plasma tv and a new audio rack
post #45 of 275
Thread Starter 
Thanks for all of the valuable replies. I have learned so much.

My reason for the thread was I asked Bose about their 191's. At the time I was going to use them for their "stereo everywhere" characteristics in rear surround and center rear surround. However, the Home Theater will also be used for home audio w/MP3's, FM Stereo and CD's. I wanted to design a system without Audible Holes so I asked about the 191's frequency response. Bose's reply was it doesn't matter because it is the sound of the speakers that counts. Well.....OK......If a speaker can only reproduce frequency's from 8khz-14khz (for instance) then it won't do me much good. It may sound fantastic, but I may also be missing MANY instruments that play in the lower or higher range. According to the Bose response I posted at the beginning of the thread, I am wrong!!
post #46 of 275
Quote:


Originally posted by vhato
Thanks for all of the valuable replies. I have learned so much.

My reason for the thread was I asked Bose about their 191's. At the time I was going to use them for their "stereo everywhere" characteristics in rear surround and center rear surround. However, the Home Theater will also be used for home audio w/MP3's, FM Stereo and CD's. I wanted to design a system without Audible Holes so I asked about the 191's frequency response. Bose's reply was it doesn't matter because it is the sound of the speakers that counts. Well.....OK......If a speaker can only reproduce frequency's from 8khz-14khz (for instance) then it won't do me much good. It may sound fantastic, but I may also be missing MANY instruments that play in the lower or higher range. According to the Bose response I posted at the beginning of the thread, I am wrong!!

The audible hole (which IMO I'm isn't very audible) is only in the Acoustimass systems I believe. but don't buy Bose. They are over priced.
post #47 of 275
Hello Newman

"Don't you think you're exaggerating a WEE bit here?! The only time I've ever heard ANY speaker sound like a sawzall, audiophile or otherwise, was when I plugged it directly into a wall oulet."

A wee bit. Though I must say the Klipsch Heresys I just got rid of did an excellent imitation of an air-powered 9" Chicago Bridge and Iron grinder.


"You're quite correct that really good results can be achieved from some truly humble drivers. It's also a lot of fun to do this. "

Indeed. Remember the Fulton FMI-80 from about 25 years ago? Used a Peerless paper cone tweeter and sounded swell, a great little speaker.

See, here's the thing with Bose Newman. I've been caught unaware a couple of times and enjoyed listening to music on Bose speakers before I was aware I was listening to Bose, in record stores and such. So I came to the conclusion they're not so bad afterall.


Are they what I want to listen to? No. But then I'm an old Altec freak and there are lots of other speakers besides Bose I don't want.
post #48 of 275
Quote:


Originally posted by Tom Brennan

A wee bit. Though I must say the Klipsch Heresys I just got rid of did an excellent imitation of an air-powered 9" Chicago Bridge and Iron grinder.




Quote:


Originally posted by Tom Brennan
I've been caught unaware a couple of times and enjoyed listening to music on Bose speakers before I was aware I was listening to Bose, in record stores and such. So I came to the conclusion they're not so bad afterall.

No, they're not so bad afterall, otherwise they wouldn't be selling a gazillion of 'em to the uneducated masses (and the ones who know better but are having their arms twisted by the "missus" in the house).


Quote:


Originally posted by Tom Brennan
But then I'm an old Altec freak and there are lots of other speakers besides Bose I don't want.

You are! Well then, am I gonna make you jealous. My Pa just happens to still have his original Altec 'Voice of the Theater' pair in his Great Room set up. Damn things still rock too (and I mean HARD)! He bought 'em around '65, I think (but then I was only a couple years old so not sure of the exact year).
post #49 of 275
Quote:


Originally posted by lexa695
Mike, do you care to qualify this? They are anything but quite stiff as compared to what? Upon reading this, you encouraged me to get out a step stool and examine the cubes. I would dare say I think they would crack before they flexed.

Most hard plastic devices will crack before they are flexed much. But to answer your question, when I dissambled one a few years back, what I remember about the cubes is that there wasn't anything remarkable about them. Seemed like the walls were around 1/8" thick, with more meat where the driver and terminals mount. Okay, but nothing special (like everything else about them). Contrasting that with other makes that use really good plastic boxes shows quite a bit of difference. I've seen some models that use really thick walls and when you rap on 'em, it's similar to a rock (even with the drivers removed so you can hear internal resonance). So, I don't dispute that plastics can be effective for enclosures, and considering Bose' already dismal freq response, the actual cube resonances are probably somewhat irrelevant.
post #50 of 275
I have to sort of agree with Bose at least with frequency response, I mean on Headfi you've got people [jokingly] comparing Sennheiser PX-100 and Grado RS-1 similar in sound because of similar FR. Then the Sennheiser 650 "is the best" because of the near flat FR..although they sound "boring" to some..

Although I still think Bose Blows, are overpriced and of cheap components. I would say the active lifestyle system is worth about £500 maximum, certainly not the ~£4500 asking price.
post #51 of 275
Mike----Yeah, those VOTs were great speakers and IMO unmatched for reproducing movie sound in the home.

I have a pair of 1961 Heathkit AS-21s, a kit version of the Altec 9844 studio monitor. 2-12s cross at 800 to a compression driver and horn. The drivers and horns are painted that Kool-man Altec green hammertone.

I also have a pair of 605A Duplexes, another Altec monitor from around the late 50s-early 60s. You probably know it; 15" woofer with a coaxially mounted treble horn. The horn driver is mounted behind the woofer magnet and the horn runs through the woofer pole-piece and ends in a small multi-cell mouth. You should hear old Elvis records over 605s; like he's in the room.

I've loved Altec sound ever since I was 10 years old back in 1959 and my Dad took me downtown to see the roadshow showing of Ben-Hur. The opening blasts of the overture were my introduction to hi-fi and I was thrilled.

Of course I didn't know then that there were 5 Altec A4s behind the screen but I learned later.
post #52 of 275
Quote:


Originally posted by vhato
3. AVSForum.com has educated me passed my financial means





I dare say that you're not the only one.
post #53 of 275
Face it guys, Bose is a marketing company that fills the niche for people who want an HT but really don't know anything about specs. The truth is, they could have a lot more speaker dollar for dollar, if they were educated.

What gets me about Bose is the ridiculous asking price for many of their "systems". Bose doesn't withhold specs for the benefit of their consumers, they do it because reviewers and competing manufacturers would rip them a new sphincter.

BTW, I used to own 901's, so I don't speak from total inexperience.

P.S.

I bought them used, so I didn't get totally ripped off.
post #54 of 275
Quote:


Originally posted by lexa695
The Acsends avg about $300 a pair, so are you using a 4.1 system? I would have figured at least a 6.1 at this stage for most people here. A cheapo center channel goes for about $75 and the better ones are about $200 to $300, so are you using a Sony center for the extra $52?

You're correct in your presumption. I thought the same thing until I sent an email and they linked to me to their "speaker configuration" ordering page.

It seems they give discounted package deals on popular comibinations of speakers. In my case, buy 4, get the 5th free. This is not apparent on their home page or product listing page. Ascend should address this. I've seen this issue pop up on more than one thread.

I was almost universally encouraged to upgrade to the 170's, but because of room size and WAF chose not to.

I gotta admit Lexa, you're a lot of fun!
post #55 of 275
Quote:


Originally posted by JeffD2.
You're correct in your presumption. I thought the same thing until I sent an email and they linked to me to their "speaker configuration" ordering page.

It seems they give discounted package deals on popular comibinations of speakers. In my case, buy 4, get the 5th free. This is not apparent on their home page or product listing page. Ascend should address this. I've seen this issue pop up on more than one thread.

I was almost universally encouraged to upgrade to the 170's, but because of room size and WAF chose not to.

I gotta admit Lexa, you're a lot of fun!

Jeff, you could have ripped me a new one, so I'll politlely bow out, but i did say what sat system. I showed my wife Klipsch B3's nwhich look like the Ascends in size and even those were too big. Seems like anything noticeable was not getting the WAF.
post #56 of 275
Quote:


Originally posted by M NEWMAN





No, they're not so bad afterall, otherwise they wouldn't be selling a gazillion of 'em to the uneducated masses (and the ones who know better but are having their arms twisted by the "missus" in the house).

Bose speakers sound kind of good In the stores (where they are perfectly placed and far away from better speakers). That's why people buy them, but once you get them out of their perfect positions, and find them impossible to set in your own room, everything gets messed up.

If Bose was a reputable company, they wouldn't have done what they did to the army with the so called canceling sound headphones.
post #57 of 275
Most people dont realise how poor Bose sounds in stores for many reasons...

Bose are almost always played with some soundtrack that has explosions and clanging Like say watching Terminator 2 or something, people in stores don't expect to be floored by low - infrasonic bass because they only ever see the tiny little satellites, then they say WOW... that sound is coming out of speakers this small? And the sales man says yes, the secret is this small black box that you hide...

Bose almost never play solo piano music or other instrumental pieces, otherwise they would never sell it to anyone who knows what an instrument would sound like... their hole in the 200-280hz zone may not be a full octave but still, it's a few keys lopped off the piano... not nice. Especially when some instruments have second harmonics which are equally as strong as the primary.

They almost always play the Bose system louder than a cheaper unit in stores that push Bose... I've heard a Bose in a friends place, volume was at 70% of max and it was what I would call completely domestic levels... nothing loud at all, except when compared to say TV speakers. People will mistake the additional volume of the small speakers to be superior sound quality... tsk tsk.

There are probably hundreds of other reasons... like it's expensive so it's for the elite people who know sound quality and style...

Cheers...
Duy-Khang Hoang
post #58 of 275
Mirage Nanosats are cheaper than the Bose system listed above and will sound better. Also, the Tannoy system linked above. So that's at least two "cheaper" sat/sub systems that are Bose-like in size and have better sound and are less expensive. The Energy Act6 system is not very big either and sounds better. It's also less expensive.
post #59 of 275
Quote:
Originally posted by Ovation
Mirage Nanosats are cheaper than the Bose system listed above and will sound better. Also, the Tannoy system linked above. So that's at least two "cheaper" sat/sub systems that are Bose-like in size and have better sound and are less expensive. The Energy Act6 system is not very big either and sounds better. It's also less expensive.

Edit
Come to think of it, I did hear the Mirage speakers. That's OK you like them, but I'll keep my Bose. I thought they sounded how they looked. small
End edit.

. I'm not familar with the tannoy system at all so I will withhold my opinion on that one. If these are internet only systems, I wouldn't have bought them anyway. I just wouldn't buy a speaker without hearing it first. Lets just say I'm content with the Bose system anyway. Oh and hdkhang, if your ever in NY, I invite you to come over to my place and listen to some Chic Corea or Kieth Emerson piano music and point out where these missing keys on the piano are. So far I haven't heard them. Just lucky I guess. I didn't hear any missing guitar or bass notes on the Joe Pass/Niels Pederson CD I have either.
post #60 of 275
Quote:
Originally posted by Ovation
Mirage Nanosats are cheaper than the Bose system listed above and will sound better. Also, the Tannoy system linked above. So that's at least two "cheaper" sat/sub systems that are Bose-like in size and have better sound and are less expensive. The Energy Act6 system is not very big either and sounds better. It's also less expensive.

Had a long conversation with the best audio dealer in town a week ago. These guys are by far the most knowledgeable dealers I've ever come across.

Bose came up in the conversation. He said if a customer raises the issue, he politely tries to explain the situation. Either the customer gets annoyed and walks out or he gets them looking at act6 and the Gallo spheres.

I must admit, the Gallo spheres must score high on the WAF. They are absolutely gorgeous with the anodized aluminum housings in gold/blue/green etc. This dealer knows what he's talking about so I don't doubt they are half decent, but for that price I am sure a more conventional speaker would sound even better.

Sound is all about moving air - small drivers just can't move enough air. Sophisticated manufacturers can get around this by clever design and tight integration with a sub, but it's easy to screw this up...

Incidentally, I ended the visit in his high-end room with a Bryston 14B SST powering B&W 802Ds. Drool...
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Speakers
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Speakers › Bose Response on Frequency