Bose sounding better than my Sony speakers? - Page 2 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 22Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #31 of 62 Old 04-28-2019, 10:26 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
b curry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: on the way to Hell, Michigan USA
Posts: 4,504
Mentioned: 53 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 975 Post(s)
Liked: 622
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave in Green View Post
Thank you for taking the time to help explain the points you were trying to make. I understand much better now and don't disagree with the points you made in your further explanation. There's a tendency among some to deify or demonize Bose in these discussions. A more balanced view acknowledges that over the years they've made positive contributions to the AV industry while pointing out that their current philosophy on speakers is questionable, especially when compared with the scientific work on acoustics and psychoacoustics that Dr. Floyd Toole began at Canada's NRC in 1965, just one year after Dr. Amar Bose founded his company.

While it's understandable that some might be attracted to the Bose sound, it's also true that Bose actively discouraged A/B testing of their speakers against others. Bose first set requirements that audio stores selling their speakers must have a separate listening room for Bose speakers and then opened their own company stores with only Bose products. If Bose speakers truly outperformed other brands in A/B testing one would have expected Bose would have welcomed those comparisons instead of discouraging them. It could be deduced that the magic of Bose psychoacoustics works best when not directly compared with the competition.

It's a real challenge to accept both the Bose concept of psychoacoustics and the results of research pioneered by Dr. Toole, which heavily featured A/B comparisons. The audio industry has largely cast its votes in favor of the research pioneered by Dr. Toole. The one area where Dr. Bose certainly came out on top was in personal wealth as he became a billionaire on the basis of marketing the Bose sound.
While I'm not aware of Bose discouraging A/B comparison, stores where I've lived that carried Bose would do comparisons without hesitation.

I can under stand a separate room for setup as Bose was dependent on room reflections for their sound and even advertised as a Direct Reflecting Speaker System. I don't see this a a unique requirement as Ivor Tiefenbrun of Linn made the same demands of his dealers. Has to do with a wall of speakers and sympathetic vibrations of dormant drivers coloring sound during the demo. My local high end shop has four rooms off the main area. The rooms are for display and storage where product can be initially demonstrated. The fourth room is used to narrow one's choice where the room is fully treated and one set or an A/B set up with your choice of electronics can be listened to in isolation. They also can conduct ABX comparisons in the same room.

Most really good shops will have a similar demo room and or encourage you to take the units home ant try them.

And yes, Bose opened company stores where they could control and optimize the demonstration environment as they saw it. They were maybe internet direct before the internet. Kind of smart if you think about it.


You get to believe what you like, but I'm not so sure about the voting and the challenge to accept thing...

The entire Harmon International group which consists of AKG, AMX, Arcam, Becker, BSS Audio, Crown International, dbx, DigiTech, HardWire, HiQnet, harmon/kardon, Infinity, JBL, Lexicon, Mark Levinson, Martin Professional, Revel, Selenium, S1nn GmbH & Co., Soundcraft, Studer, and HALOsonic with ~26,000 employees was just sold to Samsung in 2017 for $8 billlion.

The Bose Corporation with ~8000 employees reported fiscal 2017 earnings of $3.8 billion or close to half of the Harmon selling price which encompasses some 22 high profile brands, some of who have also made significant contributions including Dr. Toole as a former employee.

I just don't think you can sustain a business for 55+ years, keep it private, and generate those kind of numbers and be so far out of step with reality as many suggest with regards to Bose. Like them or not, they don't have investors to prop them up and they seem to do ok.

Again, I'm not claiming that Bose made perfect speaker, just that they developed some remarkable technology and it's difficult to argue with their success.
b curry is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #32 of 62 Old 04-28-2019, 12:14 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Ottawa, ON
Posts: 1,576
Mentioned: 23 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 788 Post(s)
Liked: 640
Quote:
Originally Posted by head_unit View Post
Mmm, I don't think so. Not saying Bose is the winner either, but many many many speaker companies do not seem to follow the flat on axis and even dispersion etc ethos started up north in the NRC National Research Center Canada. At least looking at measurements many don't, and certainly the only ones that talk about that are Harman (now Samsung) brands. Some many follow those ideas without talking about them I guess in order not to appear to be following a competitor.
PSB, Paradigm, Axiom, and, to a certain extent, Totem (all Canadian) certainly do.
Ascent Acoustics, Philharmonic, Salk, etc definitely do.
overg likes this.
sigpig is offline  
post #33 of 62 Old 04-28-2019, 12:16 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
gajCA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Sonoma County, CA
Posts: 18,178
Mentioned: 210 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8487 Post(s)
Liked: 5662
Quote:
Originally Posted by sid369 View Post
I looked at his speakers and it was tiny bose speakers and he said its from 12 years ago but sounded so much better. how, why?

I have a denon, receiver, a SVS sub and sony speakers and two atmos speakers, but mine don't like like his.

A couple more details. his room was closed, mine in a open basement enclosed on 3 sides, his may have been in a higher volume, and I am used to listen between -35 and -40db and I stream most of my stuff vs. his blu-ray.

I am thinking all these factors made his sound better than mine. Please validate.
It sounds like that was an Acoustimass system which my in laws had about 20 years ago, (the double cubes), and my friend bought at about the same time, (single cubes).

I owned Bose 901s and 301s back in the day and while the Acoustimass systems lacked the dynamics of the larger cabinet speakers Bose once made the double cube system did sound quite nice in their space for movies and background music.

My friend with the single cubed system got tired of it aesthetically and just wanted a soundbar and we got the Polk Command Bar.

The Command Bar and tiny sub sound better in every single way to me (dialog clarity, treble and bass extension) and to my friend as well so not that high a bar with the single cubes.

But if you liked the sound by all means consider trying a Bose system in your own space.

I am somewhat puzzled that your system at least didn't give you more bass impact with your SVS sub so I suspect something is amiss with your setup choices in the receiver.

Geoff A. J., California
gajCA is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #34 of 62 Old 04-28-2019, 12:20 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Ottawa, ON
Posts: 1,576
Mentioned: 23 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 788 Post(s)
Liked: 640
Quote:
Originally Posted by b curry View Post
The Bose Corporation with ~8000 employees reported fiscal 2017 earnings of $3.8 billion or close to half of the Harmon selling price...
With approx $3B budget in marketing.

The personal audio (headphones {best noise-cancellation, IMHO} Bluetooth speakers, etc.) is quite good.

The company is FAR too litigious for my tastes, which is why you don't see any published measurements of Bose systems - they simply don't allow it.
gajCA likes this.
sigpig is offline  
post #35 of 62 Old 04-28-2019, 01:43 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Dave in Green's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: USA
Posts: 7,872
Mentioned: 140 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3557 Post(s)
Liked: 2740
Quote:
Originally Posted by head_unit View Post
Mmm, I don't think so. Not saying Bose is the winner either, but many many many speaker companies do not seem to follow the flat on axis and even dispersion etc ethos started up north in the NRC National Research Center Canada. At least looking at measurements many don't, and certainly the only ones that talk about that are Harman (now Samsung) brands. Some many follow those ideas without talking about them I guess in order not to appear to be following a competitor. ...
I should have been more clear. It's been discussed at length in other threads that many of the most respected designers in the speaker industry have accepted the research pioneered by Dr. Toole and applied it to their speaker designs. Dr. Toole's basic research has been adopted as an industry standard (ANSI/CTA-2034-A). Of course that may not represent the majority volume of speakers being sold. Again, it's a quantity vs. quality issue.
Dave in Green is online now  
post #36 of 62 Old 04-28-2019, 02:08 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Dave in Green's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: USA
Posts: 7,872
Mentioned: 140 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3557 Post(s)
Liked: 2740
Quote:
Originally Posted by b curry View Post
… I just don't think you can sustain a business for 55+ years, keep it private, and generate those kind of numbers and be so far out of step with reality as many suggest with regards to Bose. Like them or not, they don't have investors to prop them up and they seem to do ok. ....
This inappropriately conflates corporate profitability with measurable product performance quality when there is no direct correlation. There are hundreds of examples of companies that have been more successful and profitable selling inferior products than companies selling measurably superior performing products at similar price points.

I get the impression that you don't really believe that Bose speakers are that great but are just throwing out pro-Bose debate points to keep the discussion balanced.
Dave in Green is online now  
post #37 of 62 Old 04-28-2019, 02:37 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
b curry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: on the way to Hell, Michigan USA
Posts: 4,504
Mentioned: 53 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 975 Post(s)
Liked: 622
Quote:
Originally Posted by sigpig View Post
With approx $3B budget in marketing.

The personal audio (headphones {best noise-cancellation, IMHO} Bluetooth speakers, etc.) is quite good.

The company is FAR too litigious for my tastes, which is why you don't see any published measurements of Bose systems - they simply don't allow it.
Not really sure what you're saying. Yes, Bose does not publish measurement. But I'm not sure what that has to do with litigious protection of intellectual property.
b curry is online now  
post #38 of 62 Old 04-28-2019, 03:45 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
b curry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: on the way to Hell, Michigan USA
Posts: 4,504
Mentioned: 53 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 975 Post(s)
Liked: 622
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave in Green View Post
This inappropriately conflates corporate profitability with measurable product performance quality when there is no direct correlation. There are hundreds of examples of companies that have been more successful and profitable selling inferior products than companies selling measurably superior performing products at similar price points.

I get the impression that you don't really believe that Bose speakers are that great but are just throwing out pro-Bose debate points to keep the discussion balanced.
Perhaps a good point.

Here's a link to a review by Julian D. Hirsch with regards to the Bose 901 from 1968. The preface to the reprint of the review in Sound and Vision by Rob Sabin dated April 26, 2018 is IMHO a reasonably good summary.

Julian Hirsch basically describes the 901 as 18 - 4" full range drivers arranged in two boxes with eight drivers pointing to the rear, one driver pointing forward and no crossover for either box. Each driver was spec'd for 30 watts with 270 watts capacity for each channel. I think this is kind of interesting as the largest solid-state amplifier available in 1968 was the Crown DC300 at 150 watts per channel 8 ohms.

The speaker boxes, left and right are connected to an active equalizer box with fixed frequency presets that offer 10 different frequency/mid-range response curves. Each preset it seems is capable of up to 18dB of boost to offset frequency anomalies associated with enclosure size, driver deficiencies, and speaker room interaction. Maybe it's just me, but that sounds suspiciously like the application of a parametric equalizer or the goals achieved by DSP filters with modern equipment.

The point is, Texas Instruments was building 4 function calculators in 1968 and not DSP chips. Bose seemed to be a head of the curve with regards to building a compact box that produced a bigger sound than it's size might allow, and gave consideration to the speakers dispersion characteristics and room interactions using analog circuits in 1960's. Isn't that where most manufacture's of are today?

Hirsch sums up the article by saying:

"In the final analysis, the judgment of a speaker must be subjective and personal in nature. I have, on occasion, warmly praised speakers that I considered to be outstanding performers. Everything I have said in the past is still valid. Nevertheless, at this moment, I must say that I have never heard a speaker system in my own home which could surpass, or even equal, the Bose 901 for overall “realism” of sound. My partner, Gladden Houck, concurs to the extent that he considers it a very fine system, certainly the equal of anything at or near its price."

Price in 1968 for a pair of 901's with the EQ was $476.00

https://www.soundandvision.com/conte...speaker-system


Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave in Green View Post
This inappropriately conflates corporate profitability with measurable product performance quality...
We will have to agree to disagree. I'm an American working for a specialized German engineering company. I travel on average 300K air miles a year in some 80+ different countries for my work. Bose works in a rather narrow discipline in a world market. They carry a rather high profile and are not an internet direct North American speaker manufacture. You simply do not survive and turn the revenue they are by delivering poor quality product and service in today's world. Yes, they are more or less out of the hi-fi speaker business and their primary business is well beyond CE. But the technology they developed from speaker design and subsequent research is very real and viable.
b curry is online now  
post #39 of 62 Old 04-28-2019, 04:37 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Dave in Green's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: USA
Posts: 7,872
Mentioned: 140 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3557 Post(s)
Liked: 2740
@b curry , I don't need to read Julian Hirsch's review as I read it in 1968 when it was first published. Made me want to buy 901s at the time though I never did. Even today many consider the 901 to be the high point of Bose home speaker systems. But when Consumer Reports published a review in 1970 that had both positive and negative comments about the 901's performance Dr. Bose turned his pack of attorneys loose and sued Consumers Union over the negative comments. If you aren't familiar with this notorious lawsuit you should do a search for the details as it's well chronicled in the legal world.

Even though Consumers Union won on appeal after 7 years of expensive litigation, the upshot of the Bose lawsuit was that many hi-fi reviewers stopped reviewing Bose products for fear that Dr. Bose would turn his pack of attorneys loose on them and they didn't have the deep pockets to successfully defend themselves as Consumers Union was able to. That soured a lot of audio enthusiasts on Bose. Perhaps that's why Bose gave up on the audio enthusiast community and aimed their speakers more at the less audio educated masses.

As for the companies making the best performing products always coming out on top in the business world, that's nothing more than a theory from a Business 101 class. It doesn't always work that way and it's as easily researched as Bose Corp. v. Consumers Union. Suggesting otherwise is not to be taken seriously.
Panson and ratbuddy like this.
Dave in Green is online now  
post #40 of 62 Old 04-28-2019, 05:03 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
b curry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: on the way to Hell, Michigan USA
Posts: 4,504
Mentioned: 53 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 975 Post(s)
Liked: 622
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave in Green View Post
@b curry , I don't need to read Julian Hirsch's review as I read it in 1968 when it was first published. Made me want to buy 901s at the time though I never did. Even today many consider the 901 to be the high point of Bose home speaker systems. But when Consumer Reports published a review in 1970 that had both positive and negative comments about the 901's performance Dr. Bose turned his pack of attorneys loose and sued Consumers Union over the negative comments. If you aren't familiar with this notorious lawsuit you should do a search for the details as it's well chronicled in the legal world.

Even though Consumers Union won on appeal after 7 years of expensive litigation, the upshot of the Bose lawsuit was that many hi-fi reviewers stopped reviewing Bose products for fear that Dr. Bose would turn his pack of attorneys loose on them and they didn't have the deep pockets to successfully defend themselves as Consumers Union was able to. That soured a lot of audio enthusiasts on Bose. Perhaps that's why Bose gave up on the audio enthusiast community and aimed their speakers more at the less audio educated masses.

As for the companies making the best performing products always coming out on top in the business world, that's nothing more than a theory from a Business 101 class. It doesn't always work that way and it's as easily researched as Bose Corp. v. Consumers Union. Suggesting otherwise is not to be taken seriously.
Which is not even close to what I said. What I said was, "You simply do not survive and turn the revenue they are by delivering poor quality product and service in today's world."

Law suit's aside, again, we will have to agree to disagree.
b curry is online now  
post #41 of 62 Old 04-28-2019, 06:44 PM
pjp
AVS Forum Special Member
 
pjp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,153
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 390 Post(s)
Liked: 277
Quote:
Originally Posted by b curry View Post
Which is not even close to what I said. What I said was, "You simply do not survive and turn the revenue they are by delivering poor quality product and service in today's world."

Law suit's aside, again, we will have to agree to disagree.
You are both exactly 100% correct.

Bose has made some stuff that sounds very, very good. I did not care for the 901's at all (maybe I never heard them set up correctly), but the 70's/80's Bose 301's (and other models) were very good for their size, their dual stacked cubes plus wimpy-appearing sub sounded great and were a game changer to the industry (and they still sound great today), and their noise-cancelling headphones were also a game changer.

Bose also has not sounded so good sometimes. A friend of mine dropped something like $3k on the Bose system (amplifier/recieiver with 901 speakers) in the early 80's. That was a ton of money back then and no system I have ever heard has ever sounded worse to me than that thing did. Bose headphones are apparently best of breed for noise cancelling, but the audio quality of my QC-15's sounds pretty weak to my ears (even if they were only $50, instead of $300).

Market-wise, you are both right. Many people have bought Bose by carefully selecting the best stuff Bose has produced. Many others have bought Bose based upon name and think it sounds great even though the particular thing they bought does not.

I'm not an overall Bose fan, but some of their stuff is very good, and I believe plenty of it is not. Nonetheless, people and companies that think different and innovate are a value to the industry. Some of their innovation is great, and some of their innovation is crap (in my opinion), but the audio world (and even us audio snobs on AVS) are better off with Bose in the world than we would be without Bose existing.
Photokid1970 likes this.
pjp is online now  
post #42 of 62 Old 04-28-2019, 08:31 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Dave in Green's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: USA
Posts: 7,872
Mentioned: 140 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3557 Post(s)
Liked: 2740
Quote:
Originally Posted by b curry View Post
Which is not even close to what I said. What I said was, "You simply do not survive and turn the revenue they are by delivering poor quality product and service in today's world."

Law suit's aside, again, we will have to agree to disagree.
Of course Bose designs, produces and sells a lot more than the home speakers originally being discussed in this thread. Home speakers likely represent a small percentage of their total business. While I don't believe that all Bose products are poor quality and that some of their products might be quite good there are in fact many companies with clever marketing and so-so products raking in quite a bit of revenue in today's world. If you don't believe that then we are most certainly in disagreement on that particular issue.

Anyway, the more this discussion deviates from Bose home speakers and into other Bose business the more it will go off topic and be less pertinent to the Speakers section of the forum.
Dave in Green is online now  
post #43 of 62 Old 04-29-2019, 06:18 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
b curry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: on the way to Hell, Michigan USA
Posts: 4,504
Mentioned: 53 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 975 Post(s)
Liked: 622
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave in Green View Post
@b curry , I don't need to read Julian Hirsch's review as I read it in 1968 when it was first published. Made me want to buy 901s at the time though I never did. Even today many consider the 901 to be the high point of Bose home speaker systems. But when Consumer Reports published a review in 1970 that had both positive and negative comments about the 901's performance Dr. Bose turned his pack of attorneys loose and sued Consumers Union over the negative comments. If you aren't familiar with this notorious lawsuit you should do a search for the details as it's well chronicled in the legal world.

Even though Consumers Union won on appeal after 7 years of expensive litigation, the upshot of the Bose lawsuit was that many hi-fi reviewers stopped reviewing Bose products for fear that Dr. Bose would turn his pack of attorneys loose on them and they didn't have the deep pockets to successfully defend themselves as Consumers Union was able to. That soured a lot of audio enthusiasts on Bose. Perhaps that's why Bose gave up on the audio enthusiast community and aimed their speakers more at the less audio educated masses.

As for the companies making the best performing products always coming out on top in the business world, that's nothing more than a theory from a Business 101 class. It doesn't always work that way and it's as easily researched as Bose Corp. v. Consumers Union. Suggesting otherwise is not to be taken seriously.
Well Dave, the Julian Hirsch article attachment was not about you or when you read it or your speaker buying habits, or what you thought the high point of Bose was, or what the outcome of any lawsuit was about, or how it may have affected any future critiques. And it sure as hell had nothing to do with the mediocrity of Consumer Uninon/Consumer Reports writings.

The take away, or at least what I had hoped it would be, was that 55 years ago in the early 60's, Bose was in the market selling a speaker system that used an active equalization device with no crossover, that attempted to tailor the speakers frequency response curve for improved performance characteristics and it's interaction with the room.

No one, no speaker manufacture or CE electronics company was offering such a solution or taking this approach at that time.

Graphic equalizers would not become available to the public until the early 70's; they were expensive and never widely used. Some ten years later, Tomlinson Holman wold incorporate some simple passive bass management shelving and high frequency filters in his APT Holman Preamplifier in an attempt to manage equal-loudness contours for an attached speaker and it would be another 20 plus years more before Holman would help found Audyssey. The SigTech AEC-1000 became available in the early 90's and was perhaps the first viable DSP/Room Correction unit at a cost of $10,000.00 plus the necessary IBM PC needed to use it. There was a company called Audile, that demo'd a prototype loudspeaker with internal DSP at the 1991 CES that never came to market AFAIK.

Again the point was that Bose seem to have an understanding, well over 55 years ago, of the need to manipulate a speakers frequency response and how that speaker and its native response or altered response interacted with the room for improved performance. As crude as the attempt may have been, technology of the day was used to achieve the goal in a way that was affordable. The idea seems to be spot on and other luminaries in the world of audio have used continuous advances in technology and research to get where we are today and that is the active interaction to alter a speakers frequency response curve to improve its performance and interaction with room anomalies.

Has nothing to do with whether or not you or anyone else likes or dislikes Bose or who can piss the farthest. It was a simplistic attempt to point out to the OP, in answer to his question, as to why he thought his neighbors 12 year old Bose system sounded "better" than his late model component selection which every one knows must be superior to any Bose products because everyone knows Bose Blows! And my response, without prejudice, was that Bose speakers typically presents a different frequency response cure with consideration to equal-loudness contours which is designed to be more copacetic with the way humans hear sound.

I did not claim that Bose was superior product, I did not claim that Floyd Toole's work was inferior, I did state that the Bose approach is different and that Bose seems to be doing very well in the world of audio regardless of the number of criticisms.

As for Business 101, I will stand by what I said in that a company that can start as a private concern and remain private and solvent for 55 years working in the same discipline and generate $3.8 billion in revenue with 8000 employees fiscal 2017 must be doing something that someone likes. As for your quip "Suggesting otherwise is not to be taken seriously", you Dave or perhaps we should all be so lucky.
fill35U likes this.
b curry is online now  
post #44 of 62 Old 04-29-2019, 06:33 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Elihawk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Iowa City, Iowa
Posts: 5,991
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1880 Post(s)
Liked: 1981
Not sure how this discussion of the Bose business model is helping the OP, but then again, the OP didn't even tell us what Sony speakers he owns or what Bose system his friend owns...and seems to have checked out of this thread.

Set up #1: EMP e5Ti, e5Ci, and EMP e5Bi surrounds, Outlaw LFM1 Plus sub, SVS NSD SB12 sub, Marantz Slimeline 1504 AV receiver
Set up #2: Def Tech SM450, CLR2002, SLS Qline surrounds and EMPtek10i10i sub, Denon 1910 AV receiver
Set up #3: Philharmonics- BMR in a 2.0 system, music only, Yamaha RXV-363 AV receiver
Elihawk is online now  
post #45 of 62 Old 04-29-2019, 08:24 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Posts: 1,204
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 405 Post(s)
Liked: 952
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigCoolJesus View Post
The Bose products available today no longer fit the audiophile field. Sorry not sorry. You can espouse the contributions Dr. Bose has made all you want...but how many home theater builds do you see using Bose speakers? Or two channel music setups?

Bose is a preference choice. Not a reference choice.
And no choice for certain vehicles.

Panasonic TC65CX850U Yamaha RX-V1079 Technics SU-V650 Panasonic DMP-UB900 Sony UBP-X800 Polk Audio SDA-2B
Panson is offline  
post #46 of 62 Old 04-29-2019, 08:35 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Posts: 1,204
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 405 Post(s)
Liked: 952
Quote:
Originally Posted by b curry View Post
EXCERPTED
Bose works in a rather narrow discipline in a world market. They carry a rather high profile and are not an internet direct North American speaker manufacture. You simply do not survive and turn the revenue they are by delivering poor quality product and service in today's world. Yes, they are more or less out of the hi-fi speaker business and their primary business is well beyond CE. But the technology they developed from speaker design and subsequent research is very real and viable.
My perception is it's just "good enough technology" for vehicle and background music applications. For the former, I have ten of their speakers. No raves, no complaints. No, I don't doze.

Panasonic TC65CX850U Yamaha RX-V1079 Technics SU-V650 Panasonic DMP-UB900 Sony UBP-X800 Polk Audio SDA-2B

Last edited by Panson; 04-29-2019 at 08:53 AM.
Panson is offline  
post #47 of 62 Old 04-29-2019, 08:35 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
BigCoolJesus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 4,970
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2081 Post(s)
Liked: 1692
Quote:
Originally Posted by Panson View Post
And no choice for certain vehicles.

Not sure what you mean
BigCoolJesus is online now  
post #48 of 62 Old 04-29-2019, 08:38 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Posts: 1,204
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 405 Post(s)
Liked: 952
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigCoolJesus View Post
Not sure what you mean
https://automotive.bose.com/vehicles

Panasonic TC65CX850U Yamaha RX-V1079 Technics SU-V650 Panasonic DMP-UB900 Sony UBP-X800 Polk Audio SDA-2B
Panson is offline  
post #49 of 62 Old 04-29-2019, 08:40 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
BigCoolJesus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 4,970
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2081 Post(s)
Liked: 1692
Quote:
Originally Posted by Panson View Post

Yea, I wasn't sure what you meant by the no choice part...just that people are stuck with what is offered?
BigCoolJesus is online now  
post #50 of 62 Old 04-29-2019, 08:55 AM
Advanced Member
 
ratbuddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 807
Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 584 Post(s)
Liked: 776
Quote:
Originally Posted by sigpig View Post
PSB, Paradigm, Axiom, and, to a certain extent, Totem (all Canadian) certainly do.
Ascent Acoustics, Philharmonic, Salk, etc definitely do.
Paradigm definitely doesn't chase flat anechoic measurements. They have access to an amazing measurement facility and top engineering talent, and they design their speakers to sound good, not to measure flat in an unrealistic listening environment. I'm totally fine with that. People who worship a flat (anechoic) line point to certain Paradigm measurements and say 'Ha, they really screwed up that speaker design.' No, they voiced the speaker how they intended, anechoic measurements be damned.

To the OP, -35 to -40 is very low. Does your receiver have dynamic EQ? It can restore life to the content when playing at lower levels.
ratbuddy is online now  
post #51 of 62 Old 04-29-2019, 08:57 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Dave in Green's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: USA
Posts: 7,872
Mentioned: 140 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3557 Post(s)
Liked: 2740
@b curry , you're right. In trying to respond to your far-reaching points I've gone as far off topic as you have. So I'll let you have the last word on business models.

Getting back on the home speaker topic, I really got interested in hi-fi sound back in 1961 when my high school buddy built a Sweet Sixteen speaker from Jim Kyle's plan published in Popular Electronics. The Sweet Sixteen became such a popular project that Popular Electronics named the story its Best Hi-Fi Article of the Year. The biggest criticism of the Sweet Sixteen was that with 16 identical 5" drivers it lacked the very highest frequencies. So Kyle came up with a new design called Sweeter With A Tweeter that added a single tweeter and the design was again featured in Popular Electronics.

Kyle's final design featured in Popular Electronics was called the Stereo Sixteen Plus Four and it was quite unique. It was a stereo speaker in a single cabinet with 16 identical 5" drivers plus 4 tweeters. The stereo effect of the single cabinet was enhanced by having half of the drivers angled one way and the other half the other way. The most unique part at the time was that it was designed to have the speakers facing the wall so that all of the sound was reflected from the wall.

I've always given credit to Jim Kyle for pioneering the concept later refined by Bose with the addition of using two separate cabinets for stereo, adding a single front-facing driver and replacing the tweeter with electronic processing that would have been beyond the reach of a DIYer like Kyle.

For anyone who's interested you can read about all this at the link below to Roger Russell's recollections of all three Jim Kyle designs. Included at the link is an image of the Stereo Sixteen Plus Four which graphically illustrates its visual similarity to the Bose 901 that followed years later.

roger-russell.com/columns/columns.htm#sweet
pjp and fill35U like this.

Last edited by Dave in Green; 04-29-2019 at 09:02 AM. Reason: Spelling
Dave in Green is online now  
post #52 of 62 Old 04-29-2019, 09:04 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Posts: 1,204
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 405 Post(s)
Liked: 952
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigCoolJesus View Post
Yea, I wasn't sure what you meant by the no choice part...just that people are stuck with what is offered?
That's essentially it for the trim a buyer chooses. Considering the car manufacturer agreement Bose has entered into, I don't think Bose would be too pleased with a dealer sound system-swap offering, since AFAIK Bose still says they design their systems as vehicle specific.

Panasonic TC65CX850U Yamaha RX-V1079 Technics SU-V650 Panasonic DMP-UB900 Sony UBP-X800 Polk Audio SDA-2B
Panson is offline  
post #53 of 62 Old 04-29-2019, 11:39 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 449
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 255 Post(s)
Liked: 238
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elihawk View Post
the OP didn't even tell us what Sony speakers he owns or what Bose system his friend owns...
From the OP's posts elsewhere, he's using Sony Core SS-CS5 for L/R/surrounds, SS-CS8 center, and SVS PB1000 sub.

A 12 year old Bose HT system could be anything (AM-10 IV, AM-15/16 II/III, Lifestyle 35/38 III/IV). I doubt there are huge differences in sound quality among the possibilities, other than the Lifestyle systems probably include signal processing.

Another credit due for Bose: they got mainstream consumers to finally accept the idea of a separate dedicated subwoofer.
pjp likes this.

Sources/processing: stack of stuff that if it isn't vintage now, it will be soon!
Amps: stacks and stacks of old iron
Main speakers: big DIYSG
Surrounds: Bose graveyard
Subs: a bunch
fill35U is offline  
post #54 of 62 Old 04-30-2019, 09:42 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Elihawk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Iowa City, Iowa
Posts: 5,991
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1880 Post(s)
Liked: 1981
I think this thread was the most recent Bose troll thread...we have seen a bunch recently, someone comes on a says "Bose isn't that bad" or "why do audiophile hate Bose", replies once or twice, then is OUT. Someone trying to drum up some bose interest. I love the "bong guy", who posted a bunch of pictures of his Bose stuff, but turns out he had more bongs than Bose. Slogan for him should have been all high no lows...
pjp and gajCA like this.

Set up #1: EMP e5Ti, e5Ci, and EMP e5Bi surrounds, Outlaw LFM1 Plus sub, SVS NSD SB12 sub, Marantz Slimeline 1504 AV receiver
Set up #2: Def Tech SM450, CLR2002, SLS Qline surrounds and EMPtek10i10i sub, Denon 1910 AV receiver
Set up #3: Philharmonics- BMR in a 2.0 system, music only, Yamaha RXV-363 AV receiver
Elihawk is online now  
post #55 of 62 Old 04-30-2019, 10:16 AM
pjp
AVS Forum Special Member
 
pjp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,153
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 390 Post(s)
Liked: 277
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elihawk View Post
I think this thread was the most recent Bose troll thread...we have seen a bunch recently, someone comes on a says "Bose isn't that bad" or "why do audiophile hate Bose", replies once or twice, then is OUT...
I'm not much of a conspiracy theorist, but it does seem like there have been a few of these types of threads where the OP starts a discussion on Bose and then heads for the exits. The threads always seem to be very light on details, painting the sketchiest picture possible, which seems to spark even more discussion on AVS. It could be that Bose is an innovator on marketing as well.
tveli likes this.

Last edited by pjp; 04-30-2019 at 10:20 AM.
pjp is online now  
post #56 of 62 Old 04-30-2019, 11:31 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
RayGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 6,202
Mentioned: 48 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2522 Post(s)
Liked: 2275
Quote:
Originally Posted by pjp View Post
I'm not much of a conspiracy theorist, but it does seem like there have been a few of these types of threads where the OP starts a discussion on Bose and then heads for the exits. The threads always seem to be very light on details, painting the sketchiest picture possible, which seems to spark even more discussion on AVS. It could be that Bose is an innovator on marketing as well.
Can you really blame them? Every Bose thread degrades into a morass of argument that has little or nothing to do with the OPs original question/concern. Same issue with every cable thread. Welcome to the internet, where every concept is taken to it's lowest common denominator.

It's a VIRTUAL channel unless stated otherwise.
RayGuy is offline  
post #57 of 62 Old 04-30-2019, 11:53 AM
pjp
AVS Forum Special Member
 
pjp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,153
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 390 Post(s)
Liked: 277
Quote:
Originally Posted by RayGuy View Post
Can you really blame them?
Yes, 100%.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RayGuy View Post
Every Bose thread degrades into a morass of argument that has little or nothing to do with the OPs original question/concern. Same issue with every cable thread. Welcome to the internet, where every concept is taken to it's lowest common denominator.
That degradation didn't happen in this thread (or the prior one I am thinking of that was almost the same). The reality is that Bose has produced some products that are great, and some that were not great at all. There are some Bose products that represent excellent value, and some that are a very poor value relative to the alternatives. The only way for their not to be strong arguments both for and against Bose would be to ignore facts that are directly relevant to the discussion, which would be pointless.

I think this was a very fair and constructive discussion. On the narrower topic of the Bose speakers mentioned by the OP (rather than the broader discussion of Bose as a company), I think there were far more comments about those old cubes sounding very good than there were against them, which is pretty damn good given the traditionally Bose-jaded AVS participants. I don't see anything wrong with this discussion at all -- both sides for and against are largely correct within the context of their comments.
pjp is online now  
post #58 of 62 Old 04-30-2019, 12:10 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Elihawk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Iowa City, Iowa
Posts: 5,991
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1880 Post(s)
Liked: 1981
Quote:
Originally Posted by fill35U View Post
From the OP's posts elsewhere, he's using Sony Core SS-CS5 for L/R/surrounds, SS-CS8 center, and SVS PB1000 sub.

A 12 year old Bose HT system could be anything (AM-10 IV, AM-15/16 II/III, Lifestyle 35/38 III/IV). I doubt there are huge differences in sound quality among the possibilities, other than the Lifestyle systems probably include signal processing.

Another credit due for Bose: they got mainstream consumers to finally accept the idea of a separate dedicated subwoofer.
Not to mention...for the first time in a long time, maybe ever...Bose started making a real subwoofer! Whether it is good or not, i have no idea...

Set up #1: EMP e5Ti, e5Ci, and EMP e5Bi surrounds, Outlaw LFM1 Plus sub, SVS NSD SB12 sub, Marantz Slimeline 1504 AV receiver
Set up #2: Def Tech SM450, CLR2002, SLS Qline surrounds and EMPtek10i10i sub, Denon 1910 AV receiver
Set up #3: Philharmonics- BMR in a 2.0 system, music only, Yamaha RXV-363 AV receiver
Elihawk is online now  
post #59 of 62 Old 04-30-2019, 12:15 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Dave in Green's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: USA
Posts: 7,872
Mentioned: 140 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3557 Post(s)
Liked: 2740
It's true that the mere mention of that 4-letter word that starts with B and ends in ose is guaranteed to spark controversy in any discussion of home speaker performance. But even in the cases where someone is deliberately trolling it remains a legitimate point of discussion that some may prefer the Bose sound to a more measurably accurate sound in the same way that some prefer the taste of sugar-laced processed foods to more natural, healthy foods. It's always fair to debate what is measurably better. But personal preferences do vary and each person's individual preferences are perfectly valid for them, whether it be taste, sight, sound or any other sensory perception.

On a personal note I want to add that even though @b curry and I have been going back and forth at each other in this thread from slightly different perspectives I don't disagree with a lot of the points he's made here and I've almost always found myself in agreement with points he's made in other threads.
fill35U likes this.
Dave in Green is online now  
post #60 of 62 Old 04-30-2019, 12:29 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Elihawk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Iowa City, Iowa
Posts: 5,991
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1880 Post(s)
Liked: 1981
I think AVS-ers are MORE than fair to Bose! If someone comes on here and says "Hey, I want a small, unobtrusive system, wireless and easy to set up that sounds much better than my TV speakers"...who is going to argue that Bose shouldn't be amongst the candidates for that OP (maybe Sonos, and some other Satellite systems)?!

however, when someone comes on and says my Bose system sounds better than ___ (you name the system, but that system has bigger drivers, tweeters and a real subwoofer), well that is when they get some push back.

Set up #1: EMP e5Ti, e5Ci, and EMP e5Bi surrounds, Outlaw LFM1 Plus sub, SVS NSD SB12 sub, Marantz Slimeline 1504 AV receiver
Set up #2: Def Tech SM450, CLR2002, SLS Qline surrounds and EMPtek10i10i sub, Denon 1910 AV receiver
Set up #3: Philharmonics- BMR in a 2.0 system, music only, Yamaha RXV-363 AV receiver
Elihawk is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Speakers

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off