Bose: Legit Audio Company or Slick Marketing?

[JerryLove]

?

I don’t understand your concern? Genesis is its own company now. They operate independent of Hyundai now. They are a sub-brand more like Infinity or Lexus rather than just a set of sub-models. Of course they will all be Genesis, it’s the brand now.

I missed that happening. My bad.

 

[Irvrobinson]

Tesla's history of making good on problems with their vehicles is well established.

Depending on when your friend's Model 3 was made, there's also the likelihood that the issue is already addressed.

Having driven both, I don't see how that conclusion is possible.

I might consider an i3 if I can get the timing right. I've heard of leases <$100/mo because of the way rebates and leases interact.


Sadly, out of my budget. Given the extremely high cost on parts on those cars (like the door handles), I'm unlikely to hunt heavily used.

One colleague of mine in SoCal had problems that involved significant paint work, body panels that didn't fit right, and the passenger door didn't function reliably. The fixes took weeks. Yes, Tesla finally fixed the issues, though even after the fixes I would still rate fit and finish well below the last Malibu I rented.

The Bolt I was in was the "premier edition". The Model 3 interiors I've been in used cheap-looking and feeling materials, and the panels fit poorly. Very disappointing. The S and X interiors are really nothing special at their price range, but acceptable.

I've heard about the i3 leases too. I've never been in one.

 

[gene]

From what I’ve read the Genesis G70 3.3T is the better car. They are the same car but the Genesis has the sportier suspension tuning. Also has a glorious Lexicon stereo that David Greisinger has a hand in putting together I believe (he would have been retired but I believe he was involved in initial development).

They both look pretty good. Who would have thought we'd see the day where Korean car companies are making more compelling cars than their Japanese counterparts?

 

[gene]

Tesla has the best electric motor in the industry and the best batteries.

Some of the tech is way cool; I'm really excited about the cruise control system, love the space, enjoy some of the little sci-fi things like the air vents, and the performance is amazing (dual motor range extended).

What bit did you think lacked quality? I ask as someone who owned a BMW that cost more that used plastic all over the engine compartment, had genmods that were lucky to run a full year, had cupholders that no car out of warranty had non-broken, and once lost a battery to the very expensive part they put in to protect the battery.

I mean: Tesla isn't Lexus, but then again, no one is.

The Model 3 I sat in had very cheap loose fitting plastic knobs and buttons. The seats are uncomfortable, and I don't like the giant screen instead of a center console with tactile buttons and dials. Also, the brakes were ho-hum on this car, Car&Driver and Consumer Reports noted it had longer break times than an F150 truck...until Elon Musk claims they made a firmware fix to address it. Sorry, but that doesn't sit well with me, to fix serious performance issues ONLY after a 3rd party discovers it.

I still feel we are a good decade away from electric cars becoming a viable alternative to performance IC cars, especially when value is factored in.

I've owned Lexus. Nice interiors, great reliability, but their engine tech is behind the Germans and their handling just doesn't compete to say nothing about their now ridiculous pricing and stupid predator grille on every design that gets bigger on each new model introduced.

 

[mtrycrafts]

... Still, i think the eq is a sign of an inherent deficiency in the design.

Well, maybe one day the design will be so good that no EQ is needed at all at any frequency, ruler flat. Not sure I will be around then.

 

[JerryLove]

The Model 3 I sat in had very cheap loose fitting plastic knobs and buttons.

What, both of them?

The seats are uncomfortable, and I don't like the giant screen instead of a center console with tactile buttons and dials.

Those are both preferences and reasons you might shy away from the car; but not something inherently wrong with the car.

Also, the brakes were ho-hum on this car, Car&Driver and Consumer Reports noted it had longer break times than an F150 truck...until Elon Musk claims they made a firmware fix to address it. Sorry, but that doesn't sit well with me, to fix serious performance issues ONLY after a 3rd party discovers it.

You mean like Acura, Audi, BMW, Cadillac, Checy, Chrystler, Dymler, Dodge, Ferrarri, Fisker, Ford (you get the idea) who all had deadly airbags which were only fixed after a 3rd party discovered it?

I do agree that Tesla missing the software error in their break system that caused long breaking times was bad. But since they are measurably the safest cars on the road; I'm not sure there's an important take-away.

And what do you mean "claims bey made a firmware fix"? Which part are you disputing.

I still feel we are a good decade away from electric cars becoming a viable alternative to performance IC cars, especially when value is factored in.

I think the value is better in electrics. Fewer moving parts. Brakes that last forever. No timing belt/chain. No oil changes. Etc; not to mention the lower $/mi costs of electricity compared to gas.

The electric Semi is a good example. Hundreds of thousands of dollars cheaper over its lifespan even before you address maintenance and down-time issues.

I've owned Lexus. Nice interiors, great reliability, but their engine tech is behind the Germans and their handling just doesn't compete to say nothing about their now ridiculous pricing and stupid predator grille on every design that gets bigger on each new model introduced.

For me: the problems are headroom (I don't fit in them),those stupid forward headrests, and lack of proper Android Auto integration.

 

[gene]

What, both of them?



Those are both preferences and reasons you might shy away from the car; but not something inherently wrong with the car.


You mean like Acura, Audi, BMW, Cadillac, Checy, Chrystler, Dymler, Dodge, Ferrarri, Fisker, Ford (you get the idea) who all had deadly airbags which were only fixed after a 3rd party discovered it?

I do agree that Tesla missing the software error in their break system that caused long breaking times was bad. But since they are measurably the safest cars on the road; I'm not sure there's an important take-away.

And what do you mean "claims bey made a firmware fix"? Which part are you disputing.


I think the value is better in electrics. Fewer moving parts. Brakes that last forever. No timing belt/chain. No oil changes. Etc; not to mention the lower $/mi costs of electricity compared to gas.

The electric Semi is a good example. Hundreds of thousands of dollars cheaper over its lifespan even before you address maintenance and down-time issues.


For me: the problems are headroom (I don't fit in them),those stupid forward headrests, and lack of proper Android Auto integration.

The fact that I sat in a Model 3 that was supposed to sticker in the $30's, actually was over $65k and had a very cheap feel to it, really turned me off. Almost the entire car is operated off a large touchscreen, which I absolutely hate. Subjectively, the car is ugly, especially the front of it. Servicing Tesla isn't cheap or always practical. The service plans are expensive and you will eventually have to replace the battery which is NOT a cheap proposition. Read what Consumer Reports said about all of this. Also, some owners here: https://www.quora.com/Does-a-Tesla-car-have-very-minimal-maintenance-costs

I typically don't keep a car more than 5 years so it makes little sense for me to buy a Tesla as the savings in gas does not offset the price increase of having an eV. Also, the Model3 is heavy and doesn't have comparable driving dynamics to my BMW. You have to spend about $77k on a Model3 to offer faster acceleration and offer comparable handling to my $51k M240i. No thanks. If I'm spending close to $80k on a car, I'm getting either a BMW M3 or an Alfa Romeo Giulia Quadrifoglio.

Tesla's more "affordable" model 3 had pretty dismal driving dynamics and acceleration for a $57k sticker price:
https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2018-tesla-model-3-test-review

now compare to the BMW M240i:
https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2017-bmw-m240i-coupe-automatic-tested-review

The BMW stops 20ft shorter than the Model 3 and is faster to 1/4 mile by over 1 sec.

Add to the fact that for $200, I threw on a Burger tune to boost the turbo 3psi and gained 40whp and torque, and you can see it further moves the gap in performance between these 2 cars. It's easy to add power and performance to a stock BMW, but expensive to do the same to a Tesla.

Lexus has really fallen behind in engine tech and it's so sad. I get average 28mpg in my 400hp BMW while I was only averaging 23mpg in my 306hp Lexus IS350f. If Lexus did a turbo6 on a small car, they would really have something special. But instead, they seem to keep moving up the price ladder with most of their "performance" coupes costing $100k+.

 

[JerryLove]

The fact that I sat in a Model 3 that was supposed to sticker in the $30's, actually was over $65k and had a very cheap feel to it, really turned me off.

I would assert that you sat in a $65k version of a car whose base model, once it comes out, is supposed to sticker at $35k.

You may notice similar things if you compare the base model BMW 2-series. In fact, I went to BMW's site, took a 2-series (which starts at $35k) and optioned it up to $62k.

Almost the entire car is operated off a large touchscreen, which I absolutely hate. Subjectively, the car is ugly, especially the front of it.

Those are subjective opinions which you are completely entitled to. Other people may feel differently.

Servicing Tesla isn't cheap or always practical. The service plans are expensive and you will eventually have to replace the battery which is NOT a cheap proposition. Read what Consumer Reports said about all of this. Also, some owners here: https://www.quora.com/Does-a-Tesla-car-have-very-minimal-maintenance-costs

Went through several of those, and the owners spoke generally very positively in regards maintenance.

Tesla has the longest-lasting batteries in the electric car industry. Yes, they will eventually need replacing... as eventually does every part in every car.

I typically don't keep a car more than 5 years so it makes little sense for me to buy a Tesla as the savings in gas does not offset the price increase of having an eV. Also, the Model3 is heavy and doesn't have comparable driving dynamics to my BMW. You have to spend about $77k on a Model3 to offer faster acceleration and offer comparable handling to my $51k M240i. No thanks. If I'm spending close to $80k on a car, I'm getting either a BMW M3 or an Alfa Romeo Giulia Quadrifoglio.

$68k (pre rebate) gets you the highest performance available in a model 3. The M240i starts at $48.

The top model 3 is indeed more expensive, faster, larger, with more storage space, more energy efficient and lower maintenance.

Tesla's more "affordable" model 3 had pretty dismal driving dynamics and acceleration for a $57k sticker price:
https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2018-tesla-model-3-test-review

The least expensive Model 3 is $41k (before rebate),not $57k

You are welcome to prefer your M240i. You aren't wrong to do so. You aren't right for someone else either.

I didn't think the handling was as fun on the model 3; though the lateral traction was quite amazing (low center of gravity will do that) and the ride smoother than my 3-series (and way smoother than the X1 I almost purchased as my most recent car). I love the lack of lag, and I enjoyed the interior. Like basically everyone, I'd like more controls; but I also very much like the "autopilot" given the commute I make, and the general isolation inside the car.

While I'm at it: I don't like the headrest. I don't think the multi-knobs on the wheel were well designed (but shall we discuss early iDrive in the BMW?).

It also happens that I have solar panels sized to power my house during an extended outage. That means I have extra electricity most of the time that I'd do better to use than sell to the electric company at the reduced buy rate. So. That's another bonus.

The BMW stops 20ft shorter than the Model 3 and is faster to 1/4 mile by over 1 sec.

And more expensive. And smaller.

Lexus has really fallen behind in engine tech and it's so sad. I get average 28mpg in my 400hp BMW while I was only averaging 23mpg in my 306hp Lexus IS350f. If Lexus did a turbo6 on a small car, they would really have something special. But instead, they seem to keep moving up the price ladder with most of their "performance" coupes costing $100k+.

I've never liked the IS, and I think the GS has really gone the wrong route in trying to be a BMW 5-series (though I otherwise like it). The ES I've really liked, but still don't fit in.

One thing I've always loved about my bimmers is that I fit in them; and the 16-way seating on the 5-series and 7-series is excellent (especially the pre-2007 versions)[/quote][/quote]

 

[BoredSysAdmin]

They both look pretty good. Who would have thought we'd see the day where Korean car companies are making more compelling cars than their Japanese counterparts?

I'd love to see new Genesis 70 in person, but photos of its interior look very nice. That said in the past (5-6 years ago) Hyundai Genesis 3.8 interior was utterly disappointing from materials selection and quality. Not long ago I took a ride in older Genesis Uber and it was badly worn out.

 

[mtrycrafts]

...
You may notice similar things if you compare the base model BMW 2-series. In fact, I went to BMW's site, took a 2-series (which starts at $35k) and optioned it up to $62k.
...

Interesting your mention this as CR is also in the discussion.

One only has to read the Oct '18 issue, page 56, Sticker Shock. Compared the range of basic and all options in 2003 and 2018. What a creep upwards of the add ons.
While only 4 examples are shown, it is eye opening.
Good thing I tend to keep cars for a while. This one is 10 years so far, last one 26 years.

 

[Motrek]

Marketing company. They tune their products for demos to the detriment of the actual customer experience.

I know two families that bought the Bose Solo TV speaker stand. I asked them what they thought of it. The responses were the same. "We love it! It makes movies sound so amazing!" Oh, hey, that's cool. But... movies specifically? "Well, if we're just watching TV, we turn it off because we don't need the sound to be so high-quality." Eh? Why wouldn't you want the sound to be high-quality all the time? "Well, it makes it really hard to understand what people are saying..."

Yup... Bose has tricked both of these families into spending over $200 on speakers that they think are great but they rarely use, because it makes human voice less intelligible than what you get with speakers that are built into a flat panel TV. Thanks so much, Bose.

Similarly, I go to a bar that has a bunch of Bose 301 speakers as their sound system. The speakers don't seem to put out anything below 50Hz but they produce a TON of one-note, sloppy, muddy, droning mid-bass. Depending on the song, this mid-bass garbage is the only thing you CAN hear, and practically speaking, it makes it difficult to have conversations with other people. When the bar has live music or hosts karaoke (i.e., people come in and set up a couple of big JBL monitors or whatever) everybody remarks on how much better it sounds, even people who don't know the first thing about audio and older people who are hard of hearing. So, thanks for that too, Bose.

 

[beginjapan!]

Marketing company. They tune their products for demos to the detriment of the actual customer experience.

I know two families that bought the Bose Solo TV speaker stand. I asked them what they thought of it. The responses were the same. "We love it! It makes movies sound so amazing!" Oh, hey, that's cool. But... movies specifically? "Well, if we're just watching TV, we turn it off because we don't need the sound to be so high-quality." Eh? Why wouldn't you want the sound to be high-quality all the time? "Well, it makes it really hard to understand what people are saying..."

Yup... Bose has tricked both of these families into spending over $200 on speakers that they think are great but they rarely use, because it makes human voice less intelligible than what you get with speakers that are built into a flat panel TV. Thanks so much, Bose.

Similarly, I go to a bar that has a bunch of Bose 301 speakers as their sound system. The speakers don't seem to put out anything below 50Hz but they produce a TON of one-note, sloppy, muddy, droning mid-bass. Depending on the song, this mid-bass garbage is the only thing you CAN hear, and practically speaking, it makes it difficult to have conversations with other people. When the bar has live music or hosts karaoke (i.e., people come in and set up a couple of big JBL monitors or whatever) everybody remarks on how much better it sounds, even people who don't know the first thing about audio and older people who are hard of hearing. So, thanks for that too, Bose.

What's funny about this comment is I think the 301's were their best speaker at the time.

 

[theJman]

Marketing company.

And seemingly a marketing article as well. For example, there are over 150 uses of the word Bose. Half as many would have probably been twice the amount any other author used to write the same story. In spots it was difficult to read simply because of that. The sale brochure slant didn't help either. Then there's the political reference with the caveat that it shouldn't become a political debate, which was directly followed by 3 paragraphs of political rhetoric. Isn't politics one of the two things you never discuss? Very bizarre piece, and a bit too promotional in nature.

 

[highfigh]

Isn't politics one of the two things you never discuss? Very bizarre piece, and a bit too promotional in nature.

That has to do with drinking- the saying is "Never argue about religion or politics when drinking". It doesn't go well.

 

[highfigh]

Similarly, I go to a bar that has a bunch of Bose 301 speakers as their sound system. The speakers don't seem to put out anything below 50Hz but they produce a TON of one-note, sloppy, muddy, droning mid-bass. Depending on the song, this mid-bass garbage is the only thing you CAN hear, and practically speaking, it makes it difficult to have conversations with other people. When the bar has live music or hosts karaoke (i.e., people come in and set up a couple of big JBL monitors or whatever) everybody remarks on how much better it sounds, even people who don't know the first thing about audio and older people who are hard of hearing. So, thanks for that too, Bose.

Look for the bar's audio system and I would bet they have a graphic equalizer that was set by their bartender who's a self-described "expert" on sound.

 

[BoredSysAdmin]

And seemingly a marketing article as well. For example, there are over 150 uses of the word Bose. Half as many would have probably been twice the amount any other author used to write the same story. In spots it was difficult to read simply because of that. The sale brochure slant didn't help either. Then there's the political reference with the caveat that it shouldn't become a political debate, which was directly followed by 3 paragraphs of political rhetoric. Isn't politics one of the two things you never discuss? Very bizarre piece, and a bit too promotional in nature.

As I've mentioned earlier and was pretty much confirmed by AH Staff is that this piece is meant to "drive higher community engagement through alternative opinion discussion" or simply called trolling.

 

[Motrek]

Look for the bar's audio system and I would bet they have a graphic equalizer that was set by their bartender who's a self-described "expert" on sound.

I looked at their setup a while ago and they don't have an equalizer in their equipment stack, so it's just the speakers that are awful. I told the owner of the bar that maybe I could make some suggestions if he wanted to replace the speakers, and his response was, "They're already Bose. It's not like you can get any better." Sigh.

 

[beginjapan!]

I looked at their setup a while ago and they don't have an equalizer in their equipment stack, so it's just the speakers that are awful. I told the owner of the bar that maybe I could make some suggestions if he wanted to replace the speakers, and his response was, "They're already Bose. It's not like you can get any better." Sigh.

That explains so much, doesn't it?
1) Marketing beats quality, every time.
2) A lot of people don't actually care about sound quality anymore.
3) You're drinking at the wrong bar.

 

[gene]

And seemingly a marketing article as well. For example, there are over 150 uses of the word Bose. Half as many would have probably been twice the amount any other author used to write the same story. In spots it was difficult to read simply because of that. The sale brochure slant didn't help either. Then there's the political reference with the caveat that it shouldn't become a political debate, which was directly followed by 3 paragraphs of political rhetoric. Isn't politics one of the two things you never discuss? Very bizarre piece, and a bit too promotional in nature.

LMAO the jig is up. It was a stealth marketing piece for Bose but you were too smart and figured it out. Of course the accompanying YouTube video where we dissed them for not being audiophile must have really put the whole endeavor over the top. Now if only I could actually get them to pay us for this effort...that would be something

 

[Verdinut]

That explains so much, doesn't it?
1) Marketing beats quality, every time.
2) A lot of people don't actually care about sound quality anymore.

They wee raised listening to compressed MP3 files and that explains much of it!

They never assisted to a real concert with only acoustic instruments!