bose

[Petro]

I did some digging and found a review that seems rather unbiased yet brutally honest from a gentlemen who dissected an Acoustimass rig a couple years ago. I vaguely remembered a friend sending it to me for a laugh when it was new and managed to find it again via google, amusingly enough.

Ergh. I can't yet post links - so, let me break this up a little.

http: // www . intellexual . net/bose . html

Remove the extraneous spaces and that link will work - sorry, the board is just trying to foil spammers.

It's a bit long, so top off your coffee mug and have a good laugh.

I still have nagging guilt at talking my parents into buying an Acoustimass rig when I was in junior high.

 

[caupina]

That's right!!!!. That's exactly what this website is all about, and I've seen that whenever anybody brings up a question regarding Bose products...but just start a thread on a brand supposedly nobody gives a rat's *** about, well.....I just don't get it.

SethL, what's so deceptive about Bose marketing strategies....people believe what they want to believe and that could be applied to any other situation in life....but at the end of the day it's your decision and choice, no one else's. I don't buy what any brand says when it comes to market their products, I just believe my senses, and the way I perceive that product, if I like it then any amount of my money is well spent.

 

[Seth=L]

That's right!!!!. That's exactly what this website is all about, and I've seen that whenever anybody brings up a question regarding Bose products...but just start a thread on a brand supposedly nobody gives a rat's *** about, well.....I just don't get it.

SethL, what's so deceptive about Bose marketing strategies....people believe what they want to believe and that could be applied to any other situation in life....but at the end of the day it's your decision and choice, no one else's. I don't buy what any brand says when it comes to market their products, I just believe my senses, and the way I perceive that product, if I like it then any amount of my money is well spent.

Why do you think people decided to go with Bose?, because they fell for their misleading advertising. You are right about people wanting to believe, and that's fine. This forum, for the most part, believes that Bose presents a poor value and is misleading in it's advertising. If some person comes along wanting to know about Bose we are going to be straight up about it. Multiple threads like this one are just nice additions that fuel the fire against Bose (at least here among us). I have owned Bose products, and they aren't good for the money. They sound good in the store, sometimes, but sound like crap in my house. They use cheap parts, cheaper labor, and spit out cheap products for high prices.

 

[caupina]

I have and still own their products (I just bought a the QC2, noise-canceling headphones to give it a try) and my experience has been completely the opposite. Never listened to them in the store, but sound good enough in my house....I couldn't care less what they're made of....I didn't buy them 'cause they looked good, instead 'cause they sounded good (that's what speakers are for, right???) What Bose product have you owned???? Why did you buy them in the first place or was it a gift???? Man, I'd never accept anything I don't like even if it was for free...what's the point???? Bose is making a lot of money...they must be doing something right, don't you think???? It's been said before, a company can't survive on marketing alone....if you market a POS, people will come back at you and prove you wrong, turn away and you eventually go broke....come on, you have to give some credit to those loyal Bose customers like me

 

[leetamm]

To reiterate Seth=L's point, the purpose of a thread like this is to hopefully open up the eyes of people who think, like I used to, that Bose is as good as it gets when it comes to hi-fi audio.

Like I said in my previous post, I think the reason for this is not only that Bose has marketed itself all over the place, but that the hi-end audio industry in general has done a poor job of not only marketing itself, but also of making itself financially accesible to the general public. But that is another topic altogether.

I had heard a number of Bose products before I became aware of the hi-end world. My dad used to have a Bose system. I don't know what model it was. It had a bass module and 2 tiny bookshelf speakers. I remember when he 1st got it I couldn't way to hear it. I went by one day with one of my favorite cd's, expecting to be wowed by true hi-fi sound. I wasn't wowed at all. To me it didn't sound any better than my Sony mini-stereo system. The crazy thing is, I never questioned the quality of the Bose system, I just assumed that either that was truly as good as hi-fi gets, or that I just didn't have ears for good sound. Another friend of mine had a Bose surround system, again I don't know what model, but I was equally unimpressed with the sound.

It wasn't until I heard my audiophile friend's system that I realized what true hi-fi sound was supposed to sound like.

Again, the point is, like used to be the case with me, a lot of people just simply assume that Bose is the name of hi-fi audio because they're both unaware and unexperienced with hi-end audio. I'm amazed at how many people I encounter who think that Bose is the pinnacle of audio, who think I'm supposed to be impressed when they tell me they're thinking about getting a Bose system, and who are incredulous when I tell them that I don't like Bose and that I think they could do a lot better than Bose.

Think about it, the average joe can afford to walk into a Best Buy and buy an HDTV that gives him stunning hi-end video. Is it crazy for him to assume that he can also get hi-end audio from the same store? He has no idea that there is whole wide world of hi-end audio products that he's never heard of and that he'll have to go to a specialty hi-end audio shop, if he can find one, to hear them.

Again, it's all about making people aware that there is much more to hi-fi audio than just Bose.

As I said in my other post, it's not just Bose's marketing that's the issue, it's the fact that the hi-end audio industry in general has regrettably isolated itself from the general market. To me that's the bigger issue and a whole other topic of discussion.

Caupina, I'm glad you like your Bose system, I really am. We all want to be happy with the stuff we spend our hard earned money on, and it's all subjective anyway. Again, I heard Bose before I knew there was anything else out ther worth listening to and I wasn't impressed at all, but in my ignorance I just assumed that it was as good as it was gonna get. It wasn't until I heard my audiophile friend's system that I realized that it wasn't, and it changed my world. I (we) just want everyone else to know that there's much much more available out there than Bose.

 

[no. 5]

Don't all speakers color the sound one way or another though?

Yes, the vast majority do, but better designed speakers will do it to a lesser degree (sometimes far, far less) than inferior speakers.

Deceptive???? Why????. Come on man, we've been through this before. If you really believe everything you read in the ads, then you're just too naive or plain dumb (no offense, really). I haven't seen or heard of any customer being forced into a Bose store and buy something from them "or else". Do you really believe the brainwashing on Bose's part??? Do you really think that Bose is going to say...."we sell overpriced audio equipment...if you buy from us, we'll let you know of the better options out there...sucker!!!!" They even have a 30-day guarantee option, no questions asked, if you don't like it, just bring it back, we'll refund your money....how bad is that...plain evil, right???. I don't think for a minute that Bose is the best there is, but it's not the worse either (not in my personal experience). My point was if most of the audiophiles in this forum hate so much Bose, why spend time talking about it????? What's the point???? Really...I just don't get it ( I'm too naive or just plain dumb)

It's not just the marketing, it is that they make speakers that are designed to sound like the best.

Anyone can make a speaker to be as accurate as the can, and market it as "the best", and that would be OK; it may be false advertising, but they tried their best.
That is nothing like what Bose does. They design speakers that use psychoacoustic principals of perception to get people to buy their product, because the sound like the best to some people, and they back it up with marketing everywhere (honestly, when is the last time you saw an ad for B&W in Newsweek?) telling people that Bose is the best.

A little on what I'm talking about with psychoacoustics, the frequency response of Bose speakers is designed to sound subjectively good, because louder is perceived as better, certain frequencies being louder than others is perceived as being better.

As an example, I remember hearing a Bose iPod system, and thinking "how is that kind of deep bass coming out of something so little?" and then I realized, it wasn't "that kind of deep bass" it was just a lot of lower midrange and upper bass; speakers that small, in an enclosure that small are incapable of producing low, or even mid bass. But the point is, my mind concluded that because there was a great intensity at one group of frequencies, there must be another group of frequency that were not there.

Is making a perceived large amount of sound come out of a small package that bad? Maybe, maybe not, but one of the things that led me to realize that iPod dock was not producing the deep bass I thought it was was the missing notes in the bass line of the song that was playing. The notes were missing because the equipment could not reproduce the frequencies where the notes were.

In addition to frequency response, I am curious to know how a set of Bose speakers measure as far as things like cabinet resonance, and driver linearity.

This sounds overly dramatic, but I do not like Bose because they use your own perception of sound against you.
There is a time and place for making big sound come out of a small package, but marketing that perceptual trickery as better? In my mind, that's just wrong.

 

[Seth=L]

I have and still own their products (I just bought a the QC2, noise-canceling headphones to give it a try) and my experience has been completely the opposite. Never listened to them in the store, but sound good enough in my house....I couldn't care less what they're made of....I didn't buy them 'cause they looked good, instead 'cause they sounded good (that's what speakers are for, right???) What Bose product have you owned???? Why did you buy them in the first place or was it a gift???? Man, I'd never accept anything I don't like even if it was for free...what's the point???? Bose is making a lot of money...they must be doing something right, don't you think???? It's been said before, a company can't survive on marketing alone....if you market a POS, people will come back at you and prove you wrong, turn away and you eventually go broke....come on, you have to give some credit to those loyal Bose customers like me

I have owned Bose 301 Direct reflection speakers, some Bose surround speakers (can't recall the model number) and a sub-sat system (also can't recall the model number). I bought the sub-sat system thinking it would sound at least as good as my $400 Infinity IL10s, they are not comparable. The subwoofer was boomy (lots of mid/upper bass), and the detail on the sats couldn't come close to approaching that of the Infinity speakers. The build quality is also much lower on the Bose. Do I expect a sub sat system to sound as good as full size speakers?, no, but I would like for them to sound good. Sub sat systems costing 1/2 or less of Bose Accoustimas systems from Definitive Tech, Energy, Orb Audio, Mirage will kick Bose all over the place in output, fidelity, and build quality (most of them even look better than Bose IMO).

Bose is a cheater. They use distortion and messed up frequency curves to make a system sound "cool". Cerwin Vega is cool too, maybe you should try them out for full size speakers, and they cost less.

 

[flamingeye]

You guys are nuts. My rear surrounds powered by my ONKYO are Bose and they do a great job of producing Whistles of passing trains, Bullets whizing by (Saving Private Ryan) and all the other background noise that comes from my Movies. What the heck are we asking these things to do?

My front cubes are not a new 321 system, but a 5 year old Bose system consisting of two cubes and this mid-range thing that sits behind the tv. I forget what it was called - They sound terriffic. We're watching movies , not chamber music ! These cubes were a company award back in 2001 and I am glad to have them.

When I turn them up and set my ONKYO to stereo , I can fill a room with qaulity sound. My Veladyne ct-150 helps these with lows, but I have no complaint with BOSE for surround sound.

I have no experience with these packaged 321 systems or salesman. All I know is I have surround in my family room and it is great.

By the way, is this like "Ringo sucked as a drummer". Cause he did a great job with the material the Beatles played.

Oh yeah , my wife loves the tiny cubes cause they are cute so shoot me.

Have you ever tried switching them out with something els like klipsch or the like you would be surprised by the difference & at ebay you can get quality speakers at a great price,O & by the way my wife thinks bose cubes are cute to & would love me to replace my klipsch kg 5.5 with those cute bose but thats apples to oranges my point is try a comparison & you will see what every body is talking about

 

[caupina]

Yes, the vast majority do, but better designed speakers will do it to a lesser degree (sometimes far, far less) than inferior speakers.


It's not just the marketing, it is that they make speakers that are designed to sound like the best.

Anyone can make a speaker to be as accurate as the can, and market it as "the best", and that would be OK; it may be false advertising, but they tried their best.
That is nothing like what Bose does. They design speakers that use psychoacoustic principals of perception to get people to buy their product, because the sound like the best to some people, and they back it up with marketing everywhere (honestly, when is the last time you saw an ad for B&W in Newsweek?) telling people that Bose is the best.

A little on what I'm talking about with psychoacoustics, the frequency response of Bose speakers is designed to sound subjectively good, because louder is perceived as better, certain frequencies being louder than others is perceived as being better.

As an example, I remember hearing a Bose iPod system, and thinking "how is that kind of deep bass coming out of something so little?" and then I realized, it wasn't "that kind of deep bass" it was just a lot of lower midrange and upper bass; speakers that small, in an enclosure that small are incapable of producing low, or even mid bass. But the point is, my mind concluded that because there was a great intensity at one group of frequencies, there must be another group of frequency that were not there.

Is making a perceived large amount of sound come out of a small package that bad? Maybe, maybe not, but one of the things that led me to realize that iPod dock was not producing the deep bass I thought it was was the missing notes in the bass line of the song that was playing. The notes were missing because the equipment could not reproduce the frequencies where the notes were.

In addition to frequency response, I am curious to know how a set of Bose speakers measure as far as things like cabinet resonance, and driver linearity.

This sounds overly dramatic, but I do not like Bose because they use your own perception of sound against you.
There is a time and place for making big sound come out of a small package, but marketing that perceptual trickery as better? In my mind, that's just wrong.

Ohhh Man, that was deep!!!!...I've heard something about psychoacoustic but never paid any attention to it, so I never thought about it the way your just presented, but at the same time I can't tell if I'm being fooled or not by this and to be honest it doesn't bother me because I like what I like the sound it comes out of those speakers (again I'm not a big fan of the small cubes, my experience has been mostly with the floor standing speakers which probably do a lot better than the little satellites).
On the other hand I'm not that much into specs that most of you audiophiles "hardcores" like to discuss, but at the same time I do like music...big time....especially jazz, and if I ever come across a speaker brand that makes me realize what I have been missing all these years, I'll buy them right on the spot. Unfortunately I haven't had that chance yet (I did auditioned some B&W and Klipsch a while ago but was not impressed, due probably to the demo room not being properly set up). Anyway thanks for your time to explain so thoroughly this psychoacoustic thing!!!!

 

[caupina]

I have owned Bose 301 Direct reflection speakers, some Bose surround speakers (can't recall the model number) and a sub-sat system (also can't recall the model number). I bought the sub-sat system thinking it would sound at least as good as my $400 Infinity IL10s, they are not comparable. The subwoofer was boomy (lots of mid/upper bass), and the detail on the sats couldn't come close to approaching that of the Infinity speakers. The build quality is also much lower on the Bose. Do I expect a sub sat system to sound as good as full size speakers?, no, but I would like for them to sound good. Sub sat systems costing 1/2 or less of Bose Accoustimas systems from Definitive Tech, Energy, Orb Audio, Mirage will kick Bose all over the place in output, fidelity, and build quality (most of them even look better than Bose IMO).

Bose is a cheater. They use distortion and messed up frequency curves to make a system sound "cool". Cerwin Vega is cool too, maybe you should try them out for full size speakers, and they cost less.

I don't have that much experience with the cubes. I did buy the Acoustimass 3 but never took the time to set them up properly (I'm not a big fan of them though, so I can't actually admit that I agree with you but I do know that when it comes to Bose most of the bashing comes from people experiences with the Acoustimass series.

I did try the QC2 headphones on my way from LAX-IAH, I'm in transit now waiting for my flight to Miami. They do diminish the background noise a lot, but wearing earplugs does a better job for a lot less..one thing that I like about them is they are very comfortable, I wore them for the entire 3 hr trip and I forgot I had them on ( I have a Sony "on the ear" ones which sound great but they tend to get uncomfortable after a while...too much pressure on the ears). SQ wise, well I can't comment on that just yet...I just listened to some music provided by the plane entertainment system, but it sucked big time. Will I keep these headphones??? I don't know, but I guess I'll end up giving them to my wife for those 11 hour trips to Chile.

Regarding the Cerwing Vega...I feel that I'd move sideways and not upwards if I chose them ....I like jazz most than anything...do you think the CV will be perfect for this kind of music?????

 

[no. 5]

Ohhh Man, that was deep!!!!

Only a little deep.

(again I'm not a big fan of the small cubes, my experience has been mostly with the floor standing speakers which probably do a lot better than the little satellites).

Pretty much; satellites, by nature of their size, will have inferior bass and lower midrange response compared to larger speakers

On the other hand I'm not that much into specs that most of you audiophiles "hardcores" like to discuss, but at the same time I do like music...big time....especially jazz, and if I ever come across a speaker brand that makes me realize what I have been missing all these years, I'll buy them right on the spot. Unfortunately I haven't had that chance yet (I did auditioned some B&W and Klipsch a while ago but was not impressed, due probably to the demo room not being properly set up).

Yes, speaker/room interaction is a huge part of overall sound quality.

If you are interested, a good pair of headphones may be a good investment; it's a fairly inexpensive way to experience good sound, and if you use them regularly, it will allow you to have some manner of a quality benchmark in your mind if you do demo more speakers - without needing to get involved in the specs of the equipment.
It would be an imperfect benchmark, however, as the human auditory memory is short.

some thought on headphones

Anyway thanks for your time to explain so thoroughly this psychoacoustic thing!!!!

My pleasure.

 

[duncan618]

Is "psycoacoustic" that bad?

Ive never considered Bose when getting ready to purchase speakers because of the Bose bashing that goes on here (and the price for the "smoke and mirrors"). Who cares if they cheat for sound if it sounds good to the perspective buyer? The only Bose system I've ever heard was one of those little CD radio things in a customers home and all I could do was keep scanning the room for a sub. None was found and I was fooled and amazed. I know that although it sounded good at low levels it couldn't shake the walls if it were turned up but still it's kinda cool.

 

[Seth=L]

Ive never considered Bose when getting ready to purchase speakers because of the Bose bashing that goes on here (and the price for the "smoke and mirrors"). Who cares if they cheat for sound if it sounds good to the perspective buyer? The only Bose system I've ever heard was one of those little CD radio things in a customers home and all I could do was keep scanning the room for a sub. None was found and I was fooled and amazed. I know that although it sounded good at low levels it couldn't shake the walls if it were turned up but still it's kinda cool.

They boom the bass at mid to high bass frequencies to make them louder.

 

[duncan618]

.......and?

 

[Seth=L]

.......and?

They boost those parts of frequency band to create the illusion of "quality bass" but once compared to a similarly priced mid-fi system it's pitfalls become quite clear.

(sorry, I have been tired for the past 3 hours and my posts may not be the most fluid or complete in thought. I will try to put a little more thought into my following posts.)

 

[no. 5]

Is "psycoacoustic" that bad?

Well, psychoacoustics is good, as it's the study of how we perceive sound, it can be used to improve a loudspeaker design, or to enhance how speakers are measured.

What's bad is telling people who have zero knowledge of how the brain perceives sound that the inaccuracies that they don't realize they are hearing makes the product the best available. Now, I am not referring to you personally, I'm just talking about how Bose markets their product; they make a product that they know the average listener will interpret as "great sound", and they reinforce that with tons of advertising that says they have "better sound through research" (though, "better sales through research" would be more accurate).