The Boston Dangler
Lifer
- Mar 10, 2005
- 14,647
- 2
- 0
Hayabusa Rider
Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
- Jan 26, 2000
- 50,879
- 4,268
- 126
I have an Onkyo-
http://www.onkyousa.com/model.cfm?m=TX-NR5007&class=Receiver&p=i
What could Bose possibly have to compete with that and decent speakers?
alkemyst
No Lifer
- Feb 13, 2001
- 83,769
- 19
- 81
alkemyst
No Lifer
- Feb 13, 2001
- 83,769
- 19
- 81
NutBucket
Lifer
- Aug 30, 2000
- 27,151
- 635
- 126
I love Bose hating but seriously, hating on 901's is not a good idea!
Here's the Mitsubishi equivalent for thousands less:
http://www.mitsubishi-tv.com/unisen.html
gevorg
Diamond Member
- Nov 3, 2004
- 5,070
- 1
- 0
IHateMyJob2004
Lifer
- Sep 29, 2004
- 18,656
- 68
- 91
Auto makers have purchasing power and Bose has to hit the automakers desires for price point. I don't know anyone that buys a car because of Bose inside.
As for what is in those cars? Probably cheap crap that has just a bit to much high end and way to much low end. That's your typical "loudness" setting by the way. Just like everything Bose has ever made. To people that don't know better, it "sounds good".
Even if Bose breaks even on their from factory audio stuff, they probably make it back to an extent from sales that would never have happened in the home audio arena due to the exposure.
30 yearsfrom now, Bose will be gone because all the younger, smarter people will grow up bashing them and telling people what kind of crap it is.
IHateMyJob2004
Lifer
- Sep 29, 2004
- 18,656
- 68
- 91
Oh, FWIW: My inlaws have one of those 5.1 cube/subwoofer things that cost about $2500.
My 20 year old towers (Infinity 3 ways with 12" woofers), 5 year old Ingfinity center channel and Infinity rear channel 2 wayss with 6.5" woofers blows it away. All powered by a new cheap Pioneer 5.1 channel amp (not using sub though) that cost me under $300. So, my towers were $400 about 20 years ago. Rears were maybe $150 and center was about $200. So, about $1050. And it blows the crap out of the Bose.
If I had to buy something similar today, I'd probably have to spend closer to $1600 because of the differences in cost for the towers these days (thanks inflation). The thing is, Inifinity does not make anything like my towers anymore.
My 20 year old towers (Infinity 3 ways with 12" woofers), 5 year old Ingfinity center channel and Infinity rear channel 2 wayss with 6.5" woofers blows it away. All powered by a new cheap Pioneer 5.1 channel amp (not using sub though) that cost me under $300. So, my towers were $400 about 20 years ago. Rears were maybe $150 and center was about $200. So, about $1050. And it blows the crap out of the Bose.
If I had to buy something similar today, I'd probably have to spend closer to $1600 because of the differences in cost for the towers these days (thanks inflation). The thing is, Inifinity does not make anything like my towers anymore.
alkemyst
No Lifer
- Feb 13, 2001
- 83,769
- 19
- 81
Doubtful...they have quite a few products that have a great niche following. The crappy acoustimass line up appeals to many that just want sound. Many are even going with soundbars (usually those that bash Bose none-the-less).
Their outdoor speakers are great for long life and good sound.
Their wave radio is a popular toy for many esp now it has a ipod dock.
The Acoustimass was really the Bose product line to cause them the issues.
I never had Bose save a set of their outdoor speakers, but those were great.
I run Klipsch myself for my home theatre needs, I have had Definitive Technology, PSB, and some other lesser brands.
Between no real documented data on the speakers from the Mfr and things like their paper cones, Bose is just marketing for the one sthat do not know any better.
Similar to Sony with their ultra-slim POS rear speakers, people will buy it because they THINK it sounds better and they are facinated by the name.
Bose had some goos speakers way back in the day, and also found out that the human ear can be fooled into thinking that it is hearing certain frequencies when they are really transposed (IOW, you hear something an octave higher and your brain tells you it is that low note). You THINK you hear "full sound" but when you actually play a sliding scale you notice the gaps.
They used that transposition illusion to make their Wave Radio sound "big". And, I have to admit, they did a good job of it. If you listen you can hear the distortion, but for most people looking for a little clock radio for a small space, it sounded MUCH better than a crappy Sanyo, Radio Shack or other radio AND it wasnot as big and obtrusive as a legit system.
Combine that with deliberate ignorance and you have a perfect consumer product. Similar to things like the Ipod, they have a decent idea, but make it seem like it is much better than it actually is and then charge the public for their ignorance.
Similar to Sony with their ultra-slim POS rear speakers, people will buy it because they THINK it sounds better and they are facinated by the name.
Bose had some goos speakers way back in the day, and also found out that the human ear can be fooled into thinking that it is hearing certain frequencies when they are really transposed (IOW, you hear something an octave higher and your brain tells you it is that low note). You THINK you hear "full sound" but when you actually play a sliding scale you notice the gaps.
They used that transposition illusion to make their Wave Radio sound "big". And, I have to admit, they did a good job of it. If you listen you can hear the distortion, but for most people looking for a little clock radio for a small space, it sounded MUCH better than a crappy Sanyo, Radio Shack or other radio AND it wasnot as big and obtrusive as a legit system.
Combine that with deliberate ignorance and you have a perfect consumer product. Similar to things like the Ipod, they have a decent idea, but make it seem like it is much better than it actually is and then charge the public for their ignorance.
Even the 901 is not exactly unanimously praised. I mean this is their response to the not overly positive review from Stereophile:
Even back when the 901 came out, there was talk of them buying good reviews. They've really done nothing that you'd call great since then. In fact, they've basically taken the one positive thing from their speakers (messing with directionality and diffusion of the sound) and used that as their focal point for the last 20 years, while using low quality speakers. Its amazing that if they'd spend a bit more and use good quality speakers with their ideas, they'd have some decent sounding stuff that might even be worth the price.
Their headphones are hit and miss as well, and the only thing people actually agree on is that the noise canceling ones are good in that respect, but other than that they aren't all that good. Some of their models are ok if they were priced at $50 or maybe $100, but they're not. Some are just a mess (I've listened to the ones that are really prone to breaking because they used a narrow cheap plastic piece as the headband, and the sound quality is just bad).
Car audio in general isn't very good, so saying the Bose system in your car is decent isn't saying much (my Mom's car has it, and it is ok for a car system, but part of that is because the tweeter is up high so you do get better clarity in the highs and a bit of sparkle than usual, but the rest of the spectrum is nothing to write home about). It is possible to do right, but most people don't want right (BASS!!!!!), and certainly wouldn't spend to have it done right (which would often require extensive modification to get speaker placement to be better).
The worst thing is, because of the high profitability and marketing (getting name recognition), many other companies have or are starting to follow Bose. Even B&W is sadly starting to do the same, although not nearly as bad as Bose in that regard, and they still make the stuff that earned their name respect in the first place.
Personally, I take issue with Bose's marketing (buying reviews, they tried to sue Consumer Reports over a bad review at one time) and the fact that they could make good quality products by just using better parts in their products, which wouldn't even cost much more.
Fact is, most people don't care about good audio and have no clue what it actually sounds like. Its not entirely Bose's fault, they're just pandering to their market, but they did help shape their market, so they're certainly not free from blame either.
Even back when the 901 came out, there was talk of them buying good reviews. They've really done nothing that you'd call great since then. In fact, they've basically taken the one positive thing from their speakers (messing with directionality and diffusion of the sound) and used that as their focal point for the last 20 years, while using low quality speakers. Its amazing that if they'd spend a bit more and use good quality speakers with their ideas, they'd have some decent sounding stuff that might even be worth the price.
Their headphones are hit and miss as well, and the only thing people actually agree on is that the noise canceling ones are good in that respect, but other than that they aren't all that good. Some of their models are ok if they were priced at $50 or maybe $100, but they're not. Some are just a mess (I've listened to the ones that are really prone to breaking because they used a narrow cheap plastic piece as the headband, and the sound quality is just bad).
Car audio in general isn't very good, so saying the Bose system in your car is decent isn't saying much (my Mom's car has it, and it is ok for a car system, but part of that is because the tweeter is up high so you do get better clarity in the highs and a bit of sparkle than usual, but the rest of the spectrum is nothing to write home about). It is possible to do right, but most people don't want right (BASS!!!!!), and certainly wouldn't spend to have it done right (which would often require extensive modification to get speaker placement to be better).
The worst thing is, because of the high profitability and marketing (getting name recognition), many other companies have or are starting to follow Bose. Even B&W is sadly starting to do the same, although not nearly as bad as Bose in that regard, and they still make the stuff that earned their name respect in the first place.
Personally, I take issue with Bose's marketing (buying reviews, they tried to sue Consumer Reports over a bad review at one time) and the fact that they could make good quality products by just using better parts in their products, which wouldn't even cost much more.
Fact is, most people don't care about good audio and have no clue what it actually sounds like. Its not entirely Bose's fault, they're just pandering to their market, but they did help shape their market, so they're certainly not free from blame either.
- Aug 9, 2000
- 18,378
- 2
- 0
Ughhh...just close this thread now.
This thread was meant to talk about Bose's new product. Instead, it looks like it is gonna turn into another typical "Oh Bose sucks" thread and "Oh here is some link that I found on the internet that backs me up. That link is now Christ even though I do not understand half the stuff they are talking about." If I wanted a Bose sucks thread, I would have posted in Audio and Video.
Apparently, Bose is now on the same level as religion as far as a topic on this board is concerned.
This thread was meant to talk about Bose's new product. Instead, it looks like it is gonna turn into another typical "Oh Bose sucks" thread and "Oh here is some link that I found on the internet that backs me up. That link is now Christ even though I do not understand half the stuff they are talking about." If I wanted a Bose sucks thread, I would have posted in Audio and Video.
Apparently, Bose is now on the same level as religion as far as a topic on this board is concerned.
You're right, what does Bose's past have anything to do with this? Considering the things people are complaining about is the same thing you were trying to point out applies here, what possibly could be the point of bringing that up?
What exactly made you think it would be any different? What's there to discuss here? Not very good display, paired with some more Bose marketing of speaker tech, and a high price? The only thing that changed is they slapped it on the back of a TV, and that part (the TV) isn't even worth discussing.
JulesMaximus
No Lifer
- Jul 3, 2003
- 74,580
- 982
- 126
I have Klipsch RF3 main speakers with matching center speaker, in-wall rear speakers and a 10" sub in the corner powered by a Harmon Kardon AVR500. I can crank the volume all the way to max with no distortion and crystal clear sound and it is VERY loud. No bose system could touch this setup.
I probably have about $2500 into it all told though. Still, paired with my blu-ray player and 50" 1080p widescreen it is still cheaper than the piece of shit the OP posted and I guarantee you it sounds better.
Rubycon
Madame President
- Aug 10, 2005
- 17,768
- 485
- 126
901s...
Well they've been around for over three decades. The full range drivers had bad surrounds (if you find a old pair at a yard sale chances are you'll see 9 cones with no surrounds at all!).
Even when the drivers were in perfect shape...
These needed serious EQ to sound presentable. Efficiency goes out the window here. 100wpc is nothing for them because of the EQ. A serious recording at moderate volume will induce clipping on peaks. Take out the equalizer and they work pretty well at reinforcement for vocals hehe!
The intermodulation distortion is atrocious at listening levels slightly beyond normal volumes too. Particularly with organ and synth music. Lots of bass pedal notes makes the reeds sound all wavy like your friend's voices sitting on the opposite side of the campfire. This is why they have things called mid range and tweeters.
BUT if you want something in a small package that sounds decent for when friends come over and you want to put some LPs on, they're just fine.
Don't get me started on the acoustimess systems! It's utterly ridiculous to throw little boxes all over the room with TINY drivers in them crossed over at (220Hz?) with a "bass module" behind the sofa! If you want BIG sound you must use BIG speakers. PERIOD! EVERY three piece system fails in this regard including computer speakers. Sure some sound decent but they do NOT produce a BIG sound! I'm a musician so sure I'm biased. Your ears ultimately are the final decision maker (and should be!).
Well they've been around for over three decades. The full range drivers had bad surrounds (if you find a old pair at a yard sale chances are you'll see 9 cones with no surrounds at all!).
Even when the drivers were in perfect shape...
These needed serious EQ to sound presentable. Efficiency goes out the window here. 100wpc is nothing for them because of the EQ. A serious recording at moderate volume will induce clipping on peaks. Take out the equalizer and they work pretty well at reinforcement for vocals hehe!
The intermodulation distortion is atrocious at listening levels slightly beyond normal volumes too. Particularly with organ and synth music. Lots of bass pedal notes makes the reeds sound all wavy like your friend's voices sitting on the opposite side of the campfire. This is why they have things called mid range and tweeters.
BUT if you want something in a small package that sounds decent for when friends come over and you want to put some LPs on, they're just fine.
Don't get me started on the acoustimess systems! It's utterly ridiculous to throw little boxes all over the room with TINY drivers in them crossed over at (220Hz?) with a "bass module" behind the sofa! If you want BIG sound you must use BIG speakers. PERIOD! EVERY three piece system fails in this regard including computer speakers. Sure some sound decent but they do NOT produce a BIG sound! I'm a musician so sure I'm biased. Your ears ultimately are the final decision maker (and should be!).
BurnItDwn
Lifer
- Oct 10, 1999
- 26,353
- 1,862
- 126
Indeed ....
I'm pretty sure my mismatched speakers sound better than anything bose ...
BIC America RTR1530s in front, JBL EC35 in the middle, BIC Accoustech PL200 subwoofer, pair of meh Sony 3 way speakers in the back
At the very least, they can deliver a mountain of sound...
I've never turned the reciever louder than -25db....
Note: I want klipshorns .... as they would literally have the capacity to make my ears bleed.
JulesMaximus
No Lifer
- Jul 3, 2003
- 74,580
- 982
- 126
BTW-I bought my car specifically because it DIDN'T have a Blose audio system. The LE model had Blose but the SE model didn't. If you wanted to upgrade the audio system in the Maxima and it came with Blose you had to replace the HU and all the speakers. A common complaint was the HU failing and then you couldn't go aftermarket unless you replaced all the speakers. Individual speakers failing was another common complaint on the Maxima forums.
It was literally shit.
It was literally shit.
slag
Lifer
- Dec 14, 2000
- 10,473
- 81
- 101
I'd actually love to be around the marketing table when they come up with the price for the unit.
They have probably $1400 in the TV and electronics, and they are wanting 4 times this much for the package. Of course, that includes white glove installation (LOL), and hopefully dinner and a reach around.
They have probably $1400 in the TV and electronics, and they are wanting 4 times this much for the package. Of course, that includes white glove installation (LOL), and hopefully dinner and a reach around.
slag
Lifer
- Dec 14, 2000
- 10,473
- 81
- 101
Not sure what year car you have/had, but the 2002/2003 Maxima SE did have BOSE, at least as an option, as did 1996 to at least 1999.
2000 I30 does also, so I assume to 2000-2001 Max does also.
The speakers blow because idgits like to let people in the county next to them listen to the same music they are. Out of 5 cars with BOSE, I had one failed speaker and it was like that when I got it. I don't think its a BOSE thing, but more of an inconsiderate driver thing with music too loud.
JulesMaximus
No Lifer
- Jul 3, 2003
- 74,580
- 982
- 126
I have a 2003 Maxima SE, bought it new in 2003. Only the GLE came with the blose system as standard equipment as far as I know.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 22K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
News NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products- Started by poke01
- Replies: 399
Facebook
Twitter