Why do you hate/love Bose products!?

[Victor ch]

Ok... as the title say many people either truly hate and criticize Bose corp. or completely fall in love with its sound quality. Looking for headphones to buy I came across thousands of reviews; there were ones that said it was amazing then others said it was ****. So if you're an audiophile, sound engineer or (like me) a "sound enthusiast" say why you love/hate Bose's speakers, headphones and other products.

Me: Yeah.. bout that... Well I changed, drastically, I know believe Bose is completely overrated, overpriced and marketing strategy is what has kept them flourishing. Even though Im pretty much in love with my QC2's I hate every other Bose product I own (Companion 3, In-Ears). You can get a much better sounding system for a lot less. In big speakers Bose are terribly overpriced and sound 'OK' but not worth half their price. Is the attitude that if you pay more you get the best what has kept Bose on the market. I'll say keep away from Bose at all costs, unless you're looking for noise-canceling over-ear headphones with good sound, in that case the QC2's are the cheapest (Senn's are 150 more and Audio-Technicas are 80 less but have no mics to monitor out side noises) Well, post your experiences with Bose equipment.


Note: I use Lossless encoding to listen my music, so I get the very best of the CD without having the CD itself.

Victor

[bartelby]

I've heard much, much better sounding equipment for a lot less.

Bose are right up there with B & O!

[ErikCLDR]

We have a $500+ Wave Radio and I must say I am not impressed with the sound quality at all. The base is there but not very strong. There are no sound adjustments. Listening to AM on it is horrible because it gives it too much base and makes it hard to understand what people are saying. FM reception isn't very good. CD lacks full base. I'm not an audiophile but I can tell you that my $300 iPod HiFi (which is probably overpriced) sounds a heck of a lot better then the Wave Radio. It has a lot more base, its $200 cheaper, and it's a lot louder.

We also have a 5.1 system sitting in our basement in a box. We haven't set it up yet. As I remember it was pretty good sounding, it just probably costs more then its worth.

I think its just all advertising. They say they're the best so people think their the best. Similar to volvo. They say they are safe, so people think they are. I mean they are safe cars in general, but there are plenty of other cars that can compare and probably cost less.

One thing about the Wave Radio though that I do like (other than the cool remote) is that somehow the sound sounds as if it is being played in the room you are in, even if you are in another room of the house and around a corner.

[MacNut]

The thing I don't like is how they hide there specs. I ask what the wattage is they say "we don't do it that way". Sound is good but you pay more then you should. I don't care either way really.

[JNB]

I hate the ads, I hate the premium pricing and limited distribution channels, but I love the equipment and have never been disappointed with any Bose product I've owned in the last thirty years. Kinda like Apple...

[Dagless]

I'm more impressed by the quality for their size. At our nearest Bose outlet store they have this demo room with 5 tiny speakers but with giant grills hiding them. I was really blown away by the sound such a tiny speaker could produce, and then blown away by the price :D

I don't mind them. Neither love nor hate. If I had the money I would go for them though just to have a great sounding system and near invisible speakers.

[cornopaez]

well, my headphones are amazing and they sound really good. They are light and very responsive... what can I say? good products and good quality.

[shecky]

there is a saying:

"no highs, no lows, just Bose."

i think their stuff is very well marketed crap.

[JML42691]

I loved them because of the amazing sound quality that could only be matched by few, I hated them because the headphones that I forked out $100 for broke two days after the warranty expired when they were used normally.

[Drumjim85]

The thing I don't like is how they hide there specs. I ask what the wattage is they say "we don't do it that way". Sound is good but you pay more then you should. I don't care either way really.

thank you! I thought I was going to be the only one to complain about that. I was trying to find the dynamic range of the converters and they dont publish the specs. The store staff couldnt tell me them either... What are they hiding? Why are they afraid to publish this info?

So, apart from that, I think its way over priced for the quality... And a bit hyped/scooped..

[MacNut]

Back in the day I think Bose was better, now a lot of people are making high quality stuff for a lot less. Bose is just selling because of the name now not the quality.

[mariahlullaby]

I got the Bose around-ear Triport headphones for Christmas, and I love them. The sound quality is great, IMO, but more than that, these are the most comfortable headphones I've had. Before this, I had some $20 Sony headphones that were great, too, but weren't that comfortable after a few hours.

[Victor ch]

thank you! I thought I was going to be the only one to complain about that. I was trying to find the dynamic range of the converters and they dont publish the specs. The store staff couldnt tell me them either... What are they hiding? Why are they afraid to publish this info?

So, apart from that, I think its way over priced for the quality... And a bit hyped/scooped..

Overpriced perhaps with their "higher end" equipment (big ass speakers) the headphones and multimedia speakers seem reasonably priced. The why don't they publish their specs?: Because they know that in paper their products are even worse than in real life.

Victor

there is a saying:

"no highs, no lows, just Bose."

i think their stuff is very well marketed crap.

LOL true, although I heard "All highs, All lows, just Bose" which means they're just plain ol' crap with good bass.

-Victor

I'm more impressed by the quality for their size. At our nearest Bose outlet store they have this demo room with 5 tiny speakers but with giant grills hiding them. I was really blown away by the sound such a tiny speaker could produce, and then blown away by the price :D

I don't mind them. Neither love nor hate. If I had the money I would go for them though just to have a great sounding system and near invisible speakers.

The size to sound thing is true! My companion 3 are loud, although the sound is below average.

Victor

[Killyp]

I've heard much, much better sounding equipment for a lot less.

Bose are right up there with B & O!

We won't go back into that again, but you really aught to spend some time looking at B&O's better bits ;)


Personally, I don't like Bose. I have no major issues with their products. For what they are, they're good. Sub/sat packages don't get much better (although you can still find a better sound from other packages), they aren't 'junk' as most audiophiles make out.

The issue is, Bose markets them as a true audiophile's system, something audio engineers approve of, which they simply don't. Any decent musician/engineer/producer would tell you that even their top of the range system wouldn't match up to a basic pair of monitors or hifi speakers.

Bose is all brand name and nothing else. Their prices do not match the performance/build quality/finish/usability of their products.

[eric55lv]

They have one of the best headphones and speakers and iPod speakers on the market that why I love Bose products

[Victor ch]

They have one of the best headphones and speakers and iPod speakers on the market that why I love Bose products

No.. they're a tad mediocre and even tough some are really nice and well priced (QC's) and some are just reasonably priced but they're mediocre (computer speakers)

-Victor

[iSaint]

I've never found the Bose sound to be very good. I remember the old Bose with the jet engines out of the back. They sucked compared to my JBL Studio Monitors.

96754

[juanster]

i hate them, they are cheapily made, they sound good, but they don't sound half as good as anything else you buy for the same price... it's all marketing thats put them as good speakers..IMO

[Cleverboy]

I hate Bose products because they simply don't taste good AT ALL.

This is unacceptable.

~ CB

[displaced]

They always seem to cost a bit too much for what they are. Plus, I agree that they're too 'heavy' sounding. They make quite good PA stuff (though nothing like as good as Tannoy stuff, naturally).

There's apparently (according to audiophiles, of which I don't really count myself) quite a new world/old world split in speaker design. US brands such as Bose tend to be heavier-sounding than speakers from UK manufacturers. Silly quasi-fact for you all there.

Personally, you can pry my Mordaunt-Short Avant 900i (http://www.mordauntshort.com/ranges.php?RAID=12&Title=Avant+900i) range from my cold, dead hands... reasonably priced, sound great, and should last me a lifetime.

[twoodcc]

i think i hate them b/c of their price. i mean, $500 for headphones!

[zioxide]

Buy Other Sound Equipment

yeah. Bose is way overpriced for the quality you get from them.

[Victor ch]

i think i hate them b/c of their price. i mean, $500 for headphones!

Yeah apparently thats what most people hate... Even I disagree with their prices but still buy them :rolleyes: In my case, I was looking for noise-cancelling headphones with a combination of good sound... I had 3 candidates: Sony, Bose and Sennheisser. With very good audio came only Bose and Senheisser then, Senheisser are worth 450$$!! and they are freakin' enormous; ended up with bose

Anyways, it seems MacRumors community seems to hate Bose nowadays... maybe they're older so they have seen what audio was way back then (which most people seem to agree that todays sound is just mediocre compared to the first fancy speakers). Im 16, and 2 years ago I really started to dig into sound and everything and ended up with Sony and Bose. I have a big 5 speaker system from Sony that soud really good, yet I dunno theres somehting in less loud Bose speakers that seem to be more "fullfilling" to me and its not price ejejej (actually the Sony set of speakers where pretty expensive)

-Victor

[rhsgolfer33]

They sound decent, but it's nothing my 6.1 Jamo speakers (with rear channels in the ceiling) and Yamaha receiver can't beat, for less.

[bov]

i would get the Bose around ear headphones but they are out of my price range. :(

[aquajet]

I've listened to an older set of the Acoustimass (cube speakers with bass module) extensively and found the old adage "no highs, no lows, must be Bose" to be backwards. The bass was boomy, the highs were peaky with no sparkle, and the mids were severely lacking. The price for this system was too much, way too much. Completely unsuitable for music listening IMO. I've heard sub-$100 bookshelf speaker systems from Pioneer, Sony and Insignia which were far more enjoyable to listen to.

I also find Bose's claim that the wave music system is capable of replacing my "component system" to be laughable. It's a neat radio, but like everything else with the Bose name, costs far too much.

I've also listened to a set of their noise-canceling headphones and found the sound to be unacceptable for the price they demand.

So basically, I find many of their products to be mediocre performers with laughably large price tags.

[Love]

I have a SoundDock and a 3•2•1 GSX. Love the uMusic feature on it. Sounds amazing, same with the SD.

[Drumjim85]

i think i hate them b/c of their price. i mean, $500 for headphones!

there are plenty of headphones / in-ears that are worth $500+..... Bose just doesnt make any of them.

[Zwhaler]

I used to love Bose for headphones, until I discovered V-Moda Vibes :)
I used to love Bose for Home Theater, until I discovered Onkyo :)

Bose is wayy overpriced for what you get. Sure it is nice, but unless you are a millionaire it is not worth the large amount of money to buy their products.

[Naimfan]

I've heard much, much better sounding equipment for a lot less.


Exactly correct.

[plinkoman]

there is absolutely nothing good about them. their products are nothing but average components that are marketed as a premium product with a premium price. they make the average consumer think it's really high end amazing sound quality, and the average consumer thinks they sound great because they don't know any better.

[juanster]

yeah like i said before i don't think i actually hate bose as the quality of it really, (kind of contradict myself from the last post i know) i just really really don t think they are worth as much as they sell it for...

[Sesshi]

As I said elsewhere, it's unsurprising to see so many Apple owners are happy Bose owners. The two are very similar: Ultimately mediocre products made easy to use for those who don't understand audio-tech, dressed up in shiny packaging and marketed to the hilt.

I own a couple of Bose products, and I find they do the job for me much in the way that Apple products do for entertainment. When I have an undemanding use for something which I don't want to fuss with or get all fancy with, I pick Bose.

Take the Triports. It's very comfortable, looks OK on the head, is lightweight and it's a 'name' where people go "Hey, a Bose.. nice!". On the other hand it doesn't sound that great, and it's a little fragile. Nevertheless I have uses for them in certain situations and that's why they stick around.

[Iscariot]

Bose killed my dad and sold my sister into slavery :(

[Mord]

I dislike them as they're too expensive and basically designed for audio-fools who automatically think expensive = good.

Personally I own speakers from the 60's that were hand built in thames ditton england.

They cost me £50

[Victor ch]

there is absolutely nothing good about them. their products are nothing but average components that are marketed as a premium product with a premium price. they make the average consumer think it's really high end amazing sound quality, and the average consumer thinks they sound great because they don't know any better.

To me they really sound good, maybe not worth every penny but they sound good. I've had the chance to test many other brands and won't seem to conclude where one or the other falls short. For example it is clear when I compare the 201 Reflecting Speakers to a big ass fancy JBL premium home theatre system (yeah Bose just don't cut it there). But when I put on my Quiet Comfort 2 and compare them to Sennheiser's PMX (some number can't remember) they both sound good, with Bose being noise-canceling and "clearer" to me (probably because they cancel out the low frequency noise) and I can't remember the price of the Sennheiser ones, but it also was quite high (maybe 50$ less). Hmm so Bose is quite overrated in their speaker systems such as the Wave music system or their home theaters. Maybe their headphones aren't, judging that (as said before) in headphones is not noticeable whereas in bigger more loud speaker system

Hmm interesting posts, thanks! apparently for big speakers Bose it definitely out of the picture, as for the Companion 3 Series II Im buying tomorrow for 290$ there is no other 3 piece system available in Costa Rica (apart from JBL creature and spyro, harman and kandor, klipch; which i've tried and are not loud, clear, bassy enough) Guess when Im older and start purchasing big home theaters and/or speakers for my house I will exclude Bose.... Shame really, I always thought it was a very good brand in all of their products, apparently they're only good in the sub 500$'s.

-Victor

[Killyp]

If you think Bose sounds good, listen to Bowers & Wilkins.

Bowers & Wilkins = fantastic sounding hifi speakers
Bose = fantastic sounding kitchen speakers

[Victor ch]

If you think Bose sounds good, listen to Bowers & Wilkins.

Bowers & Wilkins = fantastic sounding hifi speakers
Bose = fantastic sounding kitchen speakers

B&W, the makers of the Zeppelin like speakers for iPod? Aren't those like super mega expensive?

-Victor

[Evangelion]

While Bose might make decent products, the issue is that there are lots of products out there that are simply better, yet cost less. Bose is all about marketing, and less about the quality of the product.

[Killyp]

B&W, the makers of the Zeppelin like speakers for iPod? Aren't those like super mega expensive?

-Victor

My first pair of B&W speakers (DM303s) cost me £160, new, in 2001.
I then bought a second hand pair of DM7s for £300, which better £1,500 speakers on the market.

A pair of B&W 686s cost $480 linky (http://www.hometheaterstore.com/B_W_686_2_Way_Bookshelf_Speaker_p/686.htm) or £280ish in the UK.

Cheap as far as good hifi speakers go, but when you buy a pair, you're getting the same sound you'd expect for £600 ($1200ish) from other brands.

The 686 is B&W's entry level speaker, and a pair would wipe the floor with any Bose speakers out there...

[Victor ch]

My first pair of B&W speakers (DM303s) cost me £160, new, in 2001.
I then bought a second hand pair of DM7s for £300, which better £1,500 speakers on the market.

A pair of B&W 686s cost $480 linky (http://www.hometheaterstore.com/B_W_686_2_Way_Bookshelf_Speaker_p/686.htm) or £280ish in the UK.

Cheap as far as good hifi speakers go, but when you buy a pair, you're getting the same sound you'd expect for £600 ($1200ish) from other brands.

The 686 is B&W's entry level speaker, and a pair would wipe the floor with any Bose speakers out there...

Nice, thanks man! When Im looking for non-computer speakers B&W will definitely be an option. As for computer speakers and headphones, they are already purchased and both are excellent products.... the only thing missing is a hi-fi component as my Sony "mini hi-fi" is slowly dying, is to bulky and is just used for playing games with the PS3.

I just checked there and you can buy 2 of the 686-2 bookshelf speakers and 1 subwoofer (150 watt) all from B&W for 810$ thats less than Bose's Acoustic Wave radio!!!

Definitely for speakers and home theaters Bose is not an option, although for headphones they will remain my #1 choice

-Victor

[Killyp]

In that case, when it comes to replacing it, your best bet is to look at Rotel and B&W.

Rotel make some of the best 'budget' equipment out there (although it really performs to an excellent standard, and is built beautifully), and generally matches the sound of B&W speakers very well (very soulful/effortless sound).

It won't be 'cheap', but it's definitely cheaper than a Bose setup, and worth it in the long run.

[Evangelion]

B&W, the makers of the Zeppelin like speakers for iPod? Aren't those like super mega expensive?

-Victor

If you want good, small speakers for computer/iPod-use, take a look at Genelec 6020A (http://www.listenup.com/GENELEC+6020A+Silver-p-6020ASilver-p-49920.html). In white they look like something Apple might have released themself :). Although the current euro-dollar exchange-rate has made those speakers quite expansive in USA.... In Finland they cost about 600e/pair, which is pretty reasonable.

[OllyW]

My first pair of B&W speakers (DM303s) cost me £160, new, in 2001.


Wow, you were a hi-fi nut at the age of 10 :eek:

I was playing my Slade, Sweet & T-Rex 45's on my parent's radiogram when I was 10 :D

[Killyp]

If you want good, small speakers for computer/iPod-use, take a look at Genelec 6020A (http://www.listenup.com/GENELEC+6020A+Silver-p-6020ASilver-p-49920.html). In white they look like something Apple might have released themself :). Although the current euro-dollar exchange-rate has made those speakers quite expansive in USA.... In Finland they cost about 600e/pair, which is pretty reasonable.

The B&Ws will outperform the Genelecs with a good amp. They wouldn't be quite as truthful to the original recording, but they'd sound much more 'real', dynamic, transparent and definitely have much better imaging.

Wow, you were a hi-fi nut at the age of 10 :eek:

I was playing my Slade, Sweet & T-Rex 45's on my parent's radiogram when I was 10 :D

:D I was building speakers by the time I was 5 :cool:

I got my first proper hifi system when I was 8, my dad's old Rotel RA612 amp, a few other seperates, a Garrard GT35 record deck & Goodmans Minister speakers. All very retro, but fantastic kit when it was new and still stands the test of time pretty favourably.

Went up to Tottenham Court Road in London with my dad on Sep. 7th (3 days before my birthday), Tottenham Court Rd. used to be hifi haven, and back in 2001, there were still quite a few hifi stores there (although that's not the case any more). We spent a day listening to loads of different speakers, and B&W came out by far as the best.

Since then, I've bought loads more kit...

[Evangelion]

The B&Ws will outperform the Genelecs with a good amp.

Let's just say that I disagree with you, and you don't need an amp with the Genelecs. But arguing about these things would be next to pointless. They are both excellent speakers :).

[Dagless]

I'm still happy with my Rega Alya's, just thought I'd say :)

I wouldn't mind a set of them Bose PC speakers. My Rega's are the biggest part of my whole computer setup. I'd love something smaller and shift the Rega's aside till I get my own place.

[Victor ch]

I'm still happy with my Rega Alya's, just thought I'd say :)

I wouldn't mind a set of them Bose PC speakers. My Rega's are the biggest part of my whole computer setup. I'd love something smaller and shift the Rega's aside till I get my own place.

My cousin bought the Companion 3 (first series) and those are exactly what Im looking for my MacBook... I now have a 2 piece set of JBL platinum series speakers and they just won't do it, I mean they have no bass at all and are not near loud as I want them to be, whereas the Companion 3 has a pair of satellite speakers that are very loud and a small subwoofer to handle the lower notes. If what I wanted for my computer was something very loud and deep I'll use my current Sony "mini hi-fi" but its huge and besides I have 4 hard drives near the speakers (iPod, Mac, 2 external ones) and Bose are the only 3 piece small speakers that are magnetically shielded...

-Victor

[Victor ch]

If you want good, small speakers for computer/iPod-use, take a look at Genelec 6020A (http://www.listenup.com/GENELEC+6020A+Silver-p-6020ASilver-p-49920.html). In white they look like something Apple might have released themself :). Although the current euro-dollar exchange-rate has made those speakers quite expansive in USA.... In Finland they cost about 600e/pair, which is pretty reasonable.

Those certainly look nice, but way way out of my budget :o Im limited to gifted money and until I have a permanent good paying job many speaker sytems are way off limits hehe.

-Victor

[pseudobrit]

As I said elsewhere, it's unsurprising to see so many Apple owners are happy Bose owners. The two are very similar: Ultimately mediocre products made easy to use for those who don't understand audio-tech, dressed up in shiny packaging and marketed to the hilt.

Just because Macs can be easier to use doesn't mean they lack depth of functionality. Macs are mediocre (still competitive) in hardware, yes, but I buy them for the OS, not to be on the extreme bleeding edge of overclocked desktop rigdom.

And let's remember too that Apple has never said "we don't do it that way" if you asked them the specs on their machines.

There is nothing systematically disingenuous about their business model or marketing (I wouldn't say the same of Bose).

As far as audio equipment goes, I miss Technics.

[Killyp]

Let's just say that I disagree with you, and you don't need an amp with the Genelecs. But arguing about these things would be next to pointless. They are both excellent speakers :).

Oh definitely, the Genelecs are very very nice speakers indeed. There's a reason the 103x have always been used in some of the world's top studios, they're fantastic speakers. Yes you don't need amplifiers with them, they're active which means you get less distortion and signal loss from the crossover etc...

However, the B&Ws will still outperform them. Higher quality components, better drivers, impossibly simple crossovers (they're made up from a single electronic component) and larger cabinets/mid-bass drivers means the B&Ws have just got better mids and bass. The Nautilus tweeter in the B&Ws also means they're more transparent and have better imaging.

I'm still happy with my Rega Alya's, just thought I'd say :)

I wouldn't mind a set of them Bose PC speakers. My Rega's are the biggest part of my whole computer setup. I'd love something smaller and shift the Rega's aside till I get my own place.

I wouldn't get rid of the Regas, they're really very good speakers, although more suited to classical music/jazz.

[drewyboy]

Personally I like bose. My mother got a Wave and it sounds great. It fills the whole upstairs with sound which at first I was very skeptical, but hey, it works. Also I had a pair of the Sony Dj 700 i think their called and they were good, but I got a $150 pair of Bose headphones at Best Buy and when I'm listening to techno, Dj Tiesto, I feel the lower base that vibrates my ears. It's the base that's lower than hearing and I mean wow. I've only heard that type of base in a club, no joke. It's hard to communicate but I know it's low, not stupid rap base low. Those who know techno know what I'm talking about.

[Killyp]

Personally I like bose. My mother got a Wave and it sounds great. It fills the whole upstairs with sound which at first I was very skeptical, but hey, it works. Also I had a pair of the Sony Dj 700 i think their called and they were good, but I got a $150 pair of Bose headphones at Best Buy and when I'm listening to techno, Dj Tiesto, I feel the lower base that vibrates my ears. It's the base that's lower than hearing and I mean wow. I've only heard that type of base in a club, no joke. It's hard to communicate but I know it's low, not stupid rap base low. Those who know techno know what I'm talking about.

Yeh I know what you're talking about. That's what the Bose headphones do deliver oodles of, relatively well controlled but DEEP bass. I very rarely feel headphones ever deliver bass like a good pair of floorstanding speakers, but the Triports do a pretty good job of it.

I found with the Bose headphones that the highs weren't as good as others. I had a choice between Bose Triports or Sennheiser HD200s, and chose the HD200s despite the fact they're less comfortable. The high-end just didn't seem to be there on the Triports. Unbelievably comfortable though.

[Gunga Din]

Shure Headphones FTW. They rock with my ipod nano. Bose? They have a few nice products. Some of their sound systems are good, others i'm not a fan of.

[Victor ch]

Yeh I know what you're talking about. That's what the Bose headphones do deliver oodles of, relatively well controlled but DEEP bass. I very rarely feel headphones ever deliver bass like a good pair of floorstanding speakers, but the Triports do a pretty good job of it.

I found with the Bose headphones that the highs weren't as good as others. I had a choice between Bose Triports or Sennheiser HD200s, and chose the HD200s despite the fact they're less comfortable. The high-end just didn't seem to be there on the Triports. Unbelievably comfortable though.

Curiously the QC2 are not that "bassy" and has very clear highs, that is comparing it to the in ear triports and the on ear triports. I found about this while listening to some electronic music where some high pitched synths were not audible in any of them except the QC2 (and of course double checked with the "mini hi-fi" system and in there they where audible too. Also, I run the QC 2 without EQ because of their built ActiveEQ technology that really adjusts the sound. When on EQ Electronic or Rock the bass was just to clumsy and the highs didn't appear, after a short disappointment I turned the EQ on flat, having the same amount of bass but much clearer whilst the highs came in crisp and clear; then turned it off and got much clearer sound. I cannot say the same on the on ear ones, those bastards are the most bassy of Bose headphones.

-Victor

[Victor ch]

Shure Headphones FTW. They rock with my ipod nano. Bose? They have a few nice products. Some of their sound systems are good, others i'm not a fan of.

Hmm when I was about to purchase a pair of in ear headphones I took Shure into consideration and was seeing their sub-150$ lineup and they seemed ok, but when my cousins very expensive Shure noise-canceling headphones died in less than 1 year I backed off immediately. I've seen alot of advertising of those headphones and it always remembers me the ones the died in less the 1 year.

-Victor

[ich1ban]

I always do yardwork with my QC 2. It's great :D

[Victor ch]

I always do yardwork with my QC 2. It's great :D

LOL :) yes they're very good indeed. People want them to cancel out the noise even without music... they do block out low frequencies like an airplanes engine rumble or a vacuum cleaner (got one right behind me at this moment :)) and I can barely hear it when the music goes down, but by itself it does little and honestly I didn't pay 300$ to use them without music. If you combine music and their noise-canceling abilities you will get most of the sounds away: voices, people yelling, engines, even annoying terrier barks ejjeje they just seem to disappear.

Another thing I like about the QC is that they have this communications kit that fits perfectly in my iPhone and has a built in mic so I take calls in the comfort of the headphones; this is something none of the others headphones have available...

-Victor

[Sesshi]

You have to remember that half (or more) of the self-styled audiophiles who bash Bose haven't actually listened to them. That doesn't mean the Boses are terrific products, but it does mean many people who bash them do so without any experience.

I like the QC's but a major problem I have while flying is feeling stuffy in a pair of headphones. For me, in-ear monitors are the only way to go for flying, and since I have pressure and fit-based problems with generic-fit iems such as the Shures I had to go custom-moulded. And for commutes, active cancellation is ineffective against a large percentage of the sort of noise that you encounter on public transport so high passive isolation is far more effective. Which is why I once again use iems or headphones with a high degree of passive noise isolation.

[Victor ch]

You have to remember that half (or more) of the self-styled audiophiles who bash Bose haven't actually listened to them. That doesn't mean the Boses are terrific products, but it does mean many people who bash them do so without any experience.

I like the QC's but a major problem I have while flying is feeling stuffy in a pair of headphones. For me, in-ear monitors are the only way to go for flying, and since I have pressure and fit-based problems with generic-fit iems such as the Shures I had to go custom-moulded. And for commutes, active cancellation is ineffective against a large percentage of the sort of noise that you encounter on public transport so high passive isolation is far more effective. Which is why I once again use iems or headphones with a high degree of passive noise isolation.

Hmm true, but for me in ear is really just for running or something active or when I have no space to carry the big ones. I haven't been able to test my Bose QC2 in my school bus (main reason I got them) since I start 10th grade in February. But as of today my dad has gone berserk a couple of times when he asks me for a favor and Im drooling out in my music staring at the ceiling therefore unable to listen. And to me there's nothing like the comfort you get wearing circum-aural headphones, they won't heat up as much as supra-aural (on the ear) and are better for long listening time than any other buds that will hurt my ears. An example: I just came back from a trip to Guanacaste (province of Costa Rica) from the beach and it was near 5 hours and in that time only once they bothered me, and was easily fixed by taking them of for 2 minutes then right back on (it was like after 4 hours and a half that happened).

The fit is more of a personal thing but, what others dislike about the active noise-canceling is their requirement of additional power (mostly AAA batteries) but to me its easy, just spent like ¢2500 (5 bucks) on 8 Energizer Alkaline batteries that if you add up its 320 hours of noise-canceling time and carrying around 2 extra ones (80 hours) is not a space taker so thats not the big a deal.

-Victor

[Naimfan]

You have to remember that half (or more) of the self-styled audiophiles who bash Bose haven't actually listened to them. That doesn't mean the Boses are terrific products, but it does mean many people who bash them do so without any experience.

I'd be fascinated to hear your source for that bit of intelligence. . .

[Drumjim85]

Hmm true, but for me in ear is really just for running or something active or when I have no space to carry the big ones. I haven't been able to test my Bose QC2 in my school bus (main reason I got them) since I start 10th grade in February. But as of today my dad has gone berserk a couple of times when he asks me for a favor and Im drooling out in my music staring at the ceiling therefore unable to listen. And to me there's nothing like the comfort you get wearing circum-aural headphones, they won't heat up as much as supra-aural (on the ear) and are better for long listening time than any other buds that will hurt my ears. An example: I just came back from a trip to Guanacaste (province of Costa Rica) from the beach and it was near 5 hours and in that time only once they bothered me, and was easily fixed by taking them of for 2 minutes then right back on (it was like after 4 hours and a half that happened).

The fit is more of a personal thing but, what others dislike about the active noise-canceling is their requirement of additional power (mostly AAA batteries) but to me its easy, just spent like ¢2500 (5 bucks) on 8 Energizer Alkaline batteries that if you add up its 320 hours of noise-canceling time and carrying around 2 extra ones (80 hours) is not a space taker so thats not the big a deal.

-Victor

If in-ears hurt you, try getting some custom molded ones .... It's going to be a little more expensive, but you'll get better isolation and comfort

The thing i don't like about noise cancellation is that it adds noise to your medium (which is how it cancels out the outside noise) and that can create issues (like phase) with the overall medium...

[Killyp]

You have to remember that half (or more) of the self-styled audiophiles who bash Bose haven't actually listened to them. That doesn't mean the Boses are terrific products, but it does mean many people who bash them do so without any experience.

Agreed, the same goes for so much stuff in the hifi world.

Audiophiles tend to 'go with the flow' when it comes to good/bad brands or habits, just to make themselves look as if they're 'in-the-know'.

[Victor ch]

If in-ears hurt you, try getting some custom molded ones .... It's going to be a little more expensive, but you'll get better isolation and comfort

The thing i don't like about noise cancellation is that it adds noise to your medium (which is how it cancels out the outside noise) and that can create issues (like phase) with the overall medium...

They don't hurt me if I use them for less than a few hours, after a while they start getting uncomfortable later on hurting, and I've already spent 100$ on the Bose in ear and have no complaints to them, I knew what I was getting and had no unpleasant surprises.

With the purchase of the Companion 3 Series II computer speakers my "lineup" will be complete with Bose having the role on headphones and computer speakers and Sony with the hi-fi (well they say they are mini hi-fi) and in a couple of years I will then change the hi-fi component to B&W. Bose will remain my #1 choice when in headphones and for big speakers its out of the picture.

-Victor

[Sesshi]

I'd be fascinated to hear your source for that bit of intelligence. . .

The source is called "actually buying one to try out, and comparing the conclusions with wildly inaccurate 'opinions' out there from self styled experts"

It's not intelligence. It's actual comparative experience that's worth a **** of product/service. Something that I would like to see more in opinion-making forums and blogs.

[Naimfan]

The source is called "actually buying one to try out, and comparing the conclusions with wildly inaccurate 'opinions' out there from self styled experts"

It's not intelligence. It's actual comparative experience that's worth a **** of product/service. Something that I would like to see more in opinion-making forums and blogs.

So you're generalizing from your own experience?

Where are all these people who are bashing Bose without having listened to them? You asserted that "half (or more)" of the people who bash them have never heard them. I'd be curious to know if that's based on anything more than your experience. Because it is an enormous generalization.

[adrake86]

I think you are paying for the name. The product is good but not great for the price. :)

[davidjearly]

Personally, I think the whole 'Bose = crap' thing is exactly that, crap. Likewise, the idea that every Bose product is amazing is just ill-informed.

There are some Bose products that I like very much (E.g. Companion II series 2 speakers, QuietComfort 2 Headphones). At the same time, some of their higher-end professional audio equipment is much overpriced.

So, it depends on the product, but I don't have a particular like/dislike for them.

[da2005pizimp]

I love the sound and quality of bose but hate that i can't afford them

[Sesshi]

So you're generalizing from your own experience?

Where are all these people who are bashing Bose without having listened to them? You asserted that "half (or more)" of the people who bash them have never heard them. I'd be curious to know if that's based on anything more than your experience. Because it is an enormous generalization.

Indeed I am. But it is not an enormous generalisation unfortunately.

The comments I read usually specify the general prejudices of the mass instead of touching on the item under discussion's specific weaknesses which are often removed from such general prejudices held by the peer group at large. It indicates zero product knowledge for the majority of those pitching in.

[pseudobrit]

Indeed I am. But it is not an enormous generalisation unfortunately.

The comments I read usually specify the general prejudices of the mass instead of touching on the item under discussion's specific weaknesses which are often removed from such general prejudices held by the peer group at large. It indicates zero product knowledge for the majority of those pitching in.

Oh like you wouldn't **** all over Apple if the next Mac Pro had "more than adequate" listed under each column instead of processor speed, type and hard drive capacity. A company afraid to list their specs either has something to hide or wants to reserve the right. Either way, it tells exactly how they regard their customers.

[Victor ch]

Personally, I think the whole 'Bose = crap' thing is exactly that, crap. Likewise, the idea that every Bose product is amazing is just ill-informed.

There are some Bose products that I like very much (E.g. Companion II series 2 speakers, QuietComfort 2 Headphones). At the same time, some of their higher-end professional audio equipment is much overpriced.

So, it depends on the product, but I don't have a particular like/dislike for them.

Yeah I agree with you. For example their headphones are reasonably priced and are of very good quality, the same with their computer speakers and maybe even the Wave music system. But the big speakers or bookshelf speakers are way overpriced and honestly they don't sound so amazing.In some occasions you overpay due to the name, in others you do pay for what you get.

-Victor

[Sesshi]

Oh like you wouldn't **** all over Apple if the next Mac Pro had "more than adequate" listed under each column instead of processor speed, type and hard drive capacity. A company afraid to list their specs either has something to hide or wants to reserve the right. Either way, it tells exactly how they regard their customers.

There's a number of subsystems onboard the Apples which the company does not list in commonly available sales documentation, which other manufacturers do. Sound chips for example... all the more important given that the Apples are heavily sold for media use. Like Apple, Bose only makes figures available which have a broad-based utility use (impedance, sensitivity for headphones for example) and not specifics like frequency response, which the vast majority of their customers probably wouldn't even look at or query. Your point is? That Apple are as "afraid" as Bose?

I would not **** all over Apple if the build quality, reliability under varying environmental conditions and the ultimate flexibility of the systems were not "below adequate" for someone like me... but like Bose, I understand that there is a large market for people who want something "adequate" for them, which looks nice, is wife/girlfriend-friendly in terms of decor matching and has the feel of a premium product, regardless of what it's actual performance might be.

As I've said before, many things that Bose makes is perfectly respectable if not outstanding in terms of performance. But the marketing and design is clearly aimed at people who simply crave something that is a balance of looking good, being usable and sounding good in isolation, especially if you're moving up from some econo-box and haven't actually ventured towards the 'real' Hi-Fi. Once again, the parallels to Apple.

I'm a dCS (if you consider yourself an audiophile you might be familiar with this company) man as far as sources are concerned, but an iPod + Sounddock does a better job in some instances, although I wouldn't say it's actually better of course. And as a dock speaker I wouldn't say it's bad, although there are better. I use the Triport for example as a headphone with great comfort for casual undemanding listening on the move and I appreciate it as such - but I would be the very last person in the world to make any overtly positive claims to the Triport's audio capabilities. Still, I have limited occasions where this works better for me and I keep it around - just as I use my brace of Apple hardware for personal use in a number of niche, relatively undemanding roles these days.

[Victor ch]

Oh like you wouldn't **** all over Apple if the next Mac Pro had "more than adequate" listed under each column instead of processor speed, type and hard drive capacity. A company afraid to list their specs either has something to hide or wants to reserve the right. Either way, it tells exactly how they regard their customers.

According to Wikipedia: "Bose does not publish specific technical specifications (impedance, sensitivity, range, sound pressure levels) on either of their packages and/or their website and as of November 21, 2006" I also read that they do this because they believe that giving such specs might interfere with the listening experience, and they are very attached to the whole psychoacoustics thing. MTI graduate Amar Bose started the company, because the sound equipment back in those years did not take into consideration psychoacoustics, something that bothered him.

-Victor

[Unspeaked]

I'm not a big fan of THX Certification, but realize its value as a logo on a box of home theater speakers (surely it helps with sales if nothing else) and the very fact that not a single product in the Bose lineup has THX Certification makes me think twice about their quality.

[pseudobrit]

According to Wikipedia: "Bose does not publish specific technical specifications (impedance, sensitivity, range, sound pressure levels) on either of their packages and/or their website and as of November 21, 2006" I also read that they do this because they believe that giving such specs might interfere with the listening experience, and they are very attached to the whole psychoacoustics thing. MTI graduate Amar Bose started the company, because the sound equipment back in those years did not take into consideration psychoacoustics, something that bothered him.

There's no harm in publishing specs unless your business model requires you to keep your customers uninformed.

Not even Rolls Royce do this anymore because it's more important to not look like you're running Amway than it is to tout some halo of understatement.

[Killyp]

I'm not a big fan of THX Certification, but realize its value as a logo on a box of home theater speakers (surely it helps with sales if nothing else) and the very fact that not a single product in the Bose lineup has THX Certification makes me think twice about their quality.

The THX certification thing is a little weird. It's good for home movies, but it seriously damages a system's ability to reproduce music well.

In fact, the best home theatre setup I've ever heard didn't have a single THX certified component.

According to Wikipedia: "Bose does not publish specific technical specifications (impedance, sensitivity, range, sound pressure levels) on either of their packages and/or their website and as of November 21, 2006" I also read that they do this because they believe that giving such specs might interfere with the listening experience, and they are very attached to the whole psychoacoustics thing. MTI graduate Amar Bose started the company, because the sound equipment back in those years did not take into consideration psychoacoustics, something that bothered him.

-Victor

The reason Bose doesn't print it's technical specs is because they would give those who know what they're talking about cold hard facts on which to base their 'Bose really isn't that good' argument.

Now I'm not saying specs mean everything, but they do mean something. The top of the range Bose system would look appalling on paper, a frequency response from 250 Hz - 12 KHz or therabouts, whilst my £160 B&W speakers go from 82 Hz - 20 KHz. The reason is partly because of the 'gap' between the woofer and satellites. The sats can only go down to around 250 Hz before they stop producing sound alltogether, and the gap between this and the sub is so large that it actually registers as a 'drop out' of sound alltogether. All the hifi standards say the measurement is taken from the highest frequency above a certain sound level down to the lowest frequency above a certain sound level. The gap between the sub and the sats actually registers as dropping below this volume level.

Now this kinda makes things look much worse than they are, although it still tells that it's not a technically good system.

Psychoacoustics do play a larger part in speakers than technical accuracy, but with technicalities so completely wrong on Bose systems, they just can't sound very good.

As for printing specs, they could at least print some, such as the maximum SPL (which may sometimes be useful). B&O have never really revealed as much as they could in their specs (although they aren't that bad), but the reason for this is that some of their products look rubbish on paper (and are usually rubbish when actually heard too), but others are astonishingly good on paper, and even better in real life.

[Naimfan]

Indeed I am.

Fair enough.

But it is not an enormous generalisation unfortunately.

Rather disingenuous of you to say. That is what I'm asking you to support. Most "audiophiles" I know (and I know far too many from having worked in the field) won't offer an opinion on something unless they've heard it (even in sub-optimal conditions).

[Victor ch]

The THX certification thing is a little weird. It's good for home movies, but it seriously damages a system's ability to reproduce music well.

In fact, the best home theatre setup I've ever heard didn't have a single THX certified component.



The reason Bose doesn't print it's technical specs is because they would give those who know what they're talking about cold hard facts on which to base their 'Bose really isn't that good' argument.

Now I'm not saying specs mean everything, but they do mean something. The top of the range Bose system would look appalling on paper, a frequency response from 250 Hz - 12 KHz or therabouts, whilst my £160 B&W speakers go from 82 Hz - 20 KHz. The reason is partly because of the 'gap' between the woofer and satellites. The sats can only go down to around 250 Hz before they stop producing sound alltogether, and the gap between this and the sub is so large that it actually registers as a 'drop out' of sound alltogether. All the hifi standards say the measurement is taken from the highest frequency above a certain sound level down to the lowest frequency above a certain sound level. The gap between the sub and the sats actually registers as dropping below this volume level.

Now this kinda makes things look much worse than they are, although it still tells that it's not a technically good system.

Psychoacoustics do play a larger part in speakers than technical accuracy, but with technicalities so completely wrong on Bose systems, they just can't sound very good.

As for printing specs, they could at least print some, such as the maximum SPL (which may sometimes be useful). B&O have never really revealed as much as they could in their specs (although they aren't that bad), but the reason for this is that some of their products look rubbish on paper (and are usually rubbish when actually heard too), but others are astonishingly good on paper, and even better in real life.

Interesting!:) Man you REALLY know about sound. thanks for all the input :cool: Well yes apparently Bose keep those thing to themselves to avoid the "Bose is rubbish" argument.

Few minutes ago I got my Companion 3 Series II multimedia speakers system, and I am completely happy with them. The 2 tiny satellite speakers have very accurate highs (although the mids can be better) and the subwoofer sounds very nice too. I wanted a not to "bassy" system that has small speakers, needless to say these are the ones. Deep "rich" sound and very clear, now the only thing left to do is purchase a hi-fi system (Bose is definitely out in this matter) and thanks to your suggestions I will probably get B&W speakers, in the distant future that is.

-Victor

[aquajet]

Now I'm not saying specs mean everything, but they do mean something. The top of the range Bose system would look appalling on paper, a frequency response from 250 Hz - 12 KHz or therabouts, whilst my £160 B&W speakers go from 82 Hz - 20 KHz. The reason is partly because of the 'gap' between the woofer and satellites. The sats can only go down to around 250 Hz before they stop producing sound alltogether, and the gap between this and the sub is so large that it actually registers as a 'drop out' of sound alltogether.

Exactly. The Acoustimass system I've heard has 6.5" bass drivers in a bandpass enclosure and 2.5" or so paper drivers in the satelites. Anybody with an even casual knowledge of speaker designs knows that such a system would be physically unable to reproduce a remotely flat frequency response. Like I mentioned earlier, specifically the lower midrange of this system was pretty much absent, along with the highest frequencies. The amount of money spent on this speaker system was truly staggering. First time I heard it, I compared it directly to a set of large Pioneer speakers from the 1970s, complete with fancy schmancy wood lattice grills. The old Pioneers put the Bose system to shame.

[Killyp]

Interesting!:) Man you REALLY know about sound. thanks for all the input :cool: Well yes apparently Bose keep those thing to themselves to avoid the "Bose is rubbish" argument.

Few minutes ago I got my Companion 3 Series II multimedia speakers system, and I am completely happy with them. The 2 tiny satellite speakers have very accurate highs (although the mids can be better) and the subwoofer sounds very nice too. I wanted a not to "bassy" system that has small speakers, needless to say these are the ones. Deep "rich" sound and very clear, now the only thing left to do is purchase a hi-fi system (Bose is definitely out in this matter) and thanks to your suggestions I will probably get B&W speakers, in the distant future that is.

-Victor

Good move. Bose's multimedia speakers are practically top of the class. Their companion speakers and other small monitors are built like tanks, and sound fantastic considering what they are.

I've never heard a Bose 'hifi' system though...

[Victor ch]

Good move. Bose's multimedia speakers are practically top of the class. Their companion speakers and other small monitors are built like tanks, and sound fantastic considering what they are.

I've never heard a Bose 'hifi' system though...

Thanks, yup the companion sounds good and are specially small which is what I wanted, and they have this very very convenient "control pod" that allows you to mute it with a touch or connect a second audio source. Yeah they don't have a "hifi" system not near for that matter, thats why they are not even a remote option in this hehe. Thanks again for your input Kllyp, Im now looking where to buy some B&W speakers in Costa Rica for when I decide to purchase a hi-fi system.

-Victor

[Killyp]

No problem.

Just so you don't go and make any silly mistakes (which it's surprisingly easy to do), you'll need a good amp and CD player to go with them.

I'd strongly recommend Nad or Rotel in particular. I've owned quite a few things from each manufacturer, and they've all been fantastic...

[Unspeaked]

The THX certification thing is a little weird. It's good for home movies, but it seriously damages a system's ability to reproduce music well.

In fact, the best home theatre setup I've ever heard didn't have a single THX certified component.


Like I said, I'm not a huge fan of the THX stuff, but it seems like it would converge nicely with the target Bose market, so if they offered at least one system to say, "Here, this is a great THX Certified setup for home theater!" there'd be some value in that.

(As for great non-certified home theater setups, I think some great audio companies are too small and/or poor to bother going through with THX Certification, anyway, but I don't think this applies to Bose.)

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe Bose does market one or two of their products very specifically at movies... I can't see how they wouldn't love a THX Certified sticker on there.

[Victor ch]

So the thread is kinda dead now :p I think we can to a semi-rational conclusion: Bose's "small lineup" (Headphones, music monitors) are what they do best and the money to quality ratio is OK, whilst their ridiculously priced big speakers & home theaters are just overpriced due to the Bose name and do not sound according to their price. So, headphones: good sound, reasonable price; music monitors (Companion 2, 3, 5 & Music Monitor) : are their "best" products and have a reasonable price; big speakers and home theaters: crap.

Thanks again to everyone that posted their thoughts here!:)

-Victor

[Shotglass]

I saw someone on the subway with a brand new LifeStyle system. He seemed so happy and proud. Damn, I felt awful.

[Killyp]

Meh, if he likes it it's his decision.

I wouldn't so much say the cost of Bose is the biggest issue, although it is very overpriced for the sound/build/design/finish/functionality.

It's just that they market it as being fantastic sounding kit, and those unlucky enough to let advertising affect them that much will believe so and as a result, think they're buying a top quality hifi system, when in fact they really aren't.

[Sesshi]

*Looks at Macbook Pro*

Tell me about it :p

[LoganT]

Well look at the Bose 3-2-1 system. Yes for the price of of that you could get a 7 speaker setup but for some people this is good enough. For instance my uncle doesn't have much space and this is good enough for his needs.

[Greasyman]

My sister has one of those table top Wave radios and I was very impressed with the quality of sound that came out of that little thing, it really filled the room with what seemed to be the full range of sound, except perhaps the lowest of the lows.

On the other hand, why pay $500 for that when for less than half as much you can get a conventional bookshelf system that sounds just as good and has no drawbacks other than it takes up a bit more room?

[Shotglass]

I still don't get why so many people use the phrase "fills the room with sound". I believe I heard it first in a Bose commercial.

[Abstract]

Just because Macs can be easier to use doesn't mean they lack depth of functionality. Macs are mediocre (still competitive) in hardware, yes, but I buy them for the OS, not to be on the extreme bleeding edge of overclocked desktop rigdom.

And let's remember too that Apple has never said "we don't do it that way" if you asked them the specs on their machines.

There is nothing systematically disingenuous about their business model or marketing (I wouldn't say the same of Bose).

As far as audio equipment goes, I miss Technics.

Ignore Sesshi. Famous for making such remarks about Apple's products, and if you defend Apple, he'll label you a Mac "fanboi" who just wants to defend everything made by Apple.

[Greasyman]

I still don't get why so many people use the phrase "fills the room with sound". I believe I heard it first in a Bose commercial.

Seems it's a very common term that makes a lot of sense, I think I've been hearing it forever.

I realized the actual difference between a system that "filled the room" with sound and one that didn't when I made the mistake of replacing some speakers with 8" woofers with a pair of small bookshelf speakers. The sound just seemed to come directly from the little speakers, where as the larger ones really radiated. It's hard to put into words but you know it when you hear it. Think of the difference between an average sound system and a little clock radio, not in sound reproduction quality but in ambiance.

[SactoGuy18]

Well look at the Bose 3-2-1 system. Yes for the price of of that you could get a 7 speaker setup but for some people this is good enough. For instance my uncle doesn't have much space and this is good enough for his needs.

I've heard the 3-2-1 GS Series II and it's actually a surprisingly good-sounding system. It's not true 5.1 surround like you get with the much more expensive Lifestyle systems but I really like the sound field from this system.

A big problem with true 5.1 systems is that you have to run a lot of wiring for the back speakers, and it's a real hassle trying to do five-speaker placement in many rooms.

[Sesshi]

Ignore Sesshi. Famous for making such remarks about Apple's products, and if you defend Apple, he'll label you a Mac "fanboi" who just wants to defend everything made by Apple.

No. Your opinions in relation to what is out there and firmly held point of view despite a clear lack of experience is what makes me call you a fanboy. (no "i") It's not differing personal opinions. What gave you that idea?

[Victor ch]

I said before that the only thing left to purchase was a hi-fi component I think there is no need for one now. My dad gifted me his (2) 25 (or more) year-old Altec Lansing speakers. They are the model "five" series 2 and man they sound amazing, I mean the clarity in the voices and the precision in the highs are completely new to me! What surprises me the most is how well they perform even though they are very old, they're even good for electronic music. I hooked them up to the Sony amp+cd player and to the PS3; the original subwoofer is still attached to the setup. They sound wayyy better than the Bose 901 reflecting speakers. Their current "successor" are worth 900$ but I have no idea how much my dad spent on the speakers; I can't compare them (price wise) to others. I included some crappy pics taken with my iPhone.

-Victor

[displaced]

I said before that the only thing left to purchase was a hi-fi component I think there is no need for one now. My dad gifted me his (2) 25 (or more) year-old Altec Lansing speakers. They are the model "five" series 2 and man they sound amazing, I mean the clarity in the voices and the precision in the highs are completely new to me! What surprises me the most is how well they perform even though they are very old, they're even good for electronic music. I hooked them up to the Sony amp+cd player and to the PS3; the original subwoofer is still attached to the setup. They sound wayyy better than the Bose 201 reflecting speakers. Their current "successor" are worth 900$ but I have no idea how much my dad spent on the speakers; I can't compare them (price wise) to others. I included some crappy pics taken with my iPhone.

-Victor

They look great! Just goes to show that a good pair of speakers can last a lifetime! I'm definitely intending that my Mordaunt-Short set will last at least a good 10-20 years (barring any astonishing changes in speaker technology!).

One tip though -- get some stands and get those speakers off the floor! Think they sound good now? Get 'em up to head-height :)

[carlgo]

Bose is a master of marketing and, if you Believe, has altered physics.

You have to Believe that a tiny speaker can produce deep bass.

You have to Believe that by sending sound waves down plastic tunnels in front of you, the sound will then come from behind you.

An enormous advertising budget, the same message over and over until people Believe. And Bose is comfortable and Bose is everywhere.

Bose owners are obviously very sensitive and defensive about their choices.

All headphones have tiny speakers and no power, so Bose is on even ground to start with there.

That being said, I actually have a pair of the original 18-speaker Bose 901s, with equalizer. These are the sealed box ones, not the vented design that sent Bose down the path of magic.

I powered them with a quality 60 watt/channel amp (Bose said 20 watts/channel was fine) and was only sort of ok with them. Years later I borrowed a very high-powered amp and the thunderous and clear sound was great. A huge improvement. And then I had to return the amp:(

I think it is funny that a Bose product actually required an unaffordable amount of power to operate properly. The 901s are themselves a cult classic and there are rebuild kits available as people still use them.

[Victor ch]

They look great! Just goes to show that a good pair of speakers can last a lifetime! I'm definitely intending that my Mordaunt-Short set will last at least a good 10-20 years (barring any astonishing changes in speaker technology!).

One tip though -- get some stands and get those speakers off the floor! Think they sound good now? Get 'em up to head-height :)

Thanks man! One of them actually was "damaged" so I opened it and luckily found 1 cable detached so I plugged it and now works great, still very impressive how a pair of speaker much more older than me (Im 16) can sound so great. Stands? Hmm I'll definitely look for ones, although their weight might be a problem 20kg (44 USpounds) :p Is there really a big difference when they are much more higher? Thanks for the input:).

-Victor

[Naimfan]

Thanks man! One of them actually was "damaged" so I opened it and luckily found 1 cable detached so I plugged it and now works great, still very impressive how a pair of speaker much more older than me (Im 16) can sound so great. Stands? Hmm I'll definitely look for ones, although their weight might be a problem 20kg (44 USpounds) :p Is there really a big difference when they are much more higher? Thanks for the input:).

-Victor

They will sound better if you can raise them up off the floor, but don't try to get them to "head height." Just look for rigid and spiked stands that will raise them about a foot or so off the ground. Warning--good stands are not cheap. Try Target stands or Sound Organization--both are good.

The reason you want to get them off the floor is to prevent excessive bass reinforcement--try it both ways, and you'll hear that raising them a foot or so will sound a lot better!

[Victor ch]

They will sound better if you can raise them up off the floor, but don't try to get them to "head height." Just look for rigid and spiked stands that will raise them about a foot or so off the ground. Warning--good stands are not cheap. Try Target stands or Sound Organization--both are good.

The reason you want to get them off the floor is to prevent excessive bass reinforcement--try it both ways, and you'll hear that raising them a foot or so will sound a lot better!

Ok so I am getting them off the floor, perhaps raise it a foot or two. The problem is there is no Target or Sound Organization in Costa Rica, but I will look for some good stands in different places. And how expensive are they 50$ or more?

-Victor

[Naimfan]

Ok so I am getting them off the floor, perhaps raise it a foot or two. The problem is there is no Target or Sound Organization in Costa Rica, but I will look for some good stands in different places. And how expensive are they 50$ or more?

-Victor

An easy thing to try would be (don't laugh!) a cinder block. As far as stands go, yes, good ones will be more than $50--I think good ones start at ~$100 USD. Just by way of example, take a look at this (http://www.needledoctor.com/Target-HS-Self-Assembly-Speaker-Stand). Ideally you'd have a larger top plate, considering the apparent size of your speakers. You could also look at these (http://www.soundanchors.com/page52.html), which would give you probably the best performance (look at the 14" stands).

[Rodimus Prime]

I think they are good products but over priced for what you get. You have to pay a lot for the name.

[Victor ch]

An easy thing to try would be (don't laugh!) a cinder block. As far as stands go, yes, good ones will be more than $50--I think good ones start at ~$100 USD. Just by way of example, take a look at this (http://www.needledoctor.com/Target-HS-Self-Assembly-Speaker-Stand). Ideally you'd have a larger top plate, considering the apparent size of your speakers. You could also look at these (http://www.soundanchors.com/page52.html), which would give you probably the best performance (look at the 14" stands).

Thanks for all the input but I think I will have them custom built at my family's business. Probably copying the design of the Soundanchors.com ones. And yep they are large heavy bastards:p 44 pounds and about 3 foot tall. Thanks again for the input.

-Victor

[John Jacob]

What do the audiophiles here think of the KEF Instant Theatre KIT 120 (http://www.kefinstanttheatre.com/products/kit/product-range/2-speaker/kit120hd/default.aspx)?

I want a good sounding compact all-in-one system that doesn't take up much space, as I have a small room. The KIT 120 is a new product, but its predecessor the KIT 100 had good reviews. It's a pricey system though, so I'd like to know if it is worth the money.

I don't want to completely derail the OP's thread, so PM me. Thanks! :D

[Victor ch]

What do the audiophiles here think of the KEF Instant Theatre KIT 120 (http://www.kefinstanttheatre.com/products/kit/product-range/2-speaker/kit120hd/default.aspx)?

I want a good sounding compact all-in-one system that doesn't take up much space, as I have a small room. The KIT 120 is a new product, but its predecessor the KIT 100 had good reviews. It's a pricey system though, so I'd like to know if it is worth the money.

I don't want to completely derail the OP's thread, so PM me. Thanks! :D

Chill bro, I find this thread to be an avid discussion on the sound quality of consumer products:D I checked the link you gave and they look very nice, they do seem to pack a punch (the subwoofer has a volume of 16 liters:eek:) and the satellite speakers produce sound from the back too so they can produce surround. As for the brand Im sorry Im not familiar with it, I judged them by the specs and the looks ejejej.

-Victor

[Victor ch]

Hey, today I visited my local Bose retailer and asked the guy if he could "show" me how the 301 Speakers sound. Im gonna say I was amazed. To be honest I had very low expectations and was ready to hear some mediocre sound like the one on my Companion 3 (I like them a lot but they just cant seem to reproduce certain frequencies due to their nature) They actually beat my Altec Lansing 'Hi-Fi' speakers:eek: They sounded just like them but with a much better controlled bass. What amazed me though is that they're priced at $300 and holy jesus those things are loud, I felt sorry for the other guy in the showroom who just spent 5K on a home theatre that have those little speakers (like the one in the Companion 3, home theaters and Acoustic Mass setups) that suck big time. I've heard their "older brother" 901 Series Speakers and is has that same mediocre sound but a bit bassier, the same goes for the 161 and Acoustic Mass. I went through the whole setup and only the 301 and 201 set of speakers had that sound that is just amazing. Im saving up money to buy them as they seem very very nice speakers and put to shame other Bose products and several "studio monitors" I've heard. Interesting that Bose does have very nice, loud, and most important: good sounding speakers.

Victor

[Victor ch]

Well, when one is on a budget and on a quest to get the best for the price, one can realize many things, amongst that is the fact that most Bose products are not worth their price. Im utterly happy with my QC2 Headphones, love them to bits (I can isolate myself from the world into my Lossless word; get it? Lossless! ;)) Im modestly happy with my Companion 3's, they're loud, small and sound OK (far from amazing, precise or critical) I kinda hate my In-Ears and Im thankful my dad (and many other) told me NOT to get the 301's.

Although the 301's where astonishing at first, they are not worth the price. I mean, one can get a much more nice sounding set of speakers from Polkaudio at a somewhat similar price. And if you've just spend several hundred dollars on an "audiophile-grade" stereo amp, sacrificed lots of GB for Lossless files and has a 'mildly trained ear', you are just giving all that up buying Bose 301's for them. They sound nice, there's no denial in that, and they're bassy too, but you can get that for less amount of money.

Seeing my dad with his 25yr-old Altec Lansing speakers still working (although kinda dead now, one sounds weird @ high volumes) made me think: Will I keep these 301's for a long period of time? Hell no, Its highly likely I will keep searching for better speakers at similar price tags. So if I spend 500-600$ now for some KEF Q series speakers I will enjoy them long enough for me to gather $23K (or £11,400) for those B&O BeoLab 5's. If you can justify a Hasselblad H3D camera or buying a new Mini Cooper as a guilty pleasure then one can justify a 23K set of speakers :p

Anyway, thanks again to everyone who has posted with their comments regarding Bose products. I specially want to thank Kyllip for his support in my "quest for a hi-fi system", thanks bro :). I think we can conclude Bose doesn't live up to many expectations and even though they don't deserve to be called a worthless piece o' **** they don't deserve the title for an amazing (or above average) audio company. I won't change my QC2's for any other headphone (not even Grado) but everything else from Bose that I have right now can be replaced with something else and I wouldn't bother :p Anyone else with comments, experiences or something mildly related to what is discussed here feel free to post.

Victor

[asrmatt]

I think they are good products but over priced for what you get. You have to pay a lot for the name.

It's exactly what so many people tell me about my buying apple products...

[pimentoLoaf]

I love the sound in their headphones; I don't like the cost due to the overall cheapness of design.

Two Tri-ports mechanically failed within weeks of each other. The second wasn't bought: I got it free when the first broke apart whilst taking it off my head.

The head surround part fits into the headphones with a small metal clip holding it against detents; pull just a bit more than normal and the two halves of plastic detent "tube" split apart. The metal clip flies gosh-knows-where and ...

One solution is to wrap duct tape 'round the tube ends and remembering to be excessively careful when you stop using the headphones.

[riscy]

I love the sound quality and the small size of their speakers, very unobtrusive, I have them ceiling mounted, with wires concealed and people get a bit unnerved as to where the sound is coming from when I play music.

[cantthinkofone]

there is a saying:

"no highs, no lows, just Bose."

i think their stuff is very well marketed crap.

I second that. bose blows.

They sound disgusting. it's all mids. no highs, no lows. Their commercials make me laugh. All their diagrams of how their stuff works. The people they interview must be people who work for them.

I have a $20 pair of sony headphones and they sound perfect to me.

[QuarterSwede]

there is a saying:

"no highs, no lows, just Bose."

i think their stuff is very well marketed crap.
I second that. bose blows.

They sound disgusting. it's all mids. no highs, no lows.
I third it. The reason they do so well is because people don't know any better. It sounds like it's all there until you compare them to a really good system and then you go, "woah, that is crappy."

That being said, they do make some of the best sounding iPod docks. If Bose can do one thing it's bring out a lot of sound from a small package. Are they audiophile grade? No, but what small iPod dock is?


LOL, but what I've heard the most is that their products are to "bassy" which is partially true but not to the point of loosing audio performance.
They aren't too bassy, they're too low-midrangy. That's what people are hearing.

[riscy]

You buy quality, it last longer - my Bose speakers are still going very strong after 15 years and were not overly expensive to start with. Pretty good cost per year, IMO, and a better, richer sound than cheaper speakers. In fact, I am going to add to my system - not replace.

As someone else said, Bose is similar to Mac - might be a bit more expensive, but they last a lot longer.

I think they are good products but over priced for what you get. You have to pay a lot for the name.

[joekix]

In that case, when it comes to replacing it, your best bet is to look at Rotel and B&W.

Rotel make some of the best 'budget' equipment out there (although it really performs to an excellent standard, and is built beautifully), and generally matches the sound of B&W speakers very well (very soulful/effortless sound).

It won't be 'cheap', but it's definitely cheaper than a Bose setup, and worth it in the long run.

I used to love my rotel rb-1080 matched with my 805's until i got a sony es digital receiver. i really like the sound of digital amps. anyways, i have had nautilus 805's matched with a velodyne hgs-15 sub for the last 9 years and never had any inclination to upgrade. i knew when i got these 3 speakers, i was done. the rest of my system consists of the htm-2 and four lm-1s for surround.

[Shotglass]

To anyone thinking they buy quality when they get Bose equipment, I suggest you open one of their speakers.

[diehldun]

Oy, you should see the way my mom swears by her Wave Radio/CD that I got her for Christmas. She is convinced it is the greatest thing created by mankind. :D

[Shotglass]

Oy, you should see the way my mom swears by her Wave Radio/CD that I got her for Christmas. She is convinced it is the greatest thing created by mankind. :DI know the type. I've seen the videos on Bose's website, with the smiling seniors proclaiming their love for this fantastic product. It's always the good hearted housewife/grandmother praising the radio for it's "clarity" and raging about how it "fills the room with sound". Such a terrible cliché...

[Victor ch]

Today I went to one of my country's few Hi-Fi stores and tested some Klipsch speakers... holy **** Those were just awesome, even the lowest of their lineup the Synergy F-1 will beat the **** out of any Bose speaker. They had KEF and other high-end brands but I couldn't test them as I ran out of time, first time conversation with someone who cares about sound quality. He did recommend me (due to my music tastes) that I should go Klipsch rather than KEF (even though he would get more $$ from the KEF) Curious thing is that the almost half hour I spent there talking to this guy and listening to Klipsch speakers I didn't knew who he was, turned out that he was THE owner of the store(s) and brother of the guy who runs the most prestigious music academy in the country and owner of the best music-related stuff store. That guy knew a lot and was an awesome person. Sorry Bose, you'll never hear from me again, unless my QC2's give me trouble **knocks on wood**.


Victor

[Shotglass]

Today I went to one of my country's few Hi-Fi stores and tested some Klipsch speakers... holy **** Those were just awesome, even the lowest of their lineup the Synergy F-1 will beat the **** out of any Bose speaker. They had KEF and other high-end brands but I couldn't test them as I ran out of time, first time conversation with someone who cares about sound quality. He did recommend me (due to my music tastes) that I should go Klipsch rather than KEF (even though he would get more $$ from the KEF) Curious thing is that the almost half hour I spent there talking to this guy and listening to Klipsch speakers I didn't knew who he was, turned out that he was THE owner of the store(s) and brother of the guy who runs the most prestigious music academy in the country and owner of the best music-related stuff store. That guy knew a lot and was an awesome person. Sorry Bose, you'll never hear from me again, unless my QC2's give me trouble **knocks on wood**.I sincerely hope you will not be the last that I will witness getting sucked into the quicksands of audiophile music.

[Victor ch]

I sincerely hope you will not be the last that I will witness getting sucked into the quicksands of audiophile music.

What do you mean? If you mean I'll be the guy who won't take anything under 320kbps or other than Lossless then partially. If I have no other choice then meh f it, but I can have it @ higher quality then i'll do it. Im not the one who's gonna buy a magnetically suspended turntable so that the rotor itself won't interfere with the sound quality, nor will I get a turntable, I just enjoy good sound quality.

Victor

[mogzieee]

LOVE Bose cos it's so freekin awesome, but HATE it because I know i'll never be able to afford it lol

[Silencio]

Seeing my dad with his 25yr-old Altec Lansing speakers still working (although kinda dead now, one sounds weird @ high volumes)

Any 25 year-old speaker will most likely need some maintenance or repairs. How do the foams around the drivers look? Hard to tell from the pictures you posted, but the foams generally need to get replaced after a while if they decay and crack. It's cheap and fairly easy to do with most speakers. You can probably find a suitable do-it-yourself kit on eBay.

My own speakers (a set of Acoustic Research TSW-410s) are pushing 20 years old now. Thankfully they're still in excellent shape and the foams are still good. The only reason I'd replace them is because they're a little big and imposing; as much as I'd like a nice set of B&Ws I'd expect to shell out a substantial amount of money for a dramatic decrease in size and perhaps a marginal gain in sound quality, and there's plenty of other things I'd rather spend my money on right now.

[Victor ch]

Any 25 year-old speaker will most likely need some maintenance or repairs. How do the foams around the drivers look? Hard to tell from the pictures you posted, but the foams generally need to get replaced after a while if they decay and crack. It's cheap and fairly easy to do with most speakers. You can probably find a suitable do-it-yourself kit on eBay.

My own speakers (a set of Acoustic Research TSW-410s) are pushing 20 years old now. Thankfully they're still in excellent shape and the foams are still good. The only reason I'd replace them is because they're a little big and imposing; as much as I'd like a nice set of B&Ws I'd expect to shell out a substantial amount of money for a dramatic decrease in size and perhaps a marginal gain in sound quality, and there's plenty of other things I'd rather spend my money on right now.

I had to disassemble the right speaker since it didn't work; turned out to be a detached cable, when I did that I looked inside and the foam was kinda orange-ish (if that helps in anyway)and one of them actually housed a cockroach nest... The tweeters are kinda effed up and the connections in the back had to be glued in order for them to work. They're not so good sounding either, when you compare them to new speakers. My dad himself told me to better get new ones and finally give those a rest. Good thing he's paying for them hehe :p Thanks for the info though.

Victor

[Killyp]

You buy quality, it last longer - my Bose speakers are still going very strong after 15 years and were not overly expensive to start with. Pretty good cost per year, IMO, and a better, richer sound than cheaper speakers. In fact, I am going to add to my system - not replace.


Nonsense. My dad's ~40 year old Goodmans Minister speakers (from the days when Goodmans made proper hifi) are still going on strong and sound fantastic given their age. I would happily use them as main hifi speakers, and I'd be pretty confident in pitting them against pretty much any Bose speakers.


I used to love my rotel rb-1080 matched with my 805's until i got a sony es digital receiver. i really like the sound of digital amps. anyways, i have had nautilus 805's matched with a velodyne hgs-15 sub for the last 9 years and never had any inclination to upgrade. i knew when i got these 3 speakers, i was done. the rest of my system consists of the htm-2 and four lm-1s for surround.

Sick, I want your surround sound setup :p I've been eyeing up the latest B&W 680 series a lot lately, which bring some of the technology of the 800 series down to the entry level speakers. They've started using simplified crossovers (a single component is used), FST surround midrange drivers and properly engineered Nautilus tweeters. I've heard the 686 and 684 and they sounded disgustingly good...

[Unspeaked]

I'd just like to say that, personally, I find these Bose/Apple comparisons to be ridiculous.

I know some people consider Apple a hardware company (including Apple themselves) but the reason I buy Apple products is for the OS, and that's not something that translates into the musical playback world.

If Apple's OS didn't exist and we were putting it up against Sony, Dell, HP and others, it is a prestige brand. It's the fact that none of the competitors - from the cheapest bargain bin competitors to the most expensive custom built shops - allow me to run a (stable) Mac OS X.

With audio, all of these things are performing the same function - playback.

And really, Bose is only expensive if you look at it from the consumer side of things. To an audiophile, Bose prices are at the low end of the scale (though admittedly, an audiophile would easily be able to put together a less expensive, better sounding system than most Bose offerings).

[Shotglass]

Victor: I'm happy to see anyone realize sound quality matters. I couldn't care less about how much money you spend, it's just refreshing to see someone with half a brain ;)
LOVE Bose cos it's so freekin awesomeI'm pretty sure you're gonna get raped for that.

[MacNut]

Ok so we agree that BOSE sucks, but how many people are using an iPod. Won't that hurt the sound quality not being native.

[Victor ch]

Well, today I tested KEF and Klipsch properly, loved loved loved the Klipschs Reference series and loved even more the KEF's, but the KEF had this more precise sound but less "boomy" style and of course more expensive. Its almost for sure I'll get their Reference 52 speakers from Klipsch. The funny thing is that these RF-52 have dual 5.25" woofers that look so small yet they produce huge amounts of bass. My NAD amp is getting out of the customs agency and will probably arrive this weekend so I guess I'll finally have my hi-fi setup :p

Victor

[diehldun]

The Bowers & Wilkins setup in the new Jaguar XF is pretty nice.

[robanga]

I like the "Wave Radio" and Paul Harvey makes a really good pitchman for it as well.:D

[Shotglass]

Well, today I tested KEF and Klipsch properly, loved loved loved the Klipschs Reference series and loved even more the KEF's, but the KEF had this more precise sound but less "boomy" style and of course more expensive. Its almost for sure I'll get their Reference 52 speakers from Klipsch. The funny thing is that these RF-52 have dual 5.25" woofers that look so small yet they produce huge amounts of bass. My NAD amp is getting out of the customs agency and will probably arrive this weekend so I guess I'll finally have my hi-fi setup :p

VictorCongratulations. Which NAD do you have?

[Dagless]

Think I've said before. But I love them for their size.

[Victor ch]

Congratulations. Which NAD do you have?

Thanks :) I ordered the NAD C315BEE, its the less expensive of their integrated amp lineup but its a beauty hehe. Here are some of the specs:

Continuous Power - 2 X 40 Watts into 4 or 8 Ohms, 20Hz – 20kHz at 0.02%THD
Dynamic Power - 90W into 8 Ohms, 120W into 4 Ohms, 180W into 2 Ohms
PowerDrive-S™
6 Line Level Inputs including 1 Tape Loop
Front Panel Input for Portable Media Player
Bass and Treble Controls
Tone Defeat (Bypass)
Headphone Output
System Remote Control also controls NAD CD Players
Multi-way Speaker Binding Posts
Gold Plated RCA Jacks
Toroidal Power Transformer


Victor.

[Victor ch]

Victor: I'm happy to see anyone realize sound quality matters. I couldn't care less about how much money you spend, it's just refreshing to see someone with half a brain ;).

Emm thanks man. Im aware that you have throw a somewhat significant amount of money for a hi-fi setup, but not an abysmal amount of money. For this one it will be 350 for the amp and 600-700 for the speakers. Its not abysmal but it ain't cheap, Im not going to buy a cd player as I ran out of money with the amp. I cannot justify 1k+ for speakers nor for an amp, Im 16 and I really don't have any type of income (the speakers are gonna be gifts from my dad) so I spend my savings in the amp. That is the reason I researched quite a bit on speakers so I can have the best in my price range, given this Im not gonna buy those Polk I saw for 50$ less than the Reference Klipsch and NO way Im getting the 301's from Bose. Im not really into the if their more expensive they are better thing, and curious how Klipsch is underrated but they're still awesome speakers that are not so expensive.

Victor

[Killyp]

Seeing as we're on a kinda 'hifi' thread anyways, I might as well mention that I've just filled my speaker stands up with Cement Sand (which is more like a powder). I can't believe how much more controlled/smooth the bass is, plus there's a smidge more of it than I had before and definitely more extension.

A fully recommended improvement if anybody hasn't done it already...

[cheeseadiddle]

I had a set of 501's in the late 70's that I liked a lot. But I never cared for the 301's 601's and 901's and have never seen a product they advertise on TV that I liked. I listened to all of the Bose computer speaker systems and was very unimpressed. The M-AUDIO AV 40's I got sounded better than most of the Bose models I tested at less than half the price of the cheapest Bose product.

As for headphones... there are so many quality cans out there that I wouldn't even give the Bose a try.

[Shotglass]

Seeing as we're on a kinda 'hifi' thread anyways, I might as well mention that I've just filled my speaker stands up with Cement Sand (which is more like a powder). I can't believe how much more controlled/smooth the bass is, plus there's a smidge more of it than I had before and definitely more extension.

A fully recommended improvement if anybody hasn't done it already...My floor standing ones are quite heavy as it is, so I don't think this applies to me, but I have yet to spike them. What do your 301s weigh out of the box?

[Killyp]

I had a set of 501's in the late 70's that I liked a lot. But I never cared for the 301's 601's and 901's and have never seen a product they advertise on TV that I liked. I listened to all of the Bose computer speaker systems and was very unimpressed. The M-AUDIO AV 40's I got sounded better than most of the Bose models I tested at less than half the price of the cheapest Bose product.

As for headphones... there are so many quality cans out there that I wouldn't even give the Bose a try.

The Bose headphones are nice to put on - in fact the Triports are the most comfortable cans I've worn, but the sound was really not at all impressive...

My floor standing ones are quite heavy as it is, so I don't think this applies to me, but I have yet to spike them. What do your 301s weigh out of the box?

My 303s (:p) weigh 5 kg each - not exactly particularly heavy, but before, the floorstands were very audible when playing music. When I turned the volume up to a good (cough party) volume, the stands used to buzz... loudly, which was very very audible.

Each stand now weighs in at about 30 kg each, and I have to say the sound has improved considerably. The bass is more controlled and precise, and the extension has increased noticeably. The stereo image also seems more defined overall. With my B&W DM7s, the stereo image was really really impressive (not taking all their weaknesses into consideration), and that was one thing I really missed when I went back to the DM303s - the sound stage didn't seem as airy and precise. That's all changed with the weighted speaker stands - which I just didn't expect to happen.

[Shotglass]

303sI do this every time.

[Victor ch]

The Bose headphones are nice to put on - in fact the Triports are the most comfortable cans I've worn, but the sound was really not at all impressive...

I disagree, have you worn the QC2's? They are the most comfortable cans in the world, seriously :p. And I have a friend with the Triports and the sound really isn't impressive, but I don't know why the sound in my QC2's is just miles better. The lows are awesomely controlled and in certain songs encoded with lossless I feel the guy/girl who's singing right in the back of my neck, kinda creepy hehe. Shame I was mildly 'ignorant' when I got those, even tough I don't regret them at all I could've been happier with Audio-Technica's Noise-Canceling headphones, or with Klipsch's Custom-3 headphones; but meh Im happy with the QC2's.

Victor

[Shotglass]

Im aware that you have throw a somewhat significant amount of money for a hi-fi setup, but not an abysmal amount of money. For this one it will be 350 for the amp and 600-700 for the speakers.I paid a hair over 1000€ for my amp, cdp, speakers and all cables, and the whole thing sounds fantastic. Looking back at it, I don't even think it's that expensive for the quality it delivers. However, when you're a teenager who wants a hifi, and people tell you amps cost around 400€, it's like you're standing at the bottom of mount everest and someone just handed you an icepick.

[Keebler]

i put hate, but i've only tried/had 1 product - the ipod speaker and it sucked...big time. I ended up buying some Audio Engine speakers and they royally blew the Bose away - granted it might not be comparing apples to apples, but there was a diff.

i've heard their other products are great, but I wouldn't know.

I know b/c of that one experience, I won't be buying anymore Bose products in the future.

Cheers,
Keebler

[Victor ch]

I paid a hair over 1000€ for my amp, cdp, speakers and all cables, and the whole thing sounds fantastic. Looking back at it, I don't even think it's that expensive for the quality it delivers. However, when you're a teenager who wants a hifi, and people tell you amps cost around 400€, it's like you're standing at the bottom of mount everest and someone just handed you an icepick.

Hmm, I know you must throw in a substantial amount of money, if everything goes OK then mine will be circa $1120. The amp, the speakers, and cables. And quite frankly that setup won't be replaced, I *might* add an active subwoofer in the future, just in case I want more boom than the ones the RF-52's give (and they give a lot). As for the amp, wattage isn't everything, I can assure they will sound many times louder than my old Sony 500watts amp or than the 12000watts $300 mini-component I saw in the newspaper the other day; not only louder but way way better.

BTW, care to share your setup?:p

Victor

[Victor ch]

i put hate, but i've only tried/had 1 product - the ipod speaker and it sucked...big time. I ended up buying some Audio Engine speakers and they royally blew the Bose away - granted it might not be comparing apples to apples, but there was a diff.

i've heard their other products are great, but I wouldn't know.

I know b/c of that one experience, I won't be buying anymore Bose products in the future.

Cheers,
Keebler

The only Bose products I like are the QuietComfort headphones. The in-ears are too "bassy" and lack everything else. The Over/On Triports are OK, not so good sounding and when heavy bass is present they will eat every other frequency. The QC2's aren't exactly super-mega-awesome but they do sound nice, specially with Lossless files. As for the speakers: avoid them, not only the computer ones (that you can get a better sounding one from Klipsch, JBL and others) the bookshelf ones aren't **** but they're not worth the price and the 901 is a rip-off. Home theatres are mediocre and the Acoustic Mass thing is plain trash.

Victor

[c073186]

I like (not love) Bose products because they sound good to me (I do not have very discerning ears) and they look nice mounted on my wall. Also I am a sucker for marketing and things that look cool (can you say Apple?). However, I strongly dislike the Bose price. I feel like I am getting totally ripped off (probably because I am).

[Transic]

*

[Shotglass]

I like Bose products because they sound good to me (I do not have very discerning ears) and they look nice mounted on my wall.Upon further research, you will find that no one doesn't have discerning ears. Also, if you find speakers that you really like, they will look good on your wall because you will develop non-discerning eyes.

[martinmartin]

I have the original QC around ear headphones. They were a gift. They sounded good but I wouldn't have paid $300 for them. I didn't like the separate power 'brick' that was part of the cord either. Also, you couldn't really sleep while wearing them on a plane not only because they were so big but because if you covered up the 'ports' on the outside (on a pillow, for example), you would get some crazy loud sound in your ear.

Then I bought a pair of Shure e4cs (in ears), which I really liked. They were quite comfortable. Bass was subpar, but mids and highs were fantastic. Then I lost these on a trip home from China.

Last X-mas I got a pair of Ultimate Ears Super-fi 5 pro (in ears) which have better bass than the Shures, but maybe not as nice mids/highs. They were half the price, though. Also, these are less comfortable for me - after a few hours, they start to hurt a bit.

All in all, if you want something on the go, I find that in ear phones are generally better than around ear headphones...

As for home theater hi-fi, I have to recommend Outlaw Audio for components (pre/pro and amplifier). Read any review for the 990 and you'll know why - especially at the current [low] price.

I have a pair of B&W 804s's and an HTM3S and a pair of 601S3s. I went overboard on the B&W 800 series and can't quite say they're anything close to a value. Yeah, they sound great, but we're well past the point of diminishing returns here.

I do like the Bose ipod dock for its simplicity, though. I have another ipod dock called 'the dock'...I think the manufacturer is Scandyna. It was half the price of the Bose but not as good.

Just my opinions...

[Cybix]

I have two Bose Lifestyle 5 systems. These things are about 16 years old (or so)...

I didn't buy them for their sound quality, thats for sure. I bought it for the concept, and the fact that they play LOUD.

One system is in my garage, one system is outside in my entertainment area. Both are linked together, i Airtunes to them too.

The best thing about the systems? the wireless remote. I love it, especially when having guests over or throwing a party. So easy!

Having the 'cubes' attached high on my outside walls and in the garage works really well, not so obvious, nice coverage of sound.. and they blast!

Wouldn't buy BOSE for SQ.... of course.

[Killyp]

I have two Bose Lifestyle 5 systems. These things are about 16 years old (or so)...

I didn't buy them for their sound quality, thats for sure. I bought it for the concept, and the fact that they play LOUD.

One system is in my garage, one system is outside in my entertainment area. Both are linked together, i Airtunes to them too.

The best thing about the systems? the wireless remote. I love it, especially when having guests over or throwing a party. So easy!

Having the 'cubes' attached high on my outside walls and in the garage works really well, not so obvious, nice coverage of sound.. and they blast!

Wouldn't buy BOSE for SQ.... of course.

Mmm they don't go THAT loud. They have pretty weak amplifiers behind them, and generally very small drivers (incl. the subwoofer). A pair of say, Klipsches will go much much louder, especially if you add a subwoofer...

[grouper]

i have the triport around the ear headphones and i love them. they sound good, and they are super comfortable.

[c073186]

Upon further research, you will find that no one doesn't have discerning ears. Also, if you find speakers that you really like, they will look good on your wall because you will develop non-discerning eyes.

Okay, point taken. I guess here is my point: I did not do a lot of research when looking for my speakers. I saw the Bose speakers, they sounded good to me, I liked the way they looked, so I bought them.

[Shotglass]

Okay, point taken. I guess here is my point: I did not do a lot of research when looking for my speakers. I saw the Bose speakers, they sounded good to me, I liked the way they looked, so I bought them.Fair enough. You just need to be aware that this kind of attitude is what lets Bose make tons of money from mediocre products.

[Victor ch]

Fair enough. You just need to be aware that this kind of attitude is what lets Bose make tons of money from mediocre products.

Touché.... Couldn't have said it better; in fact thats what almost happened to me, I tested the 301's they sounded awesome to me (was very close to getting them) then I tested Klipsch (both consumer and fancier lines) and KEF; trust me, there's no point in comparing them, Bose is millions of miles behind these brands, specially from Klipsches Reference line and KEF iQ series. Their least expensive floor-standing non-reference speaker from Klipsch (the Synergy F-1) is easily 10x better. Im getting the Reference RF-52's this tuesday (yayy dad finally accepted the 'trade' with my old Sony system) and even though they don't quite match the décor I couldn't care less, they're plain awesome. Right now Im listening to some Lossless-encoded electronic music and oh boy.. these Bose Companion 3's are bassy m-******** but the sound is hideous, can't wait for the Klipsches...

Victor

[Killyp]

I'm sure you're gonna love them! :D

In other news, my CD player packed up this morning :(

[Victor ch]

I'm sure you're gonna love them! :D

In other news, my CD player packed up this morning :(

Thanks! :D

Ohhh no.. The Bang & Olufsen one? (not sure what you mean by packed up, Im assuming it stop working or something bad)

Victor

[Patrick425]

I don't know it just doesn't seem worth the money.

[iJohnHenry]

Exactly, and the elitist way they market their Wave radio is really off-putting to me.

[Killyp]

Thanks! :D

Ohhh no.. The Bang & Olufsen one? (not sure what you mean by packed up, Im assuming it stop working or something bad)

Victor

Yeh, the CD7000 which is a stunningly good player - still one of the best sounding players around. Built like an absolute tank, works beautifully and it looks stunning. Just randomly stopped playing CDs although it is 20 years old so it's not surprising.

Took it to B&O to service - cleaned the whole thing inside out and cleaned the lens (which fixed the issue - I was too frightened to touch the thing) and charged me £10! :)

Picking it up soon.

Also managed to fix my old (but very good) Sony DVD player and my dad's old Nad CD player.

[Victor ch]

Well, I finally got my amp and everything set up... The sound coming from Klipsche RF-52's floorstanders + NAD C315BEE amp is just awesome. The speakers have this "solid, dry thump" instead of the o so common blurred bass you'll get from Bose, the mids are extremely clear, same goes from the highs. I can't thank enough Kyllip and all who told me NOT to go Bose as I would've regretted it badly. Its a shame Bose qualify their speakers as "room filling, and rich"; unless the room filling applies to distorted sound and rich to uncontrolled bass. The one and only Bose product I won't bash is their QC2 headphones that work quite good (although if you do the research there's a better pair from Audio Technica). I own other Bose products (in-ears, companions) and eventually they'll be replaced, specially the in-ears. I own Bose and other audio brands and well, you've heard what I've said, Bose is not worth IMO, perhaps the QC2s and only if you can't get your hands on the Audio Technicas.

I will post some pics of the setup in a short moment :D

Victor

[Victor ch]

Here they are :D:cool:

(sorry for the crappy pics, its the iPhone...)

[Victor ch]

Yep, more pics hehe

[yadmonkey]

After trying a bunch of headphones, Bose and others, I settled on the Bose on-ear model. They are comfy and pretty portable and sound great to me on my iPod, but I'm a musician, not an audiophile. I hear music first and sound second, if that makes sense. In other words, Django, Louis, Billie, Miles, Herbie, Wes, and the rest can give me goosebumps on a crappy sound system.

BTW, Bose makes some kickass PA products for working musicians. Innovative, portable, and fantastic sounding stuff.

[iJohnHenry]

Reinhardt, Armstrong, Holiday, Davis (genius), Hancock and Montgomery.

Oh, and at 504 posts you may now have an avatar.

Congratulations, that only took 5+ years. :rolleyes:

[yadmonkey]

Reinhardt, Armstrong, Holiday, Davis (genius), Hancock and Montgomery.

Oh, and at 504 posts you may now have an avatar.

Congratulations, that only took 5+ years. :rolleyes:

Lol - thanks, I think!

[LiveForever]

I went into our local Bose store and had a demo - the salesman was saying isn't that incredible in the demo room but I just couldn't see it (or hear it!)

They are small cube speakers which says it all. In acoustics like optics (so forget a 5MP tiny phone camera) size matters.

Music is my passion and I have 1000's of CD's
.
We have a Tannoy (http://www.tannoy-speakers.com/) system with 1metre tall floor speakers. They are beautiful to look at and to listen to.

Others if you can get them are
QUAD (http://www.quad-hifi.co.uk/)
Wharfdale (http://www.wharfedale.co.uk/home.php)
Mission (http://www.mission.co.uk/)
Mordaunt Short (http://www.mordauntshort.co.uk)
KEF (http://www.kef.com/)
Acousic Energy (http://www.acoustic-energy.co.uk/)
Celestion (http://www.celestion.com/)

Its a surprising fact that the UK leads the world in speaker design.

[Victor ch]

I went into our local Bose store and had a demo - the salesman was saying isn't that incredible in the demo room but I just couldn't see it (or hear it!)

They are small cube speakers which says it all. In acoustics like optics (so forget a 5MP tiny phone camera) size matters.

Music is my passion and I have 1000's of CD's
.
We have a Tannoy (http://www.tannoy-speakers.com/) system with 1metre tall floor speakers. They are beautiful to look at and to listen to.

Others if you can get them are
QUAD (http://www.quad-hifi.co.uk/)
Wharfdale (http://www.wharfedale.co.uk/home.php)
Mission (http://www.mission.co.uk/)
Mordaunt Short (http://www.mordauntshort.co.uk)
KEF (http://www.kef.com/)
Acousic Energy (http://www.acoustic-energy.co.uk/)
Celestion (http://www.celestion.com/)

Its a surprising fact that the UK leads the world in speaker design.

True... The guy at the Bose retailer even made the terrible mistake to call them High Fidelity speakers, they where clearly NOT.

Actually I tested KEF and was about to switch but the least expensive floorstander (iQ5) was a tad out of my reach and didn't handle low frequencies the way I wanted. Apparently the US&A has few high end brands (I can only recall Klipsch to be honest) and yes, europeans (specially from the UK) lead the hi-fi industry.

Another curious thing is how the size thing doesn't matter that much (although your analogy is true), I mean, my dads Altec Lansing hi-fi speaker are 3-way cost like 800 bucks a piece and each woofer has 12", yet the sound isn't that 'bassy' nor precise when compared to the Klipshes, but definitely a very nice pair of speakers.

Ohh and one more thing, should I be concerned that I find it necessary to have my speakers at -2 in treble, cause if not I feel like the amp is raping the tweeters and my ears could start bleeding.

Victor

[needthephone]

Others if you can get them are
QUAD
Wharfdale
Mission
Mordaunt Short
KEF
Acousic Energy
Celestion

Its a surprising fact that the UK leads the world in speaker design.

Yes, its strange but true but the UK has been historically and still is excellent at speaker design. The BBC and ex BBC engineers seemed to have spawned some of the leading companies.

Tannoy invented the loudspeaker for example " Over The Tannoy".

QUAD are mega mega expensive, I did hear some and it was like you were in a concert hall hearing a live orchestra. Incredible. But you have to super rich to afford them.

PS Bose are brought by the same people who buy BMW 3 series. All image and pose.

[seattle]

"Ohh and one more thing, should I be concerned that I find it necessary to have my speakers at -2 in treble, cause if not I feel like the amp is raping the tweeters and my ears could start bleeding."

I think that is fine since the Klipsch tweeters are horn drivers and tend to be "bright" anyways. I also have a pair of Klipsch speaker and really enjoy them.

[garybUK]

Some of the best speakers i've heard are the Rogers brand, created by BBC engineers, they are no longer going (if you find a pair keep them!!)

Anyway check out the Sterling Broadcast LS3/5a V2 they have special drive units from KEF to BBC Spec's between £890 - £1000 and they look like a throwback to the 60's

Awesome speakers, truely awesome, specially on a good old Vinyl and a nice Sugden Tube Amp.

[LiveForever]

I really had to fight my corner with my wife to get the Big Tannoy speakers we ended up with. She thinks they look uguly but as they say beauty is in the eye of teh beholder.

I think I was unfair on BOSE as they are very discreet and do fit in well with a rooms decour as teye are so small and easy to hide. I suppose for the size they are they do pack an impressive punch. But they are not for me. I would rather sound quality over looks.

It was a close tie with the Mission's but Sail to the Moon (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YkpaJ6FAfZI) on radiohead's Hail To The Thief sounded just a bit better in the listening room.

[Victor ch]

Seattle: thanks man, I thought the Tractrix Horn did had something to do with it. Which Klipsch do you have?

needthephone: You're completely right, wish I could go to the UK sometime around. Like your BMW analogy lol.

garybUK: I've heard bout rogers but never actually seen/heard one...

LiveForever: Well, I think you were fair with Bose, I mean, they DO try to trick you into thinking that those little 2.5" (and like 30$) speakers can outperform bigger sized speakers, when actually they are pretty much crap. And well, if what you want is something loud and discrete there's always wall/ceiling mounted (not Bose ofc) speakers that will outperform those little cube speakers.

And I had a similar situation to yours... I was close to go KEF till I started testing them with electronic music and well, Klipsch (reference ones) outperformed the only ones I could afford (iQ5s) in terms of bass handling and 'room-shaking abilities' and I didin't wanted to get a sub right then (I do want one, but with the Klipsch I can wait)

Thanks to all who posted, keep posting your thoughts :D!

Victor

[yadmonkey]

Out of curiosity, a question to those who have mentioned all of these lesser known (among non-audiophiles) speaker brands, how to they compare in price to the Bose offerings?

This thread hasn't been too severe, but I've seen some real venom directed towards Bose on some forums. I suppose they ask for it somewhat through their immodest marketing, but that aside, I doubt they deserve quite the hatred they get based purely on product - at least not all of their products.

Take their headphones - I bought a pair of their on-ear headphones after having tried a bunch of others. They in no way compare to my AKG studio headphones through a good headphones amp, but they do serve a nice purpose. They are designed to fold up to be quite portable, very comfortable, and they sound pleasing to me through a mediocre headphones amp like an iPod. It's not an accurate or honest sound necessarily, but I suspect that they were designed to add oomph to consumer devices.

And as I mentioned previously, their PA systems are a godsend. Most audiophiles would know very little about what is involved in getting a good live sound, especially for acoustic musicians. It's one thing to make a band sound good to the audience and another to make it sound good to the band at the same time. For us wee jazz musicians, the budget just isn't there to get a pro sound guy and all of the professional PA and monitor equipment required to do so, not to mention the desire to cary all of that crap around. Those Bose "sticks" as I like to call them sound terrific in 360 degrees with very little tweaking and through very innovative design, they are extremely compact. As good as a pro jazz player's setup at a nice theater? No. An extremely workable alternative for perpetually underpaid semi-pros? Hell yeah.

Anyway, just a little something in defense of a company which surely attracts much of the poop they catch!

[RITZFit]

lol, this thread reminded me of a saying my friend picked up
"has no highs or lows? must be Bose" Personally, I've never liked any of the Bose systems I've tried. I could never get the right level bass or general clarity I wanted.

[Victor ch]

Out of curiosity, a question to those who have mentioned all of these lesser known (among non-audiophiles) speaker brands, how to they compare in price to the Bose offerings?

This thread hasn't been too severe, but I've seen some real venom directed towards Bose on some forums. I suppose they ask for it somewhat through their immodest marketing, but that aside, I doubt they deserve quite the hatred they get based purely on product - at least not all of their products.

Take their headphones - I bought a pair of their on-ear headphones after having tried a bunch of others. They in no way compare to my AKG studio headphones through a good headphones amp, but they do serve a nice purpose. They are designed to fold up to be quite portable, very comfortable, and they sound pleasing to me through a mediocre headphones amp like an iPod. It's not an accurate or honest sound necessarily, but I suspect that they were designed to add oomph to consumer devices.



Anyway, just a little something in defense of a company which surely attracts much of the poop they catch!

Well, KEF is quite expensive, same goes for B&W and B&O... Klipsch is reasonably priced... I mean I have the second cheapest floorstanders from the Reference series and they set me back $600 +taxes, double the amount of the Bose 301's but still quite cheap for high fidelity speakers. In terms of the price range from the Bose, well one can get some Sonys or some other brand like that within the price range and they'll beat them. The thing is that Bose claim themselves as high end and they charge ludicrous amounts of money for really jut OK sounding products. Take the Bose 901's, a relative has a pair and he swears by them, they're pretty much crap; they have like a gazillion 4.5" paper inside the enclosure yet the sound isnt as good (nor loud) as a 350$ PA speaker.

Victor

[Killyp]

Some of the best speakers i've heard are the Rogers brand, created by BBC engineers, they are no longer going (if you find a pair keep them!!)

Awesome speakers, truely awesome, specially on a good old Vinyl and a nice Sugden Tube Amp.

The LS3/5As are fantastic little speakers with classical music and some jazz. I don't find they do much for me with most other music though.

Sugden FTW. I have an old A48 amp (which has been passed down through the family) in service at the moment - sounds wonderful with a big old pair of speakers like my DM7s! Again though, not really very suited to a lot of modern music...

Yes, its strange but true but the UK has been historically and still is excellent at speaker design. The BBC and ex BBC engineers seemed to have spawned some of the leading companies.

Tannoy invented the loudspeaker for example " Over The Tannoy".

QUAD are mega mega expensive, I did hear some and it was like you were in a concert hall hearing a live orchestra. Incredible. But you have to super rich to afford them.

PS Bose are brought by the same people who buy BMW 3 series. All image and pose.

The BMW analogy is plain wrong. BMWs are built fantastically, drive fantastically, and look fantastic.

Bose doesn't 'drive' well, it isn't built particularly well, and IMO it doesn't look that special.

Out of curiosity, a question to those who have mentioned all of these lesser known (among non-audiophiles) speaker brands, how to they compare in price to the Bose offerings?

This thread hasn't been too severe, but I've seen some real venom directed towards Bose on some forums. I suppose they ask for it somewhat through their immodest marketing, but that aside, I doubt they deserve quite the hatred they get based purely on product - at least not all of their products.

Take their headphones - I bought a pair of their on-ear headphones after having tried a bunch of others. They in no way compare to my AKG studio headphones through a good headphones amp, but they do serve a nice purpose. They are designed to fold up to be quite portable, very comfortable, and they sound pleasing to me through a mediocre headphones amp like an iPod. It's not an accurate or honest sound necessarily, but I suspect that they were designed to add oomph to consumer devices.

And as I mentioned previously, their PA systems are a godsend. Most audiophiles would know very little about what is involved in getting a good live sound, especially for acoustic musicians. It's one thing to make a band sound good to the audience and another to make it sound good to the band at the same time. For us wee jazz musicians, the budget just isn't there to get a pro sound guy and all of the professional PA and monitor equipment required to do so, not to mention the desire to cary all of that crap around. Those Bose "sticks" as I like to call them sound terrific in 360 degrees with very little tweaking and through very innovative design, they are extremely compact. As good as a pro jazz player's setup at a nice theater? No. An extremely workable alternative for perpetually underpaid semi-pros? Hell yeah.

Anyway, just a little something in defense of a company which surely attracts much of the poop they catch!

The Bose PA speakers are well... again, mediocre sadly. I've used their classic PA speakers extensively and they're just mediocre at best. Their latest 'column' thingy is pretty good, but I've heard better, more portable and capable sound systems for the same price...

[yadmonkey]

Their latest 'column' thingy is pretty good, but I've heard better, more portable and capable sound systems for the same price...

I'm intrigued and would love a lead on an alternative because I'm hoping to invest in a new system in the next few months!

[needthephone]

My apologies to BMW, yes I totally agree, they are brilliantly engineered cars.
However, their cars, the 3 series in particular, do suffer in my opinion from the image of their perceived customers. They seem to attract young thrusting, middle manager types who like you to know they are young thrusting middle manger types. I'm young and I suppose I'm fairly comfortable but I wouldn't be seen dead in a BMW 3 series. Sorry its the conetations they conjur up.

On the subject of speakers I love my Missions.

Sombody said how they liked a song off a CD in the listening room on one set of speakers compared to another,

Its very important when you go and buy a decent pair of speakers to take some CD's reflecting the sort of music you like and hear them through the speakers. Often (and when I was at a Bose store this happened) the sales man will have a DVD of something like star wars so you will be blown away by the great explosions and laser zapping sounds. Don't be taken in by this as any half decent sub woofer will give you that ambient cinema explosion sound.

[yadmonkey]

However, their cars, the 3 series in particular, do suffer in my opinion from the image of their perceived customers. They seem to attract young thrusting, middle manager types who like you to know they are young thrusting middle manger types.

Ironically, some people feel the same about Apple! :D (except maybe the middle manager thing)

[Killyp]

My apologies to BMW, yes I totally agree, they are brilliantly engineered cars.
However, their cars, the 3 series in particular, do suffer in my opinion from the image of their perceived customers. They seem to attract young thrusting, middle manager types who like you to know they are young thrusting middle manger types. I'm young and I suppose I'm fairly comfortable but I wouldn't be seen dead in a BMW 3 series. Sorry its the conetations they conjur up.

On the subject of speakers I love my Missions.

Sombody said how they liked a song off a CD in the listening room on one set of speakers compared to another,

Its very important when you go and buy a decent pair of speakers to take some CD's reflecting the sort of music you like and hear them through the speakers. Often (and when I was at a Bose store this happened) the sales man will have a DVD of something like star wars so you will be blown away by the great explosions and laser zapping sounds. Don't be taken in by this as any half decent sub woofer will give you that ambient cinema explosion sound.

Couldn't agree more. Take in a CD of your favourite music, something you've listened to over and over again and really know what it sounds like. Don't let the salesman tell you which speaker is better, that's up to your own ears.

I'm intrigued and would love a lead on an alternative because I'm hoping to invest in a new system in the next few months!

Have a look at the Yamaha Stagepas systems, I have the 500 which is frankly, brilliant. I've PA'd a live funk/soul band with it, done some acoustic stuff with spanish guitars, ran a (very loud) party with them last night and got a live jazz gig come up soon. Very versatile, and they sound fantastic for a portable PA system. In many ways, they're comparable to some of the serious install speakers you see in big theatres in terms of sound quality. The built in mixer is very useful too, and surprisingly flexible given it's relatively basic design. Also has a built in reverb which may not be the best in the world, but is much better than a lot of reverbs etc... you find in budget desks.

[spamdumpster]

I really had to fight my corner with my wife to get the Big Tannoy speakers we ended up with. She thinks they look uguly but as they say beauty is in the eye of teh beholder.

I did not win this fight with my wife, and I ended up with a Bose 321 system -- chiefly because it's small & discreet.

I've been pleasantly surprised by the 321. Music sounds pretty good, and the simulated surround sound isn't terrible. It's certainly not real surround sound. Definitely not for audiophiles, but serves a good purpose. On a few occasions, someone has looked around for the rear speakers and was surprised to find that they weren't there.

Not a ringing endorsement, but better than nothing.

[Victor ch]

I did not win this fight with my wife, and I ended up with a Bose 321 system -- chiefly because it's small & discreet.

I've been pleasantly surprised by the 321. Music sounds pretty good, and the simulated surround sound isn't terrible. It's certainly not real surround sound. Definitely not for audiophiles, but serves a good purpose. On a few occasions, someone has looked around for the rear speakers and was surprised to find that they weren't there.

Not a ringing endorsement, but better than nothing.

You see, this is the one and only moment I'll agree with Bose, they designed super small speakers for this kinda things and one most give them the credit for innovation, but, then again, they do charge you like $4k for the lifestyle system and its just mediocre sounding. The demo room in the store where I bought the Klipsches was really the second best home theatre I've seen and the guys spent like 6.5K in that and totally blows Bose away; and it has the fancy version of it all, the Reference 83s with three 8inch woofers the big as$ double subwoofer etc....and one can get the setup with mines (rf-52s, smaller sub and all from the reference line) for $1.8k blowing Bose away by billions of miles.

Bose tries to trick you into believing those stupid cubes can make more sound than full surround speakers and that they also sound better, totally unacceptable, plus they charge you like a gazillion dollars for something that inside has $35 speakers. Not even audiophiles, regular people like me can tell the difference and when you've ticked the right boxes then you'll know what to get and that Bose is pretty much mediocre crap very well marketed; something that without a doubt will sound better than a piece o' ***** $99 sony or likewise cassete player, but not something worth the high price nor remotely high-end.

Victor

[LiveForever]

An interesting Poll at this Hi Fi Forum on "Bose Kit"
These guys know what they are on about...

Bose kit is:
Great kit worth having 3%
A rip off, no good, sold by marketing not quality 80%
Was good but not anymore 16%
http://forum.hifichoice.co.uk/viewtopic.php?t=16009&highlight=bose

Other good sites to research
http://whathifi.com
http://www.hifichoice.co.uk/
http://www.hi-fiworld.co.uk/
http://www.hifinews.co.uk/

[needthephone]

Wow, look at the contrast between this threads poll where its quite even for the lovers and haters

Do you love or hate Bose sound quality in their products?
Love 37.75%
Hate 43.71%
Never heard of it / I don't care 18.54%
And a similar poll where the voters know a little about sound quality. Where the haters outweigh the lovers 96% to 3%
Bose kit is:
Great kit worth having 3%
A rip off, no good, sold by marketing not quality 80%
Was good but not anymore 16%
http://forum.hifichoice.co.uk/viewto...highlight=bose

I think probably the main reason is that for "us" (although I don't own Bose) there are many factors which influence our choice. Music quality being just one of them, but also how it fits into the home decor, size, looks.

The serious audiophile will not compromise on sound quality and all other factors are very much secondary.

Its clearly not cost though as my Mission system was significantly cheaper than this Bose Lifestyle system they tried to flog me when I ventured into teh Bose store.

eg $3600 Bose (http://www.4electronicwarehouse.com/products/bose/lifestyle-48-iv.html)

$1500
Mission (http://www.wildwestelectronics.net/mission-speakers-uk-m-cube-speaker-system.html)

Although this is just a home theatre Mission system and not one for dedicated music. But it is a close comparison on small discreet systems. I have floor standers and bigger speakers all round but it was still way cheaper than Bose

[Victor ch]

(...)
eg $3600 Bose (http://www.4electronicwarehouse.com/products/bose/lifestyle-48-iv.html)

$1500
Mission (http://www.wildwestelectronics.net/mission-speakers-uk-m-cube-speaker-system.html)

Although this is just a home theatre Mission system and not one for dedicated music. But it is a close comparison on small discreet systems. I have floor standers and bigger speakers all round but it was still way cheaper than Bose

Yeah, the other day I heard the 5K version of the lifestyle thing and holy s••• its crap! stupidly designed non-fullrange speakers make sure that if you go to the other room where the cubes are (and not the sub) you wont hear the lows as their supposed to be, as if them by poor nature wasn't enough.

Victor

[Hawkeye411]

Love it ... too expensive though

[Victor ch]

Love it ... too expensive though

Then (no offense bro) you haven't heard much. Many get tricked (I did partially with the in-ears and almost the 301's) with assuming that if you pay an unprecedented amount of money then you'll get fantastic sounding stuff. Well marketed crap, the only product I'll support is the QC2, cause I have them and unlike other Bose products these ones sound quite good (not like really good, but better than the average headphone) and for being noise-canceling and 299$ a definitely well priced pair. (senns are at 450, audio tech at 250... so quite ok)

Victor

[yadmonkey]

Actually I think the in-ear headphones are refreshingly different in design with very little direct competition. I say this because they're not like other in-ear cans. Personally, I have a strong aversion to putting anything into my ears. As a musician, my ears are my greatest asset and it makes me nervous to put a speaker that close to my eardrum. The Bose in-ears sit comfortably a little outside of your ear canal, I think they sound great for things like iPods, and their placement gives a little extra sense of space.

Now I'm sure they don't compare in fidelity to this or that set of cans, but with a mediocre headphones amp like those which you'll find in an iPod, does it really matter that much? They sound very good to me for portable applications and again, I find the design to be extremely comfortable and don't feel like they stress my eardrums as much as any true in-ear phones I've used.

[Victor ch]

Actually I think the in-ear headphones are refreshingly different in design with very little direct competition. I say this because they're not like other in-ear cans. Personally, I have a strong aversion to putting anything into my ears. As a musician, my ears are my greatest asset and it makes me nervous to put a speaker that close to my eardrum. The Bose in-ears sit comfortably a little outside of your ear canal, I think they sound great for things like iPods, and their placement gives a little extra sense of space.

Now I'm sure they don't compare in fidelity to this or that set of cans, but with a mediocre headphones amp like those which you'll find in an iPod, does it really matter that much? They sound very good to me for portable applications and again, I find the design to be extremely comfortable and don't feel like they stress my eardrums as much as any true in-ear phones I've used.

I actually find their sound worst than the average, like if they put a tiny subwoofer inside a box inside another box so it'll be 'boomy'. No highs just lows, only Bose. And I always thought that sticking a headphone inside your ear canal was worse than having a circum/supra aural headphones placed over/on your ears (I was told this once and assumed it was sorta right , although I have no type of scientifically proven data to back it up) And your less scared to put a speaker INSIDE your ear than over it? Sorry that makes no sense.

Victor

[Killyp]

Actually I think the in-ear headphones are refreshingly different in design with very little direct competition. I say this because they're not like other in-ear cans. Personally, I have a strong aversion to putting anything into my ears. As a musician, my ears are my greatest asset and it makes me nervous to put a speaker that close to my eardrum. The Bose in-ears sit comfortably a little outside of your ear canal, I think they sound great for things like iPods, and their placement gives a little extra sense of space.

Now I'm sure they don't compare in fidelity to this or that set of cans, but with a mediocre headphones amp like those which you'll find in an iPod, does it really matter that much? They sound very good to me for portable applications and again, I find the design to be extremely comfortable and don't feel like they stress my eardrums as much as any true in-ear phones I've used.

You need to try some other earphones, of which there are many with a far better design and FAR better sound...

[yadmonkey]

You need to try some other earphones, of which there are many with a far better design and FAR better sound...

I'm open to suggestions, but keep in mind that we're talking about portable "bud" type headphones that don't go inside your ear canals. If there are better headphones of this type, then I'd love to know.

[DakotaGuy]

I love Bose. Love the style of their products and the sound. Some people don't like the "Bose sound" but I do. You could argue that they are overpriced, however they are a private company that funds a lot of research on top of their audio business. Bose is the only brand of speaker or headphone in my house.

[Killyp]

I'm open to suggestions, but keep in mind that we're talking about portable "bud" type headphones that don't go inside your ear canals. If there are better headphones of this type, then I'd love to know.

Bang & Olufsen A8

I love Bose. Love the style of their products and the sound. Some people don't like the "Bose sound" but I do. You could argue that they are overpriced, however they are a private company that funds a lot of research on top of their audio business. Bose is the only brand of speaker or headphone in my house.

'The Bose sound' is one which is matched by systems costing far less than half the price.

If you think the Bose kit looks nice, you need to have a look around. Boses' designs are boring, a little fussy in places and the proportions are all wrong. I liken them to burglar alarm sensors.

If you want to see a company who can combine design and performance in the correct way, B&O are the company to look at. Sound-per-pound wise, far ahead of Bose and some of the products are actually among the best in terms of sound-per-pound on the market...

[gkarris]

Love it - for certain applications.

I use it for movies in my home theater. I have a much older speaker system (the 5.1 was $500) and it sounded much better than speaker systems well over $1,000. All the cheap ones were just utter crap.

I also use a Bose 2.1 for my gaming rig.

The really small ones for a computer they have now are awesome, but at $400, they BETTER BE...

We have a Bose system in our church and it sounds incredible.

[Killyp]

Incredible? :eek: In a Church? :eek:

I'll eat my own hair if I every hear such a thing, and believe me I have a really small appetite in relation to my hair... :p

[ChrisA]

I think the Bose products are a good match to Apple's new glossy displays. People who care about accuracy and color fidelity hate both of them but if you like exagerated contrast and over saturated colors then Bose soundand glossy screens are for you.

[princealfie]

I prefer Ultimate Ears, Audio technica, and even Shure or Bang and Olufsen over Bose any day.

Bose distorts the sound with its fake attempt to dupe live sound! :rolleyes::confused:

[Victor ch]

.mac web gallery now available! (http://web.mac.com/victorch/Site/Photos.html)

Victor

[Killyp]

Nice kit. Room still looks like it could be a little boomy and too 'live'. What's going on in the listening position? (i.e., take a pic standing where the TV is pointing back).

[macwall]

The only good thing about bose is the marketing. There are a lot of cheaper products that are much higher quality.

[Victor ch]

Nice kit. Room still looks like it could be a little boomy and too 'live'. What's going on in the listening position? (i.e., take a pic standing where the TV is pointing back).

Thanks man! I dunno what you mean by 'boomy' LOL, and by 'live' i assume you mean maybe to harsh on the HF? And I'll take the pic in a few days.

Victor

[Evangelion]

Bose is the only brand of speaker or headphone in my house.

"A fool and his money will soon be parted"

[tersono]

Bose's one great product was the 901. It's still an exceptionally capable (if flawed) loudspeaker, provided you have a room that it can work well in (read: BIG). It's not the most tonally neutral thing out there, but the sheer scale of the soundstage is something to hear...

The rest of their loudspeaker range is pretty feeble, though, and always has been.

For what it's worth, I worked in high-end hi-fi for many years before I got bored with some of the pseudo-scientific BS that pervades the industry and moved on to I.T. I've had a lot of good gear through my hands over the last 30 years (and to the guys who posted about LS3/5as and Quads, I agree completely!), but have to say that the really exciting stuff is happening at lower price levels nowadays. Yes, there's still the majorly expensive stuff that appeals only to the wealthy or psychotic (we used to call 'em 'audio psychos' :D ), but these days you can get a large percentage of that high end performance at relatively sensible prices.

My current favourite mid-priced loudspeakers are Magnepan's budget A/V line - wall mounted panels for $299 and a floor-stander for $599. They need a decent active sub and they have a bit of HF rolloff, but they're staggeringly good for the dough - a real taste of the 'High End'. The floor standers offer 75% of the performance of Quad electrostats at around 10% of the price.

Difficult to get to hear, though - especially here in Europe - as Magnepan only sell 'em direct. :(

[miniConvert]

I think of Bose as a tacky, crappy brand... so whatever their marketing strategy it certainly hasn't worked on me :S

[Killyp]

Bose's one great product was the 901. It's still an exceptionally capable (if flawed) loudspeaker, provided you have a room that it can work well in (read: BIG). It's not the most tonally neutral thing out there, but the sheer scale of the soundstage is something to hear...

The rest of their loudspeaker range is pretty feeble, though, and always has been.

For what it's worth, I worked in high-end hi-fi for many years before I got bored with some of the pseudo-scientific BS that pervades the industry and moved on to I.T. I've had a lot of good gear through my hands over the last 30 years (and to the guys who posted about LS3/5as and Quads, I agree completely!), but have to say that the really exciting stuff is happening at lower price levels nowadays. Yes, there's still the majorly expensive stuff that appeals only to the wealthy or psychotic (we used to call 'em 'audio psychos' :D ), but these days you can get a large percentage of that high end performance at relatively sensible prices.

My current favourite mid-priced loudspeakers are Magnepan's budget A/V line - wall mounted panels for $299 and a floor-stander for $599. They need a decent active sub and they have a bit of HF rolloff, but they're staggeringly good for the dough - a real taste of the 'High End'. The floor standers offer 75% of the performance of Quad electrostats at around 10% of the price.

Difficult to get to hear, though - especially here in Europe - as Magnepan only sell 'em direct. :(

I actually think speaker design as a whole has taken a large leap forwards lately. Active designs are becoming far more common (simply because they are much smarter than passive designs by their very nature) and I'm actually hearing some 'digital' systems which sound better, if not much better than even the best 'analogue' systems out there.

Thanks man! I dunno what you mean by 'boomy' LOL, and by 'live' i assume you mean maybe to harsh on the HF? And I'll take the pic in a few days.

Victor

Boomy - the bass seems to really boom on certain notes, and sometimes seem a little lacking on others.

Live - too many reflections etc... - the sound from the speakers is blurred...

[yadmonkey]

"A fool and his money will soon be parted"

Kind of coy using a quote, but you essentially just called that guy a fool. Very rude and exactly why so-called "audiophiles" are often suspect in my book. It's about music, not audio.

I'm sure Bose is overpriced and overhyped and maybe there are better choices in terms of audio fidelity, but to call somebody a fool for choosing Bose crosses the line into snobbery. I run with some incredible musicians and I don't think any of them would consider themselves an "audiophile". I get goosebumps listening to old low-fidelity jazz on an iPod with stock headphones. It doesn't mean I don't appreciate the difference a real nice sound system makes, but the music comes first.

Look at it this way - I'd rather listen to Django or Wes play on a cheap plywood guitar than a mediocre guitarist playing a pre-war Martin. The former would give me butterflies, and the latter would at best give me an appreciation for the guitar. And of course the ideal would be to listen to either of them on a beautiful instrument, but the point is that music is about language, expression, liberation, and communication before it's about sound quality.

[Shotglass]

the point is that music is about language, expression, liberation, and communication before it's about sound quality.True, but for me, it just doesn't come across very well when it sounds harsh and tinny.

Also, calling a Bose customer a fool is actually justified, although in some cases it's no foolery but just ignorance. In my defense, I would be the last to say that no audiophiles are snobby. Either way, the quote is just a saying.

[yadmonkey]

You're right, it's just a saying. If Bose were putting out utter garbage, then you'd be foolish to buy their stuff, but they're not. We're talking about what people perceive to be better products and better values. I don't doubt for an instant that you can do better for the money, but it doesn't make someone a fool for liking the Bose sound and design. Naive maybe, but foolish is harsh.

[Victor ch]

Kind of coy using a quote, but you essentially just called that guy a fool. Very rude and exactly why so-called "audiophiles" are often suspect in my book. It's about music, not audio.

I'm sure Bose is overpriced and overhyped and maybe there are better choices in terms of audio fidelity, but to call somebody a fool for choosing Bose crosses the line into snobbery. I run with some incredible musicians and I don't think any of them would consider themselves an "audiophile". I get goosebumps listening to old low-fidelity jazz on an iPod with stock headphones. It doesn't mean I don't appreciate the difference a real nice sound system makes, but the music comes first.

Look at it this way - I'd rather listen to Django or Wes play on a cheap plywood guitar than a mediocre guitarist playing a pre-war Martin. The former would give me butterflies, and the latter would at best give me an appreciation for the guitar. And of course the ideal would be to listen to either of them on a beautiful instrument, but the point is that music is about language, expression, liberation, and communication before it's about sound quality.

You're quite right, music comes first. Thats why I chose Klipsch over KEF, better sounding for my music (not saying better sounding overall), but, the point is that sound quality DOES matter; I don't consider myself an advanced audiophile (wannabe maybe lol) but I sure have discerning ears and oh boy, Bose isn't what they claim themselves to be (although they're not exactly terrible). I can't stand how people listen to electronic music (where those beats are quite important and low) with their iPod headphones and @ 128kbs or lower nor the ones with those bass monster car speakers....

I honestly think the best sound equipment is that one that fits all your needs and makes you go into a weird musical ecstasy, I highly doubt Bose would be the right one for someone (given the fact that there are better sounding equipment for less dough) and well Klipsch just does that to me, I can assure B&O or B&W does that to Killyp and Yamaha does it for Luis (si mae lo meti en mi thread hahah) and others have their preferred brands....

Victor

[Victor ch]

You're right, it's just a saying. If Bose were putting out utter garbage, then you'd be foolish to buy their stuff, but they're not. We're talking about what people perceive to be better products and better values. I don't doubt for an instant that you can do better for the money, but it doesn't make someone a fool for liking the Bose sound and design. Naive maybe, but foolish is harsh.

Naive indeed... This reminds me of the day I went to test the 301's (sound isn't quite crappy but not worth $400) and there was this family (who definitely didn't look that they could afford it) testing and ready to buy a $5K Lifestyle system... I had almost no knowledge but my ears where pretty sure that those cubes sounded dreadful and that there's no way in hell someone would buy those things... the family did BTW.

Victor

[Shotglass]

You're right, it's just a saying. If Bose were putting out utter garbage, then you'd be foolish to buy their stuff, but they're not. We're talking about what people perceive to be better products and better values. I don't doubt for an instant that you can do better for the money, but it doesn't make someone a fool for liking the Bose sound and design. Naive maybe, but foolish is harsh.Foolish is harsh, but please bear in mind that some of what Bose puts out (think Lifestyle systems) really is utter garbage. It's the most cheapest components they could find, compressed into a poorly built plastic cube, it sounds like an alarm clock's built in radio, and they sell it as a high fidelity product.
Maybe the Triports have nice bass, but that won't change my mind about the company being BS. No one ****s their customers over so bad.

[daneoni]

I do admit its a little bit overpriced for what you're getting but the QC2s (bose product i have) are pretty darn good. The first rev build quality was really crap/shoddy and broke often. I had to have mine replaced twice thank God for their warranty.

My final replacement has been great thus far its even better sounding than when i first got it possibly due to burn-ins

But yeah i think its safe to say you're buying the name more than anything else. I mean they sound good but not good enough to warrant a $400 price tag

[Victor ch]

I do admit its a little bit overpriced for what you're getting but the QC2s (bose product i have) are pretty darn good. The first rev build quality was really crap/shoddy and broke often. I had to have mine replaced twice thank God for their warranty.

My final replacement has been great thus far its even better sounding than when i first got it possibly due to burn-ins

But yeah i think its safe to say you're buying the name more than anything else. I mean they sound good but not good enough to warrant a $400 price tag

Yeah, They're pretty much the only Bose product I don't consider crappy sounding. I have them too and even though the sound is far from precise or fantastic, it sure is nice and that combination of noise canceling and a 'good' sound is phenomenal (specially for traveling) I've actually plugged them into my NAD amp (with the thingy in Lo) and the sound was actually good (coming from a movie). Their price tag isn't too shabby neither, the Sennheiser opponent have a $450 tag and Audio Technicas go for $250; versus Bose's $299, and they all have mics and fancy noise-canceling abilities, not just simple noise canceling.

Another thing that I noticed with the QC2's is that they --unlike other Bose products-- aren't "bass monsters" and when compared to their Over-Ear (those popular ones that are $140) counterpart they sure beat the cr*p out of them. I really wanted circum aural headphones so thats why I didn't buy in-ears or likewise.

Victor

[Killyp]

I do admit its a little bit overpriced for what you're getting but the QC2s (bose product i have) are pretty darn good. The first rev build quality was really crap/shoddy and broke often. I had to have mine replaced twice thank God for their warranty.

My final replacement has been great thus far its even better sounding than when i first got it possibly due to burn-ins

But yeah i think its safe to say you're buying the name more than anything else. I mean they sound good but not good enough to warrant a $400 price tag

Bose aren't 'a little bit' overpriced, they're 'massively' overpriced. Their mark up is several times that of other brands.

B&O are at about 30%
B&W are at about 40%
Sony are at about 60%
Bose are at about 90% markup (seriously) on their lifestyle systems, even more for their 'top of the range' systems.

I've heard the Quiet Comforts before though and they do seem rather good, I'll give them that one :P

[Victor ch]

Bose aren't 'a little bit' overpriced, they're 'massively' overpriced. Their mark up is several times that of other brands.

B&O are at about 30%
B&W are at about 40%
Sony are at about 60%
Bose are at about 90% markup (seriously) on their lifestyle systems, even more for their 'top of the range' systems.

I've heard the Quiet Comforts before though and they do seem rather good, I'll give them that one :P

I can't debate on those numbers, except the Bose one.... You are SO right, their "top of the line" equipment is just way to expensive and you get complete trash.

Look, their 'best' one goes for $3,499, now lets compare this to emm let say Klipsch; Take mine as the main speakers (RF-52) two surround speakers(RS-42) one center speaker (RC-52) and one subwoofer(RW-10d) for an approximate of $1,800. Now you're missing the receiver and dvd player, add lets say and Onkyo 5.1 channel ($300 approx.) plus another Onkyo DVD/CD player (with 720/1080p up conversion too) for approx. $250. Lets add this up please... yes its $2,350, thats $1,149 less than the Bose one! And there absolutely NO DOUBT that such system will sound a billion times better than the Bose one.

I took Reference speakers (not the synergy cheaper ones), floorstanders instead of bookshelf ones and even a good receiver to drive those speakers (not sony or likewise) with a matching dvd player and well... you can even get a PS3 to get HD playback and a 160GB :apple:tv for even more stuff and still spend less dough than with the Bose one:eek: How you like them apples Bose? :cool: Just look at the pics and ask yourself why Bose charges so much?

Victor

[Killyp]

Their CD changers are horrific as well - they're identical to the one which is in the back of my dad's BMW...

[Victor ch]

Yah, their like an effed up version of a PS3. And their amps are also hideous, they look like an awkward heatsink, and I can only imagine how bad their actual specs must be.

Victor

[Killyp]

It's difficult to judge their amps, as they're always connected to their own speakers....

[Victor ch]

LOL, I managed to hook up the Bose subwoofer that came with the Companion setup and works "flawlessly" with the Klipsches. OFC the sound isn't amazing but it sure adds that extra kick I wanted for movies and to listen to music at low levels (so I don't have to crank them up to feel the bass)Its prolly gonna stay 'till october when I buy the proper Klispch one. Im pretty sure someone will follow with a post saying NOOOO you're killing the Hi-Fi...

EDIT: Ok after more serious testing I realized the Klipsches actually produce more bass at high volumes and way way better sounding (Thats how I listen to them lol) So for music listening Im not gonna use it, for movies however, I will plug it in and use it as that extra (and distorted) boom may come in handy.

Victor

[SDLSteve]

I loved the 901's

[displaced]

EDIT: Ok after more serious testing I realized the Klipsches actually produce more bass at high volumes and way way better sounding (Thats how I listen to them lol) So for music listening Im not gonna use it, for movies however, I will plug it in and use it as that extra (and distorted) boom may come in handy.
Victor

Hmm. If there's distortion, it could be that there's an impedance or power-level problem. You should be able to mix any brand of speaker (technically) as long as your amp is capable of driving them (impedance) and the speaker's capable of accepting the amp's output power. Of course, whether it sounds good subjectively depends on the listener!

I'm doing OK without a sub at the moment. My amp does a reasonable job of merging the .1 low effects channel into the fronts, and my front speakers (these (http://www.mordauntshort.com/summary.php?PID=51&Title=Avant%20906i%20Floorstander)) do bass pretty well. One day I'll pick up the matching subwoofer (http://www.mordauntshort.com/summary.php?PID=19&Title=Avant%20909%20subwoofer)!

[Killyp]

I have been thinking about adding a sub to my setup. I generally don't like them, but I guess a good one would probably do the trick.

I have one of these (http://www.audioreview.com/mfr/yamaha/subwoofers/PRD_126956_2741crx.aspx), which is pretty rubbish at best - doesn't really extend the response of my mains at all.

Looking at adding one of these (http://www.homecinemachoice.com/reviews/hccreviews/Subwoofers/REL/RELQuake.php) or possibly an ASW 608 (http://www.hifigear.co.uk/site/scripts/product_browse.php?product_id=4308&category_id=601) or even an ASW 601 (http://www.hifigear.co.uk/site/scripts/product_browse.php?product_id=4446&category_id=601) if I can stretch...

In fact, I'm not even sure if I'm going to change my hifi setup at all now. :p In the process of looking at buying some *big* subwoofers to augment my PA system (when I say big, I don't mean relatively big, I mean bigger than a washing machine big :D).

[Shotglass]

You need help. Or, more money to buy gear. Either way, you need to get out of this situation :D

[Killyp]

I'm so much in need of help, I'm setting up a charity - for myself.

If I did get a subwoofer, I'd actually get two, probably the RELs, one for left and one for right, so I get proper imaging.

I know they say subwoofers are omnidirectional and you can't tell where the bass is coming from, but I find I always can, especially in my room...

[Shotglass]

I'm on the same page. The only audiophile using subwoofers I know uses two. And they're huge. And quite punchy.

[Victor ch]

Im definitely gonna get a subwoofer, either Klipsch (reference OFC) or KEF but the specs are making me go for the Klipsch one... Also once I get this I can buy a center channel speakers (from klipsch prolly) and I already have enough speakers for 5.1 (I own a couple of other floorstanders)! then I could buy a proper receiver and voila! I have a home theatre, and a mighty good I'll say hehe.

Victor

[Victor ch]

Well, there has been some minor changes. The amp and the newly added tuner are in my computer desk (away from the tv; interference generator) and the PS3 is no longer hooked up. Ah, and the music now comes from an AirPort Express, the sound is just better. This setup will remain in their current position (possibly add a proper cd player) and when I get and HDTV I'll move everything to the tv furniture since the tv will be wall mounted. I think I've never heard radio sound so good hahah that old Sansui tuner is quite awesome.

Victor

[Mathue]

As far as audio equipment goes, I miss Technics.

Ahh, yes, I miss that brand as well. Bought them extensively through the 80's. Good value for the money, robust amps with pretty good specs and decent speakers, CD players and tape decks. A shame that Matsushita let the brand dwindle in the US. Today they make turntables and electric pianos. And interesting side note, on October Matsushita will change its name to Panasonic bringing the Matsushita and National brands to an end. I can only assume that the remaining use of the brands of Ramsa and Technics will soon follow.

[Killyp]

Yeh Technics made some great stuff in their day...

[Shotglass]

Yeh Technics made some great stuff in their day...I believe they made some very nice CD players in the early 90s, is that correct? I might be mistaking brands here, but I think I remember a champagne-colored, button-riddled player that looked alot like Sony's early attempts if you know what I mean.

[Victor ch]

Got rid of my Bose speakers and my uncle "gifted"me an HDTV (and I "gifted" him the Bose's). I posted in the Home Theater thread but I'll say its worthy of reposting :D

Gear:


Sharp AQUOS 32" LCD HDTV.
Klipsch Reference 52's floorstanders.
NAD C315BEE amplifier.
60GB PlayStation3
AirPort Express for streaming music.


Its effin awesome and Im adding more stuff throughout the year :D.

Victor

[Luis]

I've always been impartial to Bose and their products, but today was different.
My Bose In-Ears died out of the nowhere, the right earphone stopped working and from then it all went downhill, they are useless now. Thanks to that random failure (you can imagine how angry i was after having to deal with the screaming kids on the way to school in the bus), I had to undust my old PX100 Senns, and (after forgetting how they sound) realized they kicked the living crap out of my in-ears; I mean, I had forgotten you could actually hear mids and highs. So not only my $49 Senns destroy the much more expensive in-ears, they also have survived every single stress test after being mishandled and neglected, and my in-ears which I cared for like they were golden decide to die on me all of the sudden. No more Bose for me thankyouverymuch.

[Victor ch]

I've always been impartial to bose and their products, but today was different.
My Bose In-Ears died out of the nowhere, the right earphone stopped working and from then it all went downhill, they are useless now. Thanks to that random failure (you can imagine how angry i was after having to deal with the screaming kids on the way to school in the bus), I had to undust my old PX100 Senns, and (after forgetting how they sound) realized they kicked the living crap out of my in-ears; i mean, i had forgotten you could actually hear mids and highs. So not only my $49 Senns destroy the much more expensive in-ears, they also have survived every single stress test after being mishandled and neglected, and my in-ears which i cared for like they were golden decide to die on me all of the sudden. No more Bose for me thankyouverymuch.

Having been there when this "mishap" occurred I must say Im sorry bro. On the other side you're listening to better sounding equipment now (albeit the part that I have your PX100's now :p)

Anyway, Im getting rid of my last piece of Bose equipment, the QC2's. A pair of Senn's HD280 pro should arrive in the next month or so. Here's a graphic representation of my transition from Bose to good sounding equipment:

From http://media.shinyplastic.com/prodimg/bose-in-ear-headphones-large.jpg to http://it.people.com.cn/mediafile/200506/07/F2005060714140700000.jpg



From http://www.johnlewis.com/jl_assets/product/230405862.jpg to http://www.reampedaudio.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/05/maudio-front.jpg


And shortly from http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/productImages/6/6/00000103266-BoseQuietComfort2-large.jpeg to http://aes.harmony-central.com/111AES/Content/Sennheiser/PR/HD-280-Pro.jpg

Goodbye Bose, it wasn't nice to know you.

Victor

[iParis]

I really like them... they just need to lower their prices by a couple hundred dollars. :rolleyes:

[Victor ch]

I really like them... they just need to lower their prices by a couple hundred dollars. :rolleyes:

And when this happens their price will be equal to their sound quality.

Victor

[OutThere]

My JBL floorstanders and HK amp put any Bose setup I've heard to sleep, and for ~$700 (though I got everything at nearly 50% off).

For that price, which would you rather have...?

[Dmac77]

Honestly I think that Bose products are overpriced *****, but I'm indifferent to people buying them. I personally am saving for a nice pair of Shure canalphones.

Don

[Sesshi]

My JBL floorstanders and HK amp put any Bose setup I've heard to sleep, and for ~$700 (though I got everything at nearly 50% off).

For that price, which would you rather have...?

Do the JBL's have an alarm clock built-in?

Horses for courses, as they say. And it really is hilarious to see a bunch of Apple users ragging on Bose, since the two makers might as well be two peas in a pod in their clientele.

[Santa Rosa]

Got rid of my Bose speakers and my uncle "gifted"me an HDTV (and I "gifted" him the Bose's).

Know who got the better deal there lol :)

IMHO its a simple equation Boss = S***e

Im no audiophile but I know what sounds decent and what doesnt. I went into the Boss shop out of interest one day when hunting around for speakers, their demonstrations were embarassingly bad and their pricetags were stupid. I just said straight up to the guy, "you must actually be taking the piss, your stuff sucks ass completely, how can you sell this junk." I then left the shop, never to return.

My favourite set of speakers are my original 8 year old Harmon Kardons, and my ultimate aim would be to have a Linn system. So will just have to wait and see!! Take Boss near me and I might throw up over you.

[princealfie]

Bose sucks and I'm sticking to either B and W or at least Polk for my next iPod docking station.

[DigiCatRedux]

Granted, "good sound" is relative to the individual - but I will honestly say I've never ever come across a Bose setup that wasn't matched or even beaten to the floor by another brand in terms of sound quality, and usually for hundreds of dollars less.
I wouldn't say I hate their products... I just know I can get the same quality for less money.

[Killyp]

In all fairness to the little Wave systems, they do produce a good sound for their size, and I could happily enjoy an album through one. However, I know I'd much more rather have a proper system.

Know who got the better deal there lol :)

IMHO its a simple equation Boss = S***e

Im no audiophile but I know what sounds decent and what doesnt. I went into the Boss shop out of interest one day when hunting around for speakers, their demonstrations were embarassingly bad and their pricetags were stupid. I just said straight up to the guy, "you must actually be taking the piss, your stuff sucks ass completely, how can you sell this junk." I then left the shop, never to return.

My favourite set of speakers are my original 8 year old Harmon Kardons, and my ultimate aim would be to have a Linn system.
Instead of Linn (as great as they are), I'd look for some Naim. They're Linn's biggest competitor and tbh, with a pair of B&W 800Ds, you'll struggle to find anything which sounds better. If you can't afford the £30k+ you'd need to spend for that setup :rolleyes: then I'd recommend the Arcam Solo with a pair of B&W 686s, 685s, 684s or 683s.

Bose sucks and I'm sticking to either B and W or at least Polk for my next iPod docking station.
As good as Polk's dock is, the Zeppelin is in a slightly different league.


In other news, I was in a Bose shop the other day in the North of the UK and their 301s + 901s were wired out of phase :rolleyes: They were powering them with an Arcam Solo though which is pretty good going...

[Victor ch]

My JBL floorstanders and HK amp put any Bose setup I've heard to sleep, and for ~$700 (though I got everything at nearly 50% off).

For that price, which would you rather have...?

Yeah exactly, altought the clock radio one (pictured) is rather good, not fantastic and I rather have an iPod dock. The bigger version of the one pictured is pure crap, seriously, my sister (who gives sh** about sound) said the $1K "Acoustic Wave" DAB sounded odd, then she heard my Studiophiles and couldn't understand how someone could buy that system.

Honestly I think that Bose products are overpriced *****, but I'm indifferent to people buying them. I personally am saving for a nice pair of Shure canalphones.

Don

True, I rather go with the "well marketed crap" theme :p

Do the JBL's have an alarm clock built-in?

Horses for courses, as they say. And it really is hilarious to see a bunch of Apple users ragging on Bose, since the two makers might as well be two peas in a pod in their clientele.

I don't quite get the Apple/Bose comparison, but OK. And I don't find this hilarious.

Know who got the better deal there lol :)

IMHO its a simple equation Boss = S***e

Im no audiophile but I know what sounds decent and what doesnt. I went into the Boss shop out of interest one day when hunting around for speakers, their demonstrations were embarassingly bad and their pricetags were stupid. I just said straight up to the guy, "you must actually be taking the piss, your stuff sucks ass completely, how can you sell this junk." I then left the shop, never to return.

My favourite set of speakers are my original 8 year old Harmon Kardons, and my ultimate aim would be to have a Linn system. So will just have to wait and see!! Take Boss near me and I might throw up over you.

LOL, actually when I went to audition the 301's the guy claim they were hi-fi, even though I didin't hate them so much I knew they were NOT hi-fi, barely even "good". (thank god (and Killyp) that I didn't buy the Bose ones)

Bose sucks and I'm sticking to either B and W or at least Polk for my next iPod docking station.

From what I've heard the B&W Zeppelin is quite fantastic, a tad pricey I'll say.

Granted, "good sound" is relative to the individual - but I will honestly say I've never ever come across a Bose setup that wasn't matched or even beaten to the floor by another brand in terms of sound quality, and usually for hundreds of dollars less.
I wouldn't say I hate their products... I just know I can get the same quality for less money.

Good sound is good sound, when people are fooled (I've shamefully been there) that paying more money equals better sound they tend to go Bose, I have a couple of friends that insist their Bose headphones are the shizznit, when they really are just OK sounding, a pair of much cheaper headphones do the job better.

In all fairness to the little Wave systems, they do produce a good sound for their size, and I could happily enjoy an album through one. However, I know I'd much more rather have a proper system.


(snip some text)


In other news, I was in a Bose shop the other day in the North of the UK and their 301s + 901s were wired out of phase :rolleyes: They were powering them with an Arcam Solo though which is pretty good going...

Indeed, my grandfather is a believer in Bose (he's the one that actually owns the Acoustic Wave system and several Wave clock ones that I've tested) and those little clock ones sound OK and pack some features and are "reasonably" priced (I think they're like 350~400$).

LOL, in the Bose store in here they hook up the speakers to Yamaha receivers and such, the "Bose" labeled ones are unplugged and in the floor haha.


Victor

[Sesshi]

I don't quite get the Apple/Bose comparison, but OK. And I don't find this hilarious.

I really hate convoluted multiquotes, as much as mods may espouse them.

As I said elsewhere and then said "As I said elsewhere", the two manufacturers have very similar philosophies: Bose makes well-designed (from a user interaction point of view) yet ultimately rather mediocre and limiting products, but made easy to use, easy to buy and easy to achieve a desired result for those who don't understand audio-tech, dressed up in shiny packaging and marketed to the hilt with hyperbole that doesn't justify the product. Build quality and attention to detail in the engineering - not design - is somewhat variable as well.

Now where have I seen that before? Hmmmm...

Quoting myself again, "I own a couple of Bose products, and I find they do the job for me much in the way that Apple products do for entertainment. When I have an undemanding use for something which I don't want to fuss with or get all fancy with, I pick Bose."

I apply exactly the same rationale to my everyday players - a couple of iPods - which are although perfectly acceptable, not the best sounding DAPs/PMP's out there. If the critical level of sonic difference between say a Bose and a B&W dock is what you're raving about, I could point at that iPod you're trying to dock into it and smirk in a really annoying way :p

Me, I just don't need the degree of control or quality for the majority of my casual listening and can happily (or at least, readily) trade it off for the no-brainer features of the iPod/iTunes ecosystem. If I need significantly better audio for another purpose, I go elsewhere - as I do with computing products.

The fact that everyone here, on this board above all others, bashing Bose can't see the almost exact parallel is what makes it pretty funny.

[Victor ch]

I really hate convoluted multiquotes, as much as mods may espouse them.

As I said elsewhere and then said "As I said elsewhere", the two manufacturers have very similar philosophies: Bose makes well-designed (from a user interaction point of view) yet ultimately rather mediocre and limiting products, but made easy to use, easy to buy and easy to achieve a desired result for those who don't understand audio-tech, dressed up in shiny packaging and marketed to the hilt with hyperbole that doesn't justify the product. Build quality and attention to detail in the engineering - not design - is somewhat variable as well.

Now where have I seen that before? Hmmmm...

Quoting myself again, "I own a couple of Bose products, and I find they do the job for me much in the way that Apple products do for entertainment. When I have an undemanding use for something which I don't want to fuss with or get all fancy with, I pick Bose."

I apply exactly the same rationale to my everyday players - a couple of iPods - which are although perfectly acceptable, not the best sounding DAPs/PMP's out there. If the critical level of sonic difference between say a Bose and a B&W dock is what you're raving about, I could point at that iPod you're trying to dock into it and smirk in a really annoying way :p

Me, I just don't need the degree of control or quality for the majority of my casual listening and can happily trade it off for the no-brainer features of the iPod/iTunes ecosystem. If I need significantly better audio for another purpose, I go elsewhere - as I do with computing products.

The fact that everyone here, on this board above all others, bashing Bose can't see the almost exact parallel is what makes it pretty funny.

Fair enough, Im still reluctant to agreeing on this :p They're overall different products, although they serve the purpose of other ones (computing and all) and the same goes for the speakers. As for the remark on the B&W Zepellin its still an all-in-one audio setup, its not meant to be the most sonically accurate thing, for its purpose its prolly the best or one of the best in its kind. For the best "hi-fi experience" I use a CD player that via gold plated cables goes to the amp, from there the signal travels trhough OFC copper with gold plated banana plugs, finnaly reaching the hi-fi speakers, not from iPod so don't smirk the event. The iPod is there for just the mobile necessities. As for Apple computers, they do include a series of "technologies" that make them partially worth the price, Im aware a Dell or something might to the job but is either vulnerable to other stuff and might not include the series of technologies that in such case do have a purpose (OS X, array of sensors and small details) that in the case of being a speaker might not end up in better sonic performance (Bose's technologies, other branded technologies). Take Bose, they say their speakers can achieve life-like sound, this in other words is trying to say "high-fidelity" something they can't reach. Apple doesn't say they're the best computers on earth, I wish to think so but I know they aren't. Im still oddly confused of your point here. You don't see me and others bashing Genius speakers, bashing cheap generic speakers, we're "bashing" an audio brand that claims to be top-of-the-line when they aren't.

Victor

[ZiggyPastorius]

Fair enough, Im still reluctant to agreeing on this :p They're overall different products, although they serve the purpose of other ones (computing and all) and the same goes for the speakers. As for the remark on the B&W Zepellin its still an all-in-one audio setup, its not meant to be the most sonically accurate thing, for its purpose its prolly the best or one of the best in its kind. For the best "hi-fi experience" I use a CD player that via gold plated cables goes to the amp, from there the signal travels trhough OFC copper with gold plated banana plugs, finnaly reaching the hi-fi speakers, not from iPod so don't smirk the event. The iPod is there for just the mobile necessities. As for Apple computers, they do include a series of "technologies" that make them partially worth the price, Im aware a Dell or something might to the job but is either vulnerable to other stuff and might not include the series of technologies that in such case do have a purpose (OS X, array of sensors and small details) that in the case of being a speaker might not end up in better sonic performance (Bose's technologies, other branded technologies). Take Bose, they say their speakers can achieve life-like sound, this in other words is trying to say "high-fidelity" something they can't reach. Apple doesn't say they're the best computers on earth, I wish to think so but I know they aren't. Im still oddly confused of your point here. You don't see me and others bashing Genius speakers, bashing cheap generic speakers, we're "bashing" an audio brand that claims to be top-of-the-line when they aren't.

Victor

Actually, they do. The Macbook Air introduction. Steve Jobs' exact words were, I believe: "As you all know, Apple makes the greatest laptops in the world..."

[Victor ch]

Actually, they do. The Macbook Air introduction. Steve Jobs' exact words were, I believe: "As you all know, Apple makes the greatest laptops in the world..."

Fair enough, why don't you start a "Why do you hate/love Apple computers?!" thread?. On the other hand, if Im not mistaken a PC World mag. article claimed the MBP as the best PC laptop, how many What Hi-FI? Hi-Fi News, Sterophile or other magazines claimed a set of Bose speakers as the Best or one of the best?. Im still hesitant to say they don't correlate as much as some have told, this "comparison" could also be applied to cars, tv brands, furniture, jewelry etc. I insist they're way too different concepts.

Victor

[Chromako]

Sound okay, oo, nice. Then you look at the price and see what you could get for the same amount and the smile, if there was one, turns blah. I guess their PA stuff is good, but Tannoy is so much better. Headphones? try Audio-Technica or AKG, Sennheiser, or Shure. Speakers? not my speciality but I think that any B & W would blow them away, and those are really pricey. Or Tannoy, or Avant, or nice Cambridge Soundworks, or Klipsch. Looks? B&O is quite nice, though I think overpriced, still. Computer speakers? Blue Sky. Home theatre? What about Yamaha? just to start. I just don't see any reason why one should buy Bose. And those people who say 'I've got stuff that's better than you because it's Bose' soooo annoy me.' They aren't the best but cost enough to be. rant over.

And about Steve saying Apple makes the best laptops? I disagree, too. Some of the best? sure. I actually think the MBA was a piece of Apple pulling a Bose, to a smaller degree... sigh. nobody's perfect. Some are just more perfect than others. :p

[Sesshi]

Sound okay, oo, nice. Then you look at the price and see what you could get for the same amount and the smile, if there was one, turns blah. I guess their PA stuff is good, but Tannoy is so much better. Headphones? try Audio-Technica or AKG, Sennheiser, or Shure. Speakers? not my speciality but I think that any B & W would blow them away, and those are really pricey. Or Tannoy, or Avant, or nice Cambridge Soundworks, or Klipsch. Looks? B&O is quite nice, though I think overpriced, still. Computer speakers? Blue Sky. Home theatre? What about Yamaha? just to start. I just don't see any reason why one should buy Bose. And those people who say 'I've got stuff that's better than you because it's Bose' soooo annoy me.' They aren't the best but cost enough to be. rant over.

And about Steve saying Apple makes the best laptops? I disagree, too. Some of the best? sure. I actually think the MBA was a piece of Apple pulling a Bose, to a smaller degree... sigh. nobody's perfect. Some are just more perfect than others. :p

Why would you buy Bose?

It's less true than it used to be since many, many other manufacturers have crowded into the 'lifestyle' hi-fi market over the last 5 or so years, but the 'Wave' systems were revolutionary for the time - not in terms of technology, but the marketing application of the technology. The HT speakers in particular were 'wife-friendly', and I know many guys who've bought Bose systems specifically with the approval of their wives since it didn't muck with the decor. It was a somewhat belated wake-up with the iPod explosion but many headphone makers are also now going after the same market that Bose is, and ironically Bose themselves were caught out, releasing a portable CD player as tragically late as 3 years ago. But it is a 'lifestyle' brand and still recognised as such.

And that's exactly what Apple is. 'lifestyle' computing. You could do a heck of a lot better for most, but it's friendly to people who don't know what they should be buying but make their decisions based on other factors, such as how it looks - or to people who do know better but need an application where outright function can be sacrificed for looks, or other attributes.

I sometimes have requirements like that in audio as well as in computing (although in computing, I'd say it's a slightly more debilitating compromise). The Triport AE headphone for example is very easy and comfortable to wear and also easy on the ears in terms of their sonic response. I think it sounds pretty mediocre in terms of absolute quality, it's relatively fragile and it's not that hugely isolating - but there are situations where it's the perfect fit. For better audio, for better isolation, etc - I have others. If I depended on audio accuracy and day-in, day-out use as a profession, I'd trash it as it'd likely break, and it's not accurate enough for monitoring. But in terms of who it's built for, I can't speak too ill of it. It's not like it's branded for 'Pro's ;)


As for the PCMag review, given the wording in the review and the somewhat misleading tag of "the fastest Vista notebook that we tested" I'm wondering if it was an exercise in zeitgeist-surfing hit-bait. Other pubs have been more circumspect, giving praise where due but not going overboard. It may well have been the fastest Vista machine they had available to them at the time, but it has never been the fastest overall Vista portable *I* can buy. And by the way, the SoundDock does feature prominently in many audio publications, where it is usually positively reviewed. I take it Victor ch that's a valid endorsement too?