As I mentioned to another poster, I am not questioning the findings, however you inquired if another poster has taken apart the speakers, analzyed them with sound equipment. My question was simple, and now I have my answer. You have not.
No, I asked if he had taken them apart, nothing about analyzing. And yes, I have taken them apart.
Is it your premise that I am lying?
Drawing is no good. The distance between each pair should stay constant, otherwise your stereo separation changes as you rotate. Which is another reason to have 4, I suppose. Not that you get any stereo separation unless you hold the thing very close to your face.
LOL, not much he or Apple can do with an iPad. I like the iPad, but it isn't a 12' room.
Coming from someone who clearly has never owned Bose anything. Calling it junk and comparing it to a clock radio is retarded.
They make good products, they may be overpriced and you definitely can get better bang for your buck going with another brand, but they aren't junk, just overpriced.
I would say you are the one who has never owned one. I have, and still have family members that do.
Also someone suggested Bose should test their products with standards like frequency response, which is one of the most meaningless stats on the package of a sound product there is, you simply CANNOT judge a headphones quality by the manufacturers stated frequency response. Take a look at the back of the packaging of some cheap JVC Marshmallows, then do the same with some expensive Shure 535's and you will see what I mean. Instead of stats, try listening to the product before making your mind up about them
I have listened to them extensively, just as I have many other speakers. I'm an audio nut, far beyond being an Apple nut. And nobody said that frequency response is the only way to test speakers. However, if a speaker cannot even play 200Hz audibly....no thanks.
I might add that a proper frequency response is far more valuable than you are giving it credit. Also, marketing lies. Whatever is printed on the box means nothing. Measure it, or use measurements from trusted sources. Then go listen for a final decision.
Bose sued Consumer Reports in 1981 for libel. The basis was that CR editors significantly changed the wording of the original reviewers report to make the product sound worse. A lower court found for Bose. A higher court later reversed the libel decision, finding that the changes, although they did change the original reviewer's intent, were made "without malice," as "malicious intent" is required for a libel judgement.
Is this what you were referring to when you said "ose sued audio magazines", or is there some other incident along these lines? If so, which magazine(s), and when?
Yes, I said that poorly. Sorry about that. I did say it better in a different post.
Audio and
Stereophile had other kinds of fights with Bose, and stopped reviewing their products.
Audio no longer exists, it was folded into its brother
Stereo Review, nka
Sound & Vision. I stopped reading print mags about a decade ago, so I haven't kept up on recent events.
LOL!Like there is some law about the naming of such things.
Like a lot of companies they like to use their own special names,like "bass module".Sounds very high tech.
But there is no one to "allow" of disallow them to call it a subwoffer.Get real.
I think he is refering to Bose stores. The official Bose wording of their device is "bass module", and I believe the employees are directed to call it that, and not use the word "subwoofer".
I don't really have a problem with this particular Bose trait, many sub/sat speaker sets from many companies do not really have a "subwoofer", not the way most audio nuts think. I would not call a speaker a sub unless it can play below 30Hz effectively. They could all call them bass modules and be more accurate, if you ask me.
