The only good thing about bose is the marketing. There are a lot of cheaper products that are much higher quality.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Why do you hate/love Bose products!?
- Thread starter Victor ch
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
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
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'
), 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.
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'
), 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 think of Bose as a tacky, crappy brand... so whatever their marketing strategy it certainly hasn't worked on me :S
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'
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.
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...
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.
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.
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.
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
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
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.
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
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
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
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
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
tv for even more stuff and still spend less dough than with the Bose one How you like them apples Bose? Just look at the pics and ask yourself why Bose charges so much? Victor
Attachments
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
Victor
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
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) do bass pretty well. One day I'll pick up the matching subwoofer!
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, which is pretty rubbish at best - doesn't really extend the response of my mains at all.
Looking at adding one of these or possibly an ASW 608 or even an ASW 601 if I can stretch...
In fact, I'm not even sure if I'm going to change my hifi setup at all now. 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 ).
I have one of these, which is pretty rubbish at best - doesn't really extend the response of my mains at all.
Looking at adding one of these or possibly an ASW 608 or even an ASW 601 if I can stretch...
In fact, I'm not even sure if I'm going to change my hifi setup at all now.
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 ).
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...
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...