bose and its bad rep

[corElement]

I can go on. But why whip a dead horse again and again in this forum

That made me lol

 

[milestoneseeker]

...
I believe people have wished for a Bose at different stages of their audiophile cycle but none have wished for it in the relatively later stages. The more you understand "your" music, the more fun it is to gravitate towards a component hi-fi than a Bose setup.

I think that there are two types of audiophiles....

2. Those who grew up without access/exposure to true hi-fi components and ended up thinking that "Bose" is the holy grail of hi-fi. This category of people believed that "Bose" is the ultimate system because that is what has been marketed and "fed" to them as being the best.

As I had mentioned, ditto At one point, I used to travel from Gurgaon to CP's Bose showroom in 2001 just to experience their demos. I still remember those guys playing clips of Thomas Crown Affair and me going gaga over the "effects".

 

[apk]

There was a time in my teens when I used to love Metallica, Alice Cooper, GnR, etc. I don't listen to them any more !

There was a time in my early twenties when I was in love with Bose and dreamed of owning a 'Bose' system. I don't want 'Bose' today !

Does it mean that Metallica and Bose are bad? There was a time when I loved them....it's just that my tastes and preferences have changed, and I have moved on.

I see no reason to trash Bose. They work well for the people they are targeted at - namely the average joe. It is just not an audiophile product targeted at audiophiles.

 

[wlg]

Hi
I friend bought a Bose System in Singapore about four years ago, an IC in the subwoofer had gone bust, the Bose service center refused to do any repairs unless she produced the receipt of duty paid on the set.

 

[coaltrain]

i'm sure there are many who have already read this article.
if you haven't, do take a look. quite an eye (ear?) opener!


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

 

[koushik]

I see no reason to trash Bose. They work well for the people they are targeted at - namely the average joe. It is just not an audiophile product targeted at audiophiles.

If it is not, then it should be priced right. The background of all Bose discussion (though not always said) is their price point. No one is complaining about sony/philips.

 

[nandac]

>I'm sure there are many who have already read this article.
>if you haven't, do take a look. quite an eye (ear?) opener!
>www.intellexual.net/bose.html]intellexual net

i went through this article carefully and found the same standard arguments about inferior materials, defective/outdated technology etc most of which the points of comparison was the practices/views of the other standard hifi companies.

but didnt find anything evaluating bose on its own philosophy and standpoint.

The author complains that the driver of the cube costs only $35 and cleverly relates it to the $1200 price of the whole set. But the price of the single cube is only like 100 dollars. And how much are we to think b&w spent on its $1000 n805?

Regarding the authors other complaint about bose using acoustic rooms and other carefully selected music and movie sequences to demonstrate its products : dont other companies do this?

And in multiple hifi shops in the usa, I have seen bose lay side by side with b&w and sonus faber and dynaudio.

One interesting thing in the article was the cold hard numbers section where it says : Still, this leaves a frequency gap between the satellites and bass module of about 80 Hz! That is 80 hertz of sound that is completely erased within the system's internal crossovers! I wonder how Bose figured out which 80 hertz matters least in the audible spectrum? I will say though that this gap accounts for a huge loss in midrange sound, which is responsible for the majority contralto, baritone, and tenor vocals in music, and many sound effects in home theater. And let us not forget that the Acoustimass system also ignores audible signal from 20Hz to 45Hz on the low end (deep bass), and 13KHz to 20KHz on the high end (high treble).

But is this gap really perceived in a listening session? If such a gap were true and truly audible, then much music will sound horrible in a bose system. But in reality, it doesnt but sounds good (in its price point). and I am sure many bose owners listen to such music without hearing any obvious loss.

So practice varies with theory (or such propounded by various hifi companies and pundits). Bose is doing something which goes against the basic principles of hifi as propounded by major hifi companies, but still is able to get a good sound.

So needless to say I wasnt too convinced by the arguments in the article. Bose I think has developed a technology which radically differs in its approach from those of mainstream companies. Looking for views which would judge bose from its own perspective and merits/deficiencies.

Btw there is also a kind of insinuation made against bose of dishonesty due to the above arguments. But amar bose donated the majority of the shares of his billion dollar corporation to MIT. Doesnt sound like a dishonest person to me. Wonder how many other 'honest' companies would do that?

Just to clarify : I am not a bose-o-phile. I used to own three bose systems : an acoustimass system, a wave system and a wave radio all of which were gobbled up by my covetous relatives and friends.

But fair is fair. we need more informed views.

 

[koushik]

But is this gap really perceived in a listening session? If such a gap were true and truly audible, then much music will sound horrible in a bose system. But in reality, it doesnt but sounds good (in its price point).
....
So practice varies with theory (or such propounded by various hifi companies and pundits). Bose is doing something which goes against the basic principles of hifi as propounded by major hifi companies, but still is able to get a good sound.

Yes it does sounds horrible. When I auditioned Bose, it sounded horrible to me to say the least. Leave the frequency gap issue. There was no mids, the sound was all over the place with no focus, no imaging. No instrument separation, no tight bass. Loose airy bass that was. Wonder how people bear it who understand slightest of what the real hi-fi does at the same price bracket. It appeals to sony philips user to whom it is a clean sounding. Yes it is clean sounding not as distorted as boom boxes.
For me the bad reputation is not for the frequency gap of 80 hz but the horrible unbearable sound from an insanely priced system that lead me to search for the reason for the bad sound and then I found that I am not the only one who didn't like the sound but most of the people don't like the sound, whose opinions matter.

Talking about the cost of B&W. How many serious classical recording studios keep Bose as their reference and how many use the matrix series of b&w? We can still get the best out of matrix 805 even after 25 years. How many Bose systems will see the light of their 10th birthday?

 

[square_wave]

If such a gap were true and truly audible, then much music will sound horrible in a bose system. But in reality, it doesnt but sounds good (in its price point). and I am sure many bose owners listen to such music without hearing any obvious loss.

The point is that it does not sound good. Many years back we compared a wharfedale diamond 8.2 bookshelf speaker with the acoustimass speaker system in a friends home using a Nad C 320bee amplifier and a Marantz cd player.

- The acoustimass system gave more perceived bass. But the bass was muddy and boomy with no pitch definition or detail. The wherfedale was able to produce a more convincing picture of all the bass instruments.

- Midrange was far superior and convincing in the wharfedale

- Highs was more extended and convincing in the wharfedale.

Overall the diamond 8.2 was a superior speaker. Truthful and honest in its price point. And it cost only 12k those days. My friend promptly sold the Bose and picked up the wharfedale.

 

[nandac]

i dont' want to comment on your opinion on how bose sounds because my own experience is different as i don't find their sound bad. likewise so many millions of those who own bose systems.

>How many Bose system will see the light of their 10th birthday?

i bought my acoustimass in 1997 from audioking in iowa. it is still working fine for my cousin who uses it now.

 

[nandac]

- The acoustimass system gave more perceived bass. But the bass was muddy and boomy with no pitch definition or detail. The wherfedale was able to produce a more convincing picture of all the bass instruments.

- Midrange was far superior and convincing in the wharfedale

- Highs was more extended and convincing in the wharfedale.

Overall the diamond 8.2 was a superior speaker. Truthful and honest in its price point. And it cost only 12k those days. My friend promptly sold the Bose and picked up the wharfedale.

but many people in these same forums express similar complaints about various speakers of recognized brands (non-bose), right? everyday we see such complaints about this or that brand/product. in comparison one product is often better than the other.

btw how much does a wharf diamond cost today? bose acoustimass stereo speaker set costs like 20 k.

 

[square_wave]

but many people in these same forums express similar complaints about various speakers of recognized brands (non-bose), right? everyday we see such complaints about this or that brand/product. in comparison one product is often better than the other.

btw how much does a wharf diamond cost today? bose acoustimass stereo speaker set costs like 20 k.

This is a very subjective territory. So a forum discussion in these lines will never lead anywhere.

20k !

What you could do is to sit a 16k bookshelf speaker on a pair of 4k stands in your room and do a comparison and post back. Make sure the cables, amplifier and source are revealing enough.

This is a much more accurate way to proceed from here. This is what folks like us do

 

[koushik]

@Nandac - I don't see any signature, so just asking. What system do you use? Bose?

 

[nandac]

@Nandac - I don't see any signature, so just asking. What system do you use? Bose?

it is good to resist the temptation to see things in black and white.

 

[koushik]

Of course, but just hope that you practice what you preach.

 

[apk]

The point is that it does not sound good. Many years back we compared a wharfedale diamond 8.2 bookshelf speaker with the acoustimass speaker system in a friends home using a Nad C 320bee amplifier and a Marantz cd player.

- The acoustimass system gave more perceived bass. But the bass was muddy and boomy with no pitch definition or detail. The wherfedale was able to produce a more convincing picture of all the bass instruments.

- Midrange was far superior and convincing in the wharfedale

- Highs was more extended and convincing in the wharfedale.

Overall the diamond 8.2 was a superior speaker. Truthful and honest in its price point. And it cost only 12k those days. My friend promptly sold the Bose and picked up the wharfedale.

Agree with you totally that Bose is not an 'audiophile' product. But then there seems to be tons of people out there who buy or aspire to buy 'Bose'. They are doing it for many reasons......lifestyle statement, looks, 'bragging' rights etc; many factors that may not be related to sound at all!

Case in point: The recent Salman Khan movie "Ek tha Tiger". Now I would not go anywhere near this movie in my life.....but a large portion of our country is lapping this up. It does not appeal to me, and may be trash in my eyes, but it does have a high degree of appeal to many folks out there. Who am I to say that "Ek tha Tiger" is a bad movie. Am I not trying to be "elitist" by claiming it to be trash.

Live and let live......

P.S - I have never owned nor do I aspire (now) to own Bose

 

[Thad E Ginathom]

Bose maintained a better reputation for PA systems than for hifi. Is this still true?

I know that the Madras Music Academy have one of the best-sounding auditoria here, and it is Bose equipment, but then, many music halls in Chennai have such bad sound systems that it is easy to be best!

 

[nandac]

Bose maintained a better reputation for PA systems than for hifi. Is this still true?

I know that the Madras Music Academy have one of the best-sounding auditoria here, and it is Bose equipment, but then, many music halls in Chennai have such bad sound systems that it is easy to be best!

yea you are right - i remember seeing bose in music academy some 5 years back when john mclaughlin played with the new shakti.

 

[saikatbiswas82]

I think this thread is going to last long like "Right now I am listening to ..."... :lol:

Anyway, to give you all a little background about my musical extravaganja... I never had an audio equipment (apart from a black n white tv and a radio ) in my house during my childhood.

I started with a philips walkman in class 7 (i guess). I bought it with my pocket money (fortunately, I was not scolded that time for wasting money).

Later on during school days, I upgraded )) to "Santosh" Cassette Deck and "Santosh" speakers. BTW... Santosh is a very famous brand for cheap quality audio equipments available in West Bengal.

During college days, I bought my first PC which came with a Creative 2.1 speaker system. I was incredibly happy with the improvement of sound quality over my "Santosh" system.

When I got my first job, I decided to upgrade my 2.1 setup to home theater. So I bought another Creative 5.1 home theater system along with a Creative sound card. I was simply blown away.

One year later, I got a chance to audition Bose Lifestyle system in Kolkata. While I was taking the audition, I was asking myself....where am I??!!! How sound of music became so alive??!! so vivid??!!. That one audition changed my perception about good sound/audio systems. From then on, I have been dreaming of owning a BOSE system in my lifetime.

After using my awesome creative system (to me so far) for 5 years, I thought go ahead for an upgrade and started searching all forums/suggestions.

A couple of months back, I found this forum accidentally. When I was going through all the threads, it felt like I did hit a jackpot.

I asked some questions here, got so many suggestions, read old threads and decided to go ahead with seperates. I went went to the store, auditioned and picked up Yamaha and Monitor Audio combo.

The whole point of my storytelling is... just to prove the fact that I did not have a good hi-fi before. As a result I did not have good ears for quality music.

All the time (for my previous systems), I have been taking suggestions from experienced folks while buying a new audio equipment. I was never bluffed a single time. With each upgrade came great improvement of audio quality. I would like to thank all those people who helped with their valuable suggestions.

Now to tell something about my online research )) while selecting this system, I found one video review of an sound engineer (I don't remember his name or don't have the link right now). He appreciated BOSE for their unique quality. No matter at what volumes different songs are recorded at, BOSE will try to mitigate that and will play your song collection bringing them at a similar volume level to make things synchronous.

Ever since, I could not find any good recommendation/suggestion for a BOSE product from any audiophile.

To tell you one more fact, RicherSounds is a major audio equipment seller in UK. When I visited their store and asked for their feedback, they simply ruled out the possibility of BOSE and suggested to go ahead with seperates.

So I do believe, BOSE could have been my first love, but I finally I ended up with with a far far better system.
The same happened to my personal life as well...

 

[koushik]

Thanks Saikat, for sharing your experience with us