What do you think of BOSE?

[RanDum72]

LoL you can't HEAR what Frequencies can't be PRODUCED now can you??????

LOL my ass, so a speaker that has published specs like my Polk RT35i's or my neighbors NHT sb2's that has a range from 50-25000hz (55-22000hz for the NHT), how much of that can you hear? Human hearing has an upper limit of 20000hz (20hz a the lower end) and you can run the gamut of musical ranges off the three speakers (Bose, Polk, and NHT) with cymbals, kick drums, flutes, and they all sound the same(very good), with each speaker having a certain character of their own. You can run a test CD off these speakers and measure it with a sound meter and all of these speakers do a very good job at various frequencies(and again, your bias is more towards the small satellite/bass module models. I'm talking about the 301, a BOOKSHELF SPEAKER). It seems like you are just TOO pre-occupied with the specs and not enjoying the music here.

The bass module is such crap..... it has to be the funniest *innovation* yet

Sure and now can you count how many manufacturers actually use this concept? Even home theater is based on this concept ( and just to remind you, bass are frequencies anywhere from 300hz downwards, a SUBWOOFER is another thing whre its supposed to reproduce anything below around 60-50hz).
Instead of just reading specs and reviews (biased ones at that), why don't you go out there and listen to some speakers? I'm not a Bose fan but my ears know what a good speaker sounds like ( and yes, I will know if there is a hole in the frequency response). Quoting web sites and articles doesn't make you an expert in speakers nor bashing a brand because they don't publish specs (although its a good thing if they can) makes you one either.

 

[spidey07]

<< you can run the gamut of musical ranges off the three speakers (Bose, Polk, and NHT) with cymbals, kick drums, flutes, and they all sound the same(very good), >>



You have just dismissed yourself from making any kind of judgement of speakers with that singular statement. If they all sound the same to you then so be it, but the rest of the world can hear marked differences in those three manufacturers.

oh well.

 

[GasX]

<< So, do you think that anybody else can make 2-inch speakers that sound as good as theirs? If you compare them to larger speakers, then yes, larger speakers may sound better. But they are 2 INCH DRIVERS that sound amazingly good for their size. Obviously, small speakers will have limits but for their size ( and intended function of having good sound with small size), they are amazing. >>

I guess you have never heard of Gallo Speakers. They beat Bose cubes like a red headed step child (even to my non-audiophile trained ear.)

 

[DanJ]

<< LOL my ass, so a speaker that has published specs like my Polk RT35i's or my neighbors NHT sb2's that has a range from 50-25000hz (55-22000hz for the NHT), how much of that can you hear? Human hearing has an upper limit of 20000hz (20hz a the lower end) and you can run the gamut of musical ranges off the three speakers (Bose, Polk, and NHT) with cymbals, kick drums, flutes, and they all sound the same(very good), with each speaker having a certain character of their own. You can run a test CD off these speakers and measure it with a sound meter and all of these speakers do a very good job at various frequencies(and again, your bias is more towards the small satellite/bass module models. I'm talking about the 301, a BOOKSHELF SPEAKER). It seems like you are just TOO pre-occupied with the specs and not enjoying the music here. >>



Man...I'm not talking about specs. I'm talking about people doing frequency analysis of the speakers. Seeing how many decibals speakers can pump out at a given range. If a speaker cannot produce a given range at a high enough decibal output you cannot hear it. I'm NOT talking specifications as Bose, first off, will not give them, and second, would just lie about them anyways. I'm talking actuall real-life listening and analysing. You can say that you can hear it, but you're just hearing what can be produced, you cannot hear what the speaker cannot do. AGAIN I'm NOT talking specs like you so want me to be; in fact I rarely have talked specs, I'm talking real world performance. If a speaker has smooth frequency response through the spectrum then you can hear fine detail you cannot hear on other speakers; this is a FACT no matter how much you want to believe that I'm talking mumbo jumbo. Oh, and i'm not talking about ranges that are outside of human hearing; I'm talking about ranges you SHOULD be able to hear.

Maybe you didn't remember me saying that BOSE SUED a magazine for posting the frequency analysis of their speakers. SUED a magazine for posting what their speakers can produce. IS THIS NOT SHADY? DO YOU NOT CARE?

For some reason I don't think I'm ever going to convince you of the fact that Bose cannot reproduce sound the way it was intended to be heard. If you're happy with them fine; but don't close your eyes to the fact that they are inferior speakers for the money.

Frequency response is not SPECS it simply shows how well a speaker performs in the real world. In fact, frequency analysis is what puts specs to shame, it allows the consumer to see what he can expect to hear; if you can't understand that then you need to do some reading.


Other, then that, I don't even know what you want me to say about the bass module. It's a needless proprietary POS part that isn't near subwoofer performance. Bose could easily have attempted to make a subwoofer that connected via standard interconnects..but they had to dumb it down for the consumer I guess. Plus, the fact that you're only going to be hearing down to about 40Hz via this *bass module* you're losing just about everything that subwoofers are famous for.

You haven't presented any argument other then "i can hear every single frequency just fine" which is totally ridiculous. You keep thinking I'm talking about specs when I'm talking about real world performance through actual data analysis.

Somehow I expect you to reply.

 

[DanJ]

<< I guess you have never heard of Gallo Speakers. They beat Bose cubes like a red headed step child (even to my non-audiophile trained ear.) >>


Yep, you're right. Gallo at least attempts to make good speakers in small sizes. Plus they don't use *bass modules.*

 

[RanDum72]

You have just dismissed yourself from making any kind of judgement of speakers with that singular statement. If they all sound the same to you then so be it, but the rest of the world can hear marked differences in those three manufacturers

There's a few billion people out there, spidey. That is one, all-encompassing statement!

DanJ, your opinion is based solely on the Bose Acoustimass series of speakers( satellite and bass module). If you are not aware that Bose makes other speakers, like BOOKSHELFS (which is what I'm talking about), then you should be. You cannot make a broad generalization based on the peformance of the satellite speakers and apply it to ALL Bose speakers.

As for the Gallo speakers, can they outperform larger speakers costing the same? Can they reproduce bass? I bet those speakers need a subwoofer (or in Bose-speak, BASS MODULES)!

 

[GasX]

<< DanJ, your opinion is based solely on the Bose Acoustimass series of speakers( satellite and bass module). If you are not aware that Bose makes other speakers, like BOOKSHELFS (which is what I'm talking about), then you should be. You cannot make a broad generalization based on the peformance of the satellite speakers and apply it to ALL Bose speakers. >>

There is a whole other set of issues with their other speaker systems and they all deal with the concept of reflected sound...



<< As for the Gallo speakers, can they outperform larger speakers costing the same? Can they reproduce bass? I bet those speakers need a subwoofer (or in Bose-speak, BASS MODULES)! >>

Of course they need a Subwoofer. One thing, though, Gallo calls it a sub-woofer. Why does Bose insist on changing the name? Well, for one, the crossover is set so high that a normal sub would play half the signal. Hooray for Bose? not really. Bose already uses smaller woofers than are in a basic low-end sub. To then add the requirements of reproducing a wider range of frequencies justs reduces the quality of the sound it is capable of producing.

 

[DanJ]

<< DanJ, your opinion is based solely on the Bose Acoustimass series of speakers( satellite and bass module). If you are not aware that Bose makes other speakers, like BOOKSHELFS (which is what I'm talking about), then you should be. You cannot make a broad generalization based on the peformance of the satellite speakers and apply it to ALL Bose speakers. >>



RanDum you're basing your conclusions on ignorance. Yes, I know they make bookshelfs; but that doesn't mean they put anymore effort into them.

Do you know what there speaker cones are made of??? PAPER; just about the worst thing possible. Yea, paper is really expensive; you should pay top dollar. (sarcasm)

I wonder how much you know about the Bose patented bookshelf technology that the 301s/501/701/901's use. Where as most speaker manufacturers aim all the elements of the speakers forwards, Bose choses to reflect them in all different directions. Now lets think about this, and think about the reasons few other speaker company's use it (and no, its not that Bose has a patent).

Music is recorded to create a stereo image that when played back on nice equipment should be re-duplicated. You should be able to close your eyes and pick where the different sounds are coming from, let it be bass guitar, lead singer, drums, etc... you SHOULD be able to do this. Bose screws this image beyond compare, leaving you no image, just a wall of sound that sounds nothing like how it was produced. I assume you think this is a good thing?

SO NO, I'm not just talking about their weak satellites, I'm talking about the spectrum of their products. Seeing that speakers like the 901 use multiple small speaker elements the bass capable of being produced by this wonder of technological ignorance is often highly distorted, as small drivers cannot go even near as low as a larger driver, and when they try to (by using multiple small drivers) the bass delivered is very poor and distorted; you must not care.

I find your call out of the Gallos laughable though.

"As for the Gallo speakers, can they outperform larger speakers costing the same? Can they reproduce bass? I bet those speakers need a subwoofer (or in Bose-speak, BASS MODULES)! "

First off; you've never experienced a subwoofer if you equate bass module to equal a subwoofer. IT DOES NOT (more on that later).

Do you not understand that the bass module is proprietary? That it serves no function unless you use it with Bose systems? How many other manufacturers do this in the home theater department??? Yea, name one quality manufacturer for me please; i'm dying to know. And as Mwilding so kindly pointed out, the bass module, in actuality, provides little more then what quality satellites would provide in the bass department, as quality satellites can actually go relatively low. This bass module is a poor excuse for insanely poor designed satellites. Ever wonder why Bose doesn't say how deep their bass module goes??? THIS IS THE SELLING POINT OF SUBWOOFERS; MANUFACTURERS LOVE TO TELL; Bose does not. ARE BELLS NOT GOING OFF IN YOUR HEAD????

Of course the small Gallos can't produce low bass; at least they provide with you a SUBWOOFER that can be used elsewhere or substituted. More then we can say about Bose.

And one more thing; I'm generalizing their products; swinging back and forth if you will. My frequency analysis arguments apply to EVERYTHING Bose makes so don't tell me i'm just beating up on their satellites (which deserve to be beat up on).

You've yet to provide one argument in your defense besides "I can hear all frequencies." Congratulations.

Bose is a horrible excuse for a speaker manufacturer. If you can't eventually realize that, you haven't experienced quality sound.

 

[Servnya]

<<

<< DanJ, your opinion is based solely on the Bose Acoustimass series of speakers( satellite and bass module). If you are not aware that Bose makes other speakers, like BOOKSHELFS (which is what I'm talking about), then you should be. You cannot make a broad generalization based on the peformance of the satellite speakers and apply it to ALL Bose speakers. >>



RanDum you're basing your conclusions on ignorance. Yes, I know they make bookshelfs; but that doesn't mean they put anymore effort into them.

Do you know what there speaker cones are made of??? PAPER; just about the worst thing possible. Yea, paper is really expensive; you should pay top dollar. (sarcasm)

I wonder how much you know about the Bose patented bookshelf technology that the 301s/501/701/901's use. Where as most speaker manufacturers aim all the elements of the speakers forwards, Bose choses to reflect them in all different directions. Now lets think about this, and think about the reasons few other speaker company's use it (and no, its not that Bose has a patent).

Music is recorded to create a stereo image that when played back on nice equipment should be re-duplicated. You should be able to close your eyes and pick where the different sounds are coming from, let it be bass guitar, lead singer, drums, etc... you SHOULD be able to do this. Bose screws this image beyond compare, leaving you no image, just a wall of sound that sounds nothing like how it was produced. I assume you think this is a good thing?

SO NO, I'm not just talking about their weak satellites, I'm talking about the spectrum of their products. Seeing that speakers like the 901 use multiple small speaker elements the bass capable of being produced by this wonder of technological ignorance is often highly distorted, as small drivers cannot go even near as low as a larger driver, and when they try to (by using multiple small drivers) the bass delivered is very poor and distorted; you must not care.

I find your call out of the Gallos laughable though.

"As for the Gallo speakers, can they outperform larger speakers costing the same? Can they reproduce bass? I bet those speakers need a subwoofer (or in Bose-speak, BASS MODULES)! "

First off; you've never experienced a subwoofer if you equate bass module to equal a subwoofer. IT DOES NOT (more on that later).

Do you not understand that the bass module is proprietary? That it serves no function unless you use it with Bose systems? How many other manufacturers do this in the home theater department??? Yea, name one quality manufacturer for me please; i'm dying to know. And as Mwilding so kindly pointed out, the bass module, in actuality, provides little more then what quality satellites would provide in the bass department, as quality satellites can actually go relatively low. This bass module is a poor excuse for insanely poor designed satellites. Ever wonder why Bose doesn't say how deep their bass module goes??? THIS IS THE SELLING POINT OF SUBWOOFERS; MANUFACTURERS LOVE TO TELL; Bose does not. ARE BELLS NOT GOING OFF IN YOUR HEAD????

Of course the small Gallos can't produce low bass; at least they provide with you a SUBWOOFER that can be used elsewhere or substituted. More then we can say about Bose.

And one more thing; I'm generalizing their products; swinging back and forth if you will. My frequency analysis arguments apply to EVERYTHING Bose makes so don't tell me i'm just beating up on their satellites (which deserve to be beat up on).

You've yet to provide one argument in your defense besides "I can hear all frequencies." Congratulations.

Bose is a horrible excuse for a speaker manufacturer. If you can't eventually realize that, you haven't experienced quality sound. >>



Absolutely 100% without a shadow of a doubt, correct.

 

[DanJ]

<< Absolutely 100% without a shadow of a doubt, correct. >>



Thanks

 

[RanDum72]

RanDum you're basing your conclusions on ignorance. Yes, I know they make bookshelfs; but that doesn't mean they put anymore effort into them.

Ignorance?! I am trying to be as objective as I can be with the obvious bias and hysterics that you obviously posses. The Bose direct.reflected sound is not the only one out there. Definitive have designs that has drivers on the front AND the rear. Cambridge soundworks also has that as well as many other speaker makers. You claim that your opinion is based on the whole spectrum of Bose products while it is obvious from you rant and links that most, if not all of it, is purely based on the Satellite/sub "module" (or subwoofer) models (which is bigtime ignorance). The 201 and 301 speakers are classic two-way designs ( in the case of the newer 301, a 3-inch tweeter is back-firing while a 2 inch one is front, 201's are purely forward facing drivers with no rear firing drivers whatsoever). And they DO NOT SOUND like the sub-sat models AT ALL. Like I said, they sound as accurate as my friend's $700/pair Boston VR bookshelfs. I'm not talking about the effort that they put in these designs ( the paper cone tweeters and the bass drivers are the same, which granted is not bleeding edge), I'm talking about the sound. As for the Gallo "subwoofers", the round ones are passive and has an 8-inch driver. In bass output and extension, they are not any better than the Bose "bass modules" nor any other sub/sat models. In fact, they may even be more expensive (there's another argument for "overpriced").

As for sound "like they are meant to be heard", tell me, is there a speaker out there that will reproduce sound that is 100% accurate from the original material? even the very best frequency sweeps or the so-called best speaker designs WILL NOT BE ABLE TO DO that. You can run every scientific test out there but it all boils down to subjective tastes of the listener and his preception of sound. You talk about "being able to pick an instrument of a recording and place it where it is" and claim Bose "messes it up". Its just your bias working, I bet that blind listening tests will prove you wrong if you listen to bunch of bookshelf speakers.

Overall, you can rant about how much you hate Bose and that somebody who happens to like it is "not an audiophile like you". Ranting doesn't make you an audiophile and the lack of objectivity doesn't bode well for yor argument either. I don't claim to be an "audiophile", I've been listening to speakers for almost 15 years ( I even make my own,crossovers,cabinets, etc..). I don't have any particular love of Bose nor do I have any "hate" for it. I don't feel strongly about any speaker brand at all. Granted, Bose is not cutting edge or does it use the most advanced materials for their drivers. There are probably better sounding speakers out there. But Bose DOESN"T sound bad at all, in fact they sound very good. You may have convinced yourself that they sound bad based on your research but a lot of people out there actually like the way they sound. You can go ahead and call them "uninformed" or "ignorant" for not reading measurements (or demanding one) and reviews by so-called "audiophiles" but that is not the point. The point is, many people like the way Bose sounds and are very happy with it. They don't care how biased and unhappy you are, they like their speakers and you can go ahead and leave them alone.

End of story.

 

[CocaCola5]

Since this thread is back, I'll take the chance to sadly admit that I once(7yrs ago) did attended a Bose Product Demo about the Accoustimass Clock Radio/CD-player. I have to say though these guys sure know how to market their products.

 

[misterj]

i wanna join in the fun too! bose is blow!

any idea what the dealer cost is on their products, specifically the acoustimass am3? i had to resort to ordering these for someone (yes i have sinned) for the rears from a 'high end' shop and theyve been totally screwing me for more than a month on my orders. i know theyre gonna try and charge me 299 retail. again, i had no choice, forgive me, they only offered me store credit. =/

 

[DanJ]

<< Ignorance?! I am trying to be as objective as I can be with the obvious bias and hysterics that you obviously posses. >>


You're the one that told me you could hear the full spectrum of frequences, even if a given speaker can't produce them; of course, you'd never know what Bose could produce because they wont give you any real world measurements.



<< The Bose direct.reflected sound is not the only one out there. Definitive have designs that has drivers on the front AND the rear. Cambridge soundworks also has that as well as many other speaker makers. >>


Of course there are bipole and tripole speakers, but this is not what Bose is doing. For the most part bipoles are used for rears so that sound is reproduced more accurately, providing a lifelike stereo image, instead of a blended wall of sound, which I guess you like.



<< You claim that your opinion is based on the whole spectrum of Bose products while it is obvious from you rant and links that most, if not all of it, is purely based on the Satellite/sub "module" (or subwoofer) models (which is bigtime ignorance). >>


Give me a frequency response curve on the 201s, 301s, etc... thanks.



<< The 201 and 301 speakers are classic two-way designs ( in the case of the newer 301, a 3-inch tweeter is back-firing while a 2 inch one is front, 201's are purely forward facing drivers with no rear firing drivers whatsoever). And they DO NOT SOUND like the sub-sat models AT ALL. Like I said, they sound as accurate as my friend's $700/pair Boston VR bookshelfs. >>


First off, just because your friends are $700 doesn't mean I'm supposed to say "OH MY GOD, HE MUST BE RIGHT, $700!!!!...cost does not a good speaker make. But yes, your friend does have nice speakers, and just because you cannot hear the difference between a given speaker doesn't mean that the rest of us can't.

And to your comment that the 201s and 301s are classic direct firing bookshelf speakers, I'm going to tell you to swing by the Bose website. They do use the Direct/Reflecting® speaker technology which I am talking about which gives nothing other then sound all around, with no stereo image or accuracy. If you disagree with that you haven't heard good 2 channel surround.




<< I'm not talking about the effort that they put in these designs ( the paper cone tweeters and the bass drivers are the same, which granted is not bleeding edge), I'm talking about the sound. As for the Gallo "subwoofers", the round ones are passive and has an 8-inch driver. In bass output and extension, they are not any better than the Bose "bass modules" nor any other sub/sat models. In fact, they may even be more expensive (there's another argument for "overpriced"). >>


Lets be frank about the paper cone tweeters and not say its "not bleeding edge" and just say "its garbage."

I find your call out on the Gallo subwoofers to be quite laughable, as has been said the Bose "bass module" would be lucky to reach 40Hz as Bose has the crossover set so high on the satellites that the subwoofer is providing just about as much low end as any decent bookshelf speaker would provide. As for the Gallo subwoofer, you must have heard it and measured it right? The only thing I can go buy is that you're saying that because it is an 8-inch driver it must be the same as the Bose, which is a horrendous parallel. So what if its passive (lots of subwoofers are btw), any cheap mono amp would power it. Face it, the Gallo sub is leaps and bounds ahead of the Bose "bass module" plus its not proprietary and the company is actually happy enough with it to call it a subwoofer.




<< As for sound "like they are meant to be heard", tell me, is there a speaker out there that will reproduce sound that is 100% accurate from the original material? even the very best frequency sweeps or the so-called best speaker designs WILL NOT BE ABLE TO DO that. You can run every scientific test out there but it all boils down to subjective tastes of the listener and his preception of sound. You talk about "being able to pick an instrument of a recording and place it where it is" and claim Bose "messes it up". Its just your bias working, I bet that blind listening tests will prove you wrong if you listen to bunch of bookshelf speakers. >>


Of course no speaker in this price range is 100% accurate, I'm not saying that. I said any good bookshelf can throw a solid stereo image and soundstage, reproducing the layout of the band while it was being recorded. Any speaker thats goal is to mix this sound around just for the goal of spreading it over the room is not providing an accurate image or soundstage at all. BOSE IS NOT ABOUT ACCURACY.



<< Overall, you can rant about how much you hate Bose and that somebody who happens to like it is "not an audiophile like you". Ranting doesn't make you an audiophile and the lack of objectivity doesn't bode well for yor argument either. I don't claim to be an "audiophile", I've been listening to speakers for almost 15 years ( I even make my own,crossovers,cabinets, etc..). I don't have any particular love of Bose nor do I have any "hate" for it. I don't feel strongly about any speaker brand at all. Granted, Bose is not cutting edge or does it use the most advanced materials for their drivers. There are probably better sounding speakers out there. But Bose DOESN"T sound bad at all, in fact they sound very good. You may have convinced yourself that they sound bad based on your research but a lot of people out there actually like the way they sound. You can go ahead and call them "uninformed" or "ignorant" for not reading measurements (or demanding one) and reviews by so-called "audiophiles" but that is not the point. The point is, many people like the way Bose sounds and are very happy with it. They don't care how biased and unhappy you are, they like their speakers and you can go ahead and leave them alone. >>


LoL...lack of objectivity? You should really talk about that in this argument. I would run down the things you've said that make no sense, but I think I've touched on them all in my various replies.

I also don't claim to be an audiophile; my entire system costs about $2000, if I claimed to be an audiophile I would have spent that alone on speaker cable. I do claim to care about sound and care to do research enough to figure out what speakers can reproduce accurate and full sound in the budget I can afford.

You say I've never heard Bose or their bookshelves, but I should bring up that my brother has a pair of 301's and I would only ever use them as rear speakers in home theater, never for music reproduction as they have no imaging abilities, nor good detail or clarity.

Sure many people like the way Bose sounds because of the Bose marketing machine. Marketing does not a good speaker make, yet Bose has somehow duped most of the uninformed population into believing it does. If people had a chance to listen to other speakers in the same room with Bose and were actually allowed to A/B speakers people would easily realize that their is much more bang for the buck elsewhere.

You speak of how I have bias, yet you denounce everything I say. You say companies shouldn't provide frequency response curves, EVEN WHEN PEOPLE INTERESTED IN BUYING THEM ASK FOR THEM, this is just wrong. You say that you can hear the entire frequency spectrum just fine ("and yes, I will know if there is a hole in the frequency response" was what you said), and that Bose can hit everything with the best of them. You say I'm swepped up in specs, when I have never once asked explicity for specs, I've asked for real world performance.

If people are happy with their Bose systems fine; more power to them. My point is that Bose is a company that strives on consumer ignorance and will do everything they possibly can to keep themselves that way. Show me one other speaker manufacturer that will sue people over honest reviews, sue people for posting real world measurements of the speakers, DISALLOW stores to A/B Bose speakers with different brands, sell their speakers at 1000% markup, claim that they can reproduce 5.1 sound with 2 speakers and a "bass module" (i'm referring to their $1200 3-2-1 P.O.S.), etc.. etc...

If you want to back up a company like this so be it. Its not my money your wasting.



<< End of story. >>


Great way to end a thread. I'll be eagerly awaiting your sequel

 

[Eug]

<< Ignorance?! I am trying to be as objective as I can be with the obvious bias and hysterics that you obviously posses. The Bose direct.reflected sound is not the only one out there. Definitive have designs that has drivers on the front AND the rear. Cambridge soundworks also has that as well as many other speaker makers. You claim that your opinion is based on the whole spectrum of Bose products while it is obvious from you rant and links that most, if not all of it, is purely based on the Satellite/sub "module" (or subwoofer) models (which is bigtime ignorance). The 201 and 301 speakers are classic two-way designs ( in the case of the newer 301, a 3-inch tweeter is back-firing while a 2 inch one is front, 201's are purely forward facing drivers with no rear firing drivers whatsoever). And they DO NOT SOUND like the sub-sat models AT ALL. Like I said, they sound as accurate as my friend's $700/pair Boston VR bookshelfs. I'm not talking about the effort that they put in these designs ( the paper cone tweeters and the bass drivers are the same, which granted is not bleeding edge), I'm talking about the sound. As for the Gallo "subwoofers", the round ones are passive and has an 8-inch driver. In bass output and extension, they are not any better than the Bose "bass modules" nor any other sub/sat models. In fact, they may even be more expensive (there's another argument for "overpriced").

As for sound "like they are meant to be heard", tell me, is there a speaker out there that will reproduce sound that is 100% accurate from the original material? even the very best frequency sweeps or the so-called best speaker designs WILL NOT BE ABLE TO DO that. You can run every scientific test out there but it all boils down to subjective tastes of the listener and his preception of sound. You talk about "being able to pick an instrument of a recording and place it where it is" and claim Bose "messes it up". Its just your bias working, I bet that blind listening tests will prove you wrong if you listen to bunch of bookshelf speakers.

Overall, you can rant about how much you hate Bose and that somebody who happens to like it is "not an audiophile like you". Ranting doesn't make you an audiophile and the lack of objectivity doesn't bode well for yor argument either. I don't claim to be an "audiophile", I've been listening to speakers for almost 15 years ( I even make my own,crossovers,cabinets, etc..). I don't have any particular love of Bose nor do I have any "hate" for it. I don't feel strongly about any speaker brand at all. Granted, Bose is not cutting edge or does it use the most advanced materials for their drivers. There are probably better sounding speakers out there. But Bose DOESN"T sound bad at all, in fact they sound very good. You may have convinced yourself that they sound bad based on your research but a lot of people out there actually like the way they sound. You can go ahead and call them "uninformed" or "ignorant" for not reading measurements (or demanding one) and reviews by so-called "audiophiles" but that is not the point. The point is, many people like the way Bose sounds and are very happy with it. They don't care how biased and unhappy you are, they like their speakers and you can go ahead and leave them alone.

End of story. >>



Well, if you listen to Bose speakers they DON'T sound terrible. Just go into a store which carries Bose and other brands with demos of the speakers in a well designed room. Then compare any Bose speakers and something else in the same price range. In my own experience the Bose speakers were OK but were WAY more expensive for an equivalent sound quality. In other words, if you have an X amount of dollars, most of the time you're better off buying another brand, unless the specific look is what you're after.

While the Bose speakers out there aren't really that bad, Bose is relying on name and the fact that many who buy Bose are so impressed by them because they are a significant improvement over their old speakers (like the packaged speakers that came with their home-stereo-in-a-box system). But dollar for dollar, they're not a hot deal at all usually.

If you actually spend hours going from store to store doing comparative listening tests with your choice of music (like I did when I first started researching speakers many years ago), you start to appreciate the differences. Indeed, I ended up spending LESS on my speakers than I might have spent on Bose.

 

[SithSolo1]

<<If you are a fan of Pioneer or Sony, they have done the same thing. They sell two lines of products, the cheap Wal-Mart and even BestBuy grade, then they sell their good stuff. Because it's Sony, people pay a premium for overpriced plastic junk.>>


Hey, I like my Pioneer system! It does me just fine.
Got it 2 years ago and even then it was a year old.
Paid $600 for it.