I am not even sure if Bose designs any of the car audio systems or merely licenses their name to be used. In any case, it’s designed to a price point dictated by the auto manufacturer. I am sure with a large budget that Bose has enough competent engineers to make a good product.
I’ve listened to a lot of car audio systems and the badge has little to do with the quality. Both the best and worst stock car audio systems I’ve ever heard on cars costing >30k were both Harman Kardon branded.
I got to experience the $5k Burmeister upgrade system in a Porsche Panamera for a while. Pretty dreadful, embarrassingly bad for the cost other than bass extension.
I always disliked how the Bose systems sounded. The speakers were driven with an integral switch mode amplifier. Of course they EQ'd the heck out of that tired old 901 idea. They even put it into Corvettes. Turning it up was pointless because the EQ peaks would saturate (clip) quickly. My stock Delco systems always sounded better, and often you only needed to upgrade the speakers to get decent sound.
With the level of integration of a Delco radio with the car, changing the head unit would kill some convenience features. Things like the controls on the steering wheel, and the automatic increase of volume to keep over the road noise (three settings on our 2011 Malibu. Even the chimes are routed through the radio, so upgrading the head unit eliminates some pretty nice features.
-Chris
With the level of integration of a Delco radio with the car, changing the head unit would kill some convenience features. Things like the controls on the steering wheel, and the automatic increase of volume to keep over the road noise (three settings on our 2011 Malibu. Even the chimes are routed through the radio, so upgrading the head unit eliminates some pretty nice features.
-Chris
If it's used in formula 1, it must be crap...
You would think F1 teams would wise up and use Pass Labs...
The saturation explanation would be accurate, the ill effects hadn’t changed as much as would have been expected even when the volume was eventually reduced!
I hacked my Toyota head unit, but am not so sure I’d want to do that again, since it is very small scale, and hard to work on.
I always liked the 80s Delco stereos, had mine sounding very nice with an amp and much nicer speakers.
I did state that it was a Bose LABELED system, am familiar with oems, and creative marketing/branding.
Does Pass Labs make wireless headphones?
I’m quite sure that is indeed the case, not like a car company would really spend a dime to make a decent sounding audio system beyond loud base to help sell the car.
In the early 1980's, I worked at a GM/Delco Radio service center.
The Bose systems used in their more expensive cars were designed by Bose, but fitted by GM for a particular car.
The 4 speaker modules (front/rear) each contained a 25 watt amp and speaker, the head amp/cassette players were basically the same regardless of vehicle.
Wiseoldtech, at least through the early 90's Delco/Bose car systems remained the same. I'm curious as to what type of problems you saw on your service end?
From an aftermarket perspective, the implementation was all out of the ordinary for autosound when they showed up. Balanced low-level signals, 4" full range with ported enclosures, location based EQ, and ½Ω impedance meant ~25W/12V without the cost and bulk of a SMPS. Others, like Nissan were similar, but rears were 1Ω 6"x9" without enclosures.
Sound wasn't bad, better than most factory systems, but had real limitations as Chris and phase mentioned. Most car audio installers were confused by the systems and their only option for upgrade was replacement.
From an aftermarket perspective, the implementation was all out of the ordinary for autosound when they showed up. Balanced low-level signals, 4" full range with ported enclosures, location based EQ, and ½Ω impedance meant ~25W/12V without the cost and bulk of a SMPS. Others, like Nissan were similar, but rears were 1Ω 6"x9" without enclosures.
Sound wasn't bad, better than most factory systems, but had real limitations as Chris and phase mentioned. Most car audio installers were confused by the systems and their only option for upgrade was replacement.
Last edited:
Hello everyone
Being able to of heard the micro, soundlink mini ii, revolve, 500 speaker, and the 500 soundbar and subwoofer, they all have the same issues for me, and this includes there older designs where I measured one of there 2.55" drivers.
They all sound artificial, and the clarity when things get busy falls apart. Listening to them and trying to position instruments in live recordings is not possible. Speakers that have a less flat response still have more capability to distinguish differences and subtle differences.
Measurements of the 2.55" driver showed that it had weaker low end and high end performance than comparable drivers we buy on the DIY side of things. The paper cone was really flexible. Like a light touch to the edge of the cone and it instantly flexes, and it seems fairly thick. Must be a low mass paper pulp they use. Surround and spider had an extreme amount of throw, but the moving mass weight was very much on par with drivers of it's size. Comparing to a Samsung and Sony drivers, it was lower mass and higher SPL. To achieve the performance they do must require extreme DSP which will effect phase as well in a big way.
What I imagine is happening is like Sennheiser headphones. There very conscious of there sound signature they are known for, and the average consumer hasn't had the clear stereo imaging of a good system to compare with. Pair with this the drive to single point smart speakers, and the concern of the liveliness, stereo imaging and clarity fall away. All the average person looks for is how much bass it has, how many watts are running through that voice coil, and can I use it easily.
Has it's market, but clearly not intended for the audiophile community. Is that a bad thing or not. Entirely in the eyes(Or ears in this case) of the beholder.
Paul
Being able to of heard the micro, soundlink mini ii, revolve, 500 speaker, and the 500 soundbar and subwoofer, they all have the same issues for me, and this includes there older designs where I measured one of there 2.55" drivers.
They all sound artificial, and the clarity when things get busy falls apart. Listening to them and trying to position instruments in live recordings is not possible. Speakers that have a less flat response still have more capability to distinguish differences and subtle differences.
Measurements of the 2.55" driver showed that it had weaker low end and high end performance than comparable drivers we buy on the DIY side of things. The paper cone was really flexible. Like a light touch to the edge of the cone and it instantly flexes, and it seems fairly thick. Must be a low mass paper pulp they use. Surround and spider had an extreme amount of throw, but the moving mass weight was very much on par with drivers of it's size. Comparing to a Samsung and Sony drivers, it was lower mass and higher SPL. To achieve the performance they do must require extreme DSP which will effect phase as well in a big way.
What I imagine is happening is like Sennheiser headphones. There very conscious of there sound signature they are known for, and the average consumer hasn't had the clear stereo imaging of a good system to compare with. Pair with this the drive to single point smart speakers, and the concern of the liveliness, stereo imaging and clarity fall away. All the average person looks for is how much bass it has, how many watts are running through that voice coil, and can I use it easily.
Has it's market, but clearly not intended for the audiophile community. Is that a bad thing or not. Entirely in the eyes(Or ears in this case) of the beholder.
Paul
Mostly I had to replace blown speaker modules, an occasional head unit for cassette problems.
The system worked well, however the dynamics were limited by volume correction circuitry.
You could turn the stereo up full, and have no distortion, kinda flattened electronically.
Some people liked it, others didn't.
To me, the original Delco systems sounded better.
Sounds about right. Those who didn't like it came to us installers for answers.
I made good money adding some combination of tweeters up front, subwoofer/amp, and CD players or CD changers to them.
IMHO, the Nissan/Bose systems sounded a little more lively. But owners still brought them in for upgrades.
Last edited:
Hi jfetter,
I don't know why. I wouldn't pay $50 for a pair. Maybe $5, then we would use them as targets on the range. Honestly, the 301 uses a pair of cheap drivers in a box that is way too small with an idiotic plastic paddle in front of those cheap phenolic ring tweeters. Those are pretty bad too. And they lost a lot of cabinet volume to the gimmic plastic paddle.
The Bose 301 is one of the worst speakers ever sold by anyone anywhere!
-Chris
I don't know why. I wouldn't pay $50 for a pair. Maybe $5, then we would use them as targets on the range. Honestly, the 301 uses a pair of cheap drivers in a box that is way too small with an idiotic plastic paddle in front of those cheap phenolic ring tweeters. Those are pretty bad too. And they lost a lot of cabinet volume to the gimmic plastic paddle.
The Bose 301 is one of the worst speakers ever sold by anyone anywhere!
-Chris
forgive if already mentioned ---
I think a lot of early animosity came from the fact that Bose was viewed by many in the audiophile community as bad actor, patenting alignments and prior art that were already part of the public domain; then making sensation advertising claims about that work as their own groundbreaking technology.
The marketing has always been sensational, even if the products all were not. By the time Bose started to take a foothold, most "stereo stores" were going under in favor of big box electronic stores. Bose capitalized on this and spent a fortune on advertising and large floor space displays for their cubes... and did it again when surround sound became the rage.
I don't think the "hate" is limited to Bose. Look at any hobby, sport or vertical and there is a "Bose" that produces a mediocre product line with sensational marketing and droves of happy customers that are happy to expound that they have purchased "top of the line"... yet that wouldn't know good from bad if you showed them.
I think a lot of early animosity came from the fact that Bose was viewed by many in the audiophile community as bad actor, patenting alignments and prior art that were already part of the public domain; then making sensation advertising claims about that work as their own groundbreaking technology.
The marketing has always been sensational, even if the products all were not. By the time Bose started to take a foothold, most "stereo stores" were going under in favor of big box electronic stores. Bose capitalized on this and spent a fortune on advertising and large floor space displays for their cubes... and did it again when surround sound became the rage.
I don't think the "hate" is limited to Bose. Look at any hobby, sport or vertical and there is a "Bose" that produces a mediocre product line with sensational marketing and droves of happy customers that are happy to expound that they have purchased "top of the line"... yet that wouldn't know good from bad if you showed them.
Oh, I think there is a very special kind of “affection” demonstrated towards the company by “audiophiles” - very often based on their own personal experience in either owning or selling the products going back as far as the original 901, 501 and 301.
FWIW, the best I ever heard the 901s sound was when using a stacked pair as dance party PA system with the rear facing the audience, driven by Crown DC300A. Sources we used were open reel and cassette tape - maybe even a very well acoustically isolated turntable? This was mid 70’s, and the stereo shop I was employed at only did this a couple of times for a small local private high school, so some of the details are lost in a purplish haze. I gotta give them credit, those demo pairs survived not only that abuse, but more than a few years of in store demo - Dark Side of the Moon, Lucky Man, anyone?
EPI 150 or Large Advents smoked em for musicality and imaging AFAIC.
FWIW, the best I ever heard the 901s sound was when using a stacked pair as dance party PA system with the rear facing the audience, driven by Crown DC300A. Sources we used were open reel and cassette tape - maybe even a very well acoustically isolated turntable? This was mid 70’s, and the stereo shop I was employed at only did this a couple of times for a small local private high school, so some of the details are lost in a purplish haze. I gotta give them credit, those demo pairs survived not only that abuse, but more than a few years of in store demo - Dark Side of the Moon, Lucky Man, anyone?
EPI 150 or Large Advents smoked em for musicality and imaging AFAIC.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.