multichannel?
the idea of having a non direct sound from the rears is standard in home theatre, but for music i find that having non direct source for your mains tends to blur the image up some. Also it just doesn't have the crispness and the attack as all forward firing has. My friend has one of those bose lifestyle systems with the cubes and i found the bass flabby and not that great of imaging. For the average joe, the system works great, as a backgound music, indirect and soft sounding.
Also concerning multichannel music, my friend bought over his multchannel SACD player and we ran it through my home theatre, the idea of sitting in the middle of the band while listening doesn't excite me. When i'm listening to music i prefer the aspect of sitting in from as if i'm in the crowd. The natural reverb in your room with good imaging system will give you that great 3d image and feel of being in the club or concert hall.
once again, my 2 cents, nothing more, nothing less
shibby
the idea of having a non direct sound from the rears is standard in home theatre, but for music i find that having non direct source for your mains tends to blur the image up some. Also it just doesn't have the crispness and the attack as all forward firing has. My friend has one of those bose lifestyle systems with the cubes and i found the bass flabby and not that great of imaging. For the average joe, the system works great, as a backgound music, indirect and soft sounding.
Also concerning multichannel music, my friend bought over his multchannel SACD player and we ran it through my home theatre, the idea of sitting in the middle of the band while listening doesn't excite me. When i'm listening to music i prefer the aspect of sitting in from as if i'm in the crowd. The natural reverb in your room with good imaging system will give you that great 3d image and feel of being in the club or concert hall.
once again, my 2 cents, nothing more, nothing less
shibby
It is the effect we wanted
In those days we wanted the effect of a 3D soundstage and back the just a single pair of loudspeakers would not throw a decent sound stage evean the Highly regarded AR-3A's and the later AR-LST's were mostly 2D. Nowdays indeed a good pair of speakers and quality source components can recreate that 3D soundfield. I still use only 2 speakers in Home theater and get a 360 deg image including front to back, while sitll maintaining a tactle transient Attack.
Also note that the L-100's are non reflecting speakers that were used in front with the 901's in the rear.
In those days we wanted the effect of a 3D soundstage and back the just a single pair of loudspeakers would not throw a decent sound stage evean the Highly regarded AR-3A's and the later AR-LST's were mostly 2D. Nowdays indeed a good pair of speakers and quality source components can recreate that 3D soundfield. I still use only 2 speakers in Home theater and get a 360 deg image including front to back, while sitll maintaining a tactle transient Attack.
Also note that the L-100's are non reflecting speakers that were used in front with the 901's in the rear.
First, Bose(o) this is not an attack on you at all, I just cannot stand it when a company will do whatever it can to sell an inferior product to an ignorant customer for an amazing profit.
I use the term ‘ignorant’ to describe the typical customer that wants to buy a quality piece of equipment (usually their first), but has never heard of inter-modulation distortion, phase shift, imaging etc. It’s not to say that they could not understand it once explained, they’re just unknowledgeable.
BLOSE Encounter #1: In college ('95-'97 - not that you care, but it gives an idea of what was on the market at the time) I worked in an audio/video boutique shop that sold a good mix of mid-fi, hi-fi and Bose gear. We always had plenty of Bose equipment in stock (mostly the Acousitmass-ive-rip-off stuff), but none on the floor for demo. When I asked my boss why we did not have any on the floor, he said, “Their marketing does all the work. And believe me, if someone comes in looking for Bose, you’ll never convince them otherwise, so just let ‘em buy it.”
BTW, working at such a store, replacing blown drivers and all seeing what is really inside hi-end equipment, is what got me into DIY in the first place. I honestly found out how far your ‘hi-fi’ dollar goes.
BLOSE Encounter #3,985: This past winter I put together a home theatre system in my living room, nothing that will blow your mind, but impressive in its own right. A friend of mine at work is a die-hard Bose fan and has an Acoustimass speaker system that he forked over $1,200 for. For just $300 more, I was able to build/purchase: a DTS HT receiver, upper-end Sony DVD player, 5.1 speaker set (including a dual 15” house shaking sub with EQ), and complete IR repeater setup. He had no idea how much I spent and was blown away by the results. So, did I crush his world? No, I just keep it as my little secret.
Just my 2 cents.
SteveS
I use the term ‘ignorant’ to describe the typical customer that wants to buy a quality piece of equipment (usually their first), but has never heard of inter-modulation distortion, phase shift, imaging etc. It’s not to say that they could not understand it once explained, they’re just unknowledgeable.
BLOSE Encounter #1: In college ('95-'97 - not that you care, but it gives an idea of what was on the market at the time) I worked in an audio/video boutique shop that sold a good mix of mid-fi, hi-fi and Bose gear. We always had plenty of Bose equipment in stock (mostly the Acousitmass-ive-rip-off stuff), but none on the floor for demo. When I asked my boss why we did not have any on the floor, he said, “Their marketing does all the work. And believe me, if someone comes in looking for Bose, you’ll never convince them otherwise, so just let ‘em buy it.”
BTW, working at such a store, replacing blown drivers and all seeing what is really inside hi-end equipment, is what got me into DIY in the first place. I honestly found out how far your ‘hi-fi’ dollar goes.
BLOSE Encounter #3,985: This past winter I put together a home theatre system in my living room, nothing that will blow your mind, but impressive in its own right. A friend of mine at work is a die-hard Bose fan and has an Acoustimass speaker system that he forked over $1,200 for. For just $300 more, I was able to build/purchase: a DTS HT receiver, upper-end Sony DVD player, 5.1 speaker set (including a dual 15” house shaking sub with EQ), and complete IR repeater setup. He had no idea how much I spent and was blown away by the results. So, did I crush his world? No, I just keep it as my little secret.
Just my 2 cents.
SteveS
Grey,
Isn't this the point of testing with a square wave and looking at the tilt? A square wave contains the fundamental sine and all the harmonics, if I remember right... This explains a lot about why it's so important to have at least a 100Khz upper extension. You have to wonder how much the harmonic information way above the range of normal hearing is combining to create information that is in the normal hearing range. Reminds me a an experimental driver I remember reading about that used 2 frequencies somewhere in the 200Khz range that were very close together to reproduce audio frequencies as a result of the difference between the two. I have always wondered about redbook CD- I really do think it's a loser format.
Did someone say SACD? or, better yet- Vinyl(although I think SACD is pretty darn close)
As far as Bose goes-
the reason it sells so well to the non-experienced is that they have been trained to hear the hiss and boom cheapo discount hi-fi garbage. The best way to convert someone to true-to-life sound is to let them hear a good system. I am willing to bet that most all of you can remember a moment of "conversion"- that first system that really showed you there was more to be had. For me it was a hi-fi shop near Lancaster PA that had a set of large electrostatics that were quad-amped (with subwoofers). I was 14, and i had never experienced that kind of dynamics and clarity. I was forever sold.
Maybe we need an audio missionary? Church of the golden ear, or something.
I have noticed that the greatest common denominator when reading about audio epiphany, either as a hobby or profession is hearing Quad electrostats way back in the past. Goes for me too. An article in this months Stereophile about a big name in audio? he mentions first hearing the Quads as a turning point.
Check it out- ask others with our obsession! Perhaps it is most prevalent in the 40 to 60 age range. Of course thats fits most industry movers.
It seems half the speaker projects on the web state they are trying to achieve the Quad mids plus- more bass, more efficient, etc. if any speaker should be worshipped thats the one! I'm sure it had its flaws too. Haven't heard them for years.
Check it out- ask others with our obsession! Perhaps it is most prevalent in the 40 to 60 age range. Of course thats fits most industry movers.
It seems half the speaker projects on the web state they are trying to achieve the Quad mids plus- more bass, more efficient, etc. if any speaker should be worshipped thats the one! I'm sure it had its flaws too. Haven't heard them for years.
Serious Sound
Yeah, like the day I helped unpack and position and tweak the big Genesis system a few years back - and got paid.
When the other guys were out of the room I had the opportunity to play a few Who and Jimmi tracks for myself at full level.
THAT changed my expectations of a replay system !. - Bigtime !.
Regards, Eric.
Yeah, like the day I helped unpack and position and tweak the big Genesis system a few years back - and got paid.
When the other guys were out of the room I had the opportunity to play a few Who and Jimmi tracks for myself at full level.
THAT changed my expectations of a replay system !. - Bigtime !.
Regards, Eric.
SteveG said:
Of course, beat frequencies are always possible, but even if some instrument is producing a couple of ultrasonic frequencies that interfere to produce an audible tone, the recording device will still pick up the interference pattern. It isn't "smart" enough to discriminate.
There is something going on here, but it isn't automatic that the existence of interference patterns implies a weakness in Nyquist's theorem.
High end Audio Is like Food,You Dont want to Know what's inside
Yup I have seen alot of High end equipment that uses Component parts that are Down-Right Cheep and Bose Dose this quite well. I am not a bose fan my self I like more Dynamics and clarity that Speakers like Thiele, Avalon and the Higher end Infinity. My point was to illistrate my expearences with the Bose 901's. as far as the DIY stuff is concerned, Well indeed you can get alot better results by Building it your self provided you do it right. This is most noticable with Lounspeakers and to a lesser extent Electronics. While the Electronics can be qualified with testing suplimented with Listening, Most DIy'ers do not have the equipment to Properly test a Loudspeaker system so this becomes more of an Art-form and the results can be verry Good. I went the DIY route Simply Because i was tired of what i was paying Big Bucks for and that gose beyond Bose. so i built my own Power amp, and Preamp several headphone Amps and several Loudspeakers. The End result of my DIY loudspeakers is a 4 Way using MB Quart 1' and 2" Metal Domes a 6.5" Woofer and A 12" dual voicecoil Sub. the Sub is in a 6Th order vented Alignment using an outboard Active filtor with a controlable "Q". This sounds great with almost everything sonicaly I could want, However it took me two years to get it to that point. This is in contrast to the Electronics that Performed as expected the First time and required only moderate Sonic tweeking.
Yup I have seen alot of High end equipment that uses Component parts that are Down-Right Cheep and Bose Dose this quite well. I am not a bose fan my self I like more Dynamics and clarity that Speakers like Thiele, Avalon and the Higher end Infinity. My point was to illistrate my expearences with the Bose 901's. as far as the DIY stuff is concerned, Well indeed you can get alot better results by Building it your self provided you do it right. This is most noticable with Lounspeakers and to a lesser extent Electronics. While the Electronics can be qualified with testing suplimented with Listening, Most DIy'ers do not have the equipment to Properly test a Loudspeaker system so this becomes more of an Art-form and the results can be verry Good. I went the DIY route Simply Because i was tired of what i was paying Big Bucks for and that gose beyond Bose. so i built my own Power amp, and Preamp several headphone Amps and several Loudspeakers. The End result of my DIY loudspeakers is a 4 Way using MB Quart 1' and 2" Metal Domes a 6.5" Woofer and A 12" dual voicecoil Sub. the Sub is in a 6Th order vented Alignment using an outboard Active filtor with a controlable "Q". This sounds great with almost everything sonicaly I could want, However it took me two years to get it to that point. This is in contrast to the Electronics that Performed as expected the First time and required only moderate Sonic tweeking.
I honestly don't know enough about Nyquist's theorum to make an arguement for or against it, but I do know that this is something missing from Red Book audio cd's. My experience as a musician and my ears tell me that right away. Some examples:
In the studio, recording at only a 20 bit resolution- I noticed an increased presence comparing the multitrack masters as they were being mixed down to stereo (all the processing, eq, and fades were there) when compared to the 16 bit master itself. The inner dynamics were just so much better! There was an air and a sense of space around each instrument that was lost when going to 16 bit. It was as if the soundstage had been flattened in the front to back space. Depth was gone.
2- when comparing CD's to their older LP equivalents- They (cds) always sound cleaner, of course, given my mediocre turntable setup, but also the "roundness" was gone out of the vocals and guitars, and the wash of cymbals turns to a white noise effect. How can this be explained, given the absence of measureable distortion in the cd format?
3- the difference in listening to SACD is just as night and day as with the turntable and the cd! Is it the increased bandwidth? I don't know that for sure, but it is one thing to examine. It has that good digital "clean" quality to it, but everything is round again. Brittleness is gone.
You have to wonder about high frequency extension... how is it that Nelson Pass says there is no need for excessively high slew rates, yet at the same time it seems to make a definite impact on sound when comparing the ability of an amplifier to track a square wave? Am I comparing apples to apples here? I need to get a better grasp on this topic. Can anyone suggest some good reading?
Steve
In the studio, recording at only a 20 bit resolution- I noticed an increased presence comparing the multitrack masters as they were being mixed down to stereo (all the processing, eq, and fades were there) when compared to the 16 bit master itself. The inner dynamics were just so much better! There was an air and a sense of space around each instrument that was lost when going to 16 bit. It was as if the soundstage had been flattened in the front to back space. Depth was gone.
2- when comparing CD's to their older LP equivalents- They (cds) always sound cleaner, of course, given my mediocre turntable setup, but also the "roundness" was gone out of the vocals and guitars, and the wash of cymbals turns to a white noise effect. How can this be explained, given the absence of measureable distortion in the cd format?
3- the difference in listening to SACD is just as night and day as with the turntable and the cd! Is it the increased bandwidth? I don't know that for sure, but it is one thing to examine. It has that good digital "clean" quality to it, but everything is round again. Brittleness is gone.
You have to wonder about high frequency extension... how is it that Nelson Pass says there is no need for excessively high slew rates, yet at the same time it seems to make a definite impact on sound when comparing the ability of an amplifier to track a square wave? Am I comparing apples to apples here? I need to get a better grasp on this topic. Can anyone suggest some good reading?
Steve
901 aaaaarggh
I can remember 20 years ago a friend bought a pair of 901 here in Germany.
At this time bose claimed the 901 to be almost indestructable ("you can connect it directly to to a 220V wall outlet").
After a few weeks we opened the cabinet because we thought that somthing was wrong with them.(dull sound)
What we found was a thermistor connected in series with the speaker causing dynamic compression.
The next item was the "active equalizer" that came with them in order to enhance the bass and treble performance, in fact this was a noise generator that caused some additional ringing in the upper mids.
Not to mention the woodworks........
They may be ok for background music in a supermarket or something like this.
regards
Arne
I can remember 20 years ago a friend bought a pair of 901 here in Germany.
At this time bose claimed the 901 to be almost indestructable ("you can connect it directly to to a 220V wall outlet").
After a few weeks we opened the cabinet because we thought that somthing was wrong with them.(dull sound)
What we found was a thermistor connected in series with the speaker causing dynamic compression.
The next item was the "active equalizer" that came with them in order to enhance the bass and treble performance, in fact this was a noise generator that caused some additional ringing in the upper mids.
Not to mention the woodworks........
They may be ok for background music in a supermarket or something like this.
regards
Arne
In the 50s there was a DIY speaker called The Sweet 16. It used 16 cheap 4" drivers and in some cases a tweeter horn was added for a bit more brilliance. It was the poor mans way to get some half assed sound with a cheap amp and crappy turntable. The big difference was this was all front firing and a 4" deep square pannel. These were the first Bose 901s you could make in your garage for $15. These were also the birth of line arrays and PP arrays and other things. All of which usually sound better than Bose 901s because they are made of better parts and don't need an equaliser to distort the sound to try to reproduce true bass and treble. I think I have a copy of the Sweet 16 article that was published in Popular Electronics around somewhere. When I run across it I will post the month and year so everyone that is interested can take a look at it at the library.
Thatch
Thatch
I remember the Sweet 16. My guess would be 60s, not 50s, although I occasionally picked up a few older issues of Popular Electronics from used backstores so it could be.
If you do find the article, I'd love to read it. Maybe an amplifier article from the same era would be fun too.
Man I must be getting old.
If you do find the article, I'd love to read it. Maybe an amplifier article from the same era would be fun too.
Man I must be getting old.
man, i saw this thead and thought the subject was a joke... seeing bose in a higher end audio forum? whoah.
I am an avid bose de-converter. i try and get people away from bose. im 21, and most ppl my age think bose is the greatest since sliced bread. so, i just try and educate. my advice to anyone that is a bose fan, go out to the best audio store you can find (best buy or circuit city DONT count), and listen to a nice reference system. this is what i did to get into stereos. i heard what the best sounded like, and why it differed from everything else...
plus, look at the system, and see what's imporant. what makes the system so expensive? most likely, its the crossovers, drivers, and internal amplifiers (if any, subs mainly), and likewise.... and typically, amps are HUGE (large torodial transformers, and capacitors, etc...), and speakers are slimmer than deep, or of a proportional ratio of some sort. oh, and to have good clean bass, a bass reflex design is the most efficient. oh, and you WILL NOT find dual bandpass designs ANYWHERE in any respectable store.
now, given those facts, bose doesnt even use crossovers, their drivers are cheap paper cones (for you DIY'ers, check out this: http://www.allelectronics.com/cgi-bin/category.cgi?category=580&item=SK-95&type=store your very own bose driver, for under $7. and they make profit...), and wiring. why dont bose systems use a better connector? like a 5-way binding post? well, it would be silly
but im serious, just go out to a good audio store, listen to PSB Goldi's, B&W 80x, or get into some sweet system like the Meridian dsp8000 or something. you will realize what you have been missing all along. bose would be alright if it didnt cost so much! if they cost like $50, fine. but they dont. i bought my entire PSB Image setup, amps, transducers, etc.. for LESS than a lifestyle system.
I am an avid bose de-converter. i try and get people away from bose. im 21, and most ppl my age think bose is the greatest since sliced bread. so, i just try and educate. my advice to anyone that is a bose fan, go out to the best audio store you can find (best buy or circuit city DONT count), and listen to a nice reference system. this is what i did to get into stereos. i heard what the best sounded like, and why it differed from everything else...
plus, look at the system, and see what's imporant. what makes the system so expensive? most likely, its the crossovers, drivers, and internal amplifiers (if any, subs mainly), and likewise.... and typically, amps are HUGE (large torodial transformers, and capacitors, etc...), and speakers are slimmer than deep, or of a proportional ratio of some sort. oh, and to have good clean bass, a bass reflex design is the most efficient. oh, and you WILL NOT find dual bandpass designs ANYWHERE in any respectable store.
now, given those facts, bose doesnt even use crossovers, their drivers are cheap paper cones (for you DIY'ers, check out this: http://www.allelectronics.com/cgi-bin/category.cgi?category=580&item=SK-95&type=store your very own bose driver, for under $7. and they make profit...), and wiring. why dont bose systems use a better connector? like a 5-way binding post? well, it would be silly
but im serious, just go out to a good audio store, listen to PSB Goldi's, B&W 80x, or get into some sweet system like the Meridian dsp8000 or something. you will realize what you have been missing all along. bose would be alright if it didnt cost so much! if they cost like $50, fine. but they dont. i bought my entire PSB Image setup, amps, transducers, etc.. for LESS than a lifestyle system.
Amen Brother, preach it!!
the fact that my friend spent couple of thou on a lifestyle system only for it to be placed on top of the cupboards in his kitchen as "background music" several years afterwards says a lot about the quality.
I remember when i got my first pair of 'good' speakers. There is a high end stereo store in Edmonton called Audio Ark. I went in there to drool, and realized that good companies can make budget speakers. In the midst of big money stereo's were the paradigm performance, a very good speaker for a cheap price. $250 cdn for a pair of Titans. People, go look at the high end stereo stores, and look at what hockey player money will buy you. i am not saying to drop 20 grand on stereo equipment, but if you listen to what the "best" is, it is something to works towards. This is better than some 18yr old punk that thinks that bose or some other overpriced crap is the answer to my audiophile heaven.
Amen & Amen
shibby
the fact that my friend spent couple of thou on a lifestyle system only for it to be placed on top of the cupboards in his kitchen as "background music" several years afterwards says a lot about the quality.
I remember when i got my first pair of 'good' speakers. There is a high end stereo store in Edmonton called Audio Ark. I went in there to drool, and realized that good companies can make budget speakers. In the midst of big money stereo's were the paradigm performance, a very good speaker for a cheap price. $250 cdn for a pair of Titans. People, go look at the high end stereo stores, and look at what hockey player money will buy you. i am not saying to drop 20 grand on stereo equipment, but if you listen to what the "best" is, it is something to works towards. This is better than some 18yr old punk that thinks that bose or some other overpriced crap is the answer to my audiophile heaven.
Amen & Amen
shibby
To anyone who attempts to justify their purchase of a Bose "cube" system, or defends Bose's deceptive products, here is a great article:
http://www.intellexual.net/bose.htm
It's a long, well designed essay, that actually uses facts and scientific measurements to back up what they are saying.
You really can't argue with this one. It's a real eye opener to the doubters out there...
As for their full range, non acousticrap stuff, you gotta think that the same tactics go into all their product lines.
http://www.intellexual.net/bose.htm
It's a long, well designed essay, that actually uses facts and scientific measurements to back up what they are saying.
You really can't argue with this one. It's a real eye opener to the doubters out there...
As for their full range, non acousticrap stuff, you gotta think that the same tactics go into all their product lines.
Even though I agree that Bose products are generally rubish, that essay CAN be argued with, and the author of it espouses many urban audio myths in his attempt to attack Bose. Also, the article is technically weak as a scientific argument. There are no references cited, the author uses unfair frequency response graphs (the unsummed ones), and they are not from a disinterested source. In effect, the author has used vaguery as proof in much the same way that the Bose corporation has.
Dave Hull
True, this isn't a scientific journal here. (heck, even those are refuted everyday by other scientists). I'd like to see Dr. Bose (or any other Bose supporter) refute each one of his major points with evidence to back up why his points are weak or are simply incorrect.
To provide factual evidence to disprove his measurable claims, would prove that Bose are actually very accurate, high quality loudspeakers, with a high price/performance ratio compared to other loudspeakers in their pricerange.
To provide factual evidence to disprove his measurable claims, would prove that Bose are actually very accurate, high quality loudspeakers, with a high price/performance ratio compared to other loudspeakers in their pricerange.
My friend recently purchased a BOSE AM-6 system with the fairly large Acoustimass module and five-singe cube speakers all mated to a Yamaha receiver and Yamaha DVD player via optical cables from Acoustic Research. And, in my honest opinion are efficient, accurate and produce loads of sound. The subwoofer however, does produce a wealth of bass; inaccurate and slow transients as it may be it DOES produce bass and a lot of it. Pretty damn good for a 5.25" driver. In total it sounds much better than the Pioneer system my parents purchased. I tiried to get him to listen to Klipsch, Paradigm or, possibly get me to build speakers. But, one main goal was to keep everything unobtrusive to his mom's decor; Canton? NOPE! No use, he got the Bose for about 300 bucks off and 200 bucks off the Yamaha DVD and Receiver; cable was free.
Also recently, my friend and I built a sealed subwoofer using an 8" driver and a box about 15x15x18. Slightly quicker transients than the bose, more distortion, more bass and power. I'd use two 8" drivers next time or, add a passive radiator to lessen the distortion heard.
I'm definitely not who I use to be anymore...I said what?!?!? ohh...I don't remember that. But, you must remember that everything made by man has it's pluses and minuses (in the form of compromises).
There is one thing that I hate, people that convert or make someone 'like' a speaker and/or speaker company. When someone wants to hear...my TLs for instance, they expect me to pop in a CD and brag about how much better it sounds than Bos...JBL...etc. Nope. Nothing. I ask them what music they listen to, pop in a CD I think that demonstrates the best of that style and hand them the remote. I stand back and tell them to do what they want...check out materials and such, crank 'em to how loud they want etc. Truth is, if it sounds like you are at the symphony hall through some speakers, does it matter how you get their? Paper or HDA or Kevlar...they all have their compromises. We could continue this thread by bashing every company for it's compromises namely, bose, but that would be a waste of space.
For my PC I have Monsoon MH-502s, Headphones are Sennies and my personal stereo is DIY TL's and if I want to kick my friends in the gut I fire up my smaller, but better sounding (IMO) enhanced VP's using simple bass-reflex rules. Probably a spike and a half around 100-200Hz, but it was a three hour project for school.
Also recently, my friend and I built a sealed subwoofer using an 8" driver and a box about 15x15x18. Slightly quicker transients than the bose, more distortion, more bass and power. I'd use two 8" drivers next time or, add a passive radiator to lessen the distortion heard.
I'm definitely not who I use to be anymore...I said what?!?!? ohh...I don't remember that. But, you must remember that everything made by man has it's pluses and minuses (in the form of compromises).
There is one thing that I hate, people that convert or make someone 'like' a speaker and/or speaker company. When someone wants to hear...my TLs for instance, they expect me to pop in a CD and brag about how much better it sounds than Bos...JBL...etc. Nope. Nothing. I ask them what music they listen to, pop in a CD I think that demonstrates the best of that style and hand them the remote. I stand back and tell them to do what they want...check out materials and such, crank 'em to how loud they want etc. Truth is, if it sounds like you are at the symphony hall through some speakers, does it matter how you get their? Paper or HDA or Kevlar...they all have their compromises. We could continue this thread by bashing every company for it's compromises namely, bose, but that would be a waste of space.
For my PC I have Monsoon MH-502s, Headphones are Sennies and my personal stereo is DIY TL's and if I want to kick my friends in the gut I fire up my smaller, but better sounding (IMO) enhanced VP's using simple bass-reflex rules. Probably a spike and a half around 100-200Hz, but it was a three hour project for school.
Tube/analog audiophiles will claim that measurements are useless, and then immediately bring up measurements when you talk Bose. Non-DIY audiophiles will buy equipment because it looks good and at times questionable marketing claims (some worse than Bose). DIY audiophiles will buy components (that go into not-so-good-looking-equipment) because they look good and at times questionable marketing claims.
One of my friends who owns Bose HT was blown away and refused to believe that I had no surrounds when he listened to my modest Adcom/Axiom stereo system. Another of my friends who owns a Bose HT believes that Bose is the best. I have listened to Bose in some real-life situations and I think it provides okay sound when you take into consideration the careless placement done by their owners. I doubt my Adcom/Axiom will sound as good if placed in a similar situation. At the same time I doubt that you can make Bose sound as good as my system even if you exceed the amount of room and placement tweaking that I have performed. Does that mean that Bose is worse than my system? I don't think so!
I find it surprising that Bose is attacked so much in a Capitilistic/Democratic society where the ultimate success is measured in the amount of Money-Made/Popularity. Bose has a place in the society because they are so successful - just like SUVs have a place in the society because they are so successful (Popular does not necessarily mean good, and there is no need to be bitter about it).
Please, can we all not exist peacefully? Take with you what you like and ignore the rest!
One of my friends who owns Bose HT was blown away and refused to believe that I had no surrounds when he listened to my modest Adcom/Axiom stereo system. Another of my friends who owns a Bose HT believes that Bose is the best. I have listened to Bose in some real-life situations and I think it provides okay sound when you take into consideration the careless placement done by their owners. I doubt my Adcom/Axiom will sound as good if placed in a similar situation. At the same time I doubt that you can make Bose sound as good as my system even if you exceed the amount of room and placement tweaking that I have performed. Does that mean that Bose is worse than my system? I don't think so!
I find it surprising that Bose is attacked so much in a Capitilistic/Democratic society where the ultimate success is measured in the amount of Money-Made/Popularity. Bose has a place in the society because they are so successful - just like SUVs have a place in the society because they are so successful (Popular does not necessarily mean good, and there is no need to be bitter about it).
Please, can we all not exist peacefully? Take with you what you like and ignore the rest!
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.