Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › Members' Lounge (General Discussion) › What's so bad about Bose?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

What's so bad about Bose? - Page 13

post #181 of 194

You all = Lol 

post #182 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tsengsta View Post

Bose = Lol


Your face =  lol

post #183 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tsengsta View Post

You all = Lol 


Your mother = Lol

 

 

 

 

 

 

I just had to.

post #184 of 194

Read on some vintage audio forums, some Bose speakers from late 60s and 70s are considered some, if not the best speakers ever made.  So Bose reputation is built on some history.  Maybe not their current entry level consumer gear, but they do make some good gear.

post #185 of 194

I like my Cinemamate a lot, it could have been $100 cheaper but I've never regretted getting it.

post #186 of 194

^ what else have you heard though?

post #187 of 194

I got some circumural Triports secondhand. They seemed to be made for music that has lost the loudness wars, meh.

post #188 of 194

Bose did a good job at noise isolation, but in term of sound quality based on my experience (I don't own one tho), it falls behind the large brands like SENS and AKG. Just not my type :/

post #189 of 194

I bought some ATH-M50s after my ferrets ate my Bose Triports.  I'm now selling the ATH and getting the new AE2 because I can hardly tell a difference.  The form factor and brand factor of the Bose outweighs whatever sound quality I am missing.

 

My personal opinion is that, too often, newbies come here for audio advice, but this isn't the place for the average consumer.  This is an audiophile's forum.

post #190 of 194

Hopefully not repeating what I've already said, but some of the "brand factor" is I think that Bose markets their products (particularly their headphones) as "audiophile quality." Problem for some is, to some consumers, their headphones deliver that. Sound appreciation is a subjective thing (imho). If that same consumer was offered a comparison between Triports and comparably priced, top-rated headphones, the consumer might realize, "Oh, I like these other ones better." Notice I said "like" not "these are better."

 

A smart marketing strategy of Bose is that their headphones (and other products) are positioned in listening stations at retailers where you CAN'T compare with other, comparably priced units. I haven't been inside a Best Buy in ages, but at Target, BJ's (warehouse club store), etc. you can "hear the difference" in the Triports ... but not really, everything else is in bubble packs. Comparably priced audiophile headphones aren't even on sale there.

 

I recently replaced my older Triports' (around ear) cushions with $17 replacements, and then offered the Triports to a coworker. I told him they weren't worth $135 new, and even at the $99 price point, there were comparable headphones that were highly regarded in sound quality. I asked him to Google a bit and tell me what he though was a fair price for headphones, extension cord, and bag. He offered me $40. So ... I think the Triport AEs are worth ... $50-60 new.

 

I have some new Triport IEMs that I got free from a credit card rewards program, and I like all the accessories (lanyard, shirt clip, case, 3 sizes of plugs; oops, NO extension cord). They sound fine, are comfortable (I wore tight ear plugs for many years in aviation, and have no need for them now). Of course, they were free, so its hard to be disappointed.

 

As far as speakers, the last time I did an in-store comparison with the same audio source, I compared their center channel (CS-1?) with others, and they sucked mightily. They didn't even sound as good as their low-end 201 bookshelf speakers. Rewind to 1992 or so when I compared 401 tower speakers with several other comparably priced high-end brands, and there was no comparison, the 401s sounded clearer, deeper, more alive than all others. They still serve me well. A few years later, Consumer Reports rated their 301s with the flatest response curve of any speakers they tested; I now have a pair of those for my rear surrounds. They've slipped in the ratings since, and I believe the newer 301s don't have as much sonic dispersion as the model from the late 90s.

 

I recently listened to their latest computer speakers (Companion 5, 3.1), and they sounded great. But for $399 they'd better sound good. The $250 Companion 3s, not so great, and you can get better sounding speakers for that price point. Again, I listened in a store where you couldn't listen to the competition (not sure there even were other $400 computer speakers for sale). I have the original MediaMate computer speakers playing off an iPod (line level out) in my bedroom (that's my pic on Wikipedia), sound great. their current "computer speakers" (similar form factor, 2.0, angled wedge), Computer MusicMonitor, sell for $399, and having listened in a Bose store, I can assure you those are NOT $399 speakers.

 

All this is to answer, what's so bad about Bose? It's not just that their products now are -- generally -- not as good as they say they are (but once were), but they are priced higher than comparable quality products, and positioned for sale in spaces where they can't be compared, so their marketing hype has greater influence. It doesn't mean all their products are trash -- some are good for their intended use -- but these may be the exception. Due to their retail contracts, buying them at the price point that is commensurate with their quality is, shall we say, problematic unless you get them used.


Edited by ChromeJob - 11/6/10 at 8:50am
post #191 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by dctrombly View Post

I bought some ATH-M50s after my ferrets ate my Bose Triports.  I'm now selling the ATH and getting the new AE2 because I can hardly tell a difference.  The form factor and brand factor of the Bose outweighs whatever sound quality I am missing.

 

My personal opinion is that, too often, newbies come here for audio advice, but this isn't the place for the average consumer.  This is an audiophile's forum.


You really care that much about "Brand factor?" That's pretty shallow. Not that it doesn't happen all the time in Head-Fi. *sigh*.

post #192 of 194

1.  The word "Bose" is very useful as a snob detector.

 

2.  Cousin Danny's Bose radio really is the best sound he ever had and is the best sound he's ever going to have.

And God bless them all.

 

Sog

post #193 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by SkinnyOldGuy View Post

1.  The word "Bose" is very useful as a snob detector.

 

2.  Cousin Danny's Bose radio really is the best sound he ever had and is the best sound he's ever going to have.

And God bless them all.

 

Sog


beerchug.gif

post #194 of 194

I don't consider myself to have the keenest ears on earth. If I have a saving grace when it comes to appreciating audio quality, it's a general attention to detail that for me is more mental than auditory.

 

But I've always hated Bose as well, even while having never really familiarized myself with their offerings in any meaningful sense.

 

But that changed this past summer when I had a gig as a salesman as a high-end electronics retailer that had Bose's nose firmly up their arse. Not only did we carry every Bose product/package, but we had several dedicated rooms that were co-engineered by Bose to show off their top-spec Lifestyle systems.

 

And it was in this, supremely 'optimal' environment that I got some serious alone-time with the best of Bose.

 

Here's the quick and dirty of it; Bose systems, on first listen, will generally shock anybody who has traditional expectations of soundstage based on speaker size. Particularly when that person is not intimately familiar with the content being used to demonstrate the equipment. Space battles and operas and guitar solos sound great to the majority of ears on first listen when they're both unfamiliar to the listener and drowningly loud.

 

But I had the advantage of being able to demo for myself with material that I could be away from for 10 years on a desert island and still hear in my mind as accurately as if I had an iPod on me... And it's when you have an opportunity to do this that you see through the Bose fuaxstravaganza; nothing sounds right. The balances you're used to are completely redone. Any comfort you had with the material, over however many devices you've heard it on, is completely challenged.

 

And that's Bose. Their speakers suck at doing a lot, so they engineer them to distract you with the few things they do really well.


Edited by Centauri - 12/4/10 at 5:49pm
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › Members' Lounge (General Discussion) › What's so bad about Bose?