[mrarroyo]

Price aside, I think the average consumer will find that Bose sounds pretty good. Most of them have no real prior experience with Hi-Fi and Bose fills the gap quite nicely. Personally I find Bose sounds pretty good and would buy more of their products if their prices were about 40% of their current price level.

 

[islewind]

I notice that the Grado entry on wikipedia is pretty extensive, I assumed that a lot of that was entered by Head-fi'ers. Has anyone here contributed to the Bose entry?

 

[ex0du5]

The triports are not a hi-fideility headphone. They don't sound terrible though. I'd take their comfort and isolation over the KSC75 anyday. I'd only pay KSC75 price for em though .

 

[Lord Chaos]

Years ago when I first heard the much-raved-about Bose 901 speakers, I was expecting something great, that would just put my JBL L-100 speakers in the trash. What I heard was mediocre. I kind of liked the ambience they produced, but the sound quality was badly colored and "boxy."

Millions of people disagree with me. Or at least thousands. I've heard the PA version, which is basically a 901 turned around, and it's OK. What do you expect of PA speakers? I used to use my L-100s for PA work and I liked them better.

So, I've put Bose in the category of "famous because they're famous." It's well known that people will vote for the name they hear all the time. Few buyers of anything do any real research to find the best. I understand that. It's daunting. It took me many years of making mistakes and listening to speakers before I was halfway competent to judge.

 

[Assorted]

Don't forget their demo's. They make the demo sooooo convincing, if you ever heard one.

 

[gloco]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Assorted /img/forum/go_quote.gif Don't forget their demo's. They make the demo sooooo convincing, if you ever heard one.

Sure, because they spend 100's of thousands of dollars on the room treatment and using the highest quality gear to drive those subpar speakers.

 

[M0T0XGUY]

Quote:

Originally Posted by aaron-xp /img/forum/go_quote.gif Wikipedia - Good Resource, Bad Source

Well said. Although I usually argue to use it on most of my projects, I do eventually realize that its convenience is worth giving up to ensure reliability in my work. I use EBSCOhost instead which is a professionally edited online database for newspaper articles, encyclopedias, and websites. Much better in my opinion for actual research.

 

[Klarus]

I totally agree with whoever said they would pay KSC-75 price for Triports--but I would stick with my KSC-75s over the Triports for sure. ^_^ I remember trying someone's Triports one time, and was thoroughly surprised at how bad they were compared to my expectations (at the time, I'd heard few good headphones besides the W5000, and was using Senn HD215s--which, despite the veil, I enjoyed).

 

[fatcat28037]

Quote:

Originally Posted by gloco /img/forum/go_quote.gif Sure, because they spend 100's of thousands of dollars on the room treatment and using the highest quality gear to drive those subpar speakers.

Wow! And here I've always thought that regardless of how good your source, amplification and acoustics were if the speakers sucked so did your sound. Live and learn.

 

[uzziah]

Quote:

Originally Posted by stewtheking /img/forum/go_quote.gif Citing wikipedia as a source is a very stupid thing to do

i gotta say ditto on that; use it for quick info; it's not "trustworthy" for accuracy

 

[luckybaer]

The Bose sound system in my new car is better than the sound system in my wife's 2002 Accord EX-V6.