newb audiophile....bose?
Dec 31, 2007 at 7:11 AM Post #31 of 52
Bose are very weak. My dad has had a couple of pairs (QC2s) and the this plastic has broken. Denons are definitely better than that. As far as isolation, I'm not sure but from what I remember Bose were a little better.
 
Dec 31, 2007 at 5:32 PM Post #34 of 52
Bose doesn't have too much experience in the Headphone field but they have more expertise in the speaker field.

There are lower-profile audio makers who have far more audio experience than Bose overall. Headphones aren't Bose's forte so keep that in mind.

While there are companies that have not been in existence for too long (Ultimate Ears and Etymotic Research), they have been in the forefront of Earphone/Headphone technology and concentrate only on the earphone/headphone segment of audio and with nothing holding either of them away from ear technology, they can enhance the products to ensure better sound reproduction accuracy.

Also audio companies, while they have been making products for musicians for the majority of the time (Shure for example), much of their ear expertise comes from personal monitoring systems.

Grado has mass expertise in the headphone industry and that is why they are praised even by the people who spend so much in the headphone industry that Grado keeps their formula traditional whilst researching on how to improve sound project after project.

Much of Sennheiser's success comes from headphones.

There is a lot to say, but I wouldn't attempt to get a pair of Bose headphones as your first set, your best bet is to get a pair of Etymotic earphones, though. (Altec Lansing IM 616/716 and the Harman-Kardon EP series are fine).
 
Dec 31, 2007 at 6:03 PM Post #36 of 52
Quote:

Originally Posted by vesther /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Remember that Grado has almost 60 years of headphone experience so it's worth giving Grado headphones a try...


Isn't more like 15 years?HP1 etc came out about 15+ years ago and i believe were the first Grado 'phones.Of course Grado was already around making cartridges for a long long time.
 
Dec 31, 2007 at 6:20 PM Post #38 of 52
Marketing to the masses is Bose's forte - it's really the only thing they excel at - it sure isn't audio quality! They have expertise *selling* speakers for prices completely out of synch with their level of sound quality.
 
Dec 31, 2007 at 6:24 PM Post #39 of 52
Quote:

Originally Posted by vkvedam /img/forum/go_quote.gif
X2, yep it would save you a fortune. One day you might feel, why did I go
to google, why did I search for a decent headphone and where I have ended up. Hahaha. But will be a long journey though if you take this path and would be never ending.



I don't ward people off anymore. While it is certainly an expensive hobby and this site does not help, its definitely worth it, IMO.

Also its your own decision, its not like people on here are holding a gun to your head. Jedi mind-tricks.
 
Jan 1, 2008 at 1:05 AM Post #42 of 52
Quote:

Originally Posted by ken36 /img/forum/go_quote.gif
At some point Bose will get it right.


Why should they bother? Bose is privately held and (according to Yahoo! Finance) had a year-over-year increase of 11.1% on $2B in sales. If they can make that kind of money selling cr@ppy little boxes with thin paper cones, $500 clock radios and $1500 2-channel HTiB systems, why would they go to the trouble of producing quality products?
 
Jan 1, 2008 at 1:35 AM Post #43 of 52
Quote:

Originally Posted by billybob_jcv /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Why should they bother? Bose is privately held and (according to Yahoo! Finance) had a year-over-year increase of 11.1% on $2B in sales. If they can make that kind of money selling cr@ppy little boxes with thin paper cones, $500 clock radios and $1500 2-channel HTiB systems, why would they go to the trouble of producing quality products?


Because eventually, your product line stagnates and you have to replenish it with a new design or concept which leaves potential for improvement. Let's face it, Bose doesn't get a lot of love amongst audiophiles, especially their headphones but when you think about it:

1) The Triports aren't really bad, they are just overpriced. Knock them down to about $40-$50 and the sound-price ratio starts looking better, especially when you factor in the comfort level as well
2) The Quiet Comfort 2 is still probably one of the better choices for noise cancelling, especially if quality of noise cancelling and comfort are two of your biggest selling points.
3) While its not stellar, nor is it a true IEM, The Bose In Ear is their best attempt at good sounding headphones to date.

Each one of them is a result of Bose having to add a new technology or product to their line-up so they have something to market to the masses, and the masses won't complain that all of Bose's stuff is antiquated. I agree with Ken36; they will eventually get it right, be it on the sound side or the price side.
 
Jan 1, 2008 at 5:36 AM Post #44 of 52
Quote:

Originally Posted by wrecked_porsche /img/forum/go_quote.gif
If you find that the ATH-ESW9 is too expensive, get the ATH-ES7, its kinda like a baby brother to the ATH-ESW9. Just my 2 cents.
smily_headphones1.gif



The ATH-ESW9 are leagues above the ATH-ES7 in just about every area, imho. I wouldn't even say the signature sound is that similiar.
 
Jan 1, 2008 at 6:09 AM Post #45 of 52
Bah - Bose has been selling the same snake oil for 35 years, the only thing that changes is how much they spend on the latest marketing campaign. I'm an old dog - and I've seen the same cr@p from Bose since the early 70's. Any decent IEM is better isolation than the QC2. They won't "get it right" because real audiophile SQ is not their business model.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top