[Paganini Alfredo]

Bose is like the big brother of headphones, similar to Bud Light in the beer market. Lots of uneducated people buying their product when there's so much more beneath the surface, but for some reason don't make the effort to scratch that surface. So yeah once you do discover that world and realize how bad the general mass produced product is people in general turn their nose up towards it. I do with beer, which is why I made that analogy. I mean c'mon, give me a dark, heavy, tasty beer with some flavor to it any day of the week. I'm already spending the money...

 

[prosound]

I confess that I quite like the look of Bose's WAVE Systems - not the ACOUSTIC WAVE line though, which I find unsightly.
Off-topic now, sorry. I just wouldn't pay that price when I could have other, more reasonable choices.

 

[Ypoknons]

It takes a little time and experience to actually know. A random layman off the street can't be expected to pick these pick these up and understand if all the person has been listening to is iBuds, or hell, even someone who randomly bought a KSC75 might not appreciate the Koss headphones right.

 

[Scott_Tarlow]

The real reason why bose gets so much hate is because we tolerate uniformed opinions on this forum. It still wouldn't be a favorable headphone, but instead of having everyone scream about it, we would have some people scream about it. 

 

[Armaegis]

Their satellite speakers sound terrible. The bookshelf sizes are a bt better. They don't have subwoofers, but "bass modules". If you ever listen to one, you'll know why.
 
Headphones are mediocre for the money, and their noise cancellation is only so-so and seems to only work applied specifically to the white noise generated from their demo kiosk.
 
They funnel tons of their money into product demos and advertisement rather than product improvement. They have also been known to rig their comparison demos to make the competition sound worse (ex: setting up two speakers, but using flimsy wiring or different power for the competitor).

 

[Sinty]

the Dk1 at like 90$ is still better than the new QC15 priced at over 300$
 
so ya...they screw you big

 

[Ishcabible]

 
Quote:

Okay...
 
All I hear is the same, overpriced for what you get.
 
Only offering as to why is
 
but no explanation as to what is wrong with it.
 
Bose doesn't seem to offer specs for their products, how convenient.

 

[powerslave]

The below is more geared toward their home theater products but is an interesting read:
 
http://www.intellexual.net/bose.html

 

[High_Q]

Quote:

Thanks.  I needed that

 

 

[baka1969]

They sound boomy and muddy. They're overpriced. They lack detail and don't sound natural or balanced. The Grado SR-80(i) is a vastly better headphone and it' s under $100.

EDIT:

If you need a closed can the Denon D1001 sounds better. The M50 I have coming in so I can't say but they are highly touted for the money.

 

[Sophonax]

As many have said, it is generally felt that Bose products are overpriced for what they offer.  In my opinion, this doesn't necessarily mean that all their products are bad, but they do seem to be universally too expensive.
 
All of Bose's headphones (and probably most of their products, for that matter) are sonically outclassed by better, more obscure headphones on the market.  However, because of their advertising, nearly everyone has heard of Bose.  I don't think there are many people who haven't seen a Bose ad, but if you asked most people about the SR80is or D1001s or ATH-M50s they wouldn't have any idea what you're talking about.  In addition, Bose's headphones are quite comfortable, and they sound a lot better than crappo stock iBuds.  I suspect that many people hear a Bose headphone as their first "high-end" upgrade over the stock iBuds, and they fall in love immediately and probably don't even bother demo-ing many other headphones before buying Bose (except maybe the Monster Beats, another real winner).  This accounts for the amount of 'phones that Bose is able to sell.
 
But yes, the reason that people don't like them around here is because they do not perform to their price level.  And the reason they get hated on so much (in addition to Bose-bashing that happens just for jest and sport) is that they represent a general ignorance of the common market when it comes to audio.  We here at Head-Fi are audiophiles, we love sound quality, and it pains us to see that a company can dominate the headphone market through the quality of their advertising rather than the quality of their product.

 

[wantmyf1]

They over-advertise and are heavily pushed at mainstream retailers.  They use this, as well as rigged demos, to take advantage of the audio ignorance of people to push a low-fi product at a mid-fi price.

 

[Jack C]

Bose does help move he audio world along in certain aspects. They tend to focus on a combination of life factors rather than just features and performance. For example, I think they single handedly popularized the noise canceling headphone market. These headphones may not be great in all aspects, but they offer a fine combination that is attractive to a non-critical user group.
 
Another example is their wave radio, prior to which manufacturers generally did not try to generate good sound from small packges.

 

[poikkeus]

Bose has gained much of its reputation through aggressive advertising - quite unlike most other headphone makers. It's simply that, compared to other manufacturers, a customer could find an number of better-sounding, better-looking, and especially longer-lasting headphones. In short, Bose is not a good value. But since they're such an aggressive market force, Bose is one of the first headphones many casual listeners think of when the subject comes up.
 
I don't think that Bose headphones necessarily sound bad. I've previewed several Bose headphones, and they're satisfactory. But if I were to compare Bose to other headphones, they would fall short.

 

[Xan7hos]

^ this.