[AudioDwebe]

My 2 cents:
 
Bose-bashing is a rite of passage for anyone who considers themselves an "audiophile".  As a person grows up, they see the name, "Bose" everywhere.  It's the speakers used in hi-end cars, they're sold pretty much everywhere, and are advertised remarkably well.  So one grows believing that Bose is, indeed, the best there is. 
 
Some folks stop there and continue to believe, while others venture off the main roadway to Bosedom and find other speakers/headphones which they come to realize is better suited for their musical needs. 
 
With this newfound knowledge, and feeling as though they've somehow been "duped" by Bose for a number of years, they shout out at every given opportunity just how lousy Bose products are.  I guess many feel empowered by breaking the chains of Bose and feel better about themselves, as audiphiles. 
 
No longer being a newbie, they try and spread the words of anit-Bosedom to show the world just how much of an audiophile they really are.
 
At least that's my take on Bose-bashing.
 
Having said that, I find certain Bose products to be as good or, dare I say it?  Better than other products for their intended uses. 
 
In my personal experience, I've purchased and enjoyed the following:  301 Series II, 601 Series II, 901 Series VI (twice) and their little IE earbuds.  I find their earbuds to be a very dark sounding canalphone which requires ample amplification to sound really good, but even unamped, once I'd gotten used to their sound signature, found them to be very warm, comfortable and a relaxing listen.  They're something that has to be used alone, without swapping out with other IEMs/cans, for the enjoyment to begin.  In constant swapping mode, I could never get past their dark and somewhat muddy sound signature.  But that's only compared to other IEMs/cans.  On their own, by themselves, very enjoyable.  The only thing that I absolutely hated was that I couldn't keep their eartips on the stems.  They kept coming off. 
 
As for their speaker line, for music, I do not like their little cubes.  Those, to me, are only for movie special effects, for which they work really well.  The 301, 601 and 901 I find to be excellent speakers.  They're definitley not audiophile quality with pinpoint soundstage imaging, but they also cost nowhere near what an "audiophile" speaker does.  Even the 901s, with their cost of over a grand, is relatively inexpensive, as "audiophile" speakers often tend to cost more, and you need the proper upstream gear to take advantage of what a given speaker is capable of.  I'm talking retail price, not what one can find used. 
 
I think Bose products are for people who just "enjoy" music without the need for constant upgrades of this or that in order to make incremental improvements in their sound systems.  Their for non-audiophiles, or for audiophiles who can live with them with an appreciation of what they do, which, in my opinion, is give you a really nice sound, at a reasonable price, without the need for ultraexpensive components to match them with, or for one who has limitations in their music rooms which doesn't allow for other speakers (audiphile-type) to excel.
 
Again, this is just my 2 cents.
 
'Dwebe 

 

[swaffleman]

I rather like Bose products. They have a certain sound signature that's to die for in my opinion. I do have complaints with their headphones though. For one, their around ears aren't powerful enough and they lack real substance to the sound. They are very warm and airy...the word "whispy" works (haha...as if that made sense). But they don't have a very full sound. However, they are quite detailed.
 
The on ears have entirely too much bass, but they seem to fix the problems with the around ears. They have a very full sound. The bass is actually very nice, it is a nice blend between mellow and punchy. You can feel the impact. But it's a little much, as it overpowers other ranges at times. I honestly would have never gone from the on ears if they managed to level the balance more. They sound that good to me.
 
The in ears are like the on ears but times two. You can't hear anything but bass. It's awful.
 
Their wave radio is nice. I've had one for years and it sounds very good.
 
However, I am no fool. I know that Bose products are not meant for analytical or professional listening. They are meant only for casual music listening, and their sound reflects that.
 
And yeah they should be a bit less expensive.

 

[Graphicism]

Dwebe,
 
I'd like to know if you purchased the 301 Series II, 601 Series II, 901 Series VI (twice) you actually had any time spent with other speakers around the same pricepoint? To me it looks like you bought the 301, liked it, upgraded a couple years later and so for the past 6-10 years have had nothing but bose.
 
You also mention there IEMs are "very dark sounding" and "very warm" - I would personally find this uncomfortable, I can't stand a warm mid bass hump sound. I would put this down to you owning Bose for years, getting "used to it" and not knowing any better.
 
I'd like to know if you purchased the 301 Series II, 601 Series II, 901 Series VI (twice) you actually had any time spent with other speakers around the same pricepoint? To me it looks like you bought the 301, liked it, upgraded a couple years later and do for the past 6-10 years have had nothing but bose.
 
You also mention there IEMs are "very dark sounding" and "very warm" - I would personally find this uncomfortable, I can't stand a warm mid bass hump sound. I would put this down to you owning Vose for years, getting "used to it" and not knowing any better.

 

[maverickronin]

I've heard some 301s, and 901s before.  I'm not sure how old but I'd guess early 80s vintage.  I thought they sounded great, but I have no idea how much the cost new, or how they compare to the current models.  A few years ago my dad wasted (IMO) about 3 grand on one of those lifestyle systems.  I'm guessing because my mom wouldn't let him put the old 901s upstairs in the new house (they now collect dust in the basement...)
 
The lifestyle system sound great for movies but that's all it does.  Music sounds awful.  There's hardly any bass.  The system is capable of it though.  If you watch a movie and there's an explosion, the whole house shakes, but the deepest bass hit in a song? Almost nothing.  It's all filtered out somehow.  I have a Boston Acoustics 2.1 'multimedia' system with a 6" 'sub' in a bandpass box that not only sounds better but hits several times harder!  It's only 30 watts, and is probably 1/10th the size of the Bose 'Bass Module'.  My dads Porta Pros sound better for music.
 
It's not very reliable either.  Its been through 2 remotes in about 6 years, and the 'receiver' part had to be taken in and fixed a few times as well.  I had a higher opinion of Bose when the only product of theirs I'd heard was my dads old system set up around the 901s.  I wouldn't be surprised if their bookshelf, and full size floor standing models were still pretty good, but I doubt its $1400 good.  These are likely a better value.
 
I saw a demo of these at Sam's Club the other day, but didn't listen to it for long because the source sounded like an FM radio despite the fact that it was clearly a specially produced test loop.  What the #^@! was it playing out of?  They can't even set up a rigged test anymore?  Even bad headphones don't add static and crackling.

 

[swaffleman]

They are very good. I still have an old pair, and they are pretty large...about 2 feet tall. They sound magnificent, and we didn't have them set up in any special way. We just had them sitting on top of a large cabinet. They revealed things in the sound that I couldn't hear with even my good headphones.
Quote:

I've heard some 301s, and 901s before.  I'm not sure how old but I'd guess early 80s vintage.  I thought they sounded great, but I have no idea how much the cost new, or how they compare to the current models.  A few years ago my dad wasted (IMO) about 3 grand on one of those lifestyle systems.  I'm guessing because my mom wouldn't let him put the old 901s upstairs in the new house (they now collect dust in the basement...)
 
The lifestyle system sound great for movies but that's all it does.  Music sounds awful.  There's hardly any bass.  The system is capable of it though.  If you watch a movie and there's an explosion, the whole house shakes, but the deepest bass hit in a song? Almost nothing.  It's all filtered out somehow.  I have a Boston Acoustics 2.1 'multimedia' system with a 6" 'sub' in a bandpass box that not only sounds better but hits several times harder!  It's only 30 watts, and is probably 1/10th the size of the Bose 'Bass Module'.  My dads Porta Pros sound better for music.
 
It's not very reliable either.  Its been through 2 remotes in about 6 years, and the 'receiver' part had to be taken in and fixed a few times as well.  I had a higher opinion of Bose when the only product of theirs I'd heard was my dads old system set up around the 901s.  I wouldn't be surprised if their bookshelf, and full size floor standing models were still pretty good, but I doubt its $1400 good.  These are likely a better value.
 
I saw a demo of these at Sam's Club the other day, but didn't listen to it for long because the source sounded like an FM radio despite the fact that it was clearly a specially produced test loop.  What the #^@! was it playing out of?  They can't even set up a rigged test anymore?  Even bad headphones don't add static and crackling.

 

[Ze_Blitzkrieg]

Quote:

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...

 
Very well put. . .very well indeed.  I might like your post even more because I share you views on beer, haha.  The darker the better!  Give me flavor!

 

[AudioDwebe]

 
Quote:

Dwebe,
 
I'd like to know if you purchased the 301 Series II, 601 Series II, 901 Series VI (twice) you actually had any time spent with other speakers around the same pricepoint? To me it looks like you bought the 301, liked it, upgraded a couple years later and so for the past 6-10 years have had nothing but bose.
 
You also mention there IEMs are "very dark sounding" and "very warm" - I would personally find this uncomfortable, I can't stand a warm mid bass hump sound. I would put this down to you owning Bose for years, getting "used to it" and not knowing any better.
 
I'd like to know if you purchased the 301 Series II, 601 Series II, 901 Series VI (twice) you actually had any time spent with other speakers around the same pricepoint? To me it looks like you bought the 301, liked it, upgraded a couple years later and do for the past 6-10 years have had nothing but bose.
 
You also mention there IEMs are "very dark sounding" and "very warm" - I would personally find this uncomfortable, I can't stand a warm mid bass hump sound. I would put this down to you owning Vose for years, getting "used to it" and not knowing any better.

Hey Graphicism,
 
My speaker journey, to the best of my recollection:
 
I purchased the Bose 301 Series II in 1985 or so (which I ended up giving to my brother); the 601 Series II in about 1987 (which went to the ex); a few of the Advent speakers (Baby and a tower) early to mid 90's; Spica TC-60 in about 1996; B&W 302 in about 1997; B&W CDM1 SEs in about 1998; B&W N805's in about 2000; Bose 901's (first time) in about 2000, which I later gave to my brother; Dunlavy Audio Labs SC-IV in about 2002; JM Reynaud Trentes in about 2003; Reference 3A De Capo i's in about 2003; Bose 901 in 2005; Dunlavy Audio Labs SC-I this year; Vandersteen 2ce Sigs this year; Acoustic Zen Adagios this year. 
 
And headphones I had/and or still have (have sold lots lately as I've gotten back into 2-channel stereo):  Sony MDR-V6 in 1985; Beyer DT 990 Pros in 1994; AKG K701s in 2006, when I first joined Head-Fi (Damn You, Head-Fi!); and from 2006 to sometime last year, AKG K500, K501, K1000; Grado SR 225, RS-1, GS1000; Senn HD650; Sony SA 5000; Denon D7000; Ultrasone Proline 2500, Edition 9, Ety ER4 B/S/P, ER6; Senn IE8; Shure E500, SE530; Audio Technica CK10, CK100; Sony PFVR something; UE 5 Pros, 5EB; Bose IE; I think that's it.
 
As for headamps, I've had/and or still have:  MP3X, Canamp, Raptor, GCHA, RKV MK II, Zana Deux, Move, Hornet, and the Protector.
 
I recall the years of purchase based on my location at that time (USA Retired). 
 
The majority of my speaker-based listening have been with "audiophile approved" speakers.  But that's not stopped me from enjoying the 901s for what they are. 
 
Cheers.
 
'Dwebe 

 

[Graphicism]

Quote:

Hey Graphicism,
 
My speaker journey, to the best of my recollection:
 
...
 
The majority of my speaker-based listening have been with "audiophile approved" speakers.  But that's not stopped me from enjoying the 901s for what they are. 
 
Cheers.
 
'Dwebe 

Thanks for the reply Dwebe, you've certainly heard a lot more speakers than I have. Growing up I had the Bose Acoustimass 5 which sounded great but cost a pretty penny in England around 2001. I was happy with this until I heard some larger speakers that cost about half of what I had paid. From that point on with the occasional stop in the store to hear the latest offering I turned away from them, and that was before discovering head-fi and the bose-bashing popularity.
 
I have briefly listened to the Bose IEM/headphones and can't stand the warm bloated sound, then again I dislike Denons D2000 for the bass and put them in the same category.
 
At the end of the day I suppose there are some who will bash Bose without so much as auditioning one...

 

[luckybaer]

Quote:

Quote:
Thanks.  I needed that

 

Good lord, look at those frequency graphs.

 

[Ishcabible]

Quote:

Good lord, look at those frequency graphs.

 
Makes the Bose look decent in comparison.

 

[High_Q]

Quote:

Makes the Bose look decent in comparison.

 Any more crappy frequency response to show off guys?  Can it get any worse?
 

 

[Ishcabible]

Quote:

Quote:

 Any more crappy frequency response to show off guys?  Can it get any worse?
 

Of course!
 

 
 
Anyways, back on topic, I did like the (albeit, vintage) 901s when I heard them. They sounded nice and inviting. I'd probably pay a third of what they actually go for if they sound the same or better.

 

[maverickronin]

Quote:

Makes the Bose look decent in comparison.

Better than the Skullcandies.  You could make a case for the beats though.

 

[cvc]

No highs, no lows, it must be Bose. A salesman said that to me once. Funny stuff. At least you started off this hobby listening to some decent headphones. But no way in hell should you be happy with Bose for the rest of your life. Bose just advertises more then anyone else and that's why you probably bought their product. That's why a million people go to McDonalds for a burger. Does a big mac actually taste good? As you get older you will eventually discover the better things in life. Bose just isn't it.

 

[stevenswall]

1. They offer little in the way of value... $300 can buy you a lot more than a name, especially on plastic.
2. Use a reversed/reflected speaker design in the QC15's, a poor imitation of an open headphones quality soundstage.
3. Mostly made of plastic, even the headband, ie. the part most likely to break (second only to the cable) is not reinforced or constructed out of sturdy material.
4. Sound, not great at treble, neither bass, midrange is probably done better than most, but Bose headphones don't really shine in the sound department.