[High_Q]

Quote:

Bose Around Ear $130:
 
JVC HA-S700 $25-30
 
Like I said before, not only do they look similar, but they FEEL and sound similar as well. This is why Bose gets hated on. They are overpriced to hell.  I actually LOVE the HA-S700 because they offer good sound, durability (built better than the Bose despite the similar looks), and portability for so cheap. If Bose priced their stuff like JVC does (RX700 and RX900 anyone?), they'd be better liked around here.

It can agree they look similar, but how do you know they sound similar?  you have them both?  Do you have frequency response graph too?  If I can't hear both headphones myself my best evidence is the graph.
 

 

[Mad Lust Envy]

I've demoed the Bose quite a bit of times, both in stores, and at a family member's house (much to my dismay after telling them NOT to get them). They are both indeed similar to me. There is a JVC HA-S700 in MY house (sold it to my roomie).
 
To me graphs aren't the end to all headphone comparisons. I think the frequency graph shows the KSC75 as being really bass light. That is quite the opposite of what I hear. I think they have a pretty beefy low end for what they are, compare to others that show a stronger low end on the graphs.
 
In any case, I doubt those who have the JVC and bought the Bose afterwards would think it's worth it AT ALL. the Bose's sound quality is just a TEENY bit better. I stress teeny, which is why $25 vs $130 for the actual sound difference is absolutely ridiculous. I'd pay at the most $50 for the Bose AE. Any more is a waste, as you're venturing on a price range with headphones that can mop the floor with the Bose. I like the Bose, but people would be delusional if they thought it was worth half what they are going for.

 

[joelpearce]

Quote:

Even so, I thought all cans had a different sound signature to them.  So in some ways, Bose are like all the rest, they offer a different way to listen to a piece of music?  I've read some headphones are light and airy whereas some are warm and some are in your face sounding, why must Bose be bashed on for it's difference in sound?  Is there any one set of headphones that is completely correct in reproduction of the music?
 
I cannot say I record music and have many headphones to see which are the best, and I certainly am new to audiophile headphones.  But I am willing to learn.  I just don't think bashing on Bose is acceptable.  In fact, I am sure some people even enjoy the sound Bose offers them.  It is all a matter of opinion.  And saying that the masses are uneducated seems wrong. 

I just wanted (very respectfully) to respond to a few of the ideas here, because I think they raise some interesting points.
 
All headphones do, of course, have a different sound signature.  In high-end headphones, sound signature is a carefully refined combination of several elements in some form of balance/cohesion/negotiation: detail, depth, sound stage, warmth, etc.  In less expensive headphones, the sound is determined by the drivers that happen to be in the headphones, what the general shape of the enclosure does to the sound, and what the shape of the pads do to the sound.  They sound different, yes, but that doesn't necessarily mean that all sound signatures are equal.  Just like with movies and music and art, we can talk about both taste and quality, because they are different things.  If you don't respect the quality on display at art galleries, that's fine, but don't pretend that your child's finger paintings are equally good just because you don't know anything about art.
 
This, ultimately, is the whole point of audiophilia.  There are some absolutes, and it isn't only about taste.  I don't like the Sennheiser sound signature, but I respect that they are high quality headphones and understand why others do like them.  They are equal, in my mind, to the headphones I own (caveat: I haven't tried the really high-end ones).  I also just listened a bit to one of my students Wesc cans this week.  I don't like their sound, either, but they also sound like crap.  They are not equal to headphones that do get respect around here.  It's not just about snobby respect for price, either, because you'll see how much respect that some budget headphones get around here.  It's about companies that are able to deliver either a respectable studio or audiophile level of quality for a reasonable price.
 
Back to my taste vs. quality point.  There are plenty of people who would never read restaurant and food reviews, because they are perfectly content with fast food.  Those people may even not get why anyone would go to an expensive restaurant and spend so much for the same amount of food.  For people who do respect food quality, though, it's worth it to pay $50 for a meal--as long as it's a meal that's worth $50.  This is why we hate Bose.  Most of us have listened to their headphones at least a little, and people who are used to high quality sound can immediately recognize that Bose charges gourmet prices for fast food quality.  Despite that, the masses seem perfectly content to shell out these high prices for lousy sound.  And I do mean lousy sound, not just an undesirable sound signature.  The masses are uneducated.  That's why it's useful to have a forum like this where the few people who ARE educated hang out.  Just listening to music doesn't make you an expert on sound quality, and more than the fact we all eat makes us all food experts.
 
All of this, I'm sure, makes me sound like a bit of a snob.  I can live with that.  I have about 500 movie reviews published, and I acknowledge publicly that I am a movie snob as well.  I've seen enough movies that I can dismiss some as utter crap.  The uneducated masses may enjoy these movies, but that doesn't make the films as good as great films that they have never heard of.  The same is true of Bose.  We can, and will, continue to bash them.  As an audio company they have earned all of the disdain they have from the audiophile world.  If they start making products that are worth the money, we'll find out and give them the respect they deserve.  In the meantime, we will keep pushing the companies that are able to deliver higher quality for less than half the price.
 
We're all snobs about something.  Here, we happen to be snobs about headphones.  These guys know what they're talking about, though.

 

[cravenz]

Quote:

I just wanted (very respectfully) to respond to a few of the ideas here, because I think they raise some interesting points.
 
All headphones do, of course, have a different sound signature.  In high-end headphones, sound signature is a carefully refined combination of several elements in some form of balance/cohesion/negotiation: detail, depth, sound stage, warmth, etc.  In less expensive headphones, the sound is determined by the drivers that happen to be in the headphones, what the general shape of the enclosure does to the sound, and what the shape of the pads do to the sound.  They sound different, yes, but that doesn't necessarily mean that all sound signatures are equal.  Just like with movies and music and art, we can talk about both taste and quality, because they are different things.  If you don't respect the quality on display at art galleries, that's fine, but don't pretend that your child's finger paintings are equally good just because you don't know anything about art.
 
This, ultimately, is the whole point of audiophilia.  There are some absolutes, and it isn't only about taste.  I don't like the Sennheiser sound signature, but I respect that they are high quality headphones and understand why others do like them.  They are equal, in my mind, to the headphones I own (caveat: I haven't tried the really high-end ones).  I also just listened a bit to one of my students Wesc cans this week.  I don't like their sound, either, but they also sound like crap.  They are not equal to headphones that do get respect around here.  It's not just about snobby respect for price, either, because you'll see how much respect that some budget headphones get around here.  It's about companies that are able to deliver either a respectable studio or audiophile level of quality for a reasonable price.
 
Back to my taste vs. quality point.  There are plenty of people who would never read restaurant and food reviews, because they are perfectly content with fast food.  Those people may even not get why anyone would go to an expensive restaurant and spend so much for the same amount of food.  For people who do respect food quality, though, it's worth it to pay $50 for a meal--as long as it's a meal that's worth $50.  This is why we hate Bose.  Most of us have listened to their headphones at least a little, and people who are used to high quality sound can immediately recognize that Bose charges gourmet prices for fast food quality.  Despite that, the masses seem perfectly content to shell out these high prices for lousy sound.  And I do mean lousy sound, not just an undesirable sound signature.  The masses are uneducated.  That's why it's useful to have a forum like this where the few people who ARE educated hang out.  Just listening to music doesn't make you an expert on sound quality, and more than the fact we all eat makes us all food experts.
 
All of this, I'm sure, makes me sound like a bit of a snob.  I can live with that.  I have about 500 movie reviews published, and I acknowledge publicly that I am a movie snob as well.  I've seen enough movies that I can dismiss some as utter crap.  The uneducated masses may enjoy these movies, but that doesn't make the films as good as great films that they have never heard of.  The same is true of Bose.  We can, and will, continue to bash them.  As an audio company they have earned all of the disdain they have from the audiophile world.  If they start making products that are worth the money, we'll find out and give them the respect they deserve.  In the meantime, we will keep pushing the companies that are able to deliver higher quality for less than half the price.
 
We're all snobs about something.  Here, we happen to be snobs about headphones.  These guys know what they're talking about, though.

 
i like ya name just cos' well, it's my name too. jk. anyways. just briefly read through it, but yeah, that's why there are some that are audiophiles and some that aren't. but we don't have to be snobs about it. as long as we recognise the difference in opinions, I think it's fine. that and at the end of the day, sometimes its better to agree to disagree. anyhow, good post from ya mate.

 

[EYEdROP]

Comparing Bose to fast food is the perfect analogy.
 
Fast food tastes great. But it dosent even taste like what a burger or fries would taste like at home.  
 
For me, Bose is the same way. It sounds great to my ears, but totally wrong at the same time. They use tons of processing, phase tricks, and purposefully skewed frequency responses. 
 
When you directly compare my Bose IE to my Beyer DT48, the Bose can seem much better right off the bat to a non audiophile. Ive done this test on many many different people. And People like Bose sound, even if the logo is not shown. 
  
 The beyers do not try to impress and are very uncolored, very plain, very correct, very honest. Bose is exactly the opposite. The bose try to exite you and impress with lots of power and bass.  
 
 Children cry when you drive past mcdonalds, not a steak house. 
 
 
 
  

 

[Mr Joboto]

Quote:

Originally Posted by EYEdROP /img/forum/go_quote.gif

Children cry when you drive past mcdonalds, not a steak house.   

LOL, i liked that, good call and so true
 

 

[anetode]

Quote:

 
All headphones do, of course, have a different sound signature...

True, but I've seen precious little evidence that Bose cares about refining the sound signature of their headphones anywhere near as much as their marketing leads people to believe. Sometimes sloppy design is just that

 

[Slaughter]

Bose is the Apple of computers....ooooooooooooooo, take that!

 

[FirsToStrike]

Quote:

 Children cry when you drive past mcdonalds, not a steak house. 
 
 
 
  

I read what joelpearce wrote and really liked it, but you summed it all up in 1 sentence. Wow.

 

[Noobiiee]

I'll take that as an insult of Apple mac
 
Quote:

Bose is the Apple of computers....ooooooooooooooo, take that!

 

[MacedonianHero]

Quote:

No, rump steak... they're all bottom! Badabum tsch!!!

 
Roadkill rump steak

.
 

 

[yklee118]

My Experience with The Bose Triports vs. Sennheiser HD280-Professional.
 
Many would say that this would not be a fair comparison citing the amount of time I have owned this 2002-model year headphone.  My brother still owns the first headphone that I purchased for him on his B-Day, which is the Bose Triport Closed Headphones.  So here I go.
 
The Bose Triport Headphones are light, very comfortable over a long period of time, have a rich and full sound (unamped, amped they sound like crap for some unknown reason), and decent passive noise isolation.  Bose relies heavily on product marketing to get their target audience to purchase their products.  I purchase the Triports from a Bose store in Orange County, CA and at that time I was carrying my Sennheiser HD280s.  Their representative said that the HD280s were more for analytical than music listening pleasure (well that is his opinion since I have owned this paired since they were first introduced in 2002 during the Hong Kong Audiophile Show).  The representative pointed toward the Triport Headphones stating that it would blow the Sennheiser out of the water.  At that time I also carried the iBasso T1 amp moving from one of my favorite coffee houses to my car.  I gave the Triports a listen using the default setup at Bose then compared with the Sennheiser HD280s.
 
The marks are full sound with an emphasis in the bass and treble frequencies.  Sound isolation is fair and the comfort level is a little bit better than with the HD280s.  Soundstage however was not what I would call three-dimensional or spacious.  Bose allowed me to use my iPod Touch's music library to conduct the test before buying the headphones for my brother.  Using the Touch's headphone output the sound quality was surprisingly good however I didn't care for the lack of spatial imaging within the sound-stage and the rather dead area in the mid-range frequency response.  Other than that the headphones were quite good when paired directly to the music source. 
However when the Bose Triport Headphones are paired with the iBasso T1 using the Cardas HPI interconnect, the sound stage representation went from flat to overly wide while the treble became overly tinny and brittle.  The Bass response went from controlled to bloated.  Distortion was readily noticeable at mid-volume let alone low-volume citing that these headphones really don't like to be amplified.  Once I return to the original setup of connecting the phones to the source, the SQ returned to its rich emphasized state.  Something to think about I guess right.
 
Sennheiser HD280 comparison.
 
When compared to the direct rival (price wise) one would say dead, lifeless sound-stage, no-bass, and uncomfortable.  That could be said with many headphones out there without the given burn-in period.  This comparison is long overdue since my brother is still using the Triport though not as much since the left channel is starting to die out.  Since then he has the new Bang & Olufsen Form-2 carbon-fiber headphones.  Those blow the Triports out of the water in fullness, sound-stage image, and presence.  Enough Said.
The Sennheiser after the break-in period has the spatial imaging, the fullness, and passive isolation, which is the reason many recording groups use the HD280-Pro.  The lifeless image would be due to the lack of amplification because many who use this headphone choose not to use a headphone amp due to the low impedance.  I assured those who use this headphone that an amp is a necessary accessory because of the vast improvement gained and plus Sennheiser recommends that an amp is required to gain the necessary experience or something like that.  The 32-db passive noise attenuation is one of the reason that I purchased this headphone and at first the comfort level was low however after a few months of using the HD280, I have gotten use to it and everything else I have used seem loose.  Talk about memory fit feeling on the head.
To this day i still use the HD280s for mobile applications while occasionally using the Sennheiser HD650, AKG K701, Audio Technica ATH-W1000, and or the Sennheiser HD380s. 
 
To Each Ones Own.  The Bose Triport Headphones have a rich, full sound that is to be expected with a company that puts the same amount of effort in developing their audio products.  It is a brand niche rather than a professional audio corporation like AKG, Beyerdynamic, Ultrasone, Sennheiser, Audio-Technica, and Sony.  True there are other better products out there however the comfort level with the Bose Triports are very good compared to many other headphones of similar size or price.  At $150 is still reasonable by any standards and if a new direct competition is needed, then the Sennheiser HD380 Pro, the Beyerdynamic 750, Audio-Technica ATH-A700, etc., will be the ones to be looking for. 
 
Hope this helps those who are seeking unbiased opinions on two very good headphones.  I have too many and have listened to too many.
 
Have a great week and weekend.

 

[stevenswall]

Seems like you need a different source... Bose in ears probably can't handle the fullness or dynamics of an amp, maybe they sound nicer from the ipod because of its weak signal, and tinny amp. An equalizer can help a more analytical headphone (the HD280 for example) sound musical, you just have to be able to feed it with a good source.

 

[tyty5150]

Quote:

I've demoed the Bose quite a bit of times, both in stores, and at a family member's house (much to my dismay after telling them NOT to get them). They are both indeed similar to me. There is a JVC HA-S700 in MY house (sold it to my roomie).
 
In any case, I doubt those who have the JVC and bought the Bose afterwards would think it's worth it AT ALL. the Bose's sound quality is just a TEENY bit better. I stress teeny, which is why $25 vs $130 for the actual sound difference is absolutely ridiculous. I'd pay at the most $50 for the Bose AE. Any more is a waste, as you're venturing on a price range with headphones that can mop the floor with the Bose. I like the Bose, but people would be delusional if they thought it was worth half what they are going for.

My dad has the Bose around-ear headphones.  I'm considering buying the JVC phones just to compare and let him see too.

 
Quote:

I just wanted (very respectfully) to respond to a few of the ideas here, because I think they raise some interesting points.
 
All headphones do, of course, have a different sound signature.  In high-end headphones, sound signature is a carefully refined combination of several elements in some form of balance/cohesion/negotiation: detail, depth, sound stage, warmth, etc.  In less expensive headphones, the sound is determined by the drivers that happen to be in the headphones, what the general shape of the enclosure does to the sound, and what the shape of the pads do to the sound.  They sound different, yes, but that doesn't necessarily mean that all sound signatures are equal.  Just like with movies and music and art, we can talk about both taste and quality, because they are different things.  If you don't respect the quality on display at art galleries, that's fine, but don't pretend that your child's finger paintings are equally good just because you don't know anything about art.
 
This, ultimately, is the whole point of audiophilia.  There are some absolutes, and it isn't only about taste.  I don't like the Sennheiser sound signature, but I respect that they are high quality headphones and understand why others do like them.  They are equal, in my mind, to the headphones I own (caveat: I haven't tried the really high-end ones).  I also just listened a bit to one of my students Wesc cans this week.  I don't like their sound, either, but they also sound like crap.  They are not equal to headphones that do get respect around here.  It's not just about snobby respect for price, either, because you'll see how much respect that some budget headphones get around here.  It's about companies that are able to deliver either a respectable studio or audiophile level of quality for a reasonable price.
 
Back to my taste vs. quality point.  There are plenty of people who would never read restaurant and food reviews, because they are perfectly content with fast food.  Those people may even not get why anyone would go to an expensive restaurant and spend so much for the same amount of food.  For people who do respect food quality, though, it's worth it to pay $50 for a meal--as long as it's a meal that's worth $50.  This is why we hate Bose.  Most of us have listened to their headphones at least a little, and people who are used to high quality sound can immediately recognize that Bose charges gourmet prices for fast food quality.  Despite that, the masses seem perfectly content to shell out these high prices for lousy sound.  And I do mean lousy sound, not just an undesirable sound signature.  The masses are uneducated.  That's why it's useful to have a forum like this where the few people who ARE educated hang out.  Just listening to music doesn't make you an expert on sound quality, and more than the fact we all eat makes us all food experts.
 
All of this, I'm sure, makes me sound like a bit of a snob.  I can live with that.  I have about 500 movie reviews published, and I acknowledge publicly that I am a movie snob as well.  I've seen enough movies that I can dismiss some as utter crap.  The uneducated masses may enjoy these movies, but that doesn't make the films as good as great films that they have never heard of.  The same is true of Bose.  We can, and will, continue to bash them.  As an audio company they have earned all of the disdain they have from the audiophile world.  If they start making products that are worth the money, we'll find out and give them the respect they deserve.  In the meantime, we will keep pushing the companies that are able to deliver higher quality for less than half the price.
 
We're all snobs about something.  Here, we happen to be snobs about headphones.  These guys know what they're talking about, though.

I like the fast food vs gourmet food analogy.  Props.
 
However, comparing the movies to headphones is not easy for me to understand.  I'm a movie buff compared to many people I know in my community.  I watch all of the "classics" and recommendations of adults (I just graduated high school) and usually watch a new movie every once in a while.  They seem to repeat ideas in older movies though...  So I generally find them lacking and don't especially enjoy newer movies.  But that's just it, my opinion.  I guess there are some definite things, like bad acting and video quality and such, but taste is a major part of what people consider.  Movie standards have changed and that turns many of my generation away from older movies because of the quality of the cameras and sound, but the stories are what entice me.  ANYWAYS...  "I've seen enough movies that I can dismiss some as utter crap.  The uneducated masses may enjoy these movies, but that doesn't make the films as good as great films that they have never heard of."  This is just an opinion though, some people like those I'm sure.  And they might be uneducated on the movies you like, but that's just it, they like what they like and you like what you like.  So some people like Bose and stick with it I guess.  I don't know if I'm getting my idea across.

 

[joelpearce]

 
Quote:

Movie standards have changed and that turns many of my generation away from older movies because of the quality of the cameras and sound, but the stories are what entice me.  ANYWAYS...  "I've seen enough movies that I can dismiss some as utter crap.  The uneducated masses may enjoy these movies, but that doesn't make the films as good as great films that they have never heard of."  This is just an opinion though, some people like those I'm sure.  And they might be uneducated on the movies you like, but that's just it, they like what they like and you like what you like.  So some people like Bose and stick with it I guess.  I don't know if I'm getting my idea across.

You are.
 
The thing is, though, Citizen Kane is a BETTER movie than, say, The Hangover.  There is no debate among film scholars about that claim.  Which would I rather watch?  Well, I'm not sure.  Which would YOU rather watch?  The Hangover, I can practically guarantee it.  Which is fine with me, but you have to realize that your taste does not dictate the quality of the film.  Your taste is at least partly separated from quality.  And that's fine.
 
I have no problem with people who listen to Bose and Skullcandy, I guess, though I feel they're wasting their money.  What I'm concerned about is any claim that that makes them equal.  Movies like Citizen Kane are crucial because they are the most foundational films and become part of the lexicon of film over time.  The Hangover will be all but forgotten in 15 years.  Likewise, people will still be listening to AKG, Sennheiser and Beyerdynamic headphones from this era 15 years from now (the way that we listen to their headphones from 30 years ago now), when all of the current Bose headphones are in pieces in a landfill somewhere.
 
I just feel it's important not to equate taste with quality.