[soundeffect]

maybe they lose some of their sound qualitys by gearing it toward constructing a headphone that is small, light, and comfortable?  I have no idea, that was just a random guess.  

 

[rhythm is life]

I listened to the AE2's in 2011 and thought that the sound was very good, just not $150 good. At that price, they were competing with the M50 and some other mid-priced closed headphones with better sound quality. The QC15's are the best at what they do. I never heard their in-ears but at $179 I'm sure they're overpriced. I had my dad's old AE1 Triport for the last couple months of 2011 and thought they had good overall sound too, although the soundstage did sound artificially wide as previously mentioned. IMO, Bose and Beats should not be mentioned in the same sentence. While both companies' products are overpriced, Bose headphones sound significantly better, unless you love muddy and boomy bass.
 

 

[AaronR]

I think the Bose brand is solid. Don't know about their headphones.

 

[obobskivich]

The other thing I enjoy about the AE2 is that its pretty immune to your source, material and amp.  So its lack of detail resolution works to its advantage, in that it masks whats upstream of it.  They are my go-to cans for youtube vids, where I plug them straight into the macbook and stream away.

The big koss cans in my pic are the old A250 from the late 80s not the ESP-950.  They are traditional dynamic driver elements, and are a very "snappy-fast" sounding can, speedy and very detail revealing.  The are on-par with RS1 in that regard, but with less bass and WAY more soundstage.

I'd agree - they're smooth and forgiving. And oh, I've seen the A250 in pictures before - never heard about them though. Do you know how they compare to the 950?

maybe they lose some of their sound qualitys by gearing it toward constructing a headphone that is small, light, and comfortable?  I have no idea, that was just a random guess.  

I think so, yes. At least it would make sense - you can't have "everything" in a headphone, and the QC15 tries to buck that trend - it does an alright job but it isn't perfect (jack of all trades, master of none, type thing).

I listened to the AE2's in 2011 and thought that the sound was very good, just not $150 good. At that price, they were competing with the M50 and some other mid-priced closed headphones with better sound quality. The QC15's are the best at what they do. I never heard their in-ears but at $179 I'm sure they're overpriced. I had my dad's old AE1 Triport for the last couple months of 2011 and thought they had good overall sound too, although the soundstage did sound artificially wide as previously mentioned. IMO, Bose and Beats should not be mentioned in the same sentence. While both companies' products are overpriced, Bose headphones sound significantly better, unless you love muddy and boomy bass.

 

Their in-ears are $179?! I thought they were only like $80. Yeesh that's a lot (especially since there's so many more options for IEMs under $300!).

But I'd agree that the AE2 compete with the M50 very well - if the AE2 weren't "locked" at $150 I think they'd be even more competitive (you know how the M50 sometimes drop down to right around $100).

And +1 and Bose and Beats not being similar - Beats is a fashion toy, Bose seems to at least care about how their stuff sounds, even if it isn't "audiophile standard" equipment (if that makes sense).

 

[Neighbor808]

I was actually considering buying a Bose AE2, they seemed pretty good and even a post on this forum shed some pretty favorable light on the model. Didn't end up getting them, though. There are better for around $130-$160. I was never really a fan of Bose from the models I've heard before

 

[Pass]

This, will be my first post ever on head-fi. And, I don't think this will bring me a lot of friends here
 
'Cause I'm just totally bored of all Bose haters. I mean, are Bose products overpriced? Yes they are! It is a fact, not a opinion. Are these sound bad because they are pricey? For sure not. SQ of Bose products is as good as you like it. As it is with any brands. Sound appreciation is a very relative matter. And thanks God it is. Other way, there would be only one headphones company. And that, would be soooo sad For the value for the price : this is up to you to know what price you are willing to pay for a product, any product, any brand. It's up to you, not anyone else.
 
All in all, a comparison came in my head... is a Mercedes overpriced? For 80k++, you have almost the same performance, quality, luxury and options you could have in a 50k Acura. Is someone could honestly say that Mercedes cars are overpriced? I don't think so. But why not? They are the Bose of the cars after all! If a car buyer agrees to pay 30k more to have a Mercedes without having any critics, why a Bose buyer should absolutely be critisised? You like it (Bose or Mercedes)? You can afford it? Then buy it! End of discussion!
 
Personally, I own three pairs of cans, and one of them is an OE2i that I really am enjoying while on the go, at the office, etc. Ultra-lightweight, very comfortable, a little bass-heavy but that is why EQ exists! So, please don't bash me too much on this (at least, I have the Momentum for home listening)  
 
Thanks to all, and long live the forum!

 

[Kodhifi]

Bose wouldn't be a Mercedes though, they'd be more like......Pontiac, if they made luxury cars.
 
Mercedes A class has historically lead the way for new technology. They had airbags standard very early, antilock and traction standard before just about anyone else.
 
Is Bose an innovator in headphones? Well their claim to fame is active noise reduction and in that way they are more like a Nissan Skyline using electronics to make up for a milquetoast design.
 
Most of the newer advances in headphone technology has come from your AKG's, Sennheiser, and especially Beyerdynamic.
 

 

[obobskivich]

Bose wouldn't be a Mercedes though, they'd be more like......Pontiac, if they made luxury cars.

Mercedes A class has historically lead the way for new technology. They had airbags standard very early, antilock and traction standard before just about anyone else.

Is Bose an innovator in headphones? Well their claim to fame is active noise reduction and in that way they are more like a Nissan Skyline using electronics to make up for a milquetoast design.

Most of the newer advances in headphone technology has come from your AKG's, Sennheiser, and especially Beyerdynamic.

 

Ignoring that car analogies generally fail, you mean the W168 that was introduced in 1997? Because that car in no way was the first vehicle to have ABS, airbags, or traction control (and actually didn't come with traction control originally, it was only added due to roll-over concerns (after it was demonstrated to be fairly easy to roll)). Chrysler and Ford introduced ABS on cars (1971 Imperial and 1971 Continental, respectively), Ford, GM, and Chrysler also led the way with airbags in the early 1970s (1973 Tornado, among others) - Mercedes-Benz didn't have airbags until the early 1980s (optional on S-Class), and was not the first to introduce standard driver/passenger airbags. Volvo and BMW tend to have been responsible for later innovations (side airbags, curtain airbags, roof airbags, pedestrian airbags, etc).

Regarding the claim on "advances in headphone technology" - I'd disagree there too as well. None of those companies have really innovated anything but marketing in the last 15 years; AKG's development of the K1000 was probably the last true innovation from that company, Sennheiser with the HE series and the original HD 580, and Beyerdynamic...well, aside from inventing dynamic headphones I can't think of many "firsts" that would come from them. Doesn't make any of them bad. If you wanna talk about companies that've put out a lot of "firsts" you'd be talking about Koss and Sony primarily. Having said that, being "first" doesn't matter (except on the Internet) - Bose is certainly the field-leader when it comes to ANC, but otherwise they're pretty much in the pack with everyone else: stagnant (really, speaker technology hasn't changed dramatically in quite a while). So it just comes down to whether or not you like or dislike their sound signature - if you don't, that's fine, if you do, that's fine too.

 

[reeltime]

My thoughts are "active cancellation" is a sales gimmick.  Give me a great pair of IE passive cancellation any day.  I went to the extreme (as I tend to do) of buying a pair of UERM customs, great on planes and noise of any kind, and they do a much better job of blocking out sound than Bose does of canceling it out.  
 
Of course UERMs aren't exactly cheap, but I'd use a pair of universals with the ear-raping triple plugs over the Bose, if quality and noise blocking is the goal I'm seeking. 
 
As for active cancellation-- Having owned 2 pair of Bose active canceling cans at some time or another, the only active pair I've kept are the Sennheiser PXC 450, which at least are as comfortable as Bose, do just as good, if not better, at active cancellation, and sound better overall.  I keep them at work and pull them out on rare occasion for a change of comfort.  But honestly, none of them do very well at eliminating sound, IMO.

 

[Pass]

Quote:

Ignoring that car analogies generally fail, you mean the W168 that was introduced in 1997? Because that car in no way was the first vehicle to have ABS, airbags, or traction control (and actually didn't come with traction control originally, it was only added due to roll-over concerns (after it was demonstrated to be fairly easy to roll)). Chrysler and Ford introduced ABS on cars (1971 Imperial and 1971 Continental, respectively), Ford, GM, and Chrysler also led the way with airbags in the early 1970s (1973 Tornado, among others) - Mercedes-Benz didn't have airbags until the early 1980s (optional on S-Class), and was not the first to introduce standard driver/passenger airbags. Volvo and BMW tend to have been responsible for later innovations (side airbags, curtain airbags, roof airbags, pedestrian airbags, etc).
Regarding the claim on "advances in headphone technology" - I'd disagree there too as well. None of those companies have really innovated anything but marketing in the last 15 years; AKG's development of the K1000 was probably the last true innovation from that company, Sennheiser with the HE series and the original HD 580, and Beyerdynamic...well, aside from inventing dynamic headphones I can't think of many "firsts" that would come from them. Doesn't make any of them bad. If you wanna talk about companies that've put out a lot of "firsts" you'd be talking about Koss and Sony primarily. Having said that, being "first" doesn't matter (except on the Internet) - Bose is certainly the field-leader when it comes to ANC, but otherwise they're pretty much in the pack with everyone else: stagnant (really, speaker technology hasn't changed dramatically in quite a while). So it just comes down to whether or not you like or dislike their sound signature - if you don't, that's fine, if you do, that's fine too. --> That is so well said!

 
Well, I admit that this car analogy may be my bad! I should've took clothing instead, or anything else. I wear a 25$ Dickies working pants, because I like the fit, the length, the color, etc. I just can't imagine myself paying a hundred or two (and more) for having a hyper trendy pair of jeans. But I was fine paying 171$CAN for my phones. The point is, any domain in the world (cars, clothes, headphones, building materials, name it!) has differents niches, and that for accomodate the most of us. You know, 7 billions of human beings can't have all the same taste in all the categories of produced products.

 

[ninjames]

There's some nice, affordable stereos and things of that nature. I've always found their products to be well-built and dependable, but your mileage may vary. I have, however, disliked all pairs of Bose headphones that I've tried.

 

[proton007]

I think Bose as a brand carries that audiophile tag, that "I care about my audio" statement. Thats what makes it sell. Of course its taken them long enough to establish themselves, both through sound quality and marketing.

 

[SmOgER]

Just got S600 and I can say that if you are looking for AE2, not waste your money and get these instead! 

 
Strong deep BASS, easy mids and highs which won't make you feel sick after turning volume up... The sound signature many people are looking for (including me). I just hate this mids NOISE which some other cans are offering! 

That's why I quite liked BOSE cans, but just not in this price range...
 
Btw,all kinds of  electro music and maybe techno. This is what for these phones were intended for.

 

[Kodhifi]

Quote:

Ignoring that car analogies generally fail, you mean the W168 that was introduced in 1997? Because that car in no way was the first vehicle to have ABS, airbags, or traction control (and actually didn't come with traction control originally, it was only added due to roll-over concerns (after it was demonstrated to be fairly easy to roll)). Chrysler and Ford introduced ABS on cars (1971 Imperial and 1971 Continental, respectively), Ford, GM, and Chrysler also led the way with airbags in the early 1970s (1973 Tornado, among others) - Mercedes-Benz didn't have airbags until the early 1980s (optional on S-Class), and was not the first to introduce standard driver/passenger airbags. Volvo and BMW tend to have been responsible for later innovations (side airbags, curtain airbags, roof airbags, pedestrian airbags, etc).
Regarding the claim on "advances in headphone technology" - I'd disagree there too as well. None of those companies have really innovated anything but marketing in the last 15 years; AKG's development of the K1000 was probably the last true innovation from that company, Sennheiser with the HE series and the original HD 580, and Beyerdynamic...well, aside from inventing dynamic headphones I can't think of many "firsts" that would come from them. Doesn't make any of them bad. If you wanna talk about companies that've put out a lot of "firsts" you'd be talking about Koss and Sony primarily. Having said that, being "first" doesn't matter (except on the Internet) - Bose is certainly the field-leader when it comes to ANC, but otherwise they're pretty much in the pack with everyone else: stagnant (really, speaker technology hasn't changed dramatically in quite a while). So it just comes down to whether or not you like or dislike their sound signature - if you don't, that's fine, if you do, that's fine too.

Sorry, S-class. Look up W116 1972 model. Many firsts in that one and one of the first production cars to have safety features like that standard.
 
When I talk about advancing the technology I'm not talking about ancient history like the Koss in the 60's. I'm talking about in the last 20 years. Sennheiser and Beyerdynamic have brought dynamic headphones about as far as they can go and to the point where they begin to compete with electrostatics which is quite a feat. Both companies have contributed a lot to driver design, voice coil advances, and psychoacoustic modeling to improve the sound stage such as angled drivers etc.
 
The last time I checked the only thing Bose brought to the table was active attenuation which is kind of a party trick more than a serious advance.
 
You're free to have a different opinion and I realize my own is biased but I make no apologies, it's how I feel about that brand. If Bose went out of business tomorrow it would have a minimal impact to my hobbies. If Sennheiser, AKG, or Beyerdynamic did, it would be detrimental.

 

[ssrock64]

Meanwhile, I believe the OP hasn't checked back on this thread since making it?