Please Help w/ opinion...answer truthfully
Silverstring
weighing on my mind now.....A year ago, I bought a home theater system, my
first. I did a fair amount of research, and decided to purchase a DVD
player(Sony DVP-S550D), reciever(Pioneer VSX-D608), and speakers. While I
have been completly satisfied with these components over the past year, I
have become very concerned with my choice of speakers. I bought the Bose
Acoustimass 15 home theater package. Over the past couple of days I have
become aware of a large amount of anti-Bose sentiment on the internet. It
seems like many audiophiles(I don't mean that in a dergoatory way) trash the
company and its products extensively, while others defend them staunchly.
Its hard to find a review that dosent seem too biased one way or the other.
Like I said, I did do some research before buying(soundtests, etc.), but now
I feel as though I fell victim to the Bose "marketing machine" as some have
called it. Although I am "satisifed" with my system, I almost feel as
though I am missing out on "truly" good speakers, like my ears have become
biased to believe mine are better than they really are. I guess I'm just
wondering....is my setup REALLY that bad(or good), compared to others(in
price range)? I'm prepared to be dissapointed, so don't hold back. At the
same time, though, try to be objective. What I mean is reading "BOSE SUCKS"
or "BOSE IS THE BEST" wont really help me. Thanks a million(in advance) to
anyone who can help me.
K.C.
Arny Krueger
news:911u77$3aa$1...@bourbaki.localdomain...
> Although I am "satisfied" with my system, I almost feel as
> though I am missing out on "truly" good speakers, like my ears have
become
> biased to believe mine are better than they really are. I guess
I'm just
> wondering....is my (Bose loudspeaker-based) setup REALLY that
bad(or good), compared to others(in
> price range)? I'm prepared to be disappointed, so don't hold
back. At the
> same time, though, try to be objective.
Bose appears to be, by a small margin the largest US manufacturer of
hifi loudspeakers based on the wholesale dollar value of product
sold. They annually do approximately $900 million worth of business,
of which about 2/3 appears to be loudspeakers. They appear to be the
second largest US-based manufacturer of audio equipment, running
somewhat behind Harman, who do approximately $1,600 million worth of
business. It is a bit hard to compare exactly because Bose is a
privately-held company while Harman and Recoton is public. I think
Recoton is third with about $600 million. That all said the
loudspeaker market is highly fragmented and neither Bose nor Harman
nor Recoton dominate it, but all 3 have brands that are widely-sold
and very visible. Bose was largely built from scratch, while Harman
and Recoton were largely assembled by acquiring other companies.
Bose sells a highly-engineered, sometimes radically-designed (even
iconoclastic) intensively-sold high-margin product line that has
relatively few, not inexpensive products in it. Their product line is
small particularly compared to Harman. Bose does a lot of research
and owns a goodly number of patents which they zealously protect.
Bose does have high standards that they follow when they implement
their technology, but they are pragmatic and represent Bose values.
Bose is very conscious about public perceptions of their product and
have tried to use the courts to punish reviews that they feel
unfairly hurt their products which is of course their legal right.
I think that bigotry aside (and there is no doubt in my mind that
there is considerable anti-Bose bigotry) Bose equipment is widely
perceived to be over-sold and over-priced. No Bose equipment is truly
high end, and some of is definitely mid-fi and even kinda low-end.
Because of their attention to seemingly-unique, radical, iconoclastic
designs there are definitely popular kinds of loudspeakers that they
either don't sell, or don't sell very aggressively.
IME people actually judge loudspeaker performance based largely on
the properties of the room the speakers are in and on their personal
expectations. Bose tends to appeal to people who don't want speakers
to dominate the decor of their rooms.
Many people like "loud clean", but I think many more like "moderately
loud clean", which I think is more like what Bose tends to provide.
Many people like really enveloping wide-range systems, but many more
people like systems that don't have the ultimate in deep base or
total envelopment which is what I think Bose tends to provide. So,
for the people who have rooms that the Bose approach suits and have
expectations that Bose appeals to, Bose speakers can be highly
satisfactorily.
People who consider themselves to be true audio enthusiasts are going
to find the Bose performance envelope a little constraining. Combined
with perceptions of over-pricing and over-selling as well as the
comments of people who are just plain bigoted against Bose, the stage
has been set for quite a bit of hostility to Bose.
Every once in a while I hear a Bose system that initially strikes me
as sounding "nice". However I always seem to go away thinking "Nice,
but".
Steffen Kluge
>A year ago, I bought a home theater system, my
>first. I did a fair amount of research, and decided to purchase a DVD
>player(Sony DVP-S550D), reciever(Pioneer VSX-D608), and speakers. While I
>have been completly satisfied with these components over the past year, I
>have become very concerned with my choice of speakers. I bought the Bose
>Acoustimass 15 home theater package. Over the past couple of days I have
>become aware of a large amount of anti-Bose sentiment on the internet. It
>seems like many audiophiles(I don't mean that in a dergoatory way) trash the
>company and its products extensively, while others defend them staunchly.
I'm going to buy a surround sound setup myself soon, and I'm
probably going for the Pioneer 509 transceiver, and a set of JBL
speakers (5 + sub) for about $900 (Australian). I truly don't
believe it's worth worrying too much about movie sound
components, they're just there to add effect and excitement to
movies, most of the time you won't listen to them but stare at
the screen...
I'm not going to share any of the "home theatre" components with
my music setup which lives in the opposite corner of the house.
Also, I find the Bose speakers to be rather at the expensive end
of the spectrum. Remember, you are going to connect them to a
5-channel 100W amp that also contains lots of digital circuitry
and millions of buttons and connectors (expensive!), costing not
even half of what my two-channel bare-bones 40W amp costed 8
years ago. What do you expect?
I wouldn't even remotely consider using Bose speakers for
listening to music, though. Other people seem to share that
sentiment, maybe that's what you picked up as "anti-Bose"?
Just my humble opinion,
cheers
Steffen.
MT...@webtv.net
reading, you want (5) identical speakers & the best sub you can afford.
That means the center speaker needs to be a small enough mini-monitor
that it can sit on top/bottom of the tv & not look wierd.
I would suggest you look at the (in order of cost) Radio Shack's Pro
x88av, Edge Audio's 502D-LR, Paradigm's Atom , & ACI's Emerald speakers.
Have Fun,,,
Richard :)
PINKNIK
>At the
>same time, though, try to be objective.
Opinions are not objective. The BOSE speakers you own have passed a
very important test, they have "completely satisfied" you. Don't be
fooled by Bose or by the audiophiles. Listen. There's my truthful
answer, sucks huh?
Graeme Nattress
Unfortunately, these two characteristics don't quite go together! In
the process you loose something, and that is quality of bass. Most
small speakers have low quality bass, but the smaller the speaker,
the lower the quality, in general. They use such "tricks" as bass
ports to use resonance to make the bass sound.
Now, to many people this sounds right, because most speakers they
ever come across work in this fashion. So, try listening to some
large electrostatic speakers like the new Quads, which have
wonderfully nice bass. Or harder still to find, some large bass horn
speakers, or even some large transmission lines. Any of these should
give a very good bass quality that you can use to compare to Bose.
I don't know if bose still do those speakers that are meant to
reflect sound into the room to make it "spacious", but this is also a
problem. Because the sound already has spaciousness in it, from
either the real room it was recorded in, or artificially added in the
studio, this design of speakers gives you a double dose of that
sound. Not exactly correct.
Graeme
Jeff.W...@usa.alcatel.com
"Silverstring" <Silver...@email.msn.com> writes:
<<<stuff deleted>>>
> Like I said, I did do some research before buying(soundtests, etc.), but now
> I feel as though I fell victim to the Bose "marketing machine" as some have
> called it. Although I am "satisifed" with my system, I almost feel as
> though I am missing out on "truly" good speakers, like my ears have become
> biased to believe mine are better than they really are. I guess I'm just
> wondering....is my setup REALLY that bad(or good), compared to others(in
> price range)? I'm prepared to be dissapointed, so don't hold back. At the
> same time, though, try to be objective. What I mean is reading "BOSE SUCKS"
> or "BOSE IS THE BEST" wont really help me. Thanks a million(in advance) to
> anyone who can help me.
Your system can't be "really that bad" if you are
"satisfied" with it--make no bones about it. People
that are really focused on the sonic qualities of
speakers will frequently discover that for the price
of a set of Bose, they can get something that sounds
much better to them.
In order for a person to become dissatisfied with
their system, it takes them to hear a different one
that sounds much better to their ears than the first.
If that system is the same price (or less) than they
paid for their original, they will likely become even
more dissatisfied. If you cannot find another system
that sounds better to you for the same price as yours,
There is no reason to be dissatisfied. If it does
sound better but its more expensive, you can be
dissatisfied if you have the money to buy the better
system :-)
I would not buy Bose speakers but that is only because
I can hear aspects of the speakers that I do not like-even
for the price. That doesn't mean that they are no good
for you. Keep listening to your Bose and occasionally to
other brands. See if you can borrow some other types from
a dealer and take them home to listen. Depending on how
finicky you are about your sound, you may likely begin to
hear things in other speakers that are more desirable to
you. If you don't find this to be the case, then by
definition you have the best system for the $$ that
there is for you.
Remember, all of these audiophile discussions are
only relative in a technical way. That is relative to
something else or some other set of system attributes--
attributes that can also include such things as cost,
color, size, and the feeling that you got when you
purchased your components or your conception of what they
are worth.
In closing, a way to start this process is to sit down
and critically listen to your system. What does it seem
to do really well? Is it nice and airy/open sounding (if
that matters to you)? Do voices sound like real voices?
What does it seem to have trouble with? Maybe it has "good"
bass but it's muddy and boomy in nature. How does it sound
with saxophones? do they sound real or do they come accross
as harsh and scratchy sounding? Does the system have a
"tinny" sound to it? Do you find that you need to keep
adjusting tone controls to make it sound right? Now go
and listen to some other systems and compare how they
sound with your list of "goods" and "bads". By focusing
on specific aspects of the system and getting the most
of the good ones together, you end up with a system that
tends to sound more musical and envolving altogether.
After doing this, you may discover that the system that
was "satisfactory" before is now "just adaquate". You may
also discover that your existing system is still very
satisfactory for your needs (don't let ego get into the
way of good, sound, judgement.
- Jeff
--
-----
Jeff Wiseman Alcatel USA
Jeff(DOT)Wiseman(AT)usa(DOT)alcatel(DOT)com Richardson, Texas
(972)996-7092
pheslington
I used to drive a truck cross country and once when I was parked for
a while I went into the Bose factory direct store. I have to tell you
a few of my observations and you have to compare those insights to
your own musical value system to understand what is right for you.
Most of the package systems that I listened to sounded reasonably
good by mid-fi standards but the only home theater speaker package
that impressed my was their top of the line system with the
acoustamass bass unit. This system was set up in a special room in
which the electronics were not displayed to the consumer. The bass of
the acoustamass is reasonably good for a subwoffer of it's size but
it seemed to emphisize certain frquencies and was not as transient
perfect and natural as the best big subwoofers that I have heard but
I believe the average home owner would be pleased if they were not in
too large of a room. The small satelite front and surround speakers
are small which have the potencial to produce very good sound images
and only in the most expensive speaker system are the drivers built
to the quality needed to have anything like realistic sound
resolution.
I was reasonably impressed by the system for home theater but would
not have put it in the same catagory as the best high-end playback.
I wondered what electronics were powering the system behind the wall
and I prevailed upon the salesman to let me look inside the control
booth. A Tascam multi-track digital recorder was playing a
specifically engineered discrete multi-channel home theater
demonstration. I felt this was playing unfair and a deception on
Bose's part as no own would be using such source equipment for a home
theater. Had they have been using a Dolby Surround encoded matrix
through a typical home theater reciever the demonstration would have
been more fair. We were listening to a copy of a discrete 16/44
digital master. And compared to Dolby surround it blew it blew it
away.
The important thing is what you think and whether or not you are
happy. Many Bose products cater to visual image over sound quality.
But a few of their pieces though not contenders for absolute best
sound do offer enough of the goods for enjoyment.
Paul
Richard D Pierce
Graeme Nattress <gnat...@mac.com> wrote:
>Bose seem to want to get very deep bass out of very small boxes.
>Unfortunately, these two characteristics don't quite go together! In
>the process you loose something, and that is quality of bass. Most
>small speakers have low quality bass, but the smaller the speaker,
>the lower the quality, in general.
Your assertion is based on some implicit assumptions which are
incorrect and, thus, on its face, is also incorrect.
There is a relation between system efficiency, enclosure volume,
low-frequency cutoff and system alignment, indeed. However, just
considering system efficiency as a free variable, it's possible
to build quite high-quality systems in small enclosures that
have deep low frequency extension. For example, the old AR-3
used a cabinet volume that was smaller than contemporary systems
had had a real low frequency extension that was substantially
lower than those contemporaries. It did so by sacrificing simple
electro-acoustic efficiency for cabinet volume and low frequency
extension, fully complying with the same physical limitations
that dictated the performance of its comtemporaries.
To extend the paradigm, consider taking a 12" high-efficiency
woofer and putting it a small (say 1 cubic foot) enclosure. The
result is a high-efficiency system with a high cutoff
frequency. If the parameters are correct, it will be flat to
that high cutoff frequency and then roll off at a uniform 12
dB/octave below that point. That frequency might be, say, 100
Hz. Now, apply a complimentary filter that is flat to cutoff and
below that rises at 12 dB/octave. The result will be flat
response below the system resonance of the speaker. Extend the
boost 2 octaves below cutoff, say, and the result is a system
with flat response to 23 Hz and high-efficiency. There will be
NO compromise in distortion as a result, no more than any other
12"-based system with the same cutoff frequency. You, in this
case, have used system alignment as one of the free variables,
and the result is contradictory to your claim that small boxes
cannot have good bass. Now, any one person's implementation may
be faulty, but that's very different than claiming that it is
not possible.
>They use such "tricks" as bass
>ports to use resonance to make the bass sound.
Sorry, sir, but the correct use of "bass ports" is NOT a
"trick." It is based on completely sound physics and
acoustics. Bose's or anyone elses use of reflex system design
may or may not be correct, but, again, don't use one example
that you may or may not agree with as a broad brush to whitewash
the entire principle.
>Now, to many people this sounds right, because most speakers they
>ever come across work in this fashion. So, try listening to some
>large electrostatic speakers like the new Quads, which have
>wonderfully nice bass. Or harder still to find, some large bass horn
>speakers, or even some large transmission lines. Any of these should
>give a very good bass quality that you can use to compare to Bose.
That may or may not be true, and starts to venture into the
realm of personal preference. That the bass on a Quad is VERY
different than that of many other speakers is not in
dispute. There are two reasons for this: the complete lack of an
enclosure and (possibly) the resulting lack of enclosure-based
articfacts is one, and the fact that a dipole bass radiator
interacts with rooms VERY differently than point-source
radiators.
>I don't know if bose still do those speakers that are meant to
>reflect sound into the room to make it "spacious", but this is also a
>problem. Because the sound already has spaciousness in it, from
>either the real room it was recorded in, or artificially added in the
>studio, this design of speakers gives you a double dose of that
>sound. Not exactly correct.
Close, bvut there's a subtle gotcha in the marketing. Bose would
have us believe that sitting in a concert hall, one is bombarded
with sound that is composed of roughly 11% direct and 89%
REVERBERANT. That may or may not be true, but let's accept it on
its face value. Now, they claim, here's a speaker which presents
you with a soundfield that is 11% direct and 89% INDIRECT.
Wow, there, Amar! Some questions if we may:
1. Is Bose asserting that the REVERBERANT field in a concert
hall is exactly equivalant acoustically to the INDIRECT field
in a small listening room? REALLY?
2. Is Bose asserting that there is no significant acoustical or
psychoacoustical difference between the early arrival
INDIRECT field in a typical home listening environment and
the heavy mix of early indirect and late reverberant energy
in a concert hall environment, especially considering that
in the latter, energy is being returned LONG after the
home environment has shut up entirely? REALLY?
3. That reverberant energy found on the recording is essentially
irrelevant? REALLY?
4. That the half century and older research work that seemed to
have demonstrated quite conclusively that two-channel stereo
reproduction, by whatever means, is wholely and utterly in-
capable of reproducing even the crudest replica of the
original sound field is really wrong? REALLY?
5. That the 11%/89% ratio holds in ALL cases, for ALL music,
in ALL venues, at ALL time? REALLY?
--
| Dick Pierce |
| Professional Audio Development |
| 1-781/826-4953 Voice and FAX |
| DPi...@world.std.com |
gy
Your answer regarding Bose speakers and an honest opinion is below your
question.
"Silverstring" <Silver...@email.msn.com> wrote in message
news:911u77$3aa$1...@bourbaki.localdomain...
Response to above:
The Bose Corporation does pull some pretty amazing marketing bullshit
schemes and makes some slanderous claims on a routine basis, and therefore
I'm not a fan their company, yet their products typically do what they are
designed to do. What does that mean? Well, for example, I'm giving my
mother a Bose WaveRadio CD unit for Christmas. I had it in my kitchen for a
while, then bathroom and finally tired of it. It works fine and puts out a
huge amount of "soothing" bass. But, the Wave Radio and other Bose products
actually don't seem to produce the musical signal as it might have been
intended to be produced by those who recorded the music. That's why many
audio purist or musicians with highly tone efficient ears protest the Bose
products.
Bose direct-reflecting speakers originally were designed to disperse sound
throughout a room or audio area in a very large way, spreading the sound
into every nook and cranny for many, many feet -- the old 901's, 601's, and
others did what they were designed to do at a time when High-End audio was
just being defined (remember when some thought Quadrophonic would be the end
result of the world's greatest hi-fi's!). Popular opinion, has narrowed
slightly and these days, most hi-end enthusiast believe that "soundstaging"
and "imaging" are ideal goals for a truly great music system (I'm still a
strong proponent of Jon Dahlquist's concepts of "phase cohesion"). The Bose
Corporation went a different direction in design, yet their marketing
department doesn't seem to realize that! Naturally, many in the industry
find their claims aggravating and some are very disgusted to hear Bose imply
and sometimes outright claim that all their speakers fulfill all the
necessary requirements demanded by all audiophiles to reproduce an accurate
musical experience -- that's a huge claim from a marketing department that
has more experience in distributing in-wall vacuum systems then home audio
systems. Therefore, large numbers of people share hate and despise for the
Bose Corporation and it is Bose's fault, they've brought it upon themselves
and it is sad that any of these fellow angry audiophiles vent frustration
upon you. We must learn better to control our passions stances upon things.
Once upon a time, Bose speakers were not known for great reproduction of
fine musical details -- actually, they were quite bad, actually a little
hazy and due to the lack of any tweeters in their older upper line models,
they only produced limited and dynamically dampened high frequencies.
They've made great strides in increasing the reproduction of detail in all
their speakers (that I've recently heard), yet I've noticed that as the
frequencies go higher, they do seem to be slightly reduced in dynamic range
output -- this is very clever and I think it is intentional. If you
intentionally dampen the output, not simply chop them off at a certain
frequency, yet slightly reduce the element which electronics have difficulty
keeping correct and human ears are slightly more sensitive to discerning
aberrations at, then you can create a psycho-acoustic effect of
well-produced high frequencies, which actually change the source data or
music output from what it was originally intended to be. You see, high
frequencies can be very difficult for amplifiers and electronic circuits to
maintain good tonal balance and clarity in. Even very expensive hi-end
components will alter, modify or unpleasantly distort the dynamic contrast
of the high frequency signals. Yet Bose does this on purpose and when an
experienced listener hears through this effect, that listener suddenly is
reminded that he/she is not listening to music, but rather a Bose speaker.
aye, there's the rub. This built-in feature of Bose sound systems allow
Bose owners or users to get away with two hi-fi religious crimes; you can
use cheaper, lower performance electronics with less dramatically noticeable
impact of effect on the sound quality (that's how Bose can offer their sleek
compact amplifiers for much less than a true hi-end amp), and you can put
Bose high-frequency generating drivers (tweeter/midrange drivers units)
closer to highly reflective surfaces (walls, windows, ceilings) with less
impact on the overall sound output (when dynamic high frequencies reflect
off surfaces, they change sound characteristics of a sound system adding
distortions and colorations - the less dynamic or more dampened the high
frequencies, the lower the less dramatic the change in sound such
reflections have). As I mentioned before, I believe that Bose speakers do
what the Bose designers designed them to do. If you must, must, must stick
the smallest things possible up in the tightest, most highly sonically
reflective corners of a room, then the little Bose speakers are your ideal
choice--regardless of naysayers! Yet, there is more distortion happening
before your ears that you should know about!
Once upon a time, Bose speakers (especially the 901's) were accused of not
having real Bass. The following psycho-illusion is not exclusive to the
Bose Corporation's design of speaker systems -- it is extremely common and
becoming nearly standard in compact electronics industry. Nearly everyone
who hears a Bose WaveRadio CD unit for the first time says something like,
"gee listen to all that bass!" Yes, the bose products put out a lot of
bass --yet it is not deep, low frequency generating bass, but rather upper,
mid-bass frequency generating bass and it is a lot more than perhaps was
originally on many recordings. Again, quite clever. Amplifiers have an
easy time generating a huge amount of upper mid-bass output then they do
with controlling accurate output of a small amount of really deep low
frequency energy. So, many Bose systems put out more "overall" bass than
their like sized competitors. One of the Bose equalizer systems even takes
the information which was originally intended to be reproduced as deep low
frequency energy and changes it to be reproduced as upper mid-bass output --
I'd be irate as a musician if I knew what was happening to my designed
musical scores! (again, can you see why some people really despise the Bose
Corporation).
It really doesn't take a powerful amplifier system to put out a great deal
of house-filling bass with a Bose speaker system, yet more experienced
hi-end systems owners and listeners will easily know the difference between
really deep low bass and Bose Bass. For a bathroom radio or a battery
powered portable unit or even a background music system, I've no complaints
about the low frequency illusion which Bose uses, yet I personally don't
like it for movie watching or when I really want to listen to music -- I
feel that I'm not hearing what the artist intended me to listen to and
furthermore when I listen to the Bose WaveRadio CD unit I'm giving away, I
notice that nearly all music has a great deal of bass output around the same
frequency region (about 150hz-100hz range), which I find very tiring to
listen to after only a few songs. Thus, I've grown tired of using a Bose
systems in my kitchen or bathroom - unfortunately for me, I can hear through
the psycho-acoustic effect and into the distortion.
Don't take a baseball bat to your Bose system yet friend. But, when it
comes time for your next audio upgrade, check out your room, if you're
willing to place a pair of speakers with the tweeters at or near ear level
and against the same backwall, say about 6 to 10 feet apart from each other,
angled towards the center of the room or so, and a little bit further from
you then they are from each other -- if you are willing to set up a pair of
high-end speakers this way, after a month or two, you'll understand why so
many hi-end audiophiles frequently scream Bose sucks. If you can't do the
hi-end audio set-up, it may not matter.
Good luck and happy listening,
-gy
Chuck Gerlach
with these components over the past year "... That is all that should
matter. Are there better speakers out there?..absolutely. In that
price range?...yes. BUT ..if you enjoy what you have, then IGNORE
all of those folks who don't happen to like what you have. If your
system cost $200,000, there would be folks who believed that there
was better stuff (trust me on this)...enjoy what you have and spend
the extra money on your wife (or girl friend, or software or......)
Merry Christmas!!!
"Silverstring" <Silver...@email.msn.com> wrote in message
news:911u77$3aa$1...@bourbaki.localdomain...