4 ms·

It seems like it's really popular to bash Bose, and I wonder why. I'm not an audiophile, and I think most of the systems I've heard sound good. Is it something

by nopal 16y ago

It seems like it's really popular to bash Bose, and I wonder why. I'm not an audiophile, and I think most of the systems I've heard sound good. Is it something that only those who really know what to listen for hear? I think it's funny that one comment on this post says that Bose "forgot that there is an entire range of frequencies between the 'highs' and the 'lows'" and another one that says "No highs, no lows, must be Bose." How can both be true?

bherms 16y ago
In my experience with Bose, they make great sounding equipment for the average user and they do this by making bass more prominent than it should be to "fool" users into thinking it's good. It's still better than a lot of stuff, and the size and tech innovations like the 3-2-1 system give it a cool factor as well. For the money, though, you can get a much better setup; but then again, being a seasoned sound man for local musicians as well as spending lots of time engineering audio, I'm a bit biased as to what good sound is.
- mike463 16y ago
  "For the money, though, you can get a much better setup" This is the key point. In this case, "For the money" = $5,349 (yikes!)
  - bherms 16y ago
    Well in this instance, with the new TV, the high price is just there to balance the research costs and low amount of production. As they start to leverage the new technology and churn out more of these, the Bose TV (and others using these new techs) pricing should come down.
brk 16y ago
Bose does not strive to produce an accurate sound, they produce a unique sound, plus they have a marketing team that is probably second only to Apple. Through careful marketing, Bose produces a product that is coveted by the semi-affluent consumer who also wants to signal to themselves and their friends 'I have arrived'. Most people have never heard an accurate sound system, eg: a professionally engineered room. But they DO know that their plastic Akai system is NOT the pinnacle of sound. So, you get your first big signing bonus or job promotion and a new house. You've got a little disposable income and want to splurge a little. In comes Bose and their little magic speakers. You bring the system home, set it up, and the sound is RADICALLY different from anything you've heard before. It's way different than your little Akai system, and it seems as if the sound is careening off the walls (eq'ing towards the higher freqs, plus mutli directional speakers to achieve some reflections). This is WAY different( plus it wasn't cheap) therefore it MUST be good. I have some background in audio (both in home theater and in sound studios). 'Good' sound can be somewhat in the ear of the listener, much like art can be in the eye of the beholder. And, not everybody wants Accurate, some people just want to put on a CD of their favorite artist and hear the sound in a way they didn't expect to, and Bose delivers that experience for people.
bradleyland 16y ago
> I think it's funny that one comment on this post says that Bose "forgot that there is an entire range of frequencies between the 'highs' and the 'lows'" and another one that says "No highs, no lows, must be Bose." How can both be true? Have a look at the frequency response graphs and associated comments here. Both statements turn out to be true. http://www.intellexual.net/bose.html http://www.intellexual.net/bose.html

by nopal 16y ago

bherms 16y ago

In my experience with Bose, they make great sounding equipment for the average user and they do this by making bass more prominent than it should be to "fool" users into thinking it's good. It's still better than a lot of stuff, and the size and tech innovations like the 3-2-1 system give it a cool factor as well. For the money, though, you can get a much better setup; but then again, being a seasoned sound man for local musicians as well as spending lots of time engineering audio, I'm a bit biased as to what good sound is.

mike463 16y ago
"For the money, though, you can get a much better setup" This is the key point. In this case, "For the money" = $5,349 (yikes!)
- bherms 16y ago
  Well in this instance, with the new TV, the high price is just there to balance the research costs and low amount of production. As they start to leverage the new technology and churn out more of these, the Bose TV (and others using these new techs) pricing should come down.

brk 16y ago

Bose does not strive to produce an accurate sound, they produce a unique sound, plus they have a marketing team that is probably second only to Apple. Through careful marketing, Bose produces a product that is coveted by the semi-affluent consumer who also wants to signal to themselves and their friends 'I have arrived'. Most people have never heard an accurate sound system, eg: a professionally engineered room. But they DO know that their plastic Akai system is NOT the pinnacle of sound. So, you get your first big signing bonus or job promotion and a new house. You've got a little disposable income and want to splurge a little. In comes Bose and their little magic speakers. You bring the system home, set it up, and the sound is RADICALLY different from anything you've heard before. It's way different than your little Akai system, and it seems as if the sound is careening off the walls (eq'ing towards the higher freqs, plus mutli directional speakers to achieve some reflections). This is WAY different( plus it wasn't cheap) therefore it MUST be good. I have some background in audio (both in home theater and in sound studios). 'Good' sound can be somewhat in the ear of the listener, much like art can be in the eye of the beholder. And, not everybody wants Accurate, some people just want to put on a CD of their favorite artist and hear the sound in a way they didn't expect to, and Bose delivers that experience for people.

bradleyland 16y ago

> I think it's funny that one comment on this post says that Bose "forgot that there is an entire range of frequencies between the 'highs' and the 'lows'" and another one that says "No highs, no lows, must be Bose." How can both be true? Have a look at the frequency response graphs and associated comments here. Both statements turn out to be true. http://www.intellexual.net/bose.html http://www.intellexual.net/bose.html