Bose loudspeakers and double blind tests

[bob412]

Has anyone ever wondered why Bose loudspeakers tend to fare so well in double blind listening tests . I remember reading about golden eared audiophiles who failed miserably with the task of choosing the best sounding speakers in a double blind test . I don't remember the exact name of the magazine but Bose speakers appeared in the lineup . Guess what ? Bose would always do well in such testing . If the reviewer doesn't know the name of the product he's listening there's far less chance of a biased result . I remember when Bose came to town with their audio shows . The same thing happened locally . A lot of us country folks thought that Bose was the bests speakers in the WORLD ! Their speakers do so well in double blind testing . I bet if audio magazines would do these double blind testing Bose would fool them also . I'm not a Bose fan boy but I do like certain models they produce . For speakers considered crap by audiophiles Bose certainly does well when the blinders goes on and all you have is your ears as your guide .

 

[Sgt Shultz]

Bose in one of their specially designed setups to highlight the brands design is apples to oranges to Bose set up in your less than perfect house. Remember they use the room's reflective surfaces as part of the experience so if asymmetrical good results can be difficult to achieve.

 

[Gregg 73]

I know we're supposed to not like Bose here but I had a pair of 401's that sounded magnificent!! Part of me wishes I kept them for their design, looks, and sound.

 

[Eagle_1]

I’m currently restoring a pair of Bose 501’s and the more I learn about them the more I like them.

 

[Old Guy8]

I'll just comment. The Wave radio sounds far better that it should for what it is.

A friend is in a senior living apartment for time being. I loaned him the Wave and a CDP while there. We both noticed how full that radio sounded. In his house, he has a 300 wpc Mac integrated. So he knows good sound.

 

[twiiii]

I don't know where you are coming from but there are so many speakers that out perform Bose, especially the 901's that the list would bore you to death. If all your listening for is artificial reverberation and smeared imaging, yes, a Bose does that very well. If you are un-educated as to what real acoustic instruments sound like Bose does very well. In other word if you have always listened to recorded music Bose does well. But if you are familiar with the sound of live instruments then a Bose falls flat on it face. Yes I know for we sold a ton of the things. Like the district rep said about Bose. Bose speakers are all about creating Dr. Bose's idea of an illusion.

 

[C Hart]

Agree with the original poster above. Bose-bashers abound on AK.

In the 70s and 80s, Bose competed for audio markets very successfully with the great 501 and different-enough-to-have-cachet 901. Since the 90s, Bose has been making fine solutions for a lot of audio problems, and developed a house sound that is very pleasant.

In 1995 I bought a factory 2nd then-TOTL Acoustimass 5 S3 and ran it for a long time as my regular audio+HT system in the lean in-between years (i.e. the 90s). 141s were about as good as you could do for $40.

Today I have 2 Revolves that are stupid excellent BT speakers and can be made into a decent stereo through built in software. Oh, and the AM5 is my wife's computer speaker system. Try that with Large Advents.

But I like my JBLs, EVs, and EPIs much better.

 

[Lavane]

They do need to be properly positioned. And the room shape and size is everything with them. I never thought the 901's Ive heard great, but sounded good for what they were if set up properly. Maybe they're too finicky about where they're setup though? But then I've never heard them in a room square or rectangular room without a hallway, or opening in a wall.
I did have a pair of 301 lll's I thought sounded pretty good. I had them set up per the instructions in a large bedroom. There was something about the high end that just didn't sound quite sound right though, kind of veiled I guess. But they were easy to listen to, no ear fatigue at all. One of my son's has them now along with a Pioneer receiver I gave him. I don't think the older Bose speakers are that bad, but I do think you can do better for the same money.

 

[hnash53]

I don't know where you are coming from but there are so many speakers that out perform Bose, especially the 901's that the list would bore you to death. If all your listening for is artificial reverberation and smeared imaging, yes, a Bose does that very well. If you are un-educated as to what real acoustic instruments sound like Bose does very well. In other word if you have always listened to recorded music Bose does well. But if you are familiar with the sound of live instruments then a Bose falls flat on it face. Yes I know for we sold a ton of the things. Like the district rep said about Bose. Bose speakers are all about creating Dr. Bose's idea of an illusion.

OUCH!!

 

[mfenberg]

I inherited a pair of Bose 501 Series IV speakers back in 2019. The foam surrounds would literally crumble when touched with my finger! I decided to re-foam them and they came out pretty darn good. It was also the first time I ever re-foamed speakers! While not the best speakers I ever heard, they weren't bad, either. I sold them on CL for a fair amount!

 

[SixCats!]

Hi all,

Per usual, I continue to "haunt" the likes of all "Thrift Shops/Flea Markets/Antique Shops/Yard Sales/Junk Shops" etc. mostly in search of my next Audio gear treasure. I have been searching for pre owned Audio gear in earnest since 1999 and have/had acquired a huge amount of gear (some of which I still own/most of which has been moved along). At any rate, I recently found a very nice condition pair of BOSE 201V Speakers (for twenty dollars the pair) that I couldn't pass up. Now, I have never owned a pair of BOSE Speakers in my over fifty years as an Audio Hobbyist and I was well aware of (all the years) of BOSE bashing. Nevertheless, I figured I would "flip" these 201V's an apply the money towards some other/more desirable/wanted newer Audio gear. Once home I inspected the Speakers (excellent condition/Drivers pristine and all working) and lightly brushed off a little bit of dust. I sat the 201V's atop my EMI 529 DLS Speakers and connected up to my old classic NAD 3140 Integrated Amp. Long story short, I was totally impressed by how good/easy to listen to (and yes, musical) these little BOSE Bookshelf Speakers sounded/performed. I would describe the overall sound as perhaps warm'ish and non-fatiguing. I continued to listen to the BOSE for about a week or so (and "A-B'ed" side by side) with several different pairs of Bookshelf Speakers. I VERY much enjoy listening to these BOSE (especially since they perform quite well at lower volumes) using either Sand Amps and Tubes gear. What heck, what can I say ?
I too thought about how the BOSE might fair in a "double blind" testing situation after having listened to and enjoyed these Speakers. Ooh, the 201V's now reside in my Bedroom System connected to my ALLIED 333 Tube Receiver.

SixCats!

 

[spark1]

Has anyone ever wondered why Bose loudspeakers tend to fare so well in double blind listening tests . I remember reading about golden eared audiophiles who failed miserably with the task of choosing the best sounding speakers in a double blind test . I don't remember the exact name of the magazine but Bose speakers appeared in the lineup . Guess what ? Bose would always do well in such testing . If the reviewer doesn't know the name of the product he's listening
there's far less chance of a biased result . I remember when Bose came to town with their audio shows . The same thing happened locally . A lot of us country folks thought that Bose was the bests speakers in the WORLD ! Their speakers do so well in double blind testing . I bet if audio magazines would do these double blind testing Bose would fool them also . I'm not a Bose fan boy but I do like certain models they produce . For speakers considered crap by audiophiles Bose certainly does well when the blinders goes on and all you have is your ears as your guide .

How could there be a double blind test for picking the best sounding speaker?

And what are "golden eared audiophiles"? Would that just be people with different preferences than your own as regards sound quality?

 

[El Rubio]

My experience with Bose is limited to 201’s, 301’s, 2.2’s, and having heard wave radios and home theater setups at friends’ homes. The speakers that I owned met expectations and sounded good for what they were.
A far as Bose configuring a listening room to enhance their products, is there any speaker company that doesn’t do the same? Also, the “illusion” aspect is not just a Bose thing. When people describe an audio product’s sound qualities, they often refer to soundstage or imaging or transparency, etc . Aren’t these all illusions as well? Bose has done a magnificent job at marketing.

 

[painttoad]

i'm not a bose fan but i did think the 10.2s were decent sounding but ima sucker for dual 8s.

i do not think the 901s sounded as bad as many say and i only heard them in a showroom.

the original wave radio sounded incredible for what it was but the price tag was ridiculous.

i heard a pair of 4.2s in a large living room positioned high on shelves that sounded pretty good.

that's my experience with bose and i will never own a pair unless someone gives me a pair of 10.2s

 

[Sgt Shultz]

My experience with Bose is limited to 201’s, 301’s, 2.2’s, and having heard wave radios and home theater setups at friends’ homes. The speakers that I owned met expectations and sounded good for what they were.
A far as Bose configuring a listening room to enhance their products, is there any speaker company that doesn’t do the same? Also, the “illusion” aspect is not just a Bose thing. When people describe an audio product’s sound qualities, they often refer to soundstage or imaging or transparency, etc . Aren’t these all illusions as well? Bose has done a magnificent job at marketing.

The difference being the Bose require an optimal listening space as their designs incorporate the environment as part of their SQ. Imagine the 901 in an outside environment lol, ya that's not gonna work.

 

[swechsler]

I know we're supposed to not like Bose here

No, we don't Bose bash here. We've got quite a few enthusiasts who enjoy their Bose systems, including 301s, 501s and 901s. I personally heard a pair of the original 501s and they sounded much better than I expected based on comments from "audiophiles", even though they were in a much less than ideal environment.

 

[spark1]

"Audiophiles"?

You mean people who are enthusiastic about music reproduction?

I see lot more snobbery (actually, reverse snobbery) here about audiophiles than I've ever seen about Bose.

 

[Gregg 73]

I keep trying to hate Bose because we're told how awful they are but almost every pair I've listened to has surprised me in one way or another. I keep hearing about room placement and acoustic treatments are the only way they'll sound good but in my experience they sound good in any room I've placed them in.

 

[knotscott]

I've never been a fan of double blind tests because the duration is too short, and the number of variables is quite high, meaning that the results almost always have little meaning.

 

[spark1]

I've never been a fan of double blind tests because the duration is too short, and the number of variables is quite high, meaning that the results almost always have little meaning.

Additionally, they are designed to identify the ability to distinguish a difference...not to determine what is "best".

A test to determine which speakers are preferred (or best-liked) without the subject(s) knowing the brand of the speakers (or even being able to see them) can certainly be devised, but it would not be a double blind test, and it's validity (extensibility) would be low.

Objective testing to determine "best" could be done, but only after measurable criteria defining "best" have been established, and the testing would have to be done using test equipment, not ears.

In neither case would the methodology be double-blind.