Why is Bose bashed so much ? and when did it start ?
- Thread starter vintage4
- Start date
- Status
Don't forget product design. It's all about looks. Do you think JBL would have sold as many L-100's if they had beige grille clothes?
If you look at Bose TV marketing it is targeted toward middle aged baby-boomers who are as much concerned about size as sound. Right now speakers and home audio have been supplanted by the active headphones; another super high margin product.
I don't know but they'd have sounded better with solid plywood grilles. 3/4" thick. Baltic birch.
kconnor
Well-Known Member
I owned at the same time the 901 Series VI and two sets of Klipsch speakers, the KG4 and the Forte. The Forte was the speaker I used in my setup. The Bose 901 could hold its own with either Klipsch speaker. It actually had deeper bass than the Klipsch, which were rated to about 40Hz.
Imaging was not of the laser pinpoint variety but it was easy to localize each instrument in space. Also, no matter how close you were to one speaker the image would stay solidly anchored in position. That was uncanny and took some getting used to. The frequency response of the 901 is really a moot point because with the equalizer you can make the speaker sound practically anyway you want it to.
I was glad I had the 901s for the time that I did. I was always curious about them. I was able to find out for myself that they are a very good speaker.
Imaging was not of the laser pinpoint variety but it was easy to localize each instrument in space. Also, no matter how close you were to one speaker the image would stay solidly anchored in position. That was uncanny and took some getting used to. The frequency response of the 901 is really a moot point because with the equalizer you can make the speaker sound practically anyway you want it to.
I was glad I had the 901s for the time that I did. I was always curious about them. I was able to find out for myself that they are a very good speaker.
icenine
Super Member
The people at Bose would probably laugh at these posts. Kind of odd that an American company is routinely bashed while others in this forum frequently complain about the quality of Chinese products such as tube amps, etc. Yes Bose may outsource but so does Klipsch. And unlike many other audio companies that do not exist anymore Bose is still around and the marque is still genuine. Cannot same the same about Sansui,KLH,Akai, and a host of others.
I have to respect any American company that has been making payroll since the 1960s.
I have to respect any American company that has been making payroll since the 1960s.
kfalls, what audiophiles do you know?
People who are trying to discern audible differences between cables, or between electrolytic capacitors, are doing nothing of the sort. Many audiophiles seem not to appreciate that most of the sound the audience hears in a live concert is reflected. For example, an open grand piano echoes sound off the ceiling. In a live concert, it's often hard to discern the precise position of performers.
Some audiophiles want to reproduce exactly what the recording engineer intended, which is obviously different from replicating the performance. The engineer was likely compromising the sound for car AM radios and for boomboxes. He listens to nearfield monitors, which are not designed for home use. He and the performers were likely hoping that the listeners would *not* notice details like the sounds of squeaky chairs, breaths, turning pages, feet on pedals, fingers on valves, and so on.
Bose 901's do mask details. They're not the most "transparent" or "revealing" speakers. This is actually an advantage when listening to flawed recordings, which includes audiophile recordings. Even Gordon Holt, who didn't care for the early 901's, acknowledged that they *excelled* at playing 78's.
I'm with js1138. I move around and do other things while listening to music. The last thing I want is a small sweet spot. You can call me a casual listener if you want. Audiophiles sound vaguely disparaging when they refer to "casual listening."
People who are trying to discern audible differences between cables, or between electrolytic capacitors, are doing nothing of the sort. Many audiophiles seem not to appreciate that most of the sound the audience hears in a live concert is reflected. For example, an open grand piano echoes sound off the ceiling. In a live concert, it's often hard to discern the precise position of performers.
Some audiophiles want to reproduce exactly what the recording engineer intended, which is obviously different from replicating the performance. The engineer was likely compromising the sound for car AM radios and for boomboxes. He listens to nearfield monitors, which are not designed for home use. He and the performers were likely hoping that the listeners would *not* notice details like the sounds of squeaky chairs, breaths, turning pages, feet on pedals, fingers on valves, and so on.
Bose 901's do mask details. They're not the most "transparent" or "revealing" speakers. This is actually an advantage when listening to flawed recordings, which includes audiophile recordings. Even Gordon Holt, who didn't care for the early 901's, acknowledged that they *excelled* at playing 78's.
I'm with js1138. I move around and do other things while listening to music. The last thing I want is a small sweet spot. You can call me a casual listener if you want. Audiophiles sound vaguely disparaging when they refer to "casual listening."
guscjr
Active Member
Rea$on$ for Bo$e Ba$hing
Ditto to the above... hype, hype, and more hype plu$ way overpriced. $lick, $lick, and more $lick adverti$ing. Really come to hate 'em myself...
Ditto to the above... hype, hype, and more hype plu$ way overpriced. $lick, $lick, and more $lick adverti$ing. Really come to hate 'em myself...
stereofanboy
Addicted Member
Isn't this an oxymoron, or do you mean with no openings for the sound to come out?
I'm more of a "constant listener". I almost always have music playing, no matter what I am doing. The exception would be when I watch a dvd or videotape. When I sit down to just listen, that's when I want my stereo to sound its best. When music is just a background thing, I'm not nearly as picky.
Chris Brown
Super Member
I don't "hate" Bose, that would be stupid. You can't blame a company for trying to make money, and taking advantage of people's ignorance is big business. I think some of their products, like the 901, are workable in certain situations.
I guess the thing that puts me off the most regarding Bose is the perceptions they create. It gives people (wives) the idea that you don't need anything beyond a few satellite speakers tucked away in corners behind potted plants and fish tanks to produce good sound. That makes many people's lives a lot harder when it comes to trying to maintain a real stereo in their homes.
Also, the degree to which Bose systems are overpriced means people immediately get defensive when you criticize a system that they bought. They desperately want to believe that the $100 speakers they paid $1500 for sound amazing. I would be content to leave people to their own ignorance but everyone knows I'm into stereos and speakers and thus I'm always one of the first people they try to "impress" with their amazing new system.
I guess the thing that puts me off the most regarding Bose is the perceptions they create. It gives people (wives) the idea that you don't need anything beyond a few satellite speakers tucked away in corners behind potted plants and fish tanks to produce good sound. That makes many people's lives a lot harder when it comes to trying to maintain a real stereo in their homes.
Also, the degree to which Bose systems are overpriced means people immediately get defensive when you criticize a system that they bought. They desperately want to believe that the $100 speakers they paid $1500 for sound amazing. I would be content to leave people to their own ignorance but everyone knows I'm into stereos and speakers and thus I'm always one of the first people they try to "impress" with their amazing new system.
kfa888
Addicted Member
Totally agree. Owner 901's my father gave me and have MGII maggies. there is simply no comparison in sound quality, imaging, the maggies are many times better IMHO.
Paul Klipsch was probably among the earliest of the Bose critics, but he conducted research and published papers to get his point across, not making personal attacks or insulting people who chose to own Bose products.
No disrespect to Kfalls intended, but this is the type of Bose-bashing that I find offensive. Since the mid-80's when I sold off the last of my mid-fi equipment, I've owned hi-fi gear from McIntosh, Conrad Johnson, Linn, Naim, Audio by Van Alstine, and Vandersteen. When I chose to use Bose products in my apartment, it wasn't because I was a lemming or didn't know any better; it's because they meet my needs. When friends and family have chosen to stop using and/or get rid of component stereo systems and use an Acoustic Wave or Wave music system instead, it's not because they're being taken advantage of, it's because the combination of reduced space requirements, ease of use, and acceptable sound works for them.
It's one thing to recognize that certain Bose products don't reproduce sound in a way that pleases you, and to share that information when people with similar audio criteria are asking about products you're familiar with, but it's quite another thing to so often read in these threads that people who have purchased and enjoyed Bose products must necessarily be ignorant and easily duped.
No disrespect to Kfalls intended, but this is the type of Bose-bashing that I find offensive. Since the mid-80's when I sold off the last of my mid-fi equipment, I've owned hi-fi gear from McIntosh, Conrad Johnson, Linn, Naim, Audio by Van Alstine, and Vandersteen. When I chose to use Bose products in my apartment, it wasn't because I was a lemming or didn't know any better; it's because they meet my needs. When friends and family have chosen to stop using and/or get rid of component stereo systems and use an Acoustic Wave or Wave music system instead, it's not because they're being taken advantage of, it's because the combination of reduced space requirements, ease of use, and acceptable sound works for them.
It's one thing to recognize that certain Bose products don't reproduce sound in a way that pleases you, and to share that information when people with similar audio criteria are asking about products you're familiar with, but it's quite another thing to so often read in these threads that people who have purchased and enjoyed Bose products must necessarily be ignorant and easily duped.
Hey...I could go for a pair of original 901s. And my own nuclear power plant to properly power them.
wineslob
Wiping out white van
IMHO it started in the late 70's. The consensus was the Bose was the "best" at least with Bose heads. Where this came from, I don't know.
Maybe it was the fact that 901's, for the times, were quite expensive, or that you MUST use the EQ just to make them sound, um, OK.
Either way, I was somewhat brainwashed in the mid to late 70's that 901's were the "bomb". At this time I was beginning to go to stereo shops and getting exposed to good systems. Dayton-Wright, Dahlquist, etc...
and finally heard a 901 system that was "set up".
Sorry boys and girls, sounds like ass. There really were no highs, no lows, no correct sound field. on and on and on I could go.
Then in the 80's I saw first hand the, errrrrm, quality of the drivers in Bose speakers. One word.............junk. The 901 from the 70's used a fair quality driver (seamed paper cone, stamped steel frame), which was all of $10, dealer cost. (I knew a dealer who was also a reconer) Later 901's use(d) a plastic framed driver. Nice.
My only real beef with Bose? False advertising and hedious pricing based on it.
kfalls is correct. I experienced this first hand. In the above shop I mention, more than once I saw people walk in, plunk down cash and buy Bose, for these very reasons. The owner loved it. In his words "I never have to demo the stuff, it sells on word of mouth".
Last edited:
Chris Brown
Super Member
Certainly I know many who are quite happy and content using a $100 satellite+sub 5.1 setup, even when they paid $1500 for it at a Bose store. Personally, I'd rather be "content" and still have $1400 left in my wallet.
kconnor
Well-Known Member
All speaker companies use the least expensive drivers they can find that will do the job. The point is to make money after all is said and done . The drivers in the 901 are of better quality than most. Not every speaker needs a plastic cone.
The drivers found in the majority of manufactured speakers are close to the bottom of the line as far as what a DIY'er would use.
The drivers found in the majority of manufactured speakers are close to the bottom of the line as far as what a DIY'er would use.
Last edited:
Naptown Rob
Ponographer
Ah, the company that to my great embarrassment is the only reason most people have heard of my hometown.
My dislike of Bose is not just for their products (the 901's & the 1800 amp excepted), but also for the company itself.
I have worked in their factory.
I have also worked for a very fine man who was nearly driven to ruin by Bose's completely frivolous but well funded litigation over a thoroughly accurate technical paper he presented on one of their **** products.
I consider them to be - how shall I even put this?
Scumbags. Amoral opportunists who use deceptive practices in the marketing of shoddy merchandise. Now that I think about it, they are kind of like a "legitimate" version of the White Van guys. :scratch2:
Quality of the product is about the same.
By the way - loved the Kincaid comparison!
My dislike of Bose is not just for their products (the 901's & the 1800 amp excepted), but also for the company itself.
I have worked in their factory.
I have also worked for a very fine man who was nearly driven to ruin by Bose's completely frivolous but well funded litigation over a thoroughly accurate technical paper he presented on one of their **** products.
I consider them to be - how shall I even put this?
Scumbags. Amoral opportunists who use deceptive practices in the marketing of shoddy merchandise. Now that I think about it, they are kind of like a "legitimate" version of the White Van guys. :scratch2:
Quality of the product is about the same.
By the way - loved the Kincaid comparison!
js1138
Super Member
I have personal issues with a lot of companies, but I get over it. As a long time Bose customer, I have a different experience. And it's the customer's experience that makes or breaks a company in the long run.
I'd be curious to hear about anyone who got sued for publishing objective measurements made with good methodology. Consumer Reports got sued for deviating from their usual objective tests and reporting a negative opinion of the 901's soundstage.
I remember the incident from when it happened. CU was reporting something that can happen with 901s, but it's an exaggerated characterization of the very thing that 901s were designed to do. The problem is that CU is taken as the Word of God by many of its readers. Many of whom are in the very demographic targeted by Bose.
Over time it all comes out in the wash.
- Status