Nah, just because like iphones, ipads, imacs... Manufacturing is cheap, components are cheap, but can be sold at a high price because most people are going to buy them anyway.
Apple bought Beats for Jimmy Iovine and his mega contacts with the music industry. The rest was just incidental. Also the quality of their stuff has been increasing ever since they left Monster, the masters of overpriced, underperforming shite.
I've worked in the high-fidelity loudspeaker industry since the 1970s. I'm now retired. I always worked for companies that produced loudspeakers that directly competed with Bose products. This commentary video makes too many generalized assumptions about Bose and the examples are technically vague. It should have been about five minutes long. What looks like a "very high profit" margins in Bose designs (low cost to manufacture/high retail price) has always been irksome to Bose's competitor manufacturers and many retailers. But the technical expertise that goes into Bose product design and manufacturer is still impressive. Certainly, it's a huge advantage over the typically smaller company that hand-assembles a complicated product that inevitably fails more in proportion to that complication. I'm sure the companies I worked for (and many other similar competing companies) made "better sounding" and/or "more accurate" loudspeakers than the Bose products made at the same time. But the respect I felt towards Bose grew over the years as I considered the company's accomplishments. This respect was buttressed by the fact that only the most recent of the companies I worked for still exists under original management. Even with their success, Bose is under-appreciated. Bose is now a juggernaut that defies comparison with almost any other company in the audio business--certainly any company that just makes "speakers"--or "headphones"--or "car speakers". Harman International (now a Samsung subsidiary) was the only real rival. Bose's products are bullet-proof and are remarkably consistent due to a very well-designed (and expensive to set up) manufacturing process. This is not the way "audiophile" products are created. It's a very real advantage for Bose. Bose then markets their products expertly, with profit margins large enough to ensure the company can continue to thrive and support its customer base. On a more personal note, there's also the hundreds and hundreds of New England residents that Bose has consistently employed over the years. I've talked to many of them. As a group, they had lots of good things to say about the experience and precious little worthy of complaint.
Many of these self professed "audiophiles" listen with their eyes more than their ears. It's all inference. Just like solid body electric guitar "tonewood".
More nonsense. Bose always spent more on advertising than product innovations. They produce speakers for decades practically unchanged and overcharge for the privilege. If you look at the consistent critique against Bose, you see it is always the price vs performance ratio.
@@carlosoliveira-rc2xt Yours is a minority (dare I say elitist?) viewpoint. Bose has the largest R&D budget of any audio-only company (by a wide margin).The "superb performance" advantage for audiophile products just isn't relevant to a majority of loudspeaker owners. As far as "unchanged" goes, Bose constantly streamlines their product's design and manufacturing processes. The Bose 901 and 501 each must have had a dozen iterations. Sure, they all look the same, but from a manufacturer's viewpoint, each had improvements that made them a more desirable product. Not surprisingly, you probably weren't paying close attention. Also, their headphone division is famously innovative and successful.
Fred Johnson Who cares? They are hifi speakers. You’re not mixing records on them. I have a pair of Neumaan kh120a’s and they are razor flat and honestly not something that’s great for casual listening.
I skipped through this thing every 3-4 minutes, waiting for the information to start.. go to the end and was not surprised, your comment has more substance than this waste of bandwidth.
I am a retired audio engineer and have been in many recording studios in North America and have never seen any Bose equipment in a professional studio. I believe Bose uses audio tricks and gimmicks to make audio sound to what most people think is good. The exception is their line of noise reduction pilot headphones, however I think they are overpriced. BTW, most studios used JBL 4311s, 4312s and 4 inch Auratones to mix with. The little Auratones were to check the mix for car stereo. Just my two cents worth.
I’ve never been in studio where Bose equipment is used either. I find their sound too top & bottom for my ears which wouldn’t suit a studio anyway. Just bought some Adam speakers to mix on , bit pricy but nice.
In theory Bose "attempts to enhance" the audio quality, where an audiophile wants to hear the most accurate / pure representation of a recording, not an enhanced version.
well, last time I was on concert where Bose was used with annoying bright logos on both sides of the scene, the sound sure attempted to 'enhance' the heck out of my hearing, so much that I had to literally plug my ears with fingers. never had it that terrible before. but it was likely also local sound director's fault.
Honestly I don't know why it should be a nemesis, just don't buy them. Unlike the GPU market, audio equipement can be bought for cheap and if you want vintage stuff (especially amps) it's even cheaper. You should know this
who cares hes still racking up millions so were the ones whos idiots not him im sure hes totally losing sleep knowing hes selling shitty headphones hahahahahahahaha
Jeremy Clarkson as time goes by more and more devices (mainly laptops) are being shipped with Beats Audio as the built in audio processor. You can turn it off, but then they take your low-end as hostage and compress the music anyway. So to avoid the Beats influence I need to carry around my own DA interface. Of course I'll avoid this in future. As for headphones, my only regret is that inexperienced listeners will not know how far removed their music is from source. And all their non-hiphop music will sound subpar and they won't know why.
Essentially, all informed people (even audio lovers) hate scammers of all kinds. I think audiophiles hate Bose mostly because they dislike the way Bose misleads the general public by taking advantage of their ignorance. Bose owes its home audio success to skilled marketing and somewhat to customers who insist on having very small speakers (though even with a small size there are much better options [such as KEF] in the same price range). The 901's are the best home product Bose ever produced -- but even those are inferior to similarly priced products from other manufacturers. The size and shape of speakers should be determined by the sound they create, not the novel look they achieve. Both objective and honest, subjective testing reveal that Bose really does not have high fidelity. I sold high-end/mid-fi audio for many years and the store at which I worked had to eventually drop Bose since after people compared Bose to other, similarly priced products, they were inevitably astounded at how much better the other products sounded and we consequently very rarely sold any Bose products. Bose sells in the big box stores to people sold by the marketing rather than the sound quality.
Yup. They sound "impressive" at first during a demo. But, like that Beats junk, it really gets tiresome after a short while. Neutral, accurate audio is so much easier to listen to. They're just too expensive, too manipulative, and only work "well" in a very limited environment. There's always a better option, usually for a better price and without the shady marketing. If you're on an airplane, and want decent audio with noise cancellation, the headphones are... OK... but there is still better stuff out there, that won't irritate your ears after 15 minutes, and won't cost you >$200.
+Alan Frayser Sir, I am in my 70's and worked for decades with selling audio equipment. During all those years I sold a lot of different brands, and experienced which ones had the best quality. Sony was definitely the brand that had fewest repairs, and the inner components was of very high quality. Sound quality was also excellent. All the negative things you hear about Sony nowadays, is not true at all and are spread by competitors.
I love the shop who suggested beyerdynamic headphones and said this is our demo unit, take it home and if you’re happ, come again,pay and get new ones in box. Never bought audio from another store ever since
I used to work in a stereo store in the mid to late 80's. We carried some pretty decent stuff like Klipsch, KEF, Jamo, Boston Acoustics, JBL, etc... We briefly carried Bose but quickly abandoned the idea because nobody liked them when we could compare them A to B in the same room, same music, same amp. Bose decided that we were in violation of their terms by allowing comparisons like that and terminated our agreement. We didn't care, we blew out the few Bose products we had and never looked back. Ever since that experience, I've never been tempted to fall for the Bose marketing hype. KEF, on the other hand was magical. I wished I could afford them.
It's like that at Best Buy. They have their own separate row of headphones so you can't go back and forth between their headphones and competitors. If consumers had such a choice, it would negate all the advertisement costs the manufacturers incurred.
At a local Fry's Electronics, Bose has always had its separate demonstration area. It is highly controlled. You can only sit or stand in a designated place, and you can only play music they have pre-selected. Comparing Bose to others is intentionally impossible.
Audiophiles don't like integrated systems; they relish picking out each component and cable and upgrading pieces of the system over time. Bose products are highly integrated, which leaves audio hobbyists with nothing to do after purchase. You don't see racers racing with automatic transmissions; enthusiast like to tweak... Also, a lot of Bose products are designed to provide background music, whereas separates tend to be used for active listening / music appreciation. Even as an audiophile, I think that for an office, back porch, or kitchen you can do a lot worse than Bose's sound, compactness, and aesthetics for the price range. They also make the best mass-marketed system-in-a-box I've heard since Cambridge Sound Work's old-school 5.1 system...
You're definitely right about hobbyists wanting to be more in tune and in control of what they love. Car guys will buy tunable cars with manual transmissions. The average person will buy a 4-cylinder FWD compact car because they don't care. PC guys will build their own PCs with glass side panels, RGB, and the best specs they can get for the money. The average person will buy an OEM laptop because they don't care. It applies to any hobby. Average people will keep buying Bose because it sounds good to them, and they don't care enough for better audio. Audiophiles, however, will not.
Audiophiles don't "hate" bose, we just prefer stuff that works differently. Bose do a lot of stuff that works well for what audio professoinals might call an untrained consumer - but they do know their market, and have a brand that they've very carefully positioned to be desirable to those that like showing off a "premium brand" on their desk or shelf. We know better. we look at empirical data and measure, and judge on performance over marketing. This doesn't mean we hate it - that word is overused and is just more media hype
I agree - the MDR-1000X cans are awesome. I'm editing vlog sound with a sony 7.2 set. gaming with the PlayStation headphones, and I use sony MDR-HW300 (wireless sender) when operating cameras at gigs (so I don't forget about the cable and yank the camera ever again ;) ) ... 6 sony cameras here too.. mixed with an old canon and a few blackmagic's...
I am one of those untrained customer you mentioned .. My purpose is mostly listening songs n watching movies.. What is alternative to the costly Bose products? Please help
Personally I tend to go for the sony gear - the price is good for what you get, I like the sound space they deliver and the construction is great. The sound system/media head I have is 14 years old and going strong. The only reason I would upgrade it is for improved HDMI version for 4k/3D. Alternatively there's been massive improvement in soundbars. Sound is very much a personal taste thing - some people like more bass, some more mid-tone, and then the space you are going to put it in has a huge impact on how something performs. I know this is a useless answer - but it depends on what works for your tastes. What I will say is don't go budget, or "fancy" - make sure that what you get is solidly built, and it will last you for years. cheap stuff will rip it self to bits and end up costing more in the long run.
Nikhil Gupta Sony is decent, though not perfect. One pair of headphones you might want to check out are the Audiotechnica ATH M50X, I absolutely love them.
I'm a Klipsch fan myself. My media room is purely Klipsch and I love the way it sounds. Yet, I still purchase Bose Bluetooth speakers as they sound great in any environment. To me it's incredible how such an enjoyable sound can come out of a speaker that small. So in that regard, I don't mind all that digital wizardry and use it as it is intended; a portable speaker.
I still have the original Soundlink, with the USB receiver and remote and it still blows away any other bluetooth speaker I've owned, even the Soundlink III. I just recently discovered that using the remote you can actually get it into bluetooth pairing mode (had no idea it was bluetooth) and use it with anything other than the USB receiver. its not just quality of sound, its also overall loudness without distortion. Used it at many a party and its still going strong.
This is the most unintelligent comment used. It seems as though it is widely used by people with no true desire for complete information/explanation of a subject. Maybe because their pea sized brain cannot comprehend more than one piece of small info at a time, only has the attention span of flea, has way too much room inside the head in which it is encased (in other words, there is a lot of empty space inside that head), or, the host of said pea brain just spends way too much time trying to be a smart ass. What ever the case may be, it is an extremely idiotic response. It wastes time, energy, and space on the page (not to mention the fact that it advertises the commenter's low level IQ). If one watches/listens to a host, and doesn't find what they were expecting from him/her, then, why not just go on to the next source without wasting everyone's time by writing a comment only worthy of a moron.
nealjazz Intelligent people do not need babble. The facts will suffice. 5 minutes is all you need. Unless you are a babbling fool then you go on and on and on and on for no good reason.
Bose is a style brand when it comes to consumer audio, much like Beats by Dre. It's better than the cheap stuff, and that's enough for most non-audiophiles. The real draw is the brand.
@@kaarthuisplus This! I will never understand why people behave as if Bose are like Skullkandy or Beats. They are not. They know their shit. Its just that audiophiles are not their target market. Bose QC headphones have some of the best comfort, NC and call quality I have ever seen in wireless headphones. Not to mention the sound is not that bad as people are saying. They actually sound good in most cases. Good sound is incredibly subjective anyway.
@@PurushNahiMahaPurush Exactly, I have had my bose QC 35 2s for a couple of years now and they are very comfortable (have worn them for 13h straight on a flight), have very good noise cancellation that helps me concentrate and are overall a good headphone for day to day use and are perfectly fine for the average user. You can also have best of both worlds if you want to, audiophile gear and some headphones for work or flights for example.
Biggest complaint about Beats is the price for the quality. They’re poorly constructed and completely squash the high end. They are a fantastic fashion accessory though.
I sold hi-fi in the 1970's. When the Bose 501 came out, Bose invited us to a Seattle hotel to get the full skinny and demo of the new 501's. They gave all of us salespeople the pitch, then hit play on an open reel tape deck and we heard an announcer go over the design and play some audio clips of various genre's of music. The 501's sounded absolutely AMAZING. I became a huge fan of Bose - for about 15 minutes. After the tape played and during the break they let us listen to the albums they had there I pulled out Juice Newton and played Queen of Hearts. It sounded like crap. They had eq'd the tape to be played, specifically, on the 501's. With a normal hi-fi, they were just another mid-fi speaker. And an over-priced one at that. Ever listen to a 901 without their special processor. Yeah, crap. They always were.
yeah Bose doesn't make good speakers, but they do make good EQ's I'm sure the speakers in my QC15's don't sound that good, but by forcing you to use their hardware EQ, you wouldn't know it and they did a good job at EQing it imo
Just for your information, the EQ processor for the 901 is a crossover network unique to that speaker. And it's sophisticated enough so that you can control what comes out of the box. Every speaker you can name, outside of a single driver full range system, has a crossover designed to get a good (flat, It is hoped and claimed) response from those three separate speakers (If it's a three-way system) running in that cabinet. Take any set of speakers; I don't care how expensive and rip out the crossover from inside the speaker cabinets and see how they sound.
So true Donald, just look at the era late 60's and onward a lot of speakers sounded considerably worse than the 901's of course in todays market where DSP is used widely improvements can be made across the board. How many speakers of the 901 era actually went below 45 htz? Now even very high end setups are using subs. 901's still have the large sound stage so not just the person in the sweet spot gets the full sound.
@@sPi711 And just for your information Crossover networks and EQ are completely 2 different things. There is no crossover function going on in the 901. Each driver is running "full-range". EQ boosts or lowers frequency bands in the signal chain to get a "flat" or desired response. Crossover networks divide frequencies between drivers to send only the frequencies that each driver will reproduce. Crossovers are necessary in multi-way systems due to the fact that most higher frequency drivers can't handle the power that the lower frequency drivers can. So removing the crossover network can damage the more delicate drivers. So yes, if you remove the EQ from the 901 or the EQ from a multi way speaker, the 901 would be exposed for what it really is. A heap of really expensive Chinese paper cone drivers and plastic. I've rebuilt many of these things, I know what's inside the magic box. I've built many 2, 3 and 4 way speakers that needed zero EQ to sound fantastic.
Their specs would be an embarrassment. And the one comeback they could have - "listen to us side-by-side for proof" they can't do because they don't allow that either...for obvious reasons. ;) Best to just not print the numbers and then go spontaneously deaf if anyone calls you on it. It's worked for them for decades.
Their objective is a different one. The objective is providing the best possible user experience with the least amount of effort invested on the hardware side. That's not for me. It is probably as well the reason why they never became relevant in Germany. You see huge Bose stores in Asia, though, in prime locations where the rents are exorbitant.
In the audio segment there are plenty reputable companies. It is more that people don't know how to interpret specs. Why for example the audio disaster Beats sold so well? A buying decision made based on hero marketing, and on a quick listen that boomy bass might sound impressive. Junk for a lot of money. You can get better for half the price, i.e. from Audio Technica and Sennheiser.
Bose systems sound "good". But, to me, they don't reproduce the sound that the audio engineers want me to hear. And that is my benchmark: how closely can gear X in room Y reproduce what the engineers intended? I WANT to hear the harsh pounding of hammers on a piano. I WANT to feel the low-end of the pipe organ while watching Intersteller. I don't want Bose's representation of what THEY think I want to hear. I don't HATE Bose, I dislike what their products do to the, let's say uninformed consumer. I've learned to bite my tongue when someone wants to show me their home theater system telling me how great it sounds. I get it; sounds are subjective, and you like what you like.
You are absolutely right in that Bose does not r produce exactly as engineered but in order to actually get that reproduction you’d need a $20k system. Not exactly ideal. Everything else is just a simulation of the real thing..
I think that Bose designs their speakers to sound better to non-audiophile listeners for the way that non-audiophiles experience music. That's why non-audiophiles love their Bose setups. They're high-end mini-vans, which may cost as much as a sports car but really have a different purpose.
I must say that the Bose mini soundlink 2 is the best balanced Bluetooth speaker I have heard for that size. There is no reason for me to even compare to others. Had it 5 years and it still works beautifully. I had the old Bose acoustimas set with bass module with a big NAD amp in 1999. They sounded pretty darn good with the right recordings and worked very well for home theater. But I did not buy for perfection. More for convenience and small physical imprint and they were great. The build quality is very solid.
100% agreed, if you're happy with the sound, that's all that matters. I also have a Soundlink Mini 1, and the original Acoustimass 5's hooked up to a Cambridge amp, plus Acoustic Energy speakers and REL subwoofer. I love my Bose gear for the sound they make, and have no qualms with the marketing that hooked me in. The sky is the limit when it comes to audiophile snobbery... eg, "if your system doesn't come close to my $100K B&W Nautilus system, don't bother talking to me".
I absolutely love the Soundlink Mini 2. If they are positioned well in the room and I know where the people listening to them will be, the sound this little thing produces is huge. But of course they're not meant for critical listening. It's convenient to set up, to move around the room and to give the "impression" of a big sound. And I don't actually care if the sound really is that big or it just pretends to be. And I see how this small box does some trickery. But if the trickery works, why would I care? ^^ 99 % of the time I listen to music it's through headphones. And I also have the QC 35 II and they're the headphones that get the most use. Do they sound good? Yes. Do they sound amazing? No. But they're sounding "good enough" while being extremely convenient, reliable, having very good ANC and most important plus for them is that they are simply the most comfortable headphones I ever had sitting on my head. But do I use them for working on my music or critical listening? Of course not. You even see it in the name of the headphones: they make the world quiet while being extremely comfortable, and that's what they're loved for.
@@fabiogonzalez4413 in general this is a very complicated topic. For example when the QC35 was released, it was so innovative that there simply was no competition for ANC headphones. When the Soundlink Mini came out it was simply an amazing deal for pairing convenience with (perceived) sound quality. And now I'm looking at a BOSE system for amplification for busking because they just created the best package of convenience, portability and sound quality. But all of those products are in no way meant to be a solution for audiophiles. Do your research, put your expectations in the right spot and after that make the right purchase decision.
As a designer of audiophile product, I believe I can shed a little further light on the topic... Bose - (as pointed out in the video) - has never considered itself an "audiophile brand." Brands like Acoustic Research, B.A.T., Boulder, B&W, Conrad Johnson, Krell, Mark Levinson, McIntosh, Quad, Stax, V.A.C., Wilson Audio, etc. have always focused on the "less is more" concept - (putting fewer, but higher quality components in the signal path) - and on dedicated pieces - (separate amplifiers, preamplifiers, sources, processing, cabling, and speakers - such that you have the flexibility to upgrade, change or "tune" to your liking specific portions of the signal path independently of each other. The emphasis of these companies is on accuracy of reproduction - (i.e., "how close is the sound to the sound of the original performance?" or "How revealing of detail, nuance, instrumental placement, and recording environment is the sound?") The goal of Bose has traditionally been to position itself as a "lifestyle brand" - (a là Bang & Olufsen) - with emphasis on convenience, styling, and features. Ultimate fidelity to the source is not the primary goal, as long as the sound is generally liked by non-enthusiasts - (i.e., "How good does it sound to the average listener?") It is often said that a well-made recording will almost always sound better on an "audiophile" system, but that a poor or mediocre recording will usually sound better on a Bose. In other words, the audiophile system will reproduce exactly what it's presented with, warts and all; the Bose system is capable of making something sound "better than it is", (but only when it's not that good to begin with). The other problem that audiophiles have with Bose is that many audio enthusiasts have multiple speaker systems - each one having different attributes; the signal processing employed by Bose speakers to achieve their response adversely affects those speakers, as well as "messing up" the signal going to any subsequent components in the audio chain.
Andrew Ryder b&o Krell, Mark Levinson, Wilson are mostly junk unfortunately. Bose Professional & Panaray is of high quality, and simply one of the best. They do have different divisions. Bose consumer, and Bose Professional which includes Panaray and some speakers utilizing the B&O and JBL brand.
@@tkandme3 You have hit on an incovenient truth. Bose domestic consumer goods to me are simply unlistenable BUT..... Bose pro gear does not sound bad at all. Mark Levinson used to be some of the best you could buy but appear to have lost their way. Krell same downward spiral. Wilson is way overpriced for passive loudspeakers and has some issues. B&O is a mixed bag but that has never changed from their early days. At least they embrace active domestic loudspeaker tech. Use DSP in new & innovative ways and remain the only HiFi in the Gugenheim museum of modern art. Their low mass phono cartridge tech was and still is plagerised by many others. Because it is good and it works. So felt I must pull you up on that. Cheers
B&O makes very interesting tech available to many. Their ICEPower class-D amp is absolutely mind-blowing IMHO, and having this kind of amp on consumer laptops and screens is great.
You nailed it right. Been a fanatic audiophile until about stereo gave way to the surround sound era (early 2000s). I hated Bose not only because they cheat with EQ, but they also charge way more than good, honest, top of the line audio brands AND they custom tweak their store demos in the way you're denouncing it.
I believe that the demo music Bose used were recorded in an anechoic studio so that when reproduced by Bose "direct/reflected" speakers it sounded "better" than the same recording on a quality conventional system.
As an owner of Bose QC 25's and Senheiser HD 280 pro's, i enjoy both for different reasons. If i want to hear accurate highs and lows in a song, i prefer the Senheisers. If i'm making music, i use the 280's so that i can understand the music better. However, when listening for fun, i prefer my QC25's. Bose is more comfortable, the noise cancelling is awesome, and they have a warm sound that i enjoy (even though it might not be "accurate").
I also have used both and still prefer Sennheiser regardless. Furthermore my Bose started to fall apart after 6 months whereas the foam on my Sennheisers lasted over 3 years.
In my country (Czech Republic), the main problem with Bose is, that it's so overpriced, that only little group of people even know that Bose exists. Normal people just don't care about Bose, because of the price. Proffesionals thinks that Bose is just super expensive toy and only people, that sometimes buys one of Bose headpones are hardcore Apple fans.
I have a pair of probably 30 year old 10.2’s. I’ll never get rid of them. Do they sound as good as some other things out there? No, but the nostalgia factor is there and they are unique and I enjoy the sound on specific music.
I'm not an audiophile, and only a few minutes in, but he seems to dislike Bose because they market their products as high end as more professional and higher quality companies. Beats knows what it is. It's for middle schoolers who want bass, bass, and more bass.
Let us use a food analogy. Beats is Burger King and BOSE is taco Bell. Audiophiles are people who would eat at decent restaurants that use high quality ingredients. Get it?
Beats by Dre is McDonalds food being sold at Applebee's prices. Bose is Applebee's food being sold at steak house prices. There's hate enough for both.
youAbajajTube That's fucking bullshit, most audiophiles are hiveminded idiots like yourself. Morons like you will bitch about mainstream brands while coveting thousand dollar cables.
I don’t know why TH-cam recommends old content but I do have a comment. Bose has done a brilliant job. They are a company that’s in it to make money. They are experts. They have clear target markets. They have convinced the average person their products are great. They still sound better than anything the average person has heard. Think about other industries such as Harley Davidson. They have taken a product that has changed little over the decades and has built a following that is unprecedented in business. You still have to have a product that’s good enough to get people buy. They both are experts selling to their market demographics and creating exceptional perceptions. They have spent a lot of money and time telling average people their speakers are exceptional and many average consumers associate Bose with high end quality. That’s what they call great marketing.
In the late 80's early 90's I liked what Bose was doing. the direct reflecting concept was an interesting one to me then because I was looking for that "live in my living room" sound. I owned 301's and 201's. Around 1990/ 1991, I was a big fan of the sub-woofer/ satellite engineering concept and believed that moving frequencies below 80Hz to a dedicated stand alone cabinet was a wise choice because the human ear cannot hear directionally below 80Hz and by doing this you free up the possibility of handling the mids and highs with more specifically designed cabinets, drivers, crossovers, and amps to better reproduce a full spectrum of sound. Then Bose debuted the Acoustimass system. My own uncle was taken in by the marketing hype put forward by Bose and he dropped over $1000 on a speaker system for their house. One 5 minute listen and I had to be taken aside by the family and told not to tell uncle G what they had done to him. He liked it, and was proud of it, so let him have his enjoyment. The tiny little speakers for the highs and mids were so cheap and in tiny little plastic swivel boxes they couldn't reproduce audio anywhere near the frequencies above 80Hz so they had to set the crossover higher sending lower midrange to the so-called "subwoofer" box. Now the "sub" was completely directional. I could hear the poor thing over in the corner behind the loveseat huffing and puffing away. What a scam. It was clear, Bose did have engineering prowess, they did have a marketing department up to their elbows in ideas about how to turn a profit, and they did have products that could produce sound that could "trick" the uneducated or the naive into shelling out cold hard cash for inferior designs and sub-par sound quality. At that point it was clear to me that Bose was the Ponzi scheme of the audio world. Preying on weak, impressionable, underinformed and uneducated consumers, particularly the elderly, like my Uncle G. No people, that's not how it is supposed to work. A real sub-sat system that has great drivers in well designed enclosures with expertly engineered crossovers made with quality parts can be the pinnacle of accurate, transparent sound reproduction. Once you have heard it and appreciated it, you cannot stand what Bose does to the consumer. It's unconscionable, and it should be considered borderline fraud.
Way back when I purchased my Bose 901’s comparing them to the JBL L100’s, I loved both of them but bought the 901’s. The kicker was both speakers were being driven by a Bose amplifier putting out around 275 watts RMS which I didn’t buy then and is no longer available. Seeing that the 901’s can handle 450 watts RMS compared to 200 watts for the JBL’s, in today’s market it will cost a fortune for an amplifier to listen to the 901’s as I did. I called Bose for a solution to my dilemma and their suggestion was to buy a new amplifier Bose now makes. When I checked out it’s specs, for around $700 you get 80 watts RMS maximum per channel. At this point I will either leave my 901’s in my cedar chest or sell them least I run across a 700 watt 2 channel power amp some non audiophile have to Goodwill for a new surround sound receiver.
I am not anti-Bose as I still like their Wave radios and their $150 sound link which I compared to more expensive blue tooth speakers. Bose sounded the best in this category. Wait for a sale if you can. Micro-center had the Sound Link for $125 about 3 weeks ago.
Bose philosophy is psychoacoustics, meaning they build their speakers to sound the way they think the listener wants to hear the music. Ok. So how is that any different than a music producer who records (mixes, equalizes, autotunes) the music in a way they think it sounds best? I don’t at all get the audiophile’s argument. I know what I like I.e clean frequency separation, bass not overly boosted, crisp highs, etc. but I’m not a snob about it.
The way it is different is that, when you listen to rock, jazz, pop etc. someone had done the mastering during the recording, and here it comes the difference, when a rock band records and masters its recording it is according to the music they are playing, when a pop singer records its song the mastering is done according to his song, thus making the mastering settings different from each other, when you play it on your sound system and the system itself fiddles with the EQ settings it turns crap, as those EQ settings might be suitable for rock, but truly would not be suitable for let's say classic music.
BOSE is ok, just overpriced. It's just med fi and there is a lot of med fi stuff that's just as good for half the price. My biggest problem is SONY, not BOSE. SONY is MUFFLY! They make the worst speakers I have ever heard.
Peple get hung up on the 901s, forgetting about the Bose floor-standing speakers like the 601s, 501s, 10.2s, 8.2s, etc. These all have discrete woofer and tweeter combinations, and received good reviews in audiophile publications. I recently refoamed the 4 each 8" woofers in an otherwise pristine set of 601 Series II speakers, and they turned out to be a pleasant surprise, especially compared to the fussy 901s! Just watch the prices on 601 Series III speakers, they're selling for unreal numbers!
Heard 5 min of what you said. Not much made sense to me.. companies like Tannoy, b&w, kef, svs, klipsch or in that alignment, take pure sound quality in consideration first, simple as that. Bose is more of a lifestyle companie, they use a lot of dsp to camuflage the inferior sound that theire speakers produce. To some people thats ok and it will sound nice, but for people that understand and expect the full frequency array of sounds will imidiatly reject the sound of bose products because they know that its an artificial sound that they are listing to. People that dont care about true sound quality or never heard it will think that bose equipment sounds awesome because they simply dont know better.. its easy to understand..
Just recently purchased the Bose quiet comfort 30 and I am really loving them, sound quality is perfect for me because the most important aspect of these headphones are the noise cancelation and the Bluetooth features. For the type of work I do they are perfect.
Rock Man v I am using Sennheiser headphones (open type) fir work at home, Bose QC 15 (or so) for work while travelling, ans also Phillips and one other well known Brand noise cacellation headphones. I love the Phillips ones, but their problem is that they catch cell phone signals. So by and large I am most satisfied with the Bose ones.
Rock Man Glad you enjoy them but don't listen to Sony's or especially Bowers and Wilkins' alternatives unless you want to suffer from buyers remorse when it comes to sound quality. One thing Bose definitely has over the competition is comfort though. They're light and very comfy.
The only Bose product I've personally ever purchased was a cute little orange Bluetooth speaker for my wife, small enough to fit in her purse and charges via a normal micro USB connection. I bought it without even hearing it, it was the size and color I new she would like, the sound of quality of a small speaker certainly was going to suck no matter what. I gave to her as a present, and helped her to set it up, and was AMAZED at the sound that little dingy speaker could make! Absolutely amazed! I paid $80 or $90 for the speaker, which was certainly a bit (but not too bad) for a small portable Bluetooth speaker, but I think it was worth every penny. And this comes from a certified Bose hater.... The speaker is a "Bose SoundLink Micro, Portable Outdoor Speaker" ... and yes, it's weatherproof. For someone who wants a very small Bluetooth speaker with amazing sound, I can't recommend this little guy highly enough. But when my wife is at home, she prefers connecting to my $300 Marshall Kilburn II Portable Bluetooth Speaker... :-)
From a career audiophile in both consumer and professional audio and live sound instructor and engineer (operator)...You can’t fool with the laws of physics. If you attempt to make up for a deficiency in one area, there WILL be a trade off somewhere else. Bose practices this regularly to appeal to “the masses” who don’t care about those trade offs and are willing to pay that premium. Audiophiles (not the masses, the boys club as it were who by the way are also willing to pay a premium) won’t compromise with that signal path and want it to be pure and untouched. I’d say that it’s just a base philosophical difference. Neither side appreciates the other’s approach. That being said, my wife also doesn’t like having the big speakers and all the separate components in the living room. Yes, they’re still there (it was a condition of our marriage). THAT being said, I will admit to owning a pair of Bose noise cancelling headphones (a Christmas gift from my wife...for long flights and for falling asleep to her snoring, and not any kind of critical listening) and a Bose Bluetooth speaker (a premium from my cellular provider) for the garage workshop. Everybody has a better way to build a mousetrap, to wit...every brand regardless of its philosophical approach to “good sound” has it’s appropriate application. Don’t hate!
I’m not an audiophile. I can appreciate good sound and happen to really like Bose, but that’s just me. Everyone’s opinion is different, and I respect all of them.
There are times where I run in a venue professional audio which has a divider with another Entertainer on the other side. When they run a Bose system I have to turn mine down because limitations of what those speakers are problem is they can't match spls traditional speakers and I have to turn my volume down and frequencies down because they can't keep up
My father was in the retail audio business and friends with Dr. Bose. If you looked at his history you would know that his first concept was to create greater high frequency dispersion to increase the "sweet spot" as you walked perpendicular to the speakers. The first popular FM tabletop radio was the KLH 21. I still have one. Sounds great. The Bose wave radio is a phenomenal product, way ahead of its time, back then. What Dr. Bose did, whether you like his products or not, was push the industry to his concept. Go to any concert. They typically have high frequency speakers pointed in overlapping directions to reinforce his original concept. He was a firm believer that no 2 people hear the same thing the same way. Therefore eg. one person likes Polk, the other JBL. Neither one is right. That's audio
I'll take Polk and JBL over Bose crapola. I had a set of Polk 5s way back when. They sounded very good (esp with some real power). Never heard a Bose system that was any good.
Thanks for making an objective video about BOSE. I'm a musician and BOSE makes portable PA systems for working Musicians designed for live Gigs (Vocals, Guitar, Keys, Bass Guitar, etc.) For years, I used PA systems by the standard musician gear manufacturer's: Fender, JBL, etc. This gear was always heavy and cumbersome and one day after playing two gigs on the same day, on one of the hottest days of the year. I thought there has to be a better way. I went to my local musician's gear store with this question and was introduced to the BOSE PA system. It was EXPENSIVE. But I could return it in 30 days if I wasn't happy. Compared to my previous set up: The Bose was light, portable, and super easy to set up, and it sounded GREAT! At every gig, I played customers (IE: Audiences) would compliment me on the audio quality. So would the venue owners who booked me. Every musician who worked with me agreed that it was the best sounding PA system they have ever used in a live application. In the past, I would play a restaurant, and there would always be someone who complained that we were a bit too loud and could we please turn it down a bit. This stopped after I got the BOSE. No one ever thought we were too loud, yet everyone in the restaurant, including the owner, said they could hear us perfectly. As a working musician, it was the best investment I ever made. Bose released a little mini PA (BOSE S1 Pro) designed for the solo musician. I heard it at the NAMM show and was very impressed. I did a review of it on my channel, and an "Audiophile" who saw the video LOST HIS MIND. He started trolling and harassing other commenters on my channel. I had to ban him. (and delete his comments). He didn't seem to understand that all of his precious Audiophile manufacturer's weren't making equipment for musicians in live applications. For this reason, the term "audiophile" has always been synonymous with A**H*** for me ever since.
no. no musician in the history of the world has ever ever ever used bose equipment in a live show or gig, that includes dj/ nightclub/ music group...ever!! your obviously a paid bose employee shill.... ok... we all get it...
I buy Bose headphones for the noise cancelling technology. Sound quality makes no difference _to me_ above a certain level, but a long plane journey virtually requires my QCs.
WTF ,the sound quality of Sony are a complete mudfest I'm a guy that cares about sound not an audiophile extent but as the guy in the vid said I know how I want my sound..to sound Now I know that sound is a subjective thing but there things which are objective Such as the CLARITY of the sound and how heavy the bass is Now,SONY lacks clarity and sound muffled AF compared to Bose .. clearly Yes Sony xm3,2 may have heavier pounding bass but unless you're a basshead It just drowns out the rest of the frequencies STOP SAYING SONY HAS BETTER SOUND!!!!!
I absolutely LOVE my Sony headphones for their sound quality. With that said, for going on a plane, my QC's come into play because I still have yet to own a pair of cans that can do noise cancelling as good as my Bose headphones.
Had a pair of bose 901 series 2 with a 12 band equalizer; they sounded amazing! Sound was so clean....one of the reasons; no distortion from crossovers that were used in conventional speakers.
The over the ear headphones or any head or earphones by Bose is the only that makes them better but their home theatres or anything else by them is just trash compare to other brands out there and just way over prized. We just get fooled in to buying Bose because of how much money they put in to marketing. You will be mind blown if you listen to high end marantz or Yamaha.
May be some people considered that high price as the single point proofing high audio quality. They did not notice obvious difference of concept expressed in word Lifestyle - while that was the advantage to pay. I do not think Bose fooled people as it was nor recommended to declared audiophiles for which BOSE always had another shelve. .
I have a TEAC streamer, Marantz amplifier and Dynaudio speakers and can heartily recommend all of them. All have brilliant quality in their own right, are excellent for the price and the clarity of the Dynaudio speakers is well matched to the warmth of the Marantz amplifier. Corner-cutting, over-priced, data-hiding, psycho-acoustic, deceptive marketing, doesn't anywhere near cut it against these genuine quality manufacturers using high quality components and design work.
The talk at the end about basic tribalism is the truth of it. I am a PC enthusiast and an audiophile. I try to refrain from doing it, but it's hard not too sometimes.
I have problems with Bose for many of the same reasons. The same goes for quite a few other audio brands, but the point being that it's still tribalism at the end of the day no matter how justifiable.
I wasn't arguing whether it was justifiable or not. I don't like Bose or Beats because I belong to a more sophisticated listening group, audiophiles. I really don't. Yes, audiophiles do know a thing or two about sound equipment, but it doesn't take away from the idea that an audiophile is part of a group/type of people aka a tribe. It's not a derogatory or condescending thing. Human's "social intelligence" is what set us apart from most other things, especially other great apes, on this planet. Tribalism is very much a part of that.
So basically the opposite of anything labelled as "gaming" when it comes to audio. It'll have painfully crisp highs and stomping lows, but no real mids. Makes me wonder what would happen if Bose made a gaming audio product... It'll either sound amazing or make no sound at all.
I judge products based on their sound, and their sound alone. I don't care much about a brand name or build quality. If a product uses cheap parts but manages to make it sound better than a more traditionally built speaker with higher quality parts, I will pay more for that product. I can't speak for all Bose products, but I am a huge fan of the Bose Soundtouch 300. BestBuy sets up these demos in random locations and have no custom layout to the space in which they are placed. Owning one, I can tell you that it sounds just as good at home as it does in the store. Can you get better? Obviously, but in my opinion it's very much worth the cost. That said, I have definitely heard other Bose products that sounded exceptionally 'meh' with a very disgusting price tag. I can sympathize to the hate towards them for trying to use their superiority complex to overcharge for cheap products. As was stated, it's fairly similar to Apple. Still, I'd suggest judging each product for yourself based on how they perform rather than shunning the name.
I don't know about the rest of the world, but here in Denmark many of us who are autistic and are sensory sensitive uses them to block out sound. Many of us are sensory sensitive where light, sound, smell, taste and touch feels much more extrem. Having the Bose Quiet Comfort 35 for me, I love it. That I on an app can change how much sound I can block out. Sometimes I play low music, but really... It's just about blocking out a very noisy world. And for that the Bose are great.
Yeah as an autistic man, I got the Sony WH-1000X mkiii to cancel out noise when I'm at home in a household of 6 people because it allows me to isolate myself while still having pretty great sound quality by comparison.
None of my gear would be considered "audiophile" level. I'm a bang-for-your-buck price/performance guy. So it's not just audiophiles who think Bose sucks.
I use sennheiser hd25 headphones. Flat response, loud if needed, comfortable and you can buy every part to repair them. Mine are about 15 years old and they’re used every day
nikki callaghan, Sennheisers are good; AKG 'phones are also good, at least the old ones are, mine go back several decades plus. The best sounding headphones I ever had were Stax electrostatics, I forget the model but they weren't driven via a Transformer from the amplifier's speaker output, instead I had a Stax preamp that also had a class A headphone amp built into it specifically designed to drive those phones and they were magnificent. They definitely have limits to how loud you can play them, but they sure sounded fine! Unfortunately, when I sold the preamp I couldn't use the headphones by themselves so they went with the preamp. I believe Stax is now out of business, but I remember that some years back they had a tube type driver amp and matching dedicated electrostatic phones that cost something like a couple Grand, I bet they were good, but I never heard them and I certainly couldn't have afforded them.
I think PC enthusiasts (Myself included) hate Alienware more than Apple. Apple does plenty of things right, and they are "high end" in a way. They have a very clean, user friendly interface, and a software/hardware combo that just works. Alienware on the other hand just over charges for every desktop PC they make.
BOSE is OK, but there is much better equipment for the money that sounds noticeably better. The BOSE 901's, in the right setup and placement, did sound excellent. That was my favorite BOSE product. By the way, love the Mac Color Classic in the backround!
I knew a guy whose father bought a 901 speaker system. I visited them and listened to it, because I had heard that those speakers were really expensive and really good. What I can say is that they sounded "exciting" due to all the sound reflected off the walls etc., which was really nice if you listened to some live concert recordings. But they definitely did not sound as good as a decent (and cheaper) pair of standard floor-standing speakers when listening to normal music.
I think a lot people see friends and family buying Bose or Apple and feel like those companies are using marketing and pricing structures to prey on the public's general illiteracy in terms of audio equipment or computer hardware.
If Bose is suing or threatening people who post negative reviews, that's reason enough to not give them any money, regardless of how good their products might be. Screw these shady mafia-like companies.
@@david1235102 SERIOUSLY? If relatated to the german def for B'O'SE the O is pronounced EW & look it up on line or in any German/English dictionary. If related to threatened litigation unless it went to court there would be no records you could check. Aside from newspaper microfilm records if it made the news. Aside from records of a writ being issued if settled before trial or out of court. Good luck with that!
Bingo. This was the biggest reason. They vanished from the audio press because they actively pursued a chilling effect by suing anyone who wrote anything negative. Same shit people do here on YT when they strike videos they don't like. Bose was a bunch of trolls.
Take some Bose equipment apart and you will quickly realize the contempt is well earned. Lots of poorly cast plastic, particle board, proprietary components and they will NOT freely provide a schematic. If it breaks, it's a throwaway. Think; a Radio Shack quality company with a high-power marketing organization.
You must be young. There was a time when Radio Shack audio equipment including their speakers, were fairly well regarded at their price point. None of it was considered throwaway.
Yep...so young that I can still remember when the local Radio Shack had a tube tester, where I could test the tubes for my HeathKit Mohawk radio (which I helped my father build). What I remember best about Radio Shack's stuff was that the outer cases (their clock-radios, record players, and headphone amplifiers to name a few) where typically "glued" together. Makes it a bit difficult to open up for repairs. That is the very definition of a throw-away item. Then, again, if the consumer can't get through the glue'd-together plastic case, how can he make an assessment the poor quality components and terrible assembly techniques that were shoe-horned into it? Clever marketing...just like Bose.
@Rusty Andrews point blank period they sound good. Never found a pair of consumer headphones that are better. Everyone is obsessed with bass and bose doesn't make bass heavy headphones. They're more for vocals and detail
@@emanuellgustea122 oof. Skullcandy is junk. Sennheiser has a huge product lineup of varying use cases, and can be fantastic or shit depending on your use case. You should try the AudioTechnica ATH-M50x cans with a Fiio DAC/amp (I use a Fiio i1, but they are discontinued). I’ve compared them side by side with Bose headphones and they’re magnitudes better for the same price.
Theres also those people who think they are elite. They think they can hear a difference when they cant, can see drop frames when they cant. They invest so much time in to their hobby that they get easily insulted by the smallest issue.
If you look it up, Amar G. Bose sued critics who didn't like his products. And another reason is his speakers' weird configurations. Remember the 901? tEach one had 9 speakers, that cost about $4. apiece! Once kids found out where to get those speakers, and how to set a graphic equalizer to get the same response curve, college kids practically wore out the supplier of those speakers, building their own versions of it.
I think for the modern models noise cancelling headphones and earbuds (QC 25/ 35/ IE 20), Bose is right now the best for cancelling noise but for pure sound quality, they are merely adequate. However, in really noisy environments like inside an airplane, mowing the lawn, using the vacuum, the noise cancellation more than makes up for the sound quality. Overall, the modern noise cancelling headphones and earbuds sound really good in certain applications and are superior to traditional over the ear headphones due to the improvement in signal to noise. Also, I don't hate Bose. Like many companies, Bose has made good, average, mediocre, bad, and terrible products when keeping value in mind. I just happen to favor their modern noise cancelling headphones and earbuds for certain applications and I think the pricing for the value that you get is good in that situation. In addition, my experience with their customer service was top notch. When my IE 20 had issues, a repair was done quickly and Bose even sent the package shipping box. Bose: Audiophile, whatever that is supposed to mean, no. Pleasing sound in noisy environments YES. Anyway, I'm curious what you all think.
What ruins sound quality the most? Noise. The Bose noise cancelling earbuds QC20 are a godsend! Who gives a shit about sound quality when you can save your ears from damaging levels of dB, receive abnormally clear calls and audio, while at the same time have the most practical and comfortable fit? In any slightly noisy environment, even just for zoning out sounds when working, they are amazing.
@@aleksander4698 I absolutely agree with what you wrote. I might add that Bose noise cancelling headphones and earbuds sound pretty decent albeit colored but pleasant overall.
The only Bose equpment I have is a pair of QC15 headphones that I bought around 2011 and I love them. I have replaced the ear muffs twice in that time. They are light and comfortable, the noise cancelling is superb and the battery life is fantastic. A single AAA cell will power them for a return trip from Sydney to London or New York, you can't do that with a rechargeable battery. I'm sure that there are better sounding headphones, but who expects high fidelity on an airplane?
Truth be told Bose is not an audiophile grade product producing company and no audiophile would buy there stuff but they are a good marketing company and do R&D and create some innovative products that work like their low profile home theatre and small and boomy sound boxes. Their engineering is solid but the quality and durability of its parts is not!
The term audiophile is just plain silly. My dad was a sound engineer, but I never heard him call himself an audiophile. BTW, you also tweek sounds within the crossovers.
But there really is a huge difference between unwinding a couple of turns from an inductor, changing a resistor value or even changing the whole crossover, and using lots of equalisation and signal processing in order to conjure a particular sound. Which is the route Bose takes.
Brawndo, your pilot point doesn't make sense here, we use Bose or Lightspeed for their noise cancelling abilities which as of now are best on the aviation market. This choice has nothing to do with the sound quality. 99% of usage is radio communication which most of the time sounds like crap no matter what headphones you use.
Your terminology makes this sound like people who like to fondle their stereos late at night with a glass of wine and a riding crop. So, yes, you are right on track here.
Chuck Evans No. I've made a serious question, since I'm not a expert on that area. And, since I'm here to learn about it (and english is not even my first language), the meaning of "philia" in my humble understanding, is "to like" something. In that case, the audio. That's why I've asked if it isn't something subjective...
Matheus Bariani great discussion, as usual, thank you TH-cam. As to your question I would agree. I think it is also about the purpose you want to use one of their products for. I wouldn't do the final mix on their headphones but use them for regular listening..
I just have the Bose stuff I found at Good Will. Audiophiles definitely have particular taste and can be snobs at times. Supposedly the next frontier in the world of some audiophiles is the reel to reel tape.
Reel to reel is a hell of a lot better than vinyl! Vinyl sucked in the 70's, and it sucks now. Inner groove distortion, wow and flutter and surface noise just to name a few things wrong with the format.
I went to the local Bose store a few months ago for some over ear headphones for on my PC, they only had 2 different types of wired headphones and 3 different sample tracks. I was unable to plug in my own music device to listen to the music I want to listen to rather than the 3 pop tracks they had one there. I left and went to a better store and they allowed me to sit there for an hour or so listening to my music on their wide range of headphones before making a purchase.
I just got the Sony WH1000XM3 Headphones because of the Noise cancellation abilities they have. They make all of the difference on long train rides. Also, they sound fantastic over bluetooth, but that‘s no wonder, since the resolution of the LDAC-Codec is better than CD quality ever was. Also, if used by cable with the battery completely drained, they still sound amazing. No DSP here.
My last two cars have had upgraded bose stereos in them. Better than stock but I personally wouldn't pay for it from new. I anyways think of bose as pub speakers. Small and loud.
Almost 10 years before, I had my first audition of Bose speakers done - I was simply amazed by what a speaker of that size could do. I used to think that bose is the best audio company in the world (Still a lot of people do think the same - No arguements, preferences matter.). However, when I thought I should buy a HT system for myself, I started to research different other options available. That is when gates were open to an different audio world. I understood about what should you expect in a HT system. It is not just looks / plug and play - I was looking for configurability, value for money and transparency. I personally did not find any of these 3 in bose. They do not specify what is the driver size / material / driver frequency response, crossover - anything for that matter.They just say that their base is thunderous... how low does it go. Does it go below 20 Hz..? no answers. What is the frequency response? They are absolute secrets. It is absolutely impossible to use or configure EQ per your liking - I can not use things like REW etc.. The worst I felt of all is, their demo stages - They do not let you change a track you know, they do not let you change the speaker position, they even did not let me to connect my mobile and observe how it sounds. They did not even let me use bluetooth. Well, when I was not even allowed to try a preferred track of mine - it makes no sense for me to spend my money in it. Charging a ton for not having configurability and transparency? I am not for it. However, I am definitely not against Bose, I still like the looks and usability aspects of bose - they are very good there.
Sound is subjective and is different to everyone, there is nothing really wrong with Bose they are for a certain market much like your iPhone, Xbox, PS4. Someone will always bad mouth a product saying that their system is better or its over priced (remember your iPhone), most likely yes but not in all situations. Yes i have a Bose Wave which is convenient for that environment which was purchased for (11 years ago) the kitchen. Would I have that same kit in my lounge... No as i would prefer something more attuned to that environment possibly Yamaha, Denon, Onyko or NAD but then some one will always comment that they are no good and over priced etc, etc,. Before you call me a Bose person and should be shot a dawn, I'm not by any means but just trying to say that we all buy things that are overpriced at times because we like it and suits our needs at the time.
Mr.Sojek what do you mean don’t hear a difference? Of course you can hear the difference. Unless you’re deaf. AirPods sound different than JBL earbuds I can tell difference. Sony sounds different than Bose qc35 there’s a difference. Shure sounds different than Westone that’s a difference. !????
@@realaudioreviews My reply was regarding using charts to determine the quality of the sound. If you had two files of different bitrate would you use a graphical chart to distinguish them if differences were unable to spot?
@@MrSojek No, for charts I do not believe that FLAC has better sound than a 320 kbps bitrate file of an MP3, AAC 256 is also impossible to distinguish. Maybe if you had 50,000$ monitor speakers, or sennheisers?
The mk2s are supremely comfortable but sound quality is markedly muffled in the mids. I guess ok if you like a very warm thick safe sound. Even worse you need the (Google/Amazon sponsored?) app to fine tune the sound or adjust the noise cancelling levels. For pure sound quality a pair of Sennheiser 100s runs rings around it.
Listening to this at work on my QC25's, a must for the noise cancelling. Granted, not the best sounding headphones I've owned. The thing is about sound is that most people, especially audiophiles, are using some sort of EQ or DSP. If you don't like the sound, tune it to your liking. Don't kid yourself, other brands do the same thing with specific tuning for the sale at the store, not just audio, but TV's as well. Ever eat a Big Mac that looked like the Ad, ever take your SUV on the perfect mountain camping trip? It's all marketing.
"Bose is targeting the mass market" *looks at prices for cheapest propper 7.1 Bose setup.... 22000,- NOK ($2715)* sounds like a mass market price alright... not. "it is the most expensive in that shop and many sees more expensive as better" im glad that Elkjøp in Norway got Klipsch, Tannoy and Yamaha standing next to Bose. and some places even got Yamaha Soavo and Klipsch Palladium speakers.
Yeah, it would be more accurate to say they're targeting the rich and edgy segment of the uninformed majority of consumers - people who like to spend on something that brings "prestige" instead of just technical performance (pretty much the same as Apple fans outside of NA).
Børre Børresen The Bose 7.1 system is actually pretty good. It adjusts itself to your crapy room acoustics. Not hi-end but good. And the Bose subwoofer actually produces bass below 80hz (where sub-woofers are only supposed to operate in) I have heard it - sounds pleasant. But then they had a live Jazz demo.
now the 7.1 was one of cheaper systems and now been removed but still the shops got em as no one is willing to pay for em. at the local shop they still have em and also a 5.1 Klispch RFII+Yamaha RX-A870 standing with it and even without sub the Klispch RF82's goes deeper than the Bose system alone but now that area is quite spacious so might be of the lack of power in the Bose amp (and sounds far more "musically"). but then... most rather bought a Samsung system for 1\10th of the price or Audio Pro Black Diamond system with matching Pioneer,Yamaha or Marantz reciver for under half the price and about the replacement for the Bose 7.1 system... the new 5.1 Lifestyle 650 system price: 48000,- NOK (5900 USD)
They're targeting the mass market not the cheap market. The mass market is people that have no clue about audio and will easily open their checkbook if you wow them. I should know i've been trhough the Bose training.
I have had three pairs of Quiet Comfort headphones. I was a global traveler and used them hard. I still have my third pair. I use I POD classics and I swear by the wired ear buds. My wife own a pair of noise cancelling ear buds and blue tooth earbuds which she adores. I own a computer sound system with sub and satellites which still sounds great. I consider myself a fairly decent audiophile. Bose certainly has their place in my gear list.
I used to listen low bit-rate MP3 music on relative cheap PC speakers, however my wife was enthusiast singer and once on whim we went to to private expensive demo to go listen songs you know in setup where CD recording is not over-boosted to clipping point and where whole setup sounded surprisingly clear. It was truly revealing to hear things that you never heard in songs and didn't even know there were there. Though B&W Nautilus sounded really great, they were too big and with price hardly anyone can afford so we went to few more "realistic" demos to check dozens different brands and ended selecting KEF R300 over JBL Studio 530. Currently using KEF R300 speakers connected to $399 Chinese SMSL M500 DAC and $60 Chinese Loxjie A10 poweramp which sound better than several times more expensive stuff from other brands. I don't consider myself audiophile as I always go for quality at affordable price but I heard Bose before, event their more expensive stuff and I would put them somewhere on bottom of the stuff I ever listened to.
I refurbished models of bose . They all sound spitty, rolled off and bloated to me. Ok for background music, but not fidelity. 901's give me a headache as there is no focus to the image. Bose drivers, whizzer cones, break up badly. The stock eq uses poor parts that can get upgraded aftermarket. Bose products Frequency response are rougly 45hz-13.5khz, but very jagged. Big midbass hump. Vocals get very glary and harsh. they are essentially midrange, and pedestrian. They could never be used to mix with, they are far too inaccurate. Bose makes 100% profit, and that's insane. It's like paying $20 for a bottle of water.
Scott Lowell, I work for a stereo repair shop that used to do lots of Bose service both in and out of warranty, but then Bose shut off their servicing dealers, which means they won't supply us with parts or service info anymore, and now Bose does all the service themselves now. They don't actually ever replace components at board level as you probably know, if it's a relatively current product and they still have replacement circuit boards they just swap an entire new board into it, and that's how they fix things. If they don't have the boards then they will take the defective product back in trade towards a newer model. I have never particularly liked the way that Bose products sound, the subwoofers in particular are awful, just Woolly and humpy and mid Bassy sounding, and usually with lots of rattles and buzzes and cabinet resonance. And I really hate it when stuff is put together with molded plastic spring clips and things that clamshell and snap together, as opposed to just using screws. when the plastic molded Parts get a little older and brittle, they have a tendency to break when you try and unsnap or unclip the pieces in order to disassemble the unit. some of their pro products sound pretty good, I've heard some of their powered speakers in years past sound pretty good for like acoustic Duo and Trio type live sound production.
I always found them to be good products for people who like to have music on the background. Not for real listeners. Because thats where all the flaws show.
OOh Bose wont like that, you giving away their secret frequencies, no, they will want you to retract that statement. tell us more so we can get an informed picture because they don't really tell us shit, wow and flutter and watts=rms. its like they don't want to embarrass themselves, and they are not alone.
First pair of headphones were some Bose AE2i's. Still use them till today (although i had to replace the ear pads) and they sound pretty good. They aren't harsh and also aren't super thumpy either as to be expected.
Bose is definately overpriced and maybe the Apple of audio brands. I think the problem that audiophiles have is the image that bose has. Its pretty hyped. But in my opinion bose is really good in building small speakers that sound good. I have a soundlink mini and its incredible how much sound comes out of it. There is no other speaker in that size that sounds and is spacefilling(not only because of the bass) like that. Therefore the sound/size ratio makes many bose produkts practible.
Michael R I agree. I used to own a jbl charge 4 but when I got my Bose minilink I gave the jbl to my son. Now I’m planning to buy Bose solo 5 for my tv.
I’ve never met a “tweak” who could listen to music ... they all listen to their equipment, in my experience. The “sunk cost” fallacy runs deep with this crowd. Bose just has to be crap, otherwise how could they justify their $1k fairy-dust unobtainium speaker cables?
One huge reason I have disliked Bose for decades is because of their marketing.. Where they basically said "You don't need HUGE expensive audio equipment (which we think is junk), our LITTLE (expensive) audio equipment is just as good or even better!" And people buy into because they have more money than sense. If I as a decently educated audio lover (but no audiophile!) try to explain to them why I feel the expensive Bose equipment they bought isn't very good they more often than not respond with "Bose said it was good and it was expensive so it must be good!" Anyone who has had that happen to them a few times learns to hate Bose. It really is a lot like Apple in that respect. Working in the IT field for 20+ years I've run into a LOT of people that think Apple can do no wrong, even when the Apple product they bought has failed, is incompatible with what they want to do or otherwise is just not the right solution. Why? Because Apple in their marketing does a great job of getting those that know nothing about their products to think they're the greatest thing since sliced bread. Apple like Bose does not rely on specs or "proof" of any kind. It's more of the "We say it's good so take our word for it" drilled into people's heads time and again. to some it just works and they know it!
It's more complicated than that. Bose made large speakers for years. The flagship 901s were only discontinued a couple years ago. They are a mainstream brand marketed to people who just want something "good" and like the name and status of a high price point. There's lots of products out there like that.
nmeunier Not disagreeing, just pointing out that I think some of the venom aimed at Bose is audiophiles that either don't understand the reasons for Bose's success or are jealous their favorite brand hasn't been able to have that level of mainstream success. Bose sounds fine to many people, especially those who wouldn't know boutique audio.
nmeunier thanks for the correction (?) no offense meant, i'm german, so my english is always "experimetal" but I think, people should be free, to buy what they want. I hope, at least, he's a good doctor. have a happy 1st of may k
I have two systems at home using Klipsch speakers powered by Onkyo amps. I’ve also owned speakers from Paradigm, Energy, Infinity, and ESS. As for Bose, I own three Bluetooth speakers and I think that’s where they excel. I own the Flex, the Soundlink Mini II, and the Soundlink Color II, and they all sound a bit better than my JBL Flip 3 for around the same price. I’ve never owned Bose home speakers, such as the 301 etc. As for speaker specs, very few specs are really useful in gauging performance. Efficiency is very important. Speaking of which, when I bought my Klipsch R-15M speakers, I was able to do some limited listening between them and the Bose 301 V. I opted for the Klipsch because they sounded better to my ears. But, the Klipsch are very efficient, so they played louder, giving them an advantage. I also looked around the back, and the Bose, sadly, didn’t look well-finished. The particle board was visible and simply painted over, while the Klipsch have a very good fit and finish. Bose Bluetooth speakers on the other hand look and feel well-built.
Great video and good story but..... Everyone is different, every ear is different and also important, everyone's got his own perception of good and bad quality. It is something very personal. I don't hate Bose and I don't hate Grundig! For my personal sound experience I like to use Quad and Bowers & Wilkins speakers. But this is very personal. I've had Technics and Kef for years and loved it. People need to learn to let anyone have fun with the stuff they like. Everyone is different and about the price?.... Nobody has the same amount of money to spend on just a stereo set. If you are happy with the sound, well.... That's all that counts... 👍
I take bose second-hand, and put in better speakers put big sub amps on their passive Subs and you can't come to my house and tell me I'm missing any frequencies.
Bose catches much heat, some of it deserved. However, in the club-level pro audio world, their mini line arrays (e.g the L-Series) changed the game for solo and small combo acoustic acts. These are expensive, but simple to tweak, easy to load-in/out, and are EQ'ed and DSP'ed to emphasize vocals using the ubiquitous Shure SM57/58 mic series and piezo pickups on acoustic-electric guitars. The L-series mini-arrays have good coverage, reasonable feedback rejection and clear intelligibility. They work better in the typically bad acoustics of a small venue than say a pair of QSC K-series, which are the current"gold standard" of traditional club PA's.
I play small clubs and I actually rejected the L series Because I needed two to get stereo. That would have made them far too expensive . I was interested in the lighter weight but I use leslie effects and chorus etc. Stereo works much better for my taste.I have no problem with equalization as I am led to believe ( by this article) that audi0philes do.
i currently work at an audio store, and spend all day pointing this out. Their headphones are good, but Sony is better right now. WH1000X are much better sounding headphones compared to QC35, cost less too, and are more fun to use. I still get paid more to sell the Bose, so not all is lost!
I own Bose acoustimass 5 and in ear. When purchasing Bose soundlink revolve +, I was disappointed in the sound and returned it for UE Megaboom... I was on a low budget, as I felt it handled the bass. I am thinking of Klipsch or Shure in ear. Under $200. 00 Any tips from you folks.
*BOSE:* _Best Overpriced Sound Equipment_
Well I'll give them credit, beats are even worse.
▐ ᴇʟᴍᴏᴅᴏ7▐ idk why Apple bought them. Maybe it's because of its music services?
Nah, just because like iphones, ipads, imacs...
Manufacturing is cheap, components are cheap, but can be sold at a high price because most people are going to buy them anyway.
B uy
O ther
S ound
E quipment
▐ ᴇʟᴍᴏᴅᴏ7▐ that's why their shit shouldn't be expensive. Apple pisses me off with that bullshit.
Apple bought Beats for Jimmy Iovine and his mega contacts with the music industry. The rest was just incidental. Also the quality of their stuff has been increasing ever since they left Monster, the masters of overpriced, underperforming shite.
I've worked in the high-fidelity loudspeaker industry since the 1970s. I'm now retired. I always worked for companies that produced loudspeakers that directly competed with Bose products. This commentary video makes too many generalized assumptions about Bose and the examples are technically vague. It should have been about five minutes long.
What looks like a "very high profit" margins in Bose designs (low cost to manufacture/high retail price) has always been irksome to Bose's competitor manufacturers and many retailers. But the technical expertise that goes into Bose product design and manufacturer is still impressive. Certainly, it's a huge advantage over the typically smaller company that hand-assembles a complicated product that inevitably fails more in proportion to that complication.
I'm sure the companies I worked for (and many other similar competing companies) made "better sounding" and/or "more accurate" loudspeakers than the Bose products made at the same time. But the respect I felt towards Bose grew over the years as I considered the company's accomplishments. This respect was buttressed by the fact that only the most recent of the companies I worked for still exists under original management.
Even with their success, Bose is under-appreciated. Bose is now a juggernaut that defies comparison with almost any other company in the audio business--certainly any company that just makes "speakers"--or "headphones"--or "car speakers". Harman International (now a Samsung subsidiary) was the only real rival.
Bose's products are bullet-proof and are remarkably consistent due to a very well-designed (and expensive to set up) manufacturing process. This is not the way "audiophile" products are created. It's a very real advantage for Bose. Bose then markets their products expertly, with profit margins large enough to ensure the company can continue to thrive and support its customer base.
On a more personal note, there's also the hundreds and hundreds of New England residents that Bose has consistently employed over the years. I've talked to many of them. As a group, they had lots of good things to say about the experience and precious little worthy of complaint.
Many of these self professed "audiophiles" listen with their eyes more than their ears. It's all inference. Just like solid body electric guitar "tonewood".
buzzcrushtrendkill Humans being humans will be swayed by their other senses (e.g. sight) and not just hearing. That’s just a fact
More nonsense. Bose always spent more on advertising than product innovations. They produce speakers for decades practically unchanged and overcharge for the privilege. If you look at the consistent critique against Bose, you see it is always the price vs performance ratio.
@@carlosoliveira-rc2xt Yours is a minority (dare I say elitist?) viewpoint. Bose has the largest R&D budget of any audio-only company (by a wide margin).The "superb performance" advantage for audiophile products just isn't relevant to a majority of loudspeaker owners. As far as "unchanged" goes, Bose constantly streamlines their product's design and manufacturing processes. The Bose 901 and 501 each must have had a dozen iterations. Sure, they all look the same, but from a manufacturer's viewpoint, each had improvements that made them a more desirable product. Not surprisingly, you probably weren't paying close attention. Also, their headphone division is famously innovative and successful.
love it to read long reviews about companies for sound products that lack the most importnat part: sound quality...
*ignored video to read comments*
wish I had as well, not very well put together and really only backs up why people dont like them some good contradiction going on in there
IBISMK2 . Synopsis
Bose EQ
Bose stuff looks good
Tsunami looming
There are videos on youtube ?
Same. The dudes weird hair was creeping me out.
Looking glass. IMO you should allow others to speak for themselves!
Audiophiles don't like Bose speakers because they are not accurate...wow that took me way less than half an hour.
And they cost more than they should
Fred Johnson Who cares? They are hifi speakers. You’re not mixing records on them. I have a pair of Neumaan kh120a’s and they are razor flat and honestly not something that’s great for casual listening.
@@Skrenja Not HiFi.
Ya. BOSE is tring alter where and when you hear sound, whicj is not worth what they think its worth.
I skipped through this thing every 3-4 minutes, waiting for the information to start.. go to the end and was not surprised, your comment has more substance than this waste of bandwidth.
I am a retired audio engineer and have been in many recording studios in North America and have never seen any Bose equipment in a professional studio. I believe Bose uses audio tricks and gimmicks to make audio sound to what most people think is good. The exception is their line of noise reduction pilot headphones, however I think they are overpriced. BTW, most studios used JBL 4311s, 4312s and 4 inch Auratones to mix with. The little Auratones were to check the mix for car stereo. Just my two cents worth.
Richard D. JBL is the best. Have never used anything but them
I agree, I use JBL 4311s from the 1980s in my home.
Richard D. What would you suggest for a Beginner in the audio engineering world?
I've had a pair of JBL L-100s since 1973 and they're still wonderful--and in perfect operating condition.
I’ve never been in studio where Bose equipment is used either. I find their sound too top & bottom for my ears which wouldn’t suit a studio anyway. Just bought some Adam speakers to mix on , bit pricy but nice.
In theory Bose "attempts to enhance" the audio quality, where an audiophile wants to hear the most accurate / pure representation of a recording, not an enhanced version.
this sums up the video.
well, last time I was on concert where Bose was used with annoying bright logos on both sides of the scene, the sound sure attempted to 'enhance' the heck out of my hearing, so much that I had to literally plug my ears with fingers. never had it that terrible before. but it was likely also local sound director's fault.
Well said... period!
Perfect summary!
Finally.... someone nail it
I would like to have this guy's ability to stretch 5 words into over 30 minutes of words; that would come handy for my essays.
@Yuto Nohdomi unpacking now
Sorry my bad. Like ur video bout audiophiles
@Dash Thiago Get a room.
BOSE: Boy Our Shit's Expensive
For audiophiles under 30, the true nemesis is definitely Beats. Oh god.... beats...
The beats go on.... and the beats go on.
Honestly I don't know why it should be a nemesis, just don't buy them.
Unlike the GPU market, audio equipement can be bought for cheap and if you want vintage stuff (especially amps) it's even cheaper.
You should know this
who cares hes still racking up millions so were the ones whos idiots not him im sure hes totally losing sleep knowing hes selling shitty headphones hahahahahahahaha
Sonos sound bars too
Jeremy Clarkson as time goes by more and more devices (mainly laptops) are being shipped with Beats Audio as the built in audio processor. You can turn it off, but then they take your low-end as hostage and compress the music anyway. So to avoid the Beats influence I need to carry around my own DA interface. Of course I'll avoid this in future.
As for headphones, my only regret is that inexperienced listeners will not know how far removed their music is from source. And all their non-hiphop music will sound subpar and they won't know why.
Essentially, all informed people (even audio lovers) hate scammers of all kinds. I think audiophiles hate Bose mostly because they dislike the way Bose misleads the general public by taking advantage of their ignorance. Bose owes its home audio success to skilled marketing and somewhat to customers who insist on having very small speakers (though even with a small size there are much better options [such as KEF] in the same price range). The 901's are the best home product Bose ever produced -- but even those are inferior to similarly priced products from other manufacturers. The size and shape of speakers should be determined by the sound they create, not the novel look they achieve. Both objective and honest, subjective testing reveal that Bose really does not have high fidelity. I sold high-end/mid-fi audio for many years and the store at which I worked had to eventually drop Bose since after people compared Bose to other, similarly priced products, they were inevitably astounded at how much better the other products sounded and we consequently very rarely sold any Bose products. Bose sells in the big box stores to people sold by the marketing rather than the sound quality.
Exactly. Every word bang on.
And a lot fits on Apple which is why the pc enthusiast community hates them so much. Though Apple is way better at this than Bose ever was.
KEF♡
Bose taking advantage of people’s ignorance? Sounds like Microsoft
Yup. They sound "impressive" at first during a demo. But, like that Beats junk, it really gets tiresome after a short while. Neutral, accurate audio is so much easier to listen to.
They're just too expensive, too manipulative, and only work "well" in a very limited environment. There's always a better option, usually for a better price and without the shady marketing.
If you're on an airplane, and want decent audio with noise cancellation, the headphones are... OK... but there is still better stuff out there, that won't irritate your ears after 15 minutes, and won't cost you >$200.
We don't hate bose....we just know better
Sony is the best hi-fi brand in the world
WarthDader74
Only if you're 12
+Alan Frayser Sir, I am in my 70's and worked for decades with selling audio equipment. During all those years I sold a lot of different brands, and experienced which ones had the best quality. Sony was definitely the brand that had fewest repairs, and the inner components was of very high quality. Sound quality was also excellent. All the negative things you hear about Sony nowadays, is not true at all and are spread by competitors.
Yeah so what's good? I have 200 to spend
Mordane Sennheiser headphones man✊🏽
I love the shop who suggested beyerdynamic headphones and said this is our demo unit, take it home and if you’re happ, come again,pay and get new ones in box. Never bought audio from another store ever since
I used to work in a stereo store in the mid to late 80's. We carried some pretty decent stuff like Klipsch, KEF, Jamo, Boston Acoustics, JBL, etc... We briefly carried Bose but quickly abandoned the idea because nobody liked them when we could compare them A to B in the same room, same music, same amp. Bose decided that we were in violation of their terms by allowing comparisons like that and terminated our agreement. We didn't care, we blew out the few Bose products we had and never looked back.
Ever since that experience, I've never been tempted to fall for the Bose marketing hype.
KEF, on the other hand was magical. I wished I could afford them.
It's like that at Best Buy. They have their own separate row of headphones so you can't go back and forth between their headphones and competitors. If consumers had such a choice, it would negate all the advertisement costs the manufacturers incurred.
Thank you for sharing that experience. I will never forget your story and it really made me look at Bose completely different. 🤔
They disallowed product comparisons! That’s quite a nail in their coffin.
At a local Fry's Electronics, Bose has always had its separate demonstration area. It is highly controlled. You can only sit or stand in a designated place, and you can only play music they have pre-selected. Comparing Bose to others is intentionally impossible.
I watched this on a 3-2-1. Still sounds ok. He's right. "Good enough"
Audiophiles don't like integrated systems; they relish picking out each component and cable and upgrading pieces of the system over time. Bose products are highly integrated, which leaves audio hobbyists with nothing to do after purchase. You don't see racers racing with automatic transmissions; enthusiast like to tweak... Also, a lot of Bose products are designed to provide background music, whereas separates tend to be used for active listening / music appreciation. Even as an audiophile, I think that for an office, back porch, or kitchen you can do a lot worse than Bose's sound, compactness, and aesthetics for the price range. They also make the best mass-marketed system-in-a-box I've heard since Cambridge Sound Work's old-school 5.1 system...
I have a Bose System in my car. It's shit.
I have Yamaha HS8 studio monitors for my home studio. It's great.
You're definitely right about hobbyists wanting to be more in tune and in control of what they love.
Car guys will buy tunable cars with manual transmissions. The average person will buy a 4-cylinder FWD compact car because they don't care.
PC guys will build their own PCs with glass side panels, RGB, and the best specs they can get for the money. The average person will buy an OEM laptop because they don't care.
It applies to any hobby. Average people will keep buying Bose because it sounds good to them, and they don't care enough for better audio. Audiophiles, however, will not.
Nonsense, Bose is utter garbage.
Audiophiles don't "hate" bose, we just prefer stuff that works differently. Bose do a lot of stuff that works well for what audio professoinals might call an untrained consumer - but they do know their market, and have a brand that they've very carefully positioned to be desirable to those that like showing off a "premium brand" on their desk or shelf. We know better. we look at empirical data and measure, and judge on performance over marketing.
This doesn't mean we hate it - that word is overused and is just more media hype
Tim Simpson what's better than Bose SoundLink 3 ? I think Sony is the best mainstream
I agree - the MDR-1000X cans are awesome. I'm editing vlog sound with a sony 7.2 set. gaming with the PlayStation headphones, and I use sony MDR-HW300 (wireless sender) when operating cameras at gigs (so I don't forget about the cable and yank the camera ever again ;) ) ... 6 sony cameras here too.. mixed with an old canon and a few blackmagic's...
I am one of those untrained customer you mentioned ..
My purpose is mostly listening songs n watching movies..
What is alternative to the costly Bose products? Please help
Personally I tend to go for the sony gear - the price is good for what you get, I like the sound space they deliver and the construction is great. The sound system/media head I have is 14 years old and going strong. The only reason I would upgrade it is for improved HDMI version for 4k/3D.
Alternatively there's been massive improvement in soundbars.
Sound is very much a personal taste thing - some people like more bass, some more mid-tone, and then the space you are going to put it in has a huge impact on how something performs.
I know this is a useless answer - but it depends on what works for your tastes.
What I will say is don't go budget, or "fancy" - make sure that what you get is solidly built, and it will last you for years. cheap stuff will rip it self to bits and end up costing more in the long run.
Nikhil Gupta
Sony is decent, though not perfect.
One pair of headphones you might want to check out are the Audiotechnica ATH M50X, I absolutely love them.
I'm a Klipsch fan myself. My media room is purely Klipsch and I love the way it sounds. Yet, I still purchase Bose Bluetooth speakers as they sound great in any environment. To me it's incredible how such an enjoyable sound can come out of a speaker that small. So in that regard, I don't mind all that digital wizardry and use it as it is intended; a portable speaker.
i like the quiet comfort lineup, and the soundlink lineup. but the bigger speakers usually is lackluster
JBL👍🏼
Love my SoundTouch 30, what an amazing sound for a Bluetooth speaker
Have you listened to Klipsch the one BT speaker
I still have the original Soundlink, with the USB receiver and remote and it still blows away any other bluetooth speaker I've owned, even the Soundlink III. I just recently discovered that using the remote you can actually get it into bluetooth pairing mode (had no idea it was bluetooth) and use it with anything other than the USB receiver. its not just quality of sound, its also overall loudness without distortion. Used it at many a party and its still going strong.
30 minutes to say what you could have said in 5 minutes.
Preach it, Mike White!
Bet that’s what’s your wife says 😂
YES....
This is the most unintelligent comment used. It seems as though it is widely used by people with no true desire for complete information/explanation of a subject. Maybe because their pea sized brain cannot comprehend more than one piece of small info at a time, only has the attention span of flea, has way too much room inside the head in which it is encased (in other words, there is a lot of empty space inside that head), or, the host of said pea brain just spends way too much time trying to be a smart ass. What ever the case may be, it is an extremely idiotic response. It wastes time, energy, and space on the page (not to mention the fact that it advertises the commenter's low level IQ). If one watches/listens to a host, and doesn't find what they were expecting from him/her, then, why not just go on to the next source without wasting everyone's time by writing a comment only worthy of a moron.
nealjazz Intelligent people do not need babble. The facts will suffice. 5 minutes is all you need. Unless you are a babbling fool then you go on and on and on and on for no good reason.
Bose is a style brand when it comes to consumer audio, much like Beats by Dre. It's better than the cheap stuff, and that's enough for most non-audiophiles. The real draw is the brand.
The real draw is the comfort of their headphones, the noice cancelling and lastly sound.
@@kaarthuisplus This! I will never understand why people behave as if Bose are like Skullkandy or Beats. They are not. They know their shit. Its just that audiophiles are not their target market. Bose QC headphones have some of the best comfort, NC and call quality I have ever seen in wireless headphones. Not to mention the sound is not that bad as people are saying. They actually sound good in most cases. Good sound is incredibly subjective anyway.
@@PurushNahiMahaPurush Exactly, I have had my bose QC 35 2s for a couple of years now and they are very comfortable (have worn them for 13h straight on a flight), have very good noise cancellation that helps me concentrate and are overall a good headphone for day to day use and are perfectly fine for the average user. You can also have best of both worlds if you want to, audiophile gear and some headphones for work or flights for example.
This entire video sounded like he was talking about those overpriced and underperforming BEATS products
Yeah but Beats look good with the track suit
I have the beats studio since 2012 and the beats pill xxl since 2013. Cant say anything bad about them. They were worth every penny.
I got my beats a few years ago. Have nothing bad to say tbh.
I know what you mean. I got a pair and the of beats studio 3’s and they stopped working on the first day.
Biggest complaint about Beats is the price for the quality. They’re poorly constructed and completely squash the high end. They are a fantastic fashion accessory though.
I sold hi-fi in the 1970's. When the Bose 501 came out, Bose invited us to a Seattle hotel to get the full skinny and demo of the new 501's. They gave all of us salespeople the pitch, then hit play on an open reel tape deck and we heard an announcer go over the design and play some audio clips of various genre's of music. The 501's sounded absolutely AMAZING. I became a huge fan of Bose - for about 15 minutes.
After the tape played and during the break they let us listen to the albums they had there I pulled out Juice Newton and played Queen of Hearts. It sounded like crap.
They had eq'd the tape to be played, specifically, on the 501's. With a normal hi-fi, they were just another mid-fi speaker. And an over-priced one at that.
Ever listen to a 901 without their special processor. Yeah, crap. They always were.
That's because the 501's were crap and I'm a bose fan. Bose has put out some garbage over time.
yeah Bose doesn't make good speakers, but they do make good EQ's
I'm sure the speakers in my QC15's don't sound that good, but by forcing you to use their hardware EQ, you wouldn't know it and they did a good job at EQing it imo
Just for your information, the EQ processor for the 901 is a crossover network unique to that speaker. And it's sophisticated enough so that you can control what comes out of the box. Every speaker you can name, outside of a single driver full range system, has a crossover designed to get a good (flat, It is hoped and claimed) response from those three separate speakers (If it's a three-way system) running in that cabinet. Take any set of speakers; I don't care how expensive and rip out the crossover from inside the speaker cabinets and see how they sound.
So true Donald, just look at the era late 60's and onward a lot of speakers sounded considerably worse than the 901's of course in todays market where DSP is used widely improvements can be made across the board. How many speakers of the 901 era actually went below 45 htz? Now even very high end setups are using subs. 901's still have the large sound stage so not just the person in the sweet spot gets the full sound.
@@sPi711 And just for your information Crossover networks and EQ are completely 2 different things. There is no crossover function going on in the 901. Each driver is running "full-range". EQ boosts or lowers frequency bands in the signal chain to get a "flat" or desired response. Crossover networks divide frequencies between drivers to send only the frequencies that each driver will reproduce. Crossovers are necessary in multi-way systems due to the fact that most higher frequency drivers can't handle the power that the lower frequency drivers can. So removing the crossover network can damage the more delicate drivers. So yes, if you remove the EQ from the 901 or the EQ from a multi way speaker, the 901 would be exposed for what it really is. A heap of really expensive Chinese paper cone drivers and plastic. I've rebuilt many of these things, I know what's inside the magic box. I've built many 2, 3 and 4 way speakers that needed zero EQ to sound fantastic.
What I don’t trust about Bose is, at their price point they don’t show their specs.
At their price you can do better. Any comparable JBL/Infinity system will have more accurate sound and be quite a bit cheaper.
If they showed all the releveant specs nobody would buy the products.
Their specs would be an embarrassment. And the one comeback they could have - "listen to us side-by-side for proof" they can't do because they don't allow that either...for obvious reasons. ;) Best to just not print the numbers and then go spontaneously deaf if anyone calls you on it. It's worked for them for decades.
Their objective is a different one. The objective is providing the best possible user experience with the least amount of effort invested on the hardware side.
That's not for me. It is probably as well the reason why they never became relevant in Germany. You see huge Bose stores in Asia, though, in prime locations where the rents are exorbitant.
In the audio segment there are plenty reputable companies. It is more that people don't know how to interpret specs. Why for example the audio disaster Beats sold so well? A buying decision made based on hero marketing, and on a quick listen that boomy bass might sound impressive. Junk for a lot of money. You can get better for half the price, i.e. from Audio Technica and Sennheiser.
Bose systems sound "good". But, to me, they don't reproduce the sound that the audio engineers want me to hear. And that is my benchmark: how closely can gear X in room Y reproduce what the engineers intended? I WANT to hear the harsh pounding of hammers on a piano. I WANT to feel the low-end of the pipe organ while watching Intersteller. I don't want Bose's representation of what THEY think I want to hear. I don't HATE Bose, I dislike what their products do to the, let's say uninformed consumer. I've learned to bite my tongue when someone wants to show me their home theater system telling me how great it sounds. I get it; sounds are subjective, and you like what you like.
You are absolutely right in that Bose does not r produce exactly as engineered but in order to actually get that reproduction you’d need a $20k system. Not exactly ideal. Everything else is just a simulation of the real thing..
Exactly. I don't like this idea of psycho acoustics. Means Bose can be a force in music industry forcing music to sound as they want it to sound.
Jose Echevarria - Isn't any speaker just "simulating" the real thing?
Smedleydog1
Not when it's using algorithms to achieve predetermined sounds of what Bos thinks the majority likes.
I think that Bose designs their speakers to sound better to non-audiophile listeners for the way that non-audiophiles experience music. That's why non-audiophiles love their Bose setups. They're high-end mini-vans, which may cost as much as a sports car but really have a different purpose.
lol "audiophiles".
I must say that the Bose mini soundlink 2 is the best balanced Bluetooth speaker I have heard for that size. There is no reason for me to even compare to others. Had it 5 years and it still works beautifully. I had the old Bose acoustimas set with bass module with a big NAD amp in 1999. They sounded pretty darn good with the right recordings and worked very well for home theater. But I did not buy for perfection. More for convenience and small physical imprint and they were great. The build quality is very solid.
100% agreed, if you're happy with the sound, that's all that matters. I also have a Soundlink Mini 1, and the original Acoustimass 5's hooked up to a Cambridge amp, plus Acoustic Energy speakers and REL subwoofer. I love my Bose gear for the sound they make, and have no qualms with the marketing that hooked me in. The sky is the limit when it comes to audiophile snobbery... eg, "if your system doesn't come close to my $100K B&W Nautilus system, don't bother talking to me".
I absolutely love the Soundlink Mini 2. If they are positioned well in the room and I know where the people listening to them will be, the sound this little thing produces is huge. But of course they're not meant for critical listening. It's convenient to set up, to move around the room and to give the "impression" of a big sound. And I don't actually care if the sound really is that big or it just pretends to be. And I see how this small box does some trickery. But if the trickery works, why would I care? ^^ 99 % of the time I listen to music it's through headphones. And I also have the QC 35 II and they're the headphones that get the most use. Do they sound good? Yes. Do they sound amazing? No. But they're sounding "good enough" while being extremely convenient, reliable, having very good ANC and most important plus for them is that they are simply the most comfortable headphones I ever had sitting on my head. But do I use them for working on my music or critical listening? Of course not. You even see it in the name of the headphones: they make the world quiet while being extremely comfortable, and that's what they're loved for.
What you failed to realize it’s how much you pay vs what others equipment you could’ve bought with better quality and would last as long as boss.
@@fabiogonzalez4413 in general this is a very complicated topic. For example when the QC35 was released, it was so innovative that there simply was no competition for ANC headphones. When the Soundlink Mini came out it was simply an amazing deal for pairing convenience with (perceived) sound quality. And now I'm looking at a BOSE system for amplification for busking because they just created the best package of convenience, portability and sound quality. But all of those products are in no way meant to be a solution for audiophiles. Do your research, put your expectations in the right spot and after that make the right purchase decision.
As a designer of audiophile product, I believe I can shed a little further light on the topic...
Bose - (as pointed out in the video) - has never considered itself an "audiophile brand."
Brands like Acoustic Research, B.A.T., Boulder, B&W, Conrad Johnson, Krell, Mark Levinson, McIntosh, Quad, Stax, V.A.C., Wilson Audio, etc. have always focused on the "less is more" concept - (putting fewer, but higher quality components in the signal path) - and on dedicated pieces - (separate amplifiers, preamplifiers, sources, processing, cabling, and speakers - such that you have the flexibility to upgrade, change or "tune" to your liking specific portions of the signal path independently of each other. The emphasis of these companies is on accuracy of reproduction - (i.e., "how close is the sound to the sound of the original performance?" or "How revealing of detail, nuance, instrumental placement, and recording environment is the sound?")
The goal of Bose has traditionally been to position itself as a "lifestyle brand" - (a là Bang & Olufsen) - with emphasis on convenience, styling, and features. Ultimate fidelity to the source is not the primary goal, as long as the sound is generally liked by non-enthusiasts - (i.e., "How good does it sound to the average listener?")
It is often said that a well-made recording will almost always sound better on an "audiophile" system, but that a poor or mediocre recording will usually sound better on a Bose. In other words, the audiophile system will reproduce exactly what it's presented with, warts and all; the Bose system is capable of making something sound "better than it is", (but only when it's not that good to begin with).
The other problem that audiophiles have with Bose is that many audio enthusiasts have multiple speaker systems - each one having different attributes; the signal processing employed by Bose speakers to achieve their response adversely affects those speakers, as well as "messing up" the signal going to any subsequent components in the audio chain.
Andrew Ryder ń
If it sounds like crap it IS
Andrew Ryder b&o Krell, Mark Levinson, Wilson are mostly junk unfortunately. Bose Professional & Panaray is of high quality, and simply one of the best. They do have different divisions. Bose consumer, and Bose Professional which includes Panaray and some speakers utilizing the B&O and JBL brand.
@@tkandme3
You have hit on an incovenient truth. Bose domestic consumer goods to me are simply unlistenable BUT..... Bose pro gear does not sound bad at all. Mark Levinson used to be some of the best you could buy but appear to have lost their way. Krell same downward spiral. Wilson is way overpriced for passive loudspeakers and has some issues. B&O is a mixed bag but that has never changed from their early days. At least they embrace active domestic loudspeaker tech.
Use DSP in new & innovative ways and remain the only HiFi in the Gugenheim museum of modern art. Their low mass phono cartridge tech was and still is plagerised by many others. Because it is good and it works. So felt I must pull you up on that.
Cheers
B&O makes very interesting tech available to many. Their ICEPower class-D amp is absolutely mind-blowing IMHO, and having this kind of amp on consumer laptops and screens is great.
You nailed it right. Been a fanatic audiophile until about stereo gave way to the surround sound era (early 2000s). I hated Bose not only because they cheat with EQ, but they also charge way more than good, honest, top of the line audio brands AND they custom tweak their store demos in the way you're denouncing it.
I believe that the demo music Bose used were recorded in an anechoic studio so that when reproduced by Bose "direct/reflected" speakers it sounded "better" than the same recording on a quality conventional system.
I agree... I did a frequency response test and the Bose failed badly...
Give me an earphone recommendation
As an owner of Bose QC 25's and Senheiser HD 280 pro's, i enjoy both for different reasons. If i want to hear accurate highs and lows in a song, i prefer the Senheisers. If i'm making music, i use the 280's so that i can understand the music better. However, when listening for fun, i prefer my QC25's. Bose is more comfortable, the noise cancelling is awesome, and they have a warm sound that i enjoy (even though it might not be "accurate").
I also have used both and still prefer Sennheiser regardless. Furthermore my Bose started to fall apart after 6 months whereas the foam on my Sennheisers lasted over 3 years.
I stopped using QC25 regularly as I just knew they would break easily... Just not lasting material. You could say I'm just "rationing" usage.
bought klipsch about 15 years ago still perform as well as when they were bought. i rate them A+
In my country (Czech Republic), the main problem with Bose is, that it's so overpriced, that only little group of people even know that Bose exists. Normal people just don't care about Bose, because of the price. Proffesionals thinks that Bose is just super expensive toy and only people, that sometimes buys one of Bose headpones are hardcore Apple fans.
I have bose and samsung
Pretty universal sentiment in any country…
I have a pair of probably 30 year old 10.2’s. I’ll never get rid of them. Do they sound as good as some other things out there? No, but the nostalgia factor is there and they are unique and I enjoy the sound on specific music.
With the right AMP set up, they do sound the best still.
I always thought Beats by Dr. Dre is the villain/archnemesis of audiophiles.
I'm not an audiophile, and only a few minutes in, but he seems to dislike Bose because they market their products as high end as more professional and higher quality companies.
Beats knows what it is. It's for middle schoolers who want bass, bass, and more bass.
Let us use a food analogy.
Beats is Burger King and BOSE is taco Bell.
Audiophiles are people who would eat at decent restaurants that use high quality ingredients.
Get it?
Beats by Dre is McDonalds food being sold at Applebee's prices. Bose is Applebee's food being sold at steak house prices. There's hate enough for both.
youAbajajTube That's fucking bullshit, most audiophiles are hiveminded idiots like yourself. Morons like you will bitch about mainstream brands while coveting thousand dollar cables.
Game: Find the Bose peddler in this tread.
I don’t know why TH-cam recommends old content but I do have a comment. Bose has done a brilliant job. They are a company that’s in it to make money. They are experts. They have clear target markets. They have convinced the average person their products are great. They still sound better than anything the average person has heard. Think about other industries such as Harley Davidson. They have taken a product that has changed little over the decades and has built a following that is unprecedented in business. You still have to have a product that’s good enough to get people buy. They both are experts selling to their market demographics and creating exceptional perceptions. They have spent a lot of money and time telling average people their speakers are exceptional and many average consumers associate Bose with high end quality. That’s what they call great marketing.
In the late 80's early 90's I liked what Bose was doing. the direct reflecting concept was an interesting one to me then because I was looking for that "live in my living room" sound. I owned 301's and 201's. Around 1990/ 1991, I was a big fan of the sub-woofer/ satellite engineering concept and believed that moving frequencies below 80Hz to a dedicated stand alone cabinet was a wise choice because the human ear cannot hear directionally below 80Hz and by doing this you free up the possibility of handling the mids and highs with more specifically designed cabinets, drivers, crossovers, and amps to better reproduce a full spectrum of sound. Then Bose debuted the Acoustimass system. My own uncle was taken in by the marketing hype put forward by Bose and he dropped over $1000 on a speaker system for their house. One 5 minute listen and I had to be taken aside by the family and told not to tell uncle G what they had done to him. He liked it, and was proud of it, so let him have his enjoyment. The tiny little speakers for the highs and mids were so cheap and in tiny little plastic swivel boxes they couldn't reproduce audio anywhere near the frequencies above 80Hz so they had to set the crossover higher sending lower midrange to the so-called "subwoofer" box. Now the "sub" was completely directional. I could hear the poor thing over in the corner behind the loveseat huffing and puffing away. What a scam. It was clear, Bose did have engineering prowess, they did have a marketing department up to their elbows in ideas about how to turn a profit, and they did have products that could produce sound that could "trick" the uneducated or the naive into shelling out cold hard cash for inferior designs and sub-par sound quality. At that point it was clear to me that Bose was the Ponzi scheme of the audio world. Preying on weak, impressionable, underinformed and uneducated consumers, particularly the elderly, like my Uncle G. No people, that's not how it is supposed to work. A real sub-sat system that has great drivers in well designed enclosures with expertly engineered crossovers made with quality parts can be the pinnacle of accurate, transparent sound reproduction. Once you have heard it and appreciated it, you cannot stand what Bose does to the consumer. It's unconscionable, and it should be considered borderline fraud.
Way back when I purchased my Bose 901’s comparing them to the JBL L100’s, I loved both of them but bought the 901’s. The kicker was both speakers were being driven by a Bose amplifier putting out around 275 watts RMS which I didn’t buy then and is no longer available. Seeing that the 901’s can handle 450 watts RMS compared to 200 watts for the JBL’s, in today’s market it will cost a fortune for an amplifier to listen to the 901’s as I did. I called Bose for a solution to my dilemma and their suggestion was to buy a new amplifier Bose now makes. When I checked out it’s specs, for around $700 you get 80 watts RMS maximum per channel. At this point I will either leave my 901’s in my cedar chest or sell them least I run across a 700 watt 2 channel power amp some non audiophile have to Goodwill for a new surround sound receiver.
correction: donated to Goodwill
I am not anti-Bose as I still like their Wave radios and their $150 sound link which I compared to more expensive blue tooth speakers. Bose sounded the best in this category. Wait for a sale if you can. Micro-center had the Sound Link for $125 about 3 weeks ago.
Spot on. And THAT is why we dislike Bose. Not that we want someone to hate.
Bose philosophy is psychoacoustics, meaning they build their speakers to sound the way they think the listener wants to hear the music. Ok. So how is that any different than a music producer who records (mixes, equalizes, autotunes) the music in a way they think it sounds best? I don’t at all get the audiophile’s argument. I know what I like I.e clean frequency separation, bass not overly boosted, crisp highs, etc. but I’m not a snob about it.
Bose is the best, you ppl are just hearing things that really doesn't exist but arbitrarily created in your own mind.
Samson Su agreed
The way it is different is that, when you listen to rock, jazz, pop etc. someone had done the mastering during the recording, and here it comes the difference, when a rock band records and masters its recording it is according to the music they are playing, when a pop singer records its song the mastering is done according to his song, thus making the mastering settings different from each other, when you play it on your sound system and the system itself fiddles with the EQ settings it turns crap, as those EQ settings might be suitable for rock, but truly would not be suitable for let's say classic music.
@@hristohristov5082 Exactly!
BOSE is ok, just overpriced. It's just med fi and there is a lot of med fi stuff that's just as good for half the price. My biggest problem is SONY, not BOSE. SONY is MUFFLY! They make the worst speakers I have ever heard.
Beats by Dr. Dre - "Hold my beer"
Heh, even deaf people hate those
Where can you get the " hold my beer" edition? Is it limited?
Win of lose, we hit the bose.
Martin Lindgren haha
Peple get hung up on the 901s, forgetting about the Bose floor-standing speakers like the 601s, 501s, 10.2s, 8.2s, etc. These all have discrete woofer and tweeter combinations, and received good reviews in audiophile publications. I recently refoamed the 4 each 8" woofers in an otherwise pristine set of 601 Series II speakers, and they turned out to be a pleasant surprise, especially compared to the fussy 901s! Just watch the prices on 601 Series III speakers, they're selling for unreal numbers!
Heard 5 min of what you said. Not much made sense to me.. companies like Tannoy, b&w, kef, svs, klipsch or in that alignment, take pure sound quality in consideration first, simple as that. Bose is more of a lifestyle companie, they use a lot of dsp to camuflage the inferior sound that theire speakers produce. To some people thats ok and it will sound nice, but for people that understand and expect the full frequency array of sounds will imidiatly reject the sound of bose products because they know that its an artificial sound that they are listing to. People that dont care about true sound quality or never heard it will think that bose equipment sounds awesome because they simply dont know better.. its easy to understand..
That pretty much sums up exactly what he said...
Sstew ok then.. i guess he entered in detail, but i was a bit confused in the begining..
Just recently purchased the Bose quiet comfort 30 and I am really loving them, sound quality is perfect for me because the most important aspect of these headphones are the noise cancelation and the Bluetooth features. For the type of work I do they are perfect.
Rock Man v I am using Sennheiser headphones (open type) fir work at home, Bose QC 15 (or so) for work while travelling, ans also Phillips and one other well known Brand noise cacellation headphones. I love the Phillips ones, but their problem is that they catch cell phone signals. So by and large I am most satisfied with the Bose ones.
Rock Man Glad you enjoy them but don't listen to Sony's or especially Bowers and Wilkins' alternatives unless you want to suffer from buyers remorse when it comes to sound quality.
One thing Bose definitely has over the competition is comfort though. They're light and very comfy.
olgil I tried those and the Bose QC30 (buds) and QC35 (cans) sound better. No remorse here.
The only Bose product I've personally ever purchased was a cute little orange Bluetooth speaker for my wife, small enough to fit in her purse and charges via a normal micro USB connection. I bought it without even hearing it, it was the size and color I new she would like, the sound of quality of a small speaker certainly was going to suck no matter what. I gave to her as a present, and helped her to set it up, and was AMAZED at the sound that little dingy speaker could make! Absolutely amazed! I paid $80 or $90 for the speaker, which was certainly a bit (but not too bad) for a small portable Bluetooth speaker, but I think it was worth every penny. And this comes from a certified Bose hater....
The speaker is a "Bose SoundLink Micro, Portable Outdoor Speaker" ... and yes, it's weatherproof. For someone who wants a very small Bluetooth speaker with amazing sound, I can't recommend this little guy highly enough.
But when my wife is at home, she prefers connecting to my $300 Marshall Kilburn II Portable Bluetooth Speaker... :-)
From a career audiophile in both consumer and professional audio and live sound instructor and engineer (operator)...You can’t fool with the laws of physics. If you attempt to make up for a deficiency in one area, there WILL be a trade off somewhere else. Bose practices this regularly to appeal to “the masses” who don’t care about those trade offs and are willing to pay that premium. Audiophiles (not the masses, the boys club as it were who by the way are also willing to pay a premium) won’t compromise with that signal path and want it to be pure and untouched. I’d say that it’s just a base philosophical difference. Neither side appreciates the other’s approach.
That being said, my wife also doesn’t like having the big speakers and all the separate components in the living room. Yes, they’re still there (it was a condition of our marriage). THAT being said, I will admit to owning a pair of Bose noise cancelling headphones (a Christmas gift from my wife...for long flights and for falling asleep to her snoring, and not any kind of critical listening) and a Bose Bluetooth speaker (a premium from my cellular provider) for the garage workshop.
Everybody has a better way to build a mousetrap, to wit...every brand regardless of its philosophical approach to “good sound” has it’s appropriate application. Don’t hate!
I’m not an audiophile. I can appreciate good sound and happen to really like Bose, but that’s just me. Everyone’s opinion is different, and I respect all of them.
I agree. I am not an audiophile and I have loved Bose products but I find this super interesting!
There are times where I run in a venue professional audio which has a divider with another Entertainer on the other side. When they run a Bose system I have to turn mine down because limitations of what those speakers are problem is they can't match spls traditional speakers and I have to turn my volume down and frequencies down because they can't keep up
It's not that Bose sounds bad per se, but you can build a system for the same price that would likely change you mind radically.
i like bose...I love Klipsch.
To sum up every other comment: because you're just an average peasant that doesn't care. Audiophiles are so much better than you
As my Dad always said, $1000 speakers for people with $0.10 ears
My father was in the retail audio business and friends with Dr. Bose. If you looked at his history you would know that his first concept was to create greater high frequency dispersion to increase the "sweet spot" as you walked perpendicular to the speakers. The first popular FM tabletop radio was the KLH 21. I still have one. Sounds great. The Bose wave radio is a phenomenal product, way ahead of its time, back then. What Dr. Bose did, whether you like his products or not, was push the industry to his concept. Go to any concert. They typically have high frequency speakers pointed in overlapping directions to reinforce his original concept. He was a firm believer that no 2 people hear the same thing the same way. Therefore eg. one person likes Polk, the other JBL. Neither one is right. That's audio
I'll take Polk and JBL over Bose crapola. I had a set of Polk 5s way back when. They sounded very good (esp with some real power). Never heard a Bose system that was any good.
Thanks for making an objective video about BOSE. I'm a musician and BOSE makes portable PA systems for working Musicians designed for live Gigs (Vocals, Guitar, Keys, Bass Guitar, etc.) For years, I used PA systems by the standard musician gear manufacturer's: Fender, JBL, etc. This gear was always heavy and cumbersome and one day after playing two gigs on the same day, on one of the hottest days of the year. I thought there has to be a better way. I went to my local musician's gear store with this question and was introduced to the BOSE PA system. It was EXPENSIVE. But I could return it in 30 days if I wasn't happy. Compared to my previous set up: The Bose was light, portable, and super easy to set up, and it sounded GREAT! At every gig, I played customers (IE: Audiences) would compliment me on the audio quality. So would the venue owners who booked me. Every musician who worked with me agreed that it was the best sounding PA system they have ever used in a live application. In the past, I would play a restaurant, and there would always be someone who complained that we were a bit too loud and could we please turn it down a bit. This stopped after I got the BOSE. No one ever thought we were too loud, yet everyone in the restaurant, including the owner, said they could hear us perfectly. As a working musician, it was the best investment I ever made.
Bose released a little mini PA (BOSE S1 Pro) designed for the solo musician. I heard it at the NAMM show and was very impressed. I did a review of it on my channel, and an "Audiophile" who saw the video LOST HIS MIND. He started trolling and harassing other commenters on my channel. I had to ban him. (and delete his comments). He didn't seem to understand that all of his precious Audiophile manufacturer's weren't making equipment for musicians in live applications.
For this reason, the term "audiophile" has always been synonymous with A**H*** for me ever since.
no. no musician in the history of the world has ever ever ever used bose equipment in a live show or gig, that includes dj/ nightclub/ music group...ever!! your obviously a paid bose employee shill.... ok... we all get it...
I buy Bose headphones for the noise cancelling technology. Sound quality makes no difference _to me_ above a certain level, but a long plane journey virtually requires my QCs.
The Sony ANC headphones will sound better imho
@@benedicvelasco The Sony 1000xm3 sound bassy and muddy. Same for the inear version. I sent them back and kept my QC35ii.
WTF ,the sound quality of Sony are a complete mudfest
I'm a guy that cares about sound not an audiophile extent but as the guy in the vid said
I know how I want my sound..to sound
Now I know that sound is a subjective thing but there things which are objective
Such as the CLARITY of the sound and how heavy the bass is
Now,SONY lacks clarity and sound muffled AF compared to Bose .. clearly
Yes Sony xm3,2 may have heavier pounding bass but unless you're a basshead
It just drowns out the rest of the frequencies
STOP SAYING SONY HAS BETTER SOUND!!!!!
I absolutely LOVE my Sony headphones for their sound quality. With that said, for going on a plane, my QC's come into play because I still have yet to own a pair of cans that can do noise cancelling as good as my Bose headphones.
@@leroyrs True, I tried my friend's Sony xm3 and I got dizzy in no time. I'm gonna try out the QC35ii and NC 700 in their experience store soon.
Had a pair of bose 901 series 2 with a 12 band equalizer; they sounded amazing! Sound was so clean....one of the reasons; no distortion from crossovers that were used in conventional speakers.
Need a LOT of power to run the closed (no venting) series I and II
I'm listening to this on my Bose QC35's and I love them! They are insane for noise cancellation
The over the ear headphones or any head or earphones by Bose is the only that makes them better but their home theatres or anything else by them is just trash compare to other brands out there and just way over prized. We just get fooled in to buying Bose because of how much money they put in to marketing. You will be mind blown if you listen to high end marantz or Yamaha.
well rip my 370€ I want to fucking die now
I’m listening on my bose overear. And he sounds great. Lolll
May be some people considered that high price as the single point proofing high audio quality. They did not notice obvious difference of concept expressed in word Lifestyle - while that was the advantage to pay. I do not think Bose fooled people as it was nor recommended to declared audiophiles for which BOSE always had another shelve. .
Even sounds amazing
I have a TEAC streamer, Marantz amplifier and Dynaudio speakers and can heartily recommend all of them. All have brilliant quality in their own right, are excellent for the price and the clarity of the Dynaudio speakers is well matched to the warmth of the Marantz amplifier. Corner-cutting, over-priced, data-hiding, psycho-acoustic, deceptive marketing, doesn't anywhere near cut it against these genuine quality manufacturers using high quality components and design work.
The talk at the end about basic tribalism is the truth of it. I am a PC enthusiast and an audiophile. I try to refrain from doing it, but it's hard not too sometimes.
I have problems with Bose for many of the same reasons. The same goes for quite a few other audio brands, but the point being that it's still tribalism at the end of the day no matter how justifiable.
I wasn't arguing whether it was justifiable or not.
I don't like Bose or Beats because I belong to a more sophisticated listening group, audiophiles. I really don't. Yes, audiophiles do know a thing or two about sound equipment, but it doesn't take away from the idea that an audiophile is part of a group/type of people aka a tribe. It's not a derogatory or condescending thing. Human's "social intelligence" is what set us apart from most other things, especially other great apes, on this planet. Tribalism is very much a part of that.
"No highs, no lows. Must be Bose" :P
Ahahahaha! All these phrases and acronyms for BOSE are great, I'm dying here!
IDK when this originated, but I remember hearing it in the early 90's.
I remember it from the 70s. The 901 was the main reason why.
Bose is like "boses" in Filipino which means voice, all the meat of the voice is in the Mids, No highs, No lows, must be Bose :)
So basically the opposite of anything labelled as "gaming" when it comes to audio. It'll have painfully crisp highs and stomping lows, but no real mids.
Makes me wonder what would happen if Bose made a gaming audio product... It'll either sound amazing or make no sound at all.
The title drew me in but I just don't think one needs over half an hour to say why
If Bose is popular brand, audiophiles won't like it because it's popular. You can't be cool if you like what everybody else likes.
I judge products based on their sound, and their sound alone. I don't care much about a brand name or build quality. If a product uses cheap parts but manages to make it sound better than a more traditionally built speaker with higher quality parts, I will pay more for that product. I can't speak for all Bose products, but I am a huge fan of the Bose Soundtouch 300. BestBuy sets up these demos in random locations and have no custom layout to the space in which they are placed. Owning one, I can tell you that it sounds just as good at home as it does in the store. Can you get better? Obviously, but in my opinion it's very much worth the cost.
That said, I have definitely heard other Bose products that sounded exceptionally 'meh' with a very disgusting price tag. I can sympathize to the hate towards them for trying to use their superiority complex to overcharge for cheap products. As was stated, it's fairly similar to Apple. Still, I'd suggest judging each product for yourself based on how they perform rather than shunning the name.
BOSE stands for Buy Other Sound Equipment.
Branded Overpriced Sucky Equipment?
Hahaha
Beginners Only Scam Execution
Bad Output Sound Equipment
uh, Bacteria-ridden Oozing Scab Entree??? idk
No it's big old sexy elephant 🐘
Orleans Better Order Something Else
I don't know about the rest of the world, but here in Denmark many of us who are autistic and are sensory sensitive uses them to block out sound. Many of us are sensory sensitive where light, sound, smell, taste and touch feels much more extrem.
Having the Bose Quiet Comfort 35 for me, I love it. That I on an app can change how much sound I can block out. Sometimes I play low music, but really... It's just about blocking out a very noisy world. And for that the Bose are great.
Try the new Sony 1000 m3 it was reviewed as a better noise cancelling headphone compared to the bose 32 quiet comfort and is cheaper priced.
Yeah as an autistic man, I got the Sony WH-1000X mkiii to cancel out noise when I'm at home in a household of 6 people because it allows me to isolate myself while still having pretty great sound quality by comparison.
wtf so demark is the country of autistic people? i dint know that sorry for you
None of my gear would be considered "audiophile" level. I'm a bang-for-your-buck price/performance guy. So it's not just audiophiles who think Bose sucks.
I use sennheiser hd25 headphones. Flat response, loud if needed, comfortable and you can buy every part to repair them. Mine are about 15 years old and they’re used every day
nikki callaghan me too! Decent cans m8 🎶
I've been using Sennheiser for over four decades. Good cans. Studio quality.
nikki callaghan, Sennheisers are good; AKG 'phones are also good, at least the old ones are, mine go back several decades plus. The best sounding headphones I ever had were Stax electrostatics, I forget the model but they weren't driven via a Transformer from the amplifier's speaker output, instead I had a Stax preamp that also had a class A headphone amp built into it specifically designed to drive those phones and they were magnificent. They definitely have limits to how loud you can play them, but they sure sounded fine! Unfortunately, when I sold the preamp I couldn't use the headphones by themselves so they went with the preamp. I believe Stax is now out of business, but I remember that some years back they had a tube type driver amp and matching dedicated electrostatic phones that cost something like a couple Grand, I bet they were good, but I never heard them and I certainly couldn't have afforded them.
I think PC enthusiasts (Myself included) hate Alienware more than Apple. Apple does plenty of things right, and they are "high end" in a way. They have a very clean, user friendly interface, and a software/hardware combo that just works. Alienware on the other hand just over charges for every desktop PC they make.
brickson98 MotovlogsAndGames haha. The first thing I thought was dell.
To be fair, their monitors are pretty great, though. Still very expensive obviously, but more reasonable than their towers.
na i hate apple more. alienware is still a pc.
Alienware.... LOL.... Paying for gimmicks.....
PC would be Dell / Alienware
Android would be Apple
My favorite catchphrase from when I sold hifi gear: "Bose - Better sound through marketing." 😁
Bose products biggest asset isn't quality but rather the very effective mass marketing behind it.
BOSE is OK, but there is much better equipment for the money that sounds noticeably better. The BOSE 901's, in the right setup and placement, did sound excellent. That was my favorite BOSE product. By the way, love the Mac Color Classic in the backround!
9 three dollar midrange drivers do not make woofers and tweeters
I knew a guy whose father bought a 901 speaker system. I visited them and listened to it, because I had heard that those speakers were really expensive and really good. What I can say is that they sounded "exciting" due to all the sound reflected off the walls etc., which was really nice if you listened to some live concert recordings. But they definitely did not sound as good as a decent (and cheaper) pair of standard floor-standing speakers when listening to normal music.
901 is code for “sucker born every minute”.
What would be the replacement to a set of QC35 with noise cancellation with 20+ hours battery life?
Sony.
B&O
I think a lot people see friends and family buying Bose or Apple and feel like those companies are using marketing and pricing structures to prey on the public's general illiteracy in terms of audio equipment or computer hardware.
No, some of us are adults and can make a decision of our own.
Even if it's a really poor one.
If Bose is suing or threatening people who post negative reviews, that's reason enough to not give them any money, regardless of how good their products might be. Screw these shady mafia-like companies.
willyolio There is a German word böse, which means bad or evil so the name Bose fits the outfit quite well.
Funny cause its true. The name says it all.
Can you provide evidence or proof?
@@david1235102
SERIOUSLY? If relatated to the german def for B'O'SE the O is pronounced EW & look it up on line or in any German/English dictionary.
If related to threatened litigation unless it went to court there would be no records you could check. Aside from newspaper microfilm records if it made the news. Aside from records of a writ being issued if settled before trial or out of court. Good luck with that!
Bingo. This was the biggest reason. They vanished from the audio press because they actively pursued a chilling effect by suing anyone who wrote anything negative. Same shit people do here on YT when they strike videos they don't like. Bose was a bunch of trolls.
Boring. This guy cured my insomnia! Been up for 32 hrs without feeling sleepy but this guy has helped put me to sleep. Thanks Dudr! Goodnight.
Take some Bose equipment apart and you will quickly realize the contempt is well earned. Lots of poorly cast plastic, particle board, proprietary components and they will NOT freely provide a schematic. If it breaks, it's a throwaway. Think; a Radio Shack quality company with a high-power marketing organization.
You must be young. There was a time when Radio Shack audio equipment including their speakers, were fairly well regarded at their price point. None of it was considered throwaway.
Yep...so young that I can still remember when the local Radio Shack had a tube tester, where I could test the tubes for my HeathKit Mohawk radio (which I helped my father build). What I remember best about Radio Shack's stuff was that the outer cases (their clock-radios, record players, and headphone amplifiers to name a few) where typically "glued" together. Makes it a bit difficult to open up for repairs. That is the very definition of a throw-away item. Then, again, if the consumer can't get through the glue'd-together plastic case, how can he make an assessment the poor quality components and terrible assembly techniques that were shoe-horned into it? Clever marketing...just like Bose.
"...Bose instead looks at it from the perspective of how can we make the speaker sound better to the listener?"
THAT'S THE POINT -_-
Watching this with my Bose headphones lol
Me too
@Rusty Andrews point blank period they sound good. Never found a pair of consumer headphones that are better. Everyone is obsessed with bass and bose doesn't make bass heavy headphones. They're more for vocals and detail
@@emanuellgustea122 So you never tried out more than Bose stuff? :)
@@biboKralle i have. I've tried sony, skullcandy, sennehiser, jbl. Stuff like that
@@emanuellgustea122 oof. Skullcandy is junk. Sennheiser has a huge product lineup of varying use cases, and can be fantastic or shit depending on your use case. You should try the AudioTechnica ATH-M50x cans with a Fiio DAC/amp (I use a Fiio i1, but they are discontinued). I’ve compared them side by side with Bose headphones and they’re magnitudes better for the same price.
Theres also those people who think they are elite. They think they can hear a difference when they cant, can see drop frames when they cant. They invest so much time in to their hobby that they get easily insulted by the smallest issue.
If you look it up, Amar G. Bose sued critics who didn't like his products. And another reason is his speakers' weird configurations. Remember the 901? tEach one had 9 speakers, that cost about $4. apiece! Once kids found out where to get those speakers, and how to set a graphic equalizer to get the same response curve, college kids practically wore out the supplier of those speakers, building their own versions of it.
robertm2000 Sued for criticizing ther mediocre headphones? More pathetic than I thought.
I think for the modern models noise cancelling headphones and earbuds (QC 25/ 35/ IE 20), Bose is right now the best for cancelling noise but for pure sound quality, they are merely adequate. However, in really noisy environments like inside an airplane, mowing the lawn, using the vacuum, the noise cancellation more than makes up for the sound quality. Overall, the modern noise cancelling headphones and earbuds sound really good in certain applications and are superior to traditional over the ear headphones due to the improvement in signal to noise. Also, I don't hate Bose. Like many companies, Bose has made good, average, mediocre, bad, and terrible products when keeping value in mind. I just happen to favor their modern noise cancelling headphones and earbuds for certain applications and I think the pricing for the value that you get is good in that situation. In addition, my experience with their customer service was top notch. When my IE 20 had issues, a repair was done quickly and Bose even sent the package shipping box. Bose: Audiophile, whatever that is supposed to mean, no. Pleasing sound in noisy environments YES. Anyway, I'm curious what you all think.
What ruins sound quality the most? Noise.
The Bose noise cancelling earbuds QC20 are a godsend! Who gives a shit about sound quality when you can save your ears from damaging levels of dB, receive abnormally clear calls and audio, while at the same time have the most practical and comfortable fit? In any slightly noisy environment, even just for zoning out sounds when working, they are amazing.
@@aleksander4698 I absolutely agree with what you wrote. I might add that Bose noise cancelling headphones and earbuds sound pretty decent albeit colored but pleasant overall.
Try Sony 1000mx3 and talk
@@aleksander4698 The Sony have better sq.
A 30 minute video just to explain that 1) Bose is good but overpriced and 2) the company puts crap speakers into overengenered enclosures.
Yeah basically. And that's why it's a good video
over-engineered*
Yeah what a waste of time. 5 mins and I’m done.
The only Bose equpment I have is a pair of QC15 headphones that I bought around 2011 and I love them. I have replaced the ear muffs twice in that time. They are light and comfortable, the noise cancelling is superb and the battery life is fantastic. A single AAA cell will power them for a return trip from Sydney to London or New York, you can't do that with a rechargeable battery. I'm sure that there are better sounding headphones, but who expects high fidelity on an airplane?
Truth be told Bose is not an audiophile grade product producing company and no audiophile would buy there stuff but they are a good marketing company and do R&D and create some innovative products that work like their low profile home theatre and small and boomy sound boxes. Their engineering is solid but the quality and durability of its parts is not!
The term audiophile is just plain silly. My dad was a sound engineer, but I never heard him call himself an audiophile. BTW, you also tweek sounds within the crossovers.
But there really is a huge difference between unwinding a couple of turns from an inductor, changing a resistor value or even changing the whole crossover, and using lots of equalisation and signal processing in order to conjure a particular sound. Which is the route Bose takes.
You will not find Bose or Beats in any recording studio!
David, yet that's a silly stance to take, given that a lot of people will be listening to your music through those types of speakers.
yeah, I guess pilots are stupid to like Bose. There are no such thing as "Audiophiles". They weren't born with a set of special ears.
Brawndo, your pilot point doesn't make sense here, we use Bose or Lightspeed for their noise cancelling abilities which as of now are best on the aviation market. This choice has nothing to do with the sound quality. 99% of usage is radio communication which most of the time sounds like crap no matter what headphones you use.
Isn't audiophilia subjective?
Your terminology makes this sound like people who like to fondle their stereos late at night with a glass of wine and a riding crop. So, yes, you are right on track here.
Chuck Evans No. I've made a serious question, since I'm not a expert on that area. And, since I'm here to learn about it (and english is not even my first language), the meaning of "philia" in my humble understanding, is "to like" something. In that case, the audio. That's why I've asked if it isn't something subjective...
isn't pedophilia subjective?
Just like paedophilia
Matheus Bariani great discussion, as usual, thank you TH-cam.
As to your question I would agree. I think it is also about the purpose you want to use one of their products for. I wouldn't do the final mix on their headphones but use them for regular listening..
I just have the Bose stuff I found at Good Will. Audiophiles definitely have particular taste and can be snobs at times. Supposedly the next frontier in the world of some audiophiles is the reel to reel tape.
Reel to reel is a hell of a lot better than vinyl! Vinyl sucked in the 70's, and it sucks now. Inner groove distortion, wow and flutter and surface noise just to name a few things wrong with the format.
I went to the local Bose store a few months ago for some over ear headphones for on my PC, they only had 2 different types of wired headphones and 3 different sample tracks. I was unable to plug in my own music device to listen to the music I want to listen to rather than the 3 pop tracks they had one there. I left and went to a better store and they allowed me to sit there for an hour or so listening to my music on their wide range of headphones before making a purchase.
I just got the Sony WH1000XM3 Headphones because of the Noise cancellation abilities they have. They make all of the difference on long train rides. Also, they sound fantastic over bluetooth, but that‘s no wonder, since the resolution of the LDAC-Codec is better than CD quality ever was. Also, if used by cable with the battery completely drained, they still sound amazing. No DSP here.
I recently inherited a ‘Bose’ power amplifier from 1980 (its really good). But it turned out to be made by musical fidelity!
No matter how you tweak or process or EQ it, I'd like to know how a few 4 1/2 inch speakers can produce a strong 35hz tone.
My last two cars have had upgraded bose stereos in them. Better than stock but I personally wouldn't pay for it from new. I anyways think of bose as pub speakers. Small and loud.
Almost 10 years before, I had my first audition of Bose speakers done - I was simply amazed by what a speaker of that size could do. I used to think that bose is the best audio company in the world (Still a lot of people do think the same - No arguements, preferences matter.).
However, when I thought I should buy a HT system for myself, I started to research different other options available. That is when gates were open to an different audio world. I understood about what should you expect in a HT system. It is not just looks / plug and play - I was looking for configurability, value for money and transparency.
I personally did not find any of these 3 in bose.
They do not specify what is the driver size / material / driver frequency response, crossover - anything for that matter.They just say that their base is thunderous... how low does it go. Does it go below 20 Hz..? no answers. What is the frequency response? They are absolute secrets. It is absolutely impossible to use or configure EQ per your liking - I can not use things like REW etc.. The worst I felt of all is, their demo stages - They do not let you change a track you know, they do not let you change the speaker position, they even did not let me to connect my mobile and observe how it sounds. They did not even let me use bluetooth. Well, when I was not even allowed to try a preferred track of mine - it makes no sense for me to spend my money in it. Charging a ton for not having configurability and transparency? I am not for it. However, I am definitely not against Bose, I still like the looks and usability aspects of bose - they are very good there.
Sound is subjective and is different to everyone, there is nothing really wrong with Bose they are for a certain market much like your iPhone, Xbox, PS4. Someone will always bad mouth a product saying that their system is better or its over priced (remember your iPhone), most likely yes but not in all situations. Yes i have a Bose Wave which is convenient for that environment which was purchased for (11 years ago) the kitchen. Would I have that same kit in my lounge... No as i would prefer something more attuned to that environment possibly Yamaha, Denon, Onyko or NAD but then some one will always comment that they are no good and over priced etc, etc,. Before you call me a Bose person and should be shot a dawn, I'm not by any means but just trying to say that we all buy things that are overpriced at times because we like it and suits our needs at the time.
sound is actually objective, using charts and measurements. You clearly dont know anything of what youre saying LMAO
Do you always base your opinion on charts and measurements when you don't hear the difference?
Mr.Sojek what do you mean don’t hear a difference? Of course you can hear the difference. Unless you’re deaf. AirPods sound different than JBL earbuds I can tell difference. Sony sounds different than Bose qc35 there’s a difference. Shure sounds different than Westone that’s a difference. !????
@@realaudioreviews My reply was regarding using charts to determine the quality of the sound. If you had two files of different bitrate would you use a graphical chart to distinguish them if differences were unable to spot?
@@MrSojek No, for charts I do not believe that FLAC has better sound than a 320 kbps bitrate file of an MP3, AAC 256 is also impossible to distinguish. Maybe if you had 50,000$ monitor speakers, or sennheisers?
The mk2s are supremely comfortable but sound quality is markedly muffled in the mids. I guess ok if you like a very warm thick safe sound.
Even worse you need the (Google/Amazon sponsored?) app to fine tune the sound or adjust the noise cancelling levels.
For pure sound quality a pair of Sennheiser 100s runs rings around it.
Listening to this at work on my QC25's, a must for the noise cancelling. Granted, not the best sounding headphones I've owned.
The thing is about sound is that most people, especially audiophiles, are using some sort of EQ or DSP. If you don't like the sound, tune it to your liking.
Don't kid yourself, other brands do the same thing with specific tuning for the sale at the store, not just audio, but TV's as well. Ever eat a Big Mac that looked like the Ad, ever take your SUV on the perfect mountain camping trip? It's all marketing.
I’ve had my Bose 3-2-1 for 12 years and it’s still kicking and it’s survived many drunken nights at full blast.
bose is trash, enjoy your crap sound
COLLECTOR30 Hate Bose cause u can’t love yourself
"Bose is targeting the mass market"
*looks at prices for cheapest propper 7.1 Bose setup.... 22000,- NOK ($2715)*
sounds like a mass market price alright... not.
"it is the most expensive in that shop and many sees more expensive as better"
im glad that Elkjøp in Norway got Klipsch, Tannoy and Yamaha standing next to Bose. and some places even got Yamaha Soavo and Klipsch Palladium speakers.
Yeah, it would be more accurate to say they're targeting the rich and edgy segment of the uninformed majority of consumers - people who like to spend on something that brings "prestige" instead of just technical performance (pretty much the same as Apple fans outside of NA).
That is the "mass market" for the upper end of people who are made to think that they are buying the best gear.
Børre Børresen The Bose 7.1 system is actually pretty good. It adjusts itself to your crapy room acoustics. Not hi-end but good. And the Bose subwoofer actually produces bass below 80hz (where sub-woofers are only supposed to operate in) I have heard it - sounds pleasant. But then they had a live Jazz demo.
now the 7.1 was one of cheaper systems and now been removed but still the shops got em as no one is willing to pay for em.
at the local shop they still have em and also a 5.1 Klispch RFII+Yamaha RX-A870 standing with it and even without sub the Klispch RF82's goes deeper than the Bose system alone but now that area is quite spacious so might be of the lack of power in the Bose amp (and sounds far more "musically").
but then... most rather bought a Samsung system for 1\10th of the price or Audio Pro Black Diamond system with matching Pioneer,Yamaha or Marantz reciver for under half the price
and about the replacement for the Bose 7.1 system... the new 5.1 Lifestyle 650 system
price: 48000,- NOK (5900 USD)
They're targeting the mass market not the cheap market. The mass market is people that have no clue about audio and will easily open their checkbook if you wow them. I should know i've been trhough the Bose training.
I have had three pairs of Quiet Comfort headphones. I was a global traveler and used them hard. I still have my third pair. I use I POD classics and I swear by the wired ear buds. My wife own a pair of noise cancelling ear buds and blue tooth earbuds which she adores. I own a computer sound system with sub and satellites which still sounds great. I consider myself a fairly decent audiophile. Bose certainly has their place in my gear list.
I used to listen low bit-rate MP3 music on relative cheap PC speakers, however my wife was enthusiast singer and once on whim we went to to private expensive demo to go listen songs you know in setup where CD recording is not over-boosted to clipping point and where whole setup sounded surprisingly clear.
It was truly revealing to hear things that you never heard in songs and didn't even know there were there.
Though B&W Nautilus sounded really great, they were too big and with price hardly anyone can afford so we went to few more "realistic" demos to check dozens different brands and ended selecting KEF R300 over JBL Studio 530.
Currently using KEF R300 speakers connected to $399 Chinese SMSL M500 DAC and $60 Chinese Loxjie A10 poweramp which sound better than several times more expensive stuff from other brands.
I don't consider myself audiophile as I always go for quality at affordable price but I heard Bose before, event their more expensive stuff and I would put them somewhere on bottom of the stuff I ever listened to.
Take a tab of LSD, and then listen to your HiFi music setup. Talk about hearing sounds you never noticed before! 🤯
Glad I'm not an Audiophile, I like my Bose Headphones.
Same, they sound completely fine and to be honest I can barely here a difference in headphones past the £200 mark anyway
@@joshuakielty Stay ignorant. It's cheaper.
I refurbished models of bose . They all sound spitty, rolled off and bloated to me. Ok for background music, but not fidelity. 901's give me a headache as there is no focus to the image. Bose drivers, whizzer cones, break up badly. The stock eq uses poor parts that can get upgraded aftermarket. Bose products Frequency response are rougly 45hz-13.5khz, but very jagged. Big midbass hump. Vocals get very glary and harsh. they are essentially midrange, and pedestrian. They could never be used to mix with, they are far too inaccurate. Bose makes 100% profit, and that's insane. It's like paying $20 for a bottle of water.
Scott Lowell, I work for a stereo repair shop that used to do lots of Bose service both in and out of warranty, but then Bose shut off their servicing dealers, which means they won't supply us with parts or service info anymore, and now Bose does all the service themselves now. They don't actually ever replace components at board level as you probably know, if it's a relatively current product and they still have replacement circuit boards they just swap an entire new board into it, and that's how they fix things. If they don't have the boards then they will take the defective product back in trade towards a newer model. I have never particularly liked the way that Bose products sound, the subwoofers in particular are awful, just Woolly and humpy and mid Bassy sounding, and usually with lots of rattles and buzzes and cabinet resonance. And I really hate it when stuff is put together with molded plastic spring clips and things that clamshell and snap together, as opposed to just using screws. when the plastic molded Parts get a little older and brittle, they have a tendency to break when you try and unsnap or unclip the pieces in order to disassemble the unit. some of their pro products sound pretty good, I've heard some of their powered speakers in years past sound pretty good for like acoustic Duo and Trio type live sound production.
I always found them to be good products for people who like to have music on the background. Not for real listeners. Because thats where all the flaws show.
Water is free dude, it just falls out of the sky.
OOh Bose wont like that, you giving away their secret frequencies, no, they will want you to retract that statement. tell us more so we can get an informed picture because they don't really tell us shit, wow and flutter and watts=rms. its like they don't want to embarrass themselves, and they are not alone.
First pair of headphones were some Bose AE2i's. Still use them till today (although i had to replace the ear pads) and they sound pretty good. They aren't harsh and also aren't super thumpy either as to be expected.
Bose is definately overpriced and maybe the Apple of audio brands.
I think the problem that audiophiles have is the image that bose has. Its pretty hyped.
But in my opinion bose is really good in building small speakers that sound good. I have a soundlink mini and its incredible how much sound comes out of it. There is no other speaker in that size that sounds and is spacefilling(not only because of the bass) like that.
Therefore the sound/size ratio makes many bose produkts practible.
Michael R I agree. I used to own a jbl charge 4 but when I got my Bose minilink I gave the jbl to my son. Now I’m planning to buy Bose solo 5 for my tv.
Oh you silly goose. Apple already has the apple of sound equipment. Beats
That would be B&O Bose are an afterthought . Both are over priced for what you get.
Try the B&O A1 and we'll talk after
I’ve never met a “tweak” who could listen to music ... they all listen to their equipment, in my experience.
The “sunk cost” fallacy runs deep with this crowd. Bose just has to be crap, otherwise how could they justify their $1k fairy-dust unobtainium speaker cables?
@J L Your opinion is noted.
One huge reason I have disliked Bose for decades is because of their marketing.. Where they basically said "You don't need HUGE expensive audio equipment (which we think is junk), our LITTLE (expensive) audio equipment is just as good or even better!" And people buy into because they have more money than sense. If I as a decently educated audio lover (but no audiophile!) try to explain to them why I feel the expensive Bose equipment they bought isn't very good they more often than not respond with "Bose said it was good and it was expensive so it must be good!" Anyone who has had that happen to them a few times learns to hate Bose.
It really is a lot like Apple in that respect. Working in the IT field for 20+ years I've run into a LOT of people that think Apple can do no wrong, even when the Apple product they bought has failed, is incompatible with what they want to do or otherwise is just not the right solution. Why? Because Apple in their marketing does a great job of getting those that know nothing about their products to think they're the greatest thing since sliced bread. Apple like Bose does not rely on specs or "proof" of any kind. It's more of the "We say it's good so take our word for it" drilled into people's heads time and again. to some it just works and they know it!
Choralone422 yeah this sounds like that bit in Jurassic Park when the guy says: are they heavy? Then they’re expensive: put them back! 😆😆
It's more complicated than that. Bose made large speakers for years. The flagship 901s were only discontinued a couple years ago. They are a mainstream brand marketed to people who just want something "good" and like the name and status of a high price point. There's lots of products out there like that.
nmeunier Not disagreeing, just pointing out that I think some of the venom aimed at Bose is audiophiles that either don't understand the reasons for Bose's success or are jealous their favorite brand hasn't been able to have that level of mainstream success. Bose sounds fine to many people, especially those who wouldn't know boutique audio.
nmeunier à very simplistic point of view on your urologist 's cables
he's happy
you are jealous
nmeunier thanks for the correction (?)
no offense meant,
i'm german, so my english is always "experimetal"
but I think, people should be free, to buy what they want.
I hope, at least, he's a good doctor.
have a happy 1st of may
k
I have two systems at home using Klipsch speakers powered by Onkyo amps. I’ve also owned speakers from Paradigm, Energy, Infinity, and ESS. As for Bose, I own three Bluetooth speakers and I think that’s where they excel. I own the Flex, the Soundlink Mini II, and the Soundlink Color II, and they all sound a bit better than my JBL Flip 3 for around the same price. I’ve never owned Bose home speakers, such as the 301 etc. As for speaker specs, very few specs are really useful in gauging performance. Efficiency is very important. Speaking of which, when I bought my Klipsch R-15M speakers, I was able to do some limited listening between them and the Bose 301 V. I opted for the Klipsch because they sounded better to my ears. But, the Klipsch are very efficient, so they played louder, giving them an advantage. I also looked around the back, and the Bose, sadly, didn’t look well-finished. The particle board was visible and simply painted over, while the Klipsch have a very good fit and finish. Bose Bluetooth speakers on the other hand look and feel well-built.
Great video and good story but.....
Everyone is different, every ear is different and also important, everyone's got his own perception of good and bad quality. It is something very personal. I don't hate Bose and I don't hate Grundig! For my personal sound experience I like to use Quad and Bowers & Wilkins speakers. But this is very personal. I've had Technics and Kef for years and loved it. People need to learn to let anyone have fun with the stuff they like. Everyone is different and about the price?.... Nobody has the same amount of money to spend on just a stereo set. If you are happy with the sound, well.... That's all that counts... 👍
The measure is live music
Just because you haven't heard better doesn't your not listening to equipment that doesn't measure up
I take bose second-hand, and put in better speakers put big sub amps on their passive Subs and you can't come to my house and tell me I'm missing any frequencies.
Bose catches much heat, some of it deserved. However, in the club-level pro audio world, their mini line arrays (e.g the L-Series) changed the game for solo and small combo acoustic acts. These are expensive, but simple to tweak, easy to load-in/out, and are EQ'ed and DSP'ed to emphasize vocals using the ubiquitous Shure SM57/58 mic series and piezo pickups on acoustic-electric guitars. The L-series mini-arrays have good coverage, reasonable feedback rejection and clear intelligibility. They work better in the typically bad acoustics of a small venue than say a pair of QSC K-series, which are the current"gold standard" of traditional club PA's.
I play small clubs and I actually rejected the L series Because I needed two to get stereo. That would have made them far too expensive . I was interested in the lighter weight but I use leslie effects and chorus etc. Stereo works much better for my taste.I have no problem with equalization as I am led to believe ( by this article) that audi0philes do.
equalization is a great you cant have sound without it not one single person here would say equalization is a bad thing
Bose have some terrific noise cancelation tech, that's pretty much their only pro though…
i currently work at an audio store, and spend all day pointing this out. Their headphones are good, but Sony is better right now. WH1000X are much better sounding headphones compared to QC35, cost less too, and are more fun to use. I still get paid more to sell the Bose, so not all is lost!
They make decent dj speakers.
Sony is better though.
I own Bose acoustimass 5 and in ear. When purchasing Bose soundlink revolve +, I was disappointed in the sound and returned it for UE Megaboom... I was on a low budget, as I felt it handled the bass. I am thinking of Klipsch or Shure in ear. Under $200. 00 Any tips from you folks.