I spent 10 years as a music producer...lots of hours in studios. I learned to ignore brand names and tech stats and go with what sounded best to me. Still do that.
I agree. Some really good people are STILL mixing on NS10's which sounds far from good or neutral. Listening to what will give you your results is an infinite better approach than buying a certain brand.
But......NS10s have excellent transient response and unclouded upper bass lower mid due to good damping of harmonics! Even though they sound shit, they tell the truth in some way. To be fair there were about 5 similar sounding speakers in the late 70s that could have become the standard and they all sounded quite similar, just NS10s accidentally won out.
In 1981 I went to Dixon’s to buy a hifi. I was looking to spend £180 on a Amstrad setup. Before I bought it the sales assistant made me listen to an Akai pro series separates stack. I purchased the Akai system for £ 699 and paid for it over 2 years. My point is I thought the Amstrad thing was good, until I was shown the difference. Because me and ALAN Sugar thought it was good does not make it so. In fact it was as the salesman said, a pile of plastic junk. I cannot thank that salesman enough for making me spend an extra £500 I have since spent Thousands of pounds and been bitterly disappointed but equally that doesn’t make them products rubbish.
No. If the best thing you have ever heard is Garbage, you are now under the illusion that garbage is the best thing in the world, flooding today's economy with cheap shit and devices with planned obsolescence in mind. Its all about money money money, filling the land-fills with unrecyclable tech because they're designed to not be repaired or reused. these are really awful business practices and incredibly detrimental to the economy and the world we live in. there are unethical and should be stopped. That goes for Apple too.
@@televison_is_dead it's all about brainwashedfeeling the economy with cheap crap and manipulating consumers and thinking that their product is the best thing in the world. Its all about money money money.
What Amar Bose did was master the Waveguide. This allowed him to use cheap/small Drivers with cheap Cabinet materials to create a better than average sound in a very small package. They were never marketed as "the best" or "Audiophile Speakers". It was essentially "Speakers for Dummies" after the Audiophile craze fell out of favor around the late 80's/early 90's.
He also produced excellent speakers such as the 901's etc.....etc.... Every company makes bad speakers as evidenced by some Sony's I've heard, etc.... Don't talk until you educate yourself.
Bose's wave guide is nothing more than a crude miniaturized version of the "transmission line" enclosure invented by Bailey and Radford in the 1950s. It's nothing new at all. There's also a built in bass boost in the amp section.
@@socksumi Don't talk. You only embarrass yourself further. Bose makes plenty of speakers that are worthy of praise. All companies put out bad speakers from time to time. For you to single out bose and no other company, speaks volumes about your lack of intelligence.
@@bradhuskers others that made budget friendly speakers gave them budget prices... Bose didnt... 2 grand for alarm clock drivers... my grandparents bought one... sounds like a large alarm clock till this day... does anyone remember alarm clocks???
I am not an audio technician , just a regular guy who likes the music so much, Bose maybe doesn’t have a lot of highs or lows , however the “clarity” and the “separation” of musical instruments are IMPRESSIVE !!
Hmm I feel like you could spend the same amount of money on a piece of good audio gear and quickly find out that Bose does neither very well. All Bose does pretty well is their noise cancelling tech but other companies are doing it pretty well now. I’ve only recommended Bose is in the past for noise cancelling headphones on the airplane but that’s changed since. I know someone who likes R&B and Jazz and likes to listen to vinyl. They then proceeded to buy a set of Bose headphones since they got a “deal.” Smh
I was an audio salesman many years ago. Plenty of customers would come in, asking about the ratings and performance 'numbers' of various speakers. In my mind, numbers don't mean much. My question to the customers would always be, "How do they sound to you?" As a customer, I buy speakers to listen to, not for the literature with specifications. If the Bose sound better to you, buy 'em! If the the Infinity sound better, buy them! Don't rely on printed information to tell you what sounds good.
As a person who loves good sound, Does an audiophile hear what I hear? As you get older, you don’t hear as much. You have hand it to Bose because they have been able to what I like to call putting dynamite in a small package. You even like their Bluetooth speakers, and their headphones were way ahead of their time. What I don’t like about audiophiles is they are sound snobs! They pull out out a meter. If you don’t agree , you are wrong. I know a 8 inch woofer can’t replicate a 15 inch one. Thanks to Bose and porting technology they seem to have come close any way. I can’t hear the difference between a 700 turntable and a 3000 one! There are so many variables, and it depends on what you are listening to. I agree with Tim, it’s in your ear. If you think you got value for what you spent, Aa d are happy that’s all that matters.
Exactly my point.. I don't know what Bose is doing and how they improve the sound quality but I buy bose because I like to listen music comes out from bose speakers. I am not technical person and I don't want to do any PHD on sound.. I buy what I like.. Other music system/speakers may give original, pure or better sound then Bose but if i dont like it or they are not met my requirements what is a use of that.. I don't want good looking speakers which looks good in my living room or I can do showoff in front of friends and throw big numbers like technical guys (16-inch subwoofer, 5000watts, drive, pmpo, storage etc) but in reality I don't like the music comes out of it then what is a sense of buying what world like.. We don't always buy what is good for us but we buy what we like.. Like fruits and vegetables are good for our health but we buy burgers, chips etc we know it's not healthy but we like it. *I choose bose because I like the music cames out of their sound system*
If I am an audio salesman, I will ask what kind of music they're listening. If they listen to a lot of genre, they need flat speaker and tweak some EQ, depends on what genre they listening.
If you want to understand Bose, all you need to understand is that at the top of their design guidelines is WAF. Everything else is secondary. (Wife Acceptance Factor)
This is so so true. My best friend's dad was raised in the 60s and 70s and was a super audiophile after college. He's 70 now and has a Bose sound bar in the living room and just retired his Bose sounddock I for a home pod. This is a guy who owned the AR speakers with the sand in them and also owned ESS towers... Happy wife happy life - Bose
Billy Boden 100% right on bro! I had to beg my ex wife to accept my Magnepan’s big size. She wasn’t a fan of speakers protruding into the living space.
The only Bose product I ever owned was this desktop radio that sounded 5 times it's size. I opened it up to see why, and the only difference between this and every other radio was the weird maze like chamber behind the speakers. In fact, with the top removed, it lost 50% of it's bass response, and the mids became flat and lifeless.
That chamber was a transmission line, and it was invented not by Bose, but by Benjamin Olney who worked for Stromberg-Carlson. It goes back to the thirties - long enough ago for the patent to expire so Bose could use the technology for free.
@@timhallas4275 No but you might be trivial. T-line speakers exist to this day, I built a pair, they are an accepted type along with horns, panels, open baffle etc. Mine are an MTM confirmation with 5 1/2" drivers and have a rich mid range and go down to 40 Hz.
@@ScottGrammer who cares who invented it lol. It works, and makes tiny bluetooth speakers punch way above their price range. This is like bashing every company who uses a 4th order because they didn't invent it 🤦♂️
As someone who used to be into HiFi in a BIG WAY One day it dawned on ME , ( I’m ) sitting down and LISTENING for FAULTS . Instead of ( LISTENING TO THE MUSIC ) so my advise , for what it’s worth Stop driving yourself crazy looking for perfection and just enjoy the music .
You are a person was "BIG" into the generic name only, Hi Fi. But never became an audiophile. Regrettably the preponderance of individuals here comments and replies don't have a clue what the spokesman in this video means by the "audiophiles". I hate to say this. Consequently, he is actually addressing a rarified few.
Exactly. If you like Bose, that’s fine. If you like cheap Insignia speakers, cool. Buy those and save money. I don’t understand why audiophiles get so upset about what other people like. I’d go so far as to say audiophiles are wrong. Because audio quality is ultimately subjective. And if more people tend to like something else, then they are the odd ones out. And it doesn’t matter because it’s subjective
@@mab7175What is an audiophile? Answer: a person with narcissistic tendencies that can’t accept the fact that subjective experiences they have don’t match what most other people’s subjective experiences are. Get over yourself.
I am involved in loudspeaker design and manufacturing since long time and I agree with bass boost as well as nonlinear frequency response being a more pleasant result. On my humble opinion flat frequency response is technically correct if the recorded source has been "tailored" according to what random listeners really like (some bass boost, less 3 kHz energy, some extra 16 kHz etc.). A perfectly flat frequency response involves a faithful reproduction of the signal, a pleasant signal has a frequency response that matches the frequency response of our ears; and in fact our ears have a peak sensitivity at 3 kHz, low frequency roll off below 200 Hz and high frequency roll off above let's say 5 kHz. Back to Bose and to other speakers that may have an uneven frequency response (matching somehow our hearing system behavior) ... random listeners according to my experience really like them more and thus buy them.
Can attest. I have a pair of JBL studio monitors that have +/-2db down to 40 Hz according to the datasheet. They sound very boring. I also have a pair that I made with tweeters with huge magnets and some crossover meddling to sound crisp and deep. Tons of detail but they are not flat. Everyone is blown away but I'd never use them for recording.
The perfect system has to faithfully reproduce the sound. What the ear senses or likes has nothing to do with this. Any alteration might be agreeable but that’s not the point.
@@jimbo2629 Hi Jim, I fully agree, to some extent. The central point perhaps is the recording of a music track. For example, most electronic music is recorded with a mostly pleasant result that implicates some characteristics as I mentioned above. Not all musicians however are recorded with the same criteria; when you mix guitars, drums, voices and other channels together creating a mix there is a chance that you end up in having a boring, annoying sound. So the reason an EQ has been invented is because many times, when we play a track, there's not enough bass, too much mids or the sound is just not crisp. Building a loudspeaker that has a flat frequency response is relatively easy but the chances that a "perfectly flat frequency response loudspeaker" does not please our ears is relatively high...not because the loudspeaker is bad. So we end up in having basically all discotheques in having 12 dB more bass in order to people have fun...Also, when we buy a perfectly flat loudspeaker and place it in our living room it ends up in being in a corner, so the corner ads up to 9 dB low frequency, room resonances mess this up again adding and subtracting LF energy depending where you are. In conclusion, perfectly flat loudspeakers are the correct technical approach, but chances to distort the result due to resonances of the room, wrong placement of the speaker, reverb, wrong EQ and so on should impose the knowledge of basic acoustics by the customer. I am aware that this discussion can be very long and there are more topics that can be touched...yet back to the main topic, a customer with no knowledge at all about acoustics is easily "fooled" by a loudspeaker with more bass, less aggressive sound (less 3kHz octave) and some extra dB on the higher end of the spectrum. If we try to "fool" him with a loudspeaker with low frequency roll-off, some extra energy around 3kHz, and less high frequencies ... that's the point where the customer becomes a sound engineer ;-)
Jim bo- what your ears hear has a lot to do with frequency response. Its all in how your ears perceive the incoming sound. A flat frequency response can actually sound pretty bad compared to properly set up sound systems where the lower and higher frequencies are slightly amplified, thus counteracting what your ears actually hear thus making the frequency response seam flat to your ears.
As you get older the frequency response of your ears drops considerably. By the time you get to 60 its unlikely you can hear anything above 8KHz and even at 40 years old you can forget 16KHz
beauty are in the ears of the beholder...the 1st time I heard the sound of BOSE speakers,I already felt in love with it.but I don't discriminate other peoples choices in terms of sound of speakers.its your choice of liking...
@@joentell same, about the bass. i generally only buy equipment that is adjustable, some kind of equalizer. however, i purchased a Bose Revolve + last year, and its wonderful. i never considered bose until i needed a 360 speaker (i live out of a motorhome and am moving around often, so its nice the sound goes everywhere evenly). it sounds good, but is very flat
Normaly yes but i got a 12" rockford sub in the trunk of my carr i like bass but as for my home cinema i got a activ 6.5" jbl sub under my bed it scares the shit out of me so mutch bass
All frequencies are taken into consideration when it comes to quality regardless of sound signature preferences but ya some people like more bass some less just like treble. I do prefer my bass boosted and use an EQ even with my sony extra bass earbuds and jbl xtreme and charge 3 speakers. I don't use EQ at the outdoor skateparks though as I feel the jbl speakers sound good enough without which allows me to go a bit louder and our indoor skatepark uses their professional series.
Lack of bass equals Lack of music Go listen to piano or orchestra music on a Bose system then go listen to the same music on a infinite baffle home theater system with linear line array towers._ The best sounding alingnment out of ported , sealed and infinite baffle is infinite baffle Hear the music not the box is infinite baffle Open your ears and your mind soon follows. Ex Bose user.
I cannot believe you only have 13k subs. You have a very no nonsense way of discussing subjects like this. I like the way you present the facts, then your opinion based on those facts and then you present a very carefully thought out and pretty meticulously done audio demo. I am not 100% convinced on the value of the demo as there are far too many variables to draw a conclusion from only the sound demo. However the sound demos you have done on equipment that I am familiar with (such as the 301s) are pretty spot on. I have always thought that they sound okay for very casual listening at low volumes, where the bass bump actually helps, but not for higher volume critical listening. They are very non fatiguing speakers and kinda have the same sound signature that you may experience from a band in a bar or small club. You are exactly right about the convenience factor (also known as WAF) in many of their products. I know that about 10 years ago I bought a Bose Cinemate 3 piece system for my television in my living room. At the time there was no soundbar setup in the same price range that even came close. I know that now there are other options but for casual TV and non home theater movie watching it is still working just fine. It has a very high WAF (wife acceptance factor). I really enjoy your videos so keep up the good work.
Bose 201s!!! I had those in high school and college. I gave them to my dad over 20 years ago and he still uses them alongside a pair of Sansui SP-LE8Ts that he picked up in Japan while on R&R in Vietnam. The combined sound is very good, and all the frequencies seem filled out.
Bose is a different product that should not be compared with audiophile audio. There is no possible comparison. They are two different worlds and no, the audiophile manufacturers do not have anything to learn from the brand. If they did follow the sound signature of the brand they would no longer be an audiophile product. Bose works with Psychoacoustics. This is the branch of psychophysics involving the scientific study of sound perception and audiology. Or, in other words, they "trick" your brain. They are not audiophile products and they never intended them to be. I do not even understand why people insist on comparing them to audiophile audio. They do what they do and they are the best at what they do but their products are different. Their direct reflecting system was created to help people listen to the sound regardless of your positioning in the room. They do not have a sweet spot by design. That is not the idea. The idea was or is to dill the room with music. Stop trying to compare them with audiophile systems. They are worlds apart. And stop comparing them to Bang & Olufsen. They do not share the same goals in terms of listening experience. Bose highs are rolled off not because the tweeters are pointing backwards they are rolled off by design. Amar Bose considered that humans could not hear anything below 30Hz or above 15Khz and thus, those frequencies did not need to be there. There is an MIT lecture somewhere on youtube where you can hear him explaining why he did that and, although it is an interesting approach to audio perception, it is not comparable, at all, with high-end audio. As a side note, Bose was not one of the first using sound-cancelling on their headphones. They were the first. Amar designed the first headphones after a helicopter ride he had. Bose worked with the military to create the headphones for the pilots and other things. Something interesting about Bose is that they also created a car suspension system. Look it up. It was very heavy and did not really catch up at the time, but they were in the right direction.
I really enjoyed this video, I have zero allusions about the sound quality of Bose speakers and yet I seem to have accumulated several pairs over the years anyway. I'm in the process of ummm hotroding some at the moment. Just for giggles I'm using a pair of 101's as woofers with a pair of Gemstones as tweeter and mid-range connected to an external crossover..!!
Something that's rarely explored in audiophile conversations is what you might call "coffeeshopability." How well do speakers play when they're not in a typical stereo setup. When reviewing speakers, we always talk about sound stage and imaging. That only happens when you're sitting in a sweet spot that is likely relatively small. In the real world, how often are speakers actually used like this? If you're in a coffee shop listening to music, you're never going to benefit from stereo imaging. You will still notice things like clarity, tight bass response, and crisp highs. Though a lot of the offerings from Bose are lacking. They do generally perform well in businesses, public places, or most other places you're listening to music. Maybe that's some of the intent behind those rear facing tweeters, to throw the sound around rather than focus it. I love my stereo setup, but most of the time I listen to music, I'm cooking dinner, entertaining company, or moving around throughout my house. I'm rarely in the tiny sweet spot between my KEFs.
Unfortunately a long technical response to this got wiped by a shitty WiFi connection but long story short, Bose are making consumer audio products with a different functional spec to audiophile equipment. The company was founded because Amar Bose believed that reflected sound was a psychologically important element of a live performance and he wanted speakers that reproduced that even if it meant sacrificing integrity of sound reproduction in the treble spectrum. With modern DSP it's possible that Bose could produce an audiophile grade speaker that gave a flatter frequency response, improved trebles with minimised "smearing" as you describe it, while reducing the inevitable standing waves of direct & reflected sound using cabinet design, phase guide & DSP to tie it all together, but that would be a very expensive product and would have to tradeoff some sound diffusion versus accuracy within the listening sweetspot. Bose customers want location-insensitive speakers which sound good. That means sound diffusion and emphasised bass. They don't want audiophile speakers and there's arguably little point in Bose making them. It's much more likely that companies like KEF and B&W would introduce lifestyle wireless speakers for use in cafe's, offices and kitchens with a more diffuse and less accurate sound, which they have done. They're chasing the bigger market rather than Bose chasing a niche. The Bose signature sound is a result of decades of research into creating easy to use and good sounding speakers that diffuse sound effectively & that you can listen to all day. I love listening to Klipsch horns for an hour or so but I find them fatiguing after more time. Bose make an inoffensive stylish product with great engineering and do so at high volume. They've enabled a lot of people to get good sound quality at home with minimal setup or tuning. They're actually doing a good thing. Having said all that I have KEF speakers, yamaha amps & AVs in my house but I don't diss Bose buyers. Their purchase made sense for them. The 301s give a pleasant diffused sound that works in many non-ideal listening spaces. They fit a use case & are actually pretty cheap.
I would price price system which competes satisfactory with ambient real sounds. It is not the case in listening room. My system which I set up and aligned does satisfactory in almost every point of my room and out. Listening chair is only for proper left right location.
@DispelTheMyth it's not just to widen the sweetspot. Bose believed that listeners felt sound reproduction was more lifelike with reflected sound. Lots of people like these speakers. They might lose something in terms of treble and overall frequency reproduction accuracy versus non reflecting speakers of a similar price but they sound dynamic & full in many listening environments. I feel sorry for those who hate Bose because they're kind of missing the point. They're not making speakers for modern audiophiles. It's a simple to use mass market consumer product. The original 901 was in many respects a work of genius. The 9 single driver design uses active EQ to push the frequency reproduction across the driver array & to remove reflected standing waves. The absence of a crossover network was deemed a selling point in those days as there was a tradeoff of single driver rolling off or distortion, versus amplitude dips & artifacts of driver mismatch around the crossover points. Bose went for multiple single drivers and I think the 901 found a good balance of distortion versus rolling off. It's great for opera, rock and folk with a nice powerful amp and the right distance to the walls. It sounds fluid and organic. It's not the perfect speaker but it's one man's intriguing vision of what a lifelike speaker should sound like. I recommend everyone listen to properly setup 901s at least once in their lives. I'd make the same claim for Klipsch La Scalas but the wife would kill me if I bought a pair. Maybe it's worth it. Speakers to listen to before you die 😁
I have tried many different speaker brands. The last pair of speaker stays with me is bose. I find it easy sounding and comfort to listen for long time (no harsh). it is one size fit all to me.
I really enjoy your videos in general. This one brought back memories because I had Bose as a professor back in the 80s. Bose was hated be audiophiles well before the Acoustimas (?) speakers. IIRC, Bose was very big on speaker placement in the room being pretty critical of wall placement and corners. Part of his philosophy on the direct/reflecting was that people, in a living situation, aren’t nailed to one sweet spot in the room. People move around so the dispersion helps create a wider listening area. I had a pair of 801s and really loved them. Back the you could easily go into a store and compare Bose to brands like KEF, JBL, Boston Acoustics, Polk. and a host of others. I liked his speakers although many had issues with the full range, multiple drivers in the 901 vs a traditional woofer/tweeter setup. BTW my 801s worked with any receiver. I think I should also point out that Bose was a great innovator in car stereos. The one ideal thing about cars is you know exactly where people are sitting.( unlike a room). I think he worked with Cadillac to get some of the first higher quality sound systems in cars back in the 80s. Anyway, keep up the great videos.
What a terrific video. Being in audio for decades you concisely described what Bose is. A product for the masses, Bose was very lucky, he was at the right place at the right time. His product worked because it was simple to unbox and install. Wires were color coded with proprietary jacks and plugs to make for a dead simple installation. The product was tiny and hid in the background. So, it had a high wife acceptance factor. My issue with Bose was not the construction or sound, it was the cost. You paid for a huge ad budget including Mr. Paul Harvey and that jacked up the price. The customer thought they were paying more due to better quality parts and performance when in actuality they were getting mediocre crap. If the price was cut by 50%, would have an entirely different attitude towards the product and company.
Agree. I'm not sitting still in one spot listening to music. I move around, do other stuff, may sit in different locations of my workshop/office and the direct/reflecting dispersed sound make for better coverage that allows me to work and enjoy the music at the same time. Currently rocking a Bose 201 with an Infinity 12" sub. So yeah, I like a solid, thumping bass.
CopperWhopper67, People disagreeing, but civil, polite, and fun! I got this far without being repulsed, traumatised, or fearful about the future of humanity as too often happens when reading comments.
@@johnconnor4953 whereas accurate representation is not necessarily subjective. At least to a lesser degree. At the low end of the audio market there are sacrifices and a lot of room for subjectivity between brands. At the high end trade offs are discernible. Bose is known for using marketing to to position it's product rather than engineering. For the price of a Bose system you can purchase a lot more fidelity. Most people aren't familiar with high end speaker brands but pretty much everyone has heard of Bose, hence the mainstream appeal.
@Trevor Hoft mabye, but he could just want to note something he didn't like about the video (btw, it's obvious you're a Skullcandy fan, if you're trying to research why competitor companies are worse, I've been there, I've seen it, please stop.)
I recently finished setting up my home theater system. Onkyo, Sony and Boston Acoustics components. It sounds amazing - but it took me 2 weeks and lots of tweaking to get it right. Bose systems mostly 'black box' type, with speaker placement really the only concern. This no doubt appeals to the masses.
As a bose dealer for quite a few years there is a place for it. It does exceptionally well in open floor plance with monstrously tall ceilings without wall to wall carpet. I had baffle boards setup for in home demos with a few different architectural speakers and bose cubes. And would "go the extra mile" and let home owners decide for themselves. Very interesting when you turn someone's living room into a sound room.
i could actually imagine that type of room could make bose sound OKish. And that's just how I picture the average metrosexual bose (pose) owner's apartment!
i use to work as technician for bose. i can assure that they have a enclouser design excellent. they can deliver bass even with small speakers. like soundlink mini. they use normal amplifier d class at 20v . the qualitiy of material are good. as you say they lack in middle and highs and have punchy bass
Those 201's were my first ever speakers. I loved them. Then I found other brands and have continued to grow. I don't knock others for liking Bose. Just enjoy what you enjoy.
I love Bose. They sound great. Just purchased the S1 Pro for my bedroom. Sounds amazing. Popular brands will always get a lot of hate from self proclaimed experts (audiophiles).
To note, the dip between 8-10k on the Bose speakers also happens to be where sibilant noises occur in the human voice. I'm guessing the dip in response in the 8-10k range is very, very intentional for that reason.
Bose is very very good at tuning sounds that can be listened to hours without headache, same is not true with other brands that audiophile like. If I can't enjoy the music, the accuracy is second thought. I have some of their headphones, they are the most comfortable of all of the companies.
@@Capturing-Memories I never said bose has heavy bass, are you dreaming? Bose controlled treble and bass, little high mids and that's why we can listen to them for ours without headache.
@@nitinkumar29 Nothing said about headphones, this video is about Bose speakers and his tests clearly show Bose boosts the base compared to a technically well designed audiophile speakers the same size and power for 1/3 the price.
Your test video cleared me why I'm a fun of Bose and what is the matter behind of it. It seems more saturation, clarity in base and middle ranges and that's what takes me. Thank you for work.
I also have one. It’s sounds great with deep house, R&B, smooth Jazz and corridors Spanish music. I take to my father in laws house sit on the patio and have a drink. He loves it too.
@slow mazda Well, it's personal preference. It may not be good to you but what's good to you may not be good to others. I am not an audiophile and I am pretty sure I will not like audiophile standards.
When I was a teenager, I loved the Bose Acoustimass presentation they had at Fry's Electronics, where they played a home theater demo with large speaker boxes covering the tiny Acoustimass satellites, and would do a surprise reveal at the end showing that all of that sound was coming from such tiny speakers. It was great marketing. Though I know now there are better speakers to choose, Bose is still killing it in the wireless noise cancellation market. I really liked the quotes and historical context you gave in your video. Great production value.
I bought the AM-5 back then and while they do produce large-sounding bass and decent upper mid/lower treble, the huge dip in the middle frequencies has always kept me from being satisfied with them as far as music is concerned. The sound in a home theater setup can be supplemented to some degree by the use of the center channel speaker, but I ended up using the Bose subwoofer under the covered porch floor for outdoor bass, and the satellites are sitting on a bookshelf. :D
Currently sony has the best noise canceling and I prefer their sound a bit more for my earbuds and have xb70bt but bose is a decent brand. I don't have home speakers anymore I've been so happy with my mobile jbl xtreme and charge 3 for home theater and for outdoor skateparks and the indoor skatepark has their professional series . My only complaint about bose is lack of selection/options
A pretty fair assessment! A couple of things worth pointing out: 1) Yes, Bose markets toward people who want better sound (than cheap, off-the-shelf systems), but part of their marketing for Ease of Use is to capture the older demographic, who cannot hear high frequencies anyway. In other words, as human ears age, OUR treble rolls off too! Older people can't hear the lack of treble on Bose, but they CAN hear the deeper bass. 2) It's hard to tell online, but sometimes, if we have to choose between stronger bass of the 301s vs. more transparent highs of the others, I would want the extra bass and give up that last 10 kHz on top. Try something like Ace of Base's The Sign. 3) If the SVS Prime can't accurately represent bass, how is that any better than the Bose not being able to accurately present treble? It's kind of apples & oranges. What we WANT is both, and to MY ears, if I can't have both, I'd take more bass and less of the ear-splitting treble. I guess in this regard, you could say the 301s have a "warmer" sound, instead of "brighter." 4) I bet there was a lot of eye-rolling when your audiophile viewers saw the paper cone drivers in the 301s.
The basic premise of an audiophile is that the reproduced music should be as close to the experience you get if you were sitting in front of the band playing live. The thing is, even if you remove all artificial amplification from the live performance, you can not always reproduce the music in your living room at the same volume as a live performance. Well, at least if you have a family living under the same roof. When you play the music at a much lower volume, the lower frequencies tend to loose in share of energy when everything is flat. Combined with the room character, the out put needs to be tweaked to be enjoyable. Simple as that. Bose does this and adds beautifully manufactured objects that fits any living room style and build quality that lasts a lifetime. They should be applauded.
@@antiangelofmusic my first "high-end" (lol, thats what I thought in 1990) were some Bose towers. They sounded decent at the time but I just make my own cabinets now. Good clean power, well built crossovers, and high bit rate music is more interesting to me. I still use my Custom made Focal Geminis style cabinets I built 20 years ago.
Had my 5.1 lifestyle system nearly 15 years now and still going strong! Has a nice smooth sound and decent clarity if you play with the bass and treble.
for me Bose is allways scam for less money you get much better systems , better in every thing. BOSE Lifestyle 650 Home Entertainment System 5.1 compare it to a Teufel ULTIMA 40 Surround All-In Edition "5.1.2-Set" for the same price but incl. Denon AVR-X2700H DAB AV-Receiver , Beamer BenQ W2700 and Panasonic DP-UB824 Blu-Ray-Player
I’ve been in an orchestra for 5 years now, so I know a good bit about how sound should really be-it’s where my audiophile fascination spawned from. Now, I have two different types of listening times, and a pair of headphones for each. One where I specifically sit down, put on my one pair of headphones (Sennheiser HD1’s) and listen to the music-and the music only, every detail, the highs and lows and mids. My other pair is used for commuting, where I like to listen to good music with world class noise cancelling to drown out the drone of a bus engine in the background. Guess which pair that is? My Bose. Bose does indeed fit its intended audience headphone wise, someone who wants a pair of pretty good headphones with insane noise cancelling for average use. Edit: here’s how I feel on the SVS vs the BOSE: the SVS sounds very good if your genuinely listening to the music, and the Bose fits a more relaxed sound environment where music is in the background or it’s just casual.
Rhodesia thank you that’s how I see music too and that’s how I feel Bose fits in the market is not meant to be the center attention is for the background to fill the party
oh wow, ive been searching for a sound system for my family, especially my young kids to enjoy. i think your explanation gave me the answer ive been looking for. enjoy the experience w/ my kids while music plays in the background, and when theyve all grown up, enjoy the music to reminisce the moments with my kids ( maybe a $5000 system playing spongebob songs)
JN's Channel Their home theater systems are expensive for no reason just thought I should warn you on that. Especially for the quality they be giving you. If you’re looking for a separate component setup (dedicated channels w/ receiver). I highly recommend going that route. Taking WAF (Wife Acceptance Factor) into consideration though, maybe a decent sound bar will work for you.
@@Iridiumcosmos You are right, for the price of their entry level I can buy a dedicated receiver and just build my own stereo speakers from old car speakers.
I got the Bose 501's a long time ago and loved them as they had some good bass and the highs didn't leave your ears ringing, which is bad by the way, and they are still playing after more than 30 years of use.
Mine are over 30 years old also!!! I also had them in the tobacco barn for ten years exposed to the weather elements with a pair of Sony speakers. I brang them all in, hooked-up & first time turning them up, Sony popped. My kids still use 501’s everyday & they still hit
That is very true, for me, Bose designed their speakers for you listen to it for much longer periods of time because too much highs is exhausting to the ears. If there are guys out there with either a 2 or 3 way frontal pair of speakers with lots of highs, try listening with a moderate high volume and ears gets tired after a few songs. Rest your ears then try it again with treble lowered similar to Bose's high frequency range and will notice a big difference in your ears and you can listen to it a lot longer. But then of course, each of us have our own preference.
The harman curve suggested for hifi.. is a tilted curve (like bose) with some boost in the bass region. However the Bose have a peak in the mids end its extension at both ends is poor. Someone said "no highs, no bass, it shall be bose"
The basic Bose principal was to be able to walk around room and still retain some assemblence of stereo effect, without just hearing the closest speaker. That was designed in several models. There is also a flat power response. Its sounds good in next room.
No it was to use the smallest speaker drivers possible and maximise their sound. unfortunately thats how bose got their reputation of having no bass or treble, "got no highs got no lows, must be bose"
@@Synthematix The 4.5 inch size were optimum for intended purpose. 901s go lower than most speakers, 30 Hz. Bose uses up to 18 inch on pro models, and as low as 1 inch domes on Japanese models
True my senheisers i can listen for hours, but my audiotechnica headphones are overwhelming to the senses after about 5 hours. Although the audiotechnica is blissfull listening and the difference is like fastfood vs a chefs dish. Muffled versus superclear.
I owned a pair of Bose 501, They sounded great , particularly on live recordings that has an ambience. In real live concerts, music is loud and there is really no precision on spot. And the good thing is that you can keep listening for as lo g as wish with feel tired. I am an audiophile, I do enjoy listening to them .
They have a bass rich sound with diffuse imaging. This is their appeal. But they also lack sparkle and detail and because they use paper woofers and paper cone tweeters the 501s can sound a bit crude and unrefined compared to drivers made of laminates, metals and silk domes.
@@socksumi The Bose were intentional manufactured to sound spectacular and not with "audio transparency" for neophytes entry into component stereo high fidelity audio equipment. My interests in audio began the mid 1960s. The intent of audio high fidelity from the outset from pioneering forerunners as Avery Fisher was for high fidelity audio component gear to simulate reproducing a live performance in your listening room. Hence, the initiating emergence for the term audiophile. This from the outset was the trajectory of the development from the outset of the high fidelity audio industry. The trend toward this tenet in the development of technologies of high end audio was regrettably diverted by Bose. Sales had appreciably increase for audio gear in the mid 1970s. And Bose diverted the trajectory from neutral transparency and sonic accuracy to gimmickries. To capture the ears of the naive surging purchasers of audio gear. Thus the buyers of audio gear shifted from acquisition toward sonic accuracy to bragging rights of I have more spectacular sounding speakers. The audiophiles who predated Bose scoffed at Bose gimmickries designing speakers blasting tweeters to bounce higher audio frequencies off the walls behind the speakers. Efforts to create a bogus soundstage for spectacularisms not imagery for spatial localizations including depth within the horizontal plane. Hence, potential new audiophiles during Bose concocted gimmickries were being diverted away from the coinciding developments toward "phase coherence" in loudspeaker design developments in high end audio equipment. Bose is responsible for misguiding purchasers of audio gear during the largest growth spurt of the industry in the history of high end audio. Unfortunately the myth of Bose yet prevails.
The average person has never heard of Kef, or Wharfedale, whatever. I know when I first became interested in getting some audio equipment, I first looked at Bose. That’s all I knew.
Once I started to research a bit, I realized I could put together a decent system for a much cheaper price than Bose & with better sound. I bought an Onkyo 7030 CD player, a Sony receiver, & Pioneer BS22 speakers for less than $300. Not high end but a respectable system to start out with. Cheaper than Bose too!
@@jmarcguy I remember comparing the Bose 301 with other speakers in Circuit City. The cost was similar with the DCM CX-27 I think it was. I ended up buying the Bose because of the marketing and the hype, thus pride, in owning "Bose" speakers. Like Joe's review shows, they had ample bass, but they never sounded "cozy" and no matter how I placed them there always seemed to be a dead spot in the middle of the speakers. I guess that's what Joe was talking about when he mentioned something about the lack of center image. The Bose 301s used to be the best selling speaker in the world! That's back when there were companies like DCM, Infinity, Advent, JBL, Polk, Klipsch, all were available at the local retailer, and Bose STILL outsold them! In stores, like Joe said, the bass made them sound more attractive. I dunno, if I had it to do over, I would have purchased the DCMs. Edit: btw I was very young. lol
@@joentell I liked DCM back in the day. I ended up with a pair of Timeframe 600, thanks to the trade up policy of Circuit City; traded in the 301 within a year. :) DCM is still around, I have a nice 2 kevlar driver with one soft dome tweeter center channel speaker by DCM in my home theater now.Edit: The TImeframes are still in my attic :) I guess I am a speaker addict!!! XD
The SVS speakers sound more natural, for sure. They're also perceptibly louder because the bass they produce doesn't overpower everything else, and the flatter highs allow to cut more.
Which to the majority of consumers means flat and boring. I normally use an EQ with my earbuds and speakers for music. I do turn my EQ off with my JBL xtreme and charge 3 at the skatepark so I can get max volume as the speakers can''t handle it on and could damage them
The SVS def have a more accurate sound. The the Bose sound a little grey in the low end but much louder. Not a fan of Bose but I think their 901's are amazing if placed right.
Bose is so popular because of large marketing budget, and appeal to form over function. As far as DSP goes, many very expensive speakers use DSP (legacy audio, paradigm persona 9) and those speakers sound amazing 😉 Great video as usual!
Is it necessary to be an expert in sound as long one is satisfied with what he listens ! Bose is simply focussed on what he does with full confidence that many so called audiophiles lacking. Your explanation is nice indeed.
what was the frequency response of your head unit? to be clear these speakers are amazing with the right amp! i have had the bose 301 speakers for many years, the sound is amazing with beautiful imaging in the right room and they have to be set up with nothing around them to block the sound from the sides
I am not a Bose fan, but respect men like this. As the saying goes: 'The Person Who Says It Cannot Be Done Should Not Interrupt The Person Doing It' The SVS is in a another league totally smashing those Bose, still Bose sells like Crazy over here.
SVS makes tiny aesthetic speakers like Bose? Remember bose is a product that's like Apple products. Overpriced if you compare to Android and Android Hardware options but a different value and experience package. Perfect...? Far from it. But it has it's own buyer segment
I found that many people see owning Bose as a sort of Status Symbol (we all know Bose doesn´t price their cheap stuffs low). Have that said, they are seeking for the WOW effect on other people. Bowers & Wilkins, Monitor Audio, Canton, Revel, KEF, Sennheiser, Bolsano Villetri, can´t give them that "WOW" they are looking for, because most people have never heard about those brands, and probably will never do.
A good set of speakers is the one that produces an open, detailed, controlled and balanced sound, meanwhile plays all types of music, connects to any kind of amplifier equipment driven by any sound source and the only necessary adjustment is the volume control.
My father had some 301's but after some years the outer rubber rings of the woofer cones rotted away completely. Maybe Bose choose better materials now but that put me really off from buying Bose and I am still happy with my 20 year old Kef's. They are still going strong :-)
This was a problem for ALL speaker manufacturers when they switched from a cloth based surround to foam. This foam tended to deteriorate in about 12 years from the date of manufacture. I had to replace the surrounds in my AR-3a speakers twice in the first twenty-five years I owned them. The last repair has lasted over twenty years, so I guess this foam has been improved. Meanwhile I have a pair of AR-3 speaker from the 1950s with cloth surrounds that are still fine.
I have two pairs of 10.2s, Series I and Series II. Both are over 30 years old. Never reconed and the foam rings are still good. Both sets of speakers still sound fantastic.
I've got some Bose 901's and I still love them for what they do. I have some Joseph audio speakers that are really bad ass. I have two different stereo system in the house...I love them both.
Great demo! A couple things struck me harder than I thought they would in the playback tracks: 13:38 Alan Walker - Fade: With the Bose, I didn't hear the slap-back delay at all unless I specifically listened for it. 16:32 Jabberheads - Jolene: Without being familiar with the song, I legit thought she had a filter on her vocals when they came in on the Bose demo! I was waiting for it to clear up, but it didn't until it instantly did when the SVS demo started. Strangely, that track through the Bose also gave me a feeling of being in an old crusty diner in a small town. Personally, I'm definitely an audiophile. I like hearing clarity, and a nice sound stage, over muddled bass (more mid-bass in this case) any day. I'm running my own custom built speakers for my computer setup and I legit pause music/videos every once in a while because I thought the sound I heard was some noise in my house.
The Bose 901's are awesome. I sold many to bars in the 80's and they played they shit out of them never a failure. Sounded great with proper eq. And freaking LOUD! I am a life time bench tech and was working at a Bose Authorized Repair Center back in the 80's. The Bose rep brought a set by back in the early 80's and did a demo. He took an ac cord stripped it down and then connected it across the speaker terminals and plugged it in to an ac outlet. I stepped back lol. Speaker made a wicked loud 60 cycle hum and all the speakers went out as far as they could. Left it connected for about 10 seconds. It played fine afterwards lol....very very tough speaker. Pretty indestructible. I never remember one failing. Eventually 20 years later most got speaker foam rot. Hard to find a set now 40 years later that have not been re coned. Still great with a re cone.
I've always bought Bose systems especially their 201, 301 & 901 speakers, they out performed most speakers in sound, the only close competitor was Klipsch Horns. Everyone wanted huge speakers that needed insurmountable power from you amplifiers to drive them but the Bose are small compact and doesn't need a huge amp to drive them to make alot music that sounds great and like your at a concert!
It depends what you're listening to. I had the SoundDock 10. Whereas I was impressed with it in the first few months later I realised that it was missing a lot in the mids and highs
I'm an engineer. In 2004 I began to reengineer original Bose 901. It took me 4 days to fix the bass and 4 years to fix the treble. Results were very satisfactory. It's an accurate full range system now without sacrificing the desirable aspects that make it unique.
@@gregsz1ful According to Hirsch Hauck labs it went to 26 hz with 10 percent THD. I'm talking about only the original and series II. These were CTS acoustic suspension drivers and the enclosure was sealed and has stuffing. But here's the kicker. Bose said IMO incorrectly that he had to get the system resonant frequency above 180 hz because he said below that frequency phase shift at resonance was audible. Mine appears to be at about 250 hz and is under damped with a well document rise of around 7db, very unacceptable. Below that frequency response falls off at 12 db per octave crossing the 1 khz output at around 95 hz and continues to fall at 12 db per octave. But the equalizer only provides 6 db per octave boost. At 30 hz it provides 18 db of boost when it should provide 30 db. That's 1000 times the power at 1 khz to remain flat. But each enclosure only handles 270 watts, 30 watts per driver times 9. So what's needed is 4 stacked systems wired in parallel for a 2 ohm load and a Crown 2502 Drive Core II amplifier to equal what my Teledyne AR9 can do with 60 wpc. At today's prices that's under $2000. The putty sealing the drivers dried out and cracked creating air leaks. Rather than removing 18 drivers and the putty I sealed the perimeter of each one with GE silicone caulking, very easy and fast to work with. The cloth surrounds on the CTS drivers was in perfect condition. I have 1 pair I drive with a 138 wpc Marantz receiver which I can easily clip without a low cut filter. It's also necessary to prevent acoustic feedback on my well suspended Empire 698 turntable. The tweeter array is driven by a 100 wpc RX500B receiver loafing along probably at about 1 or 2 watts. The tweeters cut in at around 9 khz with a simple 6 db per octave crossover. There are 6 per channel. I haven't listened to it in over 4 years.
I have the 1st series 301's. Had to replace the rubber on the driver and that kept them going a decade longer. I finally just put them on my old component rack. It has my old Technics amps and my old about 1984 Panasonic 4 head VHS tape machine. Top of the line then.
One thing I've noticed is Bose doesn't seem to be hated nearly as much in the headphone audiophile circles than they are in the hifi stereo/home theater circles. Their consumer oriented NC headphones and portable products are IMO competitive at their price points and I get the impression that's where most of their R&D gets focused these days. (Though Sony seems to be beating them at that now)
I think their headphones offer a better value compared to their speakers. They did have the best active NC headphones at one time. I'm not a headphone guys, so just a guess.
I have 2 pairs of Bose Interaudio 2000xl and they're actually quite good traditional little bookshelf speakers from the 70s and still going strong; good sensitivity, extended and tight bass, rather good highs for cone tweeters and pretty flat in between; I guess that's from before Bose found his profitable niche as an artist :)
Those interaudios were the budget line from Bose: they were designed to be, as you say, traditional, and they are probably the best value Bose product ever made, perhaps even one of the best regardless of price! My take on Bose is, in general, they seem to make products designed to please the ears of the average listener, not audiophiles: they are a lifestyle brand. You’ll notice, for a while, they also marketed smaller speakers, with a separate hideaway unit for bass. This looks far better to an interior designer, but that single hideaway speaker speaker goes high enough that some low voices and instruments will not be in stereo. In general, only an audiophile will notice this minor “flaw.” There’s often less high treble or “air” to the Bose sound, which makes them sound warmer to average people, but duller to musicians or audiophiles. They also have a mid-bass bump, which makes them sound like they have a good amount of bass, however, listen to any other speaker, and you’ll notice a decrease in bass volume, but the lowest note they can hit will be far deeper than all but a few Bose products. It’s all about how the end user wants their music to sound, provided they aren’t a musician listening to their own music.😂
Bose tricks: 1) Boost the mid bass so there is a huge peak at one set of frequencies, it's called one note bass. 2) Create a saddle (or suck out) in the lower midrange that tends to highlight the presence region and the female voice. 3) Create a broad band lift in the treble from the upper mids to mid treble. This net effect approximates the Fletcher Munson curve found in the old "loudness" buttons. Lots of folks seem to like to this curve and Bose capitalizes on it. It's called "saleable sound".
The “don’t know better” argument irks me - I absolutely love my 301 Series V speakers, paired with small 161s for a quad setup in my bedroom, but all of my actual stereo equipment serves their purposes perfectly well too. I feel like too many people ignore Bose’s best as well, like 400-800 Series speakers, but ah well. I appreciate the neutrality of my ADS, Pioneer, and Cambridge speakers, but the Bose has a coloration that makes them very enjoyable for casual listening and general multimedia. As for imaging, I’d say the Direct/Reflecting Bose models are very peculiar and very particular, but can be done well.
Yes, I didn't mean to say that they don't know any better. I noticed that it came off a bit harsh. I meant to say they target people who may not be interested in the technical aspects and just go based on whether it sounds good to them. As I pointed out though, our ears can be tricked. I may try to prove this theory using sound demos some day.
But they do target folks who do not know better. Folks buy bose since they see a friend who also purchased bose . The reverse also happens as folks who were bose fanatics by chance listen to a diy home theater system with infinite baffle subwoofers in manifolds and mains center surround linear line tower array and the bose fanatic renounces to the bose brand fast . Good thing bad sound is not fatal otherwise bose would be the leading cause of death.
@@joentell il say "real deal" then if that fits better. cause you actually measure these speakers for the real specs. i dont see anyone do the quality of work you do its really informative thanks a ton! there is a guy called big d wiz who measures amplifiers check him out.
Thanks for the video! I am not an audiophile, but I would say that the SVS has more definition and detail. In that regard, I would go for that speaker. :)
I like Bose because it is the smaller size but give you the sound of a big speaker. As I own it for longer I miss the vibration from the big speakers. So as starting to go the other way because I like clarity and good bass with vibration and Bose can't deliver the vibration for same sound.
On the other hand, the bump in the high frequencies on the SVS make some of those frequencies sound artificially harsh. Some people will like that as they say they are "crisper". I'll stick with Klipsch although I do like both Bose and SVS. You can't cut or boost frequencies that aren't there.
seephor I’m my experience with bose I like that you can play it as background and it won’t distract a lot that you can hear the music in good volume and still can talk and hear people around. They do well in businesses shops and stores
seephor I know. Bose is very muddy, and not tight at all. I’d much rather get KRK monitors honestly, as they’re way tighter then Bose, and not as muddy in the low mids. Bose is essentially just Beats in speaker form. Hyped frequency response and bad dynamics.
@@juliobello4561 Agree with this somewhat. I find the treble on most bookshelf speakers under say £1K somewhat harsh presenting what I term an unnatural "treble veneer" that you don't hear on real instruments. I guess it's distortion. I would prefer to have that rolled-off if I had to make a choice which is I guess what Bose do. Listening to some better speakers e.g. Focal 1008 Be's with Beryllium tweeters and that veneer disappears and the instruments start to sound closer to real life, more natural and less fatiguing. A decent pair of headphones also achieves this.
Klipsche has to be the best on the market especially for the price. I know their not cheap but you get what you pay for on this planet!!! Too loud sometimes man and oh they make the best subwoofers also!!!
The Bose headphones and home systems are one thing. Our band switched from conventional PAs and instrument amps to the Bose L1 Model II with the B2 bass modules for many of our mid-size performances, and the new S1 Pro units for smaller gigs. Combined with the Tone Match system, we are still amazed at what we can get out of the system. We can put the tower behind us for a sort of monitor system, and it will not feed back through the mikes or instruments. We run vocals, guitars, drums and bass through it, and it sounds as good or better than having all the standard gear. We looked at and tested other tower units on the market, and they just don't compare. Granted, the Bose is more expensive, but the savings is in not having to lug a truckload of gear around to gigs, and time spent on balancing prior to a gig.
bill karle, thats exactly where they REALLY accell, many pubs and clubs still successfully use 80s and 90s bose cannons, they dont have a stereo soundstage as such for a reason THEY ARE RAN MONO,they do the job superb (how often in any commercial premises would you be between two? its purley horses for courses and as for ease of use (modern home systems) alot of features are what B&O has done in home sustems decades earlier tbh :) (bose are usually 20yrs behind, they are a great product of course they are so there's no real discussion apart from everyone buys what they like :)
U need to listen to the F1, I think all their research goes into pro speakers then home speakers! All they doing is copying other brands and getting things done somehow!
I have a pair of Bose 401s from an estate sale. I have replaced the caps, but they still have a flat, unimpressive sound with little to no highs. Regarding the bulb fuses in line with the cap and wire wound resistor, if that bulb fuse is blown, the entire speaker will not sound, correct?
I still use a pair of 6.2's for my HT LF & RF speakers. The center & surrounds are Polk audio & the subs are MTX & Audiosource. Seems to work. I also have JBL's & KEF's as backups for the 6.2's just in case.
I am a speaker junkie, I change out my speakers constantly and I love it! I do mostly vintage stuff and I also refoam and recap the crossovers. I like Bose and I will admit I was obsessed with them at one time. I sold off my 901s and the smaller speakers but I still have my 501. For some reason, they deliver a wonderful sound that I cannot part with.
I thought this was a well thought out video. As a musician and ex broadcast engineer I prefer the bass NOT to be boosted relative to the other frequencies but extended down in response as far as possible (well, 20Hz). With some equipment however, the bass boosting is just making up for a poor speaker bass response so the term 'bass boosting' can be quite misleading. Nothing beats the sound of a very good pair of speakers fed with a flat (non EQ') input. I'm pleased you pointed out the difference between equipment which sounds merely 'nice' compared to equipment which sounds accurate. That said, most people come to really appreciate an accurate sound over prolonged listening and particularly with acoustic recordings.
yeah I personally dislike flat speakers that don't go down that far, as much I dislike speakers that boost bass. Cause they're both messing up the sound. On one hand you're making everything muddy sounding, and on the other you're just missing a key bit of the music. Which is why I ended up making my own bookshelf's for my desk, as I don't have room for a sub but still wanted a flat sound that got down lower than 40hz that wasn't stupidly expensive.
@@__-fm5qv Well done you. I don't have a sub now simply because my main speakers (transmission line) are flat down to nearly 18Hz. Having everything form the low end to the upper midrange coming form the same drivers and cabinets makes all the bass and midrange very coherent.
I prefer using an eq for music no matter how expensive/good my earbuds and speakers are. Unless my priority at the moment is to max volume like with my JBL xtreme and charge 3 at the skatepark and when used as my home theater
I spent 10 years as a music producer...lots of hours in studios.
I learned to ignore brand names and tech stats and go with what sounded best to me.
Still do that.
I agree.
Some really good people are STILL mixing on NS10's which sounds far from good or neutral.
Listening to what will give you your results is an infinite better approach than buying a certain brand.
Personally I just abuse my graphic EQ to the point that it sounds perfect ;)
@@johnrickard8512Whatever works, John!
@@annekedebruyn7797 No argument from me.
But......NS10s have excellent transient response and unclouded upper bass lower mid due to good damping of harmonics! Even though they sound shit, they tell the truth in some way. To be fair there were about 5 similar sounding speakers in the late 70s that could have become the standard and they all sounded quite similar, just NS10s accidentally won out.
Whatever you buy - if it sounds good to you - it's good.
I like that
In 1981 I went to Dixon’s to buy a hifi. I was looking to spend £180 on a Amstrad setup. Before I bought it the sales assistant made me listen to an Akai pro series separates stack. I purchased the Akai system for £ 699 and paid for it over 2 years. My point is I thought the Amstrad thing was good, until I was shown the difference. Because me and ALAN Sugar thought it was good does not make it so. In fact it was as the salesman said, a pile of plastic junk. I cannot thank that salesman enough for making me spend an extra £500 I have since spent Thousands of pounds and been bitterly disappointed but equally that doesn’t make them products rubbish.
No. If the best thing you have ever heard is Garbage, you are now under the illusion that garbage is the best thing in the world, flooding today's economy with cheap shit and devices with planned obsolescence in mind. Its all about money money money, filling the land-fills with unrecyclable tech because they're designed to not be repaired or reused. these are really awful business practices and incredibly detrimental to the economy and the world we live in. there are unethical and should be stopped. That goes for Apple too.
@@televison_is_dead it's all about brainwashedfeeling the economy with cheap crap and manipulating consumers and thinking that their product is the best thing in the world. Its all about money money money.
Lots of people buy and like Macdonald's.. But please don't try and pass it off as good food!
What Amar Bose did was master the Waveguide. This allowed him to use cheap/small Drivers with cheap Cabinet materials to create a better than average sound in a very small package. They were never marketed as "the best" or "Audiophile Speakers". It was essentially "Speakers for Dummies" after the Audiophile craze fell out of favor around the late 80's/early 90's.
He also produced excellent speakers such as the 901's etc.....etc....
Every company makes bad speakers as evidenced by some Sony's I've heard, etc....
Don't talk until you educate yourself.
Bose's wave guide is nothing more than a crude miniaturized version of the "transmission line" enclosure invented by Bailey and Radford in the 1950s. It's nothing new at all. There's also a built in bass boost in the amp section.
@@socksumi
Don't talk. You only embarrass yourself further. Bose makes plenty of speakers that are worthy of praise.
All companies put out bad speakers from time to time.
For you to single out bose and no other company, speaks volumes about your lack of intelligence.
@@bradhuskers others that made budget friendly speakers gave them budget prices... Bose didnt... 2 grand for alarm clock drivers...
my grandparents bought one... sounds like a large alarm clock till this day...
does anyone remember alarm clocks???
"Speaker for Dummies?" You must be referring about yourself.
I am not an audio technician , just a regular guy who likes the music so much, Bose maybe doesn’t have a lot of highs or lows , however the “clarity” and the “separation” of musical instruments are IMPRESSIVE !!
Cant have clarity without highs or lows.
Acoustic guitars sound amazing on Bose.
I think bose actually separate the soundstage even if the source track is mono
@@KinChungE they do not, its not possible
Hmm I feel like you could spend the same amount of money on a piece of good audio gear and quickly find out that Bose does neither very well.
All Bose does pretty well is their noise cancelling tech but other companies are doing it pretty well now. I’ve only recommended Bose is in the past for noise cancelling headphones on the airplane but that’s changed since.
I know someone who likes R&B and Jazz and likes to listen to vinyl. They then proceeded to buy a set of Bose headphones since they got a “deal.” Smh
I have two paper cups with string between from when I was a kid still sound great need 3 more cups and a dustbin to upgrade to 5.1
🤣
Please take my upvote this comment made my day
nowdays a dustbin is used as subwoofer ? ":D
I was an audio salesman many years ago. Plenty of customers would come in, asking about the ratings and performance 'numbers' of various speakers. In my mind, numbers don't mean much. My question to the customers would always be, "How do they sound to you?" As a customer, I buy speakers to listen to, not for the literature with specifications. If the Bose sound better to you, buy 'em! If the the Infinity sound better, buy them! Don't rely on printed information to tell you what sounds good.
I understand, but it's tricky when changes in volume will affect ones perception of a speaker. But generally, I agree with you.
As a person who loves good sound, Does an audiophile hear what I hear? As you get older, you don’t hear as much. You have hand it to Bose because they have been able to what I like to call putting dynamite in a small package. You even like their Bluetooth speakers, and their headphones were way ahead of their time. What I don’t like about audiophiles is they are sound snobs! They pull out out a meter. If you don’t agree , you are wrong. I know a 8 inch woofer can’t replicate a 15 inch one. Thanks to Bose and porting technology they seem to have come close any way. I can’t hear the difference between a 700 turntable and a 3000 one! There are so many variables, and it depends on what you are listening to. I agree with Tim, it’s in your ear. If you think you got value for what you spent, Aa d are happy that’s all that matters.
Exactly my point..
I don't know what Bose is doing and how they improve the sound quality but I buy bose because I like to listen music comes out from bose speakers.
I am not technical person and I don't want to do any PHD on sound.. I buy what I like.. Other music system/speakers may give original, pure or better sound then Bose but if i dont like it or they are not met my requirements what is a use of that..
I don't want good looking speakers which looks good in my living room or I can do showoff in front of friends and throw big numbers like technical guys (16-inch subwoofer, 5000watts, drive, pmpo, storage etc) but in reality I don't like the music comes out of it then what is a sense of buying what world like..
We don't always buy what is good for us but we buy what we like.. Like fruits and vegetables are good for our health but we buy burgers, chips etc we know it's not healthy but we like it.
*I choose bose because I like the music cames out of their sound system*
If I am an audio salesman, I will ask what kind of music they're listening.
If they listen to a lot of genre, they need flat speaker and tweak some EQ, depends on what genre they listening.
Even looks can convince people one way or another on the sound.
I find people seem to love a ton of treble and of bass these days.
If you want to understand Bose, all you need to understand is that at the top of their design guidelines is WAF. Everything else is secondary. (Wife Acceptance Factor)
This is so so true. My best friend's dad was raised in the 60s and 70s and was a super audiophile after college. He's 70 now and has a Bose sound bar in the living room and just retired his Bose sounddock I for a home pod. This is a guy who owned the AR speakers with the sand in them and also owned ESS towers... Happy wife happy life - Bose
Billy Boden 100% right on bro! I had to beg my ex wife to accept my Magnepan’s big size. She wasn’t a fan of speakers protruding into the living space.
So true!
had my pioneer cs speakers disguised as coffee tables for a year.
I always imagined a good partner would allow and urge me to pursue my hobby... maybe this is why I'm single.
The only Bose product I ever owned was this desktop radio that sounded 5 times it's size. I opened it up to see why, and the only difference between this and every other radio was the weird maze like chamber behind the speakers. In fact, with the top removed, it lost 50% of it's bass response, and the mids became flat and lifeless.
That chamber was a transmission line, and it was invented not by Bose, but by Benjamin Olney who worked for Stromberg-Carlson. It goes back to the thirties - long enough ago for the patent to expire so Bose could use the technology for free.
@@ScottGrammer I'm not into trivia.
@@timhallas4275
No but you might be trivial.
T-line speakers exist to this day, I built a pair, they are an accepted type along with horns, panels, open baffle etc.
Mine are an MTM confirmation with 5 1/2" drivers and have a rich mid range and go down to 40 Hz.
@@ScottGrammer who cares who invented it lol. It works, and makes tiny bluetooth speakers punch way above their price range.
This is like bashing every company who uses a 4th order because they didn't invent it 🤦♂️
Before Bose, labyrinth enclosures were trial and error for the most part. Bose went all in with the right materials and physics.
As someone who used to be into HiFi in a BIG WAY
One day it dawned on ME , ( I’m ) sitting down and LISTENING for FAULTS .
Instead of ( LISTENING TO THE MUSIC ) so my advise , for what it’s worth
Stop driving yourself crazy looking for perfection and just enjoy the music .
My sentiments exactly.
You are a person was "BIG" into the generic name only, Hi Fi. But never became an audiophile. Regrettably the preponderance of individuals here comments and replies don't have a clue what the spokesman in this video means by the "audiophiles". I hate to say this. Consequently, he is actually addressing a rarified few.
Exactly. If you like Bose, that’s fine. If you like cheap Insignia speakers, cool. Buy those and save money. I don’t understand why audiophiles get so upset about what other people like. I’d go so far as to say audiophiles are wrong. Because audio quality is ultimately subjective. And if more people tend to like something else, then they are the odd ones out. And it doesn’t matter because it’s subjective
@@mab7175What is an audiophile? Answer: a person with narcissistic tendencies that can’t accept the fact that subjective experiences they have don’t match what most other people’s subjective experiences are. Get over yourself.
the difference between someone who likes music and an audiophile is the music lover listens to the music and the other listens to the speaker
I am involved in loudspeaker design and manufacturing since long time and I agree with bass boost as well as nonlinear frequency response being a more pleasant result. On my humble opinion flat frequency response is technically correct if the recorded source has been "tailored" according to what random listeners really like (some bass boost, less 3 kHz energy, some extra 16 kHz etc.). A perfectly flat frequency response involves a faithful reproduction of the signal, a pleasant signal has a frequency response that matches the frequency response of our ears; and in fact our ears have a peak sensitivity at 3 kHz, low frequency roll off below 200 Hz and high frequency roll off above let's say 5 kHz. Back to Bose and to other speakers that may have an uneven frequency response (matching somehow our hearing system behavior) ... random listeners according to my experience really like them more and thus buy them.
Can attest. I have a pair of JBL studio monitors that have +/-2db down to 40 Hz according to the datasheet. They sound very boring. I also have a pair that I made with tweeters with huge magnets and some crossover meddling to sound crisp and deep. Tons of detail but they are not flat. Everyone is blown away but I'd never use them for recording.
The perfect system has to faithfully reproduce the sound. What the ear senses or likes has nothing to do with this. Any alteration might be agreeable but that’s not the point.
@@jimbo2629 Hi Jim, I fully agree, to some extent. The central point perhaps is the recording of a music track. For example, most electronic music is recorded with a mostly pleasant result that implicates some characteristics as I mentioned above. Not all musicians however are recorded with the same criteria; when you mix guitars, drums, voices and other channels together creating a mix there is a chance that you end up in having a boring, annoying sound. So the reason an EQ has been invented is because many times, when we play a track, there's not enough bass, too much mids or the sound is just not crisp. Building a loudspeaker that has a flat frequency response is relatively easy but the chances that a "perfectly flat frequency response loudspeaker" does not please our ears is relatively high...not because the loudspeaker is bad. So we end up in having basically all discotheques in having 12 dB more bass in order to people have fun...Also, when we buy a perfectly flat loudspeaker and place it in our living room it ends up in being in a corner, so the corner ads up to 9 dB low frequency, room resonances mess this up again adding and subtracting LF energy depending where you are. In conclusion, perfectly flat loudspeakers are the correct technical approach, but chances to distort the result due to resonances of the room, wrong placement of the speaker, reverb, wrong EQ and so on should impose the knowledge of basic acoustics by the customer. I am aware that this discussion can be very long and there are more topics that can be touched...yet back to the main topic, a customer with no knowledge at all about acoustics is easily "fooled" by a loudspeaker with more bass, less aggressive sound (less 3kHz octave) and some extra dB on the higher end of the spectrum. If we try to "fool" him with a loudspeaker with low frequency roll-off, some extra energy around 3kHz, and less high frequencies ... that's the point where the customer becomes a sound engineer ;-)
Jim bo- what your ears hear has a lot to do with frequency response. Its all in how your ears perceive the incoming sound. A flat frequency response can actually sound pretty bad compared to properly set up sound systems where the lower and higher frequencies are slightly amplified, thus counteracting what your ears actually hear thus making the frequency response seam flat to your ears.
As you get older the frequency response of your ears drops considerably. By the time you get to 60 its unlikely you can hear anything above 8KHz and even at 40 years old you can forget 16KHz
beauty are in the ears of the beholder...the 1st time I heard the sound of BOSE speakers,I already felt in love with it.but I don't discriminate other peoples choices in terms of sound of speakers.its your choice of liking...
Personally, I don't believe bass is an indicator of sound quality. I like my music balanced.
I hear you. I think that lack of bass sometimes takes away from the engagement for me.
@@joentell same, about the bass. i generally only buy equipment that is adjustable, some kind of equalizer. however, i purchased a Bose Revolve + last year, and its wonderful. i never considered bose until i needed a 360 speaker (i live out of a motorhome and am moving around often, so its nice the sound goes everywhere evenly). it sounds good, but is very flat
Normaly yes but i got a 12" rockford sub in the trunk of my carr i like bass but as for my home cinema i got a activ 6.5" jbl sub under my bed it scares the shit out of me so mutch bass
All frequencies are taken into consideration when it comes to quality regardless of sound signature preferences but ya some people like more bass some less just like treble. I do prefer my bass boosted and use an EQ even with my sony extra bass earbuds and jbl xtreme and charge 3 speakers. I don't use EQ at the outdoor skateparks though as I feel the jbl speakers sound good enough without which allows me to go a bit louder and our indoor skatepark uses their professional series.
Lack of bass equals Lack of music
Go listen to piano or orchestra music on a Bose system then go listen to the same music on a infinite baffle home theater system with linear line array towers._
The best sounding alingnment out of ported , sealed and infinite baffle is infinite baffle
Hear the music not the box is infinite baffle
Open your ears and your mind soon follows.
Ex Bose user.
I cannot believe you only have 13k subs. You have a very no nonsense way of discussing subjects like this. I like the way you present the facts, then your opinion based on those facts and then you present a very carefully thought out and pretty meticulously done audio demo. I am not 100% convinced on the value of the demo as there are far too many variables to draw a conclusion from only the sound demo. However the sound demos you have done on equipment that I am familiar with (such as the 301s) are pretty spot on. I have always thought that they sound okay for very casual listening at low volumes, where the bass bump actually helps, but not for higher volume critical listening. They are very non fatiguing speakers and kinda have the same sound signature that you may experience from a band in a bar or small club. You are exactly right about the convenience factor (also known as WAF) in many of their products. I know that about 10 years ago I bought a Bose Cinemate 3 piece system for my television in my living room. At the time there was no soundbar setup in the same price range that even came close. I know that now there are other options but for casual TV and non home theater movie watching it is still working just fine. It has a very high WAF (wife acceptance factor). I really enjoy your videos so keep up the good work.
Bose 201s!!! I had those in high school and college. I gave them to my dad over 20 years ago and he still uses them alongside a pair of Sansui SP-LE8Ts that he picked up in Japan while on R&R in Vietnam. The combined sound is very good, and all the frequencies seem filled out.
Bose is a different product that should not be compared with audiophile audio. There is no possible comparison. They are two different worlds and no, the audiophile manufacturers do not have anything to learn from the brand. If they did follow the sound signature of the brand they would no longer be an audiophile product. Bose works with Psychoacoustics. This is the branch of psychophysics involving the scientific study of sound perception and audiology. Or, in other words, they "trick" your brain. They are not audiophile products and they never intended them to be. I do not even understand why people insist on comparing them to audiophile audio. They do what they do and they are the best at what they do but their products are different. Their direct reflecting system was created to help people listen to the sound regardless of your positioning in the room. They do not have a sweet spot by design. That is not the idea. The idea was or is to dill the room with music. Stop trying to compare them with audiophile systems. They are worlds apart. And stop comparing them to Bang & Olufsen. They do not share the same goals in terms of listening experience. Bose highs are rolled off not because the tweeters are pointing backwards they are rolled off by design. Amar Bose considered that humans could not hear anything below 30Hz or above 15Khz and thus, those frequencies did not need to be there. There is an MIT lecture somewhere on youtube where you can hear him explaining why he did that and, although it is an interesting approach to audio perception, it is not comparable, at all, with high-end audio. As a side note, Bose was not one of the first using sound-cancelling on their headphones. They were the first. Amar designed the first headphones after a helicopter ride he had. Bose worked with the military to create the headphones for the pilots and other things. Something interesting about Bose is that they also created a car suspension system. Look it up. It was very heavy and did not really catch up at the time, but they were in the right direction.
Contractions scare u? 🤔
Great video man! Love the Bose in the ceiling part. I was rollin'!!
Thanks man! Who does that right? I even got AC vents to cover them! LOL.
@@joentell Classic!!!
I really enjoyed this video, I have zero allusions about the sound quality of Bose speakers and yet I seem to have accumulated several pairs over the years anyway. I'm in the process of ummm hotroding some at the moment.
Just for giggles I'm using a pair of 101's as woofers with a pair of Gemstones as tweeter and mid-range connected to an external crossover..!!
That's awesome! Let me know how it goes!
....And if you think Bose gear is overpriced over in the USA you should see what you have to pay for them here in Australia..!!
Something that's rarely explored in audiophile conversations is what you might call "coffeeshopability." How well do speakers play when they're not in a typical stereo setup.
When reviewing speakers, we always talk about sound stage and imaging. That only happens when you're sitting in a sweet spot that is likely relatively small. In the real world, how often are speakers actually used like this? If you're in a coffee shop listening to music, you're never going to benefit from stereo imaging. You will still notice things like clarity, tight bass response, and crisp highs.
Though a lot of the offerings from Bose are lacking. They do generally perform well in businesses, public places, or most other places you're listening to music. Maybe that's some of the intent behind those rear facing tweeters, to throw the sound around rather than focus it. I love my stereo setup, but most of the time I listen to music, I'm cooking dinner, entertaining company, or moving around throughout my house. I'm rarely in the tiny sweet spot between my KEFs.
I like that!
Unfortunately a long technical response to this got wiped by a shitty WiFi connection but long story short, Bose are making consumer audio products with a different functional spec to audiophile equipment. The company was founded because Amar Bose believed that reflected sound was a psychologically important element of a live performance and he wanted speakers that reproduced that even if it meant sacrificing integrity of sound reproduction in the treble spectrum. With modern DSP it's possible that Bose could produce an audiophile grade speaker that gave a flatter frequency response, improved trebles with minimised "smearing" as you describe it, while reducing the inevitable standing waves of direct & reflected sound using cabinet design, phase guide & DSP to tie it all together, but that would be a very expensive product and would have to tradeoff some sound diffusion versus accuracy within the listening sweetspot. Bose customers want location-insensitive speakers which sound good. That means sound diffusion and emphasised bass. They don't want audiophile speakers and there's arguably little point in Bose making them. It's much more likely that companies like KEF and B&W would introduce lifestyle wireless speakers for use in cafe's, offices and kitchens with a more diffuse and less accurate sound, which they have done. They're chasing the bigger market rather than Bose chasing a niche. The Bose signature sound is a result of decades of research into creating easy to use and good sounding speakers that diffuse sound effectively & that you can listen to all day. I love listening to Klipsch horns for an hour or so but I find them fatiguing after more time. Bose make an inoffensive stylish product with great engineering and do so at high volume. They've enabled a lot of people to get good sound quality at home with minimal setup or tuning. They're actually doing a good thing. Having said all that I have KEF speakers, yamaha amps & AVs in my house but I don't diss Bose buyers. Their purchase made sense for them. The 301s give a pleasant diffused sound that works in many non-ideal listening spaces. They fit a use case & are actually pretty cheap.
I would price price system which competes satisfactory with ambient real sounds. It is not the case in listening room. My system which I set up and aligned does satisfactory in almost every point of my room and out. Listening chair is only for proper left right location.
@DispelTheMyth it's not just to widen the sweetspot. Bose believed that listeners felt sound reproduction was more lifelike with reflected sound. Lots of people like these speakers. They might lose something in terms of treble and overall frequency reproduction accuracy versus non reflecting speakers of a similar price but they sound dynamic & full in many listening environments. I feel sorry for those who hate Bose because they're kind of missing the point. They're not making speakers for modern audiophiles. It's a simple to use mass market consumer product. The original 901 was in many respects a work of genius. The 9 single driver design uses active EQ to push the frequency reproduction across the driver array & to remove reflected standing waves. The absence of a crossover network was deemed a selling point in those days as there was a tradeoff of single driver rolling off or distortion, versus amplitude dips & artifacts of driver mismatch around the crossover points. Bose went for multiple single drivers and I think the 901 found a good balance of distortion versus rolling off. It's great for opera, rock and folk with a nice powerful amp and the right distance to the walls. It sounds fluid and organic. It's not the perfect speaker but it's one man's intriguing vision of what a lifelike speaker should sound like. I recommend everyone listen to properly setup 901s at least once in their lives. I'd make the same claim for Klipsch La Scalas but the wife would kill me if I bought a pair. Maybe it's worth it. Speakers to listen to before you die 😁
I have tried many different speaker brands. The last pair of speaker stays with me is bose. I find it easy sounding and comfort to listen for long time (no harsh). it is one size fit all to me.
I really enjoy your videos in general. This one brought back memories because I had Bose as a professor back in the 80s. Bose was hated be audiophiles well before the Acoustimas (?) speakers. IIRC, Bose was very big on speaker placement in the room being pretty critical of wall placement and corners. Part of his philosophy on the direct/reflecting was that people, in a living situation, aren’t nailed to one sweet spot in the room. People move around so the dispersion helps create a wider listening area. I had a pair of 801s and really loved them. Back the you could easily go into a store and compare Bose to brands like KEF, JBL, Boston Acoustics, Polk. and a host of others. I liked his speakers although many had issues with the full range, multiple drivers in the 901 vs a traditional woofer/tweeter setup. BTW my 801s worked with any receiver.
I think I should also point out that Bose was a great innovator in car stereos. The one ideal thing about cars is you know exactly where people are sitting.( unlike a room). I think he worked with Cadillac to get some of the first higher quality sound systems in cars back in the 80s.
Anyway, keep up the great videos.
What a terrific video. Being in audio for decades you concisely described what Bose is. A product for the masses, Bose was very lucky, he was at the right place at the right time. His product worked because it was simple to unbox and install. Wires were color coded with proprietary jacks and plugs to make for a dead simple installation. The product was tiny and hid in the background. So, it had a high wife acceptance factor.
My issue with Bose was not the construction or sound, it was the cost. You paid for a huge ad budget including Mr. Paul Harvey and that jacked up the price. The customer thought they were paying more due to better quality parts and performance when in actuality they were getting mediocre crap. If the price was cut by 50%, would have an entirely different attitude towards the product and company.
Agree. I'm not sitting still in one spot listening to music. I move around, do other stuff, may sit in different locations of my workshop/office and the direct/reflecting dispersed sound make for better coverage that allows me to work and enjoy the music at the same time. Currently rocking a Bose 201 with an Infinity 12" sub. So yeah, I like a solid, thumping bass.
I have never seen a more polarized comments section on a non political video. Wow.
CopperWhopper67,
People disagreeing, but civil, polite, and fun!
I got this far without being repulsed, traumatised, or fearful about the future of humanity as too often happens when reading comments.
Welcome to the age-old love-hate bose debate!! I primarily watch these Bose videos for the comment section, lol.
There's a reason for that.
We have polarized comments because sound is a subjective thing most of the time.
@@johnconnor4953 whereas accurate representation is not necessarily subjective. At least to a lesser degree. At the low end of the audio market there are sacrifices and a lot of room for subjectivity between brands. At the high end trade offs are discernible. Bose is known for using marketing to to position it's product rather than engineering. For the price of a Bose system you can purchase a lot more fidelity. Most people aren't familiar with high end speaker brands but pretty much everyone has heard of Bose, hence the mainstream appeal.
Wow! That's was informative and very well thought out and presented! Great video!
Your backdrop swapping every other sentence is distracting as hell.
You're not the only one. Just trying something new. No more.
Yes, though this as well
@Trevor Hoft mabye, but he could just want to note something he didn't like about the video (btw, it's obvious you're a Skullcandy fan, if you're trying to research why competitor companies are worse, I've been there, I've seen it, please stop.)
Lol... nothing to say!
That's his twin brother helping do the video. lmao
I recently finished setting up my home theater system. Onkyo, Sony and Boston Acoustics components. It sounds amazing - but it took me 2 weeks and lots of tweaking to get it right. Bose systems mostly 'black box' type, with speaker placement really the only concern. This no doubt appeals to the masses.
As a bose dealer for quite a few years there is a place for it. It does exceptionally well in open floor plance with monstrously tall ceilings without wall to wall carpet. I had baffle boards setup for in home demos with a few different architectural speakers and bose cubes. And would "go the extra mile" and let home owners decide for themselves. Very interesting when you turn someone's living room into a sound room.
i could actually imagine that type of room could make bose sound OKish. And that's just how I picture the average metrosexual bose (pose) owner's apartment!
My parents still have their 901’s. From the early 80’s
My Parents also have them, the Version VI. I really like them. But don't want to own them by myself.
901s working until now!
i use to work as technician for bose. i can assure that they have a enclouser design excellent. they can deliver bass even with small speakers. like soundlink mini.
they use normal amplifier d class at 20v . the qualitiy of material are good. as you say they lack in middle and highs and have punchy bass
Cheap design, cheap parts, great marketing - Ex Bose engineer.
they do
Those 201's were my first ever speakers. I loved them. Then I found other brands and have continued to grow. I don't knock others for liking Bose. Just enjoy what you enjoy.
I love Bose. They sound great. Just purchased the S1 Pro for my bedroom. Sounds amazing. Popular brands will always get a lot of hate from self proclaimed experts (audiophiles).
To note, the dip between 8-10k on the Bose speakers also happens to be where sibilant noises occur in the human voice. I'm guessing the dip in response in the 8-10k range is very, very intentional for that reason.
Bose is very very good at tuning sounds that can be listened to hours without headache, same is not true with other brands that audiophile like. If I can't enjoy the music, the accuracy is second thought. I have some of their headphones, they are the most comfortable of all of the companies.
Having more base never a good thing for your ears, so your statement doesn't have any bases.
@@Capturing-Memories I never said bose has heavy bass, are you dreaming? Bose controlled treble and bass, little high mids and that's why we can listen to them for ours without headache.
@@nitinkumar29 Have you watched the video all the way to the end?
@@Capturing-Memories yes. I have several headphone from bose and other company. I know what he meant, and what I have experienced.
@@nitinkumar29 Nothing said about headphones, this video is about Bose speakers and his tests clearly show Bose boosts the base compared to a technically well designed audiophile speakers the same size and power for 1/3 the price.
Your test video cleared me why I'm a fun of Bose and what is the matter behind of it. It seems more saturation, clarity in base and middle ranges and that's what takes me. Thank you for work.
Maybe Bose also knows that most people like using V-shape equalizer in their amplifier.
That little soundlink speaker is pretty amazing. Good sound is good sound, to hell with delusional audiophile elitists.
Well said.
Maybe you're just easily impressed. I have no issue with bose, but c'mon.
@@stizuart for the price and size it sounds amazing
I also have one. It’s sounds great with deep house, R&B, smooth Jazz and corridors Spanish music. I take to my father in laws house sit on the patio and have a drink. He loves it too.
@slow mazda Well, it's personal preference. It may not be good to you but what's good to you may not be good to others.
I am not an audiophile and I am pretty sure I will not like audiophile standards.
When I was a teenager, I loved the Bose Acoustimass presentation they had at Fry's Electronics, where they played a home theater demo with large speaker boxes covering the tiny Acoustimass satellites, and would do a surprise reveal at the end showing that all of that sound was coming from such tiny speakers. It was great marketing. Though I know now there are better speakers to choose, Bose is still killing it in the wireless noise cancellation market.
I really liked the quotes and historical context you gave in your video. Great production value.
I was amazed by that same demo. I mentioned it in my HomePod vs. Bookshelf speakers video. ruclips.net/video/g9VpR2eEtGM/видео.html
I bought the AM-5 back then and while they do produce large-sounding bass and decent upper mid/lower treble, the huge dip in the middle frequencies has always kept me from being satisfied with them as far as music is concerned. The sound in a home theater setup can be supplemented to some degree by the use of the center channel speaker, but I ended up using the Bose subwoofer under the covered porch floor for outdoor bass, and the satellites are sitting on a bookshelf. :D
Currently sony has the best noise canceling and I prefer their sound a bit more for my earbuds and have xb70bt but bose is a decent brand. I don't have home speakers anymore I've been so happy with my mobile jbl xtreme and charge 3 for home theater and for outdoor skateparks and the indoor skatepark has their professional series . My only complaint about bose is lack of selection/options
They are made for home cinema, not so much for music.
A pretty fair assessment! A couple of things worth pointing out:
1) Yes, Bose markets toward people who want better sound (than cheap, off-the-shelf systems), but part of their marketing for Ease of Use is to capture the older demographic, who cannot hear high frequencies anyway. In other words, as human ears age, OUR treble rolls off too! Older people can't hear the lack of treble on Bose, but they CAN hear the deeper bass.
2) It's hard to tell online, but sometimes, if we have to choose between stronger bass of the 301s vs. more transparent highs of the others, I would want the extra bass and give up that last 10 kHz on top. Try something like Ace of Base's The Sign.
3) If the SVS Prime can't accurately represent bass, how is that any better than the Bose not being able to accurately present treble? It's kind of apples & oranges. What we WANT is both, and to MY ears, if I can't have both, I'd take more bass and less of the ear-splitting treble. I guess in this regard, you could say the 301s have a "warmer" sound, instead of "brighter."
4) I bet there was a lot of eye-rolling when your audiophile viewers saw the paper cone drivers in the 301s.
The basic premise of an audiophile is that the reproduced music should be as close to the experience you get if you were sitting in front of the band playing live. The thing is, even if you remove all artificial amplification from the live performance, you can not always reproduce the music in your living room at the same volume as a live performance. Well, at least if you have a family living under the same roof. When you play the music at a much lower volume, the lower frequencies tend to loose in share of energy when everything is flat. Combined with the room character, the out put needs to be tweaked to be enjoyable. Simple as that. Bose does this and adds beautifully manufactured objects that fits any living room style and build quality that lasts a lifetime. They should be applauded.
An audiophile listens to the equipment, everyone else listens to the music
Yeah, they are a strange bunch, some listen to power cables that cost thousands of dollars.
How does the equipment sound with no music ?
@@CASANOVAPRO1985 ask an audiophile 😄
I listen to both. Do you like Bose? Lol!
@@antiangelofmusic my first "high-end" (lol, thats what I thought in 1990) were some Bose towers. They sounded decent at the time but I just make my own cabinets now. Good clean power, well built crossovers, and high bit rate music is more interesting to me. I still use my Custom made Focal Geminis style cabinets I built 20 years ago.
Had my 5.1 lifestyle system nearly 15 years now and still going strong! Has a nice smooth sound and decent clarity if you play with the bass and treble.
I bought my wave radio in 1997 and it's still like brand new and flawless.
I tried to blow mine up by turning all the way up didn't work still sounds great after 15 years as well 5.1 lifestyle best sound system ever
Love my Bose tv sound bar. Affordable yet amazing sound
for me Bose is allways scam for less money you get much better systems , better in every thing. BOSE Lifestyle 650 Home Entertainment System 5.1 compare it to a Teufel ULTIMA 40 Surround All-In Edition "5.1.2-Set" for the same price but incl. Denon AVR-X2700H DAB AV-Receiver , Beamer BenQ W2700 and Panasonic DP-UB824 Blu-Ray-Player
Using 301 series since 1987. It’s a bigger sound box with two tweeters. Have the newer 301 as well which is one tweeter. The older one is gold
I bought a wave radio a few years ago. I freaking love it. Best sound ever and it takes up very little space. Best money I ever spent.
Designed by Henry Kloss for Amar Bose.
I’ve been in an orchestra for 5 years now, so I know a good bit about how sound should really be-it’s where my audiophile fascination spawned from. Now, I have two different types of listening times, and a pair of headphones for each. One where I specifically sit down, put on my one pair of headphones (Sennheiser HD1’s) and listen to the music-and the music only, every detail, the highs and lows and mids. My other pair is used for commuting, where I like to listen to good music with world class noise cancelling to drown out the drone of a bus engine in the background. Guess which pair that is? My Bose. Bose does indeed fit its intended audience headphone wise, someone who wants a pair of pretty good headphones with insane noise cancelling for average use.
Edit: here’s how I feel on the SVS vs the BOSE: the SVS sounds very good if your genuinely listening to the music, and the Bose fits a more relaxed sound environment where music is in the background or it’s just casual.
Rhodesia thank you that’s how I see music too and that’s how I feel Bose fits in the market is not meant to be the center attention is for the background to fill the party
oh wow, ive been searching for a sound system for my family, especially my young kids to enjoy. i think your explanation gave me the answer ive been looking for. enjoy the experience w/ my kids while music plays in the background, and when theyve all grown up, enjoy the music to reminisce the moments with my kids ( maybe a $5000 system playing spongebob songs)
JN's Channel Their home theater systems are expensive for no reason just thought I should warn you on that. Especially for the quality they be giving you. If you’re looking for a separate component setup (dedicated channels w/ receiver). I highly recommend going that route. Taking WAF (Wife Acceptance Factor) into consideration though, maybe a decent sound bar will work for you.
@@Iridiumcosmos You are right, for the price of their entry level I can buy a dedicated receiver and just build my own stereo speakers from old car speakers.
I'll take the Sony noise cancelling headphones over the Bose.
Speakers, Bose has nothing worth mentioning and hasn't for decades.
I got the Bose 501's a long time ago and loved them as they had some good bass and the highs didn't leave your ears ringing, which is bad by the way, and they are still playing after more than 30 years of use.
Same experience I have 😀
my very first loudspeakers! bought em in japan in 84.
Mine are over 30 years old also!!! I also had them in the tobacco barn for ten years exposed to the weather elements with a pair of Sony speakers. I brang them all in, hooked-up & first time turning them up, Sony popped. My kids still use 501’s everyday & they still hit
That is very true, for me, Bose designed their speakers for you listen to it for much longer periods of time because too much highs is exhausting to the ears. If there are guys out there with either a 2 or 3 way frontal pair of speakers with lots of highs, try listening with a moderate high volume and ears gets tired after a few songs. Rest your ears then try it again with treble lowered similar to Bose's high frequency range and will notice a big difference in your ears and you can listen to it a lot longer. But then of course, each of us have our own preference.
The harman curve suggested for hifi.. is a tilted curve (like bose) with some boost in the bass region. However the Bose have a peak in the mids end its extension at both ends is poor. Someone said "no highs, no bass, it shall be bose"
The basic Bose principal was to be able to walk around room and still retain some assemblence of stereo effect, without just hearing the closest speaker. That was designed in several models. There is also a flat power response. Its sounds good in next room.
No it was to use the smallest speaker drivers possible and maximise their sound. unfortunately thats how bose got their reputation of having no bass or treble, "got no highs got no lows, must be bose"
@@Synthematix The 4.5 inch size were optimum for intended purpose. 901s go lower than most speakers, 30 Hz. Bose uses up to 18 inch on pro models, and as low as 1 inch domes on Japanese models
Friend of mine just spent $3500 on some Bose system,after hearing my B&W speakers he almost cried.
Hey man what model B&W speakers is it?
I bet!!😳😆😆
I have always found B and W speakers a little brite.
@@rickatkinson1000 That's quite possible if you're used to the rolled off highs Bose speakers tend to have
$3,500 is a lot of money to throw around on gear so aimlessly.
I had B&W bookshelf speakers. When the highs blew it sounded like Bose speakers.
Lol 😂
My experience with both brands is very similar.
Bose soundsport headphones are my favorite. I never had a migraine even when listening to it for hours.
True my senheisers i can listen for hours, but my audiotechnica headphones are overwhelming to the senses after about 5 hours. Although the audiotechnica is blissfull listening and the difference is like fastfood vs a chefs dish. Muffled versus superclear.
Wow......you don’t get a migraine. How nice. That’s like saying you like Mc Donalds because it never gives you the runs or makes you throw up.
@@martyzielinski2469 no highs no lows. No ear strain. No migraines.
I owned a pair of Bose 501, They sounded great , particularly on live recordings that has an ambience. In real live concerts, music is loud and there is really no precision on spot. And the good thing is that you can keep listening for as lo g as wish with feel tired. I am an audiophile, I do enjoy listening to them .
I like the 501 because that have 10'' woofer's in than I head 201' thar cool and 901's I like the sound of 501's more bass
They have a bass rich sound with diffuse imaging. This is their appeal. But they also lack sparkle and detail and because they use paper woofers and paper cone tweeters the 501s can sound a bit crude and unrefined compared to drivers made of laminates, metals and silk domes.
@@socksumi
The Bose were intentional manufactured to sound spectacular and not with "audio transparency" for neophytes entry into component stereo high fidelity audio equipment. My interests in audio began the mid 1960s. The intent of audio high fidelity from the outset from pioneering forerunners as Avery Fisher was for high fidelity audio component gear to simulate reproducing a live performance in your listening room. Hence, the initiating emergence for the term audiophile. This from the outset was the trajectory of the development from the outset of the high fidelity audio industry. The trend toward this tenet in the development of technologies of high end audio was regrettably diverted by Bose. Sales had appreciably increase for audio gear in the mid 1970s. And Bose diverted the trajectory from neutral transparency and sonic accuracy to gimmickries. To capture the ears of the naive surging purchasers of audio gear. Thus the buyers of audio gear shifted from acquisition toward sonic accuracy to bragging rights of I have more spectacular sounding speakers. The audiophiles who predated Bose scoffed at Bose gimmickries designing speakers blasting tweeters to bounce higher audio frequencies off the walls behind the speakers. Efforts to create a bogus soundstage for spectacularisms not imagery for spatial localizations including depth within the horizontal plane. Hence, potential new audiophiles during Bose concocted gimmickries were being diverted away from the coinciding developments toward "phase coherence" in loudspeaker design developments in high end audio equipment. Bose is responsible for misguiding purchasers of audio gear during the largest growth spurt of the industry in the history of high end audio. Unfortunately the myth of Bose yet prevails.
You think you are an audiophile??? Self DELUSION.
The average person has never heard of Kef, or Wharfedale, whatever. I know when I first became interested in getting some audio equipment, I first looked at Bose. That’s all I knew.
It's a shame right!
Once I started to research a bit, I realized I could put together a decent system for a much cheaper price than Bose & with better sound. I bought an Onkyo 7030 CD player, a Sony receiver, & Pioneer BS22 speakers for less than $300. Not high end but a respectable system to start out with. Cheaper than Bose too!
@@jmarcguy I remember comparing the Bose 301 with other speakers in Circuit City. The cost was similar with the DCM CX-27 I think it was. I ended up buying the Bose because of the marketing and the hype, thus pride, in owning "Bose" speakers. Like Joe's review shows, they had ample bass, but they never sounded "cozy" and no matter how I placed them there always seemed to be a dead spot in the middle of the speakers. I guess that's what Joe was talking about when he mentioned something about the lack of center image. The Bose 301s used to be the best selling speaker in the world! That's back when there were companies like DCM, Infinity, Advent, JBL, Polk, Klipsch, all were available at the local retailer, and Bose STILL outsold them! In stores, like Joe said, the bass made them sound more attractive. I dunno, if I had it to do over, I would have purchased the DCMs. Edit: btw I was very young. lol
Thanks for sharing that. One of my first jobs was at Circuit City! I totally forgot about DCM! I actually purchased those as a gift for someone!
@@joentell I liked DCM back in the day. I ended up with a pair of Timeframe 600, thanks to the trade up policy of Circuit City; traded in the 301 within a year. :) DCM is still around, I have a nice 2 kevlar driver with one soft dome tweeter center channel speaker by DCM in my home theater now.Edit: The TImeframes are still in my attic :) I guess I am a speaker addict!!! XD
The SVS speakers sound more natural, for sure. They're also perceptibly louder because the bass they produce doesn't overpower everything else, and the flatter highs allow to cut more.
Which to the majority of consumers means flat and boring. I normally use an EQ with my earbuds and speakers for music. I do turn my EQ off with my JBL xtreme and charge 3 at the skatepark so I can get max volume as the speakers can''t handle it on and could damage them
The SVS def have a more accurate sound. The the Bose sound a little grey in the low end but much louder. Not a fan of Bose but I think their 901's are amazing if placed right.
Bose is so popular because of large marketing budget, and appeal to form over function. As far as DSP goes, many very expensive speakers use DSP (legacy audio, paradigm persona 9) and those speakers sound amazing 😉
Great video as usual!
The Budweiser of sound.
901s in the 70s had no dsp and sounded amazing with enough power
Audio seems to cut off at 18:00. Thought my speakers knew I was shopping for their replacements!
I still have Acoustimass 10's and I love them.
Both videos that I watched today of yours, have been excellent quality. Great info, while speaking at a good pace, thats easy to follow.
Hey thanks!!!!
Is it necessary to be an expert in sound as long one is satisfied with what he listens ! Bose is simply focussed on what he does with full confidence that many so called audiophiles lacking.
Your explanation is nice indeed.
what was the frequency response of your head unit? to be clear these speakers are amazing with the right amp! i have had the bose 301 speakers for many years, the sound is amazing with beautiful imaging in the right room and they have to be set up with nothing around them to block the sound from the sides
This is exactly why I have my acoustimass with a set of Polk drivers for the front channel in my home theater. The highs are lacking. Nice explanation
SuperFluffyfluff nice that’s smart move there haha
My friend has bose accoustimass and it sounds good but I love my Tannoy speaker's on audiophile music.
Here i am listening on my wonderful Bose Quiet Comfort35s
I am not a Bose fan, but respect men like this. As the saying goes: 'The Person Who Says It Cannot Be Done Should Not Interrupt The Person Doing It' The SVS is in a another league totally smashing those Bose, still Bose sells like Crazy over here.
SVS makes tiny aesthetic speakers like Bose?
Remember bose is a product that's like Apple products. Overpriced if you compare to Android and Android Hardware options but a different value and experience package.
Perfect...? Far from it. But it has it's own buyer segment
Love my SVS and Older Bose acoustimass system! While SVS is better in every way (imo) the Bose don't sound half bad!
Sounds like you're just paying more for the box
I found that many people see owning Bose as a sort of Status Symbol (we all know Bose doesn´t price their cheap stuffs low). Have that said, they are seeking for the WOW effect on other people.
Bowers & Wilkins, Monitor Audio, Canton, Revel, KEF, Sennheiser, Bolsano Villetri, can´t give them that "WOW" they are looking for, because most people have never heard about those brands, and probably will never do.
A good set of speakers is the one that produces an open, detailed, controlled and balanced sound, meanwhile plays all types of music, connects to any kind of amplifier equipment driven by any sound source and the only necessary adjustment is the volume control.
I owned a pair of 901's back in the 70's..awesome speakers!!
Now THATS a unicorn
The holy and coveted 901s!!!
Imagine the Bose 2201 relaunch in this day and age. Lol
@@jerryellis4518 amen to that!
U 'ole timey.
LMAO "I remembered I had some bose speakers in the ceiling" as you do
villegas24 he broke out the stash 😂🤣
I've been waiting for over a decade for someone to make this video. Thank you.
Audio is lost at 17:54 till end of Jazz comparison. Audio came back for Acoustic Guitar after that, so it is not my rig.
That same speaker bose acoustimass is what I found next to a dumbster where I work at last week . Works great too. Just wondering why they tossed it.
Efrain Gallardo I am not much of a fan of Bose but I’d still take them, free is free!
My father had some 301's but after some years the outer rubber rings of the woofer cones rotted away completely. Maybe Bose choose better materials now but that put me really off from buying Bose and I am still happy with my 20 year old Kef's. They are still going strong :-)
This was a problem for ALL speaker manufacturers when they switched from a cloth based surround to foam.
This foam tended to deteriorate in about 12 years from the date of manufacture. I had to replace the surrounds in my AR-3a speakers twice in the first twenty-five years I owned them. The last repair has lasted over twenty years, so I guess this foam has been improved. Meanwhile I have a pair of AR-3 speaker from the 1950s with cloth surrounds that are still fine.
I have almost 50 year old Bose 901’s that were never re-coned and they still sound great.
I have two pairs of 10.2s, Series I and Series II. Both are over 30 years old. Never reconed and the foam rings are still good. Both sets of speakers still sound fantastic.
Bose sounds like it's being suffocated by a pillow
I agree with you 💯 percent
I bought a Bose revolve soudlink + for my birthday, I always dreamed of it. And I'm really happy with the quality sound.
Then you win....
that's because you have never heard anything else...So don't listen to anything else and you will never have a problem with it!
@@003590510 I don't have problems with it.
Same here
I've got some Bose 901's and I still love them for what they do. I have some Joseph audio speakers that are really bad ass. I have two different stereo system in the house...I love them both.
Okay.
A very level-headed and correct analysis.
the secret behind bose is buying a different brand, thx for coming to my TED talk.
Sri is great. I pray daily for the hot mess of South Africa 🇿🇦.
Great demo! A couple things struck me harder than I thought they would in the playback tracks:
13:38 Alan Walker - Fade: With the Bose, I didn't hear the slap-back delay at all unless I specifically listened for it.
16:32 Jabberheads - Jolene: Without being familiar with the song, I legit thought she had a filter on her vocals when they came in on the Bose demo! I was waiting for it to clear up, but it didn't until it instantly did when the SVS demo started. Strangely, that track through the Bose also gave me a feeling of being in an old crusty diner in a small town.
Personally, I'm definitely an audiophile. I like hearing clarity, and a nice sound stage, over muddled bass (more mid-bass in this case) any day. I'm running my own custom built speakers for my computer setup and I legit pause music/videos every once in a while because I thought the sound I heard was some noise in my house.
Then u must be stupid if u get distracted by house noises
Thanks for this review , I have Bose and am currently building a new system , not Bose , in the comparison the Bose sounds muddy
The Bose 901's are awesome. I sold many to bars in the 80's and they played they shit out of them never a failure. Sounded great with proper eq. And freaking LOUD!
I am a life time bench tech and was working at a Bose Authorized Repair Center back in the 80's.
The Bose rep brought a set by back in the early 80's and did a demo. He took an ac cord stripped it down and then connected it across the speaker terminals and plugged it in to an ac outlet. I stepped back lol. Speaker made a wicked loud 60 cycle hum and all the speakers went out as far as they could. Left it connected for about 10 seconds. It played fine afterwards lol....very very tough speaker. Pretty indestructible. I never remember one failing. Eventually 20 years later most got speaker foam rot. Hard to find a set now 40 years later that have not been re coned.
Still great with a re cone.
I like Bose and had a few 301's - ideal dorm room speakers. I still have a pair and mix them in my room with B%W's as an extra pair. Lots of fun.
Love my Bose 901 in the 80s
I've always bought Bose systems especially their 201, 301 & 901 speakers, they out performed most speakers in sound, the only close competitor was Klipsch Horns. Everyone wanted huge speakers that needed insurmountable power from you amplifiers to drive them but the Bose are small compact and doesn't need a huge amp to drive them to make alot music that sounds great and like your at a concert!
It depends what you're listening to. I had the SoundDock 10. Whereas I was impressed with it in the first few months later I realised that it was missing a lot in the mids and highs
The sound quality for the price is amazing. Very happy with BOSE +20 years
I'm an engineer. In 2004 I began to reengineer original Bose 901. It took me 4 days to fix the bass and 4 years to fix the treble. Results were very satisfactory. It's an accurate full range system now without sacrificing the desirable aspects that make it unique.
Wow
Go down to 30 Hz ???
@@gregsz1ful According to Hirsch Hauck labs it went to 26 hz with 10 percent THD. I'm talking about only the original and series II. These were CTS acoustic suspension drivers and the enclosure was sealed and has stuffing. But here's the kicker. Bose said IMO incorrectly that he had to get the system resonant frequency above 180 hz because he said below that frequency phase shift at resonance was audible. Mine appears to be at about 250 hz and is under damped with a well document rise of around 7db, very unacceptable. Below that frequency response falls off at 12 db per octave crossing the 1 khz output at around 95 hz and continues to fall at 12 db per octave. But the equalizer only provides 6 db per octave boost. At 30 hz it provides 18 db of boost when it should provide 30 db. That's 1000 times the power at 1 khz to remain flat. But each enclosure only handles 270 watts, 30 watts per driver times 9. So what's needed is 4 stacked systems wired in parallel for a 2 ohm load and a Crown 2502 Drive Core II amplifier to equal what my Teledyne AR9 can do with 60 wpc. At today's prices that's under $2000. The putty sealing the drivers dried out and cracked creating air leaks. Rather than removing 18 drivers and the putty I sealed the perimeter of each one with GE silicone caulking, very easy and fast to work with. The cloth surrounds on the CTS drivers was in perfect condition. I have 1 pair I drive with a 138 wpc Marantz receiver which I can easily clip without a low cut filter. It's also necessary to prevent acoustic feedback on my well suspended Empire 698 turntable. The tweeter array is driven by a 100 wpc RX500B receiver loafing along probably at about 1 or 2 watts. The tweeters cut in at around 9 khz with a simple 6 db per octave crossover. There are 6 per channel. I haven't listened to it in over 4 years.
@@markfischer3626 I love this comment because it reveals how much work and thought you did on the resonance and response... for fun. For yourself.
I remember in the early day's of the Bose 901's they were always demode in a large room. They sounded great.
The 301 Mk4 is not "an older 301" - it was on of their last. Older would be the series 2 - and it sounded better.
I have the 1st series 301's. Had to replace the rubber on the driver and that kept them going a decade longer. I finally just put them on my old component rack. It has my old Technics amps and my old about 1984 Panasonic 4 head VHS tape machine. Top of the line then.
Not sure about audiophiles or technicians, I loved some of the Bose systems…
One thing I've noticed is Bose doesn't seem to be hated nearly as much in the headphone audiophile circles than they are in the hifi stereo/home theater circles. Their consumer oriented NC headphones and portable products are IMO competitive at their price points and I get the impression that's where most of their R&D gets focused these days. (Though Sony seems to be beating them at that now)
I think their headphones offer a better value compared to their speakers. They did have the best active NC headphones at one time. I'm not a headphone guys, so just a guess.
I have 2 pairs of Bose Interaudio 2000xl and they're actually quite good traditional little bookshelf speakers from the 70s and still going strong; good sensitivity, extended and tight bass, rather good highs for cone tweeters and pretty flat in between; I guess that's from before Bose found his profitable niche as an artist :)
Those interaudios were the budget line from Bose: they were designed to be, as you say, traditional, and they are probably the best value Bose product ever made, perhaps even one of the best regardless of price!
My take on Bose is, in general, they seem to make products designed to please the ears of the average listener, not audiophiles: they are a lifestyle brand. You’ll notice, for a while, they also marketed smaller speakers, with a separate hideaway unit for bass. This looks far better to an interior designer, but that single hideaway speaker speaker goes high enough that some low voices and instruments will not be in stereo. In general, only an audiophile will notice this minor “flaw.”
There’s often less high treble or “air” to the Bose sound, which makes them sound warmer to average people, but duller to musicians or audiophiles. They also have a mid-bass bump, which makes them sound like they have a good amount of bass, however, listen to any other speaker, and you’ll notice a decrease in bass volume, but the lowest note they can hit will be far deeper than all but a few Bose products.
It’s all about how the end user wants their music to sound, provided they aren’t a musician listening to their own music.😂
Bose tricks:
1) Boost the mid bass so there is a huge peak at one set of frequencies, it's called one note bass.
2) Create a saddle (or suck out) in the lower midrange that tends to highlight the presence region and the female voice.
3) Create a broad band lift in the treble from the upper mids to mid treble.
This net effect approximates the Fletcher Munson curve found in the old "loudness" buttons. Lots of folks seem to like to this curve and Bose capitalizes on it. It's called "saleable sound".
The “don’t know better” argument irks me - I absolutely love my 301 Series V speakers, paired with small 161s for a quad setup in my bedroom, but all of my actual stereo equipment serves their purposes perfectly well too.
I feel like too many people ignore Bose’s best as well, like 400-800 Series speakers, but ah well.
I appreciate the neutrality of my ADS, Pioneer, and Cambridge speakers, but the Bose has a coloration that makes them very enjoyable for casual listening and general multimedia.
As for imaging, I’d say the Direct/Reflecting Bose models are very peculiar and very particular, but can be done well.
Yes, I didn't mean to say that they don't know any better. I noticed that it came off a bit harsh. I meant to say they target people who may not be interested in the technical aspects and just go based on whether it sounds good to them. As I pointed out though, our ears can be tricked. I may try to prove this theory using sound demos some day.
yeah... still gonna buy bose after watching this video lol
But they do target folks who do not know better.
Folks buy bose since they see a friend who also purchased bose .
The reverse also happens as folks who were bose fanatics by chance listen to a diy home theater system with infinite baffle subwoofers in manifolds and mains center surround linear line tower array and the bose fanatic renounces to the bose brand fast .
Good thing bad sound is not fatal otherwise bose would be the leading cause of death.
i like how you are a serious speaker reviewer
Am I? 😉 I'm just a guy messing with speakers and trying back up what I say with data.
@@joentell il say "real deal" then if that fits better. cause you actually measure these speakers for the real specs. i dont see anyone do the quality of work you do its really informative thanks a ton! there is a guy called big d wiz who measures amplifiers check him out.
Yes, he actually commented on my recent Bose video. Hopefully we can setup a collab soon!
Also, thank you! 🙏🙏🙏
Thanks for the video! I am not an audiophile, but I would say that the SVS has more definition and detail. In that regard, I would go for that speaker. :)
I like Bose because it is the smaller size but give you the sound of a big speaker. As I own it for longer I miss the vibration from the big speakers. So as starting to go the other way because I like clarity and good bass with vibration and Bose can't deliver the vibration for same sound.
The Bose sound muddy compared to the SVS. SVS has a brighter and more dynamic sound response. I'm surprised so many liked the Bose.
On the other hand, the bump in the high frequencies on the SVS make some of those frequencies sound artificially harsh. Some people will like that as they say they are "crisper". I'll stick with Klipsch although I do like both Bose and SVS. You can't cut or boost frequencies that aren't there.
You no what has a bright dynamic sound? Scratching a chalk board and transistor radios. People like Bose because it's not thin and tinny.
seephor
I’m my experience with bose I like that you can play it as background and it won’t distract a lot that you can hear the music in good volume and still can talk and hear people around. They do well in businesses shops and stores
seephor I know. Bose is very muddy, and not tight at all. I’d much rather get KRK monitors honestly, as they’re way tighter then Bose, and not as muddy in the low mids.
Bose is essentially just Beats in speaker form. Hyped frequency response and bad dynamics.
@@juliobello4561 Agree with this somewhat. I find the treble on most bookshelf speakers under say £1K somewhat harsh presenting what I term an unnatural "treble veneer" that you don't hear on real instruments. I guess it's distortion. I would prefer to have that rolled-off if I had to make a choice which is I guess what Bose do. Listening to some better speakers e.g. Focal 1008 Be's with Beryllium tweeters and that veneer disappears and the instruments start to sound closer to real life, more natural and less fatiguing. A decent pair of headphones also achieves this.
I used to be a big fan of Bose until I heard some rf versions of klipsch.i sold my Bose and never looked back.
@Khalid Ibn Alwaleed More expensive but you get way better audio experience.
Klipsch is where its at!!!
Well like any other a Hole you COMPARE bananas to Appels !!!
You so frak you.... can't use you testemony fore anything ... ..
Recently got a pair of Klipsch r-28f. Best decision ever!
Klipsche has to be the best on the market especially for the price. I know their not cheap but you get what you pay for on this planet!!! Too loud sometimes man and oh they make the best subwoofers also!!!
The Bose headphones and home systems are one thing. Our band switched from conventional PAs and instrument amps to the Bose L1 Model II with the B2 bass modules for many of our mid-size performances, and the new S1 Pro units for smaller gigs. Combined with the Tone Match system, we are still amazed at what we can get out of the system. We can put the tower behind us for a sort of monitor system, and it will not feed back through the mikes or instruments. We run vocals, guitars, drums and bass through it, and it sounds as good or better than having all the standard gear. We looked at and tested other tower units on the market, and they just don't compare. Granted, the Bose is more expensive, but the savings is in not having to lug a truckload of gear around to gigs, and time spent on balancing prior to a gig.
That's awesome! I hear they make some good PA stuff like you're saying.
bill karle, thats exactly where they REALLY accell, many pubs and clubs still successfully use 80s and 90s bose cannons, they dont have a stereo soundstage as such for a reason THEY ARE RAN MONO,they do the job superb (how often in any commercial premises would you be between two? its purley horses for courses and as for ease of use (modern home systems) alot of features are what B&O has done in home sustems decades earlier tbh :) (bose are usually 20yrs behind, they are a great product of course they are so there's no real discussion apart from everyone buys what they like :)
Hi
Hi
U need to listen to the F1, I think all their research goes into pro speakers then home speakers! All they doing is copying other brands and getting things done somehow!
I have a pair of Bose 401s from an estate sale. I have replaced the caps, but they still have a flat, unimpressive sound with little to no highs. Regarding the bulb fuses in line with the cap and wire wound resistor, if that bulb fuse is blown, the entire speaker will not sound, correct?
Bose speakers sound like somebody threw a blanket over the SVS Speakes. ijs
Well, you know what they say...
No highs, no lows ... it must be Bose.
Agreed
@@Watcher3223 But there is one more factor - variety of impressions This I like more than bass and highs
Bose wins. Fuck off.
PlatinumEagleStudio's Against SVS? LOL Hell no.
Bose definitely sounds good. I'm no audiophile but in terms of appreciating a wide range of music, Bose does the job well
After 28 years (Im 48) I will be moving on from my Bose 6.2's to Klipsch Heresy's
I still use a pair of 6.2's for my HT LF & RF speakers. The center & surrounds are Polk audio & the subs are MTX & Audiosource.
Seems to work.
I also have JBL's & KEF's as backups for the 6.2's just in case.
I am a speaker junkie, I change out my speakers constantly and I love it!
I do mostly vintage stuff and I also refoam and recap the crossovers.
I like Bose and I will admit I was obsessed with them at one time. I sold off my 901s and the smaller speakers but I still have my 501. For some reason, they deliver a wonderful sound that I cannot part with.
I still prefer JBL and Cerwin Vega
@DADOU OMÉGA If it sounds bad it is most likely operator error.... my sony amp pushes my subwoofers hard and they sound really good.
Great video mate, interesting and informative!
I thought this was a well thought out video. As a musician and ex broadcast engineer I prefer the bass NOT to be boosted relative to the other frequencies but extended down in response as far as possible (well, 20Hz). With some equipment however, the bass boosting is just making up for a poor speaker bass response so the term 'bass boosting' can be quite misleading. Nothing beats the sound of a very good pair of speakers fed with a flat (non EQ') input. I'm pleased you pointed out the difference between equipment which sounds merely 'nice' compared to equipment which sounds accurate. That said, most people come to really appreciate an accurate sound over prolonged listening and particularly with acoustic recordings.
yeah I personally dislike flat speakers that don't go down that far, as much I dislike speakers that boost bass. Cause they're both messing up the sound. On one hand you're making everything muddy sounding, and on the other you're just missing a key bit of the music. Which is why I ended up making my own bookshelf's for my desk, as I don't have room for a sub but still wanted a flat sound that got down lower than 40hz that wasn't stupidly expensive.
@@__-fm5qv Well done you. I don't have a sub now simply because my main speakers (transmission line) are flat down to nearly 18Hz. Having everything form the low end to the upper midrange coming form the same drivers and cabinets makes all the bass and midrange very coherent.
@@johnr6168 Ooh that sounds pretty nice yeah! I'd love to try and make something like that once I have enough space (ie my own place).
I prefer using an eq for music no matter how expensive/good my earbuds and speakers are. Unless my priority at the moment is to max volume like with my JBL xtreme and charge 3 at the skatepark and when used as my home theater
Great presentation Joe. Glad I stumbled onto your channel.
I personally like Bose in the car audio systems from the factory. Especially in the maxima
Same here, I've 7.1 with an active Bose Sub in mine, the quality in range is impressive, plus they aren't bad further up the power scale too.