A Different Perspective on Bose

Discussion in 'Speakers & Subwoofers' started by Chu Gai, Feb 3, 2004.

  1. Chu Gai

    Chu Gai Lead Actor

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2001
    Messages:
    7,270
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I'd like to put a little perspective on Bose and contrast it here and there with items that get not only a pass, but a fair amount of praise bordering on religious fanaticism. I intend to borrow a bit from an oft cited web site (http://www.intellexual.net/bose.html) where the author, presumably from ignorance, has made a number of assumptions and statements that are false. I'm not going to touch on all of them, just some. My opinion is that if you want to slam Bose then bolster your argument with facts and not errors.

    General Marketing Statements
    Despite the fact that younger people will buy a Bose product, their marketing is targeted to a distinctly different and older age group as evidenced by say the Bose ads done by Paul Harvey. A few facts about older people.
    As a poplulation they are suffering from upper frequency hearing losses as well as decreased sensitivity. Keep that firmly in your mind as you rail against the FR curves.
    Their musical and movie tastes are distinctly different. Believe it or not, LOTR and Star Wars and pod races with special effects aren't the end all to movies. While for some it is, others enjoy a good movie without all that.
    The tenet that sound accuracy and quality has a different priority. An enhancement is wanted over what an RPTV but that's all it is. Further it needs to blend in better with the decor. A sacrifice if necessary is made to that end. Older people may well value the time they spend together with a higher priority and it's just not worth it to be pig-headed about some matters. It's not a question of 'yes dear', its a question of 'yes dear I love you'.
    OK, let's move on and dissect some of the statements made in that link.


    THE CUBES:
    There is no question that the drivers are inexpensive and that the prices are jacked up disproportionately IMO. So are a lot of things. How's about $1/bottle water with fancy names that comes from the city of Miami's drinking supply? How's about shampoos, nail polish, your golf clubs that you think are adding 35 yards to your drive? Are cables that cost $6 in parts and sold for $100 overpriced? What about conventional zip cord wrapped in techflex sold for that same price (can anyone say Cobalt?)? Own any of them? Keep in mind that for some people small is the object. And anything even slightly bigger is not going to work. There's a trend for flat wall speakers, speakers that look exactly like art or mirrors. A consideration in all these cases is going to be compromises in FR, distortion, etc. Maybe Gallos are better? Myself I haven't seen the FR curves but I'm pretty willing to bet that they're interesting. BTW, none of you believe that a round design eliminates distortions due to the enclosure now do you? Say you don't buy into that little marketing lie and obfuscation.


    Quote:



    my own observations lead me to believe that they are nothing more than dyed Manila hemp.




    This is an idiot speaking. His little marketing spiel is designed to create an image in your mind that paper should never be used as a material. Are there resonance that occur higher up with paper? Sure. You'll also find them with kevlar, carbon fiber, and other materials. All materials at one time or another have been used both successfully or unsuccessfully in applications.

    Quote:



    In a cube speaker the size of the Acoustimass, a dome tweeter would perform much better than a cone tweeter. However, Bose disregards this fact because making paper cone tweeters is a much cheaper manufacturing process.




    Probably correct or perhaps it also had to do with an intentional design consideration by Bose. I'm not privy to what their reasons were but it might have had something to do with intentionally creating some beaming.


    Quote:



    The thin plastic enclosures that Bose uses is very light and resonant, and fails miserably at all of the aforementioned goals.




    Yes, and plastic enclosures have been used by some manufacturers and gotten a pass from the audiophile press. Again this is due in part to size constraints and quite possibly the accepting of resonances as an intentional goal for sound modification and alteration.


    Quote:



    In addition, the cube enclosures also fail at magnetically sealing the drivers so that it not only gives off EMI (electromagnetic interference), but also receives it with little resistance.




    I have no idea what he's talking about. Do you? Suddenly wood is better at shielding?

    THE SUBWOOFER:

    Quote:



    Bose doesn't even claim that its "Bass Module" is in fact a subwoofer because they can't!




    So why does the author of this paper keep dragging it in? Again, not everyone is enamored by stomach churning subs. All they want is an enhancement over what they've got.


    Quote:



    Smaller subwoofers move faster and thus have tighter bass response for improved clarity and accuracy, but larger subwoofers can reproduce lower frequencies and at louder volumes.




    Sometimes and it all depends. Get more drivers in with a smaller xmax and you can do tricks down low also. I'd expect a smaller driver reproducing 40 Hz to move faster than a larger driver reproducing 20 Hz, wouldn't you? Something about the width of the signal maybe? In all this is a gross generalization and completely negates the truth that response and performance is a system dependent thing where enclosures/drivers/crossovers need to be designed together.

    Quote:



    Bose takes these drivers and uses them as a subwoofer unit!




    No stupid, they don't. They're a bass module and don't make them more than they are. Why bother stating what they are and then condemn them something they're not.


    Quote:



    Organic foam surrounds are known for drying out, rotting, and falling apart within 10-15 years of its manufacturing regardless of usage. Today foam is reserved soley as a cheap substitute used only in low-end speakers where price range is most critical.




    More idiocy. I've written before on foam surrounds in speakers and the causes of rot. It all depends on the composition and other factors. Look it up if you want more information by doing a search.


    Quote:



    I own a pair of $50 Boston Acoustics CR4 bookshelf speakers...




    I wouldn't brag about it.


    Quote:



    However, Bose uses raw untreated paper that does not possess near the quality of treated paper.




    I doubt it and I'd want to see some proof here.


    Quote:



    ...use marble, methacrylate polymer, solid oak, or solid cast aluminum. I could bust a Bose cabinet in half over my head, but I would not have that same level of confidence in busting a nOrh cabinet over my head.





    Responses in order are so?, oh that's a plastic too, expensive and not as acoustically inert as MDF nor as dimensionally stable, and aluminum doesn't vibrate? I can point to audiophile speakers, floor standers, with ceramic or diamond tweeters, expensive too, and they weigh well under 100 lbs. Maybe they've got some inherent resonances too, huh?

    [​IMG]
    Some have looked at the above and said something like look at that dip in the FR occuring a bit over 100 Hz. Try summing the two curves, it'll look a lot better.


    Quote:



    Notice the high end roll-off at sub-20kHz frequencies at the far right and the extreme colorization from 1 kHz to 20kHz with huge emphasis on 5 - 7kHz.




    It's not a sub so don't make it more than it is. Extreme coloration...hmmmm. Well it's fairly flat in the 1-4 kHz range where it's important to get things right and it's definitley raggy up top. Put that in perspective with upper frequency losses as we get older. While ugly, it might not mean that much.


    Quote:



    Another thing to consider is that the only relevant information on the graph is the measurement between -3dB to +3dB because 3 decibels is the slightest detectable change from zero to the human ear.




    In terms of overall SPL well yes. However, that's a gross generalization. In the area of 2-5 kHz, in young people of good hearing, the minimum SPL able to be detected is about 0.1-0.2 dB. That's for sine waves. With music, it's a bit worse. As you move out on either end of the audible spectra it changes and just noticeable differences become on the order of several dB greater before they become noticeable. I'd like to think better results could've been achieved if only because they could be. However it may well be a moot point with older individuals.

    While on this topic of frequency response, take a look at some of your own speakers. I'll bet they're signficantly better. However, how is that frequency response in the room you put them in? Anyone have situations where the rooms are just plain weird? Has your signficant other laid down the law and said something like no, they stay here when you know that moving them out and away from the walls would do a better job? What about putting them on hard reflective surfaces? Did the signficant other say that sub has only one place and it's resulted in large room interactions? What say you?


    Quote:



    If and when you look at this document, you will soon realize that absolutely no where are there any specifications for the system's actual performance




    I agree. That sucks. Bought any Audiquest cables...what about Monster...what about Transparent...Straightwires anyone...? Any specs there?
    BTW, how do you like the following response I got from Stellavox, an allegedly high end company when I inquired about what the output impedence of their amp was?
    1- PW1 impedance: we do not publish this data


    Quote:



    To reiterate the above, the Acoustimass's bass module responds to 46 Hz to 202 Hz at ±2.3 dB, while the satellites respond to 280 Hz to 13.3 KHz at ±10.5 dB. This is, by the way, the only speaker that I have ever seen tested with a ±10.5 db allowance. Still, this leaves a frequency gap between the satellites and bass module of about 80 Hz!




    Go figure. The idiot posts the FR curves and doesn't know how to add things up. What a putz.


    Quote:



    That is 80 hertz of sound that is completely erased within the system's internal crossovers!




    Am I the only one here who is glad this person doesn't design speakers? Further inaccuracies follow.


    Quote:



    Do the math folks, this Bose system only produces 13,176 of the 19,980 Hertz in the audible sound spectrum. That's only ~66% of the actual recording being played back to you!




    That'd be fine if musical content was distributed evenly across the audible spectrum. It isn't though. A very rough approximation is that it's an inverse relationship and the amount of musical energy is proportional to 1/f. If you've lost signficant hearing above 15 kHz and you don't care about the thundering 20 Hz sound effects, then so? Better approximations would be determined by applying a weighting factor. Well is that the way we do math? Is it any wonder SAT math scores don't move much?

    I'm going to give a bit of rest as to the other errors and assumptions in that web reference. Much of it is irrelevent.
    That they are skilled in marketing and product placement is undeniable. Other companies would do well to study what they do successfully and apply it to some of their own products. I don't know about you, but bad english grammer and spelling errors turn me off to a website. That the salespeople who sell their products are uninformed is true. So are the jerks in the high end places that've been selling esoteric stuff for a number of years. They have a target market and study it. BTW, how many of us have been sucked into marketing? Think you haven't? McDonalds makes a good hamburger? You a Pepsi drinker and believe that the Pepsi challenge was an accurately done test? Kids suck you in to buying them Nike's, Abercrombie & Fitch, and so forth? You believe that your hair sucks up vitamins? If nothing else, get a year or two's subscription to Consumer Reports and pay attention to how marketing works and be a little more than a bit skeptical of any company's claims.

    Yes it's true that the Bose speakers have a significant amount of distortion and depending upon the model can have localization problems. I personally don't think that's the right way to do things. However, ask yourself a few questions. Why do people and the press give a pass and extol the virtues of turntables that color the sound, SET amps that introduce their own FR abberations because of their high ouput impedance and relatively unregulated power supplies, 5-figure DACs that lack reconstruction filters and have more distortion than signal (Audio Note), tubes that resonate with distortion and microphics? There's a bunch of stuff out there. How's about horns that resonances? Cerwin Vega gets a pass?

    There's a real good reason that reviewers of speakers read the promotional material and make sure they know what they're listening to. If they didn't and gave high marks to an inexpensive speaker but low marks to a StereoPhile A list speaker then the world would end. For many the WAF is far stronger than is thought. I'd like to see some in-depth testing of speakers that meet the Bose criteria of small, small, small.


    My brother in law bought a bose system. He hasn't set it up properly and when I get a chance, I'll spend some time with him and make it work better than he has it now. I'm not going to tell him how he could've bought something better as I rather like him. I also respect him. He did a tour of duty in Vietnam while in the Navy. He's now in the Air Force reserves and was in the first Gulf War and recently came back from Iraq and Kuwait where he served his country again. I'll cut him more than enough slack. If we listen to a movie it's to spend some time together and that time is more valuable than any deficiencies his system may have.

    So in summation, I don't think too much about that web link. Making stupid, ill-informed and technically inept comments is a great social experiment, ain't it?
     
  2. BrianWoerndle

    BrianWoerndle Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2002
    Messages:
    794
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    After owning that exact Bose system, and an equally priced system from Paradigm, I can personally say that you can hear (or not here) everything said in that article.

    I do not go around bashing Bose because I do feel that they have some great attributes. But I try to make sure people have some real information to decide by instead of just marketing.
     
  3. Chu Gai

    Chu Gai Lead Actor

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2001
    Messages:
    7,270
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    That sounds reasonable. The article though is replete with errors. How old are you?
     
  4. Nathan Stohler

    Nathan Stohler Second Unit

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2004
    Messages:
    329
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0

    My girlfriend's father served in Vietnam, but I don't cut him any slack about his Acoustimass system [​IMG]

    His wife told me she prefers the Bose speakers to larger speakers that are "more like furniture", so I guess it's apparent who runs things in that household. [​IMG]
     
  5. cabreau

    cabreau Second Unit

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2003
    Messages:
    322
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I owned a Bose Acoustimass II system, then I owned Paradigm Atoms with the matching surrounds and sub. For the money...the Bose SUCKED and the Paradigm sounded outstanding. I heard things with the Paradigms that were not audible with the Bose. What really pisses me off is that the guy as Sears conned my father into buying the Bose in the first place, talking them up like they could turn coal into diamonds. Anyway, I HATED the Bose surround and at that point had given up on surround systems thinking that was "as good as it gets". Boy, was I wrong. When I heard the first Paradigm setup I almost shat myself.
     
  6. Ryan T

    Ryan T Second Unit

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2001
    Messages:
    406
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Personally i think most people are mad because the regular J6P thinks bose is the end all means in the audio world. They think everything else is trash compared. And the fact that bose has had several stupid law suits and such just make people angry. I go by what sounds good to ME and bose sounds pretty crappy in my opinion. The fact that they are priced so high just pours salt on an open wound. The reason bose gets bashed so much is because a lot of uninformed people go around thinking bose is the best ever and nothing is better. It's frustrating to see people spending that much money on stuff that isn't even worth CLOSE to what was paid for it and then bragging about it. But to each his own i guess. If people want to throw their money away go for it. Just don't go acting like bose is better than a lot of other great speakers like paradigm, B&W, Axiom, Mission, KEF, the list goes on and on since just about everything sounds better than bose and is cheaper...


    Ryan
     
  7. Chu Gai

    Chu Gai Lead Actor

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2001
    Messages:
    7,270
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I don't dispute that Ryan. Now find me something as small as Bose. Not a little bigger. Small.
     
  8. ChrisArmour

    ChrisArmour Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2003
    Messages:
    150
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    There were errors in the article, but the author brought to light some very real problems with the Acoustimass system. The main facts being that it's way overpriced in two different arenas; when compared to it's closest performing competitors, and, when looking at the materials used in its construction. All you did was give us possible excuses for why the Acoustimass system performs as badly as it does. You make it sound as if Bose designed the speaker for people with hearing loss, I dont remember reading anywhere in the Bose literature where it says, "great for people with diminished auditory capacity". Also, what does being a Veteran(which I am) have anything to do with the value a speaker system?
     
  9. Adam Bluhm

    Adam Bluhm Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2002
    Messages:
    611
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I installed a Pioneer HTiB for a co-worker of mine. The speakers were similar to the size of the Bose cubes. I didn't take the time to do a side-by-side at all, so I cannot give you dimentions. The receiver had all standard features that a HTiB needs, as well as inputs to receive signals from their vcr, DVD player and television output.

    It sounded great, and it was as small as Bose.

    .. since you asked.
     
  10. Chu Gai

    Chu Gai Lead Actor

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2001
    Messages:
    7,270
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    He said he bought it because it was small and he could position it where he wanted to. He also liked the sound. He didn't contrast it to anything else other than the speakers in his TV. It had to do with cutting him some slack.
    You're right, the ads say nothing about hearing losses, but you're ignoring the target demographics and their buying habits.
    I guess we'll never see FR curves for the Pioneers but if they're anything like the majority of Japanese speakers, I'd suspect the drivers are even cheaper and the response spectacularly uneven.
     
  11. Phil Iturralde

    Phil Iturralde Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 1998
    Messages:
    1,867
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Great INFO Chu! For some, it's the size that matters vs. dynamic HT playback!


    **NOTE: Sound & Vision Speaker Graphs scans and images reproduced on this webpage with permission from SOUND & VISION - a trademark of Hachette Filipacchi Media U.S., Inc.

    Phil
     
  12. ChrisArmour

    ChrisArmour Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2003
    Messages:
    150
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0


    Yeah, I'm sure that they may be just as bad(probably not though), but at least they are priced accordingly.
     
  13. MikeH1

    MikeH1 Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2000
    Messages:
    1,492
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Here Chu. Check out these official Bose's forums but be sure to post something nice. I wouldn't ask too many real questions there though about their product or your message won't be posted.

    http://bose.infopop.cc/6/ubb.x?a=cfrm&s=8206048934

    I love the disclaimer on the site:

     
  14. Jesse Sharrow

    Jesse Sharrow Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    Messages:
    745
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I agree on all your statements. But I still strongly feel that for the money older people even, dont need to spend $1500-$4000 to get that same thing. A decent HTIB would do the same thing.
     
  15. Paul Rosen

    Paul Rosen Auditioning

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2004
    Messages:
    5
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    This is my first post on these forums and I am a very much a newbie in this area. However, I can think of nothing better to comment on than the Bose mystique. Like a lot of people, back when I was a little younger -- and a little less knowledgeable -- I was one of those who went out and spent what little money I had in college on a Bose Acoustimass system. I didn't even bother to listen or try out anything else, because, like a lot of people, I was brainwashed into thinking that they were the best mass market speakers out there. "They must be, look at the price . . . and the advertising!!"

    Even a few months ago, when my financial and living situation allowed me to do some serious upgrading, I was all set to go out and get a new Bose AM-16; again, without listening and trying out various speakers. Then, by chance, I started reading forums such as this and S&V's. The overwhelming . . . no, universal . . . opinion on Bose was negative. More importantly, unlike Bose, they backed up what they said by providing the simple advice to just go out and listen to a lot of speakers to test them out. So I took there advice and thought this was a great idea: I test drive cars and other items, why not speakers.

    So for a month, thats exactly what I did. I went everywhere and tested out everything I could get my ears on. And you know what? Everything bad that people said about Bose was abosolutely, 100% true. They could not hold a candle to any other speaker system that I tested. And most of those systems were comparable or cheaper in price than the Bose AM-16.

    The Bose "bass" was aweful and the clarity of the high and midrange was consistently lacking. The worst part, given that I use my system almost exclusivley to watch movies, was that the center channel could not come close to producing an acceptable range and volume of sound. Granted, most movies are poorly written, but I would at least like to hear what the actors are saying.

    Oddly enough, the Bose systems I listened to in the "Bose-designed" listening rooms was remarkably better than the systems I auditioned in "conventional" areas.

    So, in closing, I can honestly say that as an average listener and somewhat-educated consumer (now), Bose produces inferior speakers that are extremely overpriced. They are nowhere near as accurate and powerful as the base line speakes I listened to by Paradigm, B&W, DefTech, Klipsch, Athena & JBL (I ended up with the B&W 600 series if anyone is wondering).

    So, say what you want, and defend Bose as much as you want (for whatever reason), but for me the proof is in the listening. It's just a shame that more people don't go to the lengths to audition speakers as they do to try out other consumer items. But I guess thats why Bose makes so much money.
     
  16. Ray Kerr

    Ray Kerr Extra

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2003
    Messages:
    15
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Geez... Somebody help me outta my rocker and find my walker for me!!! Little Dude (as a geriatric I can call ya that![​IMG] ), not all of us older (with one foot in the grave) people are sitting in our rockers listening to Lawrence Welk (old Polka Music and Variety show that was on TV LONG before you were born)... I guess I should give up all my loud movies, my (real) Rock & Roll (Zepplin, Stones, Doors) and sell off all my sportsbikes... As an old phart (with deteriorating hearing) I can tell you that BOSE sounds like crap to me. Now with these bad ears, I do enjoy a brighter speaker, something that (IMHO) Bose can't do(they sound kind of muddy to me). You're stereotyping us chronologically challenged... We love a excellent sound system just as much as you young whipper-snappers do... SO I guess I should get rid og my Mitsu RPTV and buy an Emerson 27" 'cuz my eyes are bad too? [​IMG]
    My younge neighbors whent out an bought a Bose system (against my wishes) and are always complaining that my old Klipsch Quintets and sub sound WAY better that their system. And are even more upset with my Ebay purchased bookshelf Klipschs'. I've tried tweaking thier system for them w/o any real success... And their ears and eyes are better (and younger) than mine...
    Gonna get off the saopbox, before my equalibrium is upset and I fall down (and can't get up)!
     
  17. Robb Roy

    Robb Roy Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2002
    Messages:
    711
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Chu,

    I respect what you're trying to do here, and for the most part, I agree -- we should all think about the products we buy, and the products we bash. There is one (and only one) point I would like to pick a nit with:



    Quite right about our listening environments, but this is a fatalistic attitude. What sense would it make to say: "Since my wife won't let me pull the speakers more than a foot from the wall, I might as well buy poor-sounding, overpriced speakers"? Or "Since I have tile floors, I should pick a speaker that costs a lot of money and sounds terrible, but at least it's out of the way"? Or "My commute to work is only 2 miles, and I so rarely have to get on the freeway that it would be cheaper for me to rent a car on those occasions than buy one, that I'll just get a go-cart instead"?

    While very few of us will ever have listening environments that are perfect, that doesn't mean we should use our environments as an excuse to buy inferior products.

    -Robb

    P.S. You are quite right not to give your brother-in-law any crap about his purchase decision. Not because he's a vet, but because he made it, and he's happy with it. Sometimes people make it sound that way, but it's not like it's a moral affront to humanity to buy a Bose system.
     
  18. Chu Gai

    Chu Gai Lead Actor

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2001
    Messages:
    7,270
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I'm not so much defending Bose as looking to put a bit of perspective on matters. You'll rarely find me recommending speakers but I do have this thing about accuracy. Now maybe it is that I've got what I consider a fairly decent b*llsh*t meter due to involvement in the marketing industry as well as a scientific background. Ads and marketing is interesting for me. I enjoy how companies spin words.
    Further I found numerous errors in that referenced website. Now that may not bother people seeing as how the website is anti-Bose. However if I were to strip the errors, inaccuracies, side-tracks, etc. There wouldn't be much there. You can't have it both ways. Many of you see Bose's ads and marketing and call it lies. My perspective is different as I see it as carefully crafted marketing which leaves much to interpretation. But for the sake of comparison, let's call it lies. If you rail against that, then rail against the problems in that link. Those were far more egregious.
    I also wanted to point out that there is a segment of the population for whom a minimalist approach where the look is clean is of great importance. You're going to have to give up something to get that at least the way things stand today.
    I won't compare Bose against a floor standing or nice bookshelf. Frankly it doesn't. However, both of those also aren't minimalist approaches. Close? To some maybe it is. But not for the person looking for something that's really small.
    I thought for some time about what I consider shortcomings of the Bose systems and that is the large amounts of distortion and how that colors the sound. I also know Bose has a real R&D department with extensive testing capability. I also know Bose carries out various studies with people in the areas of pyschoacoustic preferences involving statistical analysis of the data. Focus groups, testing of individuals and groups, correlations studies with age, income, education, etc. Combining all this, I can't help thinking that many of these response anomalies, discontinuties, and distortions are intentional. Not because they please 100% of the people but because their studies indicate that a greater percentage of people enjoy it. Let's say they've figured out how to maximize the house edge. If that's true, and it sounds pretty plausible to me, that's pretty smart.
    Every now and then it's time for the Bose slam. Well that's fine. Then slam with some facts and not with errors. The arguments will carry far more weight.
     
  19. Chu Gai

    Chu Gai Lead Actor

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2001
    Messages:
    7,270
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    You're 100% right Robb and I wasn't advocating for lesser speakers. Two things are of paramount importance to me. Speakers=#1, Room=#2. I simply wanted to point out that even with our own well performing speakers we are forced into compromises. Those compromises affect our good speakers. It's a tough world. Rooms aren't all that friendly a lot of times. The other half may have staked out their territory like a wolf marking it's area of eminent domain. If you bought a decent microphone and ran some FR curves it might be damned frightening. Anyone whose read my posts over time knows I strongly advise listening to speakers and I also advise a greater proportion of dollars be allocated there.
    Stay with the car. The kid's will borrow the go-kart.
     
  20. Nhan_H

    Nhan_H Second Unit

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2003
    Messages:
    431
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Chu, I've seen your previous posts, and I think you are pretty knowledgeable about audio products. I think others have addressed other sections of your post, but I'm not sure why you keep insisting people are trying to compare Blose cubes to bookshelves/floorstanders, as at least one of the posts here as well as many other posts in this forum have already provided many alternatives that are blose-sized speakers, like Gallo, Hsu Ventriloquists, Rocket Tykes, Mirage, Klipsch, and even computer speakers. I own a pair of Gallos that would blow any of those Blose cubes away (hate using that term, but I wanted to make an assertive statement here). I also have an on-loan $300 Logitech 5.1 computer speaker system that I would put up against a $3000 Blose setup.

    I also own a pair of PSB 6Ts and just recently some new Rockets (550/200/250). I won't even pretend to try and compare them to the little Blose cubes.
     

Share This Page