|
|
|
|
Why shouldn't someone buy Bose?
Joseph Oberlander wrote:
Farrell8882 wrote:
A friend of mine asked me "Why _not_ Bose?" and I really don't have an
answer
for her. I know audiophiles routinely revile the brand, but that's not an
excuse I'm comfortable sharing. It's not one I can either defend or expound
on.
The number one problem with Bose is not their sound, which is passable,
but that the exact same thing can be had via Cambridge Soundworks for
a couple of hundred dollars.
I, for one, don't think so. It is true that Cambridge does have some high-value
content systems but the cost-reduction is evident upon inspection.
Cambridge soundworks of course changes the
mounts and wiring terminals and color just enough so as to pass the
minimum amount of changes to not infringe on their patent, but it's
essentially the same thing.
Why pay 400% markup over the same thing without the label?
That's a good reason; but frankly the chances of returning a Cambridge product
for warranty is quite high.
For $800-$1000, she can get a full setup that will sound several times
better. Tannoy and KEF, for instnace, make very good minisystems,
as does Energy.
I like those systems but, frankly,they are in the same league sound-wise.
Real rubber surrounds on the speakers instead of
foam.
And, besides implied longevity, and well-known sensitivity losses.what
difference does this make?
Connectors that can be used with any receiver.
For the most part that's true; but nearly all low cost multichannel systems use
spring-clip terminals. And even if they don't ...... who cares; don't all
aspiring audiophiles use stripped wire or spade lugs?
Screws instead
of glue to hold it together.
I've never seen any modern loudspeaker cabinet held together with screws. As
for drivers and I/O terminals the most common problems I encounter are drivers
or terminals loose in particle board cabinets by having stripped screws in
particle board that "weren't glued" to the cabinet.
$10 speakers(their cost) versus $1-2
ones BOSE uses.
This is another common thought. Any mfr that doesn't make their own drivers
(most) pays a mark-up which. of course,, increases the final price of the
system and also reduces the internal control over quality.
IFAIK Bose manufactuers many of their own drivers and would have a lower
internal cost. So what? Wjy does the end-user care one way or another?
No, these aren't high-end soundsystems, but they are a step up.
From what? I would agree that I could; assuming you too, put together and
install a better sounding system than joe-average walking the streets, for a
given price than one would pay for a Bose.
But few non-enthusiasts could do likewise. And even fewer would be able to
install it. That's the magic of Bose ...... sell people what they want; (small,
nearly-inviisible, smartlyy styled) not what might be best-sounding to
enthusiasts or preferable to salesman of other products.
People also cpmplain about the special "Bose-Only" demomstration areas. Of
course, that is high-powered marketing, but I've never heard a single
enthusiast complain about a similar, even MORE obstrusive, technique "Single
Speaker Demostration" employed by Linn Sondek in the 80s.
Perhaps that's because Linn Sondek was never a major competitor.
|