The late Richard Pierce has a long and colorful history of discrediting
Bose hype and marketing. Most of his "audio anecdote of the interval"
postings have been removed from web sites, but Google Groups has a rich
archive of his postings and te threads coming from them. Just search
Google for "Bose 901 Pierce" for a good start.


OK Google groups here are a few quotes that IMHO give a basic overview
of the BOSE discussion. Bottom line is (I think) most speakers are
trying to achieve 20 to 20k flat response, whereas BOSE is presenting a
more colorful sound field. The crux of the arguement seems to be the
claims BOSE makes and hense the marketing complaints.

If you like BOSE that's cool BUT it's not an audiophile speaker - it's a
TYPE OF SOUND FIELD not based on accurate reproduction but giving an
ejoyable listening experience. BOSE may be the BEST for you and that's
great. It's just not sonically accurate, it's more something like
sonically pleasing (to some) and a colorful embellished representation.

HERE ARE THE QUOTES FROM GOOGLE GROUPS:

A direct/reflecting system such as the 901 produces ONLY very early
reflected sound, and the VAST majority of home listening venues have
little or no REVERBERENT field to speak of. You simply cannot duplicate a
concert hall soundfield by simply substituing the word REFLECTED for the
word REVERBERENT, no matter how aggressive your corporate legal
department is.

Gawd, I wish this myth would go away. If you like the 901's fine. But
don't use the marketing crock-o'-**** that blindly equates 'reflected'
with 'reverberent' as justification for your preference.

Richard Pierce


I dislike Bose because they make an inferior product, and charge a
premium price for it. The only reason they sell so well is that
through extensive marketing, they have come to be the "status" brand
of speaker. People seem to hold Bose speakers in awe because they
make the only $1500 pair of speakers you can buy at Highland or
Fretter or Circuit City. When they go to those places and see that
Bose is their top-of-the-line, they assume that there's no competition
for that niche, and that Bose must be the best speaker maker, since
they make the "best" speaker available.

John Stimson


Ah yes, the old "popularity equals quality" argument. How many times
have I heard this? I really enjoy listening to Bose speakers while
drinking Budweiser beer with McDonalds Big Mac hamburgers while
watching the Mighty Morphin Power Rangers with all the kids who were
popular in high school. This always makes for a fine night of
high-quality entertainment. Do you see how silly it is to equate
popularity with quality? How many paintings did van Gogh sell? Why
is it that Bose proponents regularly fall back on this weakest of all
arguments?

This debate is nothing new under the sun. As mentioned before, all
the usuaul agruments pro and con are summarized in the Bose FAQ. I do
not mean this unkindly, its more a matter of long term exasperation
with seeing the same points made over and over again, but you may wish
to read this before entering into the Bose fray again.

Bert


And since when is consumer response an indication of quality or
technical superiority. If that was true, then McDonalds' Big Mac is
far superior to a gourmet dinner, the Ford Pinto and VW bug are better
cars than anything ever made by Ferrari, and sterno is a better drink
than Chateau whatever. Using consumer poularity as a measure of
quality is a stupid defense.

Richard Pierce

The late Dick Pierce?

He just posted here recently, when did he die?

"still learning" wrote:


The late Dick Pierce?

He just posted here recently, when did he die?

And does Dick know it?

Harvey Gerst
Indian Trail Recording Studio
http://www.ITRstudio.com/