| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#42
|
|||
|
|||
Why shouldn't someone buy Bose?
|
|
#43
|
|||
|
|||
|
Why shouldn't someone buy Bose?
Strap yourself into a CTS-V and prepare to smile ear to ear. It sure ain't
no SAAB (which is a GM brand, by the way)! By the way, you are confusing Cadillac quality with M-B. Caddy's are decent on quality. It's Mercs and a lot of other German brands that tend to be crappy on quality/reliability. Actually, few German brands are anything but poor in quality. Porsche may be the only well known exception. -- - GRL "It's good to want things." Steve Barr (philosopher, poet, humorist, chemist, Visual Basic programmer) "Joseph Oberlander" wrote in message news:tYhbc.159574$1p.2046199@attbi_s54... Nousaine wrote: For $250, it's a decent budget system. For $1300 with the Bose name and a $100 receiver unit included, it's just not a good deal. As I said 'value' is the operative factor. Neither sounds that god. True. For $1300, I'd still probably go for two excellent speakers and add in comparable surrounds later on as $500 for a pair versus $1300? For $1300 you can get something very good or make your own. Some of the kits online are quite good. Both the Bose and the Energy are equal in setup difficulty as they both require little mounts/stands and as for wires - gosh - any speaker wire will do. But we shouldn't foget that the Bose comes with wires that are already terminated on one end. They also have a very nice large fold-out system diagram. Of course this means nothing to you and me; but to many consumers this is no small matter. Lol. Sometimes I do wonder about them. Most speakers these days come with diagrams. The amplifier certainly does. I'll give Denon that - they make some of the most understandable and overkill manuals in the business. It's more like Cadillac. Millions on image and yet a common Lexus beats them for reliability and driving experience. I think you're wrong here; at least with regard to the cars I've driven (STS vs LS400; and the large SUVs.) I guess I can't speak for reliability but in driving and styling it's Cadillac by a fair margin. The Lexus SUVs are a big disappointment to me. But again the cache/image is the thing. GM builds unreliable crap barely better than Ford. The Lexus SUV - yeah, it bites. The point of a true SUV is to go off-road, and to do that, you need small and agile. You wonder why the Lexus is so bad? Because it's really a 4wd oversize van with fancy sheetmetal. The STS is eh - okay I guess. Did nothing for me compared to a GS400. Of course, strap yourself into a SAAB 9-5 with the big turbo in it...(grin) It's no 911, but it's no Caddy either. Then show me the data, because the KEF system doesn't do this. I doubt if you've actually measured the KEF system yet. It will surprize you. Ths stuff has all been published in S&V. But you're right I haven't dome a KEF system for some time. Actually I just shipped out a KEF HTIB 2 weeks ago that had been gathering dust awaiting the signal to measure it because it was getting in the way. Now I wish I hadn't. If it was the little one, I'd say not to bother. The midrange $1300-$1500 2005 model is quite decent - the first minisystem that approaches real speakers, IMO. My father uses Tannoy R1s for his surrounds and they are about as small as you'd really want to go and get acceptable sound. But *if* you have to go small, these aren't half bad. Me - I'd probably go for wall-colored MMGs or simmilar if near-zero footprint was a must. I'm wondering what the company looks like these days and who's really doing things. It's true that Dick Small and Laurie Fincham are both KEF alumni but I'm not so sure that they are still the top brand of old. I ship both Celestion and KEF back to the same address. Yeah, other than their top end stuff, it's all too like the rest of them. OTOH, while cheap, their low-end is like Tannoy - somewhat acceptable and a notch above most of the other budget lines. The lack of blare(read: proper HF design to keep the tweeter in line) alone is a big deal. Most small speakers fail this litmus test miserably. It's more of a design thing than a driver problem - and not that hard to deal with, yet most companies are so darn cheap that they don't even try to address it. But I've never found a 'small' home theater set or HTIB that doesn't have a dynamically weak upper bass/low midrange area between 150 to 300 Hz. That's because the common bass module (even tho the crossover dial may be marked 200 Hz) seldom has response above 150 Hz and the satellites are rapidly falling in output capability at the lower end of their bandwidth. I've heard a *few* - but yeah - most all of them are utter crap. They sound like... Well, I have this informal test I do. I really have superb listening skills being a musician, singer, and having studied it all in school. So it's actually pretty accurate. The "test" is how far away can I walk from the speaker before it sounds like a "speaker" - or a source of music. Kind of like how a clock radio sounds in the next room - it's just "blare over there" and more volume does nothing to make it sound more realistic. For most HTIB type speakers, that's about 8-10 feet. For a pair of Tannoy S8s, it's about 30-40 ft. Quite acceptable. This is one reason Maggies do so well - they have huge range in this sort of test. The point of all of this is that with enough SPL and dispersion, the sound envelops you and you can't reliably tell one direction from another without the sound specifically going there(typical of a real movie theater) Your mind gives up at some point trying to figure out where all the sound is and just zones out - and you just enjoy the music or movie. Tiny speakers can't really do this, IME - we both agree on this. They never sound realistic no matter what they are playing. Subwoofers in this category typically have maximal SPL capability at 60 Hz and above but fall at 12-24 dB per octave below 62 Hz. Few are capable of producing reasonable SPL with low distortion even down to 32 Hz. I personally cut subs off with a hard filter or digital processor at 60hz. Higher than that is directional in my house and is going to be interfered with by the true LF sounds. This means good mains. 6-8 inch woofers and 40-50hz cleanly. I think that response graphs taken at moderate output levels fail to tell the whole story. Dynamic capability in the lower end of response is also important. For example the Boston Acoustics CR55 is a wondeful speaker (nearly dead-flat with tightly controlled directivity) down to 100 Hz (80 Hz claimed) but the lowest frequency where it can deliver clean SPL is 80 Hz @ a paltry 80 dB. The 4 1/2-inch woofer just can't do any better than that. I sometimes do simmilar tests with the drivers out of the box - as resonance is faking it, IMO. True - the cabinet helps some, but for many makers it's a cheap way out. Almost any $5 driver can be made to sound acceptable with enough cabinet tweaking. I like designs with no ports/vents in them myself. More WYSIWYG. Yes, I've seen B&W 602 size speakers like this that barely reach 60hz, because there is no magic gimmick to reinforce bass. IMO, a good driver should sound decent enough outside of a box. I hear very few that do. Morel and Seas and Scanspeak are pretty good at this "test", though. The matching subwoofer that came with the system would produce 108 dB SPL @ 62 (snip) frequencies; often the subwoofers are smaller and can't do 25 Hz but they can have significant SPL at 60 Hz. All highs, no lows... (grin) The idea that a 6 in ch driver can do realistic bass - I guess I'm with you on this - I'm old skool(sm)  It takes mass, and thatusually means a decent amp and a 2-3 way speaker that can do 50-60hz cleanly before we get to talk about a sub. BTW - yes, I've heard a LOT of god-awful flabby and chuffy subs over the years. It's not rocket science anymore, but it does require a better than $30 15 inch speaker. It is true that this effect is quite large with Bose as it is in any system with less than 6.5-inch midrange drivers. Indeed I think the 200-300 Hz hole in the Bose is one of its big demonstration points. A suck-out on that range gives the impression of great clarity. Probably so. I didn't understand this until a few months ago when I was in a Bose store in the mall and it hit me that they are made to sound "good' in very noisy environments like typical audio stores due to this type of effect. The same with cars - it's nowhere near accurate, but then again, the road and engine and wind noise in a typical car is like a huge wet blanket on the midrange. You need skewed speakers to sound accurate unless you want to spend big bucks(like $100 per speaker or more). But if it's a Uni-Q it will have the classic 3-bump response error that comes with the reflections of the tweeter from the cone walls as sound exits the driver. I, personally, have never found this to be particularly annoying but it's been measurable in every Uni-Q I've had. Well, it's no monitor to be sure, but not rubbish either. As you say, it's not particularly annoying. Wel, since the Bose box has upwards of 30-40% distortion when raised to decent sound levels... How do you know this? Others have measured it. Typical of most HTIB setups, the bass "module" is made out of LDF or plastic or simmilar and resonates quite readily. 80hz is doable with good drivers. With decent SPL and low distortion. Not if they're smaller than 5-25-inches. 6 or 6.5 is a useful minimum size for a system with true dynamic capability at 80 Hz. Smaller drivers simply don't have the displacement for that job. It depends. Some do - some do not. Many *do* suck at low frequencies. I'm constantly amazed at the utter rubbish that makers foist off on us in most speakers. You can tell it's a $10 driver just by looking at where it is made and the obvious errors and quality control issues. The moral is that you need to really make your own speakers as the rubes charge you ungodly markups. $300 in parts yields a hell of a tower speaker(one) if you are halfway competant. But 25 Hz isn't "subsonic" either. And let's not forget that the fundamental ofthe lowest note of an organ with 32-foot stops is 16 Hz. Sure if you never play that kind of material who cares? But in my opinion few "subwoofers" are really subwoofers. They are, for the most part, simply common woofers. Indeed the reason I have a self-designed custom "subwoofer" is more than just partially because I couldn't buy a commerical unit that would play modern recordings as intended with sound of 10 Hz on them. This is actually one of my most common gripes. I love my 4410s because they have big 10 inch woofers in them. Woofers. Not subwoofers. Because 10 inch drivers are necessarry for decent low-end. Mine do 35-40hz cleanly, but suck gobs of power as expected. For organ music - a seperate big 15 inch sub would almost be mandatory - 8 or even 10 inchers won't cut it. That the organ has a seperate set of pipes for the foot pedals is a clue that that last octave or two needs a seperate speaker system. Oh - I also respect what you say about subs. JBL PRO makes some big subs for motion picture use. I'd probably build my own, but IMO, a "woofer" is 6-10 inches and a "sub" is 12-18 inches. Q: is there anything larger than an 18 inch made currently? Not that I'm aware of. Hartley used to sell those really bad 24-inch models and Eclipse had a 32-inch car woofer for a while but I think those are all gone. I remember a 24 or 32 incher custom one at the Exploratorium in San Fransisco. They had a knob hooked up to a tone generator and could go from 40hz down to about 10hz. Pretty fun, actually, as your body would start to react at the very bottom end. I always wanted one but I was able to acquire custom TC Sounds 15-inch unit swith 2/3 more Vd than the JBLs. This was primarily because the 23.4mm Xmax of the TC Sounds more than offset the 10mm JBLs 60% more cone area. Nice to know. How much do they cost? I wasn't leaving out Madisound. Larry Hitch is a good friend and will be hosting the upcoming PSACS April meeting. I don't thin PartsExpress is crap either. I think they're just great. Like publishing the fhe CLIO frequency response of that woofer you mentioned. What they have IS documented well enough - but I just wish they carried better drivers. When you are faced with 20 $10-$20 choices... John Stone of SEAS was a presenter at a PSACS meeting last year. I'm sure he'll be at Madisound for the PSACS meeting too. Morel, on the other hand, often seems to have some construction difficulties. I've often seen drivers glued up poorly and much of their stuff seems, like Bose, overly priced for what you get. Their tweeters seem to be okay. The idea was a Morel tweeter and a Seas or Scanspeak midrange and/or woofer. That one looks much better than the first 2. But it doesn't have 20 kHz even directly on axis. And it's falling quickly at 100 Hz. I'd certainly use one but the $45 makes it less competitive. And by the way how do you know that the price might be in quantity? Well, yeah - as I said, any smart designer would use a seperate tweeter, even in a surround speaker. And let's talk about DIY speaker manufacturers. How about KEF and Dynaudio. In the 80s and early 90s I sometimes made custom speakers for friends. This required me to purchase drivers from places like Madisound and Zalytron (I'm guessing this was pre-PartsExpress.) ... After awhile I think I figured out what was going on. KEF used to select drivers for their up-market products so that when you burned out a driver in either channel you had to return BOTH speakers for repair (they had to install selected drivers.) This meant that KEF didn't manufacture drivers to a given tolerance; they mase a car-load and then selected individual units for given speakers. JBL used to do this as well for a while. It got really annoying in fact, so I ended up swapping out the tweeters for aftermarket ones and the sound improved greatly. It made no sense that I had to replace them in pairs. So what would be the logical thing to do with the drivers that were 'out-of-tolerance' for any speaker model being produced? Sell them to the DIY market. Go fig. What makers don't do this today? If I was making speakers, I'd be picky and rather have 100 to sell that are proper as opposed to 1000 that are all over the place. It would be good to know which makers sell their crud to the DIYer crowd and where to get the decent ones. But I thought you were offering them as a response to Bose. If a company will sell a product with BS and you'll buy them with the reason that "they'll fit in a corner" it seems to me that your arguments about Bose are.... well just pretty similar to mine. Well, NoRH sound decent enough, the blather aside. That he's using a superb cabinet design helps a LOT to deal with the frankly average drivers. I'm still amazed that he doesn't slap a small supertweeter on al of the cabinets to offload some of the stress from the main driver. http://www.partsexpress.com/pe/showd...number=297-409 This seems to be an acceptable self-contained unitlike you'd see on most budget systems. NoRH should try to put something like this on a couple of models. |
|
#44
|
|||
|
|||
|
Why shouldn't someone buy Bose?
Right you are about the Lexus vs. Caddy thing, Tom. No Lexus can match the
driving experience of a CTS-V Cadillac. Not even close for driver involvement. Similarly, Lexus styling is very unimaginative and conservative. The big LS has always just been the n-1 generation S-Class Merc tidied up a bit. Current Cadillac styling is very much fresh and like nobody else. You may not like it, but it copies no one. Lexi are unbeatable on reliability, though, as well as hedonistic comfort. I know, have driven an LS for 10 years now. Love the thing for what it is, but a driver's car it is not. -- - GRL "It's good to want things." Steve Barr (philosopher, poet, humorist, chemist, Visual Basic programmer) "Nousaine" wrote in message news:WQ6bc.157847$_w.1769319@attbi_s53... Joseph Oberlander wrote: ....some snips.... Nousaine wrote: And what's your point? My opinion is that competing CSW products in this performance class do not offer significantly better performance. The real issue is price and style. But the price difference is a whopper. $1300 versus $250. For $250, it's a decent budget system. For $1300 with the Bose name and a $100 receiver unit included, it's just not a good deal. As I said 'value' is the operative factor. Neither sounds that god. The Energy is a better system. Never said otherwise. But it's not as easy to install and it's materially larger. So; I'm not really arguing with anything you say but am just trying to put some perspective on the real issues with the perspective of having evaluiated and measured hundreds of loudspeaker systems of all price/performance categories. Both the Bose and the Energy are equal in setup difficulty as they both require little mounts/stands and as for wires - gosh - any speaker wire will do. But we shouldn't foget that the Bose comes with wires that are already terminated on one end. They also have a very nice large fold-out system diagram. Of course this means nothing to you and me; but to many consumers this is no small matter. They don't spend millions on marketing like Bose to artificially generate the image. Note the incident with Bose and the noise cancelling headphones they were supposed to make for the military. What incident? Can you be more specific? On the other hand, if I follow your line of reasoning then the millions Toyota spends on the Lexus image automatically means their cars have poorer performance. It's more like Cadillac. Millions on image and yet a common Lexus beats them for reliability and driving experience. I think you're wrong here; at least with regard to the cars I've driven (STS vs LS400; and the large SUVs.) I guess I can't speak for reliability but in driving and styling it's Cadillac by a fair margin. The Lexus SUVs are a big disappointment to me. But again the cache/image is the thing. Sorry - look at the KEF. Also look at the Energy Take 5.2 That's a real sub they mate with it in both cases. That's what you say. By my standards none of those have real "subwoofers." The Energy 8 inch sub is the same one they sell with the Mirage FR:X line, just with a different label on it. It's small, but it IS a real subwoofer. In fact, the sub costs $300 by itself. So you say. I've measured and inspected those and dozens of other systems. They most certainly do. Then show me the data, because the KEF system doesn't do this. I doubt if you've actually measured the KEF system yet. It will surprize you. Ths stuff has all been published in S&V. But you're right I haven't dome a KEF system for some time. Actually I just shipped out a KEF HTIB 2 weeks ago that had been gathering dust awaiting the signal to measure it because it was getting in the way. Now I wish I hadn't. I'm wondering what the company looks like these days and who's really doing things. It's true that Dick Small and Laurie Fincham are both KEF alumni but I'm not so sure that they are still the top brand of old. I ship both Celestion and KEF back to the same address. But I've never found a 'small' home theater set or HTIB that doesn't have a dynamically weak upper bass/low midrange area between 150 to 300 Hz. That's because the common bass module (even tho the crossover dial may be marked 200 Hz) seldom has response above 150 Hz and the satellites are rapidly falling in output capability at the lower end of their bandwidth. Subwoofers in this category typically have maximal SPL capability at 60 Hz and above but fall at 12-24 dB per octave below 62 Hz. Few are capable of producing reasonable SPL with low distortion even down to 32 Hz. http://www.energy-speakers.com/take5...ers_specs.html 80-20Khz +/-3db for the satellites. MDF, binding posts, seperate tweeter, poly cone woofer, and rubber surrounds. So you accept manufacturing specifications as true performance measurements? I see. Based upon that, Bose shouldn't even make ANY sound at all because they refuse to print specs. I can pull up graphs though for the Qef Uni-Q driver they use for the low end and the tweeter they use. They seem like they would have a moderate but acceptable dip where they crossover, but nothing worse than many other speakers like Tannoy and B&W. I think that response graphs taken at moderate output levels fail to tell the whole story. Dynamic capability in the lower end of response is also important. For example the Boston Acoustics CR55 is a wondeful speaker (nearly dead-flat with tightly controlled directivity) down to 100 Hz (80 Hz claimed) but the lowest frequency where it can deliver clean SPL is 80 Hz @ a paltry 80 dB. The 4 1/2-inch woofer just can't do any better than that. The matching subwoofer that came with the system would produce 108 dB SPL @ 62 Hz but only 70 dB at 25 Hz (capability falls at 23 dB per octave below 62 Hz; bandwidth uniformity of 83%.) This means that when an equal-intensity wideband signal that would drive the subwoofer to maximal ouput with an 80 Hz crossover would produce 108 dB at 62 Hz but only 70 dB at 25 Hz. And the satellite with subwoofer overlap would be somewhere in between but nowhere near 108 dB. This whole scenario is intensified with the typical HTIB ..... the satellite woofers are usually smaller and begin limiting at higher frequencies; often the subwoofers are smaller and can't do 25 Hz but they can have significant SPL at 60 Hz. Even this is pretty good compared to most HTIB systems. But in my experience the dynamic range "hole" exists with all HTIB and small HT systems I've seen. It is true that this effect is quite large with Bose as it is in any system with less than 6.5-inch midrange drivers. Indeed I think the 200-300 Hz hole in the Bose is one of its big demonstration points. A suck-out on that range gives the impression of great clarity. Certainly no chasm like the Bose. The tweeter in the KEFs will go higher than 13.5Khz - that I can guarantee. But if it's a Uni-Q it will have the classic 3-bump response error that comes with the reflections of the tweeter from the cone walls as sound exits the driver. I, personally, have never found this to be particularly annoying but it's been measurable in every Uni-Q I've had. And, of course, please note that the 13.5 kHz upper bandlimit was an "average" over +/- 30 degrees and not on-axis as were the specifications for the drivers you referenced. Again your argument has only one thread ....value. Not really - I'm terying to point out that better than Bose can be had for less money. Bose is overpriced and a smart consumer realizes this and buys a better system for the money. Isn't that what I said? :-) 38-150hz - subwoofer. 100 Watts. I'll bet that it doesn't actually reach 150 Hz at the upper end and won't do 25 Hz with 10% distortion. Wel, since the Bose box has upwards of 30-40% distortion when raised to decent sound levels... How do you know this? So you are flat out wrong. KEF's smallest and cheapest system they make has flat response and no "hole" - for less money than Bose. You're guessing on the hole. But again the major consideration in your argument is 'value.' Nothing wrong with that but again I think that enthusiasts such as me and yourself tend to underestimate that Bose is willing to sell people speakers that they want and not those that we think they should want. For most of those customers it's Bose or nothing. So they claim. I've tested more than one and, while they do have more extended high frequency extension they also have performance errors similar to Bose. Have you tested the 2005 system? It's certainly better than the Bose in every way. No I haven't. Have you tested the 2005 Bose Lifestyle system? :-) The 80 Hz bandlimit for example. Most manufacturers claim 60 - 80 Hz for satellites when, in use, they often cannot produce realistic low distortion SPL anywhere near the bandlimit. As an ilustration I recently measured a more expensive satellite system with a spec'd lower bandlimit of 36 Hz. 80hz is doable with good drivers. With decent SPL and low distortion. Not if they're smaller than 5-25-inches. 6 or 6.5 is a useful minimum size for a system with true dynamic capability at 80 Hz. Smaller drivers simply don't have the displacement for that job. Now, 36hz - that's almost certainly pseudo-science. Oh no; I can imagine there are a number of ways of getting such a measurment. But it doesn't have any useful meaning in real life. This is another area where I'll throw in another gripe I have about "power ratings" of active speakers or any powered system. Power ratings aren't standardized and for the most part are meaningless. Come on. Bose is flat out anemic compared to even the Energy sytems. Others have pulled apart their amplifier unit and it's dreadful compared to say, a lowly Denon 1600 series receiver. But how does that matter in any given way? As I said before I don't care what power is needed to produce SPL what I want to know is what SPL comes out of the speaker. While I agree that Bose probably doesn't put 100 watts into the woofer; I'll also arhue that the 100 watts printed on the spec sheet of an 8-inch powered subwoofer is also meaningless. True - My guess is that the 250W version really puts out about 100w continuous, and maybe 50W with near zero distortion. Still, 50W is a decent amount of bass. Maybe. That depends on some other things like the moving mass and compliance of the driver and the BL product and the enclosure design. But again as an end-user that's all transparent to me. I need to know how much SPL at low distortion I can get and how uniformly that is distributed over the subwoofer bandwidth. I don't care how much power that takes; and I sure as hell shouldn't discriminate against a manufacturer who can do a given job while sucking less power out of my wall. The power rating is essentially meaningless, as is the number of voice coils and as are the words "high excursion" in this context. What would qualify it as a "subwoofer" is 85 dB SPL @ 20 Hz (the threshold of audibility at that frequency) with less than 10% distortion. I'll bet that model won't do that. Probably not. Otoh, I think 20hz is silly. Most people consider the same at 25hz to be acceptable as a small subwoofer. But 25 Hz isn't "subsonic" either. And let's not forget that the fundamental ofthe lowest note of an organ with 32-foot stops is 16 Hz. Sure if you never play that kind of material who cares? But in my opinion few "subwoofers" are really subwoofers. They are, for the most part, simply common woofers. Indeed the reason I have a self-designed custom "subwoofer" is more than just partially because I couldn't buy a commerical unit that would play modern recordings as intended with sound of 10 Hz on them. The KEF are better, smaller, and cost less. Win win win. I'd say that value would be their advantage. So ....? Why hate Bose for comanding a premium. Do you hate Monster Cable for selling zip cord at inflated prices? If there's a villain in the house I'd be looking at accessory and vacumn tube electronics. I dislike all three when they are touted as better "values" to the beginning audio enthusiast. But those are touted as "sounding better" when, in fact they either sound exactly the same as one another or perhaps even worse. I'm so used to hearing the high-end snobbery that it's sometimes refreshing to hear a new Bose buyer pull rank. It's the same thing but at a far lower cost. Actual tests. 4 inch woofer and a 1/2 inch dome tweeter. It's not rocket science to build a decent little speaker these days. Their spec pages state +/-3db and so far, all KEF speakers test very close to their claims. Bose - doesn't even PRINT their specs. So you take "spec sheets" as a reliable performance indicator. I don't. And I've measured KEF speakers and since Raymnd Cooke died and Laurie Fincham left for Harman/THX they've not been the same. But they are better than Bose. Me? I personally stand by my JBL 4400 series. I have real graphs for them and they aren't stunning on paper, but they really DO what the graphs suggest. There's a reason I still recommend the little 4408As for $299 each. They sound damn good for what they are. No marketing or ubsurd claims, either. I do agree with you on that. Take Klipsch - they rate their speakers at ubsurdly high sensitivity and yet they test at a normal 88-90db(most 87-89db test closer to 80-85db). At least the JBL actually *do* the 89db they are rated at. Btw - I still remember having the loudest system in college. 2 4408s and a big Yamaha CA-1000 amp. Holy crap they were loud (heh) My neighbor had a big stack - made by DAKor something - 5 speakers and a claimed ungodly loud rating as well as about 4 ft high and 2.5 ft wide. He blew out his midrange while I was only halfway as loud as I could go Oh - I also respect what you say about subs. JBL PRO makes some big subs for motion picture use. I'd probably build my own, but IMO, a "woofer" is 6-10 inches and a "sub" is 12-18 inches. Q: is there anything larger than an 18 inch made currently? Not that I'm aware of. Hartley used to sell those really bad 24-inch models and Eclipse had a 32-inch car woofer for a while but I think those are all gone. It's even getting hard to find 18s anymore. JL Audio had a great 18 but it's been discontinued. Much of the reason for this is the excursion improvements being made for 12 and 15-inch models. For example when I was designing my system the JBL 2245 18 was being used by others making infra-systems'; but I was able to acquire custom TC Sounds 15-inch unit swith 2/3 more Vd than the JBLs. This was primarily because the 23.4mm Xmax of the TC Sounds more than offset the 10mm JBLs 60% more cone area. Sure. http://www.partsexpress.com/pe/showd...number=264-820 There's your 15Khz full-range 4 inch driver for $20. It's not great, but it does show the Bose has no excuse. 13.5Khz means they need a seperate tweeter. Thank you for the link. I went there and that driver has an octave wide 12 dB peak at 7 kHz (their own graphs show that), which if compesated would give the speaker a useful bandwidth of 10 kHz. Is that what you want them to use? Well, that is if I was looking for a Bose-like speaker. Frankly, partsexpress has crap. I usually shop places like Madisound. You left out: And this is just crap from an E-tailer. A place like Madisound sells real high-quality drivers. They carry many brands. The Aurasound seem to be superb for small full range use. I wasn't leaving out Madisound. Larry Hitch is a good friend and will be hosting the upcoming PSACS April meeting. I don't thin PartsExpress is crap either. I think they're just great. Like publishing the fhe CLIO frequency response of that woofer you mentioned. The Aurasound are slick little drivers. I'd still use a 2-way setup anyway or even a 3 way(sure the crossover is more technical, but unless you can do this sort of thing, you're not a real "designer". I personally like Morel and Seas. They seem to blend well together in some circumstances. John Stone of SEAS was a presenter at a PSACS meeting last year. I'm sure he'll be at Madisound for the PSACS meeting too. Morel, on the other hand, often seems to have some construction difficulties. I've often seen drivers glued up poorly and much of their stuff seems, like Bose, overly priced for what you get. One 3-way I had on paper that I'm interested in testing had a +/- 1db response. by carefully choosing rather pricey components from the two makers. This was back when the whole "Jupiter Audio" nonsense was happening. I posted a counter system using 3 speakers, and it should stomp on Ellis Audio by the look of it. Of course, $600 per speaker in drivers is a bit rough - lol. http://www.partsexpress.com/pe/showd...number=297-356 Here's what I had in mind. It's $45.25 here, but if Bose were buying direct, their price would likely be near $20. No comment on this I note. This was the one I had in mind.A good driver from a respected name. I'd suspect that this would crush most full-range drivers quite easily. That one looks much better than the first 2. But it doesn't have 20 kHz even directly on axis. And it's falling quickly at 100 Hz. I'd certainly use one but the $45 makes it less competitive. And by the way how do you know that the price might be in quantity? These companies like Vifa and Seas are not large outfits and while to do OEM work I'm wondering if they have the capacity to manufacturer large lots for other than current customers. For example a interested party of a well known European speaker manufacturer told me that his company had (worldwide) 60 employees including him. And let's talk about DIY speaker manufacturers. How about KEF and Dynaudio. In the 80s and early 90s I sometimes made custom speakers for friends. This required me to purchase drivers from places like Madisound and Zalytron (I'm guessing this was pre-PartsExpress.) But with KEF (who also sold drivers through audio dealers) and Dynaudio there seemed to be a trend with cone speakers. Sometimes 2 drivers (other than tweeters) with identical part numbers would differ radically from the published specifications. For example a 7-inch midrange with a published Fs of 45 Hz might actually have an Fs of 75 Hz and the matching unit might be 60 Hz. Or a woofer with a published Fs of 20 Hz might actually be 2-5 Hz lower or higher. After awhile I think I figured out what was going on. KEF used to select drivers for their up-market products so that when you burned out a driver in either channel you had to return BOTH speakers for repair (they had to install selected drivers.) This meant that KEF didn't manufacture drivers to a given tolerance; they mase a car-load and then selected individual units for given speakers. So what would be the logical thing to do with the drivers that were 'out-of-tolerance' for any speaker model being produced? Sell them to the DIY market. How about Dynaudio, at that time a OEM manufacturer, what would a clever company do with individual units that didn't qualify under the OEM standards ......selll them to the DIY market .....all under a given part number. So when I bought a pair of 7-inch mid/woofers spec'd at 45 Hz Fs I may have actually gotten a pair of speakers that failed spec on an OEM run with a completely different surround, motor, or spider assembly. Small decent range speakers do exist that aren't that expensive, espeically if you are a big company that buys millions of them at steep discounts. Why not apply for Chief Engineer or Director of Purchasing at the Mountain? :-) Heh. I don't fit well in retail or marketing because: 1: I will only represent or sell a product that I feel is best for the situation - or at least adequate. What my boss wants me to push be damned. 2: I will gladly tell people where they can obtain a solution to their problem - even if it isn't our business. 3: I care not for the bottom line. IMO, if your company NEEDS 500% margins over cost to stay in business, it's broken. My sugestions have usually been met with "too expensive" - as if $10 more really requires $50 more in markup. (meanwhile the management droids get millions in salary) Oh - sorry - lol - got off on a bit of a rant. Well, it is possible. Something like a Fostex FX200 comes close. The F200A is 30hz-20Khz, which is respectable, if really expensive. Btw - GHEEZ that's an expensive speaker. Ouch. That's your response to your original post :-) You left out the fanciful idea about how non-rectangular enclosures work. That's NoRH's blather. I chose them because they are angled to fit in a corner, nothing more. But I thought you were offering them as a response to Bose. If a company will sell a product with BS and you'll buy them with the reason that "they'll fit in a corner" it seems to me that your arguments about Bose are.... well just pretty similar to mine. |
|
#45
|
|||
|
|||
|
Why shouldn't someone buy Bose?
I can see from the inside that the bose component parts are not what we
consider to be high quality. The small voice coil, the stamped frame, the passive crossover that tries to make up for the tiny speaker. I hear the upper mids and the upper lows, but where did the rest of the music go? Inside that radio is a stereo sound expander chip that creates a "wide field" effect... thats why the radio sounds that way. Radio shack used to sell an effects system like that too. Remember when they first put spring reverb tanks on car radios and 8 tracks? everybody had to get one. Thats what this bose trend reminds me of... Joseph Oberlander wrote in message ... randyb wrote: There may be a simple way to see if things have changed in the last 10 years. I have a great deal of respect for Tom's measurements and evaluation techniques as I am sure many here do. See if Ellis, Salk, Dennis Murphy , (or one of the othters) would part for a few days with one of their best creations and see if Tom would be willing to measure them. I can think of several speaker designs that the DIY crowd hold close to their hearts. Maybe take it off line to see if any of the parties are willing (oh, and let me know the results) Sounds interesting. Of course, the line has to be drawn as to where small established firms with a few employees and DIYers are different from major large firms. At some point, the small firms were DIYers, so in theory it must be possible. Perhaps include independant companies with less than ten employees? 20? For instance, NoRH would qualify as there are only a few employees. The level between DIY and commercial firm is razor thin in this case. Also get a couple of the Madisound kits in there as well. |
|
#46
|
|||
|
|||
|
Why shouldn't someone buy Bose?
On Wed, 14 Apr 2004 04:52:14 +0000, GRL wrote:
Strap yourself into a CTS-V and prepare to smile ear to ear. It sure ain't no SAAB (which is a GM brand, by the way)! By the way, you are confusing Cadillac quality with M-B. Caddy's are decent on quality. It's Mercs and a lot of other German brands that tend to be crappy on quality/reliability. Actually, few German brands are anything but poor in quality. Porsche may be the only well known exception. I have a 96 Impala SS with the Bose system and I also have a 2000 Dodge Caravan with the Infinity system. The Infinity blows the Bose away and it's not even close. Not that either can compare to the Pioneer / Infinity Kappa system (self installed last year, nothing fancy but great sound) in my 92 Chevy Caprice. The only problem the Dodge Infinity system has is that it's kind of funky the way the drivers (speakers) have their own amplifiers on them and the way the head unit interfaces with them. I've never seen the need to replace the Infinity system though but the Bose has drove me crazy for years and the only reason I keep it is because these cars are worth more when everything is stock. Swampford |
|
#47
|
|||
|
|||
|
Why shouldn't someone buy Bose?
swampford wrote:
I've never seen the need to replace the Infinity system though but the Bose has drove me crazy for years and the only reason I keep it is because these cars are worth more when everything is stock. The only Dolby Digital certified audio system so far is in a Volvo. It doesn't use Bose. From what people say, it's stunning - worlds better than even most custom installs. |
|
#48
|
|||
|
|||
|
Why shouldn't someone buy Bose?
On Tue, 13 Apr 2004 06:59:44 +0000, Nousaine wrote:
(ebsimonds) wrote: (Nousaine) wrote in message news:Kk5ac.130243$Cb.1466684@attbi_s51... Mark Howell wrote: On Mon, 29 Mar 2004 19:57:20 GMT, (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. Here's one reason. The P.O.S. Bose amplifiers in the Delco/Bose stereo in my Cadillac have failed repeatedly, and one of them actually caught fire -- the stench was unbelievable although actual damage was minimal. So as far as I'm concerned, Bose literally stinks! Mark Howell Well that surely sucks. OTOH I've performed extensive and detailed evaluation of a couple hundred production OEM sound systems and nearly 500 when you count prototypes and concepts and by and large Bose delivers the best on-road sound.Their best car systems are better than 80-90% of the home systems I've listened to...... perhaps 300 over the past quarter century..... in pure sound quality terms. Of course, it is true that I've seen no more than a couple really good Bose home systems. You obviously haven't listened to the Bloze system in my C4 Corvette or my C5 Corvette. Both are without a doubt the crappiest sounding systems I have ever heard. The Chrysler Infinity system in my wifes '91 Voyager is a better sounding system than the one in my 2-1/2 year old Corvette. The only "improvement" in the C5 vs. the C4 is the fact that it's easier to replace it in stages if you're inclined to do so. EBS Sure I have. I've owned 2 C4s (150k miles) and now have a C5 with 60k on it. I've even driven and tested the upcoming C6 audio system (both the base and the Bose.) In the meantime I've also evaluated nearly 500 other OEM prototype/staged/production systems in the past 5 years. And furthermore evaluated several hundred aftermarket systems over the past decade. . You want to know my opinion? Maybe not; but I'm going to give it to you anyway :-) On a scale of 1 to 5 (one being unlistenable to 5 being exactly identical to a high-quality 2 channel home audio system) Bose can deliver a OEM sound system in a car, in their best effort, that is frankly, better than 90% of the home audiophile systems I've heard in the past 15-years. The C4-5 Corvette isn't their best effort but it's still a 70-percentile system on that scale. Between you and me; don't expect anything more from the C6. I'm not sure exactly what your standards might be but, on the whole, Bose has a better sound throughput than any other OEM premium supplier. __________________________________________________ __________ Nousaine.. I agree with most of the comments here regarding Bose, I am not as experienced in auto based systems as you, in fact I have very limited experience. However, I wonder what your opinion regarding the "Monsoon" based speakers are? I was in one GM auto back a year or so ago and it had Monsoon speakers in it and I'm not sure of the electronics. However, it was, to my ears, a cut above in definition that was noticeable even with road noise while driving at moderate speeds. There are some Korean efforts now with Monsoon speakers also. As to the Bose systems in an auto sounding better to you than 90% of home systems. I have always felt that a well developed system in the auto acoustic environment sounded really good! Extremely difficult to achieve this sound in a large room! Oh yes, have you noted any EQ built into the electonics, assuming they are Bose? Or, is this addressed in your tests, etc. Anyway, thanks for the comments regarding your beliefs on auto sound. Those of us that have been around awhile are familiar with your experience in this realm...and it is respected. Previous comments regarding the market that Bose has selected to go for are right on. Obviously, standard market research has not alerted many vendors as to where the market "vacuums" are out there. Bose has fell into the "money trap"...prices are almost as bad as the "high-end". I think Bose has, through a trial and error policy, stumbled into this current marketing success. Small, modern, unobtrusive, consumer weaknesses, inexpensive parts, healthy ad campaigns...overpriced. Drat..good formula for success! Leonard... |
|
#49
|
|||
|
|||
|
Why shouldn't someone buy Bose?
|
|
#50
|
|||
|
|||
|
Why shouldn't someone buy Bose?
Nousaine..
I agree with most of the comments here regarding Bose, I am not as experienced in auto based systems as you, in fact I have very limited experience. However, I wonder what your opinion regarding the "Monsoon" based speakers are? I'm curious also. I currently have a VW New Beetle with the Monsoon system upgrade and to my ears it is the finest factory system I've yet encounted in an automobile. My wife's new Toyota Sienna has the JBL upgrade and well, let just say I'm much less impressed with it. Any comments? -Jim |
|
#51
|
|||
|
|||
|
Why shouldn't someone buy Bose?
On Fri, 16 Apr 2004 16:03:46 +0000, lcw999 wrote:
Nousaine.. I agree with most of the comments here regarding Bose, I am not as experienced in auto based systems as you, in fact I have very limited experience. However, I wonder what your opinion regarding the "Monsoon" based speakers are? I was in one GM auto back a year or so ago and it had Monsoon speakers in it and I'm not sure of the electronics. However, it was, to my ears, a cut above in definition that was noticeable even with road noise while driving at moderate speeds. There are some Korean efforts now with Monsoon speakers also. I'm not Nousaine (nor do I play him on TV!) but, I have a 2004 Jetta (my 18 yo daughters car) with a Monsoon based sound system and for a stock system it sounds pretty darn good for an upgraded stock system. Be aware though that the system sounds different depending upon the model car it is installed in and although I think each system is tweaked for the particular car, there are differences. I heard a Monsoon system in a 2004 Pontiac Grand Am and I didn't like the sound of it. Also, if you decide to go with a custom unit later on, it's a little more involved but not much. I would say go and give a listen and see what you think. As to the Bose systems in an auto sounding better to you than 90% of home systems. I have always felt that a well developed system in the auto acoustic environment sounded really good! Extremely difficult to achieve this sound in a large room! Depending upon the car, yes that is true. But a car also masks a lot of distortion, noise and weird frequency aberrations that would drive you crazy in a home environment. Leonard... |
|
#52
|
|||
|
|||
|
Why shouldn't someone buy Bose?
"Nousaine" wrote in message
news:1GVfc.153822$K91.406472@attbi_s02... Joseph Oberlander wrote: swampford wrote: I've never seen the need to replace the Infinity system though but the Bose has drove me crazy for years and the only reason I keep it is because these cars are worth more when everything is stock. The only Dolby Digital certified audio system so far is in a Volvo. It doesn't use Bose. From what people say, it's stunning - worlds better than even most custom installs. I listened to the Volvo Dolby Digital system when first introduced in 1996. I've, within the past year, evaluated the DD system in the XC90. I'm not sure if I'd call that system Dolby Digital "certified" but its surely branded Dolby Digital. Yes it is better than all but a handful of expensive aftermarket installations (and MOST very expensive after market systems) but it's not as good as the Bose system in the Cadillac STS. Close, very good, but somewhat less. As for Bose they do not universally deliver systems as good as the STS but they never toss-up a turkey and I can't think of a single car class where they are not best -in-class. Mind you I've tested nearly 500 OEM sound systems (including 200 production vehicles that have been sold to the public) in the past 5 years. I disagree with the turkey comment. I have had 2 Maximas with the factory bose, and while they sound great, both CD players failed, one with only 1000 miles past the warranty. |
|
#53
|
|||
|
|||
|
Why shouldn't someone buy Bose?
|
|
#54
|
|||
|
|||
|
Why shouldn't someone buy Bose?
Jim Mattoni wrote:
Nousaine.. I agree with most of the comments here regarding Bose, I am not as experienced in auto based systems as you, in fact I have very limited experience. However, I wonder what your opinion regarding the "Monsoon" based speakers are? I'm curious also. I currently have a VW New Beetle with the Monsoon system upgrade and to my ears it is the finest factory system I've yet encounted in an automobile. My wife's new Toyota Sienna has the JBL upgrade and well, let just say I'm much less impressed with it. Any comments? JBL is cheaper re-branded Infinity - at least for car audio. I'd rate it almost identical to Kenwood. Quite good for "factory" audio, but not special. |
|
#55
|
|||
|
|||
|
Why shouldn't someone buy Bose?
Why should someone not buy Bose?
My answer, for me, is that I personally prefer other speaker systems, and Bose doesn't give me the bang-for-the-buck I want, given that I don't prefer their sound. |
|
#56
|
|||
|
|||
|
Why shouldn't someone buy Bose?
|
|
#57
|
|||
|
|||
|
Why shouldn't someone buy Bose?
On Sat, 17 Apr 2004 18:13:16 +0000, Joseph Oberlander wrote:
Jim Mattoni wrote: Nousaine.. I agree with most of the comments here regarding Bose, I am not as experienced in auto based systems as you, in fact I have very limited experience. However, I wonder what your opinion regarding the "Monsoon" based speakers are? I'm curious also. I currently have a VW New Beetle with the Monsoon system upgrade and to my ears it is the finest factory system I've yet encounted in an automobile. My wife's new Toyota Sienna has the JBL upgrade and well, let just say I'm much less impressed with it. Any comments? JBL is cheaper re-branded Infinity - at least for car audio. I'd rate it almost identical to Kenwood. Quite good for "factory" audio, but not special. Outside of the pro-audio field, JBL hasn't produced anything worthwhile since the LSXX series of loudspeakers circa 70's.... The Infinity system, at least in Dodges is pretty decent. Not great, but not bad either especially for the $500 price. The Monsoon in my daughters VW Jetta is damm good! |
|
#58
|
|||
|
|||
|
Why shouldn't someone buy Bose?
Stewart Pinkerton
wrote: On Fri, 16 Apr 2004 18:33:33 GMT, (Nousaine) wrote: As for Bose they do not universally deliver systems as good as the STS but they never toss-up a turkey and I can't think of a single car class where they are not best -in-class. Perhaps you might consider the Harman system in the Jaguar XK8 and the Linn system in the Aston Martin Vanquish. -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering I haven't evaluated either of those but I was also considering the Levinson and BMW Harman products. The latter in the 7-series branded Logic 7 is a dead heat. But my understanidn is that the Logic 7 system will soon be history. |
|
#59
|
|||
|
|||
|
Why shouldn't someone buy Bose?
|
|
#60
|
|||
|
|||
|
Why shouldn't someone buy Bose?
(Nousaine) wrote:
"davidb1" wrote: ...snip..... As for Bose they do not universally deliver systems as good as the STS but they never toss-up a turkey and I can't think of a single car class where they are not best -in-class. Mind you I've tested nearly 500 OEM sound systems (including 200 production vehicles that have been sold to the public) in the past 5 years. I disagree with the turkey comment. I have had 2 Maximas with the factory bose, and while they sound great, both CD players failed, one with only 1000 miles past the warranty. Bose does not supply the cd players or head units for any of their systems. For example the GM Bose products use Delphi head units. It was demonstrated to me today that Delphi no longer has a lock on head units in Bose systems. But, Bose is not the supplier of any head units AFAIK. |
| Reply |
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Bose 901 Review | General | |||
| Whey do people buy Bose Acousticmass systems instead of something like this? | General | |||
| How to fix no display or no sound in Nissan Maxima or Infinity I30 with Bose Radio Clarion | Car Audio | |||
| Bose receiver broken and need alternate. | General | |||
| replacing a Bose radio | Car Audio | |||
Linear Mode
