Amar Bose, RIP

Doublej · « **on:** 13 Jul 2013, 12:02 am »

http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/2013/07/12/bose-corp-founder-dies/QZuRfzTmerlYCcGCyJj0zJ/story.html

JerryM · « **Reply #1 on:** 13 Jul 2013, 12:20 am »

May he listen to the Top 40 via Bose speakers for all eternity.

geowak · « **Reply #2 on:** 13 Jul 2013, 12:45 am »

That is sad, indeed. He was a good engineer, all kidding aside. I had the 901s and they were revolutionary for the day. With the right amp, they sounded very open. Many do not know that he developed his own automobile suspension system.
http://www.bose.com/controller?url=/automotive/bose_suspension/index.jsp
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eSi6J-QK1lw

Davey · « **Reply #3 on:** 13 Jul 2013, 02:10 am »

I imagine there will be numerous smart alec comments in this thread now. Too bad.

Dave.

S Clark · « **Reply #4 on:** 13 Jul 2013, 02:23 am »

You can't say much bad about a guy that gives his multimillion bucks worth of Bose stock to his alma mater for research and scholarships. Apparently he has been a big supporter of MIT for decades.
And like his products or not, he was an innovative engineer and a helluva marketer.
And I agree with Geowak about the spaciousness of the 901s with the right setup.

sts9fan · « **Reply #5 on:** 13 Jul 2013, 02:58 am »

The only reason he gave 51% of Bose to MIT is bacause of inheritance tax.

S Clark · « **Reply #6 on:** 13 Jul 2013, 03:23 am »

Quote from: sts9fan on 13 Jul 2013, 02:58 am

The only reason he gave 51% of Bose to MIT is bacause of inheritance tax.

That's a cynical thing to say unless you have personal knowledge to back it up.

coverto · « **Reply #7 on:** 13 Jul 2013, 05:23 am »

Here's a proper writeup - sounds like he was a heck of a guy. I now regret all of my past smart-alecky comments on Bose.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/13/business/amar-g-bose-acoustic-engineer-and-inventor-dies-at-83.html?hp

JLM · « **Reply #8 on:** 13 Jul 2013, 08:53 am »

I thought he might have been older.

Frankly never agreed with the direct/reflecting premise. I know much of what we hear is reflected sound, but why 'reflect it an extra time in the reproduction'? OTOH we've all learned since the 60s and to put it into context of the time, we just developed high powered solid state amps (that the 901's needed) and the impressive speakers of the day were Altec A7s, Khorns, and the like.

Ericus Rex · « **Reply #9 on:** 13 Jul 2013, 11:05 am »

The Bose business philosophy:

If your speaker sounds terrible just add an active EQ. EQ makes everything better!

If you get a bad review of your product just sue the reviewer...and win the case. That'll stop people from judging your product based on its (lack of) merits.

Spend far, FAR more on marketing than product development. If people think they're getting the best then the actual (poor) quality of the product is irrelevant.

sts9fan · « **Reply #10 on:** 13 Jul 2013, 12:56 pm »

Quote from: S Clark on 13 Jul 2013, 03:23 am

That's a cynical thing to say unless you have personal knowledge to back it up.

It's not cynical at all. It's just fact. I know many folks that work at Bose and worked on the same raod as the HQ for many years. The fact is that the transfer of large privently held companies from parent to offspring can be challenging in the US. Bose does not want to go public so taxes become a serious issue when you can't sell off inherited shares to pay the bill. Anyway, not cynical at all.
FYI I have a Blose soundlink and think its awesome for the beach, pick nicks etc.

Doublej · « **Reply #11 on:** 13 Jul 2013, 01:09 pm »

Quote from: sts9fan on 13 Jul 2013, 12:56 pm

It's not cynical at all. It's just fact. I know many folks that work at Bose and worked on the same raod as the HQ for many years. The fact is that the transfer of large privently held companies from parent to offspring can be challenging in the US. Bose does not want to go public so taxes become a serious issue when you can't sell off inherited shares to pay the bill. Anyway, not cynical at all.
FYI I have a Blose soundlink and think its awesome for the beach, pick nicks etc.

This is different than your first claim that the only reason Bose donated his wealth to MIT was to avoid paying tax to the government. I find it very difficult to believe your first claim because Bose spent his entire adult life at MIT and I suspect was smart enough to have lawyers create trusts and/or other mechanisms to financially provide for his loved ones while avoiding paying 51% of his wealth in taxes.

sts9fan · « **Reply #12 on:** 13 Jul 2013, 01:27 pm »

The company cannot be put in trust.

Doublej · « **Reply #13 on:** 13 Jul 2013, 01:37 pm »

Quote from: sts9fan on 13 Jul 2013, 01:27 pm

The company cannot be put in trust.

Nice job ignoring your first claim!

So there is no way to transfer any value from the company to Bose's family without paying 51% tax? I am not an estate attorney but I have a tough time believing this.

Devil Doc · « **Reply #14 on:** 13 Jul 2013, 01:45 pm »

Guy just died and there's strangers, that have no stake, fighting over his money.

Doc

dB Cooper · « **Reply #15 on:** 13 Jul 2013, 01:55 pm »

Quote from: Ericus Rex on 13 Jul 2013, 11:05 am

The Bose business philosophy:

If you get a bad review of your product just sue the reviewer...and win the case. That'll stop people from judging your product based on its (lack of) merits.

In 1971, Bose sued Consumer Reports for pointing out- accurately- that the Bose 901, playing back a recording of, say, a solo violin or guitar, would create an image of a six foot wide instrument. And let's just say for the sake of argument that the violin was recorded playing outdoors. In the second case, you would get an "image" of a six foot wide violin playing in a concert hall the sound of which was added to the playback by the speakers. And while the effect is most obvious in a situation like the example cited in the CU review, it does the same thing to all recordings, just not as obviously. While that may sound "pleasing" with some material, it is not high fidelity IMO.

Consumer Reports won in the Supreme Court. But they had to spend a fortune in legal fees because some thin skinned egotist couldn't handle one negative review. (The commercial hifi rags of the time, all of which ran Bose ads, all gave glowing reviews.)

Likewise, a good IEM with proper fit will shut out more noise than any NR headset I have heard, and do it without introducing distortion or the inconveniences that come with batteries.

Opinions of his equipment and/or design philosophy aside, I am sure the man was a decent human being whose loss will be grieved by his family and friends. RIP

AJinFLA · « **Reply #16 on:** 13 Jul 2013, 02:20 pm »

RIP Dr Bose. You brought music into more homes/lives than all the audiophool dodos combined.

ratso · « **Reply #17 on:** 13 Jul 2013, 04:12 pm »

Quote from: AJinFLA on 13 Jul 2013, 02:20 pm

RIP Dr Bose. You brought music into more homes/lives than all the audiophool dodos combined.

always thought it was very silly how it became the cool "audiophile" thing to do to bash bose.

sts9fan · « **Reply #18 on:** 13 Jul 2013, 04:17 pm »

I can't find where I said 51% tax. He gave 51% of the company.

Andre2 · « **Reply #19 on:** 13 Jul 2013, 04:25 pm »

back in 1985, when I was studying engineering at The University of Texas, I bought a pair of reflective Bose speakers, if memory serves me they were under $500 for the pair, and I was very happy with them. Thank you Bose, RIP.

Just this quote noted in the NYT makes my day: (...) In a 2004 interview in Popular Science magazine, he said: “I would have been fired a hundred times at a company run by M.B.A.’s. But I never went into business to make money. I went into business so that I could do interesting things that hadn’t been done before.”