[JLM]

Thanks Steve.

His health had been steadily declining for 7 years, but he failed surprisingly quickly (even to hospice) in the last few hours/days/weeks, which was good for him. 

Are we far enough off topic now?  Sorry again, let's try this:

I suppose "rip off" can be in the eye of the beholder...

How about various aspects of design?  Is a 15 mm thick solid metal faceplate a rip off?  How about super exotic wood veneers or piano black finish with 100 coats of clear coat?  How about selling an integrated amp without providing a pre-amp output to provide a possible upgrade path? 

[dBe]

Hmmmm.....

I would say that the biggest rip off in anything is that person that espouses opinion built on only their belief system.  They influence others that are gullible and unwilling to learn things for themselves.

I read it on the internet somewhere...   

What a shame.

Dave

[RDavidson]

Hmmm......to me a "rip-off" is something that claims to be or do something it actually doesn't.

Extra thick face plates on components, BMW paint on speaker cabinets, etc. are "jewelry" and are not necessary, but I don't think they're rip-offs. I think (most of time) when people buy audio jewelry (or anything of luxury) they know what they're paying for, or at the very least know that they're paying for luxury.

On the other hand, anything made by Bose, I tend to think most people don't know what they're paying for. People are lead to believe that Bose products offer some sort of luxury or are superior. We all know this not to be true whatsoever. Better built and better sounding products can be had for the same prices if not less (far less). I guess if people buy the Bose name to "feel" superior, then those people are getting what they paid for. People spend A LOT of money to feel good about themselves and/or to try and impress others.
 

[jackman]

I disagree regarding "Everything from Bose".  I was looking for a small portable bluetooth powered speaker and picked up a Bose Soundlink Mini (I had a gift certificate and needed to spend it).  For under $200, it's the best sounding tiny bluetooth speaker I have ever heard and it is really cool looking with an aluminum case.  Battery life is great and it works perfectly and has decent range. 

It's really tiny and can't fill a giant room with sound but it plays loud enough for its intended purpose and the bass from this little thing is pretty impressive (okay, it's a little sloppy at higher volume levels) at moderate volume level.  It's not an audiophile product and is crazy small but it sounds good and is only $199.  I've tried several mini players from all of the major manufacturers (needed something that was battery powered) and this one sounds best to me. 

http://www.amazon.com/Bose-SoundLink-Mini-Bluetooth-Speaker/dp/B00D5Q75RC/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1394144673&sr=8-1&keywords=mini+bose

I'm not familiar with their other stuff but the Soundlink Mini is kind've cool...and I never thought I'd say that about a Bose item.  Please feel free to shoot me!

[fredgarvin]

  Are mega expensive discrete class A and AB amps going the way of the dodo because of the improvements being made in these very inexpensive class D and T amps?

Maybe, but it may have more to do with attitudes towards them  adjusting with time than, by ratio,  the improvements. 
A bit like 'break in'- "it sounds better to me now" (after 150 hours of listening and adapting).

As far as my opinion on what the biggest rip offs are, and this is about our subjective opinions, I would say cables. Of all types. Not that there aren't differences in quality and sound characteristics, but that the biggest scams are probably in this sphere of audio.

[Letitroll98]

As far as my opinion on what the biggest rip offs are, and this is about our subjective opinions, I would say cables. Of all types. Not that there aren't differences in quality and sound characteristics, but that the biggest scams are probably in this sphere of audio.

Sounds about right.  I Googled up the Siltech Emperor Crown – $40,000 speaker cables.  As far as I can tell this is for a standard 8' length.  Maybe they're worth it, but I would need a lot of convincing no matter if I actually had the disposable for them.  I would wonder if I could find a $20,000 pair of something that might sound as good, or indistinguishable.   

And I should add that like you, I easily hear differences in cables.  I've never had a $40k set in my system, but find it hard to believe there would be a construction technique or material list that could justify the price.

[DaveC113]

40 oz of gold? 

[RDavidson]

I'm not familiar with their other stuff but the Soundlink Mini is kind've cool...and I never thought I'd say that about a Bose item.  Please feel free to shoot me!

I was perhaps making an over generalized statement (aimed primarily at Bose's home speaker systems and perhaps some of their smaller pieces of gear like headphones) just to make a point. Generally speaking, Bose is a prime example of a rip-off.

[jackman]

I was perhaps making an over generalized statement (aimed primarily at Bose's home speaker systems and perhaps some of their smaller pieces of gear like headphones) just to make a point. Generally speaking, Bose is a prime example of a rip-off.

I disagree in general because Bose fills a niche for people who want small unobtrusive speakers that sound reasonably good. I don't identify with this group but for their niche, Bose does a better job than any company and they are very successful.  This same group would question the value of a $2,000 power cord or a $500 USB cable.  Also, Bose has excellent resale value and high WAF.  Their speaker systems don't have the sound quality of good audiophile equipment but they are super compact and sound good enough for the people in their target market. 

It's all relative.  For me "Beats" products are crazy ripoffs.  I listened to the little Pill bluetooth speaker before buying the Bose and was shocked at how cheaply it was constructed and how bad it sounded.  Their headphones are also not a good value IMO.  Then again, I'm guessing people who buy Beats products are more into the looks than the sound.  Who am I to judge?

[Devil Doc]

They've probably already been mentioned but crystals, stones and gong like devices whose mere presence in the room improve the sound.

Doc

[jackman]

They've probably already been mentioned but crystals, stones and gong like devices whose mere presence in the room improve the sound.

Doc

Agreed 100%  Out of curiosity, has anyone ever seen these items in someone else's system?  I never have but suspect the owners hide them to avoid ridicule when they have guests.  Magic pebbles, etc.  I'm amazed those guys can stay in business.

[RDavidson]

I disagree in general because Bose fills a niche for people who want small unobtrusive speakers that sound reasonably good. I don't identify with this group but for their niche, Bose does a better job than any company and they are very successful.  This same group would question the value of a $2,000 power cord or a $500 USB cable.  Also, Bose has excellent resale value and high WAF.  Their speaker systems don't have the sound quality of good audiophile equipment but they are super compact and sound good enough for the people in their target market. 

It's all relative.  For me "Beats" products are crazy ripoffs.  I listened to the little Pill bluetooth speaker before buying the Bose and was shocked at how cheaply it was constructed and how bad it sounded.  Their headphones are also not a good value IMO.  Then again, I'm guessing people who buy Beats products are more into the looks than the sound.  Who am I to judge?

Tit for tat. Beats products fill a niche in the exact same way Bose gear does. They're both marketing driven "scams" that cost a premium (to the general consumer). This premium price also adds to the perception of quality. Back to my original statement, the equipment price doesn't match their "stated" performance. Anything along these lines is a blatant rip-off.........but, like I said, people spend A LOT of money to look/feel good.

And maybe this is all getting to the core of the problem. Marketing. It's all smoke and mirrors.

[jackman]

Tit for tat. Beats products fill a niche in the exact same way Bose gear does. They're both marketing driven "scams" that cost a premium (to the general consumer). This premium price also adds to the perception of quality. Back to my original statement, the equipment price doesn't match their "stated" performance. Anything along these lines is a blatant rip-off.........but, like I said, people spend A LOT of money to look/feel good.

And maybe this is all getting to the core of the problem. Marketing. It's all smoke and mirrors.

Bose makes products that meet the meets of their consumers.  This is why they are so successful.  The same can be said for Beats, I guess.  If the products meet the needs of the consumers, it's hard to call them rip-offs.  My little Bose bluetooth player is an example.  I wasn't expecting audiophile performance for $200 but it is well built, compact and sounds as good as I expected.  Not a ripoff in my book.  If the aluminum was just plastic coated metal and it sounded bad or battery life was not good, I'd call it a ripoff. 

For home systems, people who buy Bose products seem satisfied.  Several friends who own Bose for instance have heard better sounding systems but would never be willing to trade sound quality for convenience and form factor/WAF.  In their minds, they are getting what they paid for so how can you call that a ripoff?  Plus the stuff has great resale value. 

[jarcher]

I've come to peace somewhat with Bose, though obviously I think there are better values for performance out there.  I have heard many products in the compact / portable / "lifestyle" segment that cost about the same and sound even worse. 

I think in some respects they might actually deserve some praise because they are one of the very few companies in the audio world who expend considerable money on marketing to spread the idea of "better sound" to the mass market - even if Bose as the object of that might be questionable to many of us.  For this reason I don't think I'd cringe anymore that your average person would say "Bose" if you asked them to bring up an audiophile name : I think in many cases it's simply the only name they've ever heard.

[jackman]

Jarcher,

Until I picked up the Mini, I never owned any of their products and have bashed Bose a lot in the past.  Never thought I'd be a "supporter" and I don't think I am, technically.  Their products are at the high end of the range in the categories they are in but are still cheaper than B&O.  People who own B&O are probably more into the looks than sound, and I admit some of their stuff is pretty cool looking. 

On the surface, this hobby is full of ripoffs, but I think to qualify as a true ripoff, you have to deceive people and I'm not sure Bose or B&O deceive people.  They just cater to people who have different priorities.  The resale on Bose items is pretty impressive and their stuff seems to sell quickly on eBay. 

[RDavidson]

Bose makes products that meet the meets of their consumers.  This is why they are so successful.  The same can be said for Beats, I guess.  If the products meet the needs of the consumers, it's hard to call them rip-offs.  My little Bose bluetooth player is an example.  I wasn't expecting audiophile performance for $200 but it is well built, compact and sounds as good as I expected.  Not a ripoff in my book.  If the aluminum was just plastic coated metal and it sounded bad or battery life was not good, I'd call it a ripoff. 

For home systems, people who buy Bose products seem satisfied.  Several friends who own Bose for instance have heard better sounding systems but would never be willing to trade sound quality for convenience and form factor/WAF.  In their minds, they are getting what they paid for so how can you call that a ripoff?  Plus the stuff has great resale value.

Sorry Jackman, you just don't make a convincing argument for me. There are MANY better (made/engineered/performing/priced) products out there than Bose and Beats that also meet the same requirements of their niche. So the name / marketing is worth the premium? I, personally, don't think so. To each their own I guess. That's fine if people are happy paying for this. Again, the problem is the way they're marketed. There's a reason Bose won't and will never allow their Acoustimass systems to be displayed / demoed in the same room as their competitors. It's all about about image control and being sure the general consumer's perception of the brand is positive / seen as premium. Deceitful? I think so.

[jackman]

RDavidson,

Which portable system is superior to the Bose, when you consider ease of use, WAF, overall sound quality (none of them sound great to me) and resale value?  They cost more but are reliable and easy to resell for a great price.  I don't own one of their systems but they dominate the category and command the highest price.  It's true their actual response curves are dreadful but their stuff sounds pretty good for its intended purpose.  How is this a ripoff? 

[geowak]

I had a pair of Bose 901's in the '80's that I liked alot. Great innovative design. I think it was in 1980, that Amar Bose started to take profits from Bose and began development of his active automobile suspension system, that also is very impressive. I never thought of Bose products as rip offs. He was a very intelligent and creative engineer. But there are audio engineers that have produced much better designs, in terms of sound quality.

[RDavidson]

RDavidson,

Which portable system is superior to the Bose, when you consider ease of use, WAF, overall sound quality (none of them sound great to me) and resale value?  They cost more but are reliable and easy to resell for a great price.  I don't own one of their systems but they dominate the category and command the highest price.  It's true their actual response curves are dreadful but their stuff sounds pretty good for its intended purpose.  How is this a ripoff?

jackman, you're siting one specific product. I've been speaking in generalities then narrowed the argument specifically to their bread and butter line of products (Acoustimass) which have been in the market the longest and have thus been in people's homes / minds the longest. Most of Bose's reputation / foundation is built on the Acoustimass engineering.

Look, it's cool if you like your little portable Bose Bluetooth gadget. I'm sure it meets your expectations. Then again, you were able to do a direct A/B comparison in the store and were able to make the "best" choice (for you). There were no smoke and mirrors in this specific situation / product marketing.

Now, back to the Acoustimass systems, it sounds like we're in agreement here. Bose "dominates the category and command the highest price. It's true that their actual response curves are dreadful...."
Again, it is marketing that has driven the price of these systems, not actual product quality. Not even taking response curves into the argument, the materials that these systems are made of is of far less quality than similarly and even lower priced systems in the same category. I don't see how this isn't a rip-off irrespective of one's enjoyment of the perceived sound quality?

It's all smoke and mirrors, man.

[RDavidson]

I had a pair of Bose 901's in the '80's that I liked alot. Great innovative design. I think it was in 1980, that Amar Bose started to take profits from Bose and began development of his active automobile suspension system, that also is very impressive. I never thought of Bose products as rip offs. He was a very intelligent and creative engineer. But there are audio engineers that have produced much better designs, in terms of sound quality.

Bose once made some real advancements in home audio (and in other products) no doubt. Bose's influence on the industry is huge. But somewhere along the lines the Bose company became marketing, not engineering driven. Sad, really.