Was Bose right after all?

Watson · « **on:** 8 Dec 2005, 05:29 am »

As audiophiles, we've probably all engaged in beating up on the Bose cubed speakers when friends start inquiring about Bose...

... but lately I've been thinking, maybe Bose wasn't so wrong after all. Here's my reasoning:

Single driver crossoverless speakers have gained a huge amount of momentum lately, largely for the clarity of their midrange. People used to criticize Bose because they didn't use crossovers and because the measurements could never compare to traditional speaker designs, but now that single driver speakers have caught on, is this really still a valid criticism? Judging from the Sound&Vision published measurements, the Bose cubes measure better than many of the single driver speakers popular here, with their most severe peak being +6dB in the midrange. The Moth Cicada, in comparison, has a +10dB peak. Moreover, the way Bose arranges their cubed speakers, one on top of each other, angled in separate directions, helps to increase their horizontal dispersion -- one of the most severe issues with single driver speakers.

What's more, single driver crossoverless designs generally have no baffle step compensation and thus an early midbass rolloff. The Bose subwoofer crossover at 200Hz is too high in a perfect world, but having the crossover that high purposefully helps to counteract the lack of baffle step compensation on the satellites.

Even the pricing isn't that out of line, compared to some of the single driver loudspeaker vendors out there. Not to mention, their little chipamp based amplifier is pretty much in line with the current popularity of GainClone-style chipamps.

I'm not trying to defend Bose (they don't have any products I'm ever interested in buying), but I do wonder if a lot of the bashing in the past was misdirected now that single driver speakers are in vogue.

Rob Babcock · « **Reply #1 on:** 8 Dec 2005, 06:19 am »

Single driver fads notwithstanding, I think anyone with ears knows the bashing was richly justified!

kfr01 · « **Reply #2 on:** 8 Dec 2005, 06:36 am »

I think rather than validating Bose, your post exposes single driver designs for what they are, IMHO: less than ideal.

I enjoy my small bookshelves based on the CSS FR125S drivers; as computer speakers.

For critical listening (shit, even casual listening at decent volume levels, or home theater) I'm still of the opinion that single driver designs don't cut it. Perhaps I enjoy my bass more than others, or perhaps I just don't like the fact that most of the single driver designs out there don't stay composed when asked to play material with bass at any appreciable volume level.

Watson · « **Reply #3 on:** 8 Dec 2005, 06:50 am »

kfr01, I tend to agree with you. I've had bad experiences with single driver speakers as well (not composed at high volumes (doppler distortion), uneven FR, not good off-axis), but I'm not willing to write them off yet. I need more experience with them. They seem to have a certain quality that some people really like. It may be that this quality was what Bose engineers were aiming for as well. Perhaps the general public likes the midrange quality, even with all the other limitations. And Bose does include a subwoofer and a high pass crossover on the satellites, which gets around your bass complaints.

kfr01 · « **Reply #4 on:** 8 Dec 2005, 07:49 am »

Quote from: Watson

Perhaps the general public likes the midrange quality, even with all the other limitations. And Bose does include a subwoofer and a high pass crossover on the satellites, which gets around your bass complaints.

I think the general public likes bright sounding upper midrange and warm boomy bass. "Listen, there's the subwoofer booming! - and listen to those cymbals!"

Audio people (not the general public) like single driver designs because -they do- have a certain midrange magic that even I can enjoy (see my FR-125S review in the DIYCable circle). For certain types of music (violin, for me) I can see why some folks find them superior. I would consider them if my musical tastes were not as broad.

Also, Bose's high pass + subwoofer solution does not defeat my bass complaints. Why?

Cohesion, accuracy, and distortion. Bose offers one-note-wonder disjointed bass that rolls off early, low accuracy, and high distortion levels. Turn it up and everything gets muddier and muddier. Take the price into consideration and I think bose is one of the worst price / performance values in audio.

Watson · « **Reply #5 on:** 8 Dec 2005, 08:10 am »

Quote from: kfr01

Also, Bose's high pass + subwoofer solution does not defeat my bass complaints. Why?

Cohesion, accuracy, and distortion. Bose offers one-note-wonder disjointed bass that rolls off early, low accuracy, and high distortion levels. Turn it up and everything gets muddier and muddier. Take the price into consideration and I think bose is one of the worst price / performance values in audio.

It may be boomy, subjectively, but it doesn't roll off that early. The Sound&Vision review (which panned them, by the way, but this was before the single driver resurgence) measured f3 for the subwoofer at 46 Hz. It's an 8 inch driver that needs low enough inductance and Mms to go up to 200Hz, so that's not really that bad from an engineering perspective. Not great, not bad.

As for pricing, I'm not sure I really agree. The Bose Acoustimass speakers are around $1300, but that includes a preamp, amp, subwoofer, and four single drivers. The Omega Mini Me (basically the cheapest thing they sell), by contrast, costs $389 and only includes two single drivers and nothing else. The Omega is probably still the better value, but when you account for all the other things you get with the Acoustimass system, it's not an order of magnitude difference. Judging strictly from measurements, I can think of several speakers with much worse price/performance ratios.

ooheadsoo · « **Reply #6 on:** 8 Dec 2005, 09:14 am »

Single driver resurgence or not, the Bose systems don't sound very good. The bass is definitely one note and filled with distortion. Playing with my friend's system, I found it impossible to get a balanced sound with any clarity. All of the bass is muddy. I don't believe that the F3 is really in the 50hz ballpark. It may be very loud at 50hz, but the rest of the bass is certainly not merely 3db more than what it's playing at 50hz. The S&V measurements may be discounting a midbass hump as a matter of course. The Bose system also has little in the way of real fleshed out midrange. It's simply not a hi-fi "single" driver system. There's much better in the single driver world - there's worse as well, but they tend to be computer speakers and the like.

kfr01 · « **Reply #7 on:** 8 Dec 2005, 01:04 pm »

Quote from: Watson

It may be boomy, subjectively, but it doesn't roll off that early. The Sound&Vision review (which panned them, by the way, but this was before the single driver resurgence) measured f3 for the subwoofer at 46 Hz. It's an 8 inch driver that needs low enough inductance and Mms to go up to 200Hz, so that's not really that bad from an engineering perspective. Not great, not bad.

As for pricing, I'm not sure I really agree. The Bose Acoustimass speakers are around $1300, but that includes a preamp, amp, s ...

For that price, I would much rather have a 5 channel basic Polk setup, 10" subwoofer, and an inexpensive HK receiver. MUCH MUCH MUCH better value, imo. If interested in strictly audio, $1300 buys a lot. Some towers from Energy and a decent Denon. Not bad, eh?

f3 at 46 is early, imo. To also hit 200hz, fine task, but at that frequency the subwoofer can be localized. I'm not a fan of the "oh listen, the sub is over there behind the coffee table" sound. "Was that male singer's voice partially coming from the coffee table?"

jkelly · « **Reply #8 on:** 8 Dec 2005, 01:18 pm »

Hi,

Not sure if this thread is about Bose or single drver systems but I wanted to make a comment. The first full range (!) single driver system (and I have had 3 <1k in my system) that really did it for me was the Brines FT-1600 MKII. This system reproduces bass as good or better than any speaker I have had, at any size. It is just amazing. You know, the kind of bass that you feel the pressure. In addition the tone of this speaker is so enjoyable. I can't say it is warmth because it's not dull and flat - maybe rich sounding.
Thinness and brightness wear on me. The Brines make instuments sound fuller, even deeper, richer. The final comment is that in 30 years it is the first system that my wife actually used as a reference when she said "these don't sound as good as those single speaker ones".

So I was in agreement with your comments until I purchased a pair of the Brines.

Try to get a listen to them if you can.

FWIW,

Jeff

rbrb · « **Reply #9 on:** 8 Dec 2005, 05:35 pm »

B O S E
Better Off with Something Else

Kevin Haskins · « **Reply #10 on:** 8 Dec 2005, 06:44 pm »

I'd say they are doing something right. They are profitable! They please most of their customers. I don't know too many people who buy them who do not like them. I'd say they have a better record than most high-end audio companies because the high-end audio customers are almost never happy with their speakers and exchange them yearly.

By that metric they make a better speaker because they are both profitable and have happy customers.

I'm just stirring up the pot here. Don't get too upset with me for supporting Bose.

J@ck · « **Reply #11 on:** 8 Dec 2005, 07:48 pm »

I'd say the concept is correct.
But Bose spent too much on marketing to have a good product.
Anthony Gallo is using the very same concept with very good result. I like their new A'Diva Ti speakers.
I think someone can put up a very stylish yet nice sounding system with the A'Diva Tis, a good amp(those modded class D would be nice, or a SE 300B if you like) and a good subwoofer, something like a Hsu, SVS, REL, Adire DIY,...etc in a smaller room.

miklorsmith · « **Reply #12 on:** 8 Dec 2005, 07:52 pm »

A quasi-objective listen:

http://www.epinions.com/content_211914428036

Kevin Haskins · « **Reply #13 on:** 8 Dec 2005, 08:21 pm »

We have designed a similiar concept. It uses the WR-125 with an inexpensive tweeter (just couldn't do the Full range driver alone). The center is an MTM for the obvious reasons. Overall it would just stomp the Bose into the dust by every measurable metric. The Bose monitors would have a size advantage though because our objective was to have monitors that reach to 80Hz for an easy crossover to the sub.

We designed a killer little subwoofer (XBL^2 w/PRs)that get's down to 30Hz with authority (better than 105db @ 2M across it's usable bandwidth) Size is small, I choose the small 8" Hsu subwoofer as our size limitaion. The entire system would sell for about $800 but in order to do systems in that price range you have to have the big dollars to subsidize the inventory, marketing etc... I'd need about 100K to launch the product. Any takers???

Russell Dawkins · « **Reply #14 on:** 8 Dec 2005, 08:57 pm »

The Hsu Ventriloquist gets very good reviews and with a sub is well below $1000.
It would seem to be similar to Bose, done better.
http://www.hsuresearch.com/products/

Kevin Haskins · « **Reply #15 on:** 8 Dec 2005, 09:23 pm »

Quote from: Russell Dawkins

The Hsu Ventriloquist gets very good reviews and with a sub is well below $1000.
It would seem to be similar to Bose, done better.
http://www.hsuresearch.com/products/

That little 3" just doesn't cut it. I agree it's better than Bose but not by much. The center is another story and it was a good trick to use it for the midbass. Still... an MTM with the WR-125s walks all over it and it roughly the same size. The monitors don't even compare. The sub....

I agree though. Hsu did a great job for the price point. They don't look as fancy as the Bose. Bose sells into that upscale market where looks are as important (if not more) than the performance.

nathanm · « **Reply #16 on:** 8 Dec 2005, 09:26 pm »

I've never any Bose speakers perhaps with the exception of some a friend had in college. They looked like a white tackle box with a grille where the lid should be. Can't remember how they sounded, though.

I put together my mom's system with reconstituted Apple Cube speakers, (free!) They're the semi-spherical clear polycarbonate doodads with a mirror-finish 2" speaker cone. I wonder if they would be met with the same disdain that Bose has? They're not terrible sounding, certainly can't play very loud but she seems to like it well enough. Tiny speakers like that do have an imaging advantage and it's easy to move them around. The whole subwoofer integration thing is a real pain, though.

Perhaps because people have been listening to internal television speakers for so long they've been conditioned to like speakers that have nothing going on below 200Hz.

smargo · « **Reply #17 on:** 9 Dec 2005, 02:04 am »

I think the whole point is that what companies can learn from bose is that they are superior marketing people. Which just goes to show you that you don't need the best product - you only need to market it cleverly and have infomercials and private outlet stores and products that are fit and forget and a signature like "acoustic wave".

Below is an excerpt from a recent court case involving their "acoustic wave" copyrights.

"With respect to ACOUSTIC WAVE, the uncontested evidence before the Board showed over 17 years of use on the products covered by the mark, with annual sales of over $50 million, which translates to approximately 50,000 units sold annually, given the $1000 price per unit of record, and approximately 850,000 units sold since the product debuted. Bose has spent more than $5 million annually to advertise the covered products. The text of virtually every advertisement for the product touts the advanced electronic concepts that produce the rich and full sound amplified from a relatively small device. Such text is clearly written for sophisticated consumers who, given the price tag, are likely to appreciate the technological advances represented by the product. The ACOUSTIC WAVE mark appears on the product and its packaging along with the famous BOSE house mark. "

why doesn't another "high end" manufacturer take their marketing concept and run with it!

regards,
smargo

Skynyrd · « **Reply #18 on:** 9 Dec 2005, 03:06 am »

Thanks for stirring the pot Kevin!

As an avid audiophile, I must say that Bose is on my list. And it is quite possible that, in my room, some Bose speakers would outperform my Martin Logan Quests, or my Magnepan MMG/NHT1259 combo or my VMPS RM40's. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if there was a lot of things about the Bose set up--the one with five little cubes and two transmission line subs, complete with DSP and a sleek receiver--that is better than the multiple amplifiers, electronic crossover, and "high end" componentry I have right now. I'd love to try it. Granted, I'd feel a lot better if the Bose stuff sounded like crap, but I suspect it would sound great.
Also,none of the aformentioned speakers that I own come with digitial signal processing or with transmission line subwoofers like some of the nicer Bose setups have. And how about customer service? When I went to a Bose dealer, the salesman was super helpful, showed me many Bose systems, and could even deal with the presence of my four year old. Gave her a balloon! Call me easy, I call shopping at the Bose store the best customer service I've ever had shopping for audio.

So Bose is on my list!

Bottom line is, I enjoy audio with the complicated set up, and the gigantic speakers that consistently don't quite sound right (only because I haven't bought the latest ubermensch amplifier, of course)and I know that the bottom line for me is at least as much about audio-toy playtime as it is about sound!

I'm just not old enough for Bose yet. I gotta play.

Skynyrd

TheChairGuy · « **Reply #19 on:** 9 Dec 2005, 03:39 am »

My Dad loves his Wave radio, and I gave him too much shit about everything earlier in life...therefore, it's hifi to me

All semi-joking aside, Bose is a remarkable company. Sidney Harmon, CEO of their chief competitor, mentioned in an article a few years ago that he has never met Dr. Amar Bose and doesn't know what he looks like and it's like competing with a ghost. It is about the most tightly held, good sized private company that I know of.....M & M Mars coming a very close second.

Talk about stealth marketing...I think those Bose guys should get serious kudos for marketing...that it obliviates any criticism their products merit for poor sonics. Really, I'm in consumer goods and have an inkling as to what they do, and it is remarkable stuff.

Great post - keeps you thinking at least, and it's different than the normal drivel about cables, cryo and tweeks. Not that I'm immune to participation in those...but this topic is very thoughful next to most of those