Bose Wave System

[synthfreek]

One of my favorite hobbies is to give people a hard time on youtube with their Bose videos they post. Check them out!

[Jay481985]

One of my favorite hobbies is to give people a hard time on youtube with their Bose videos they post. Check them out!

hahahahha thats mean

[mas]

And it just goes on and on and on...for the quadrillionth time...

I am not a Bose fan. But I DO recognize whta they do well, that most here miss.

To my knowledge they are not in the market, nor do I know that they are even oriented toward building the 'state of the art' in anything.

And while some will complain about this, (in addition to the fact that most fail to understand just what the physics trade-offs are!), they also fail to appreciate what Bose does better than most companies in the business.

And that is that they do market research, identify market drivers (no, not speakers), and produce products that are 'good enough' that satisfy what customers want. And like it or not, at this they do a truly exceptional job!

It proves little in the real world of business to simply design and build exotic conceptual products that fail to suit the needs and desires of the mass market.

Sometime you might want to stop and ponder why Toyota kicks Bugatti's rear. Who cares how fast the Veyron goes? And for that matter, GM, FORD and Chrysler had better figure this out fast too!

And, like it or not, as you whine about Bose, people are busy carrying them out of the stores to a greater degree than they do many other 'more preferable' brands. And if that is the market space in which one is going to compete, then they might be better served by learning what Bose already knows. And that is what the average person wants. And they provide product sufficient to satisfy it.

All of the rest is simply noise.

{oh...and regards UTube videos: Give them all the grief you like. Nevertheless, just remember whose equipment are they are actually buying and using!!!! So just who is actually laughing? And someone might want to figure out why so many are, as to the degree that your brand doesn't, 'your' brand is a failure. So I would suggest spending more effort in a more productive manner, as simply complaining isn't selling any more of what it is that you like! So, maybe "mean" isn't the proper word!}

[sean5340]

This is interesting. http://www.intellexual.net/bose.html I've owned Acoustimas with passive sub and agree with this assesment.

[Guest srobak]

Sometime you might want to stop and ponder why Toyota kicks Bugatti's rear.

Not at all... Toyota is not only affordable - but it is also practical. The Veyron is anything but - in either aspect. Has little to do with advertising or market research, and more due to common sense and wallet thickness. The same cannot be said for the Bose market.

Who cares how fast the Veyron goes? And for that matter, GM, FORD and Chrysler had better figure this out fast too!

Eh... they do have that figured out. In fact - they barely even acknowledge that the Veyron is on the market - let alone what speed it can obtain (Top Gear tested it a year ago to 247mph). The Big 3's problems have nothing to do with the Veyron, nor Bugatti.

poeple are busy carrying them out of the stores to a greater degree than they do many other 'more preferable' brands. And if that is the market space in which one is going to compete, then they might be better served by learning what Bose already knows.

Better sales through massive advertising campaigns. When was the last time you saw a Klipsch TV commercial that lasted the full 2 minutes and 30 seconds of airtime break? Or 30 seconds for that matter? JBL? EV? ML? How about in any non-audio related magazines? SkyMall? I agree... it takes a lot more than putting a couple of lines in Best Buy to gain recognition. But... then again - that is part of the exclusivity of owning Klipsch. At one time - Bose was a bit more exclsuive - now pick 20 random homes on the map, and maybe 5 will have a Bose piece in it. You will be lucky to find 1 that has Klipsch. I actually don't mind that - really. As long as the sales are enough to keep Klipsch happy, in business, and putting out great product - I'm fine with it. But - if they were to go on a massive campaign - I would be happy too - because then it would certainly be good for the brand.

And that is what the average person wants.

I am almost shocked to say that for the first time - I agree with your opinion of what the average person wants. Usually you are not able to obtain that perspective or otherwise confuse it with what you think they want, or what business or technology markets want (dream). This time you are right though - average people want "common/household names" - which only became such due to marketing.

So just who is actually laughing?

I am, actually - as my mid-range Klipsch and HK gear sounds 10fold better than Bose's premium gear, and cost a fraction as much.

[oscarsear]

What bothers people about Bose is that they overbearingly advertise that their products provide the finest in sound reproduction. Yet no Bose advertisement ever suggests that the prospective buyers test that assertion. It has just been advanced and repeated so often that people buy into it (literally). I made an acquaintance who boasted about his Bose sound system. He was not a poor person and he was a smart individual. When he heard my set-up be was very mad at himself, Bose and the retailer he trusted to represent the finest in products. And thars the rub. Bose is better than some and worst than most. It certainly is not the high end sound reproduction they claim. It is essentially product misrepresentation almost to a fraudulent degree. The only thing that Bose does that is good is keep the consumers interest in the sound reproduction market fertile. Klipsch could at any time step in and coat tail an ad campaign that would be quite successful, for not a ton of money, just because Bose has its extensive advertising presence. No doubt Klipsch retailers would appreciate such an endeavor.

[oldbuckster]

GENTLEMEN, why do you insist on dancing around the real issue ....... Bose products are for Joe Average Consumer that wants to plug-in and play music, they are not audio buffs, nor do they want to be. Not everyone cares about audio the way people on this forum do, believe it or not, Audiophiles are in the MONORITY on this, the market place is fueled by Joe Average Consumer, who are the Majority. People who buy Bose don't care about, SPL, watts per channel, Big speakers in their living rooms, they just want some music, as simply as they can ............... even their Home Theatre systems are simple to use, that's what they want .........

[BLSamuel]

Better marketing through research. They are very good at marketing relatively simple easy to use products that do sound a lot better to the people that buy them are used to hearing and that are easy to hide in one's home at a cost that I'd consider overpriced for the quality of sound.

But systems don't have to be complicated to sound good and maybe that's their best marketing insight. Now if the sound quality was as good as they advertise, then they'd really have something. Their products don't sound terrible necessarily, just a lot less good than what can be had for the $. They're small and cute to some I suspect.

And it may be that a lot of people would rather have background music rather than music that sounded like the real thing. If they're happy, then they're happy I guess, but there's got to be a few who are only happy because they believe they should be and just don't know how much better the sound quality can be? Aussie, time to get back to work on your redemption.

It'd be interesting to see some reall measurements of those little cubes and relatively little bandpass boxes optimisically referred to as subwoofers. Maybe a lot of people don't want to be pounded in the chest by a smoking electric bass or whacked thumped by the kick drum, or have the hair on the back of the neck as the critters in Jurasic park creep up on you or an explosion sound and feel like a real explosion ...

[Guest srobak]

Bose products are for Joe Average Consumer that wants to plug-in and play music

I could swallow that, if I didn't know that Joe Average Consumer could buy an entire Onkyo HT In A Box system for HALF the price of the Bose system, and have it sound twice as good - and that price is the driving force for 90% of what Joe Average Consumer buys. There is something else happening... Probably something along the same lines as with Zales... household name, and every "joe jewelry buyer" shops there - although they are over-priced for their quality, and other places frequently offer much more bang for the buck. It is more about someone's comfort level with a name brand I think. I mean - if it were a computer, and you didn't know anything - would you buy a Dell, or would you buy a Nishwa with an Asus motherboard (and at this point you don't know that the Asus boards are some of the best) at 2/3rds the price? You would probably buy the Dell - because you know the name... they too tie up your tv and every print media known to man with ads. Just like Bose.

It'd be interesting to see some reall measurements of those little
cubes and relatively little bandpass boxes optimisically referred to as
subwoofers. Maybe a lot of people don't want to be pounded in the
chest by a smoking electric bass or whacked thumped by the kick drum,
or have the hair on the back of the neck as the critters in Jurasic
park creep up on you or an explosion sound and feel like a real
explosion ...

No risk of that with bose Here is a link someone posted earlier: http://www.intellexual.net/bose.html

From that:

THE COLD HARD NUMBERS (PART ONE):

Unlike any other speaker or amplifier manufacturer, Bose refuses to
publish any frequency response charts or distortion data on their
products (and with good reason). And thus a few independent
audiophiles, industry professionals, and newsgroups have taken it upon
themselves to benchmark test the much debated Acoustimass system. The
resulting numbers are always consistent. Here is a pretty credible one
sourced from the August 1999 issue of Sound and Vision magazine...

	SATELLITES	BASS MODULE
Frequency Response	280 Hz to 13.3k Hz at ±10.5 dB	46Hz to 202Hz at ±2.3 dB
Sensitivity (SPL at 1 meter)*	85.1 dB	N/A
Impedance (minimum/nominal)	5.3/8 ohms	N/A
Bass Limits (-3/-6 dB)	280/220 Hz	46/40 Hz
* measured with 2.8 volts of pink-noise input

To reiterate the above, the Acoustimass's bass module responds to 46
Hz to 202 Hz at ±2.3 dB, while the satellites respond to 280 Hz to 13.3
KHz at ±10.5 dB. This is, by the way, the only speaker that I have ever
seen tested with a ±10.5 db allowance. Still, this leaves a frequency
gap between the satellites and bass module of about 80 Hz! That is 80
hertz of sound that is completely erased within the system's internal
crossovers! I wonder how Bose figured out which 80 hertz matters least
in the audible spectrum?

[oldbuckster]

I could swallow that, if I didn't know that Joe Average Consumer could buy an entire Onkyo HT In A Box system for HALF the price of the Bose system

Don't mean to be cruel here, I would anyday, anytime, take a BOSE system over Oinkyo ................. Guess maybe we forgot about the personal choice of the person spending the money .................. EH ? .... Let's not let this escalate into a heated debate .... frankly, Bose bashing on here is OLD ....

[Guest srobak]

Oh I'm not bashing per se... look in this and the other threads - I actually praise a couple of their models... (NOT the AM/Lifestyle ones though)

Hrm - let me get my friend's Onkyo box system model... it actually doesn't sound too bad - and certainly kicks the big Bose lifestyle system.

[mas]

Oh I'm not bashing per se... {but meanwhile, here, let me cite this example where I can bash Bose yet again while I am not bashing them per se. Geesh.}.. and (they) certainly kicks the big Bose lifestyle system.

I am almost shocked to say that for the first time - I agree with your opinion of what the average person wants. Usually you are not able to obtain that perspective or otherwise confuse it with what you think they want, or what business or technology markets want (dream).

First, my comparison with the Bugatti was hyperbole, not a literal practical example, but you utterly missed it the point, yet again. But thank you for attempting to analyze it as if the exaggerated example were actually real! So why is it again that someone would opt for a ~$11,000 Toyota rather than a ~$1.2M Bugatti Veyron? ROFLMAO.**

And now you again attempt to tell me, in addition to btlongo when you informed him that he could not even start a thread to discuss what he thought he wanted to discuss but was incorrect for thinking, and anyone else with whom you deal what they mean as obviously they have no understanding of what they are saying until you arrive to clarifiy that for them as the resident thread cop.

I wish I cared at all about what you say. But I don't. And for the record, you haven't a clue about much to which I refer - after all, to you 'disruptive technology' is evolutionary in your mind - after you denied and totally demonstrated your ignorance of the very existence of the business concept. Except that it is disruptive from a business sense. But then you declared it a non-issue as you attempted to clarify that for me earlier as well.

Hell, its pretty bad when the concept is even written up in Wikipedia! You failed to comment on Schumpeter's creative destruction model, but I am sure that that was only an oversight, as I am sure that you will determine that he was but a figment as well.

Bottom line, Bose does not have to make the best product. Instead they focus on market drivers and deliver products that satisfy the consumer desires instead of erudite critics such as yourself. And the consumers don't need you explaining what they really wanted or what they really meant to buy either.

In short, Bose's strategic marketing skills are exemplary.

May I suggest that you have more than your hands full as you need to go back and research your incorrect claim that CD and DVD sales are up for 2007.

So, my net reaction is that if I did happen to say something to which you agree, then I most graciously assert that, at least with regards to that point, I must have been wrong.

** Of COURSE they compete in different market segments. Duh! Gee, I have 3 pre-school kids and I work at Pennys...should I buy a Porsche GT3 or a Hyundai for a practical family car? But I look sooo good in the Porsche. Gee, if it weren't for the massive advertising for Hyundai, i might be tempted to buy the Porsche.....it is such a difficult choice with which the average person literally struggles...yeah, right...

[Guest srobak]

First, my comparison with the Bugatti was hyperbole, not a literal practical example

As with most of your posts. If you are using it to drive home a point - then use practical examples. The problem I and others see with a lot of your arguements is that you use im-practical examples to justify your practical logic. However - it usually just results in trying to either compare two identical cans of shaving cream, or else apples and t-bone steaks and saying they are competitors. We have been over this.

But thank you for attempting to analyze it as if the exaggerated example were actually real!

As I stated before - you go on with your utopian examples... I'll stick to the real world & that of the "reality, earth-based, average consumer".

I wish I cared at all about what you say. But I don't.

Yet you continue to spend thousands of keystrokes a week convincing yourself of that. OK.

And for the record, you haven't a clue about much to which I refer

Guess what? MANY people do not understand to what you refer - because it is completely abstract, waffled, and utopian in presentation and represents nothing more than "pie in the sky" thinking with the latest & greatest techologies. Meanwhile - the rest of the world understands that there is an evolutionary process - you don't just pull a fresh technology out of the box and drop it on the world and say "there you go - now use this to over-write everything you have ever known, done, bought, sold, and processed with this, and do it in short order - cause that is how the very near future will be."

to you 'disruptive technology' is evolutionary in your mind

And in the minds of BILLIONS of consumers around the globe. Not to mention the very businesses who provide said technologies to the masses. If it was so disruptive in the business world concepts - why in the hell are they adopted by thousands of very successful businesses, raking in trillions of dollars? Earth, man... Earth... extend the landing gear.

Hell, its pretty bad when the concept is even written up in Wikipedia!

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! This is your funniest statement to date! Because it is in Wiki it is GOSPEL? You HAVE completely lost touch with this planet, haven't you? There is so much mis-information on that site, it's not even funny. But no... you are Mr. "I quoted it from the web! If it is on the web - it must be true!"... well I can point you to a dozen websites that say that the grass is pink, the sun will implode in 5 years, and the 9/11 attacks were conducted by our own government. Dag nabbit - it's on the web - IT MUST BE TRUE! Bose claims to have the best sound and most accurate speakers this planet has ever heard... they say so in printed literature and on the web - IT MUST BE TRUE!

the consumers don't need you explaining what they really wanted or what they really meant to buy either.

Never said that. Per usual you take things completely out of context and extrapolate nonsense from it in efforts to support your own argument. The only things myself (and thousands long before me) have ever "explained" was that Bose's claims were flatly false. Nothing else about what someone else wants, or what they meant to buy. Most "Bose Bashers" problems aren't with the consumers of their products - but with the company and their tactics themselves, as someone else stated in this thread.

In short, Bose's strategic marketing skills are exemplary.

While being completely un-ethical and flatly dishonest, not to mention bullish in nature (trademarking the long-established tehcnical term "acoustic wave"... are you kidding me? Why not TM "ball bearing" while you are at it?)

research your incorrect claim that CD and DVD sales are up for 2007.

Take it up with Billboard - a company which has both hands fully on the music and entertainment media industry - instead of being hired to monitor it and a million other things. If you want to believe in NPD's numbers as much as NMR's - you got right ahead. I have already pointed out how absurdly flawed their sampling is.

So, my net reaction is that if I did happen to say something to which you agree, then I most graciously assert that, at least with regards to that point, I must have been wrong.

Waffling again... so now Bose DOESN'T do a good job in marketing, promotion and advertising? Make up your mind!

[oldenough]

Guess what? MOST people do not understand to what you refer

That's somewhat presumptuous, i for one take exception to your thinking to know my mind.

My turn to be Forum Sheriff.

[Guest srobak]

If it doesn't apply to you - then it is possible that you are not included in the "most" group, and my apologies.That being said... edited for effect to "many"

[oldenough]

Just the possibility of not being included hurts

[Guest srobak]

Hahah... nice... It's ok though - you have a Kawi - you are included

[synthfreek]

oldbuckster you would be amazed with how many people are the OPPOSITE of how you describe them. They are NOT plug n play Joe Consumer. They really and earnestly believe that they have made a well-researched and wise decision. They really do think Bose has the best sound quality available and will argue 'til the day they die.

[mas]

First, my comparison with the Bugatti was hyperbole, not a literal practical example

As with most of your posts. If you are using it to drive home a point - then use practical examples. The problem I and others see with a lot of your arguements is that you use im-practical examples to justify your practical logic. However - it usually just results in trying to either compare two identical cans of shaving cream, or else apples and t-bone steaks and saying they are competitors. We have been over this.

But thank you for attempting to analyze it as if the exaggerated example were actually real!

As I stated before - you go on with your utopian examples... I'll stick to the real world & that of the "reality, earth-based, average consumer".

I wish I cared at all about what you say. But I don't.

Yet you continue to spend thousands of keystrokes a week convincing yourself of that. OK.

And for the record, you haven't a clue about much to which I refer

Guess what? MANY people do not understand to what you refer - because it is completely abstract, waffled, and utopian in presentation and represents nothing more than "pie in the sky" thinking with the latest & greatest techologies. Meanwhile - the rest of the world understands that there is an evolutionary process - you don't just pull a fresh technology out of the box and drop it on the world and say "there you go - now use this to over-write everything you have ever known, done, bought, sold, and processed with this, and do it in short order - cause that is how the very near future will be."

to you 'disruptive technology' is evolutionary in your mind

And in the minds of BILLIONS of consumers around the globe. Not to mention the very businesses who provide said technologies to the masses. If it was so disruptive in the business world concepts - why in the hell are they adopted by thousands of very successful businesses, raking in trillions of dollars? Earth, man... Earth... extend the landing gear.

Hell, its pretty bad when the concept is even written up in Wikipedia!

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! This is your funniest statement to date! Because it is in Wiki it is GOSPEL? You HAVE completely lost touch with this planet, haven't you? There is so much mis-information on that site, it's not even funny. But no... you are Mr. "I quoted it from the web! If it is on the web - it must be true!"... well I can point you to a dozen websites that say that the grass is pink, the sun will implode in 5 years, and the 9/11 attacks were conducted by our own government. Dag nabbit - it's on the web - IT MUST BE TRUE! Bose claims to have the best sound and most accurate speakers this planet has ever heard... they say so in printed literature and on the web - IT MUST BE TRUE!

the consumers don't need you explaining what they really wanted or what they really meant to buy either.

Never said that. Per usual you take things completely out of context and extrapolate nonsense from it in efforts to support your own argument. The only things myself (and thousands long before me) have ever "explained" was that Bose's claims were flatly false. Nothing else about what someone else wants, or what they meant to buy. Most "Bose Bashers" problems aren't with the consumers of their products - but with the company and their tactics themselves, as someone else stated in this thread.

In short, Bose's strategic marketing skills are exemplary.

While being completely un-ethical and flatly dishonest, not to mention bullish in nature (trademarking the long-established tehcnical term "acoustic wave"... are you kidding me? Why not TM "ball bearing" while you are at it?)

research your incorrect claim that CD and DVD sales are up for 2007.

Take it up with Billboard - a company which has both hands fully on the music and entertainment media industry - instead of being hired to monitor it and a million other things. If you want to believe in NPD's numbers as much as NMR's - you got right ahead. I have already pointed out how absurdly flawed their sampling is.

So, my net reaction is that if I did happen to say something to which you agree, then I most graciously assert that, at least with regards to that point, I must have been wrong.

Waffling again... so now Bose DOESN'T do a good job in marketing, promotion and advertising? Make up your mind!

ROFLMAO!

Utopian examples? Oh no, now you are going to break this down word by word (talk about out of context!)(and I HOPE that this is hyperbole and not destined to become reality!) and 'explain'(sic) why hyperbole does not exist and how such is "Utopian"!

Not only are you totally unable to understand hyperbole, but you misinterpret sarcasm seriously and serious concepts as fantasy.

Take your fatally flawed business acumen into a strategic management class and discover what you don't know. But ignorance is indeed bliss. And you sir must be one of the most self-satisfied folks I have ever encountered!

And you have explained how Bose's claims are flatly false? You haven't a clue as to why their claims are flawed. Many here do. And you certainly haven't explained the physics.

There must be a thread somewhere ELSE that you can police. Say on the AVS Forum! (Sorry AVS guys...no offense intended!)

Waffling my ***. You sir are an idiot.

[Guest srobak]

now you are going to break this down word by word (talk about out of context!)

Break things down so they can't be taken out of context, Mr. Wizard.

you misinterpret sarcasm seriously and serious concepts as fantasy.

Well - as we can't hear you type - try investing in some smilies and emoticons.

Take your fatally flawed business acumen into a strategic management class and discover what you don't know.

Flawed? So all the companies raking in trillions of dollars are all doing it wrong - because YOU say so? Got it. BTW - aced the class quite some time ago, thanks

And you have explained how Bose's claims are flatly false? You haven't a clue as to why their claims are flawed. Many here do. And you certainly haven't explained the physics.

Why do I need to re-explain what everyone else already has, and what they understand? For your argumentative benefit? Not my yob, mang. However - once again - you have proven (yet again) that you do not read other people's posts. Why bother responding to them if you don't know what you are responding to? Now scroll back to the links and read the information which I pasted in this *very* thread which state clearly why the claims are flawed, yet don't even need to be referenced because most folks with half an ounce of intelligence concerning speaker design and functional concepts already knew there was an enormous hole in the spectrum from AM based systems over 2 decades ago, and that pretty much all their products have anything but a linear frequency response curve. This isn't ground-breaking news here, Pal.

There must be a thread somewhere ELSE that you can police.

It's called contributing, not policing - try to keep up. Where have you been? We have been talking about Bose and their flaws here...

Waffling my ***.

Perhaps you should stand for a bit, then. Anyhow - yes - you did waffle, for the umpteenth time. First you said Bose did a great job at marketing. Then you said you were wrong, based upon the simple fact that I had agreed with you - and that Bose indeed does not do a great job in marketing. Yes, that sir - is waffling.

You sir are an idiot.

It is a natural human behaviour to lash out at the things which you do not understand, instead of actually trying to discuss them calmly. This is amplified when doing so immediately after having told the subject you are lashing out at that you don't care what they say, and spend yet another several thousand keystrokes in trying to convince yourself of that. Enjoy!