Anthony Gallo Micro Nucleus or Base Accoutismass 10 Series III? [Archive] - Audio & Video Forums


View Full Version : Anthony Gallo Micro Nucleus or Base Accoutismass 10 Series III?

09-14-2004, 07:18 PM

I am looking for a satellite/sub combo that has great sound quality and great aesthetics. I am considering the BOSE ACC 10 Series III -- but I am very intrigued about the Micro's. Could you please give me any other info?



N. Abstentia
09-14-2004, 07:51 PM
Well if you're looking for sound quality you can forget Bose.

09-14-2004, 08:26 PM
As a former owner of a Bose Amassofcrap 5 Series II I agree with N. Abstenia. The highs and mids are horrific and the sub module is basically a paper weight. And the price should be illegal but...some folks love them. Best Buy can't keep them in stock ( a salesman friend says 95% of their Bose sales are to folks over 40). The best thing for you to do is listen to them both and and let your ear decide (be forewarned, Bose puts a lot of time and effort into their listening rooms to make them sound friendly to their speakers). If it was me setting up home theater and size was an issue, I would go with a set of "micro" monitors from one of the better speaker companies and a sub. You can ask around on this forum about speakers like Monitor Audio B2, Paradigm mini monitor, etc. If you feel like building your own the Peanut from Speaker City looks promising. It may even come pre-built and you'll be buying a lot better parts instead of contributing to Bose's advertising budget

Good luck!

09-15-2004, 06:31 PM
Read this ( and this (

09-15-2004, 07:35 PM
Not much to add to what Stratman said - Bose is generally hideous and the sub sats are no different. And I agree - every other set-up from those listed and more will sound better. A&B Sound sells an all Mission system for $599.00Cdn and looks nice and sounds pretty good for the money and certainly better than the 3 times the price Bose dreck. Energy also has a system but it is double the price of the Missions - I did not directly compare so I can't say which would be better.

Actually and it pains me to say it but even Sony has a style system that looks very much like the B&W's. The Sonny's are dirt cheap and sound at least credible.

Bose is Better Off with Something Else.

But hey JBL is Junk But Loud.

There are far better looking products than Bose too. For instance Bang and Olluffson is a style company and LOL might even make it past 14khz.

Listen to the B&W 302 (a $225 small loudspeaker) versus the $1800.00 Blows 901. The 302 kills it. Hell buy 3 sets of Paradigm Atoms and a $500.00 Paradigm Sub. No contest at all and you'll save maybe $100.00 even after buying the stands. You could run two Atoms in the center.

09-15-2004, 08:11 PM
The Gallos are a good alternative to the Bose AM series, in the sense that they are equally compact, cost about the same, and sound noticeably better. But, in the price range that you're talking about, you really should consider going with some decent bookshelf speakers and a bona fide subwoofer. Or at least look at some sub/sat systems that use two-way satellites rather than the one-way cubes/spheres that Bose and Gallo use. Right around the $1,000 price point you can go with Energy's Take Five (or the higher line Encore system without the subwoofer), Paradigm's Cinema, or Boston's Micro systems. Any of those alternatives will run circles around the Bose AM system and not sacrifice any of the design-friendliness.

09-15-2004, 08:20 PM
As a former owner of a Bose Amassofcrap 5 Series II I
LOL :D!!! That's a good one. I'll have to remember that.

09-15-2004, 08:32 PM
Gallos hands down, or some of the online companies.