why bose is the holy grail..

[bubbagump]

Found this in Digg:

http://www.hometheaterblog.com/homet...bout_bose.html

[Florian]

This should be a sticky!

[Worf101]

Good job B.G. Thanks for the information. Nothing really ground shaking but it's a great tool to give my friends who just don't want to believe me when I tell them that Bose is merely the "best known" audio brand not "the best". Thanks again...

Da Worfster

[Resident Loser]

...don't we already know...same ol' same ol'...ad nauseum...

There is no best of anything, nothing beyond a personal preference that is...

jimHJJ(...besides, it's the music that matters...)

[E-Stat]

Found this in Digg:

Nothing really new there. Bose excels at marketing, not audio reproduction. Amar laughs all the way to the bank.

rw

[Resident Loser]

Nothing really new there. Bose excels at marketing, not audio reproduction. Amar laughs all the way to the bank.

rw

...in the .pdf of Lou Reed's critique he pretty much does a number on the B&Ws and even the MLs don't escape entirely unscathed...Klipsch and their horns (which as we know are anathema to some) get a rave (mostly for max SPLs?) and, paradoxically, completely against the Bose-bashers mantra of "...no highs no lows, it must be Bose..." Mr. Reed seems to hear quite the opposite, complaining of no mid-range?...curious that. Adding all the possible frequency bands into the mix, one would think they have no output across the entire audio band...

I also question the statement that he would "...pay money not to hear that..." Was he referring to the Acoustimas system or Mos Def?

jimHJJ(...can you say ambiguous...perhaps self-servingly so...)

[E-Stat]

...completely against the Bose-bashers mantra of "...no highs no lows, it must be Bose..." Mr. Reed seems to hear quite the opposite, complaining of no mid-range?

Whatever. I formulated my opinion of the 901s decades ago. Amar kinda forgot to factor in the room as the primary cause of creating the 89% indirect radiation pattern when he measured Boston Symphony Hall. I guess in a completely dead environment the concept would work fine. For me, further reflecting the reflections doesn't. Yes, you can put lipstick on a chicken, but why? You can equalize the bejeezus out of a gaggle of 4" midranges to produce highs and lows (on the order of 30db), but the result is hardly optimal.

I do, however, like one of the underlying concepts behind the design: full range operation devoid of crossovers and differing radiation patterns. That's why I like full range electrostats! My pair has the radiating surface equivalent to three hundred-fifty 4" drivers to produce bass - yet with the total moving mass only a tiny fraction of one 4" cone driver for optimum high frequency reproduction. Look ma, no voice coils!

rw

[Florian]

Hey E-Stat, is this correct.....?

The DIVA is 185cm tall (taking out the slanted side) its 60cm wide (78 with slant) so we have 11100cm2 of radiating are (bass panel) per side. Thats 4370in2 aprox....which means that if we take 4" inch drivers it would have 1092 4" drivers per side per bass panel? Seems like an awfull lot....is there a brian error?

-Flo

[E-Stat]

Hey E-Stat, is this correct.....?

Please do check my math. Per SL website, radiating area per U-1 2200 square inches.

http://soundlab-speakers.com/u1.htm

Area of circle = pi * radius squared

2 * 2 * 3.14 = 12.56

2200 / 12.56 = 175 (each speaker)

Sorry for the inches vs. centimeter calcs.

rw

[Resident Loser]

...but what does this:

Whatever. I formulated my opinion of the 901s decades ago. Amar kinda forgot to factor in the room as the primary cause of creating the 89% indirect radiation pattern when he measured Boston Symphony Hall. I guess in a completely dead environment the concept would work fine. For me, further reflecting the reflections doesn't. Yes, you can put lipstick on a chicken, but why? You can equalize the bejeezus out of a gaggle of 4" midranges to produce highs and lows (on the order of 30db), but the result is hardly optimal.

I do, however, like one of the underlying concepts behind the design: full range operation devoid of crossovers and differing radiation patterns. That's why I like full range electrostats! My pair has the radiating surface equivalent to three hundred-fifty 4" drivers to produce bass - yet with the total moving mass only a tiny fraction of one 4" cone driver for optimum high frequency reproduction. Look ma, no voice coils!

rw

...have to do with the article(s) cited...The Acoustimas stuff (the fodder for the article) and the 901s have little in common...A simplistic and dismissive "whatever" would have been fine...everything beyond that seems...well...just sort of b!tchy...

jimHJJ(...and of little purpose...)

[E-Stat]

...but what does this......have to do with the article(s) cited

You were baffled as to Lou Reed's reaction. I explained why.

...completely against the Bose-bashers mantra of "...no highs no lows, it must be Bose..." Mr. Reed seems to hear quite the opposite, complaining of no mid-range?

The "mantra" you cited originated with the 901. Midranges inherently do neither.

"Why is Bose so popular?

So let's examine some of the reasons Bose has carved out such a strong niche in the audio market and then I'll offer my own observations and hopefully level the playing field a bit. Going all the way back to the Bose 901's (and farther) the company began a campaign of branding and word association that remains with them to this day."

The author is stating that their core competancy is marketing. I agree.

rw

[dpacella]

here's a stupid theory on the design of the drivers (midrange-tweeter driver!)...adding to another potential reason why they fare so well in the consumer audio stores:
Consider that a significant percentage of such stores (best buy, etc) sit all the speakers next to each other....you get the most sound toward the listener by radiating/projecting/pointing the drivers at the consumers auditioning the speakers...therby creating the illusion of a clearer sound-in-a crowd..
Ever open the cover on a bose speaker? Sure they claim reflection-radiating-whatever (they do that too), but that also helps in the war between A/B box switching when all the contenders are miserably placed next to each other...
Try pulling that bose out in the room and repeating with a JBL or Polk Audio....what bass then?

And that wispy irritating dry-as-the-sahara treble extension....what on earth....
..Just another example of how good marketing and a great business idea carry the day...
..it's all about the profit margins...not the pure quality of the speaker...in this case...