Are Bose 301 Speakers the best in there price range?

[thekid]

MarkW-loved the joke

At the risk of bringing this thread back in the area of the original topic....

I think we can all agree Bose has done a great job marketing their product. IMO marketing can prop up an average product but it can not overcome the faults of a poor one.

The question I have though is; if marketing was so easy why have not at least one of Bose's competitors imulated their marketing strategy. Now I have heard some here say that some of manufacturers have made a deliberate decision to remain "boutique" dealers and focus on quality. I will buy that with some, but others have been in business a long time and are fairly large corporations or subsidaries of large corporations who are not in the business of "leaving money on the table" so to speak. Has Bose cowed them so much they don't even try anymore? Is Bose the Microsoft of the speaker world-meaning that they have established such a dominant position that it is financial suicide to try and compete with them at the marketing level?

Understand I am not defending Bose but am more curious about how the industry operates vs the Bose model. Successful business models are often copied but in the speaker world this just does not seem to be the case. There are a few of you out there who have been following the industry for a long time maybe you can shed some light on this.

[L.J.]

A woman in her forties went to a plastic surgeon for a facelift.
The surgeon told her about a new procedure called "The Knob," where a small knob is placed at the top of the woman's head and can be turned to tighten up her skin and produce the affect of a brand new face-lift. Of course , the woman wanted "The Knob."

Over the course of the years, the woman tightened the knob, and the effects were wonderful, the woman remained young looking and vibrant.
After fifteen years, the woman returned to the surgeon with two problems . "All these years, everything has been working just fine. I've had to turn the knob many times and I've always loved the results. But now I've developed two annoying problems:

First, I have these terrible bags under my eyes and the knob won't get rid of them."
The doctor looked at her closely and said, "Those aren't bags, those are your breasts."

She said, "Well, I guess there's no point in asking about the goatee .

Now, that was funny..

[GMichael]

MarkW-loved the joke

At the risk of bringing this thread back in the area of the original topic....

I think we can all agree Bose has done a great job marketing their product. IMO marketing can prop up an average product but it can not overcome the faults of a poor one.

The question I have though is; if marketing was so easy why have not at least one of Bose's competitors imulated their marketing strategy. Now I have heard some here say that some of manufacturers have made a deliberate decision to remain "boutique" dealers and focus on quality. I will buy that with some, but others have been in business a long time and are fairly large corporations or subsidaries of large corporations who are not in the business of "leaving money on the table" so to speak. Has Bose cowed them so much they don't even try anymore? Is Bose the Microsoft of the speaker world-meaning that they have established such a dominant position that it is financial suicide to try and compete with them at the marketing level?

Understand I am not defending Bose but am more curious about how the industry operates vs the Bose model. Successful business models are often copied but in the speaker world this just does not seem to be the case. There are a few of you out there who have been following the industry for a long time maybe you can shed some light on this.

There have been a few copycats. But no one who has stepped up to the plate to stand toe to toe and go punch for punch. The Yamahas, Denon's and Onkyo's of the world have shot out a few HTIB systems that sound better than Bose but don't have the same advertizing behind them. My guess is that it's because it's not all they do. Yamaha makes motorcycles & other motor sports equipment. Not to mention some very nice musical instruments. There are others who make HTIB systems that are so bad that they make Bose look like they really are the best. Altec Lancing has done a good job to make small systems that sound bigger than they are. But they have aimed their marketing at the computer world and don't compete directly with Bose. They do look and sound very similar. Both have decided that the general public wants small speakers more than they want great sound. And they have learned how to cut the right corners. Their research has shown them that it's the voices that people want to hear the most. But they also like a little thump. So they spend their money to make a speaker that reproduces the mids fairly well. The highs roll off fast but the commom person doesn't mind. Throw in a sub and you're good to go. So what if there's a gap between 100htz and 200htz? Unless you play them side by side with a better system you won't notice. You'll never know what you're missing unless you hear it from somewhere else. So the common man goes along thinking, "this is great! I get hi-fi sound without the hugh hi-fi system. What are all those guys thinking buying those big speakers? "

[noddin0ff]

Keep it up and I'll tell ya a story about a boy, a cat and a cotonwood tree.

Update to 'Poplar' tree...

[thekid]

GMichael

Thanks for the response your Yamaha example is kind of what I was getting at.

The oft repated Bose formula is low quality components+marketing=overpriced speakers sold to a mass market. Yamaha is a large corporation and is motivated by profit so you would think they would copy the Bose formula and increase their marketshare/profit margins. Assuming Yamaha's product is as good or better than Bose they should be successful. Buy a little time on QVC, put together a media campaign and with Yamaha they could cross-promote within their already established market base.

[markw]

They make much more than speaker systems. Their name and reputation is built on the overall width and quality of their lineup. If their only claim to fame was speakers then you might have a point.

[Florian]

I think it depends highly on the image Yamaha, Onkyo etc. wants. Onkyo does build small HTIB systems which properbly sound better then the small BOSE altough they are not as neatly integrated (disc changer, processsor etc..) BUT they also have the Onkyo Integra DTR9.1 or the combination with BAT. Do they want to push their small systems with advertising by saying its the best? No, because whats the point in spening a few K for a big system. BOSE's products dont really differentiate from each others. The "ONE" marketing plan works for all their products. Better sound through advertising.

[PAT.P]

Its funny that Bose as their "niche " market no matter .Take Harman International they are into so many audio product .In speakers they own Infinity,JBL,Revel and more.In receiver /amp their own Harman Kardon ,Crown ,Mark Levinson,Lexicon ect ect.Their market is consumer home/car ,pro application/studio .Personaly I won't buy any Bose product it just does'nt turn me on .

[jocko_nc]

I think it says a LOT for Yamaha that they don't advetise so much, at least not in mass-market brand name building ways. They are certainly found in niche-specific media, but I cannot recall a genreic TV ad for motorcylces, boats, outboards, electronics or musical instruments. People know Yamaha. People know their products. Their products largely speak for themselves. As a diversified manufacturing company, I have to say they do it right. I have a lot of respect for the way they must have been managed over the years.

I have a Yamaha receiver that turned out to be a great purchase. I have a Yamaha outboard that is truly an exceptional piece of machinery. I have an old Yamaha guitar amp. All good stuff.

jocko

[topspeed]

I think it says a LOT for Yamaha that they don't advetise so much, at least not in mass-market brand name building ways. They are certainly found in niche-specific media, but I cannot recall a genreic TV ad for motorcylces, boats, outboards, electronics or musical instruments. People know Yamaha. People know their products. Their products largely speak for themselves. As a diversified manufacturing company, I have to say they do it right. I have a lot of respect for the way they must have been managed over the years.

I have a Yamaha receiver that turned out to be a great purchase. I have a Yamaha outboard that is truly an exceptional piece of machinery. I have an old Yamaha guitar amp. All good stuff.

jocko

Jocko, I couldn't agree more!

I can't think of another company that is as diversified as Yammie and yet still maintains a consistent level of excellence regardless of the product. In home electronics, they are one of the very few, if not the last, mass market company to still build their own boards and dacs. Their quality and reliability is unquestioned. In pro audio, whether it's acoustic instruments such as pianos and drum kits or electronic synths, they are placed among the elite. Their motorcycles have one countless world championships and they do contract engineering and manufacturing for a number of automobile companies like Ford as well as race teams. They must have one of the best collections of engineering talent on the planet.

[Woochifer]

I think it says a LOT for Yamaha that they don't advetise so much, at least not in mass-market brand name building ways. They are certainly found in niche-specific media, but I cannot recall a genreic TV ad for motorcylces, boats, outboards, electronics or musical instruments. People know Yamaha. People know their products. Their products largely speak for themselves. As a diversified manufacturing company, I have to say they do it right. I have a lot of respect for the way they must have been managed over the years.

I have a Yamaha receiver that turned out to be a great purchase. I have a Yamaha outboard that is truly an exceptional piece of machinery. I have an old Yamaha guitar amp. All good stuff.

jocko

It's actually quite interesting because Yamaha's roots are in music education and musical instrument manufacturing. The only mass marketing that they do is with their motorcycles, and that seems to work very well for their corporate branding.

I honestly cannot remember a product line where Yamaha did not make something that was at least a cut above average. At one time, Yamaha had a sporting goods division that manufactured tennis racquets (they were one of the first to use composites and graphite), archery equipment, golf clubs, etc. They also established a solid reputation for making good computer peripherals such as sound cards and CD-RW drives, until the price competition forced them out of the market a few years ago.

Working with professional musicians in college, I remember that Yamaha maintained great relationships with recording artists who used their products. The musicians I knew told me about how well made and reliable Yamaha's instruments were -- everything from the bass guitars to the horn instruments to the electronic keyboards.

But, it also seems that a lot of Asian companies have this kind of diversified product lineup. For example, we know that Hitachi makes TVs, but they also manufacture industrial robots, earth moving equipment, forklifts, power tools, and disc drives. Hyundai we know from their cars, but they also make memory chips, and PCs. LG is one of the top three plasma TV manufacturers worldwide, but they also make refrigerators, air conditioners, washing machines, cell phones, and microwave ovens. Panasonic is a similarly diversified company, as their National division is one of the top selling appliance brands in Asia. In the U.S., they sell stuff like pencil sharpeners, phones, Toughbook laptop computers, photocopiers, rice cookers, blood pressure monitors, massage chairs, etc.

[emorphien]

The only critique I could offer of some of Yamahas instruments (I speak mainly of their brass as I play the trombone) is they tend to lack the warmth and "soul" of some of the other brands. That's fine for some and some types of music though and they are technically excellent instruments. But if you ask some players they're just very flat and straightforward without any character.

[Woochifer]

The only critique I could offer of some of Yamahas instruments (I speak mainly of their brass as I play the trombone) is they tend to lack the warmth and "soul" of some of the other brands. That's fine for some and some types of music though and they are technically excellent instruments. But if you ask some players they're just very flat and straightforward without any character.

I heard that as well, but a common theme among the musicians I knew seems to be that Yamaha instruments travel well and hold up under the abuse of touring and lugging from one studio session or live gig to another very well. Plus, they tend to be more consistent from one instrument to another. Most of the guys I talked to played Yamaha's electric basses and electronic keyboards.

[emorphien]

I heard that as well, but a common theme among the musicians I knew seems to be that Yamaha instruments travel well and hold up under the abuse of touring and lugging from one studio session or live gig to another very well. Plus, they tend to be more consistent from one instrument to another. Most of the guys I talked to played Yamaha's electric basses and electronic keyboards.

No doubt they're well made stuff, which is more of a concern with electronic instruments than brass. Most good brass instruments are all pretty solid but that's nothing a color guards flag pole won't fix with a quick whack to the slide shaft.

[SlumpBuster]

I use Yamaha golf clubs, a set of irons, that I inherited. They are really nice and I haven't found anything that I would replace them with. When I got a new Cobra driver and set of woods at like $300 to $400 each, my friends all thought they were great but couldn't understand why I relied on my Yamaha's so much.

[jamison]

I think that Joe consumer goes out and buys Bose because of name regonition...they dont want to fuss over it they think that Bose automatically means good sound... I think that most of the people on here who post regularly know better. we do research and try to find that extra tweak that makes our system sound better. Joe consumer doesnt know any better or want to know any better... what i have a problem with is Joe Consumer (my brotherinlaw and his friends) telling everyone else how much better Bose is and how i should sell my set of speakers and get BOSE because joe blow musician recommends them. Ignorance is bliss they say... I would like to think that ill never see bliss ... the one thing in life ive learned for certain is that ALTHOUGH I MAY NOT BE THE SMARTEST PERSON IN THE WORLD THERE ARE MORE PEOPLE OUT THERE THAT ARE DUMBER THAN I AM...

[thekid]

Wooch

You might have a point when you mention the diversified companies because their business models probably build in a certain pricing point/profit margin for each division and if they are making that their is no push within the corporate structure to go after additional dollars.

Flo- Your point regarding company and their "image" is one that is often used but I just don't see it on a regular basis in the business world. Business does care about their image- name branding but in the end the bottom line is still about profit. For example Warren Buffett buys business' that have name value and established niche within their line of business and then asks them to go out and make money-sometimes putting lots of money into advertising so that business can grow. Now the companies still maintain their original character or niche but they are increasing profit and by default market share.

Harman is probably a good example of company that appears to be solely in the consumer electronics business and would be someone you think would take a page from the Bose marketing game plan and run with it.

I know I have kind of taken this thread in another direction but I think it is interesting (or scary) the type of behavior/results people ascribe to Bose marketing within the speaker industry. Again this is not meant as a defense of Bose just an observation. Someone mentioned Microsoft earlier and not being a techie I don't know if they are viewed in some of the ways in the software/computer industry as Bose is within the speaker industry. There was a lot of talk about McDonalds earlier and while they are a mass marketer they don't hold the same name recognition as Bose does within the general public. Can anyone think of-nominate another company that is similar to Bose within their given industry i.e. marginal product but percieved good/excellent reputation with the public?

[GMichael]

There was a lot of talk about McDonalds earlier and while they are a mass marketer they don't hold the same name recognition as Bose does within the general public.

Huh? Are we talking about the same McDonalds?

[Worf101]

Man, just got through this thread... Jeeze Louise... what a cracker. When I see guys like this character NJM or whatever the hell his name is, I always wonder where he/she comes from. Obviously a Bose fanboi... but why... It's been proven that Intel and others PAY people to join forums and expect them to build a rep then pump their products whenever possible. So when I see someone vociferously defend the indefensible... I begin to smell a rat, a plant, a shill, a trojan horse. Something is rotten in the state of AR and it ain't me... I washed last month.

Da Worfster

[Resident Loser]

...So when I see someone vociferously defend the indefensible... I begin to smell a rat, a plant, a shill, a trojan horse...

...with all due respect, while that may be the case (although I seriously doubt Bose would need to plant a shill given their non-audiopile customer base), I must question your use of the word "indefensible"...

What do you find "indefensible"?

The fact that someone, somewhere...who actually isn't a marketing-smitten boob, might actually prefer a Bose product?

I've already voiced my reservations about some of their stuff...

Their pricing, while high, is based on their advertising costs AND the always-cited argument re: low cost of raw materials they use vs. pricing, isn't the only facet to take into consideration.

If you read any books on marketing/business strategies, one of the biggest arbiters of pricing is percieved value...why else would some cups of coffee cost upwards of $4, certain toiletries (which are mostly ionized or distilled water) cost a day's pay per ounce or specific brands of womens' shoes cost $600-800 a pair?

I object to their closed-loop systems for obvious reasons...but...the 3-2-1 system is unarguably the simplest approach for a psuedo-surround HT experience...The whole HT enchilada is predominantly based on the unreal boom and sizzle of my oft mentioned laser-totin' mechanical lizards, so this product just carries it to a logical (and obviously acceptable-by-a-part-of the-buying-public) conclusion...fun and fast, plug'n'play...cheez'n'crackers it's only tee-vee...and FWIW I find the sound produced, given the premise of HT in general, to be quite satisfying and otherwise technically interesting...

I also object to the single summing bass module of the Acoustimass/Lifestyle stuff...but I also have a problem with single summing subs in general...in saying that however, if set up properly (as any intelligent audio enthusiast would position the components) a reasonbly respectable presentation would result. Not to mention the "value" (perceived and otherwise) of the decorating/WAF...

And whilst on the subject, while I may be a bit of a Bose-O-phile, placement and positioning is certainly a big issue with most of their line...

I purchased my 901-IIs (MSRPd @$525/pr)in '75...based, in part, on what I found as strong, technical reasons...no woofers, no tweeters, no crossovers...just nine 4.5" full-range drivers with +/- 1/4in. excursion and the equivalent output of a 12" woofer, with none of the cone mass and potential for hangover, etc. The ususal counter to that I oftimes hear is the spec of a high distortion figure...I've never heard any distortion or degredation of sound attributable to such...P.S. In practice...like it or not, believe it or not, it works. Obviously anecdotal and included only FWIW (which I realize is zero!), I perceive it as smooth, crisp and tight, well-extended bass response, felt as well as heard.

I've gone through a bit of work to coax the best performance out of them, but not really much more than other's who are as serious about sound. When I moved into my house, I had to build a half-wall for the right speaker to do it's direct/reflect thing and balance out the dispersion pattern/soundfield produced. In addition to reasonable room tweaking, the SAE half-octave EQ I added before becoming lord of the manor, aided in further refining the sound...Having a Crown test disk, an SPL meter and a more-than-tolerant wife, many FR plots later, I had a system that was EQd from the stylus to my preferred listening position...I determined that, at least for me, flat wasn't where it was at, so I have incorporated a gentle roll-off of freqs above 8-10k which sounds more natural...it hands me a laff when I read the ol' party-line-mantra of "...no highs, no lows...it must be Bose..."

Then there's the 301s I used to use as rears when I was into the whole post-quad, ambience recovery phase or the 101s that were bracketed over my bed (and would whack me whenever I forgot they were there). 901s and 301s=excellent sonic match for surround, synthesized or otherwise...in fact the both EQd to a very simialr response curve...The 101s were compact and operating as near-field radiators, were nearly oblivious to room effects.

The over 30yr.-old 901s are still alive and kickin'...the 301s (victims of foam-rot) and 101s are no longer used...the bedroom now has a GPX CDP ($7 after rebate) plugged (via a RS adapter) into basic Wave radio (won in a non-audio retailers promotion-I would never pay that much for a clock-radio) which, when properly positioned, sounds quite good BTW...plus it has a small footprint and doesn't bop me noggin'...

I have often said, given the whole direct/reflecting aspect of the majority of Bose loudspeakers, a comparison with direct-radiator systems is simply untenable...neither sounds like the other, nor given their immense design differences, should they...I won't tell anyone what they should buy and I certainly don't tout Bose products...even though they have worked for me for over 30yrs. That is a decision that the individual should arrive at for themselves...you will either like them or you won't, but they are a completely different animal and must be appreciated and more importantly listened to, from a different perspective and with a different mindset.

jimHJJ(...and for some they just might be the "best"...)

[HAVIC]

Can anyone think of-nominate another company that is similar to Bose within their given industry i.e. marginal product but percieved good/excellent reputation with the public?

Yeah the Apple Ipod. I can't believe the hype this thing gets for the price that is. It is very similar in the BOSE model.

Here is what I mean you have the bose speakers which most people will say that the are over priced for the sound that they produce.

Apple Ipod is overpriced for the quality and features they offer. What they are selling you is a flashy nice looking device. They are the only mp3 player that advertises on a regular basis, the only one on tv atleast. Becuase of this people just run out and buy an ipod, most do not even realize that there are alternatives.

Another issue with the ipod is it's percieved easy of use. Why do I need to install new software on my computer to use this thing, just another step that is not needed.

It only has a headphone jack, no seperate lineout. It does not come with a carrying case.
Has a proprietary connect on the bottom of the ipod requiring you, if you lose it, to buy theirs. No line in. Not radio or microphone. Everything is an add on extra.

You have to make an appointment to have it looked at in a store (NY area atleast) and can still wait up to 3 hours to have it looked at. My 1 friend is on his 7th refurbished ipod, my other friend his 4th (Both are 4g ipods.) I hear horror stories all the time.

Can only use itunes no other online music support. DRM kills your battery. Lack of extensive codec support.

I can go I but I think it is pretty close, however I feel that this comparison model only works for the ipod not the entire company.

You look at most other mp3 players in the market and they come with a lot more for the same money or less.

[audio_dude]

can someone tell me again, how did this go from how crappy Bose is to woman that are men jokes...and yamaha...

[JohnMichael]

can someone tell me again, how did this go from how crappy Bose is to woman that are men jokes...and yamaha...

Just part of the charm of AR or at least those of us that can not stay on topic. If we told you how this happens we would really be off topic. Sorry

[topspeed]

That's an interesting analogy, Havic. The only thing that I counter is that to me, Apple's AAC format sounds a heckuva lot better than MP3. I've heard the same song encoded at 128 AAC on an iPod and then compared it to a 128 MP3 on a Samsung and it was horrid. I have no idea why it sounded so much better, but even the owner of the Sammy was surprised. In fact, he went out and bought an iPod later that week. Therefore, in that respect it at least lives up to it's perceived value.

I almost hate to get this thread back on track, after all I thought we were talking about Yamaha ? I have to admit that for their market, Bose is brilliant. They build equipment specifically for their target market: plug-n-play simplicity, aesthetics, and name recognition. The second greatest human need after self preservation is recognition. People like to be aknowledged and Bose, through a lot of very clever marketing, has managed to infuse the sense of Bose=high quality in the mass psyche. Try to name one person that hasn't heard of Bose!

They seem to be really pushing the 321 system right now and if you watch the ad, you'll note that they aren't making any wild or outlandish claims. They have a testimonial from some guy that simply states "Compared to a TV's speakers, the Bose 3-2-1 will astonish you." Of course they will! TV speakers suck, but he's certainly not lying. Now if he said the 321 sounds better than the similar Yamaha YSP1, then we'd have something to flame Bose about.

As an interesting aside: Bose is losing ground big time with luxury car makers. As we all know, Bose builds car audio systems in everything from Chevy to Mercedes. However, research has shown that they have become almost too ubiquitous and luxury buyers no longer think of them as "special" enough. Apparently, these buyers don't cotton to having the same stereo in their $100,000 S500 as you can get in a Cobalt. Therefore, now you see Bang & Olusen, Linn, Dynaudio, and even Burmester! This is an interesting trend, not only for gearheads but as a barometer on the general buying public. Is it possible that Bose has become overexposed? Hmmm...

Meh. Bose, Yamaha, Apogee...who cares? As long as the owner is happy, more power to 'em.

[HAVIC]

That's an interesting analogy, Havic. The only thing that I counter is that to me, Apple's AAC format sounds a heckuva lot better than MP3. I've heard the same song encoded at 128 AAC on an iPod and then compared it to a 128 MP3 on a Samsung and it was horrid. I have no idea why it sounded so much better, but even the owner of the Sammy was surprised. In fact, he went out and bought an iPod later that week. Therefore, in that respect it at least lives up to it's perceived value.

I agree it does sound much better but if you take the time a encode everything to apples proprietary format and then you want to switch to a competitor you have to re-encode all your music. OOG or ogg vorbis is considered the best lossy format and mp3 the worst, it has to due with the algorithm they used to compress the music. If you notice apple only supports the crappy lossy formats and their own lossy, which is much better than the rest. So when your ipod dies you go out and buy another because you dread re-encoding your 150+ cd collection again.