i read an article at [Link: MSU.EDU] ----------> SPEAKERS THAT SAID ALL BOSE AND OTHER MASS MARKETED SPEAKERS LIKE POLK,INFINITY,YAMAHA ALSO USED CHEAP DRIVERS AND DID NO RESEARCH IS THIS TRUE?

I'm not certain about Polk or Infinity, however I was not overly impressed with Bose myself. Yamaha make excellent receivers, but high-end speakers really aren't their thing (same as Sony).

I'm sorry but I realy must dissagree with all comments on Bose speakers. I own a home theatre system with the Sony STRDB925 Digital/DTS Receiver and Bose AM10 Speakers and it is awsome with tons of bass and crisp clear dialouge. The speakers are tinty and not intrusive, I call them wife friendly, I just wonder how many of these people who knock Bose have actually sat down messed with the settings on their Amps/Receivers and really listened to a good Bose set up!
You can keep your big boom floorstanders I'll stick with my discreat Bose AM10s.

Bose's main criticism is that they incredibly expensive for the sound qulaity. I'm sure that Oliver is right and the Boses sound absolutely great, but I expect that the large floor standers he disparages are half the price.

I will tell you that I had Bose AM5s as my mains for three years and thought they were great.....unitl......I heard something else, and did some research. As it turns out, the Bose cubes in general suffer from poor imaging and lousy frequency response, particularly at the high end. If you ever ask a Bose salesman what the frequency response is, they won't answer the question...and none of their literature has this info. One of the HT mags did a test and discovered that the cubes generally frop off above about 14K...which is poor.

Just a comparison of the Energy Take 5 speakers with any Bose Cube system will give you instant recognition of the limitations of Bose speakers.

They are experts at marketing, but for what they cost, there are a ton of alternatives far cheaper, that will blow them away.

By the way, this is not only my opinion. Visit www.audioreview.com and look up any of the Bose Cube systems in their reviews and they consistently are rated poor by those who have owned them. In fact, they are in that site's "Hall of Shame" section.

Steer clear of them, save some money, and get better imaging with tons of other alternatives.

TK

From my experience and from quite a bit of research, here's my 2 cents:

There are 2 types of environment which should be considered:

1. Home Theater (Movies, TV)
In this situation the source of the sound is generally not the most accurate, therefore imaging is not that big a factor. Rather, tonal balance is more important. Thus, Bose will work here. Bose have the advantages for it being very sensitive, also the sub is very loud (but not very accurate).

2. Music.
This is where Bose simply does not perform. Because of its small size, it simply could not reproduce music accurately. It's loud, but not accurate. For this environment it is best to have floorstanding speakers.

I want to get in on this one too.

All the audiophiles love to bash Bose and any other speaker brand you can buy at The Good Guys or Circuit City, but the truth is that they are just being snobs. I have a system built over the last 10 years which I am very happy with (Stereophile class B).

That's the most important part, I am happy with it. The best speakers in the world, are the ones that sound best to you. Bose makes great speakers for background music. They fill the room much better than any speaker with pinpoint imaging, and they have a nice musical tonality. I agree they are not very accurate, and their frequency response stinks, but if you listen casually, not critically, they sound great.

What is the number one most requested/revered brand of factory installed car audio? Bose! Why? Not because the public is stupid, or because only audiophiles have good hearing. The real reason is because when you are in the car, you are driving. Listening to music is a secondary priority. Thus car-audio constitutes casual listening and once again Bose excels.

As for how much they spend on research, I know for a fact that Mr. Bose was a PhD from MIT, and they annually recruit lots of MIT engineering grads. Also Polk develops all their own drivers in house with very complex R&D and testing procedures. I read once that they do laser interferometry experiments on all their cone drivers to see the stress patterns as they distort. Hence the funky patterns molded in.
Harmon international (maker of JBL and Infinity) just spent tens of millions of dollars building a brand new state of the art speaker R&D facility, because the Canadians were kicking their butts. (Canada has a great National Lab type infrastructure for speaker mfg.)

The take home message is: Don't believe the hype.
That means both Audiophile hype, and mass marketing media blitz hype. Everybody is full of it. Listen and judge for yourself.

Truth is,Bose has the best marketing in the audio business.They are guru`s at this.Their speaker line is a joke.They use cheap paper cone drivers,cheap plastic spring clips for speaker wire,cheap plastic enclosers and charge you BIG time for a flawed design.I owned the 901`s and the 201`s and thought they were great until I went out and auditioned other brands.The gentleman who brought up the Energy Take 5`s nailed it right on the head.For hundreds less they outperform the Bose in EVERY area.And if the gentleman who said Bose sound great when set up right had the Take 5`s in their place ,he would see why most everybody bashes them.If alot of people would do alittle homework they would NOT make the same mistake I did.

I haven't been to Remote Central in quite a while, but found this particular question intresting. I have to consent with the majority on this one. I own my own theater company in Texas and judge "sound quality" for car audio as a hobby. To the everyday consumer on their own Bose isn't a bad speaker, however when put next to Energy, Mirage, Wharfedale, Bose is quite literally "BLOWN AWAY". Bose truly has a great marketing Dept, (i wonder if any of the are looking for jobs) but a saying that has been in the professional part of our industry of years..."No Highs, No Lows.... must be BOSE".

From all the information that I have seen, heard, and from my own experience, here's my analysis of Bose speakers.

Advantage:
Bose is loud. Most people equate this loudness with goodness, which is not true. Bose has one of the highest sensitivity in a speaker that I have seen. A 3db sensitivity equals twice the loudness. Because of this sensitivity, Bose requires very little power to achieve big sound. Bose uses small cones, small drivers, small everything to achieve this. Also the Bose sub in most cases are active sub, so it's also louder.

Disadvantage:
The smallness, loudness, come at a price. Bose is terrible at imaging. In side by side comparision with other speakers, Bose simply cannot compete. Please note that other speakers may have a lower sensitivity (which requires a bigger amp), but if your amp can drive it (the speaker), then other speakers simply blows Bose away. The sub is loud because it's an active sub, but again, imaging is absolutely terrible.

The conclusion:
A lot of people equate loudness with goodness. This is simply not true. If comparing 2 speakers side by side, you have to setup the environment so that both speakers brand be driven to achieve the same level of sound!. If you are at a listening studio and simply switches speakers without modifying the volume, then Bose will sound louder, giving it a false advantage.

The ultimate goal of all of these products (amp, speaker, component...) is the reproduction of the original sound (the source), and reproduce it as accurate as possible. It is, therefore, accuracy is more important than anything else.

Daniel: Your story remided me of what I saw at Comdex Canada today, which I just got back from. At the Creative Labs booth they were busy showing off their small cube speakers - at deafening volume levels from 100' away! I couldn't believe how much distortion and outright clipping I could hear. Everything was harsh and bassy. Absolutely horrible, but most of the people there were so impressed with how "loud" they could be. Gaaah.

I recently went on a trip to Bose HQ in Boston
USA. We were treated to various demos and teasers for up and coming equipment. One of the demos was treated as Top Secret. We were lead into a Home Cinema set-up room complete with Seleco Projector a Yamaha Amp/Reciever and DVD & LD. The speakers were floorstanders set up for full Dolby Digital.
The sytem fired up with various demos of Music and Movies in D-Digital and DTS.
Afterwards we were asked how we liked these new speakers. Everyone and I mean everyone was amazed superb sound,bass,frequency response and image placement.
It was then that they removed the false outer casing to reveal a full set of AM10s. Everyone was astounded. Don't be critical for critical sake!

Even though I felt that this thread is sufficiently long enough and that everyone is entitled to their own opinion, one thing I would like to make very clear:

There is such a thing as false imaging. The "true" image of anything is the recreation of the original source, including any instrumental/environmental factors, either POSITIVE or NEGATIVE. Anything that detracts from these reproductions, no matter how good, are not "true" imaging.

Example: A movie is recorded in MONO. The same movie is played using a Dolby Digital 5.1 in somewhat a simulated surround mode. Is this true imaging. No.

Example: A music CD is recorded in stereo. The same CD is played using Dolby Digital 5.1 with DTS to create more ambience. Let's say it sounded better. But is this true imaging. No.

Example: A black-and-white movie has just been colorized. The result is stunning. But is this true imaging. No.

Frequency are divided into 3 regions: Low, Mid, High. The low (bass) are omnidirectional. The mid and high are unidirectional. Most of the musical energy are in the mid-range. Bose cubes have a unique design. It's movable and you can point the cubes toward the listener, directing the sound. Because of this, Bose is loud. But is this true imaging. No.

I know that I may be too critical in this area, but you can ask anybody about this and get the same answer:

* The way to test for imaging is not with movies in any kind of surround modes. In fact, don't use movies for this kind of test at all.

* The way to test for imaging is with music. Not any kind of music, but classical instrumental.

And yes, I have been to those Bose presentations. Do try to get them to play a classical CD. Then close your eyes for a full 5 minutes, block out all thoughts, really listen and compare!.

From what I've heard and read it appears that the Bose line is a great marketing idea but you can get a lot better speaker for the money. I own a pair of Bose 4.2's and when I bought them (About 10 years ago) I bought them because of the Bose name. I have since educated myself more on A/V equipment and speakers and while I won't say the Bose sound bad, I wouldn't buy them again.

In the end though if they sound good to you that is all that matters. Wife acceptance factor (WAF) is why a lot of people decide on Bose AM series. They are nice and small and will match your nice white walls.

Read the Bose FAQ to understand why the audiophile community dislikes Bose:
[Link: www-bigbang.stanford.edu]

The Bose AM series is way outdated for Dolby Digital setups. The cubes have their highs rolled off so that they can blasted at high volumes. The passive bass module (not even a true sub) can't compare to any decent powered sub. So basically it has great mid-range, but at the expense of the infamous "No Highs, No Lows, must be Bose...."

Here's another recommendation for the Energy Take 5 as "Bose-killers". Nice and small like the Bose cubes, better build, better sound, and you save a ton of $$$.