Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 29th Apr 2011 20:04 UTC
In the News Between all this bickering over who's peniphone is the largest best, it's always nice to be able to post a positive story, a story which shows that for every abusive company, there's one that shows the world just how it's done. This time, it's Bose. Founder and primary stockholder of Bose, Amar G. Bose, has donated a large number of non-voting shares of the company to MIT, where he spent his university career. Dividends over these shares will be paid each year to MIT, which will use it for research and educational purposes.
Order by: Score:
Great Move
by BeOSJim on Fri 29th Apr 2011 22:24 UTC
BeOSJim
Member since:
2010-01-20

That is a great move. I hope that MIT makes the most of it.

I am reminded of a time several years ago when we powered a pair of Bose 901 speakers with 5,400 watts each off of a bridged four channel amp. Amazingly nothing blew and all of the drivers in the speakers still worked great. I think I still hear AC/DC ringing in my ears...

Reply Score: 1

Comment by zizban
by zizban on Fri 29th Apr 2011 22:40 UTC
zizban
Member since:
2005-07-06

Bose just makes great audio stuff. I have a wave radio and headphones and they have lasted me years.

Reply Score: 2

Alex Forster
Member since:
2005-08-12

A bit off topic, but what ever came of the Bose Suspension project?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eSi6J-QK1lw&feature=player_detailpag...

Reply Score: 2

Priest Member since:
2006-05-12

I think it became a seat instead of a full suspension: http://www.bose.com/bose_ride_system/index.jsp

Reply Score: 2

Objective measurements
by ndrw on Sat 30th Apr 2011 04:26 UTC
ndrw
Member since:
2009-06-30

He doesn't believe in objective measurements of audio quality


Although I agree there is more to the customer satisfaction than just objective audio quality (e.g. design, functionality, reliability, package, customer support, low price, high price) I simply can't trust people saying the above.

Good quality audio equipment should also excel in objective measurements. Anyone saying otherwise is in business of selling dreams not the equipment (which is fine as long as he/she is honest about it).

Reply Score: 5

RE: Objective measurements
by Priest on Sat 30th Apr 2011 07:46 UTC in reply to "Objective measurements"
Priest Member since:
2006-05-12

Have you been into a Bose store? I saw a surround sound demo at one (Woodbury Common) where you sit in a small theater with large speakers and listen to the way the sound fills the room. At the end of the demo they lift up the speakers which are just a hollow cover over some tiny cube speakers.

As far as small form factors go they seem to deliver.

I have a Yamaha home theater receiver (HTR-5940) with large (45 lb) 3 channel floor speakers and while it is loud and probably posts some big numbers the audio quality is total crap because there are 40 themed settings for the digital processor and they all sound horrible. Even the "straight" setting badly messes with the audio so bad I can't tolerate using it for TV at any volume and I'm not picky.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Objective measurements
by No it isnt on Sat 30th Apr 2011 11:38 UTC in reply to "RE: Objective measurements"
No it isnt Member since:
2005-11-14

In reality, the tiny BOSE speakers can't move enough air to deliver actual bass, so instead they ramp up harmonic distortion to give the illusion of the sound being there. That might impress in certain situations, but at the cost of subtlety. Good speakers are always better, but they cost more and take far more space.

Reply Score: 4

RE[3]: Objective measurements
by jackeebleu on Sat 30th Apr 2011 12:22 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Objective measurements"
jackeebleu Member since:
2006-01-26

So I guess BOSE audio doesn't exist in reality? What does exist in reality is one's ability to appreciate what they experience. There is no definitive way that you or any other person can tell another person what they like. BOSE products appeal to people that don't want to be bogged down with numbers and measurements, they just want what sounds good to them.

Reply Score: 0

modmans2ndcoming Member since:
2005-11-09

There is a science to hearing and Bose does good middle range speakers.... that is all they can do because, given the choices in product engineering, they have scarified good highs and good lows. This is not stuff an audiophile only notices, if you were placed in a room with correct sound dampening and you heard a Bose speaker system against something higher end, the Bose would feel hollow.

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Objective measurements
by Thom_Holwerda on Sat 30th Apr 2011 14:08 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Objective measurements"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

This is not stuff an audiophile only notices, if you were placed in a room with correct sound dampening and you heard a Bose speaker system against something higher end, the Bose would feel hollow.


That's exactly the point. Who has a room with correct sound dampening at home?

I'd like my audio equipment to sound good *in practice*. Not in some theoretical perfectly sound-proofed room.

Reply Score: 3

modmans2ndcoming Member since:
2005-11-09

It isn't hard to do... you really just need to stop first reflection and you're good. In practice, Bose still sounds awful. the only thing they do well is making it easy to set up.

Anyone who is setting up a home theater room would want to avoid Bose speakers. Buy their headphones (those are very good) buy their radios... again... good based on the market it is in.... but for home theater....avoid avoid avoid if you have any AV abilities at all.

Reply Score: 3

RE[6]: Objective measurements
by mistersoft on Sun 1st May 2011 17:56 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Objective measurements"
mistersoft Member since:
2011-01-05

" This is not stuff an audiophile only notices, if you were placed in a room with correct sound dampening and you heard a Bose speaker system against something higher end, the Bose would feel hollow.


That's exactly the point. Who has a room with correct sound dampening at home?

I'd like my audio equipment to sound good *in practice*. Not in some theoretical perfectly sound-proofed room.
"

you're right and wrong there Thom (-not picking a fight especially as Music and Audio appreciation are both massively subjective as has been noted already)
however yes, what you can hear *in practice*, and which might contribute to your increased enjoyment is rightly what matters. An example if I may: A friend of mine has a nice little music listening room furnished with lots of nice trinkets and little light etc, and more to the point, about 99% of the floor,walls and ceiling are covered with a variety of fabrics, drapes, soft furnishings etc - it's basically an acoustically dead room(ish) and he has 4 small speakers - a pair of jpw gold monitors and a pair of old b&o beovox 600s (or maybe 60.2's -something like that anyways) all set up at 2 stereopairs through a decent but low end hifi amp and I can honestly say that at low to medium volumes it sounds almost perfect in there!
I on the other hand have some (I'm not going to say higher-end, but higher power handling) Acoustic Energy speakers, a higher power decent amp plus 2 quality 600W subs, L +R. If they were installed in a slightly scaled up version of my friends listening room, I don't doubt they would sound equally amazing to his set up at low and medium volume albeit with a bit more scale and bass depth added perhaps - however I'm in a modern city centre flat with high ceilings, lots of hard bare walls and a hard laminate floor: acoustic nightmare- it really does sound ten times worse at normal vols, even though equipment is really good. At 'club' volumes it's £$%^ing great however! :-) except for the neighbours. My meandering point is that (and I have tried and owned bose gear in the past): yes it can flatter both acoustically poor environments and flatter average recordings - but you do lose a lot of highs and lows, and overall clarity vs even mid-fi competition, with the caveat that yes, carpets, curtains, ?tapestries in your listening room help a lot.

But yes, well done Mr Bose!! A good gesture - I do hope at least a portion will go towards at least for scholarship for someone who deserves a place but can't afford it though!!

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Objective measurements
by No it isnt on Sat 30th Apr 2011 13:38 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Objective measurements"
No it isnt Member since:
2005-11-14

I'm not sure what you think you're objecting to, but I'm pretty sure you're not objecting to what you think you're objecting to.

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Objective measurements
by Priest on Sun 1st May 2011 20:39 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Objective measurements"
Priest Member since:
2006-05-12

"In reality, the tiny BOSE speakers can't move enough air to deliver actual bass"

The cube speakers are not used for bass, they are surround sound speakers, bass is produced by the subwoofer which is pretty effective.

Reply Score: 2

Bose.....sigh
by modmans2ndcoming on Sat 30th Apr 2011 13:27 UTC
modmans2ndcoming
Member since:
2005-11-09

Audio wise, Bose is in the middle of the pack... about two rungs above the "Home Theater in a Box" speakers. For the money, you can get much better sound elsewhere.

Engineering wise, they are amazing. They have figured out how to bring OK sound to everyone with out needing an AV installer to do the work.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Bose.....sigh
by StephenBeDoper on Sat 30th Apr 2011 17:15 UTC in reply to "Bose.....sigh"
StephenBeDoper Member since:
2005-07-06

Audio wise, Bose is in the middle of the pack... about two rungs above the "Home Theater in a Box" speakers. For the money, you can get much better sound elsewhere.


"No highs?

No lows?

Must be Bose."

Sorry, couldn't resist.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Bose.....sigh
by orestes on Sun 1st May 2011 19:44 UTC in reply to "Bose.....sigh"
orestes Member since:
2005-07-06

Bose's greatest accomplishment is selling the perception of value, regardless of the actual product's merits. The only company I can think of that comes close to that level of marketing brilliance is Apple.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Bose.....sigh
by bnolsen on Mon 2nd May 2011 01:08 UTC in reply to "RE: Bose.....sigh"
bnolsen Member since:
2006-01-06

I can't agree with the above statement more. I guess you could say that bose was always on the cutting edge of making speakers that looked distinctly different from everyone else's. I had a pair of 301's for a while (pure junk) and knew of folks with other bose stuff.

I guess you could say that bose tends (or tended) to do things first, but usually not best.

Reply Score: 2

Very nice
by hollovoid on Sat 30th Apr 2011 16:04 UTC
hollovoid
Member since:
2005-09-21

This is an incredibly kind gesture from Bose.

I do not use any Bose equipment anymore, but they do have a knack of making average sources sound great. Excellent sources expose flaws, but thats not really their target audience anyways.

Reply Score: 2

Shame on the universities.
by jefro on Sat 30th Apr 2011 21:15 UTC
jefro
Member since:
2007-04-13

I am sure that the big universities have billions and billions of dollars in vested in all sorts of things. UT is buying physical gold and storing it for some reason.

Why don't they offer cheaper or free degrees so that any qualified individual could attend?

Reply Score: 1

RE: Shame on the universities.
by modmans2ndcoming on Sat 30th Apr 2011 23:55 UTC in reply to "Shame on the universities."
modmans2ndcoming Member since:
2005-11-09

a place like Harvard offers tuition rates that are indexed against parental income... 10% of the parents income is the cap for tuition per year up to 160K per year in income, after that standard rates apply.

That is thanks to their endowment. MIT, being the best school in the nation for science and tech should certainly follow Harvard's lead on that as there are many people who have the grades and talent but can't get a scholarship so they end up at the local Community Collage and transfer to a 3rd tier university.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Shame on the universities.
by Hypnos on Sun 1st May 2011 15:53 UTC in reply to "Shame on the universities."
Hypnos Member since:
2008-11-19

Many large institutions are hoarding physical gold and silver to hedge against a default by the US gov't, and the crash in the dollar that would result. (Check out the tickers "GLD" or "SLV" on Google Finance, to see their huge run-up the last several months.)

Reply Score: 1

I can't find any reduction in Harvard's
by jefro on Sun 1st May 2011 16:21 UTC
jefro
Member since:
2007-04-13

I can't seem to find any evidence of any indexed tuition for any major school.

I'd like to know that link to some bonafide web page.

Reply Score: 1

AnyoneEB Member since:
2008-10-26

Cornell has a policy that families with incomes below $60k/yr pay nothing ( http://cornellsun.com/section/news/content/2009/02/17/financial-aid... ). I believe this was partially in response to other Ivy League schools having better financial aid.

Here is an article on Harvard supporting the 10% claim: http://www.boston.com/news/education/higher/articles/2007/12/11/har...

Beginning next fall, families earning $120,000 to $180,000 a year will be required to pay, on average, no more than 10 percent of their income. Harvard will also eliminate loans in financial aid packages, replace them with grants, and remove home equity in determining a family's assets.

Reply Score: 1

Gold as an Investment
by jefro on Sun 1st May 2011 16:28 UTC
jefro
Member since:
2007-04-13

Personally I feel that there is no good reason to buy gold for an investment. Any product that is being bought and sold for intrinsic value is bound to fail. Last time gold was up many people lost a lot. Buying gold is not a productive investment. Spending Billions by a US university not only furthers this faux sense of value it undermines the currency it is trying to base it's existence on. It is unpatriotic and foolish. How many Americans are being helped by their purchase. Almost none versus the millions that are suffering by inflation caused by commodity speculators. To make it worse, why by high? Isn't the saying buy low and sell high?

Reply Score: 1

RE: Gold as an Investment
by bnolsen on Mon 2nd May 2011 01:17 UTC in reply to "Gold as an Investment"
bnolsen Member since:
2006-01-06

Have to agree with this. Gold is okay to add to your portfolio for long term speculation but not good in general. I've just been fortunate in that I bought some before the last presidential election. The value's just about doubled since then.

And if you're worried SHTF scenarios you'd be better served investing in cigarettes and cans of beans.

Reply Score: 2

I thinks that's a bit exagerating
by twitterfire on Mon 2nd May 2011 14:59 UTC
twitterfire
Member since:
2008-09-11

Saying that for every abusive company there's one to show how it's done.

I think that for 100 bad guys there's only one good guy. Amongst the rich guys who made substantial donations for education, science or charity I can only mention Bill Gates, and now Amar Bose.

Reply Score: 2

Karitku Member since:
2006-01-12

Paul Allen gave 9 million to MIT few years ago. Also did you know Bose sued Consumer magazine in 70's because they didn't like Bose products, this took ages and up Bose settling it. Or that Bose sued several smaller makers in 80's and 90's for patent stuff, some of them went bust. You don't win trophies for been nice and you don't make millions either.

Reply Score: 2

Request for advice
by vodoomoth on Mon 2nd May 2011 15:08 UTC
vodoomoth
Member since:
2010-03-30

[OFF TOPIC]

Well, I've read many of the comments and the sentiment about Bose is, contrary to what I would've thought, rather lukewarm.

The irony is that two days ago, I considered buying Bose speakers while in a tech shop, window shopping.

I've known of Koss via word-of-mouth about 7-8 years ago and I have loved some (discontinued) fantastic headphones I've bought from them (KSC55 or 50, don't remember) but I've been disappointed with the rest of my purchases from them.

Now, I am wondering... if Bose isn't that much of a reliable maker to buy high quality loudspeakers from... what brand would you guys advise?

Reply Score: 2

RE: Request for advice
by Hypnos on Mon 2nd May 2011 15:32 UTC in reply to "Request for advice"
Hypnos Member since:
2008-11-19

I think Bose is the king of getting decent sound from small sources, e.g. car speakers or the Wave Radio.

But, if you have space, you can get better sound for the same price. Several years ago I bought a Boston Acoustic speaker set over the Bose alternative for my home theater, though the Bose set was somewhat physically smaller.

My audiophile-quality headphones are Klipsch isolating in-ear.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Request for advice
by Soulbender on Mon 2nd May 2011 16:00 UTC in reply to "Request for advice"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

Wharfedale.
Make sure you get wood cabinets. Plastic or composites doesn't cut the mustard.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Request for advice
by Thom_Holwerda on Mon 2nd May 2011 18:47 UTC in reply to "RE: Request for advice"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

I'm quite in love with my speakers from KEF. I'm no audiophile but they sound great to me (and look good to boot - black wood (real wood) in a simple, non-nonsense design. Very stylish).

Reply Score: 1

RE: Request for advice
by qortra on Mon 2nd May 2011 19:05 UTC in reply to "Request for advice"
qortra Member since:
2005-10-05

3 different posts, and 3 different answers. You're probably not going to get a consensus or fantastic audio advice at OSNews (unsurprising, given the name).

My sincere recommendation is to post this question in an on-topic forum. I recommend avsforum.com. They have a large user base, and their members subscribe to less "audiophile hokum" than do members of other forums. Seriously, this is a great question that deserves a great answer from people who care about the topic, so don't ask it here. When you do ask your question, make sure to do the following:

1) Post it in the proper section (probably one dedicated to Speakers and Subwoofers). The speakers themselves ought to account for the majority of money you spend. Good receivers, by comparison, can be had cheaply.
2) Be fairly specific about your requirements - size, price, aesthetics, and typical use case (music, movies, video games, etc).
3) Don't mention Bose. You'll get laughed at and people might not take your question seriously.

My personal recommendation for speakers is Ascend Acoustics. They are an internet only company that makes fantastic stuff. The owner is very knowledgeable and accessible. But seriously, don't take my word for it - post in the appropriate forum and see what kind of feedback you get.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Request for advice
by Soulbender on Mon 2nd May 2011 21:32 UTC in reply to "RE: Request for advice"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

3) Don't mention Bose. You'll get laughed at and people might not take your question seriously.


Maybe that's why you SHOULDNT ask those people. It's like asking Rolls-Royce owners what car to buy.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Request for advice
by qortra on Tue 3rd May 2011 03:31 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Request for advice"
qortra Member since:
2005-10-05

Maybe that's why you SHOULDNT ask those people. It's like asking Rolls-Royce owners what car to buy.

The gear I buy is actually cheaper than Bose, and outperforms it in almost every way. In fact, this is the experience of almost everybody who has cared to legitimately test Bose against its competition. Laughing might not be an appropriate reaction, but they would be wise to warn the OP against Bose.

Some of the people in audio forums have expensive gear, and some (like me) don't. Regardless, they do (on average) know what they're talking about. It would behoove you (and the OP) to listen to people who have expertise in a field, rather than scorning them and implying they're all elitists.

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Request for advice
by beeba on Wed 4th May 2011 20:56 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Request for advice"
beeba Member since:
2010-06-03

Rather than listening to the people, why not go listen to the speakers themselves? see what you like.

(ok, listen to people too).

I'd say that it's all subjective, and if you like how they sound, then they're right for you.

Some people might tell you that you don't know what sounds good, which might also be true. I think that critical listening is not natural.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Request for advice
by vodoomoth on Tue 3rd May 2011 06:49 UTC in reply to "RE: Request for advice"
vodoomoth Member since:
2010-03-30

That's a first-class reply you gave me there. Thanks!

Reply Score: 2