Re: Looking for Facts on Bose

["Linus D. Toy" <linust@interramp.com>]

okay--here's my 2 pennies worth...these come from having to listen to the
Bose systems in my 200q and her Accord.

At 01:47 AM 5/21/96 -0400, ScharfR@aol.com wrote:
>1.  What is wrong with the Bose systems? I'd prefer a technical answer, but
>recognize that subjectivity comes into play in all listening evaluations.

a few items... 

1.  the frequency response favored by Bose engineers.  They offer a heavily
boosted bass.  In the Honda, this was done by detenting the tone controls
(bass & treble) about 2/3 of the way up the scale.  the high end is missing.
On the Audi, the tone controls are detented at neutral positions, but the
freq. response is still out of whack (technical term) to me.  and there's no
balance control on these head units (either car).  personally, i prefer a
more neutral frequency response curve.  Some of my music simply sounds funny
(one more technical term) in the car when compared with the system at home.
this is especially true for clear, open music (classical, some jazz, etc)

2.  the CD player is an RF modulator type--I'd like a direct connect style
that doesn't limit my CD frequency response to that of an FM tuner.  what's
the big deal about that?  dynamic range and signal/noise ratio.  the higher
frequencies, even if you can't hear them directly, do color the music with
unique characteristics.  OTOH, in a mobile environment, there's so much
other noise it isn't as critical as at home.  see my comment about stereo
$$$ below.

3.  the system is difficult to upgrade.  as several on this list have
discussed, the amplifiers are at the speakers, not in a centralized
amplifier.  This means redoing the whole *&^%$# thing, not just the speakers
or the head unit, etc.

>2.  Is there a heierarchical process to follow in seeking improvements? (i.e.
>rip out the loudspeakers, rip out the radio head, rip out the antenna ...)

this is somewhat personal, but the most important parts are usually the
signal source (head unit) and speakers.  then comes the amp.  as i'm not
fond of "altered" signals, you'd have to pay me to put in an equalizer.  

on the issue of antennae, this one depends on whereabouts you live.  here in
hill-infested seattle, with all the buildings downtown, i've had lots of
difficulties in the past (my 4kcsq, other cars).  I must admit I've had no
problems with FM reception in the 200q (i know--makes no sense to me,
either), 'tho AM isn't much to brag about.  

>3.  Are there economical alternatives, or does one have to spend large
>dollars to replace an already expensive system?

see above.  also, there have been attempts to get adapters made
(crutchfield) but they don't always work, right Al?

>4.  Are there Bose defenders out there?  (Is it possible that Bose is fine,
>but some folks just like to spend/tweek/fiddle?)

not a defense of the Bose system, but I am leaving it alone.  plus, it
provides that nifty (yet another technical term) display in the dash about
the station i'm listening to.  I've taken to putting my stereo $$$ into the home

>Not trying to start a "radio war", just want to have a better level of
>information for my next purchase. Polite responses gladly accepted.

as i said, 2 pennies.
--linus
----------------------------------------------------------------------
* linus toy           email:  linust@interramp.com                   *
----------------------------------------------------------------------