Amar Bose 83 Dies

[Q8]

His contribution to audio may be questionable but RIP

http://m.washingtonpost.com/busines...7fcc6e-ebec-11e2-aa9f-c03a72e2d342_story.html

 

[Quad Linda]

No highs, no lows, must be Bose.

Better sound through marketing.

Hi-fi for the deaf.

 

[EMB]

That pretty much sums it up. Even the NY Times obit noted his 'namesake company became synonymous with high quality audio systems and speakers'....which would be akin to saying that 'Ripple became synonymous with high quality wine'. Yet I've had friends rave over the sound quality of the 'wave' music system..but one of them is someone who said LET IT BE NAKED had great sound quality, which, again, brings that wine metaphor into play, along with my friend's sense of what 'great sound quality' would entail. Well, the 'wave' IS a small, convenient thing, I guess.

ED

 

[Quad Linda]

No one in this world, so far as I know — and I have searched the record for years, and employed agents to help me — has ever lost money by underestimating the intelligence of the great masses of the plain people. - H.L. Menken

(Often misquoted as "No one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people.")

 

[leevitalone1]

It was this guy who lobbied against quad broadcasts in the 70's. CBS wanted to do some and he was not only against it, but had a direct hand in stopping it.

 

[jimfisheye]

Always wondered why the name was spelled without the "L".

 

[user 4725]

BOSE = Buy Other Sound Equipment.

 

[JonUrban]

Way back when they only made 301s 501s and 901s, and they were all in real wood, not pressed wood, a Navy buddy of mine had 4 901s hooked up to a big Marantz quad amp and a TEAC reel, and blasted Tomita Snowflakes are Dancing from Q4. Of course, he probably had the dual EQ's cranked up, but it was totally astonishing to me.

I could never afford 4 901s, but my first quad system started with 4 301s before I moved on to "real" speakers!

At any rate, the company from the "Mountain" in Framingham (some mountain, have you ever seen it? It's a hill) really went down the tubes IMHO once they moved on from those early speakers, but at one time they were pretty inovative. They made a Quad Pre-Amp (4401) that I would lust for in magazines, but again could never afford.

Time marches on. We'll all be gone at some point.

 

[fredblue]

It was this guy who lobbied against quad broadcasts in the 70's. CBS wanted to do some and he was not only against it, but had a direct hand in stopping it.

really!? bloody fool..

I've had full on arguments with people before about how shit their acoustimass technology is! some folks think that crap is hi-fi when all it is horrible boomy bass/low-mid and tinny treble..!?!?!? @:

 

[Cibola]

It was this guy who lobbied against quad broadcasts in the 70's. CBS wanted to do some and he was not only against it, but had a direct hand in stopping it.

Did he give a reason for doing such a thing?

 

[jaybird100]

The 901's were never a good speaker for quad. They blurred the effect too much, given their direct/reflecting nature. While I was stationed in Keflavik, Iceland, a Bose rep came to our exchange to tout 901's for quad systems. When we questioned their suitability because of their design, he got extremely defensive and pretty much told us we were nuts if we doubted their capability in quad systems. When he played a demo, from a quad reel, it sounded like bad matrixed surround. He retreated with his tail between his legs. Needless to say, no one bought Bose speakers for their quad systems.

 

[jaybird100]

Did he give a reason for doing such a thing?

Do we have proof of this? Is there an article we can find that explains his logic (pardon the pun) for doing this? And just how much clout did he think he had here?

 

[Caspersozza]

Any eulogies to Amar Bose should really focus on his sensational marketing skills. If ever there was proof of the efficacy of advertising, it is the staggering prevalence of over-priced Wave radio/CDs in Britain which, given the appalling, reed-thin sound they produce, can only be down to decades of drip-feed advertising in all national newspapers.

I know half a dozen people with Wave radios. They all sound absolutely terrible, and most don't seem to care. But then one of my friends, who had spent the best part of £10,000 on a 2.0 CD system, was given a Wave radio by his wife for Christmas. Priceless comedy - brilliant!

 

[EMB]

A friend of mine who ran an electronics shop up north used to keep some Bose speakers kicking around for demo purposes--to show off just how bad they were in case anyone was wondering, heh. I particularly despised the bookshelf units, which really did sound awful--no decent bass, screechy upper mids, few highs, etc. But yes, Bose and his gang were brilliant in terms of marketing even back when they were selling kindling like that. They developed a name brand and must have known they'd do fine as long as they didn't sell to audiophiles but Joe & Jane Public who grew up with transistor radios or old furniture-styled consoled and therefore cared more about aesthetics like looks than sound quality. And of course their pitch with their headphones was how they would cancel out extraneous noise--not only from outside sounds but cancel out dynamic range, too. The millions poured into magazines--the newspaper insert Parade was a favorite employed to sell the Wave unit--brought in millions more, I'm sure. Marketing, not sound, will be Mr. Bose's legacy, and his minions continue their dark trade to this day....

ED

 

[jaybird100]

I agree, Bose's number one product is their marketing. I sell Bose products at work, and the main reason I do is because the commission on them is good. As for the bookshelf speakers. I push Polk Audio over Bose, mainly because they do sound better.

 

[leevitalone1]

The marketing ploys used tell you that the stuff sounds good, and coupled with a high price because most belive you get what you pay for, really belive that it sounds good. Brilliant ploy. They market to the higher income people who really think they are getting something special.
And the ease of connections makes it even more attractive. The reason I like the sound bar idea. Especially because some are made by high end gear makers. A person would be better off with one of those than blose.

 

[jaybird100]

The marketing ploys used tell you that the stuff sounds good, and coupled with a high price because most belive you get what you pay for, really belive that it sounds good. Brilliant ploy. They market to the higher income people who really think they are getting something special.
And the ease of connections makes it even more attractive. The reason I like the sound bar idea. Especially because some are made by high end gear makers. A person would be better off with one of those than blose.

I do have to give Bose credit for an innovative sound bar. This is one product that lives up to its promise. It projects sound to give the illusion of speakers beyond the confines of the bar, giving the illusion of speakers where none exist.

 

[Jeffrey Michael]

I heard that Soundbar over the weekend. I thought it was a piece of .... no matter WHAT it was TRYING to convey to the consumer. Illusion my ASS! How about trickery?

 

[jaybird100]

I heard that Soundbar over the weekend. I thought it was a piece of .... no matter WHAT it was TRYING to convey to the consumer. Illusion my ASS! How about trickery?

Bose does its thing with sonic trickery. I've always said that. But compared to other soundbars I've heard, it's interesting.

 

[Jeffrey Michael]

Sorry! My Post wasn't directed at you. Only my dislike for Bose overall. I will agree about their Marketing dept.