Bose vs. Logans...Not what you think

[amey01]

You know, sometimes, you do just have to let it go. If they like what they hear/see and are comfortable with the price, then hey, it’s their money.

I always tell people who ask that Bose blows, and that there are any number of better choices, I even offer to do the config/shopping/setup for them (if they are close enough friends). So far, only two uptakes on that in the last 12 years. Others take the advice and go shopping on their own and wind up with whatever the salesperson convinces them of. When I hear it, it’s never as good as my recommendation was, and funnily enough, often much more expensive.

The problem is, some people just don’t care about total audio quality. I’ve been training my wife for close to 31 years now on how to appreciate good audio reproduction, and have had some of the best systems we have known over the years. However, she’s just as happy listening to her iPod played back through a cheap Sony boom-box in her sewing room, complete with >3% THD (which drives me nuts).
But when listening to the big system in the HT, she really digs the detail and clarity. But it’s not crucial to her.

On the plus side, she’s totally supportive of my addiction and helps me get over my penny-pinching upbringing and will say things like ‘just get it, you know you want it, and you can afford it’. Man, on those days, I really love her :angel:

Same with my wife - she loves the sound, but it's not at all important to her - she's just as happy with her iPod.

My parents are even worse - when they come over they always exclaim how much nicer our house would look if it wasn't for "all that clutter over on that wall".

For the record, they have one of my "recommended" systems - no 'Logans or anything, but something better than Bose. Way better. Problem is, Mum can't operate it and gets frustrated when she wants to do something "simple" like put on the radio. She thinks there's too many wires, the speakers are too big and ugly (she's laid them down flat, much to the disgust of Dad), and "why do we need this boom-boom thing sitting in the middle of my lounge room?" (the subwoofer).

If I had my time again, I would certainly recommend Bose - heck, they never listen critically and things would be much simpler not having to go over there and re-configure all the settings, time delays, subwoofer levels, et al that they've stuffed up having no idea what they're doing.

 

[Brad225]

I wonder which speakers get more playing time, Acoustimass or Wilson.

Tough decision.

I'll bet if he had spikes under the Bose stands it would be much closer.

 

[David Matz]

You'd think I work for Bose, but sorry, I don't agree. I'm just trying to be fair.

Bose are not "better" or "worse" than 'Logans - just different. While ML strives to the ultimate sound quality for a given price (important to me and the rest of us), Bose strives for other things.

Let's face it - Bose is cheaper than ML, and they give customers:

* An easy to integrate product
* A high WAF product
* A trendy product
* An easy to use product
* An easy to set up product
* An easy to live with product
* A better sounding product than Sony, Panasonic, et. al. consumer stuff

I think this list is the key to the discussion. Bose has successfully marketed their product to get people to believe that they are "much better than what you got". Most people just believe the advertising, without challenging, and assume it is the best they can get. Furthermore, high end audio does not reach out to the consumer; the consumer has to find high end audio. However, Bose through their marketing reaches out to thousands of consumers. Their market is huge, and if they can convert a small fraction of the Sony owners, they have succeeded. In contrast, only 186 Conrad Johnson 350 amps were manufactured. Not sure how many pairs of Summits, Vantages, or CLS's were ever sold, but it is a different market.

As an aside, one of my behavioral marketing professors worked as a consultant to Bose. He suggested adding a "Hear what you have been missing line" to their magazine ads to evoke scarcity. He says it was a highly successful ad.

 

[Gordon Gray]

As others have stated, the vast majority of people use music as background noise and don't care about the sound quality.

And for those who may think they care, serious listening is cranking up something so they can impress you with how loud their system can play.

We are all a small fringe market who actually choose products based on the "sound" and who actually can sit for more than five (5) minutes to listen to music, one on one.

Frankly, I see this trend consistent with others going on in this country.

A voluntary effort to "dumb down" and closing down our minds and hearts to the arts because we choose to not allocate our personal time to such endeavors.

And let's not forget about the power / influence of Paul Harvey or other media messengers.

Scary stuff, my friends.

GG

 

[amey01]

I wonder which speakers get more playing time, Acoustimass or Wilson.

Tough decision.

I'll bet if he had spikes under the Bose stands it would be much closer.

I think the picture proves my point - the fact that there is room for *BOTH* the Wilsons and the Bose in that listening room proves they're different products.

I see the Bose as nothing more than the art on the walls, the Plasma screen, the rug on the floor. It's not a high-end product, and it is not competing with the high-end equipment in that room. It is built for a different purpose, and clearly that owner is using them for different purposes.

We don't go crazy at people for buying art or rugs instead of spending the money on high-end audio. Why go mad at them for buying Bose?

 

[amey01]

As others have stated, the vast majority of people use music as background noise and don't care about the sound quality.

And for those who may think they care, serious listening is cranking up something so they can impress you with how loud their system can play.

We are all a small fringe market who actually choose products based on the "sound" and who actually can sit for more than five (5) minutes to listen to music, one on one.

Frankly, I see this trend consistent with others going on in this country.

A voluntary effort to "dumb down" and closing down our minds and hearts to the arts because we choose to not allocate our personal time to such endeavors.

And let's not forget about the power / influence of Paul Harvey or other media messengers.

Scary stuff, my friends.

GG

Very scary - good post.

People are so crass these days - they want "in your face" entertainment like Playstations and the internet.

It's a shame, but my guess is that we'll certainly see less of people devoting time to listen to music, go to concerts, admire art, etc.

They want the quick thrill of doing a burnout in a car to the soundtrack of a "Mega-bass" boomy subwoofer rather than listen to the delicate naunces of a Stradivari or Guaneri.

Heck - if that's all you want, you're wasting your money on Bose - go out and buy a Samsung Theatre-in-a-box system!