In what way was Bose a pioneer other than proving spending a billion dollars on advertising could bring you market presence? I think all his so called "creations and breakthroughs" have been debunked?
Dr. Bose Passes Away at 83
- Thread starter DonH50
- Start date
- Status
In what way was Bose a pioneer other than proving spending a billion dollars on advertising could bring you market presence? I think all his so called "creations and breakthroughs" have been debunked?
I think Fremer's comments were written after reading this obit.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/13/b...ic-engineer-and-inventor-dies-at-83.html?_r=0
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/13/b...ic-engineer-and-inventor-dies-at-83.html?_r=0
I think Bose's genius was taking the 'plastic crap' consumer level junk disposable electronics for people that would never spend the time (or money) to invest in serious gear* to another level- stylized, 'lifestyle' components that people instantly recognize by name- down a notch or two or more from companies like B & 0 but cheaper too- and commercializing the hell out of it- for add-ons to TV systems without the hassle of using a more involved HT audio system, table radios (H Kloss did a nice job with those too, back in the KLH and Advent days), etc.
Did Starbucks invent the coffee shop?- I don't think so, but try and think of an espresso bar/coffee store today without Starbucks- they reinvented the concept by borrowing from 'real' coffee bars and institutionalizing it broadly. I think their coffee sucks (their espresso shots are OK, and cheap), and in that sense, they 'invented' something.
_______________
*And rightly so, most average stiffs aren't going to invest in an audio processor, separate basic amps, high quality speakers, subwoofer systems, etc. for the TV. Even the HT 'receiver,' which isn't "serious gear," is more of an investment than most folks probably want to make to get surround for their TV. And, today, given the fact that most 20 somethings watch movies on their computers, the idea of a full-on HT system doesn't make any sense.
Did Starbucks invent the coffee shop?- I don't think so, but try and think of an espresso bar/coffee store today without Starbucks- they reinvented the concept by borrowing from 'real' coffee bars and institutionalizing it broadly. I think their coffee sucks (their espresso shots are OK, and cheap), and in that sense, they 'invented' something.
_______________
*And rightly so, most average stiffs aren't going to invest in an audio processor, separate basic amps, high quality speakers, subwoofer systems, etc. for the TV. Even the HT 'receiver,' which isn't "serious gear," is more of an investment than most folks probably want to make to get surround for their TV. And, today, given the fact that most 20 somethings watch movies on their computers, the idea of a full-on HT system doesn't make any sense.
I just googled Amar G. Bose in google patents and found a very long and impressive list of patents, starting in 1956. My curiosity focused on US 3582533 "Loudspeaker system" ( I think it is related to the 901 concept). I am just quoting a paragraph - nice to read it in a 1967 patent.
It is well known that loudspeakers perform differently in different rooms and perform in a room‘ differently from the performance in an anechoic chamber (a special suspended compartment surrounded by sound absorbing wedges of material so that the compartment is essentially free of sound echoes).
Nevertheless, not infrequently it is thought that anechoic chamber measurements of loudspeakers represent meaningful indicia of loudspeaker performance. In fact, recent work shows that anechoic chamber measurements provide less meaningful information for evaluating the performance of a loudspeaker in a listening room than previously thought.
The reason for this conclusion is that the hard surfaces provided by walls represent a portion of the loudspeaker sound radiating system whereas an anechoic chamber does not have such hard surfaces.
I have to say that after a very superficial look at his patents he seemed to be an inquisitive mind and a notorious scientist. Surely all in my humble and poorly uninformed opinion - I never researched on Dr. Bose before and I know he was not an audiophile idol!
It is well known that loudspeakers perform differently in different rooms and perform in a room‘ differently from the performance in an anechoic chamber (a special suspended compartment surrounded by sound absorbing wedges of material so that the compartment is essentially free of sound echoes).
Nevertheless, not infrequently it is thought that anechoic chamber measurements of loudspeakers represent meaningful indicia of loudspeaker performance. In fact, recent work shows that anechoic chamber measurements provide less meaningful information for evaluating the performance of a loudspeaker in a listening room than previously thought.
The reason for this conclusion is that the hard surfaces provided by walls represent a portion of the loudspeaker sound radiating system whereas an anechoic chamber does not have such hard surfaces.
I have to say that after a very superficial look at his patents he seemed to be an inquisitive mind and a notorious scientist. Surely all in my humble and poorly uninformed opinion - I never researched on Dr. Bose before and I know he was not an audiophile idol!
Fremer's article isn't ill-timed, it's mean-spirited, arrogant and completely tasteless. It is dancing on the man's grave. I'm not a fan of any of Bose consumer products, never have been. Not a fan of Fremer's either. But the latter just took a big hit from I think he's one of the most marked victims of expectation bias I've ever seen and is awfully impressed with himself beyond merit, to I think he's a callous ******* who doesn't deserve a voice in the media. YMMV.
Tim
Tim
Here is what I have to say about this. MF is either telling the truth or he isn't. If he is, then suing lots of people is part of Bose's legacy. MF only has to worry about Amar Bose showing up in his listening room and converting his stereo system into the sound of a Bose Wave radio.
Stop being so parochial Tim. If you read anything at all, you would know, and it's been reported in many places, that Fremer has passed with flying colors, several DBTs (as has Atkinson). In fact, Fremer is the perpetual thorn in the side of these people and despite him picking 5/5 in one test, he was labelled the lucky coin. So he's hardly the victim of expectation bias; but you are certainly guilty of bias.
I thought the Consumer Reports suit was public knowledge.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consumer_Reports (scroll to middle of page)
Also from Wikipedia:
Discussion of the quality of Bose products can sometimes elicit strong and polarized opinions. There are two major camps: those who see Bose as a maker of high-end equipment, and others who see Bose as a company that uses marketing to make extravagant claims for otherwise ordinary products.
In some non-audio related publications, Bose has been cited as a producer of "high-end audio" products.[3][26][27][28][56][57][58][59][60][61] Commenting on Bose's "high-end" market positioning among audiophiles (people concerned with the best possible sound), a PC Magazine product reviewer stated "not only is Bose equipment's sound quality not up to audiophile standards, but one could buy something that does meet these stringent requirements for the same price or, often, for less."[62] Bose has not been certified by THX for its home entertainment products.[63]
Bose's flagship 901 speaker system was criticized by Stereophile magazine in 1979.[64] In a review of the 901 system, stating that in the magazine's opinion, the system was unexceptional and unlikely to appeal to perfectionists with a developed taste in precise imaging, detail, and timbre; and that these shortcomings were an excessive price to pay for the improvement in impact and ambiance generated by the large proportion of reflected sound [to on-axis sound]. However, the author also stated that the system produced a more realistic resemblance of natural ambiance than any other speaker system.
A 2007 review in Audioholics online magazine reiterated that Bose was very expensive for its performance. Of the Bose Lifestyle V20 Home Theater System the reviewer wrote, "The Bose system is very expensive at nearly $2,000 and the sound quality isn't really any better than many other surround systems costing a third of the price... the smaller [bass] cones cannot reproduce lower tactile [sic] frequencies." The review includes an interview with a Best Buy sales manager who suggests from his experience that, despite his directing customers to a better-sounding and less expensive alternative, some customers insist on Bose.[65]
A 2005 market study published by Forrester Research reported that Bose's brand name was among several computer and consumer electronics brands most trusted by US consumers including Dell and Hewlett-Packard.[66]
Most recently, in July 2013, iLounge wrote about the Bose Soundlink Mini that "Audio quality is SoundLink Mini’s real trump card over Jambox and most—not all—of its competitors.... SoundLink Mini delivers much deeper bass and cleaner mid-bass at all volumes, suffering from noticeable distortion solely at the top of its volume scale." [1]
Legal action[edit]
Bose is recognized by audio industry professionals as a litigious company.[67][68] In 1981 Bose unsuccessfully sued the magazine Consumer Reports for libel. Consumer Reports reported in a review that the sound from the system that they reviewed "tended to wander about the room." Initially, the Federal District Court found that Consumer Reports "had published the false statement with knowledge that it was false or with reckless disregard of its truth or falsity" when it changed what the original reviewer wrote about the speakers in his pre-publication draft, that the sound tended to wander "along the wall." The Court of Appeals then reversed the trial court's ruling on liability, and the United States Supreme Court affirmed in a 6–3 vote in the case Bose Corp. v. Consumers Union of United States, Inc., finding that the statement was made without actual malice, and therefore there was no libel.[69][70][71] In an interview decades later Bose said "We had 37 people at the time. I gathered them in one room and said, 'If we don’t do anything, it will probably kill us. But if we do something, we have no credibility since we’re just a small company and we can’t do anything against this.' I said I think we oughtta do something. I wanted a vote. It was unanimous in favor of taking action. Little did we know it would take 14 years to go through the legal process."[13]
Bose sued Thiel Audio in the early 1990s to stop the audiophile loudspeaker maker from using ".2" (point two) at the end of its product model "CS2.2". To comply with Bose's trademark of ".2" associated with the Bose Model 2.2 product,[72] Thiel changed their model name to "CS2 2", substituting a space for the decimal point.[73] Bose did not trademark ".3" so in 1997 when Thiel introduced the next model in the series, they named it the "Thiel 2.3", advertising "the return of the decimal point."[74]
In 1996, Bose sued two subsidiaries of Harman International Industries—JBL and Infinity Systems—for violating a Bose patent on elliptical tuning ports on some loudspeaker products.[68] In 2000, the court determined that Harman was to cease using elliptical ports in its products, and Harman was to pay Bose $5.7 million in court costs.[68] Harman stopped using the disputed port design but appealed the financial decision. At the end of 2002 the earlier judgment was upheld but by this time Bose's court expenses had risen to $8 million, all to be paid by Harman.[72]
Bose was successful in blocking QSC Audio Products from trademarking the term "PowerWave" in connection with a certain QSC amplifier technology. In 2002, a court decided that the "Wave" trademark was worthy of greater protection because it was well-known on its own, even beyond its association with Bose.[75]
In 2003, Bose sued the non-profit electronics trade organization CEDIA for use of the "Electronic Lifestyles" trademark[67] which CEDIA had been using since 1997. Bose argued that the trademark interfered with its own "Lifestyle" trademark.[76] Bose had previously sued to protect its "Lifestyle" trademark beginning in 1996 with a success against Motorola and continuing with settlements against New England Stereo, Lifestyle Technologies, Optoma and AMX.[77] In May 2007, CEDIA won the lawsuit after the court determined Bose to be guilty of laches (unreasonable delays), and that Bose's assertions of fraud and likelihood of confusion were without merit.[78] CEDIA was criticized for spending nearly $1 million of its member's money on the lawsuit, and Bose was criticized for "unsportsmanlike action against its own trade association", according to Julie Jacobson of CE Pro magazine.
I think the suits were pure and simple about intimidation and making people think twice about reviewing Bose products. After all, any negative press would have sunk their advertising campaign. That was a brilliant strategy.
Now there's a company we should all look up to.
Yep. And the head of BJC just happened to be a lawyer and was just too happy to let Monster Cable know they were full of chit and they were ready to go to court.
IMO, Bose ( the company...not sure about the man) does the general public a MAJOR disservice. Why, because they propagate in the public an understanding that their inferior product is a superior audio system. To the uninformed, the gear is top-of-line and superior to other equipment. I have seen numerous Bose system's installed in ultra pricey homes by " designer's" that are of the belief ( due to the marketing dollar and nothing else
) that this gear is a) superior quality and b) designed to produce the true sound of music.
MF's comments were well taken, IMHO. Perhaps, he should have differentiated between the man and his company...IF that is possible. But, again IMHO, this company ( and probably/possibly it's founder) deserves all of the bad press that MF was dishing out.
) that this gear is a) superior quality and b) designed to produce the true sound of music.MF's comments were well taken, IMHO. Perhaps, he should have differentiated between the man and his company...IF that is possible. But, again IMHO, this company ( and probably/possibly it's founder) deserves all of the bad press that MF was dishing out.
I don't have to read anything but this board to read that being reported many times, Myles. Hearing something in DBTs (it is not pass/fail) does not make Fremer the ear of objectivity. Writing that article under the headline announcing Bose' death, however, does make him a jerk. MHO. YMMV.
Tim
I am astonished that what I would expect to be a thread on a great man can turn in such an accusing debate on his products.
I just went through the information available in the net about the Bose 901 - Julian Hirsh, Gordon Holt, Jeff Dorsay and many others reviewed it. There is some consistency on their reviews - this speaker is not for the perfectionist, but ideal for some type of listeners, that effectively prefer enjoying music with some semblance of natural ambiance.
BTW, if you manage a large company you have to go in litigious to protect your marketing and research assets. This happens all the time - remember that the Porsche 901 later became the famous 911 because Peugeot owned the copyright of model names with three numbers with a second figure of 0 in France!
I just went through the information available in the net about the Bose 901 - Julian Hirsh, Gordon Holt, Jeff Dorsay and many others reviewed it. There is some consistency on their reviews - this speaker is not for the perfectionist, but ideal for some type of listeners, that effectively prefer enjoying music with some semblance of natural ambiance.
BTW, if you manage a large company you have to go in litigious to protect your marketing and research assets. This happens all the time - remember that the Porsche 901 later became the famous 911 because Peugeot owned the copyright of model names with three numbers with a second figure of 0 in France!
I would replace the words "make him" with the word "confirm he is".
How good is ears are (nor aren't') is not the issue. He is incredibly full of himself.
- Status
Similar threads
