DIYbanter - View Single Post

Trevor Wilson

On 20/05/2017 10:09 AM, wrote:
"**I did not say that ALL Luxman integrated amps used such a
system. Just
their low end ones. I know of no amplifier that employs pre/main
connectors that does not disable the the tone controls when it is
used as a power amp only. "

Seems to be a misunderstanding here. If the tone controls are in the
power amp feedback loop then they would not affect the pre out of
course. Whether this is desirable or not is up in the air. By
disabled when used as a power amp I assume you mean bypassed, because
regular pre outs are after the tone controls.

**There is no misunderstanding on my part. Any amplifier that uses tone
controls as part of the power amp section (and Luxman is the only
manufacturer IME to do so - And I have serviced pretty much every
Marantz product made since the late 1960s - I was Marantz service
manager in Australia for several years) will not have pre/main
connections fitted.

"**If you think an Acoustimess„¢ system can EVER sound good, then
you need
to get out a lot more. Bose Acoustimess„¢ are absolute crap. There is
a huge, deep and wide hole in the frequency response of the system,
centred around 200Hz, the woofer module (it cannot, EVER, be called
a subwoofer) "

No disagreement here, but this was in conjunction with another
system. Together they sounded good. It was a corner situated system.
The Bose sats were on top of the big speakers and the bass module was
way back in the corner.

**Not a snowball's chance in Hell that such a system would provide a
credible high fidelity result. Certainly, someone with a poorly educated
ear might think it sounds impressive. But good (ie: HI FI), not a chance.

Best thing Bose made was the wave radio, they don't sound all that
great but for their size the do pretty well. Convenient, the customer
doesn't have to hook anything up. The sound is adequate for quite a
few people.

**WAY too expensive. Sound was OK. Just. The best two products Bose ever
did was their 'sound bar' and their desk top computer sound system. Both
were easy to use, sounded good and were reasonably well built and
presented. Everything else is ****.

But when you get like 901s, who the **** brainiac got the idea to use
nine speakers and face eight of them away from the listener ? We
strive to have clear sound, to have loudspeakers that sound almost
like the best of headphones but on a larger scale. Some people like
Bose but I think he was a snake oil salesman.

**Of course. The entire premise was faulty to any sane thinking human
(ie: Non-Trump voters).

All this "ambiance", that is your room, you DON'T WANT THAT. You want
the ambiance in the recording. Not your room.

Another good thing Bose made were my Mother's speakers. Smaller than
a toaster but shake the floor. I can't even get a model number, they
were some kind of special order I bought from where I worked at the
time.

Other than that I don't have much use for Bose. In my buddy's system
they served well as tweeters.

**They don't even do a good job at that. The cone area is far too large
to enable decent sound quality without beaming.

People forget that Amar Bose was the wealthiest person in the audio
business. By a very considerable margin. He got that way, by building
stuff as cheap as possible and selling it for as much as possible and
ploughing huge amounts into promotion. People forget that when Bose
first introduced surround sound systems, Bose was too cheap to pay Dolby
Labs to use their ubiquitous systems and, instead, developed their own,
incompatible, ****ty sounding one.

We must NEVER make excuses for Bose. ****ty products, ****ty company.

--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au