"Executive" Stereos

[bordeaaj]

If anyone does happen to need a boost in reception a great antenna is the award winning Magnum Dynalab Silver Ribbon Antenna SR-100. It's supposed to be the very best high-efficiency indoor antenna for the money. It's only about $35 and matches the retro look of the Tivoli really well...though it may be a little too retro and funky to meet the infamous WAF aka Woman Acceptance Factor. You tune it by pulling up or pushing down on the knob at the top of the center extension loop (which is a loop of metal ribbon just like the sides though you can't quite see that in this picture...it's not a solid rod) which causes the side loops to shorten or elongate as needed. Kind of weird but it really helps grabs the weak signals if you need it. It works very well as a television antenna too.

 

[Michael]

Bose! Great sound great value period.

 

[HlSheppard]

While I've got a few Bose items I don't know if I'd agree with them being anywhere close to a great value...

I have an older Cambridge Soundworks model 88CD on the way, along with a Tivoli Model one. We'll see how the Bose stacks up this week.

 

[bordeaaj]

Bose! Great sound great value period.

The consensus from just about every audiophile forum I've been on agrees that while the Bose sound quality is indeed great (if not excellent) there are systems that sound as good or better for far less. That said, I sure wouldn't turn down anything by Bose if someone handed it to me.

 

[ada8356]

I picked up one of the Model Ones yesterday.

It's a sharp looking, nice sounding unit.

However, I find the AM reception to be pretty poor. I'm on the 21st floor and have the unit on my desk by a window.

Any suggestions?

 

[sparkchaser]

I picked up one of the Model Ones yesterday.

It's a sharp looking, nice sounding unit.

However, I find the AM reception to be pretty poor. I'm on the 21st floor and have the unit on my desk by a window.

Any suggestions?

Are you using the internal or external antenna? Is the back switch selected to the corresponding antenna you are using?

 

[ada8356]

Are you using the internal or external antenna? Is the back switch selected to the corresponding antenna you are using?

The included external antenna is only for FM and the toggle switch in the back is only related to the external FM antenna.

I can get an additional external antenna for the AM which I may try, however I found that turning the unit 45 degrees gets me a lot better AM reception... go figure. So I just kinda re-arranged my desk and moved the radio to a different location so that it doesn't look funny in that orientation.

 

[ouch]

The consensus from just about every audiophile forum I've been on agrees that while the Bose sound quality is indeed great (if not excellent) there are systems that sound as good or better for far less. That said, I sure wouldn't turn down anything by Bose if someone handed it to me.

When did excellent become better than great?

 

[sparkchaser]

The included external antenna is only for FM and the toggle switch in the back is only related to the external FM antenna.

I can get an additional external antenna for the AM which I may try, however I found that turning the unit 45 degrees gets me a lot better AM reception... go figure. So I just kinda re-arranged my desk and moved the radio to a different location so that it doesn't look funny in that orientation.

Didn't realize that.

At least you got to rearrange your office.

 

[peacefrog]

When did excellent become better than great?

About the same time audiophiles began saying Bose sound quality is great.

 

[HlSheppard]

Received my Cambridge Model 88Cd today...

Sound quality on FM is MOST impressive. Rich - nice bass without being "boomy."

I've had results ALL over the map with different CD's though... Some play quiet (VERY quiet). Some play and you hear "interference" noise. Some CD's don't play at all (Mp3?). That's been a bit vexing. All in all - nice tuner sensitivity and nice sound, although I'm still playing with it.

The Tivoli model One should be here shortly in a day or two.

 

[bordeaaj]

When did excellent become better than great?

About the same time audiophiles began saying Bose sound quality is great.

Poor>Fair>Good>Great>Excellent>Awesome!!! I agree with you...but I am not out to jump on the back of someone who obviously loves his Bose system either. I'll leave that to others more qualified. Admittedly I'm no expert but I have, in fact, visited and belonged to more than one audiophile forum while researching for my own system. I just meant to politely respond to Michael that when it comes to value Bose systems are very expensive for the sound quality...I was trying not to offend but what the heck, right? Although highly critical of Bose value:quality ratio, according to the forums I've been to Bose systems do sound Great when compared to much of the popular stuff you hear out there, ie: Technics, Cerwin Vega, Pioneer, Kenwood, Sony, etc which I will assume the masses would consider Good (subjective, I know). Bose Systems are nicer than that. That's why I said I wouldn't turn one down if it was given to me. But I also know they are well known for being a major big name ripoff. When taken in context of value, what you get for the price is apparently horrible. As always, ignorance can be costly. The links below explain Bose criticisms pretty well. One can do a little research and use the same amount of money to put together an Excellent, maybe even Awesome, stereo system. Hope that explains my position a little better without coming across as a complete ***!!! I'll leave that to the "experts" as well as there often seems to be a direct correlation. Or maybe I should just observe Hanlon's razor.

http://www.intellexual.net/bose.html
http://www.intellexual.net/speaker5.html

 

[peacefrog]

Hope that explains my position a little better without coming across as a complete ***!!!

It does, and I probably came off a bit mean-spirited. I agree with your comments, but I would say that Technics, etc. are not audiophile brands. In comparison to those, Bose may indeed sound great. But your main point is right on: there are better values than Bose.

 

[bordeaaj]

It does, and I probably came off a bit mean-spirited. I agree with your comments, but I would say that Technics, etc. are not audiophile brands. In comparison to those, Bose may indeed sound great. But your main point is right on: there are better values than Bose.

 

[ouch]

I'm not looking for an argument, but the notion that excellent is a higher order descriptor than great is absurd. Better than 99 out of 100 people will think that great refers to something better than excellent.

Having dabbled in audio gear for over thirty years, I can say without hesitation that the finest value, across their entire line, is provided by Mapnepan speakers. I've had the Tympani IV's, 3.6's, 20.1's, and others, but I never cease to be amazed by my 1.6QR's.

 

[Taz]

I'm not looking for an argument, but the notion that excellent is a higher order descriptor than great is absurd. Better than 99 out of 100 people will think that great refers to something better than excellent.

Having dabbled in audio gear for over thirty years, I can say without hesitation that the finest value, across their entire line, is provided by Mapnepan speakers. I've had the Tympani IV's, 3.6's, 20.1's, and others, but I never cease to be amazed by my 1.6QR's.

Do not about that Ouch I would but my ML's against them

 

[castlecraver]

I'm not looking for an argument, but the notion that excellent is a higher order descriptor than great is absurd. Better than 99 out of 100 people will think that great refers to something better than excellent.

Not absurd. I'd consider "excellent" > "great," in addition to the couple posters here. So its at most 97 out of 100

 

[mozart]

I'm not looking for an argument, but the notion that excellent is a higher order descriptor than great is absurd. Better than 99 out of 100 people will think that great refers to something better than excellent.

I would say it's the other way around: 99 out of 100 people will think that excellent refers to something better than great. You may be that one At least it's now 96/100. Best - MM

 

[bordeaaj]

Not absurd. I'd consider "excellent" > "great," in addition to the couple posters here. So its at most 97 out of 100

I would say it's the other way around: 99 out of 100 people will think that excellent refers to something better than great. You may be that one At least it's now 96/100. Best - MM

With all due respect, being a well-schooled post grad with a pretty good grasp of the English language as well as having dabbled in audio gear for over thirty years myself, I strongly agree with castlecraver and mozart. But it is admittedly a crude scale and we could argue semantics all day long, couldn't we. You have to know your audience and address them appropriately. Since this is a shaving forum, not an audiophile forum, the statement was a generality encompassing the entire universe of stereo equipment. Taking such an audience into account, an attempt to limit comparators to just audiophile brands, which by definition would include only those models ranking in the Awesome category of my crude scale, is what could truly be called absurd. You simply can't have audiophile level equipment without the non-audiophile equipment to compare and contrast them against. The audiophile forums members even recognize that...that's where I got this information. And to make such a strong statement about value across the entire line of Mapnepan speakers, as fine a value as they may be, damages your credibility as an audiophile. You risk stepping over the line into fanboy territory...you, yourself, prefer them so obviously they are, without hesitation, the single finest value on the market. Go ahead and make the same statement on an audiophile forum and you'll see what I mean. You'll be questioned by true audiophiles who may disagree, offer several alternatives, and who have the ability back up their arguments with real numbers right off the top of their heads. Fun discussion though, hopefully no hard feelings!!!

 

[catatonic]

Jeeze folks. Sounds like some folks forgot to have their morning happy beans.

Bose is what it is: a company with some interesting ideas, but relies on audio trickery (psycho-acoustics) entirely, instead of using better drivers.

Given, this line of thinking is essential for their acoustimass speakers...but their 901s could have been made far, FAR better if they did what Advent did in the mid-90s car audio field and made time-aligned coaxial speakers to replace the full-range drivers used in the 901 (I think KEF is following Advent's footsteps in this now). This is just my ranting though....being as picky as I am about audio.

Really, I tend to reccomend Wharfedale speakers to people who want to get good sound at Bose prices.