Slashdot Mirror


Bose's iPod SoundDock Reviewed

LabRat007 writes "Playlist has a review of the Bose SoundDock, the desktop speaker system for the iPod that Bose has lately been promoting the holy hell out of. The long and the short is that it sounds great--better than any other iPod-specific speaker system--but for $300 is lacking in many features even cheaper setups have, like the ability to actually use the SoundDock as a syncing dock. Oh, and it has no line-in, so you can't use the SoundDock as output for anything else, like a PC or laptop, for instance." It's not quite as cute, but I like my Cambridge Soundworks Model 88 (now superseded by the Model 730) as a laptop loudspeaker system.

16 of 49 comments (clear)

  1. In the professional audio world by Mononoke · · Score: 3, Informative
    Bose is an acronym for Buy Other Sound Equipment.

    Most of what you are paying for when buying Bose is the marketing.

    Not quite as bad as Monster Cable, but close.

    --
    NetInfo connection failed for server 127.0.0.1/local
    1. Re:In the professional audio world by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 4, Informative
      > Bose is an acronym for Buy Other Sound Equipment.
      > Most of what you are paying for when buying Bose is the marketing.

      Hehe. What's that tagline that us audiophiles use:
      "All the highs, none of the lows, must be Bose!"
      Gee, I wonder why they NEVER give tech specs on any of their speakers. Not anything fancy like SN ratio, but even the BASIC info such as frequency range! Maybe because they are CRAP and OVER_RATED speakers.
      See the speaker forumforum at avsforum if you want MULTIPLE confirmations on how bad they sound.

      Monster cable isn't THAT bad.... the rule of thumb is to spend 10% of your Home Theater / Speaker cost on cables... so MC is'n't that over-inflated. It's not great, but it's better that Rat Shack.

      BTW, if anyone is serious about GOOD video cable quality, check out the Nordost line.

      Peace
      --
      While killing all the lawyers would make many people EXCEEDINGLY HAPPY (myself included)
      it would NOT _SOLVE_ the problem -- because the problem is the face in the mirror.
      If you don't like the laws, then DO something about it, or shut up,
      because simply bitching accomplishes absolutely nothing.
    2. Re:In the professional audio world by commodoresloat · · Score: 2, Informative
      BTW, if anyone is serious about GOOD video cable quality, check out the Nordost line.

      Only if you're also serious about paying $2,000-4,000 per meter!

    3. Re:In the professional audio world by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      Well, pro audio is about the "maker" side (as opposed to the "user" side), which creates equipment that allows you to judge whether a recording "translates" well to a wider range of different usage scenarios, like home hifis, car stereos, radio clocks etc.

      These studio monitors basically show as many flaws of your music as possible. It's quite funny to listen to your favorite recordings on such things only to sometimes hear all kinds of badly mixed elements etc. :-)

      The predominant brand here is Genelec. Get some 1030A,1031A or 1032A (only depending on room size) and have some fun. Or go with the Mackie HR824, which can be found in virtually every big studio just because they always sound the same, are not as expensive, easier on the ears, and it's just a standard on their own.

      Cheers!

    4. Re:In the professional audio world by nathanh · · Score: 2, Informative
      Monster cable isn't THAT bad.... the rule of thumb is to spend 10% of your Home Theater / Speaker cost on cables... so MC is'n't that over-inflated. It's not great, but it's better that Rat Shack.

      Whose rule of thumb is that? So if my amp costs $2000, the speakers cost $3500, the player costs $500, you're telling me I need $600 worth of cables? What drugs are you smoking?

      Heavy gauge shielded copper for the speakers is less than $2/m. Gold plated connectors are $3 each. Decent interconnects (prebuilt, not worth building your own) are $40 each. I'd be struggling to spend even $100 on the cabling for the entire system. That's less than 2% of the entire system.

      I believe in the "half on your speakers, half on everything else" rule of thumb but 10% just for cables sounds like a Monster Cable Marketing Myth.

    5. Re:In the professional audio world by dwvanstone · · Score: 2, Informative

      Bose is actually named for its 1964 founder (and current MIT professor of EE & CS) Dr. Amar Bose. I agree that what you're buying is marketing, but I don't want the parent's acronym (humorous as it is) to be labelled as informative.

  2. For $100 by commodoresloat · · Score: 4, Informative

    Get yourself a set of Roland MA-8 Powered Studio Monitors. They are small and simple, with a big sound for such a small speaker. They're meant to be reference monitors so they have a nice clean sound; I haven't heard the Bose but I can almost guarantee you'll like the Rolands at least as well if not better. Only slightly less portable than the Bose. And you can plug anything into them that has an RCA-style adapter.

  3. Looks familiar by the+quick+brown+fox · · Score: 2, Informative

    Looks like it's--let's say "inspired by"--the Bang & Olufsen BeoSound 1, which is itself no paragon of hifi value.

  4. Cambridge Bose by mjc_w · · Score: 3, Informative

    Cambridge also has a model 740

    (http://www.cambridgesoundworks.com/store/catego ry .cgi?category=aud_radio&item=c174rczzz)

    for $300 that has a cd player that can also play mp3 cds.

    --
    This is the Constitution.This is the Constitution under the Bush administration. Any questions?
  5. In home audio... by downward+dog · · Score: 5, Informative

    (I'll answer the question for home audio, not pro audio, because Bose makes home audio equipment.) There is no predominate brand, but here are a few that are generally highly-regarded and reasonably priced: Paradigm Magnepan Martan Logan NHT And two brands that audio snobs might look down on, but actually produce a few decent speakers: Polk Infinity In particular, the Polk RTi28/RTi38 is considered one of the best low-priced speaker sets around. I think you can get a pair for $200 or so, and a center channel (for home theater) for $150. Great sound and great construction. I have run the Polk RT series for about 5 years, and I've been happy with them (though I now have the itch for something in the $1000+ range...). Hope this helps.

  6. Re:It's called mid-range... by dgatwood · · Score: 4, Informative
    Depends on what came with the speakers. I can trivially put together a system that will show a huge difference in sound between a pair of cables. Take a 10 AWG super-heavy-duty extension cord, cut the ends off and hook it up to one set of speakers. Take a puny piece of 22 AWG speaker cable (typical of some inexpensive home stereo systems with small speakers) and hook it up to an identical pair of speakers. Switch between the two. :-D

    As a general rule, for speaker cables, bigger is better. The bigger the cable, the greater the distance at which you can drive a given load without a voltage drop. Because voltage drop causes a disproportionately large drop in the lower frequencies, the smaller the cable, the thinner the sound. The difference between 10-12 AWG and 18-24 AWG is noticeable over a sufficient distance.

    Monster cable comes in at 14 AWG, which is heavier than average for a speaker cable, so I'm not surprised if someone can tell a difference between that and a smaller cable. That said, the audible difference is likely the gauge, not the construction.

    Some related reading material....

    Frankly, if you're measuring the distortion of a speaker cable, you have way too much money and should give me some of it. :-)

    --

    Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

  7. Re:isn't it kind of wasteful? by SuperBanana · · Score: 3, Informative
    isn't it a bit of a waste to spend to much on a set of speakers almost in vain to reproduced already degraded music...?

    It's a bit of a waste to spend money on Bose equipment. Usually audiophiles are stuck up pontificating snobs, but on Bose, they're right- Bose's technique is to use cheaply made speakers and EQ the hell out of them. Why make a $20 driver, when you can buy a $2 driver and for 50 cents of electronics, make it boom and squeak enough to fool a casual listener?

    Buy a set of decent headphones like Grado's SR-60s, or pick up some CSW speakers on clearance. The older brands made by Henry Kloss's companies prior to CSW are often a steal as well, though you'll need an amp of course.

  8. Re:In a similar vein (ot) by commodoresloat · · Score: 2, Informative

    I've heard the KRKs - don't remember which ones but they were about $400 for the pair - and they were great. I recommend the ones I use, the M-Audio BX5 which are $300 a pair. Not mobile and light like the MA-8s but for your price range they have terrific sound and put out 75 watts as opposed to the DM-20s 20 watts. I also have the SP-5Bs on my turntables and they are basically the same as the bx5s but they allow you to adjust the direction of the tweeter which can be useful in critical listening environments. If you're recording these are nice monitors for the price. I've listened to $1000+ Event monitors and they do sound much nicer; if I had the money and wanted a recording studio I would probably spend it on those, but for $300 a pair these suit my needs fine.

  9. better review on ipodlounge by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    as always, ipodlounge's review debunks the bose myth. http://www.ipodlounge.com/reviews.php?id=P5445

  10. Re:It's called mid-range... by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 2, Informative

    > You guys end up telling us to spend too much money on the wrong things.

    What is the most expensive speakers or video system you have actually spent some time with??

    Once you've heard & seen a GOOD system, then you know where the priorities need to be adjusted.

    This isn't a discussion about crap speakers less then $500.

    Why in the earth that someone would spend a few thousand dollars on getting mid-range gear, and skimp on the cables is beyond me. If you can afford the $3500 speakers/TV, you can afford to spend $300 to get GOOD cables.

    I spent $4000 on the plasma. Spending $400 on two video cables (Component & S-Video) WAS a noticable improvement over the $40 cables.

    > 10% on cables!!

    The trick is how to maximize the quality/price ratio. I came up with the 10% rule, because it was worked out VERY well for me. Since it is a rule, it provides a STARTING point -- it's not the word of God.

    I probably shoud revise that rule with 2 clauses:

    1) This price is based STRICTLY on the Video, and Speakers ONLY. This does not include the receiver, players, and other gizmos.

    2) Between 1% and 10% is a good price range. Oviously the "real" serious audiophiles with the golden ears, will spend more. Hey everyone has a hobby, and I can understand their need for quality, but the rest of, a good price point helps prioritize the budget.

    > If you're only spending $500-1000 on a system, just use the cables that come with the speakers..

    I definatey agree. The 1%-10% would have us in the $5-$50 and $10 to $100 price range.

    Peace

    --
    Life is about noticing patterns.

  11. Re:JBL OnStage by DanFrakes · · Score: 2, Informative
    I stopped by the Mac store to buy the Altec Lansing inMotion speakers after reading a good review of them. They had the the JBL OnStage and it has better bass and nicer controls.
    Having tested both side by side, the inMotion has better bass. It also has a remote, can be powered off batteries, and is truly portable. On the other hand, I agree about the On Stage's controls -- the touch-sensitive buttons are very cool. It also has better treble and a more "open" sound, although sometimes the treble can be a bit bright.