Game already happened .. no fires .. lots of garbage though ..
The new Bose killer? JBL Eon One Compact
- Thread starter B-Sharp
- Start date
Now that it appears to be shipping, just saw that one of the dealers has the JBL Eon One Compact for $436 .. looks enticing ....
This, unfortunately, is very true. This quote is from Audioholics - "In the early 1990s, the Bose AM-5 held some 30% of the US speaker market. Not Bose the company. Just the AM-5." That's right, a speaker system only slightly better than a Kazoo accounted for 30% of the US market!
How could that be? R & D, Engineering? Nah, MARKETING!
Someone recently told me my iPhone wasn't nearly as good as their Android phone, but I just payed more because of Apple marketing and their stores.
With the am-5, It absolutely couldn't be they had some happy customers that referred anyone?
It couldn't be that they had a good 20-30 year reputation?
It couldn't be their gauruntee, could it?
Somehow, they couldn't market their TV. That bombed. Seems weird if they were so good at marketing bad products. How could a product not be successful?
Not only did these marketers get people to buy a kazoo like product, they got them to pay a premium for it.
That's great marketing.
They were so successful, that 30 years later, people still see it as a premium brand. Now we are at amazing marketing level
If this can all be done with just marketing, why didn't Kmart, Sears, Compaq, Enron, blackberry, or Therenos just hire a better marketing team? Seems silly to lose 10's of billions when better marketing could solve it.
Nothing wrong with not liking a brand or product. So many other wonderful options. But just because someone doesn't see the attraction, to write off the success of major companies like Bose and Apple to just good marketing of bad products makes as much sense as Kanye West telling people God made him the greatest artist ever
No. 3: The Bose Acoustimass AM-5
We’re talking about influence here, not personal sound preference or whether you like a company’s advertising. Please hold all those comments about, “They don’t produce real bass below 60Hz,” or “There’s an acoustic hole between 120-200Hz so big you could drive a Mack Truck through it, because the sats and the sub never meet up,” or, “The sats aren’t a real tweeter and they give up the ghost by 13kHz.”
All of that may be true, but one thing is for sure: It’s all irrelevant.
The Bose Acoustimass AM5As far as influence is concerned, the Bose AM-5 is tough to top. Recognizing the way people wanted (and didn’t want!) speakers to look in their homes in the 1980s and building upon well-known and well-understood acoustic principles of frequency-dependent directionality, localizability and masking behavior, Bose correctly identified and predicted a fundamental change in the way people wanted to use and interact with speakers in their homes. The dorm room Baby Boomers were all grown up now. They were buying homes. They were starting families. Large Advents on cinder-block stands in a dorm wouldn’t suffice any longer. Now, all of a sudden, appearance mattered as much as, if not more than, great sound. The sub-sat system solved this dilemma and introduced an element of “cool” to the equation: All the sound, including the bass, seemed to come from those diminutive twisty little sat cubes. That became the new “Look at this” factor.
AM-5 sales took off, and the old wooden coffin boxes of yesteryear were left standing in the dust. The age of dominance for the traditional box speaker was over for good. That’s influence for you.
Bose showed the speakers industry the way to do sub-satellite systems.
The AM-5 did something else of extraordinary importance: It showed the speaker industry the way to do subwoofer-satellite systems. So-called “good” manufacturers introduced many really excellent-sounding systems, like the Boston Acoustics Sub Sat 6 and 7, and the Cambridge SoundWorks Ensemble systems (Kloss, again!) But even more important than this, the AM-5 showed the industry how a subwoofer-satellite system could make a home theater system feasible and workable in a normal living room. When Dolby Pro Logic multi-channel receivers became available in 1990, home theater would not have been anywhere near as successful and widely accepted by the mainstream buyer if the consumer had to somehow convince his wife to allow five big wooden boxes to be strewn around the living room in a visually-objectionable manner. But a hideaway subwoofer and five small, easy-to-place, barely-visible sats? No problem. The AM-5—for all its acoustic shortcomings—showed the industry how to do it.
At one point in the early 1990s an audio industry research firm reported that the AM-5 held some 30% of the US speaker market. Not Bose as a company. Just the AM-5. That’s the dictionary definition of “influence.”
All credit to AudioHolics, plus, thank your wife.
We’re talking about influence here, not personal sound preference or whether you like a company’s advertising. Please hold all those comments about, “They don’t produce real bass below 60Hz,” or “There’s an acoustic hole between 120-200Hz so big you could drive a Mack Truck through it, because the sats and the sub never meet up,” or, “The sats aren’t a real tweeter and they give up the ghost by 13kHz.”
All of that may be true, but one thing is for sure: It’s all irrelevant.
The Bose Acoustimass AM5
AM-5 sales took off, and the old wooden coffin boxes of yesteryear were left standing in the dust. The age of dominance for the traditional box speaker was over for good. That’s influence for you.
Bose showed the speakers industry the way to do sub-satellite systems.
The AM-5 did something else of extraordinary importance: It showed the speaker industry the way to do subwoofer-satellite systems. So-called “good” manufacturers introduced many really excellent-sounding systems, like the Boston Acoustics Sub Sat 6 and 7, and the Cambridge SoundWorks Ensemble systems (Kloss, again!) But even more important than this, the AM-5 showed the industry how a subwoofer-satellite system could make a home theater system feasible and workable in a normal living room. When Dolby Pro Logic multi-channel receivers became available in 1990, home theater would not have been anywhere near as successful and widely accepted by the mainstream buyer if the consumer had to somehow convince his wife to allow five big wooden boxes to be strewn around the living room in a visually-objectionable manner. But a hideaway subwoofer and five small, easy-to-place, barely-visible sats? No problem. The AM-5—for all its acoustic shortcomings—showed the industry how to do it.
At one point in the early 1990s an audio industry research firm reported that the AM-5 held some 30% of the US speaker market. Not Bose as a company. Just the AM-5. That’s the dictionary definition of “influence.”
All credit to AudioHolics, plus, thank your wife.
No. 3: The Bose Acoustimass AM-5
We’re talking about influence here, not personal sound preference or whether you like a company’s advertising. Please hold all those comments about, “They don’t produce real bass below 60Hz,” or “There’s an acoustic hole between 120-200Hz so big you could drive a Mack Truck through it, because the sats and the sub never meet up,” or, “The sats aren’t a real tweeter and they give up the ghost by 13kHz.”
All of that may be true, but one thing is for sure: It’s all irrelevant.
As far as influence is concerned, the Bose AM-5 is tough to top. Recognizing the way people wanted (and didn’t want!) speakers to look in their homes in the 1980s and building upon well-known and well-understood acoustic principles of frequency-dependent directionality, localizability and masking behavior, Bose correctly identified and predicted a fundamental change in the way people wanted to use and interact with speakers in their homes. The dorm room Baby Boomers were all grown up now. They were buying homes. They were starting families. Large Advents on cinder-block stands in a dorm wouldn’t suffice any longer. Now, all of a sudden, appearance mattered as much as, if not more than, great sound. The sub-sat system solved this dilemma and introduced an element of “cool” to the equation: All the sound, including the bass, seemed to come from those diminutive twisty little sat cubes. That became the new “Look at this” factor.
The Bose Acoustimass AM5
AM-5 sales took off, and the old wooden coffin boxes of yesteryear were left standing in the dust. The age of dominance for the traditional box speaker was over for good. That’s influence for you.
Bose showed the speakers industry the way to do sub-satellite systems.
The AM-5 did something else of extraordinary importance: It showed the speaker industry the way to do subwoofer-satellite systems. So-called “good” manufacturers introduced many really excellent-sounding systems, like the Boston Acoustics Sub Sat 6 and 7, and the Cambridge SoundWorks Ensemble systems (Kloss, again!) But even more important than this, the AM-5 showed the industry how a subwoofer-satellite system could make a home theater system feasible and workable in a normal living room. When Dolby Pro Logic multi-channel receivers became available in 1990, home theater would not have been anywhere near as successful and widely accepted by the mainstream buyer if the consumer had to somehow convince his wife to allow five big wooden boxes to be strewn around the living room in a visually-objectionable manner. But a hideaway subwoofer and five small, easy-to-place, barely-visible sats? No problem. The AM-5—for all its acoustic shortcomings—showed the industry how to do it.
At one point in the early 1990s an audio industry research firm reported that the AM-5 held some 30% of the US speaker market. Not Bose as a company. Just the AM-5. That’s the dictionary definition of “influence.”
All credit to AudioHolics, plus, thank your wife.
Ahhh...so product design and R&D DID have something to do with it? Not just marketing?
Why on earth would a company want to design a sound system that a woman might also like to have in her home? Isn't that the definition of research and development?
Last edited:
Bose designs, produces and sells many popular products, I own a few, quite a few. I use(d) & own(ed) Bose Pro gear.
They seem to be priced correctly and of sufficient build quality, are reliable and perform with enough sufficiency that they are a profitable company.
They are sufficient...they do what they do, nothing more, nothing less.
What Bose does not do is make pro sound equipment that has ever satisfied the more discerning ears of audio professionals. No audiophile that I know of prefers the sound of Bose over other professional audio gear, NOT ONE. I concur.
2ea.hizown...carry on.
They seem to be priced correctly and of sufficient build quality, are reliable and perform with enough sufficiency that they are a profitable company.
They are sufficient...they do what they do, nothing more, nothing less.
What Bose does not do is make pro sound equipment that has ever satisfied the more discerning ears of audio professionals. No audiophile that I know of prefers the sound of Bose over other professional audio gear, NOT ONE. I concur.
2ea.hizown...carry on.
That's true with JBL, EV, Peavey, etc. as well. I don't know of any professional sound person that picked those brands because they "sound better" .. they are picked because they are reliable, consistent and sound good enough.
It's been well documented over the years I'm no defender of Bose but honestly to a true audiophile they have no interest in any pro gear simply because NONE of it sounds good as what they can get elsewhere. Pro gear is not designed to be audiophile quality it's meant to serve a purpose. That being said everyone has a preference to their ears and from a technical standpoint some are better than others it's up to each of us to pick our poison
My L1 when I had it, properly setup sounded better than many of the products I auditioned, including the one I ended up replacing it with, DB Tech ES1203. Honestly, now when I go to weddings and hear the typical PRX, K series, EKX, I think it sounds pretty muddy.
I agree that there generally is no replacement for displacement in just about every aspect of life, and BOSE has many products in the Touring line that will wipe the floor of high-end JBL products as well. They are also about the same size. BOSE has new Touring Products, and are heavily marketing their products to compete with JBL, EV, Meyer, Danley, l-acoustics, etc.
Just have to know the limitations of each of the products.
In the last 2 years, there have been several Touring acts and large stadium replacing their line arrays with the new Bose Stuff.
Has anyone ever worked with the VRX tops. They sound awful but super loud. I use them a few times a year for big shows, and can't stand how harsh they are. Oddly enough, I really the VRX subs.
I still think Meyer sounds better than any of them, but you certainly pay for it.
As said above, to each their own. So nice to have so many awesome and good sounding options these days.
I agree that there generally is no replacement for displacement in just about every aspect of life, and BOSE has many products in the Touring line that will wipe the floor of high-end JBL products as well. They are also about the same size. BOSE has new Touring Products, and are heavily marketing their products to compete with JBL, EV, Meyer, Danley, l-acoustics, etc.
Just have to know the limitations of each of the products.
In the last 2 years, there have been several Touring acts and large stadium replacing their line arrays with the new Bose Stuff.
Has anyone ever worked with the VRX tops. They sound awful but super loud. I use them a few times a year for big shows, and can't stand how harsh they are. Oddly enough, I really the VRX subs.
I still think Meyer sounds better than any of them, but you certainly pay for it.
As said above, to each their own. So nice to have so many awesome and good sounding options these days.
Last edited:
All I know is I'm extremely happy with my gear for the events I do. I can't say how they compare to other stuff because I've never compared it to anything since. When I'm very happy with gear, I don't spend time doing comparisons.
For example, have been extremely satisfied with my Sennheiser ew series wireless mics. So I've spent no time comparing them with other mics.
I too, love that there's so many good choices out there today. Everyone should use what works best for them
For example, have been extremely satisfied with my Sennheiser ew series wireless mics. So I've spent no time comparing them with other mics.
I too, love that there's so many good choices out there today. Everyone should use what works best for them
I have no issue running those brands, have owned multiple JBL speakers, and would certainly gravitate to them in a production or heavy duty use need, but not because they are the "best" sounding gear, but because they sound good and they are reliable and durable. As mentioned, if I want "great" sounding gear, compression horns and large diameter midrange drivers are just not conducive to audiophile quality sound.
10% off at Sweetwater until Dec 2nd. A few other JBL speakers also 10% off.
JBL EON One Compact Portable PA Speaker with Rechargeable Battery
120-watt All-in-one PA System with 8" LF Driver, 1" HF Driver, 4-channel Mixer, 2 Microphone Preamps, DSP, Bluetooth, and 12-hour Rechargeable Battery
www.sweetwater.com
The argument between iPhone and Android will never go away because both will claim they're better than the other. Both are great in their own right. It's just a matter of what you prefer. Some like JBL and some like Yamaha. It's about what you like. Some like Bose and some say their stuff is way over priced. At any rate they are still around and still going strong.Someone recently told me my iPhone wasn't nearly as good as their Android phone, but I just payed more because of Apple marketing and their stores.
With the am-5, It absolutely couldn't be they had some happy customers that referred anyone?
It couldn't be that they had a good 20-30 year reputation?
It couldn't be their gauruntee, could it?
Somehow, they couldn't market their TV. That bombed. Seems weird if they were so good at marketing bad products. How could a product not be successful?
Not only did these marketers get people to buy a kazoo like product, they got them to pay a premium for it.
That's great marketing.
They were so successful, that 30 years later, people still see it as a premium brand. Now we are at amazing marketing level
If this can all be done with just marketing, why didn't Kmart, Sears, Compaq, Enron, blackberry, or Therenos just hire a better marketing team? Seems silly to lose 10's of billions when better marketing could solve it.
Nothing wrong with not liking a brand or product. So many other wonderful options. But just because someone doesn't see the attraction, to write off the success of major companies like Bose and Apple to just good marketing of bad products makes as much sense as Kanye West telling people God made him the greatest artist ever
I also have the S! pro and a JBL Eon One Pro. I'm thinking about using them for ceremonies. If I can get my testicular fortitude up. I'm trying to make it all lighter do you happen to have photos of your setup and how many folks do you feel this works for?
Been using the s1 pro since it came out last year for ceremonies. It’s been fantastic. I can’t say It’s better than the JBL as I’ve never compared them.
I’ll get some pictures when I get back in the USA. Coming home tomorrow