Why Bose?
 

Down in Cornwall last week, my other half dragged me along to the
Minack Theatre to see a performance of La Traviata. As it's open air
and has quite a large and very steep auditorium, there's some sound
reinforcement both for singers and for the mini-orchestra, which used
Bose speakers. My word, they're ****poor. Horrible boxy sound. Don't
know why they didn't go for higher quality sound and lower cost and
use Behringer instead. Just reinforced my feeling about Bose, having
heard the PA things that look like black stoves in use at a couple of
gigs. Are they perceived to be good because they're expensive?

--
Mike Fleming

Why Bose?
 

Mike Fleming wrote:

--------------------


Down in Cornwall last week, my other half dragged me along to the
Minack Theatre to see a performance of La Traviata. As it's open air
and has quite a large and very steep auditorium, there's some sound
reinforcement both for singers and for the mini-orchestra, which used
Bose speakers. My word, they're ****poor. Horrible boxy sound. Don't
know why they didn't go for higher quality sound and lower cost and
use Behringer instead.



** You are joking ?

Behringer is just cheap Chinese ****.


Just reinforced my feeling about Bose, having
heard the PA things that look like black stoves



** Black stoves ??

More info needed.



in use at a couple of
gigs. Are they perceived to be good because they're expensive?


** When you decide to post sensibly, we may get somewhere.

Cos this post looks just like a stupid troll.



..... Phil

Why Bose?
 

On 16/07/2017 14:04, Mike Fleming wrote:
Down in Cornwall last week, my other half dragged me along to the
Minack Theatre to see a performance of La Traviata. As it's open air
and has quite a large and very steep auditorium, there's some sound
reinforcement both for singers and for the mini-orchestra, which used
Bose speakers. My word, they're ****poor. Horrible boxy sound. Don't
know why they didn't go for higher quality sound and lower cost and
use Behringer instead. Just reinforced my feeling about Bose, having
heard the PA things that look like black stoves in use at a couple of
gigs. Are they perceived to be good because they're expensive?


Obviously yes.

They use to sell BOSE equipments in fashion outlets here in Italy.

Draw your own conclusions.

Frank


P.S.: "No highs, no lows, must be BOSE!"

Why Bose?
 

Phil Allison wrote:

Mike Fleming wrote:

Just reinforced my feeling about Bose, having
heard the PA things that look like black stoves

** Black stoves ??

More info needed.

I guess he means something like the ubiquitous 802:

https://pro.bose.com/en_us/products/loudspeakers/point_source_sound_reinforcement/panaray/panaray_802_iv.html

Chris
--
Chris J Dixon Nottingham UK


Plant amazing Acers.

Why Bose?
 

sunnuntai 16. heinäkuuta 2017 15.04.09 UTC+3 Mike Fleming kirjoitti:
Down in Cornwall last week, my other half dragged me along to the
Minack Theatre to see a performance of La Traviata. As it's open air
and has quite a large and very steep auditorium, there's some sound
reinforcement both for singers and for the mini-orchestra, which used
Bose speakers. My word, they're ****poor. Horrible boxy sound. Don't
know why they didn't go for higher quality sound and lower cost and
use Behringer instead. Just reinforced my feeling about Bose, having
heard the PA things that look like black stoves in use at a couple of
gigs. Are they perceived to be good because they're expensive?

--
Mike Fleming

Remember it is not just about the speakers, but also the audio being fed to them. Small personal mics that may be fine for pop concerts probably will not do justice to Verdi. And getting your "mini-orchestra" to work for an outdoor event, is quite a challenge.

Agreed with you about Bose. In my opinion Behringer are even worse!

La Traviata is wonderful. Hopefully the poor sound reinforcement did not spoil your enjoyment.



Iain

Why Bose?
 

In article ,
Phil Allison writes:

Mike Fleming wrote:

--------------------


Down in Cornwall last week, my other half dragged me along to the
Minack Theatre to see a performance of La Traviata. As it's open air
and has quite a large and very steep auditorium, there's some sound
reinforcement both for singers and for the mini-orchestra, which used
Bose speakers. My word, they're ****poor. Horrible boxy sound. Don't
know why they didn't go for higher quality sound and lower cost and
use Behringer instead.



** You are joking ?

Behringer is just cheap Chinese ****.

Bose is just expensive ****.

Just reinforced my feeling about Bose, having
heard the PA things that look like black stoves

** Black stoves ??

More info needed.

http://www.gear4music.com/PA-DJ-and-...PA-System/114B

Sounds boxy and nasty.

in use at a couple of
gigs. Are they perceived to be good because they're expensive?


** When you decide to post sensibly, we may get somewhere.

Cos this post looks just like a stupid troll.

It's not a troll at all. The Bose speakers at the Minack are crap.
Perhaps you should listen to some Bose PA speakers and hear how poor
they are.

--
Mike Fleming

Why Bose?
 

In article ,
Iain Churches writes:

sunnuntai 16. heinäkuuta 2017 15.04.09 UTC+3 Mike Fleming kirjoitti:
Down in Cornwall last week, my other half dragged me along to the
Minack Theatre to see a performance of La Traviata. As it's open air
and has quite a large and very steep auditorium, there's some sound
reinforcement both for singers and for the mini-orchestra, which used
Bose speakers. My word, they're ****poor. Horrible boxy sound. Don't
know why they didn't go for higher quality sound and lower cost and
use Behringer instead. Just reinforced my feeling about Bose, having
heard the PA things that look like black stoves in use at a couple of
gigs. Are they perceived to be good because they're expensive?

Remember it is not just about the speakers, but also the audio being fed to them. Small personal mics that may be fine for pop concerts probably will not do justice to Verdi. And getting your "mini-orchestra" to work for an outdoor event, is quite a challenge.

There were some front-of-stage mics for the vocals too - the vocals
had exactly the same boxy sound to them. Couldn't see how the
orchestra were mic'ed, they were tucked under an awning (kept the
blazing sun off them, the chorus and soloists were strutting their
stuff in clothing which would have kept them warm in the Arctic).

Agreed with you about Bose. In my opinion Behringer are even worse!

La Traviata is wonderful. Hopefully the poor sound reinforcement did not spoil your enjoyment.

I still enjoyed it, it was just irksome to hear the poor sound
reproduction. And given my cloth ears, it has to be pretty bad for me
to notice.

--
Mike Fleming

Why Bose?
 

In article ,
Mike Fleming wrote:
It's not a troll at all. The Bose speakers at the Minack are crap.
Perhaps you should listen to some Bose PA speakers and hear how poor
they are.

At one time, many years ago, Bose did actually lead the world in terms of
good quality PA gear. You'd see it in the best nightclubs, etc. But it
relied on using the matching amps which were equalised to the speakers.
But not cheap. Of course since then others have caught up.

I'm surprised their modern stuff is poor in PA terms.

--
*If a thing is worth doing, wouldn't it have been done already?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Why Bose?
 

On 16/07/2017 10:04 PM, Mike Fleming wrote:
Down in Cornwall last week, my other half dragged me along to the
Minack Theatre to see a performance of La Traviata. As it's open air
and has quite a large and very steep auditorium, there's some sound
reinforcement both for singers and for the mini-orchestra, which used
Bose speakers. My word, they're ****poor. Horrible boxy sound. Don't
know why they didn't go for higher quality sound and lower cost and
use Behringer instead. Just reinforced my feeling about Bose, having
heard the PA things that look like black stoves in use at a couple of
gigs. Are they perceived to be good because they're expensive?


**Last time I listened to Bose PA speakers, was at a local ski field.
The voice was clear and intelligible, the speakers were compact and easy
to move and place. All in all, an excellent choice for the job.

Oh, you're talking about music?

Bose are the absolute worst choice for music. Good for speech though.
Singing? Forget it.

--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

Why Bose?
 

Chris J Dixon wrote:

------------------------


Mike Fleming wrote:

Just reinforced my feeling about Bose, having
heard the PA things that look like black stoves

** Black stoves ??

More info needed.

I guess he means something like the ubiquitous 802:

https://pro.bose.com/en_us/products/loudspeakers/point_source_sound_reinforcement/panaray/panaray_802_iv.html


** So the 8 x 4inch drivers which you cannot see look like the elements on the top of an electric stove ??

Never heard that one before.



..... Phil

Why Bose?
 

Mike Fleming wrote:

----------------------



Down in Cornwall last week, my other half dragged me along to the
Minack Theatre to see a performance of La Traviata. As it's open air
and has quite a large and very steep auditorium, there's some sound
reinforcement both for singers and for the mini-orchestra, which used
Bose speakers. My word, they're ****poor. Horrible boxy sound. Don't
know why they didn't go for higher quality sound and lower cost and
use Behringer instead.



** You are joking ?

Behringer is just cheap Chinese ****.

Bose is just expensive ****.


** Then what was your point ?



Just reinforced my feeling about Bose, having
heard the PA things that look like black stoves

** Black stoves ??

More info needed.

http://www.gear4music.com/PA-DJ-and-...PA-System/114B

Sounds boxy and nasty.


** Looks like a pot belly stove to some.

But not the first model you think of when the Bose name is mentioned.


in use at a couple of
gigs. Are they perceived to be good because they're expensive?


** When you decide to post sensibly, we may get somewhere.

Cos this post looks just like a stupid troll.

It's not a troll at all.


** Yes it is- you want US to discuss you opinions of a usical sound we cannon hear.

The Bose speakers at the Minack are crap.

** Really ?


Perhaps you should listen to some Bose PA speakers and hear how poor
they are.


** I am familiar with the 901s and the 802s.

Neither is a hi-fi speaker and they are overpriced.

But the Bose "pot belly" system is PORTABLE, easily set up and inconspicuous.

Is there a Behringer equivalent?

..... Phil

Why Bose?
 

In article ,
Phil Allison writes:

Chris J Dixon wrote:

------------------------


Mike Fleming wrote:

Just reinforced my feeling about Bose, having
heard the PA things that look like black stoves

** Black stoves ??

More info needed.

I guess he means something like the ubiquitous 802:

https://pro.bose.com/en_us/products/loudspeakers/point_source_sound_reinforcement/panaray/panaray_802_iv.html


** So the 8 x 4inch drivers which you cannot see look like the elements on the top of an electric stove ??

Never heard that one before.

No, that's not what I was referring to. Have a look at the link I
posted.

--
Mike Fleming

Why Bose?
 

In article ,
Phil Allison writes:

Mike Fleming wrote:

----------------------



Down in Cornwall last week, my other half dragged me along to the
Minack Theatre to see a performance of La Traviata. As it's open air
and has quite a large and very steep auditorium, there's some sound
reinforcement both for singers and for the mini-orchestra, which used
Bose speakers. My word, they're ****poor. Horrible boxy sound. Don't
know why they didn't go for higher quality sound and lower cost and
use Behringer instead.



** You are joking ?

Behringer is just cheap Chinese ****.

Bose is just expensive ****.


** Then what was your point ?

Read what I wrote. The point is there.

Just reinforced my feeling about Bose, having
heard the PA things that look like black stoves

** Black stoves ??

More info needed.

http://www.gear4music.com/PA-DJ-and-...PA-System/114B

Sounds boxy and nasty.


** Looks like a pot belly stove to some.

But not the first model you think of when the Bose name is mentioned.

Perhaps not you, I as a hobbyist musician do encounter portable PA
systems on a very regular basis. Got some in the garage, in fact
(including some Behringer).

in use at a couple of
gigs. Are they perceived to be good because they're expensive?


** When you decide to post sensibly, we may get somewhere.

Cos this post looks just like a stupid troll.

It's not a troll at all.


** Yes it is- you want US to discuss you opinions of a usical sound we cannon hear.

Of course you can hear it. Just go to the Minack Theatre and have a
listen. I've told you where you can hear it, the rest is up to you.

The Bose speakers at the Minack are crap.

** Really ?

Yes, otherwise I wouldn't have said it.

Perhaps you should listen to some Bose PA speakers and hear how poor
they are.


** I am familiar with the 901s and the 802s.

Neither is a hi-fi speaker and they are overpriced.

But the Bose "pot belly" system is PORTABLE, easily set up and inconspicuous.

And doesn't sound very good. And it's only a little easier to set up
than a conventional system.

Is there a Behringer equivalent?

Not a direct equivalent to that. I just use a pair of Behringer B210Ds
on small gigs where I couldn't be bothered to get the RCFs out (and
they get used as monitors when I do use the RCFs).

--
Mike Fleming

Why Bose?
 

I don't know. The bbc used to use them in the old Television theatre all
those years ago. Now they were not bad, but they were kind of spacy as they
had speakers on the back as well as the front.
The acronym somebody reminded me of in another group is.
Buy Other Soud Equipment.
They have been far worse since the guy who founded the company died and the
name was sold off.
Brian

--
----- -
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please!
"Mike Fleming" wrote in message
...
Down in Cornwall last week, my other half dragged me along to the
Minack Theatre to see a performance of La Traviata. As it's open air
and has quite a large and very steep auditorium, there's some sound
reinforcement both for singers and for the mini-orchestra, which used
Bose speakers. My word, they're ****poor. Horrible boxy sound. Don't
know why they didn't go for higher quality sound and lower cost and
use Behringer instead. Just reinforced my feeling about Bose, having
heard the PA things that look like black stoves in use at a couple of
gigs. Are they perceived to be good because they're expensive?

--
Mike Fleming

Why Bose?
 

Not really, I'm no fan of Bose and the afore mentioned company's stuff is
cheap it is true but some of their designs can be quite nice.
I'd also warn about sonus as well.
Brian

--
----- -
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please!
"Phil Allison" wrote in message
...
Mike Fleming wrote:

--------------------


Down in Cornwall last week, my other half dragged me along to the
Minack Theatre to see a performance of La Traviata. As it's open air
and has quite a large and very steep auditorium, there's some sound
reinforcement both for singers and for the mini-orchestra, which used
Bose speakers. My word, they're ****poor. Horrible boxy sound. Don't
know why they didn't go for higher quality sound and lower cost and
use Behringer instead.



** You are joking ?

Behringer is just cheap Chinese ****.


Just reinforced my feeling about Bose, having
heard the PA things that look like black stoves



** Black stoves ??

More info needed.



in use at a couple of
gigs. Are they perceived to be good because they're expensive?


** When you decide to post sensibly, we may get somewhere.

Cos this post looks just like a stupid troll.



.... Phil

Why Bose?
 

In article ,
Brian Gaff wrote:
I don't know. The bbc used to use them in the old Television theatre all
those years ago. Now they were not bad, but they were kind of spacy as
they had speakers on the back as well as the front.

There was a pair of Bose slung on a catenary wire system to cover the
front of the circle. All the rest was covered by RG Jones columns. Bit of
a bodge, really. The original installation had poor coverage to the front
of the circle and stalls. Just the place important guests would sit.

These days you don't always see line source columns used for PA in a TV
studio.

Before I retired, EV units became popular. Just a conventional two driver
speaker. They sounded better than line source, and didn't seem to be any
worse in terms of separation between stage and audience area - but could
handle a great deal more level for pop etc stuff.

--
*Everybody lies, but it doesn't matter since nobody listens*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Why Bose?
 

The Mike Fleming Troll wrote:

----------------------




** You are joking ?

Behringer is just cheap Chinese ****.

Bose is just expensive ****.


** Then what was your point ?

Read what I wrote. The point is there.



** The only point visible is right on top of your fat head.





Just reinforced my feeling about Bose, having
heard the PA things that look like black stoves

** Black stoves ??

More info needed.

http://www.gear4music.com/PA-DJ-and-...PA-System/114B

Sounds boxy and nasty.


** Looks like a pot belly stove to some.

But not the first model you think of when the Bose name is mentioned.

Perhaps not you,


** Not anyone - you trolling, ****wit asshole.


I as a hobbyist musician ............


** ROTFLMAO ....

With your fist permanently wrapped around you tiny cock.




It's not a troll at all.


** Yes it is- you want US to discuss you opinions of a usical sound we cannont hear.

Of course you can hear it.



** Ok - so now this troll is clearly totally INSANE.



Just go to the Minack Theatre and have a
listen.


** Not my problem - ****head.



I've told you where you can hear it,


** That is no kind of point at all.

Just a ****wit troll's usual BULL****





The Bose speakers at the Minack are crap.

** Really ?

Yes,

** No.



** I am familiar with the 901s and the 802s.

Neither is a hi-fi speaker and they are overpriced.

But the Bose "pot belly" system is PORTABLE, easily set up and inconspicuous.

And doesn't sound very good.


** Who gives a flying **** wot a pile of **** TROLL like you bull****s ????

NO ONE ALIVE !!



Is there a Behringer equivalent?

Not a direct equivalent to that.


** Yawnnnnnnn - more insane CRAPOLOGY


WARNING to Mike,

**** off, or I will **** you off.

In spectacular fashion too.

Cos I absolutely LOATHE psychopathic trolls.





... Phil

Why Bose?
 

maanantai 17. heinäkuuta 2017 2.20.34 UTC+3 Dave Plowman (News) kirjoitti:
In article ,

At one time, many years ago, Bose did actually lead the world in terms of
good quality PA gear.

Please substantiate this claim.

Bose are and have always been expensive and mediocre, and compare poorly in comparison tests, which as a former audio professional you surely know.
Have you ready any professional reviews?

Iain

Why Bose?
 

sunnuntai 16. heinäkuuta 2017 20.49.20 UTC+3 Mike Fleming kirjoitti:
In article ,
Iain Churches writes:

sunnuntai 16. heinäkuuta 2017 15.04.09 UTC+3 Mike Fleming kirjoitti:
Down in Cornwall last week, my other half dragged me along to the
Minack Theatre to see a performance of La Traviata. As it's open air
and has quite a large and very steep auditorium, there's some sound
reinforcement both for singers and for the mini-orchestra, which used
Bose speakers. My word, they're ****poor. Horrible boxy sound. Don't
know why they didn't go for higher quality sound and lower cost and
use Behringer instead. Just reinforced my feeling about Bose, having
heard the PA things that look like black stoves in use at a couple of
gigs. Are they perceived to be good because they're expensive?

Remember it is not just about the speakers, but also the audio being fed to them. Small personal mics that may be fine for pop concerts probably will not do justice to Verdi. And getting your "mini-orchestra" to work for an outdoor event, is quite a challenge.

There were some front-of-stage mics for the vocals too - the vocals
had exactly the same boxy sound to them. Couldn't see how the
orchestra were mic'ed, they were tucked under an awning (kept the
blazing sun off them, the chorus and soloists were strutting their
stuff in clothing which would have kept them warm in the Arctic).

Agreed with you about Bose. In my opinion Behringer are even worse!

La Traviata is wonderful. Hopefully the poor sound reinforcement did not spoil your enjoyment.

I still enjoyed it, it was just irksome to hear the poor sound
reproduction. And given my cloth ears, it has to be pretty bad for me
to notice.

--
Mike Fleming

Generally, for open-air concerts the audio rig is rented (lights too, together with riggers and a crew) so the relative cost of Behringer and Bose is not really relevant. Someone made a poor choice, which cannot now be undone. But what you *could* do is to make your opinion known to the even't organisers,so that they will not make the same mistake again.

Like you, I play music as a hobby (big band and symphonic wind ensemble). As an audio engineer, i also mix concerts and theatre. We get plenty of feedback, most of it positive, and take it very seriously. Everyone who makes contact gets a reply, and often a pair of complimentary tickets to the next performance. Without an audience there would not be a gig.

Iain

Why Bose?
 

Dave Plowman (Nutcase) wrote:

----------------------------------

At one time, many years ago, Bose did actually lead the world in terms of
good quality PA gear.


** ROTFL - wot utter crap.


You'd see it in the best nightclubs, etc.


** Oh, that is fantastic proof - of absolutely nothing.


But it
relied on using the matching amps which were equalised to the speakers.


** There were no such amplifiers.

Bose sold outboard equalisers to go with their **** boxes - from the first 901s onwards - that could be used with any power amp.

Bose brand amplifiers were rebadged products from other companies cos Bose really never made anything themselves.

Back in the 80s, I did a lot of service work for a hire business that dealt mainly in Bose equipment - like 802s, 802Es plus the horrible 1800 amp series, the PM2 powered mixer and others. The failure rate was high.


But not cheap. Of course since then others have caught up.


** There was none for them to do.



.... Phil

Why Bose?
 

In article ,
Phil Allison wrote:
Dave Plowman (Nutcase) wrote:

----------------------------------

At one time, many years ago, Bose did actually lead the world in terms
of good quality PA gear.


** ROTFL - wot utter crap.

Thanks for your vote of confidence.


You'd see it in the best nightclubs, etc.


** Oh, that is fantastic proof - of absolutely nothing.

And it sounded very good by the PA standards of the day.

Perhaps you'd give your recommendations from the '70s?


But it
relied on using the matching amps which were equalised to the speakers.


** There were no such amplifiers.

Bose sold outboard equalisers to go with their **** boxes - from the
first 901s onwards - that could be used with any power amp.

Ah right. A Mullard 3-3 would have been ideal, then, in your little world.

Bose brand amplifiers were rebadged products from other companies cos
Bose really never made anything themselves.

Back in the 80s, I did a lot of service work for a hire business that
dealt mainly in Bose equipment - like 802s, 802Es plus the horrible
1800 amp series, the PM2 powered mixer and others. The failure rate was
high.

You worked for a company that hired out rubbish? Surely that would be
against your principles?


But not cheap. Of course since then others have caught up.


** There was none for them to do.



... Phil

--
*If you ate pasta and anti-pasta, would you still be hungry?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Why Bose?
 

Dave Plowman Nutcase MORON wrote:

---------------------------------------



At one time, many years ago, Bose did actually lead the world in terms
of good quality PA gear.


** ROTFL - wot utter crap.

Thanks for your vote of confidence.


** Go drop dead - imbecile.



You'd see it in the best nightclubs, etc.


** Oh, that is fantastic proof - of absolutely nothing.

And it sounded very good by the PA standards of the day.


** No it didn't - you imbecile.




But it
relied on using the matching amps which were equalised to the speakers.


** There were no such amplifiers.

Bose sold outboard equalisers to go with their **** boxes - from the
first 901s onwards - that could be used with any power amp.

Ah right.


** Drop dead, ****head.



Bose brand amplifiers were rebadged products from other companies cos
Bose really never made anything themselves.

Back in the 80s, I did a lot of service work for a hire business that
dealt mainly in Bose equipment - like 802s, 802Es plus the horrible
1800 amp series, the PM2 powered mixer and others. The failure rate was
high.

You worked for a company



** No, they came to me to get various repairs done, special items built and reliable technical advice.

Know nothing, **** for brains poms had no chance.

FOAD.



..... Phil

Why Bose?
 

tiistai 18. heinäkuuta 2017 2.37.49 UTC+3 Dave Plowman (News) kirjoitti:
In article ,

At one time, many years ago, Bose did actually lead the world in terms
of good quality PA gear.


You'd see it in the best nightclubs, etc.

And it sounded very good by the PA standards of the day.

Perhaps you'd give your recommendations from the '70s?

Dave. You must be trying to wind Phil up:-)
We all know that compared with JBL and Altec, Bose were mediocre,
with poor reliability.

Iain

Why Bose?
 

In article ,
Phil Allison writes:

The Mike Fleming Troll wrote:

Oh, OK. You can **** right off then, **** for brains.

--
Mike Fleming

Why Bose?
 

On Mon, 17 Jul 2017 00:19:46 +0100, Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:

In article ,
Mike Fleming wrote:
It's not a troll at all. The Bose speakers at the Minack are crap.
Perhaps you should listen to some Bose PA speakers and hear how poor
they are.

At one time, many years ago, Bose did actually lead the world in terms of
good quality PA gear. You'd see it in the best nightclubs, etc. But it
relied on using the matching amps which were equalised to the speakers.
But not cheap. Of course since then others have caught up.

I'm surprised their modern stuff is poor in PA terms.


As mainly a punter in the late 70's/early 80's I can understand what you
are saying here. A well set up Bose system usually sounded smoother than
just about anything else I heard. Back then a typical PA system for a
medium size venue appeared to be a collection of horns, acoustic lenses
and bass bins stacked in a somewhat random arrangement either side of the
stage.

It wasn't until Turbosound came along that I started to hear better sound
at the average gig.

I'm sure that there were better PA's around but they took skill to set up
and so it was rare to hear a system that sounded really good. If you
followed the instructions for an 802/302 setup you would end up with an
impressive sounding system with little effort.

I've heard the L1's and they're not poor if used as intended (just
overpriced compared to the alternatives). They're supposed to be used by
an individual musician in a very small venue so their use in a theatre
setting seems strange.

--
JRP Music - http://www.jrpmusic.co.uk

Why Bose?
 

In article ,
Phil Allison wrote:
At one time, many years ago, Bose did actually lead the world in terms
of good quality PA gear.


** ROTFL - wot utter crap.

Thanks for your vote of confidence.


** Go drop dead - imbecile.

Thanks for the intuitive response. Again.

--
*A computer once beat me at chess, but it was no match for me at kickboxing.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Why Bose?
 

In article ,
James Perrett wrote:
On Mon, 17 Jul 2017 00:19:46 +0100, Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:

In article ,
Mike Fleming wrote:
It's not a troll at all. The Bose speakers at the Minack are crap.
Perhaps you should listen to some Bose PA speakers and hear how poor
they are.

At one time, many years ago, Bose did actually lead the world in terms
of good quality PA gear. You'd see it in the best nightclubs, etc. But
it relied on using the matching amps which were equalised to the
speakers. But not cheap. Of course since then others have caught up.

I'm surprised their modern stuff is poor in PA terms.


As mainly a punter in the late 70's/early 80's I can understand what you
are saying here. A well set up Bose system usually sounded smoother
than just about anything else I heard. Back then a typical PA system
for a medium size venue appeared to be a collection of horns, acoustic
lenses and bass bins stacked in a somewhat random arrangement either
side of the stage.

Yes. I remember hearing a Bose setup in a medium sized nightclub in
Chelsea. Early '70s. The group was just piano, bass, drums and vocals. Not
meant to pin you up against the wall as in a disco or rock concert. And
was very surprised just how clean it sounded. So very different from the
norm in those days. Of course it had someone who knew what they were doing
driving it - but even then, it impressed. To the point were I took some
work colleagues along to hear it.

It wasn't until Turbosound came along that I started to hear better
sound at the average gig.

Once it was established half decent sound for PA was possible and popular,
others followed.

I'm sure that there were better PA's around but they took skill to set
up and so it was rare to hear a system that sounded really good. If
you followed the instructions for an 802/302 setup you would end up
with an impressive sounding system with little effort.

Quite. The fact the system came equalised for a half decent sound meant it
worked pretty well out of the box. So ideal for the vast majority of small
gigs where just getting it working was good enough.

I've heard the L1's and they're not poor if used as intended (just
overpriced compared to the alternatives). They're supposed to be used by
an individual musician in a very small venue so their use in a theatre
setting seems strange.

It's very easy to get decent gear to sound horrible. ;-)

--
*We have enough youth, how about a fountain of Smart?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Why Bose?
 

tiistai 18. heinäkuuta 2017 12.57.14 UTC+3 Dave Plowman (News) kirjoitti:

On Mon, 17 Jul 2017 00:19:46 +0100, Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:


Yes. I remember hearing a Bose setup in a medium sized nightclub in
Chelsea. Early '70s. The group was just piano, bass, drums and vocals. Not
meant to pin you up against the wall as in a disco or rock concert. And
was very surprised just how clean it sounded.

So just a vocal with a trio. Are you saying that bas and drums were also fed to the PA?

|So very different from the
norm in those days. Of course it had someone who knew what they were doing
driving it.

Don't kid yourself:-)

If you had gone to the back of the stage you would probably have found small Soundcraft mixer, fader positions marked with sticky tape and red marker pen, set up by whoever installed the system. At the sound check of such gigs, it is usually the bouncer or the barman who stands in front of the stage for 30 seconds and says, "Yes. I can hear everyone"


Iain

Why Bose?
 

In article , "James
Perrett" writes:

I've heard the L1's and they're not poor if used as intended (just
overpriced compared to the alternatives). They're supposed to be used by
an individual musician in a very small venue so their use in a theatre
setting seems strange.

I may have unintentionally misled here - the Bose speakers in the
Minack weren't L1s, I was making a general point about Bose rather
than about the L1 specifically.

--
Mike Fleming

Why Bose?
 

Once upon a time on usenet Iain Churches wrote:
tiistai 18. heinäkuuta 2017 12.57.14 UTC+3 Dave Plowman (News)
kirjoitti:

On Mon, 17 Jul 2017 00:19:46 +0100, Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:


Yes. I remember hearing a Bose setup in a medium sized nightclub in
Chelsea. Early '70s. The group was just piano, bass, drums and
vocals. Not meant to pin you up against the wall as in a disco or
rock concert. And was very surprised just how clean it sounded.

So just a vocal with a trio. Are you saying that bas and drums were
also fed to the PA?

So very different from the
norm in those days. Of course it had someone who knew what they were
doing driving it.

Don't kid yourself:-)

If you had gone to the back of the stage you would probably have
found small Soundcraft mixer, fader positions marked with sticky tape
and red marker pen, set up by whoever installed the system. At the
sound check of such gigs, it is usually the bouncer or the barman who
stands in front of the stage for 30 seconds and says, "Yes. I can
hear everyone"

.... which is why I was hired by a band back in the late 70s / early 80s to
initially set up the mixer (and tweak as the room filled or otherwise)
before / during operating what started as rudimentary stage lighting
(progressing on to a full off-stage mix a few months later and more lights
every so often).

I spent three years working with that band, living in hotels and 'band
accomodation' eight nights out of ten and touring the country, most often
driving the bands bus between towns on Sun/Mon or Tuesday. I have many many
fond memories of that time (and more than a few gaps...). ;)
--
Shaun.

"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy
little classification in the DSM*."
David Melville (in r.a.s.f1)
(*Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders)

Why Bose?
 

Dave Plowman (Nutcase Moron) wrote:




Yes. I remember hearing a Bose setup in a medium sized nightclub in
Chelsea. Early '70s.



** In the early 70s, the only PA product Bose sold was the model 800 speaker.

Virtually the same as the concurrent 901 home speaker, with one driver removed. Wooden box, 8 x 4 inch cheap woofers plus external equaliser.

Possibly a Crown 300A or Phase Linear 400/700 amp was being used too.

Near identical to what many Bose 901 owners had at home, if they turned the boxes around to face them.

Bose leading the PA system world ????????

You story is, as expected, a total crock of ****.

Like you.


..... Phil

Why Bose?
 

keskiviikko 19. heinäkuuta 2017 3.13.11 UTC+3 ~misfit~ kirjoitti:
Once upon a time on usenet Iain Churches wrote:


Don't kid yourself:-)

If you had gone to the back of the stage you would probably have
found small Soundcraft mixer, fader positions marked with sticky tape
and red marker pen, set up by whoever installed the system. At the
sound check of such gigs, it is usually the bouncer or the barman who
stands in front of the stage for 30 seconds and says, "Yes. I can
hear everyone"

... which is why I was hired by a band back in the late 70s / early 80s to
initially set up the mixer (and tweak as the room filled or otherwise)
before / during operating what started as rudimentary stage lighting
(progressing on to a full off-stage mix a few months later and more lights
every so often).

I spent three years working with that band, living in hotels and 'band
accomodation' eight nights out of ten and touring the country, most often
driving the bands bus between towns on Sun/Mon or Tuesday. I have many many
fond memories of that time (and more than a few gaps...). ;)
--

Halcyon days!

Working at a recording studio, I didn't have much spare time,afer work, overtime and study. But when I did, I played vibraphone in a MJQ-style band called "Sophisticated Jazz" at hotel and night club gig, whenever time permitted. I was a huge John Lewis/Milt Jackson fan at the time.

Most places where we played had a handful of Reslo mics, and a small mixer on which the levels and fixed-band EQs had been set up when the system was initially installed. On the top of the mixer was usually a paper "Don't touch!" Our guitarist and bass player both had small combo amps, and so an an acoustic band we controlled our own internal balance and were not dependent on PA.



Iain

Why Bose?
 

In article ,
Phil Allison wrote:
Dave Plowman (Nutcase Moron) wrote:




Yes. I remember hearing a Bose setup in a medium sized nightclub in
Chelsea. Early '70s.



** In the early 70s, the only PA product Bose sold was the model 800
speaker.

Virtually the same as the concurrent 901 home speaker, with one driver
removed. Wooden box, 8 x 4 inch cheap woofers plus external equaliser.

Woofers only? Be a very odd sounding speaker if that's all it had.
Explains a lot.

Possibly a Crown 300A or Phase Linear 400/700 amp was being used too.

The amps were badged Bose. One per two speakers. With equaliser.

Near identical to what many Bose 901 owners had at home, if they turned
the boxes around to face them.

Bose leading the PA system world ????????

At that point in time, unusually good for a PA system. And likely a
million times better than anything you ever heard then. As most were
pretty poor then.

You story is, as expected, a total crock of ****.

Like you.

Seems I'm not the only one who heard them and was impressed. So it's very
likely you never did in as an installation. But then I'd be surprised if
you ever left your workshop given your mental problems.

--
*Tell me to 'stuff it' - I'm a taxidermist.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Why Bose?
 

keskiviikko 19. heinäkuuta 2017 13.01.30 UTC+3 Dave Plowman (News) kirjoitti:


(Dave enthuses about Bose)

At that point in time, unusually good for a PA system. And likely a
million times better than anything you ever heard then. As most were
pretty poor then.

Sorry Dave, but that simply is not true! The best places in the 70's, Marquee, 100 Club, Mandrake, Raffles, Ronnie Scott's (the old address) all had Crown driving JBL. A vastly superior combination, and still the choice of many venues and concerts today.

Iain

Iain

Why Bose?
 

Dave Plowman is a ****ing IDIOT


---------------------------------


Yes. I remember hearing a Bose setup in a medium sized nightclub in
Chelsea. Early '70s.



** In the early 70s, the only PA product Bose sold was the model 800
speaker.

Virtually the same as the concurrent 901 home speaker, with one driver
removed. Wooden box, 8 x 4 inch cheap woofers plus external equaliser.

Woofers only? Be a very odd sounding speaker if that's all it had.
Explains a lot.


* *FFS you *ca*n look it up - you wanking moron .



Possibly a Crown 300A or Phase Linear 400/700 amp was being used too.

The amps were badged Bose.


** Bose did not sell an PA amplifier in the early 70s.

The first was the Bose 1800 in the very late 70s.


Near identical to what many Bose 901 owners had at home, if they turned
the boxes around to face them.

Bose leading the PA system world ????????

At that point in time, unusually good for a PA system.


** No it was ****ing not.

I just proved it.


You story is, as expected, a total CROCK of ****.

Like you.

FOAD of cancer - you vile pommy scumbag.




...... Phil

Why Bose?
 

In article , Iain
Churches wrote:

Halcyon days!

Working at a recording studio, I didn't have much spare time,afer work,
overtime and study. But when I did, I played vibraphone in a MJQ-style
band called "Sophisticated Jazz" at hotel and night club gig, whenever
time permitted. I was a huge John Lewis/Milt Jackson fan at the time.


Alas my performing experiences weren't quite in that class..

http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history...PantoPlus.html :-)

I recommend that those of a nervous disposition should avoid looking at
some of the images on the above page. 8-]

There are other pages in the collection, but fear not, their photos are
less alarming. I've not got to Hawai'i and grass skirts as yet!

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa...o/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

Why Bose?
 

In article ,
Phil Allison wrote:
** Bose did not sell an PA amplifier in the early 70s.

The first was the Bose 1800 in the very late 70s.

You are talking pure ******** again. I know what I saw. Of course things
take a long time to reach OZ. Mainly your medication, it seems.

--
*Could it be that "I do " is the longest sentence? *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Why Bose?
 

On Wed, 19 Jul 2017 11:49:37 +0100, Iain Churches wrote:

keskiviikko 19. heinäkuuta 2017 13.01.30 UTC+3 Dave Plowman (News)
kirjoitti:


(Dave enthuses about Bose)

At that point in time, unusually good for a PA system. And likely a
million times better than anything you ever heard then. As most were
pretty poor then.

Sorry Dave, but that simply is not true! The best places in the 70's,
Marquee, 100 Club, Mandrake, Raffles, Ronnie Scott's (the old address)
all had Crown driving JBL. A vastly superior combination, and still the
choice of many venues and concerts today.


While there may have been expensive JBL systems that sounded better than
Bose, the average JBL system that I heard was pretty disappointing.
However, I remember they had a booth at one of the hifi shows where they
demoed some of their PA gear at high volume which sounded impressive - too
bad none of their customers seemed to be able to make them sound that good.

I would have to add that, of the venues you mention, I've only ever been
to the 100 Club and I don't remember being particularly impressed with the
sound (although I don't remember it being bad either).


--
JRP Music - http://www.jrpmusic.co.uk

Why Bose?
 

In article ,
Phil Allison wrote:
** Bose did not sell an PA amplifier in the early 70s.

I've no idea of the number, but I can describe it.

In a vinyl covered case (similar to a guitar amp, etc). Rack width, and
with the equaliser mounted in the box too. About 4U high and roughly
square. Pretty heavy so likely had a decent size transformer. Cooling fan.
Odd thing was the speaker output connectors were 1/4" jacks - same as the
speakers. Whole lot clearly labelled Bose. Of course it could have been
something cobbled together by the UK importer.

Not the sort of thing you'd do for a domestic amp. Designed for being
moved around - it even had a lid and carrying handles.

--
*Don't worry about avoiding temptation. As you grow older, it will avoid you.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Why Bose?
 

In article ,
James Perrett wrote:
On Wed, 19 Jul 2017 11:49:37 +0100, Iain Churches wrote:

keskiviikko 19. heinäkuuta 2017 13.01.30 UTC+3 Dave Plowman (News)
kirjoitti:


(Dave enthuses about Bose)

At that point in time, unusually good for a PA system. And likely a
million times better than anything you ever heard then. As most were
pretty poor then.

Sorry Dave, but that simply is not true! The best places in the 70's,
Marquee, 100 Club, Mandrake, Raffles, Ronnie Scott's (the old
address) all had Crown driving JBL. A vastly superior combination,
and still the choice of many venues and concerts today.


While there may have been expensive JBL systems that sounded better than
Bose, the average JBL system that I heard was pretty disappointing.

Most PA systems are pretty disappointing. Especially 50 years ago. And JBL
were far more about level than quality.

However, I remember they had a booth at one of the hifi shows where they
demoed some of their PA gear at high volume which sounded impressive -
too bad none of their customers seemed to be able to make them sound
that good.

Yes - careful setting up makes a world of difference.


I would have to add that, of the venues you mention, I've only ever been
to the 100 Club and I don't remember being particularly impressed with
the sound (although I don't remember it being bad either).


-- JRP Music - http://www.jrpmusic.co.uk

--
*If vegetable oil comes from vegetables, where does baby oil come from? *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.