Posted: Wed Feb 04, 2004 5:16 am
Jeff, I quit building my own gear unless it wasn't available commercially. Then I try to get used gear and modify it if the parts and work isn't too extensive. The AVT20B project came about because tube emulating bass PRACTICE amps were almost nonexistent, or too big, loud, and expensive (Roland DB series, Peavey BAM), or unsuitable for guitar as well. I am thinking of restringing my 4004L B-E-A-D, then I will need cabs that go DEEP.
In spite of Bose's claim of portability, It's a 3-section beanpole/stand with 1 or 2 bass pods. Is this REALLY an improvement over simply hauling in a Roland DB500 or other such combo bass amp in a single trip? Guitar and bass players need somewhat different preamp sections, and has this been addressed, or does Bose expect you to run through input devices to adapt to your instrument? Bose is notorious for building something that LOOKS different then using voodoo advertising claims and "bought reviews" to sell to gullible ignoramuses. Their original 901 speaker was a box with 9 little wideband speakers installed and an active equalizer that boosted the highs and lows to try to achieve linear response. There was not one original idea in the whole mess, other than a MARKETING SCHEME that married several different pre-existing devices together. The direct/reflecting speaker idea had been utilized years before (and done better) by Quad, KLH, and any other electrostatic loudspeaker that came before the 901, but the average gullible dude at any of the various Bose 901 factory demonstrations usually knew nothing of the Bose's better competitors. The Dahlquist DQ10 is another speaker of that 901 era that I would have rather owned, as it had an open-backed midrange driver for the direct/reflected sound. Dr. Amar Bose was a master of BS more than anything else, and gave new meaning to the phrase "piled higher and deeper". I see that Bose has not changed their marketing strategy one iota: "find something different that we can claim to have invented, advertise the living daylights out of it, and the ignoramuses will line up to buy it. When the jig is up, we'll move on to our next BS project." The line source speaker is a great idea that needed more exposure, but for bass the column needs deeper extension than Bose has given it. Bass players, and to a lesser extent guitarists, are getting the crumbs of a design that was geared toward vocalists and acoustic instrumentalists. Throwing in a bass pod does nothing to maintain the line source idea across the full bass spectrum, and tears apart the music at the crossover region. They should at least have made it where the beanpole mounted directly to the bass pods like all hybrid electrostatic/dynamic audiophile speakers have done. When you make the crossover as high in frequency as Bose has obviously done, you CAN hear that the pod and beanpole have been separated unless they are placed very closely together. A couple of 6.5" woofers will NOT play a venue of more than a very small size without being overloaded. Many 6.5" woofers should have been mounted in a separate column that's as tall as the mid/tweeter column and mountable together, like Magneplanar had already done in their tall panel speakers. Infinity is a company that had already done this with dynamic drivers in their IRS speaker system years ago. Bose has once again "reinvented the wheel". The older guys like me and Bob have seen this happen before, so you younger guys should hold on to your money. The line source idea is good, but somebody other than Bose will give you a better piece of equipment for your money, as usual. Just give it some time.
In spite of Bose's claim of portability, It's a 3-section beanpole/stand with 1 or 2 bass pods. Is this REALLY an improvement over simply hauling in a Roland DB500 or other such combo bass amp in a single trip? Guitar and bass players need somewhat different preamp sections, and has this been addressed, or does Bose expect you to run through input devices to adapt to your instrument? Bose is notorious for building something that LOOKS different then using voodoo advertising claims and "bought reviews" to sell to gullible ignoramuses. Their original 901 speaker was a box with 9 little wideband speakers installed and an active equalizer that boosted the highs and lows to try to achieve linear response. There was not one original idea in the whole mess, other than a MARKETING SCHEME that married several different pre-existing devices together. The direct/reflecting speaker idea had been utilized years before (and done better) by Quad, KLH, and any other electrostatic loudspeaker that came before the 901, but the average gullible dude at any of the various Bose 901 factory demonstrations usually knew nothing of the Bose's better competitors. The Dahlquist DQ10 is another speaker of that 901 era that I would have rather owned, as it had an open-backed midrange driver for the direct/reflected sound. Dr. Amar Bose was a master of BS more than anything else, and gave new meaning to the phrase "piled higher and deeper". I see that Bose has not changed their marketing strategy one iota: "find something different that we can claim to have invented, advertise the living daylights out of it, and the ignoramuses will line up to buy it. When the jig is up, we'll move on to our next BS project." The line source speaker is a great idea that needed more exposure, but for bass the column needs deeper extension than Bose has given it. Bass players, and to a lesser extent guitarists, are getting the crumbs of a design that was geared toward vocalists and acoustic instrumentalists. Throwing in a bass pod does nothing to maintain the line source idea across the full bass spectrum, and tears apart the music at the crossover region. They should at least have made it where the beanpole mounted directly to the bass pods like all hybrid electrostatic/dynamic audiophile speakers have done. When you make the crossover as high in frequency as Bose has obviously done, you CAN hear that the pod and beanpole have been separated unless they are placed very closely together. A couple of 6.5" woofers will NOT play a venue of more than a very small size without being overloaded. Many 6.5" woofers should have been mounted in a separate column that's as tall as the mid/tweeter column and mountable together, like Magneplanar had already done in their tall panel speakers. Infinity is a company that had already done this with dynamic drivers in their IRS speaker system years ago. Bose has once again "reinvented the wheel". The older guys like me and Bob have seen this happen before, so you younger guys should hold on to your money. The line source idea is good, but somebody other than Bose will give you a better piece of equipment for your money, as usual. Just give it some time.
