Looked at the BOSE Acoustic Wave music system at

Paying more than

Paying more than

We have the acoustimass surround system which is bloody fantastic.

Not the cheapest gear but from my own experience worth every penny.

If you buy the the amp, cd player, tuner, cables, speakers (inc sub) and all other bits as well from Riches Sounds then it works out quite cheap, but the sound quality is much better than that of a Midi system. But is the BOSE better than buying the above?

BOSE are really overpriced. They sound OK, but you can get a similar sound for far, far less money.

I'm guessing you want them, because they're small and discrete? I had a similar problem, when we moved to an older property with a narrow lounge, which didn't lend itself to decent hifi speakers. In the end, I settled on the Acoustic Energy Aego 5 system: it blows the doors off Bose, is smaller, and only cost

If you buy the the amp, cd player, tuner, cables, speakers (inc sub) and all other bits as well from Riches Sounds then it works out quite cheap, but the sound quality is much better than that of a Midi system. But is the BOSE better than buying the above?

Probably not! Full-size separates tend to wipe the floor with any sub/satellite system.

How big is the lounge? The Aego 5 system is good for my room, but a large lounge might be too much for it.

BOSE stuff does sound good , no doubt about it , but you are paying a good premium for the design and name. A similar sounding separates system from other quality makes would be about half the price.

As for not spending more than

Vikki, I'd just insist to try auditioning the stuff before you part with your cash.

Any self-respecting bose dealer will have the kit available to demo so you can listen before you buy.

The same can be done with richer sounds as long as you book in advance. As soon as your considering spending money on electronics, if the money seems like a lot to you, insist on testing it before spending. Richer sounds do have a 14 day no-quibble money back guarantee if you don't want the stuff once you'd had a chance to sample it at home.

If you do go in for an audition, bring your own music, music you like and know. The kind of music that will either sound just "ok" or really get your foot tapping with excitement

I've spend quite a lot of money on audio in my car, and whilst some people may say it's daft, the amount of time I spend listening and enjoying it far outweighs the thought of how much moolah I spent on it

HTH

And when you listen to BOSE, have a listen for the midrange (or lack of it!)

Midrange is fine for me.

It doeas depend on the acoustics of the room and as our TV room was designed with the Bose system in mind it works and sound fine.

BOSE stuff does sound good , no doubt about it , but you are paying a good premium for the design and name. A similar sounding separates system from other quality makes would be about half the price.

As for not spending more than

BOSE stuff does sound good , no doubt about it , but you are paying a good premium for the design and name. A similar sounding separates system from other quality makes would be about half the price.

As for not spending more than

That's fine if you want to watch telly on a portable and listen to the sound through bean tins.

Personally, I get a real buzz out of watching films on a decent TV with a reasonable surround-sound system. I don't enjoy watching films so much on other people's systems, if they don't sound or look as good.

Horses for courses, and all that. You could also argue that we should all drive around in 1.0 litre Fiat Pandas, and our brains would get used to that, too.

I didn't say I could not hear the difference, but I do mean that it is not worth spending anything more, the difference in quality is effectively meaningless.

Of course it isn't meaningless.

You could use the same argument about cars , and say that we should all be driving round in 1.2 furbies.

I have a

do you really enjoy TV any more now on your large widescreen stereo TV than you did 25 years ago on a 20 inch B&W TV with mono sound? I really doubt it. It is the quality of the TV programme that matters, just as it is the nature of the song/music you are listening to that is really all that is important, as long as you can hear it.

Well, overlooking the fact I'm only 24 so wasn't watching much TV 25 years ago, I'd say the enjoyment is increased by the quality of the equipment upon which it's reproduced.

The point of getting good quality hifi is to try and reproduce as much detail as possible - you want to listen to the music, not the equipment, and escape any distortion, colouration or compression. I've yet to hear a

Personally, I get a real buzz out of watching films on a decent TV with a reasonable surround-sound system. I don't enjoy watching films so much on other people's systems, if they don't sound or look as good.

Hear hear! I like to be able to see what I'm watching, and also immerse (sp?) myself in it. It's the same with computer games too - while Space Invaders is addictive, having more realism so that you feel involved and inside the game, really adds a lot of depth to it

Chris

I myself have both a large wide screen TV with surround sound stereo and a separates Hi Fi system, but then I am a real gadget man, but I still stick by what I say. Watching as I am sometimes forced to do TV on the Kitchen 14 inch rather tha in the living room (why does the wife always get that set), I notice the difference only for a few minutes, then I am lost in the programme and it does not matter a jot. The same goes for the hi fi system.

As for coputer games I will always think simple to play games like space invaders will always be better than the modern incredably complex and ultimately almost umplayable games are. Doom 3 is so refreshing because it is almost as simple to play as the original, really only being a metter of better graphics. Back to basics is my motto .

I can't see me taking back GTA San Andreas and getting a copy of Pac man, to be honest.

I can't see me taking back GTA San Andreas and getting a copy of Pac man, to be honest.

Why would you need to.

Can't you go into the arcade in GTA and play the games there?

Nope, far too expensive for what they are. Spend your grand on proper separates.

I think Bose are very good for the money. I have a wave radio CD and for its size at full volume with no poping I couldn't find anything to match it. As for the lifestyle systems a friend has one and it kicks my Sony vega systems' butt

I didn't say I could not hear the difference, but I do mean that it is not worth spending anything more, the difference in quality is effectively meaningless. Your brain should be able to compensate. To understand what I mean, do you really enjoy TV any more now on your large widescreen stereo TV than you did 25 years ago on a 20 inch B&W TV with mono sound? I really doubt it. It is the quality of the TV programme that matters, just as it is the nature of the song/music you are listening to that is really all that is important, as long as you can hear it.

Jesus William. You do talk ****e. But we love you

Looked at the BOSE Acoustic Wave music system at

If you're after something that is stylish, a bit gadgety, slightly retro and sounds excellent check [url']http://www.ruark.co.uk/tivoli/index.htm[/url]

One speaker? Hmmm. Have a look at Rotel, they're nice pieces of kit. Arcam also if you like it smooth.