|
New member Username: NsivaPost Number: 1 Registered: Oct-05 | I recently moved to a house and found Bose array speakers in 2 rooms (living, family) and 2 speakers in the deck - all wired. I need some help on how I can use these. Here is the configuration: Family room - 2sets of array speakers and 6 wires, labeled as family, deck and living from a outlet - presume these are the speaker cables Living room - 2 sets of array speakers; 4 wires labeled left, right, Stereo 1, Stereo2 in a corner - presume they need to be connected to amplifer or receivers Deck - 2 speakers What kind of system I need to connect these speakers, as they look nice and they are all wired? Can anybody make-out what is going here? Thanks a bunch Sam |
|
New member Username: NsivaPost Number: 2 Registered: Oct-05 | Just a small correction. I just found 2 sets of speakers in another room - living room 2. So, I presume that 6 wires from the family are coming into family room, living room 2 and deck. The living room 1- is probably separate. |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 6290 Registered: May-04 | I'd be careful. It's quite possible the last family in the house died from listening to the Bose speakers. |
|
Silver Member Username: Timn8terSeattle, WA USA Post Number: 563 Registered: Dec-03 | Array? |
|
John Bon Jovi Unregistered guest | Jan, when someone comes to this forum asking for help, they aren't looking for you to criticize their equipment (most of the time). We all realize that Bose speakers suck..comparitively. But given that they are free, and came with the house...who wouldn't take free speakers? sure, you'll wanna replace them eventually, but for now use what ya got. that's all Siva is asking for, help with the setup. not speaker advice. |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 6311 Registered: May-04 | I didn't give speaker advice. And neither did you, JBJ. |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 6312 Registered: May-04 | Actually what I would do with free Bose has nothing to do with the issue. |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 6313 Registered: May-04 | Unfortunately, Siva hasn't given enough information to allow a useful reply. But jump right in there, JBJ. Since you don't care for my reply, I would hope you have a better answer. |
|
Silver Member Username: ChitownPost Number: 380 Registered: Apr-05 | This comment is as unhelpful as Jan's, but this is probably the fourth post I have seen this past month where people have said that they moved into a house wired and set with bose speakers. In one case even the subwoofer was left. I can see why people with Bose are deciding to move on, but why so many in such a short period of time? But Jan is right there is not enough info here. Some Bose speakers will not work with anything but a Bose receiver. So this is hard to tell |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 6319 Registered: May-04 | I suggest the Bose speakers might be haunted and you think I'm being serious. Just who needs to lighten up some here? |
|
Silver Member Username: NuckParkhill, Ontario Canada Post Number: 172 Registered: Dec-04 | That is a bit excessive TR. I am uneducated in Bose, what would make a speaker work with only 1 specific brand of Receiver? Impedance? Or do they only work 'properly' with the matchi9ng power source? |
|
Silver Member Username: ChitownPost Number: 387 Registered: Apr-05 | Some of them are driven at 1.5 Ohm if I remember correctly. Also some have strange connectors in the end of the wires without any documentation usually as to what does what. |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 2743 Registered: Mar-05 | > this is probably the fourth post I have seen this past month where people have said that they moved into a house wired and set with bose speakers. In one case even the subwoofer was left. I can see why people with Bose are deciding to move on, but why so many in such a short period of time? Wouldn't be surprised if it was all the same anti-Bose troll looking to stir the pot... |
|
Silver Member Username: ChitownPost Number: 390 Registered: Apr-05 | Nuck somehow your posting about the whitesox didn't make it here, but I got it through the e-mail. I'm not much of a baseball fan in general, but of course I am happy for the Sox. It just happens though that ground zero of the parade celebration is going to be right outside my office building in downtown this morning. People have already lined up at 6:00 a.m. when I came to the office. |
|
Unregistered guest | this could be the built-invisible system Bose had in the late 90's. If it is, the the living room has 5.1 surround sound (hence the 6 wires). You have stereo in the 3 other locations. You are probably missing the center channel for the living room (should be 3 dual cubes, 2 ceilings and a subwoofer). You should have 2 amps in the basement (they look like big car amps). These amps *can* be made to work with a regular receiver, but it's a lot easier if you use a Bose lifestyle receiver. If you can pull down a speaker and look at the back (or somehow find out when it was made), you can figure out if you have the proprietary 1.2 Ohm speakers or the more common 4 Ohm speakers. I have this system and it's fairly easy to get it up and running if you have all the parts and it's already wired. You could also call Bose. |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 6410 Registered: May-04 | "You could also call Bose." AWWW! That would be too easy! |
|
Silver Member Username: Stu_pittNYC, NY Post Number: 723 Registered: May-05 | "You could also call Bose." I wonder if they'll give you speaker specs if you call them. |
|
Bronze Member Username: Fps_deanPost Number: 29 Registered: Oct-05 | Hey Bon Jovi... you have a good point, but Jan Vigne's comment was too funny. |
|
New member Username: FarmergogginPost Number: 5 Registered: Oct-05 | i do not see what is wrong with bose |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 6430 Registered: May-04 | That's what's so spooky about them. You can't see it. I tell you all, these things are haunted! |
|
Bronze Member Username: Fps_deanWilliamstown, MA USA Post Number: 42 Registered: Oct-05 | Yeah they look perfectly fine. But the thing is they made a couple good speakers in the 60s and 70s and their quality dropped and dropped worse than (mainly American... the japs never had any balls to begin with!) cars did in the late 70s (for reference, a 69 Vette had about 375 hp at the wheels, and the limited L88 engine put out around 600. By 1979, the Vettes were putting out 150 HP at the wheels). So what do they do? They shift their market to something more affordable that the average Joe working for $5/hr to feed 10 kids can afford, and it's all junk! Listen to the 901 which are $1200 floor units. Then compare them to just about any $600/pair speaker out there and be amazed at how much better they sound. Bose is the Gibson of speakers... make a good product, then put out trash and ride the name until they go bankrupt. |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 2140 Registered: Feb-05 | "the japs never had any balls to begin with" I hope you know how offensive that sounds. |
|
Silver Member Username: NuckParkhill, Ontario Canada Post Number: 214 Registered: Dec-04 | fps...That is one of the most offensive epithets I can imagine. I am caucasion and I am offended. Do tell if you wear glasses, are overweight, have a disability or have someone in your family with an alternative lifestyle so we can chip in with stupid, useless remarks! Oh, wait! Most of us are mature adults(most) |
|
Silver Member Username: GavincummPost Number: 308 Registered: Feb-05 | Then explain to me why the Japanese make some of the best cars in the world if their engineering blows. I'll take a Honda or Acura anyday over a GM |
|
Anonymous | But I would take a Ford GT over an Acura NSX! |
|
Silver Member Username: GavincummPost Number: 309 Registered: Feb-05 | not me |
|
Anonymous | The main thing I have against Honda products is their outright horrible turning radius (having owned a 93 Accord and driven an 02 Accord and 92 Civic). Both Toyota and Nissan are significantly better in this regard. You might also note that in general their engines are seriously devoid of torque and need to rev fairly high to achieve any kind of power. Also, in the Honda/Acura stable only the NSX and RL are not front wheel drive vehicles, which is decidedly inferior in a performance context. Conversely, interior fit and finish of Japanese vehicles seem a couple steps above their American counterparts, their build quality and reliability are still ahead, and they are pretty economical as far as gas is concerned. As far as the NSX is concerned, its alright if not overpriced, and it desperately needs the new model to come out to maintain some kind of semblance of being a high performance vehicle. |
|
Silver Member Username: GavincummPost Number: 310 Registered: Feb-05 | I agree about the fact that the NSX needs to be updated, but don't think the turning radius is that bad. Of course, I am talking about a 2004 Civic. Granted, the older models werent that hot, such as the accord. But, as soon as Nissan works out the issues with their engines I might agree with you about them being an ok car. I know 2 people that have brand new nissans that are lemons. One of them was a 2003 Sentra SPEC-V, and the other was a 2003 altima. They both had the same problems with the cooling system, and blowing head gaskets. Needless to say, the SPEC driver went to an Acura RSX, and the Altima driver went to a Toyota Camry. But, the SPEC-V has the altima engine in it, so it is no surprise that they are both having these problems. |
|
Silver Member Username: GavincummPost Number: 311 Registered: Feb-05 | I love toyota products, however. But Scion, ugh. They look TOO cheap. |
|
Anonymous | I also like Toyota and my wife recently bought a Corolla for a commuter car. I'm actually looking at a Scion for myself in a year, but it all depends on the test drive. If I hate it, I'm probably going to get a Civic Hybrid. |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 6440 Registered: May-04 | Not to get into the "japs" thing; it is too offensive to merit further discussion I hope. But, Bose didn't make products in the 1960's; the company was a 1970's phenom. And the federal government stepped into the fray in 1971 and insisted that auto manufacturers not claim outrageous horsepower figures just as audio manufactures had to relinquish the claims of "one channel driven at 1kHz into a purely resistive 8 Ohm load to achieve an I.E.A. peak, instantaneous power output of 500 watts" for a Sylvania console. In the 1960's American car manufacturers were riding the wave of NASCAR and the motto "Race it on Sunday, sell it on Monday". The "at the wheels" HP was with any trick the dyno guys could think up to make the product look like you had to have thise year's model over last year's. You could factory order a motor with 11.5:1 compression and go to the corner gas station to buy 104 octane gas for $0.37 a gallon. Guys were running 5.88 gears on the street! And you couldn't breathe in Los Angeles due to the smog. Anti-pollution devices began changing the product, the industry had to go to "as installed" HP ratings with an air cleaner and all belts to power steering, brakes, etc. along with a working alternator and accessories hooked up not just sitting there. Leaded gas was no longer available and the 11.5:1 engine was gone and the price of gas soared to $0.78 a gallon. In 1972 HP numbers dropped by about 50% due to the new measuring techniques just as that Slyvania console eventually had to be rated at 12 watts RMS. fps - I see by your profile that you are 23. Stop with the "japs" thing before you turn 24, please. I don't remember that term being used in "Super Sport Compacts". And learn what you are talking about when you discuss the times that many of us lived through. The 1960's and '70's were a very different attitude than today. Some things about those times should be remembered and some should be buried. It would take a lot to get me to part with my McIntosh tube amps from the early 1960's and I wish I still had my Chevelle SS or my friend's '66 GTO with tri-power carbs. But a Honda Civic that gets 58 MPG and runs on something other than petro fuels most of the time is a very good thing. Fewer wars for oil and all that stuff. http://www.stereophile.com/loudspeakerreviews/425/ |
|
Silver Member Username: GavincummPost Number: 312 Registered: Feb-05 | end of discussion, I hope! |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 6442 Registered: May-04 | I'll only add that I bought my Chevelle for $2900 and some change. I just couldn't go the $4200 for a new Vette at the time. Things change! |
|
Gold Member Username: T_bomb25Dayton, Ohio United States Post Number: 1146 Registered: Jun-05 | And a Mitsibishi Evo gets 27 hwy a gallon and it will run away from a new Mustang Cobra.Thats a horrible analysis comparing Japanese engineering to American car engineering,American car engineering hasnt been good since the 60s.And people dont forget when Bose made their few decent speakers the Japanese were doing very good in audio back then,hell they probably designed them and found out how terrible they were after the 601,901,and 301 and sold the design to doctor Bose,and none of those 3 speakers wernt anything special either. |
|
Bronze Member Username: Fps_deanWilliamstown, MA USA Post Number: 53 Registered: Oct-05 | Art... yeah that didn't sound too good actually.. but the Japanese cars at the time didn't have any power like the American cars (and well... still don't but now it's closer!). My problem with the Japanese cars is that my knees hit my chin in them. But when they changed the rating from the flywheel to the wheel in 1971 or 1972? to save people money on insurance, that only amounted for something like 20% of the HP power loss. The 79 Vette was rated at 150 hp and 185 at the flywheel. |
|
Anonymous | The quarter mile time is 0.4 seconds off from the Evo IX to the Mustang GT; hardly running away. The Mustang also does 25mpg highway. You might also note the 10 grand price difference. Still have to wait and see what the Shelby GT500 is going to do. Now another fun comparison might be the current Corvette against the Evo. The vette beats it by 0.7 seconds at the quarter and still gets ~25mpg highway. |
|
Bronze Member Username: Fps_deanWilliamstown, MA USA Post Number: 55 Registered: Oct-05 | Oh and Nuck, I am caucasian too. Not always proud of it, but I am. No need to take offense though. |
|
Silver Member Username: NuckParkhill, Ontario Canada Post Number: 220 Registered: Dec-04 | Taeaun, the evo6 was close on gas, but the current evo gets NOTHING close to that, my brother has one and it sucks gas like a hose! AND lost to an STi. Nice car, but... |
|
Bronze Member Username: Fps_deanWilliamstown, MA USA Post Number: 57 Registered: Oct-05 | Maybe the 1980 Vette. Not the C06 or Z07 though! |
|
Silver Member Username: NuckParkhill, Ontario Canada Post Number: 222 Registered: Dec-04 | Yeah I take offense Dean. Thats hors e s h i t . I dont buy it cause I am canadian |
|
Anonymous | What about the 1980 vette? |
|
Bronze Member Username: Fps_deanWilliamstown, MA USA Post Number: 60 Registered: Oct-05 | The Evo IX may do a 1/4 close to a 1980. I meant to say 1990 though, the 1980s werent very good still. |
|
Anonymous | The Evo IX does the quarter in 13.4 per C&D. The C06 Vette does it in 12.7, per C&D. The Mustang GT does it in 13.8, again per C&D. The Z06 Vette does it in a blazing 11.7 @ 125mph. My old 93 Accord LX w/ automatic transmission wouldn't have hit 60 yet... |
|
Gold Member Username: T_bomb25Dayton, Ohio United States Post Number: 1149 Registered: Jun-05 | The RS Evo thats stripped down with a different turbo and 200 pounds lighter done it in 12.9 my friend has one they ddint build many,I dont know the trapspeed.Yeah the new Vette is silly fast one of the few good american cars that and the new Colbalt SS,and the Dodge Neon SRT-4,are the only new american cars Id buy.I saw more than a few SRT-4 running 13.2s stock at Edgewater race way without the Mopar mods,when I ran my 90 Eclipse GSX last year. |
|
Bronze Member Username: Fps_deanWilliamstown, MA USA Post Number: 67 Registered: Oct-05 | ^^The newer SRT-4's do 14.2 stock. The older ones do it in closer to 18. That thing was modified. "My old 93 Accord LX w/ automatic transmission wouldn't have hit 60 yet..." lol!! I've driven some cars (Plymouth Acclaim, Honda Civic), that would not do 60 at all, so don;t feel bad. |
|
Bronze Member Username: Fps_deanWilliamstown, MA USA Post Number: 68 Registered: Oct-05 | Oh and the new Vette C06 was the second fastest stock Vette ever made. The Z07 is getting close to the second fastest stock street legal car ever made. (#1? 1968 Plymouth S/S Barricuda!). That has come a long way since 1980. I'd like a Vette... that would be fun. I drive a Buick for the combination of size, trunk space, gas milage (30 mpg highway... not bad!) and power. |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 6448 Registered: May-04 | Trunk space?! |
|
Silver Member Username: ChitownPost Number: 404 Registered: Apr-05 | How did this post turn into Cartalk? |
|
Silver Member Username: GavincummPost Number: 314 Registered: Feb-05 | LMFAO! because I made a very bad analogy. |
|
Anonymous | TW: Evo RS (2004) quarter in 13.5 @102mph per C&D. |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 6454 Registered: May-04 | How can anyone complain about the performance of today's cars, if the product coming stock from the showroom floor is turning 13.5 second quarter mile times? As has been noted, most of us in 1969 would have loved to be able to buy a car that did those times. Trunk space or not! Now if only the audio world had the equivalent products that kept up and bettered most of what was available in the 1970's. I don't know about the rest of you, but just adding more channels and DSP modes isn't doing it for me. |
|
Silver Member Username: GavincummPost Number: 317 Registered: Feb-05 | same here! Hence why I am so in love with my Rotel 2 channel amp, and am thinking about going outlaw audio for a stereo pair of monoblocks. |
|
Bronze Member Username: Raj_pEvanston, IL USA Post Number: 20 Registered: Oct-05 | Wow it seems that every thread here gets way off track without fail! |
|
Gold Member Username: T_bomb25Dayton, Ohio United States Post Number: 1156 Registered: Jun-05 | This thread was destined to get off track,as soon as Bose was mentioned it was off track,so you cant blame anyone on this forum,blame Bose.And Car and Driver is the slowest magazine in existence! |
|
Bronze Member Username: Fps_deanWilliamstown, MA USA Post Number: 71 Registered: Oct-05 | Jan... actually the fastest stock car in the quarter, totally unmodified was the 1968 Plymouth S/S Barricuda and a Dodge Hemi Dart did it ever so slightly slower. Third was the '69 Vette with the L88 engine option, but all three of those were very limited in production. There are a lot of other cars from the era high on the list too, but the new Vette is looking as good as ever (very close to the L88 and there were more than 250 made!). I don't have any problem with today's cars though. I didn't like the early 80s when you have a 350 with only 150 hp... I mean what gives? If I have a gas guzzler it better at least go fast! My 205 hp is more than enough for me (and not having 400 under my hood probably keeps me alive longer too!) |
|
Gold Member Username: T_bomb25Dayton, Ohio United States Post Number: 1177 Registered: Jun-05 | I like my 380 h.p. under the hood of my modified Chrysler Conquest,well it doesent have a american part on it well the real name is Mitsubishi Starion a Japanese legend it took the 6 years to get it in to the states,because it blew the doors off of everything america maid so they watered it down to 188 from 270 to get past the border,but they left evrything intact so you could raise the pwer back up well about 80% of it anyway with a simple twist of a bolt. |
|
Bronze Member Username: Fps_deanWilliamstown, MA USA Post Number: 82 Registered: Oct-05 | I don't think stock Chrystlers have had American parts for a long time not councing the Canadian models that Chrystler still made the engines for (and from what my Canadian friends tell me, they lasted a hell of a lot longer than the Mitsubishi engines). It's still a Chystler rated 280 remember... |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 2159 Registered: Feb-05 | "they lasted a hell of a lot longer than the Mitsubishi engines)." Incorrect. It was the other way around. |
|
Bronze Member Username: Fps_deanWilliamstown, MA USA Post Number: 84 Registered: Oct-05 | ^^ I have never seen a Chystler with a Mitsubishi engine hit 200,000+ miles, and most of them ended up in a jukyard by 100,000. I have seen a few with Chrystler engines from the same era with 250,000 miles on them before they died. |