Why all the hate for the BOSE in the MS3 GT?
- Thread starter 94jedi
- Start date
My Mach 460 in my GT sounds better in all honesty. The MS3 does sound better than the stereo in my focus, but not by too much. The reason I'm unimpressed with it is lack of MP3 playback via the head unit's CD deck. Completely worthless to me, especially when it's an integrated system like it is.
CTGrey02 said:
(iagree) The lack of native MP3 support is my biggest complaint as well. Sure, it's got an AUX port, but you get unwanted noise/ distortion in the sound. It's not a deal-breaker since people don't buy this car for the sound, but it's still a huge disappointment for those of us who enjoy music.
regardless of what anyone thinks about the bose system, it's still WAY better than the non-bose s***... absolutely gutless and NOTHING on any range at all... only reason why you want that pile of s*** when you buy the car is if you're going to be putting in an aftermarket headunit.... I'm NOT because I don't care to spend the money, void warranties, and disable certain functionalities (such as the clock, temp display etc), so I'll stick to the bose s***
- :
- 2010 Mazda CX-9 GT Dolphin Gray
Anyone who has perspective knows...
Audio is a very personal thing. When you factor in the recording, the type of music, your ears and your mood every system will sound different. Personal preference also plays a part.
I've listened to the Bose system and it sounds fine for listening to music at sane levels. You will be disappointed if you expect bass that will punch a hole through your chest or dynamics that will raise the roof. It's a $25,000 car after all with a killer engine, killer suspension, killer interior design and tons of features. It also well screwed together. I don't know what you guys expect?For the money and the overall performance your getting I think it's a well-balanced system.
94jedi said:
Audio is a very personal thing. When you factor in the recording, the type of music, your ears and your mood every system will sound different. Personal preference also plays a part.
I've listened to the Bose system and it sounds fine for listening to music at sane levels. You will be disappointed if you expect bass that will punch a hole through your chest or dynamics that will raise the roof. It's a $25,000 car after all with a killer engine, killer suspension, killer interior design and tons of features. It also well screwed together. I don't know what you guys expect?For the money and the overall performance your getting I think it's a well-balanced system.
- :
- 2010 Mazda CX-9 GT Dolphin Gray
What type of options?
Adding options to cars costs money from design to manufacturer. It also complicates test. The more combinations the more money and time it takes to test.
Mazda pays Bose to design and implement a car audio system. The more system choices/configurations Mazda asks for, the more bottom-line cost goes into the car. Cost also come in the form of development. Adding extra configurations adds time, which translates to cost. There's cost in the parts kept on hand, cost in the floor space used to house parts and cost in the factory to change the line when a different configuration is built.
Mazda budgets in how much of an "Audio System" they can afford in any design. The Bose system in the 3 no doubt was designed to a cost.
It may seem easy to "Add Options" but there are repercussions for every button or widget added from the initial development process to final factory assembly.
CTGrey02 said:
Adding options to cars costs money from design to manufacturer. It also complicates test. The more combinations the more money and time it takes to test.
Mazda pays Bose to design and implement a car audio system. The more system choices/configurations Mazda asks for, the more bottom-line cost goes into the car. Cost also come in the form of development. Adding extra configurations adds time, which translates to cost. There's cost in the parts kept on hand, cost in the floor space used to house parts and cost in the factory to change the line when a different configuration is built.
Mazda budgets in how much of an "Audio System" they can afford in any design. The Bose system in the 3 no doubt was designed to a cost.
It may seem easy to "Add Options" but there are repercussions for every button or widget added from the initial development process to final factory assembly.
Antonio DiMarco said:
You have a good point, but you're also completely missing the point of this conversation.
What CTGrey is saying is that Mazda already has the exact same Bose system that plays MP3s. $400~500 option that was never available even as an option even though they had them available. Your argument about extra configuration is null because Mazda already has them built for our cars.
speed3shon
Member
- :
- 2007 Mazdaspeed3
ive never had a problem with burned cds...
but no mp3s jedi
but no mp3s jedi
Antonio DiMarco said:
My last car was around $22,000 and came with a Monsoon audio system that is one of the best quality (not supper bassy , no subwoofer) car audio systems installed from a factory I have heard. Although the rest of the car fell apart (VW) the stereo from Monsoon is amazing.
I hate the fact I have a BOSE system as they are way overpriced for the quality speakers they produce. It is like buy Monster brand cables in Best Buy/CC and pay $75 for a $20 cable. The Monster is not a bad cable but you can get much better for less money than Monster charges. Same goes for BOSE.
My Uncle is a BOSE fan but also has a Monsoon system in his Buick and is amazed how bad the Bose sounds in the car.
While I do not need a supper bass system that shakes every bolt loose in the car, I like quality and feel that it is not there. Any volume over 12 and the system sounds like crap.
Remember BOSE spends more money in marketing than all other speaker brand companies combined. If any are interested in a BOSE story you can read it here
