Hmmm. Didn't think of that....more efficient speakers...easier to drive...require less power to drive to the same db...or allowing slightly higher db with the same power...which seems congruent with the announced 3db. I think your on to something here....great thought

But don't we have a member who has "access" to such a simple question? Is there something sensitive about sharing simple technical information of no significant consequence? Back in the 80's there was a technical support line you could call to get some of this kinda info.

Or is Bose just embarrassed to release performance data relative to their system in the Corvette...hey, I think I just broke the code!Chevrolet is all about Corvette performance facts....seems to me there is a marketing opportunity for an audio mfg to leverage the Corvette as a platform for a high performance audio system. Lexus has Mark Levinson (part of Harmon International)....how about Harmon let JBL loose on a hi=po audio for the Vette?! Heck, for that matter...I'd suggest Bose take advantage of the opportunity since they are expert marketers. But perhaps all they are....all marketing and no performance (trying to wave the flag in front of the bull)

Maybe I'll just have to turn the Corsa's up and forget the rest eh?!

 

i seriously don't understand why GM doesn't put a better stereo in the C6. the lexus' get the mark levinson, as you pointed out, and now, hell, a freakin mitsubishi eclipse gets an awesome stereo.

i'd gladly pay $1k extra on the price of the car for a proper system with component speakers, crossovers, real amps, and real subs.

 

At least I'd like to have the option for a real upgrade...so those that want it can get it OEM...and those that don't care, don't have to! To each their own!

 

I agree that GM should step up the materials in the Corvette, but why would we want leather on the console? I see lots of people mention this. What's the deal? It sounds really odd to me, I don't think I've ever seen a car with a leather console?

 

Do a survey on how many people were going to buy a Corvette but didn't because of the weak stereo. There's your answer.

I'd rather pay a bit more for a good stereo, too, but you and I aren't the average Corvette buyer.

 

Havent really dug that hard yet. To busy buying all my initial mods -loyds matts etc. I have seen on other threads that people seem very happy with the eclipse speakers. They seem like a perfect size match for the stock speakers. A guy had a pic of them not to long ago.

 

I removed the Bose system w/i one month of purchasing my '04 Coupe. I installed Alpine head w/XM, JL Audio amp, JL speakers all around, a JL subwoofer and separate amp. What a difference!

The minute I sat in my new '06 coupe, I knew the so-called upgraded Bose system again would have to go. I am waiting for a component to arrive that will allow the same system to be installed in my C6 without changing the system head. The subwoofer I used in the C5 cannot be used in the C6 since there is no rear well to place it inside of.

Those who have heard a good audio sistem will quickly detect that the upgraded Bose system is not very good. It does sound better, however, than my stock system in my Dodge Ram Hemi pickup and in my Olds minivan.

 

And boy Oh boy do you pay for it. It's like a $2500.00 option that must be taken in as part of a package.

The 3LT radio/cd player sounds OK to me too. With aftermarket exhausts, and the top down, quality isn't that big an issue.

 

One, reference to efficient speakers is probably not what you meant. Inefficient is what you want in a speaker so it will respond to the drive. 100% efficient for example will give you sound without any drive, not good.

Two, It's not a Lexus it's only two seats very close to one another and not a lot of area for sound.

Three, Bose was the only one that stepped up in 1984 to do a sound system for the Corvette. The primary task was to make a computer diagramed sound profile so that both the passenger and driver hear exactly the same sound, not an easy task.

Four, you need to understand ”Near and Far Field Theory” to diagram your sound profile, most of which is dependent on the interior.

Five, Increasing power to accomplish your end negates all reflective wave fronts therefore giving you the raw or one could say boom box approach, not good for some, including me.

Six, I can assure you that the Bose Engineers don’t wake in the morning to go to work to make a bad system on purpose. I would suggest you take a tour of their facility and then decide.

Seven, what would Paul Harvey say. :-))

Eight, the human ear can detect a 1 db change but not less than that.

 

Jimman, talk about an audiophile. It sounds like your good at what you do though. For myself I vaguely remember someone talking about near and far field theory in a physics class I once slept through, but didn't that have more to do with RF?

Damn, I'd hate to have to pay for the only sound system you guys will accept

For us mortals the sound system is good, not great but good enough to drive by.

It does take all kinds to make a world doesn't it?

Al

 

Mechanical waves work very similar to RF that's why one can't tell what direction low frequency notes are coming from and Highs seem to come from where ever your head is turned.

 

It's a logarithmic increase; a doubling of power.

 

GM should change suppliers, JBL, Harmon Kardon or Nakamishi, might be other better choices

 

A 100% efficient speaker would convert all of the electrical signal drive fed to it to audio. All, but not more than all. That's what 100% efficiency means. It doesn't mean prepetual motion, free energy machines, or any other pseudo-science nonsense.

In the real world, no speaker is 100% efficient, though some tweeters come pretty close. Where speaker efficiency really falls off is at low frequencies. Few speakers are even 1% efficient at low frequencies (a proper enclosure can boost efficiency, but at low frequencies the enclosure has to be very large to effectively improve the impedance match between the speaker cone and free air). That's why a good stereo system will have bigger amps driving the low frequency woofers than it has driving the high frequency tweeters (or some really good passive crossover networks).

The car is damn near as wide as my pickup, and has a much larger open volume behind the seats than my truck. But the stereo soundstage is much worse in the Corvette. That's just poor system design.

Well, its an easy task if you don't care about proper stereo imaging. Bose obviously doesn't, since the mixed mono drivers they use in the dash and rear destroy the stereo soundstage in the Corvette.

That's true. You might want to take a calibrated binaural microphone and measure the sound field in the Corvette with an audio spectrum analyzer and vector stereo imaging display. You'd be shocked by just how bad it is. Frequency response plots of pink noise (flat sound source) vary by as much as 22 dB, and the phase vectors on the imaging display wander all over the place as test frequencies are varied. It is one of the worst "premium" stereo systems I've ever measured. (I have access to laboratory grade equipment to do the measurements, and have done many such measurements in vehicles, homes, and public performance venues).

BTW, did you ever wonder why Bose doesn't publish the performance specs for any of their systems? Every reputable high fidelity manufacturer is happy to deluge you with spectrum plots, stereo vector displays, etc to show you that the system really is high fidelity. Bose doesn't, and if you do the measurements yourself, you see why. Their systems are no where close to high fidelity.

The most accurate stereo reproduction occurs in an anechoic chamber, which is why reputable organizations test stereo components in such chambers. Since auto cabins are rarely good anechoic chambers, the best thing to do is to do what audio engineers in glass windowed sound control rooms do, use near field monitors driven hard enough to mask any ambient room echo, or wear quality headphones.

The goal of any high fidelity stereo system is to reproduce as accurately as possible what you would have heard if you had been present at the recording venue when the recording was made. There should be no coloration of the sound due to the stereo system components, or the space in which the sound is reproduced. The latter is not an easy thing to do in many cases, but there are known solutions, and Bose doesn't use any of them.

They do what mass production engineers usually do, try to make systems as cheaply as possible while counting on the general public to have little or no idea what good stereo reproduction (or live music) actually sounds like. They're masters of "fool the ear". They can make crap sound pleasant. But it isn't accurate high fidelity stereo. If you could A/B with the live performance, even the untrained ear would know it was being lied to, and very blatantly lied to at that. And that's why Bose won't let retailers set Bose systems up in listening rooms with other manufacturer's equipment. You'd then be able to do A/B testing, and even to the untrained ear the Bose systems would come off very badly.
Anything he's paid enough money to say.

Actually, the trained ear can hear changes much smaller than 1 dB (in some aural contexts), though the average untrained person probably won't notice. That's how trained radio operators can pull weak signals out of what just sounds like raw noise to the untrained person.

Of course this is a moot point with respect to the Bose sound systems in our Corvettes. We aren't talking about 1 db changes there. There are gross deviations from high fidelity, as much as 22 db, across the sound spectrum produced by the Bose system in the Corvette. (22 db = a 158.5 times level change. That's not trivial, it is huge)

 

Thanks shopdog! Always enjoy hearing your input (no pun intended!).

 

If they offer this then the wood trim can't be far behind.

 

You make interesting points but my initial statements were just generic talking points more or less titles of discussion and a weak attempt at humor with the Harvey statement.
Actually wasn’t expecting to be critiqued to that detail on mere statements but if you want to I’m up for it. Also curious about your analysis of wave theory within the Corvette. Could you share the data and test procedures you used and what initiated that testing.

 

Got no highs, got no lows, must be Bose!

 

When I decided to build a HT it soon became apparent that I needed to study. Spent a couple years at it before I finally pulled the trigger. And no, its not one of those rooms that costs more than the average house. All together including cabinets and what not I spent 30k. Spare change for many here but enought to make me spend quite a bit of time auditioning systems and reading up. Here is a couple of general audio observations (background stuff) that apply to the C6. Bose uses a simple human quirk in the design of most of its systems. Any human being when given enough sound information will fill in the blanks with what he (or she) knows should be there. This is the basis of what makes all sub/small cube speakers work. Given enough of the bass and enough of the mid and low highs combined with the human brains ability to add the missing musical information these speakers manage to sound good. My computer system for instance has a set of Klipsch 2.1s. Play a cd on it and it sounds pretty good. If I turn right around and play it on my HT I can instantly hear how much better it could sound if played on a system capable of accurate full range sound reproduction. The much richer sound comes from being able to hear all of the musical information. keep in mind here Im not an expert and my ears have been subjected to a lot of engine rooms and other noisy equipment for the better part of a lifetime and my hearing is probably worse than average. Its a difference that anyone can hear. Now of course Im not trying to compare the two systems just explaining what makes them what they are. This is why when you go to the audio store you find the home theater in a box setups and such in one room and the bigger systems in another. Seemingly its just sorted by price but acutally they dont want to expose these systems side by side with something that can play full range. Bose didnt of course discover this but you have to give them credit for being the first to really leverage it at retail. This applies to the C6 because essentially what you have is a small form factor system like your average computer speakers. The woofers dont have enough power or excursion to produce low base and then you have tweeters which are not really tweeters combined with mono mid ranges behind you to help fill in the mid range. Unfortunately to the detriment of sound staging. Thats the other major factor that hurts the sound. As designed the system cant produce good stereo imaging. Its physically impossible. Again your going to notice this if you have a system that does do it right. No need for golden ears. The main hit with bose in the HT world is not that it sounds like utter crap. Its that you can always get better sound for the same money or the same sound for less.