Hi Guys, I'm happy to report that despite your thoughts and prayers, I'm still here . No, seriously, I want to thank all of you for your kind words of support during my recent hip replacement surgery. To be honest, I am experiencing slightly more discomfort than I had anticipated, and I'm still trying to get the images of those ugly 'nurses from hell' out of my mind (this may require years of therapy).

I do have a legitimate question, however, although it's probably going to sound totally stupid to most of you, especially those of you familiar with the Bose system. It's this whole thing about using two of these systems (orig. or compact) to create a STEREO effect. Aside from the terrible price premium, how does this even work? At it's simplest, stereo would include a left and right signal that would place different parts of a musical composition at different places along a 190/degree plane to simulate what you would hear from a live group standing at different spots on the bandstand. Bass is omnidirectional, making placement pretty much immaterial, and the addition of a center channel MIGHT make virtual placement of different instruments or vocals somewhat more accurate. So, here is my question. My understanding of the Bose system is that everyone, no matter what your location in the room, hears pretty much the same thing. So what gets fed to the 'left' system and what gets fed to the 'right'? Since both 'systems' are going to distribute their prospective signal in such a way as to 'make everyone hear the same thing', wouldn't their combined, simultaneous output have some kind of 'missional' conflict. It might sound ok, even GOOD, but would it be .....STEREO? I think it be more like CX@5%4KJ&X7A + BASS.

I'm being a little facetious, sure, but given the cost of two of these systems (plus stereo mixer???), is this the best way to spend your STEREO dollars if your goal truly IS stereo?. This whole post is going to sound incredibly stupid if I'm missing something obvious here. But it does seem to me that if a highly rated company like BOSE were truly interested in putting out a premium STEREO system, they would engineer it themselves and not leave acoustically/engineering-challenged users to create some gerry-rigged, Frankenstein with their product label on it.

Let me be clear that this is NOT a bash of Bose products or Bose users. I have no doubt that when used as intended, it is a marvelous system. I just don't understand how someone (ok, I'll use Zuki as an example) could go from 2 Podium 802's (<300.00) being 'sweet' and 'almost there', and 'the stereo effect bringing so much more to the table than a (single) compact Bose', to 2 Bose Compacts (for stereo effect) + Tone Match??/stereo mixer + Thumper or other 'bass boost' appendage + additional complexity of setup (especially for 1hr, multi-gig days), all for marginally improved stereo perfomance. I know I'm going to take a killing for this (especially since I've never heard a 'Bosi' in a A-B comparison with a conventional STEREO PA) but it sure seems like some kind of mass hypnosis to me (I can speak with authority on this subjuct, having been victimized by it many times during my purchasing career ).

I really AM interested in the thinking behind this though, and an explanation of how these systems would be configured for STEREO (detailed configurations, please, including the use of any subs, mixers, etc.

thanks,

chas

Chas glad to see your recovering nicely ...but I will let your buddy Diki lay down a few paragraphs on this subject...all I personally know is IT SOUNDS GREAT!!

chas ... great to have you back ... hope your physical pain ends a lot sooner than your 'mental' pain ...
About your question ... I use an INexpensive alesis mixer with L/R outs ... from my kb, I can pan voices to the left, right, or center... using two powered speakers,one on each side of me, I can separate the L from the R, so when I have a voice panned to the right I hear it from that speaker, etc ... bass and drums are panned to center so they come out both speakers ...
That being said, this sounds GREAT to my ears, but how much separation (if any) the audience is hearing depends on where they are located, I guess ...

I'm sure others will give you more on this ...

t.

Curious, Donny... do you HAVE a stereo Bose system? I thought you had just the one.

Those that DO have a stereo Bose system haven't remarked anything negative about the stereo imaging, and to be fair, one doesn't really expect much accurate imaging beyond maybe 20-30 feet out from the system (at the back of the room, most stereos sound about the same as a mono system). But this is where your dancers are, where those that are paying the MOST attention to what you sound like are. Giving them a spread out sound helps preserve the illusion of reality...

After all, as arranger players, illusion is ALL we are about. No real drummer, bassist, guitars, strings, what have you. But we work hard and spend LOTS of money to sound like they are real. Why compromise that by using a PA that sounds like they were all piled up in one spot?

Chas,

Glad to see you posting again, and I sincerely hope you quickly recover.

As for the stereo stuff--I guess I've posted this more times than I care to recall, but here goes--one more time.

"The only person that will benefit from stereo is the performer. The audience, especially with the Bose systems, may hear a somewhat fuller sound, but stereo--not a prayer unless they're within a few feet of the performer.

I've tried a pair of Bose systems just to see if there was something I was missing. There was NOT! Beyond 10 to 12 feet in front of the keyboard everything sounded mono to my aging ears. Maybe my hearing is shot to hell, but that's the way it sounded to me.

Cheers,

Gary

Nope just one BC for small gigs as stated.

Surprisingly, this is NOT what those that DO have a stereo Bose rig say, though, Gary...

Maybe the imaging isn't as detailed as a point source PA would make it (although, I've yet to hear anyone say they have compared the two side by side and got that impression), but if your poles are set up twenty feet apart or so, why it would suffer is beyond me.

And, bottom line, that twenty or thirty feet in front of you is where ALL the dancing takes place. Further out than that, who cares if the stereo doesn't matter?

Maybe Ian, zuki, leezone (you got two sticks?) or other Bose users that DO use stereo could chime in?

And yet, here you are telling chas how good a stereo system sounds. And I'm the one with the crystal ball?

I used two Bose L1 for several months, and, in my opinion, the stereo sweet spot is enhanced substantially...why else would I spend a lot of extra money...just for a small improvement?

I don't mind spending money, but I do hate to waste it.

I didn't use a mixer...just straight out from the keyboard's L and R...when someone sang, we used the keyboard's mic input.

Regarding the Compacts...

I used (actually demo'd) the Bose Compacts in a large hall, as well as in the store proper, and whilst it was being tested, two (or perhaps three...I can't remember) of the people present, ended up buying (or ordering) two Compacts, where they had initially been interested in getting just one.

So...it wasn't my imagination.

The bigger L1's are the way to go if you expect you will need a fair amount of oomph, but the Compacts are still a very capable system.

I haven't bought mine yet...waiting for some gig confirmations....right now I'm using my Yamaha MS60S powered monitors.

Wasn't trying to start a catfight, here. Actually, from the response, whether you agree with it or not, sounds to me like Gary is the only one who understood and tried to answer the question. In fact, if I just read the specs and listened to Bose's description of the system (regular and compact), Gary's response is what I would have expected. I still don't understand why one would pick that particular system design for a component stereo PA. I think Diki was diki-ering all around the issue by introducing phrases like 'detailed (stereo) imaging' and 'point source' PA. That sounds like it's creeping closer to clearing up some of my confusion about the efficacy of using TWO of these mono-by-design, full range, full coverage systems to create the ultimate flexible, gig-friendly, STEREO PA.

Also, could someone speculate as to why Bose does not offer a STEREO version of this unique design? Could it be that Bose doesn't think STEREO is necessary with this design concept? Remember that old dance, the HUSTLE?

I was just thinking, what if we confused our desire for a FULLER sound with a (perceived) desire for STEREO. Could we end up spending premium bucks pursuing the wrong thing? Just wondering.

chas

"A dirty mind is a terrible thing to waste"

Take a look at Bose's own ads... solo guitarists setting up to play coffee house style. Why would HE need stereo..? Take a look at how Bose envision a band using them. One EACH (guess they all are doctors in their spare time!)...

Then listen to those that actually DO use them as a stereo system. To be honest, sounds like IAN is the only one answering your question (from experience, anyway). Everyone else (including those with mono systems) is speculating.

Diki-ering, if you like!

Um, no.

What you describe above is known as a "binaural" recording. The binaural recording, once quite popular, was the attempt to recreate the actual exact sound of a performance, inclusive of the room acoustics. That kind of recording is hard to find today and has fallen by the wayside for all but the smallest group of purists in favor of the Stereo recording, which is quite a different animal entirely.

The old stereophonic method of recording an orchestra with the two mics positioned at a measured "3 to 2" distance is no longer done. Instead there is a lot of close mic'ing and multitracking, bringing in the Mix Engineer to create a sound that is larger than the actual. Richer, some might say.

We can take advantage of that when playing live with MIDI or AutoAccompaniment keyboards and the like, panning the instruments across the soundstage to force the perception that the bass player is standing "stage right" while the horn player is over on the left, etc. We can also take advantage of the fact that there are two separated amplifier and speaker systems at work, one reproducing mostly one instrument or so, the other side duplicating the rest. This can help the system be able to handle transients easier, which can translate to a clarity of sound. Even before the pair of Bose Compacts came into my life, I ran a true Stereo front in the small to medium venue clubs -- and always got compliments on our sound as compared to other acts that played the same places. Besides that, my MIDI synths all feature Stereo pianos, which I love to keep that way and the most critical part of the equation to me -- Leslie rotating speaker simulation, which can NOT sound proper at all from a mono source. I needs me some motion, some FM as well as AM going on when the B3 patch calls for some spin. In mono, every single Leslie emulator out there sounds like a sick and weak tremelo.




While this is true for the lower frequencies, a bass guitar or plucked bass fiddle does not make all of its energy "down there" where the directionality is not apparent to the human ear. You can easily use your ears to locate the bass player on teh soundstage due to the *note initiations* -- the ATTACK of the note, the "pluck" -- which is spread out above the range of nondirectionality. As high as the 5K mark. Matter of fact, it is the pluck marks that give the bass part its definition. Filter them out and you get a mushy mess of a bass sound not appropriate for any modern music that I know of. (This is also why accomplished B3 players who play the walking bass with the LH also kick one of the pedals at the initiation of each bass note -- typically a tritone away from the root of the current chord -- because it mimics the pluck of the bass string and adds that all-important definition to the part.)



Did you know that the original stereo diesing consisted of three channesl, L, R and Middle? It was indeed more accurate, especially for recreating those Binaural recordings. However, the mfrs deemed it too expensive and, afraid that customers of the day would not be willing to invest the cost of three amplifiers and three speaker systems, they cut it back to only two.



In my setup, Left and Right stereo outputs from my keyboards and MIDI synths get fed Stage Left and Stage Right accordingly. Internal Pans are left at default, typically the 12 oclock mark.



I think I've already explained what the real difference here is. You are confusing Stereo amplification with a true Binaural Recording.



I haven't seen a mono mixer worth using in decades. So that's a nonproblem.



You said it, I didn't, now govern yourself accordingly.

And one more thing:

Many of the samples used today are in stereo for a sound reproductive reason. You need the stereo amplification to take full advantage of that.

I'm mostly talking keyboard patches here, horns and such are still mono for the most part.

Every one of my currently used MIDI drumset patches and samples simply light up the room when reproduced in stereo rather than mono.

If someone can't hear the difference it does not bother me. I don't care how you sound.



[This message has been edited by --Mac (edited 10-16-2009).]

Chas, I don't have any agenda behind promoting the Bose...in fact, I should be endorsing Yamaha, but all I can do is relate what I have experienced from my own perspective.

I don't want to carry excess gear because I am basically very lazy, and if they could make keyboards and speaker cabinets out of Styrofoam...nah, I'm not THAT lazy.

Seriously, I'm of the opinion that we are ultimately playing the speaker(s)...it's the last link in the chain, and probably the most important.

So, I want the best speaker I can find, and the brand makes no difference....I could easily push Yamaha Stagepas 300/500(they are in stereo) but as it has been said, you wouldn't notice the stereo effect if you were any great distance away from the speakers.

It is not that way with two Bose, whether they be the Compacts, or the larger L1's...the stereo effect is greatly expanded because of the inherent nature of the array speakers in each cabinet...I don't know the science behind it, but I do know what my ears tell me...and, I'm not the only one.

You know the saying..."if it's stupid, and it works...it isn't stupid."

Another side benefit is the stage looks far cleaner, and you would not need monitors...of course the other advantage (as some have mentioned) is that you essentially hear what the audience hears, both in separation and volume level, so it is easy to judge when you may be too loud.

I hate being told to turn down...it is such a negative situation....I consider it almost an insult, but sometimes it's deserved, and I try to avoid it at all costs.

You know, my friend, I'd rather push Yamaha because I do some work for them, but, if I'm to recommend a pro system to a buddy who wants to hear his keyboard at it's optimum performance, it would have to be two Bose L1's or two Compacts.

A fool and his money, are soon partying....or something like that.

Chas,

Just to clarify, my goal is still stereo, but just a simple setup to include 2 Compacts. No extra woofers (use the Bose) or mixers (use the PA800). Can't get any easier. Always in my car, the choice to take in one or two

I believe from Ian and a few others on the Bose forum (including a Bose tech I had lengthy conversation with) is that a dual system will provide an unbelievable stereo field, which will allow the panning of instruments along with the things outlined by Mac.

I too had the question of what would happen with 2 180 degree mono fields running amok and meeting very weird in the middle? Who knows. I still know, (or at least perceive to hear) something is missing by playing only mono.

I do love the Bose, even mono, but need to investigate the stereo field. I can always sell one, but can't pass up on being my very best.

Thanks, Zuki. Looks like you and I are at least on the same page in the confusion area. I'm sure MAC is correct in that I'm some kind of idiot still living (sonically) in the 70's with some kind of outdated notion of what 'stereo' is. The statements I made about my understanding of stereo weren't meant to be taken as technically accurate, just trying to convey my perspective of a situation which I wanted some clarification on. I was looking for an answer, not a snide analysis of my question. For those of you that took it in that spirit and responded accordingly, I thank you.

chas

Chas, let me "shoot from the hip" here If one pays attention to the Bose ads, each musician uses his or her own system. That would, in effect, give a stereo sound as each instrument and voice would be amplified separately and be heard from the audience collectively. I believe that having two columns would essentially serve the same purpose by spreading the left and right channels to their maximum width.

As previously stated, the stereo "effect" pretty much dissolves beyond 20-30 ft. leaving a mixed mono sound further out. Personally, unless the channels are close enough to actually hear the mix in each channel, I feel that stereo might be a less than optimum way to amplify live stage sound. How many times have you been near to the right channel only to miss the parts you are used to hearing out of the left channel?

I say that for those who prefer or insist on stereo, then you will always be looking for the best mix. For us able to settle for live mono, what's the fuss?

Bose is very good, good enough to cause arguments among knowledgable musicians. Other systems are also very good. Price is something each of us has to deal with. If you are not willing to pay the price for a Bose then find the best system you can afford and be happy with it. How or why I ever came to own a Bose Compact still confounds me, but I'm glad I have it now.

You heard mine, remember?



------------------
Bill in Dayton

Quote
At its simplest, stereo would include a left and right signal that would place different parts of a musical composition at different places along a 190/degree plane to simulate what you would hear from a live group standing at different spots on the bandstand.
End Quote

Quote from Mac
What you describe above is known as a "binaural" recording. The binaural recording, once quite popular, was the attempt to recreate the actual exact sound of a performance, inclusive of the room acoustics. That kind of recording is hard to find today and has fallen by the wayside for all but the smallest group of purists in favour of the Stereo recording, which is quite a different animal entirely.
End Quote


Hi Mac
Have to disagree there, binaural recording had nothing to do with listening to the recordings over speakers, it was a recording technique to allow headphone users to hear the sound naturally rather then inside the head.
Essentially a Dummy head was made and 2 microphones were place inside the ears of it, this meant that the recordings picked up all the details as a human ear does, then when you played this back over headphones, it gave the user the full spatial experience rather then inside the head.
It was completely useless for use on speakers, as speakers are placed much further apart. (They don’t match the original microphone spacing)
Regards

Bill

Okay, now it makes more sense (in terms of Bose's intended use). So at it's best, it should be like listening to an acoustic group but with volume control. Still, this sounds very different from running a group of musicians through one system. Didn't you just lose your 'stage placement'? As I see it, in your first example (1 system/musician), that would be the ideal, and true stereo. Mixing the input signals and distributing them along a left/right axis to recreate the 'perception' of what was done in example #1 would be 'next best' or 'perceived stereo'. I'm making this stuff up as I go along, but I've long been curious about this. We gloss over a lot of stuff because we assume that 'musicians' are supposed to 'know this stuff', but in fact, what we 'know' is years and years of accumulated opinions, street wisdom, flat-out misinformation, and assorted BS.

Let me re-ask the question. Let's suppose we just wanted a great STEREO PA, you know, basically a left and right speaker system (powered/unpowered). WHY WOULD A BOSE OR BOSE COMPACT ANCHORING THE LEFT AND RIGHT SPEAKER POSITIONS PRODUCE A BETTER STEREO SOUND THAN CONVENTIONAL SPEAKERS OF SIMILAR POWER AND PERFORMANCE SPECS BUT AT A FRACTION OF THE COST?



Not sure I understand what that means? Anyway, thanks. Just shedding light on Bose's intended use was helpful (and makes sense). I'm now quite anxious to hear one demo'ed though I'd likely never buy one. I find the new generation of 'conventional' PA speakers just too seductive at half the cost. Plus, there's the familiarity factor.

Can't wait to get up and about and spending money again. A few toys I've still got my sights set on; a new super-duper controller to replace my (perfect condition) A70. Upgrade my VP550 for a VP770. Maybe a few goodies for my 'studio'. Of course, the DM-10 is already on order. Ahhh, so much time, so little money .

chas

OR enough money but so little time!
Still got brand new 3 year old toys I haven't found time for.

And by the way Charles I wish you a speedy recovery. My crusty 78 year old neighbor had it done a couple years ago and within days he was out walking around the block 3 times a day. Very slowly at first but now he mows lawns for all the "old" people in the neighborhood.

[This message has been edited by mikeathome1 (edited 10-17-2009).]

God bless him ... I've been saying for a while that I don't mind getting OLDER at all ... it's getting OLD that I hate !!! ...
As Mr. Diamond says "Getting old ain't for wimps!" ..
t.

"We're all Dying Everyday"

Hey, now that's uplifting

Yes but true herman.....


Life is too short to Dilly Dalley my friend!!.... Live "EVERY DAY" as if it was your Last!!
Enjoy your Family & Friends and you'll be fine!

Thanks Mike. I used to hear those stories and go, yeah, yeah... NOW, they're music to my ears. Beats the hell out of "we're all dying....". May be true but who wants to be reminded. Anyway, I'm sure Donny didn't mean it that way.

chas

chas

Exactly Chas....I only wish more people would stop wasting time & complaining & BS'ing in their lives and make every day count for something.........look at some old pictures of your life and you'll see how fast it went.....instead of saying" I'll get to it someday" ...just go for it NOW!!!......down the road you'll be happy you did

Now get well soon..

Chas get well soon.

Donny great philosophy. That's the way I try to live. In the late 90s I gave up a lucrative sales job to pursue my hobby with computers. I will admit I was in the right time at the right place RJR was offering an early retirement package. The tobacco business was going up in smoke and I was still young enough to do something else with my life. I went back to college for another degree this time in the tech field. For the last 10 years I've been working a job that used to be a hobby. 4 years ago I started gigging and music had been another hobby. Granted I don't have the musical skills that many of the pros who visit this site have, but I'm having the time of my life playing a few gigs every month. I'm up at 5 everyday to read the newspaper, then off to work, 3 days a week during lunch I hit the gym. After dinner each night some time with the family then at 9 PM I sit at the keyboard and many nights it's close to midnight before I call it a day. Me? I'm living everyday like it's my last.....and I try hard not to get the "poor me." blues either that sometime can slip into our lives ( sorry for the soapbox routine )

T. just get Steve & that great RI Italian food ready on "The Hill" for us......just a minor rescheduling from our original plans but, me and my bodyguard Fran WILL be there for sure asap .....Hopefully in FEB stay tuned

That came long after the original use of the term as binaural recording.

But I do remember the dummy heads. They were even used in attempts to recreate for speaker use at some point also. Didn't work all that well, actually.

In both cases, I am now old enough to make the claim, "Hell, I was THERE!"


--Mac



[This message has been edited by --Mac (edited 10-17-2009).]

Wow,

Played a rather large gig tonight (for me). Several Catholic schools came in for a Retirement/High School combination prom night. About 150 people. The solo Bose smoked. Everyone had a good time. The youngsters loved it, as I laid out the rock and roll. Had a great time. 2 Bose and I'm off and running.................

I've been using the Bose Model II for some time and love the vocal sound produced, as well as the guitar sound (solo act). But when I added two small keyboard amps to the mix, wow, what a much bigger, fuller sound. I'm using premixed stereo rhythm tracks from a laptop, which has two audio outputs. One goes to the Bose, the other to the two amps. Even at low volume (cocktail, dinner music), the room is full of sound. It's hard to go back to the Bose alone after hearing the "almost" stereo surround effect.

Does somebody who owns two BC's but has not observed much of a stereo effect care to try it again with a larger separation between speakers? From Ian's observation and how sound from BC's drops with distance (much slower), I wonder if the amount of separation one normally places similar conventional speakers with is too short for Bose linear speaker arrays.

Thanks
Shiral

Still waiting for someone OTHER than Gary to claim that stereo separation with Bose sticks actually IS worse than normal speakers. Ian has stated with HIS pair that the stereo sweet spot is actually LARGER than conventional systems. A direct contradiction. So before this all gets out of hand, perhaps we ought to find out if this is REALLY a problem, or just one person's opinion?

Somehow, I don't find Ian's observation contradictory. Sound emanating from a linear source (BC) drops slower compared to that from a point source (conventional). So, to observe the same kind of drop you need to move further hence the expanded sweet spot. Basically, due to slower drop of sound strength with distance, all the effective physical dimensions (separation between speakers, where you sense the sweet spot, where it ends, etc..) get expanded too. ...just the way I see it.

Shiral

I see, Diki. You meant observations by Gary and Ian contradict; not that Ian's observation contradicts with what's expected.

The enlarged stereo sweet spot was quite evident on both Bose systems...the L1's and the Compacts.

If it was only me who heard the systems and remarked how much better the stereo was than conventional speakers, then I would say it was just my own perception.

Thing is, several professional entertainers were at a few of my gigs and remarked on the L1 in stereo.

The Compacts were tried out in the store proper, and again, later on, in a large hall.

In this case, there were several other people interested in hearing the Compacts in stereo...afterwards, a couple of them ordered and bought two Compacts, when initially, they were only going to buy one.

I haven't bought mine yet...looks like they may have to wait until the new year.

Ian

[This message has been edited by ianmcnll (edited 10-19-2009).]

My guess for the more dramatic stereo effect is that the Bose systems are Line Arrays. Each of the speaker elements in a Line Array has a much more concentrated sound direction than normal PA (or HiFi speakers for that matter).

Doc-Z

I must say that I'm not implying that I know more about these systems than Gary....he forgot more than I'll ever know about PA systems.

Plus, he's older....er...more experienced.

All I can do is relate my own experience with each Bose system, and my own years of playing through conventional speakers (in stereo).

I strongly urge that anyone considering two Compacts, to try them out first.

Two of these things ain't cheap, and maybe one will do the trick.

I know, for my own satisfaction, I'll be buying two when the time comes.

Sometimes Ian and I differ on certain subjects, and this is one of those instances.

This is right off the Bose website:

"Spatial Dispersion™ loudspeaker technology features six small drivers mounted at precise angles inside a slim, vertical enclosure. This proprietary Bose technology delivers nearly 180 degrees of horizontal sound coverage. Sound remains consistent even at extreme sides of the system."

Now, lets look at the technical aspects of their advertised data. If you are a performer, and your system at one end of a square room, using a single system, the coverage is 180 degrees (actually, a little more). It is uniform in volume, it is emitted from 6 tiny speakers facing in various directions, plus the sub, which sits upon the floor.

Now, lets assume that you are positioned in the center of that wall with your keyboard, and lets farther assume that you are situated 6 feet from the wall. Now, if the Bose L1 Compact system is positioned to your right, say about 3 to 5 feet, and a couple feet to the rear, everyone in the room is hearing mono from that source, regardless of where they are in the room. That is a given from everyone that I know using the L1 and L1 compact.

Now, what would be the effect of placing another identical system, one that has 180 degree coverage, one that fills the room equally with different mono sounds from the other side of the keyboard. IT'S MONO! IT'S VERY HIGH QUALITY MONO--BUT IT'S MONO!

I tried this using both my L1 Compact and my standard L1, then set up with a pair of L1 Compacts, the second borrowed from a friend who had the same question about stereo. The sound was definitely fuller, richer, and the quality was unsurpassed by any sound system that either of us had owned at any time. But, it was still mono.

Another friend, who owns a pair of L1 Model II systems set up in a massive hall just north of Baltimore last week. He supplied the system for a Musician's Hall Of Fame Award Banquet and performed as well. The hall was jammed with nearly 200 pro musicians and performers, all of whom said it was the best sound system they ever heard. The systems were set on stage about 15 feet on either side if the instruments and performers. My friend, and the person who put the banquet together, both expected to hear stereo--THEY DIDN'T. IT WAS MONO!

And, when you look at the sound/speaker pattern from a vertical array system, not just Bose, they're all fairly consistent. The coverage, by and large, is about 180 to 210 degrees, and the falloff is minimal at best.

Now, with conventional speakers, the pattern is much more directional, averaging 45 to 50 degrees. Some speakers have a little wider dispersion, but there is probably an equal number of conventional speakers, particularly those with higher frequencies, that have a narrower cone of dispersion. A pair of them, mounted on poles or on the floor, and positioned 10 to 15 feet on either side of the keyboard, would provide a sweet spot of 20 to 30 feet. Don't take my word for it, look it up in Wikipedia under stereo systems. You can also find an enormous amount of information about stereo from dozens of other internet sources.

The most pronounced stereo is achieved by placing the speakers at extreme distances and angling them slightly toward the far end of the room. I've done this using a pair of Peavey 15s with 10-inch horns and placing them on poles about 5 feet high. The stereo effect was awesome, almost like a ping-pong ball bouncing from wall to wall. But, the crowd was much happier when the speakers were moved during the first break and placed just 6 feet on either side of the performers. (I was with a 5-piece, Country Band back then.)

I'm well aware my hearing is shot to hell, but I can still tell the difference between stereo and mono. What I hear, even with two Bose systems, is mono. I will admit, however, that a pair of Compacts, or standard L1s, does sound richer and fuller than a single of either model. For me, though, it does not sound that much better for me to purchase a second system. And, I sincerely believe my audiences would not notice the difference at all. (They're old geezers too! )

This is just MY observation, and the observation of a bunch of pro musicians at a banquet.

Cheers,

Gary

So to clarify - even though there might be two separate and distinct mono sources, the fact that they are being broadcast in line arrays BLENDS the two signals into a massive mono signal? There is no directivity caused by the two differing signals? OK, works for me (yeah, right)

Gary - you're a guru!

[This message has been edited by cassp (edited 10-19-2009).]

On 11/25 I'll be able to set up two Compacts at a large retirement facility (they have one as a house system).

I think it would be a shame not to have the stereo effect available by using 2 Bose, L/R out from the keyboard.

You mean to tell me there is no panning sounds, as they run left to right? Just the same mono sounds on either side of the room?

It will be difficult for me to really do a test, as they all eat, etc before my performance starts.

I can say that the mono system is really blowing my mind and I could live with just one unit instead of a conventional stereo setup (thought I'd never say this).

I have to do a Bosi test drive though.

Aw Shucks!

Gary

Don Mason has 2!

Don, what do you think? Do they sound stereo, like a conventional system. Do 2 units blow your mind vs one?

Jim,

Sit down at your keyboard and record a very creative midi file, one that has lots of stereo effects and lasts a couple minutes. Put it in your keyboard, fire up both systems, play the midi file and walk throughout the room, listening carefully for those stereo sounds you created. Be objective, make sure that you can actually hear the left channel coming from the left, and the right channel sounds coming from the right. And, if you do some creative panning, you want to hear that as well. This will only take a few minutes, you can play the midi file at a modest level and it will not disturb anyone while they are eating.

If you think you hear stereo, go for two systems. If not, you already know what one system sounds like.

Hope everything works out well for you,

Gary

Well, Gary...we'll have to agree to disagree.

I know what I and several pro musicians heard...it was stereo, and it was good.

But, like I said, a person should try a pair out before they buy.

I'm very glad I did, and so were several of the people that bought two.

The L1's had the same stereo performance as the Compacts....they were just louder.

Here's a post I saw from a 2-year user of 2 Bose systems (for what it's worth):


As regards connecting up two systems, I prefer to run my two L1’s in stereo. I find that they give a much better sound when used in stereo.

Conventional PA systems are (in my opinion) better run in mono because the audience members seated on the left hand side of the room can’t hear the music coming out of the right hand speakers (and vice versa). So stereo sound is all but lost when using a conventional PA in a cabaret room type environment.

However the Bose L1 disperses the sound around so incredibly well, that you CAN run two of them in stereo and everyone, no matter where they are seated in the room, will hear everything. Stereo works really well when using two Bose L1’s and sounds fabulous.

For what it's worth, Jim, that's just what I've been trying to say...they are different than a conventional two speaker stereo system.

I can't explain why they are better...I can only say they sound better...much better.

I'm not a technician...I'm a musician, and I do know what I hear.

You'll understand once you try two.

I certainly can hear stereo when I use two of them. But one is four feet from my left ear, and the other is four feet from my right ear.
I think some of the effect carries onto the dance floor, which is very small and starts three feet in front of me. It's maybe 20 x 20 feet.
After that, you wouldn't be able to pick out stereo placement, but the sound is full and the volume is even throughout the rest of the room. They are perfect for my situation. I generally use one extension on each side, so the top speakers are even with my ears, and about even with the dancers' ears, but over the head of the diners.
Of course by the time it reaches most of the diners, it is totally dispersed anyway.
In large venues, I use basically the same setup only the speakers are spread farther to my left and right, and angled slightly toward me, or more accurately, toward the center of the room. For 90 percent of the audience, the speaker placement matters very little, so I set them to optimize MY listening enjoyment. And it is really inspiring to be smack in the middle of that sound.
DonM

Perhaps it's just me, but are we really thinking about what some of us are saying, here? When was the last time anyone heard a stereo recording where sounds emanated from EITHER the left or right speakers..? Perhaps in stereo's earliest days, when complete separation (or as close to complete as LP's could achieve) was exploited as a gimmick, but it soon disappeared, and stereo got down to the task of recreating the WHOLE soundfield, not just the edges.

So the task of each speaker is not to just play what few sounds might get panned hard out, but primarily those within the soundfield. Plus, it's not JUST intended to give a detailed accurate sound 'picture' when one sits optimally in the 'sweet spot' (basically, an equilateral triangle with the speakers, which BTW indicates that the wider the speakers are placed, the bigger the 'sweet spot'), but anyone almost anywhere in the room other than right next to one speaker or another will get an enhanced feeling of spaciousness, as left and right speaker waves arrive at the ear at different times (not to mention bouncing off room surfaces at different times).

Stereo is FAR more complex than 'left out of the left speaker, right out of the right', and I suggest that, if any of this interests you, you do a FAR more detailed study of the technique before grand theories are put forward with little more than advertising hype and conjecture as basis... Maybe start with Wikipedia and move on from there. I'm pretty positive few if any here are capable of giving a knowledgeable discourse on the difference for stereo perception between a spherical and a planar wave

Couldn't tell you the difference between a spherical and a planar wave, and I am not young enough to know everything , but I do know what I heard, and so did several of my professional musician friends, some of who were so convinced by "hearing" Bose Compacts in stereo, bought a pair.

We musicians rely on our ears for our living...I know I depend on mine for it, and I don't part with hard earned money very easily....something like you, my friend.

Having said that, and after getting deep into a discussion I know very little about, technology wise, I have decided to forgo the Compacts and, instead, buy a pair of Bose L1's....I used them throughout the summer, and they were awesome, and I'd rather have more power than I'd need and hardly ever use it, than get to a gig, and find that my system does not have quite enough ooomph to do the job.

Plus, the system won't be working hard.

The Compacts are most definitely adequate for small jobs, but I'd rather invest my money in the L1's if I plan to use just one PA to cover all gigs.



[This message has been edited by ianmcnll (edited 10-20-2009).]

This discussion has gotten me interested in hearing/using a stereo Compact setup. Despite Diki's pontificating, I think a pair of Compacts might certainly emanate some sort of effectual sound, be it stereo or just something pleasingly different. I wouldn't expect to hear the Leslie sim (for example) move across the stereo plane, but I would think I would somehow hear and feel that movement. Would I hear top and bottom splits of a piano separately as I do out of my keyboard's speakers? Probably not, but I expect it would blend into a fuller sound somewhere, somehow. JMO

The Leslie sim thrives on stereo....big difference.

Damn, I'm confused, but I think I wanna be a DonM

Actually, Jim, there's nothing to be confused about...just try a pair of Compacts in stereo, and then decide if using two is worth it.

You'll know as soon as you hear them.

OK--Zaaaaap! You're Don Mason. Whoops! Missed it by that much.

Gary

I don't claim to be able to give that but there could lie the answer why some agree there's stereo and some don't. If it's a perfectly planar wave front (if you can make them) we won't hear any stereo effect at all. The conventional systems make spherical wave fronts and linear arrays such as BCs make nearly cylindrical wave fronts. Though relatively slowly, volume does drop even with Bose sticks (nearly cylindrical wave front, energy density drops roughly 1/r compared to 1/r^2 in spherical). Volume won't drop if it were a planar wave front (something like a laser beam but the sonic form).

So, we are somewhere in the middle (stereo as we have used to perceive with spherical wave fronts and planar where we won't have any stereo). Some tend to project it to one end and the others to the other end.

Theoretically, with Bose sticks, I find it hard to imagine there's no stereo at all or there's stereo as we've used to hear; we are somewhere in the middle with an expanded or blurred stereo effect. I wish I could afford two of them to try this, but I'm not one of those lucky people.

Shiral

It's definitly overkill for a nursing hime gig....not too mention all the setting up for an hour show.
Just leave the second BC system
in the car to use only when needed.

Ok, so what have we learned so far, kiddies? Firstly, that the question may not have been as 'dumb' as some would have you believe. 2. Two Bose systems, whether regular or compact, and no matter how hooked up, will sound better than ONE. Well, Duhhh. Everything else seems to be as much opinion as fact.

If you'll remember, Zuki prompted my question by claiming to not be 'quite' satisfied with the single compact. It was his 'then' opinion that the cure for this was to add another compact to create what he REALLY wanted, which was, a STEREO system with Bose clarity. My impression, at the time, was that he was convinced that the lack of fullness he experienced was due to the monophonic nature of the Bose system, and that nothing short of true STEREO was going to be acceptable. Following a slightly different line of thought, but based on experience, Ian (who now appears headed back to a dual L1 system) seems more driven by the overall sound of the dual system, whether or not a (questionable) stereo enhancement is responsible for the perceived 'fuller' sound.

I think if we could strip away every semblance of 'fanboyitis', we'd probably find that Gary's answer made the most sense. Likewise, DonM, who claims to hear a stereo presentation, but only if the two systems are very close to each ear, AND that it quickly blends together after leaving the speaker source. I'm guessing that you could put two pine trees close enough to each ear and get SOME kind of stereo effect (if only because your two big ugly, worn-out ears aren't exactly equal).

Sooooo, what have we learned? Same thing we knew quite a few posts back. The Bose system sounds great (depending on the venue ), TWO Bose systems (aka Bosi) sound even greater. 'FULLNESS' may be a better quality than STEREO for a PA system (again, in some venues ). Jim (Zuki) is still confused but excess money is clouding his judgement. Bose's marketing and design intent, a chicken in every po.....uh, a system for each musician, would not lead a rational person to conclude that two of these bad boys is the best solution for someone whose primary goal is TRUE, HIGHLY DETAILED, STEREO. Remember one thing. The best PA system in the world is not going to hide a sub-par performance, in fact, it's going to highlight it. GIGO (but with extreme clarity ).

You know what, screw this. I'm going for 7.1 SURROUND. Wonder if it'll sound better with 7 Bosi or .........

chas

Now that's funny

Chas,

Have you considered trying two Bose L1's or Compacts?

The reason I'm going for the L1's is that I've used them in the past, and I am familiar with their performance.

All we can do is rely on what we hear, and what we like to hear...if I'm playing a system that makes my keyboard sound at it's best (which happens to be stereo for Tyros3 and PSR-S-series) then I'm going to enjoy the playing experience much more, and also pass this vibe on to my audience.

It's no more difficult to understand than the difference between playing an instrument we like, and that seems to suit our style, and one that doesn't quite feel right.

And, as I always say, we are ultimately playing the speaker. It is the last link...like the vibrating string and soundboard of a violin.

It reminds me of the difference between a real Leslie, and a simulator...one is actually animated and moving air...one isn't.

The Bose in stereo(as most stereo systems would do) gives more animation to the instrument's sound (especially an arranger) and spreads this effect to a much wider degree than a conventional system.

Some are content to use only what is needed ("that's good enough")...others want to their sound at the best it can be, even though they might even be the only ones that notice....some fall somewhere in between.

So, Chas, what have you learned? Do you now have more interest in trying out two Bose systems, to find out what your ears tell you?

Surely they are the final answer.

Ian the Curious



[This message has been edited by ianmcnll (edited 10-20-2009).]

I'd like to, but unfortunately, that money has already been allocated towards the purchase of a 'nearly new' '58 Edsel.

chas

I didn't see a smiley, so are you serious?

no

That's a relief...I thought it might have been the pain killers...

Chas,

Your synopsis of the thread, above, is spot on.

And, don't give up on the Edsel--I would love to have one.

Cheers,

Gary

I knew you'd say that, Gary...after, all, he agreed with you.

Be careful of '58 Edsel Teletouch transmissions...very problematic automatic.

I know the transmissions were a problem, but I really thought the car was neat. Of course, I also loved the 55 and 57 Chevy, and lots of other old cars in that era.

Cheers,

Gary

I had a '58 Mercury Park Lane with a 430 cubic inch/360 horsepower engine and a push-button transmission.

Like the Edsel, the problem wasn't exactly with the transmission...it was the push button controls, which were electric and more prone to get out of whack, unlike the Chrysler push button controls, which were mechanical.

The Edsel had the buttons in the center of the steering wheel.

I used to collect old cars...gave it up, and now I dabble in old synthesizers.

One of my favorites was the Studebaker Golden Hawk, which was a neat sports car that was way out of my price range.



My neighbor had one and I got to ride in it just a few times--it was incredible.

While this has nothing to do with sound systems, if you're old enough to remember these cars, like old sound systems, they sure bring back some fond memories.

Cheers,

Gary

Remember the old column speakers...we had a set of Yorkville's; called Traynor back then.

http://www.yorkville.com/print.asp?type=71&cat=46&id=297

The local music store, Long & McQuade...the owner, Jack Long, was a partner to Pete Traynor, and allegedly helped him out financially when he was getting started in the speaker/amp/PA equipment.

The ancestors to the Traynor KB- amps.

I used to use an old Fender Bassman amp and a custom made speaker cabinet...that wasn't yesterday.

I knew there was a reason I liked you....

Fav Car of mine? Torn between:

'57 T-Bird
'53 Buick Skylark

Go Yankees!!

I bought a RED Silverado Pickup today. Not yet an antique, but it's a 98, and that's from the last century. Looks and drives like new. I bought it because it matches my boat.
I will take a picture of it tomorrow, because it will probably never be this clean again.
If only I had some of my past cars back:
57 Chevy, 58, and 66 Vettes, 66 Mustand, 72 240Z, Mazda Rx7, etc. I could sell them and retire.
Oh I forgot, I "retired" 30 years ago to play music.
DonM

American cars, LOL.

Oh yeah, "The Mustand"....

Seriously though, what a unique car the Mustang was.
The Chrome Horse, such a great, simple idea.

Can we get back on topic?......
none of these older cars had anything but AM "Mono" radio and but that was ok right? And there was "No Seperation" in the front seat between me and my girlfriend ever..

Bet there was a 'Vertical array' involved, though .

chas

Yes, & with a wide dispersion...

I had a 1949 Cadillac Coupe de Ville that was painted the same color as my fridge...white.

There's probably no psychic (or psychotic) connection with Don having a truck the same colour as his boat, but it's true...there was also much less chrome on the fridge., although they were both très cool.

The Caddy had Hydramatic, and leather inside...the fridge had Defrost-o-matic and had nothing inside but beer, as I spent all my money quenching the Caddy's insatiable thirst for gas and my own, at the time , unquenchable thirst for Molson Canadian.

Seamaster...even more LOL..."Canadian" cars...the Acadian, the Frontenac, the Laurentian, the Strato-Chief, the Beaumont, the Bricklin, and the Meteor...anyone else remember any more?

[This message has been edited by ianmcnll (edited 10-21-2009).]

Very funny .

Know what else is weird? I grew up just as car-crazed as any other American teenager, but I don't recognize a single car on Ian's list (so I'm guessing they never reached the status of world dominance ).

chas

One thing for sure Chas....those cars you didn't recognize, are highly prized today by collectors...their rarity was as much due to low production, as it was to the salted roads, and salty air climate, especially in the Maritimes where I live.

On a quiet morning, when the wind was just right, you could hear your car rust in the driveway.

The Laurentian, and Strato-Chief were Canadian Pontiacs...built on a Chevrolet chassis and using Chev engines and transmissions.

The Beaumont was a Pontiac...something like a Chevelle.

There was even a Pontiac Parisienne...the top model.

The Meteor was based on the Ford.

The Frontenac was based on the Ford Falcon.

The Bricklin was designed and built by Canadian, Malcom Bricklin...based on AMC components, I believe.

The Canadian Dodge cars, especially 55-56, were actually Plymouths with Dodge front clips.




[This message has been edited by ianmcnll (edited 10-21-2009).]

Hammond, Vinatge cars, etc, & so many other great things all fond non passed on memories all down the toilet.........
it all went too fast.

We even had our own Hammond organs here in Canada...the Northern Hammond....similar to a C-3.

I almost forgot, I had a 59 MG. Didn't keep it long. I was 6' 5", and in college and it didn't have a back seat! I blew out the engine between Stillwater and Norman Oklahoma, on the way to a OSU-OU football game.
A lot of people had Mustangs, not many of us had "Mustands". It was red too. It did have a back seat but I was married to my first ex-wife at the time, so sex was out of the question.
She did enjoy making love in the back seat, but she always wanted me to drive the car.
DonM

Just a passing thought, but has anybody wondered why some of the keyboards from the 50's and 60's are prized collector pieces now, fondly trotted out onstage by all those that can stomach the cartage, but none of the PA's of the period have really stood the test of time...?

They even had vertical column line arrays back then, but you don't see anyone playing through them any more

BTW, has anyone seen the movie Cadillac Records? It's the story of Leonard Chess and very interesting from a historical aspect. It has good music too, and lots of great cars, mostly Caddys.
DonM

Because a PA isn't an instrument. It's just something that takes the 'important' thing, the instrument or voice, and tries to present it louder and clearer. Some have had somewhat 'signature' sounds but not to the extent where someone is going to stop and say, "wow, listen to that EON wail".

chas

This was in response to Diki's post.

[This message has been edited by cgiles (edited 10-21-2009).]

Actually, the Bose L1, and maybe the Compact, will have some sort of status someday...they definitely have their own sound, and cult following.

Guitar amps like the Fender Twin, and Princeton Reverb have status, as does the legendary(in Canada, anyway) Traynor YGL-3 Mark III Bass Amplifier...as well as the Marshall Stacks and Vox AC-30.

Leslies are another speaker system that has reached legendary status, especially the 122 and 147.

But PA's in general...not so much.

I do remember using Altec Lansing "Voice of the Theater" cabinets...they were very popular, but not so much today.

Traynor made the columns we all hated, but couldn't afford anything better at the time.

But Bose will bring out something (or someone else will) that fixes all the L1's shortcomings, and it too will one day disappear into the dusty realm of 'you remember when the early Bose sticks had little low mids and no reverb or compression controls (and you even had to WIRE them together ) and we all used to go crazy for them?'

In the meantime, no matter HOW close a Nord gets, someone will still prefer the B3..!

...until they have to lift one.



chas