Arcam Solo Mini + Acoustimass 5

[miniman]

I've had my Sony separates and TDL Near Field Monitors for the best part of 20 years now and I simply don't have the space for it downstairs anyone. Also with a 1yr old toddling around prodding stuff I need speakers which are very small and discreet ideally. So I am thinking about an Arcam Solo Mini and a set of Bose Acoustimass 5 speakers on floor stands. I understand that Bose kit isn't really the best in terms of audiophile status, but is there anything else similarly compact?

[headcase]

The bose is nice and loud and boomy, they generally impress the uninitiated so if your not too bothered about total perfection then they are a good way to go.

[telecat]

All the Major UK speaker makers produce Small Speakers. Check out the Monitor Audio Radius Systems. Personally I have never compromised my system. I prefer that the Kids learnt that they didn't "play" with things they shouldn't. Until they were old enough I protected them by making sure they couldn't reach them.

[Plotloss]

www.anthonygallo.co.uk

[hiltonig]

yep i would agree on the bose, i had the acoustimass 15 now changed to B&W mt30 far better in overall sound quality, bose sounds impressive but after a time sounds boomy and midrange performance not so good.

[Ruxpin]

Arcams own Muso speakers are pretty small - ok not bose small but much smaller in person than i was thinking when i bought a mini/muso/rdock system

[900T-R]

Arcam Solo - good idea.
Bose Acoustimass - bad idea - coming from something decent like you have, you wil come to regret that move expecially given what they cost. There's enough choice in quality small speakers that will blow the doors off the Bose milk cartons for less.

[miniman]

Have picked up a very cheap set of Acoustimass 5s to try out with my existing separates, if I really don't like them then they will go back on eBay forthwith! The Gallo stuff is out of my budget to be honest.

[allgonepetetong]

My daughter learn t very quickly not to touch things she shouldn't. I preferred this to changing my whole hi-fi system

Just a thought, unless of course you are using this to justify a new system in which case, go for it.

[miniman]

I have no concerns with my daughter, she will be taught what is and isn't hers. One of my existing speakers was already damaged, however, by someone elses child who obviously doesn't know better. As there were several toddlers in the house at the time, it's hard to pin it on a particular parent.

[anonymous-user]

daughter of allgonepetetong said:

Daddy, where have my hands gone and why are you holding a chainsaw?

[PJR]

If I may be nosey.. What did you pay for the Acoustimas 5's? Were they the regular stereo (with sub) pair?
I've been running those (series II) for around 15 years and have been quite pleased them. I only just replaced them with a pair of pricey PMC studio monitors (very different sound!). Anyway, was thinking of selling the Bose, so wondered what they were worth?! But if its not much, then I may as well keep them for something.

Bose comes in for a lot of unfair flack from the internet crowd. I think they made some great stuff. Sure, they made the odd duff product too, but then so have most speaker manufacturers..

P,

[miniman]

Yes it's the subwoofer + a pair of twin-cubes.



I paid £200, it is completely mint, no marks etc. and as-new working order. Another pair went for £160 + postage a couple of days ago, I picked mine up so I was happy to pay a little more as I could go and check them out and walk away if they weren't as described.

[PJR]

Thanks for that I figured that is about what they were worth. Cost me something like £700 new though! Many years ago.. And yes, mine appear to be identical.
Now I wonder what you will make of them!? I still like mine, I just fancied a change, as well as something better suited to studio use.

P,

[miniman]

I've given them a quick try whilst I wait for stands to arrive, I like them to be honest. They sound much more detailed than my previous speakers and more precise, if that makes sense. And plenty of bass which I like

[900T-R]

"Detailed" and "precise" are not exactly terms one immediately associates with Bose Acoustimass systems (they're more of a 'fills the room' sort of thing, sounding more or less the same everywhere in the room) - sounds like your old TDL speakers were pretty knackered or a blatant mismatch with the rest of the kit.

Edited by 900T-R on Thursday 21st May 20:39

[miniman]

Keep in mind that "the rest of the kit" equals a 1992 Sony amp that cost me £100 (which was a lot of money for a 16-yr-old!) and a matching CD player. Also, I just don't think my ears are well tuned enough to distinguish between "ok" and "excellent" kit so hopefully the Bose kit will work out ok.

[miniman]

So, in the end I couldn't justify the cost of the Solo, so instead I took a look at the What Hi-Fi reviews and got myself a Denon DM37DAB and very happy with it I am too. Sounds great, much better than the old stuff.

Great price and quick delivery from Derestrictor, too.

[Mr2Mike]

PJR said:

Bose comes in for a lot of unfair flack from the internet crowd. I think they made some great stuff. Sure, they made the odd duff product too, but then so have most speaker manufacturers..

The Bose brand was and is far more about marketing than about quality sound equipment, a designer label if you like. Modern Bose stuff is probably somewhat better than the older stuff, though that certainly wouldn't be difficult. However, their pricing structure means they compete with products from extremely competent manufacturers who spend their budgets on developing stuff that genuinely sounds good, rather than on marketing to convince people it sounds good.

Overall I think the flak is entirely justifiable on the poor value of Bose products alone.

[PJR]

Mr2Mike said:

PJR said:

Bose comes in for a lot of unfair flack from the internet crowd. I think they made some great stuff. Sure, they made the odd duff product too, but then so have most speaker manufacturers..

The Bose brand was and is far more about marketing than about quality sound equipment, a designer label if you like. Modern Bose stuff is probably somewhat better than the older stuff, though that certainly wouldn't be difficult. However, their pricing structure means they compete with products from extremely competent manufacturers who spend their budgets on developing stuff that genuinely sounds good, rather than on marketing to convince people it sounds good.

Overall I think the flak is entirely justifiable on the poor value of Bose products alone.

We'll have to agree to disagree on this perhaps then. I don't claim they make the best kit by any means. but they certainly have made some great gear that justified its cost. If Bose is more about marketing than sound and quality, then I hate to think what they spend on marketing when they spend nearly $100million a year on R&D. Many folks fail to give them credit for being somewhat pioneering with regards to the micro satellite and sub format that so many have copied over the years. Yet no one beats on the companies that copied... Instead beating on Bose because, well, thats what everyone else on the net does. Actual experience or not.

P,