Jump to content

Bose vs No Bose. Which is worth it?

texas18

Recommended Posts

Reidan Enthusiast

Reidan

Posted
Posted

I have Bose in my 03 Avalanche. It sounds great. My wife got a 05 Lucerne with non-Bose. Could really hear the difference. She really wished she had Bose. 4 years later someone ran a traffic light and totaled the Buick. So we ended up getting a Traverse with Bose. Sounded much better than the Buick, but not as good as my Avalanche.

 

Back in March I rented a Silverado for a few days while the Avalanche was in the shop. It was a base model with non-Bose touchscreen radio. Sound was about even with the Buick. So, when I decided to in July get the Sierra, I knew without a doubt it had to have a Bose radio.

 

Now the Bose radio in my new Sierra sounds good. But, I think the Bose in my old Avalanche sounds better!

 

Don't know if the acoustics of the Avalanche are better. But, it does have more speakers. The Avalanche had speakers on the A Pillars where the Sierra does not. So better high frequency capability with those extra tweeters on the pillars.

 

And the Bass speaker would rattle the rear view mirror so much the cars in the mirror were distorted.

  • Replies 66
  • Created
  • Last Reply
fbachman Senior Enthusiast

fbachman

Posted
Posted

Well, having left the days of upgrading the sound systems long behind me (old fart now)...

 

I find the non-denali bose system in mine quite good. Will it blow out the windows from the inside with bass? Nope.

 

But, as a musician in a previous life, having perfect pitch, and the sort, I find that the sound, clarity and fidelity is pretty darn good out of the box (to me).

 

Beats the pants off of the system in my '07 (non bose). I find it quite good. (That is until I listen to AM... there is definitely a software update still "pending" to get the AM fidelity in check). It's not the speakers, as when you flip over to pandora, from AM, the difference is absolutely huge.

 

Maybe GM will figure that one out soon..... :dunno:

ChevyRoofer Senior Enthusiast

ChevyRoofer

Posted
Posted

Well, having left the days of upgrading the sound systems long behind me (old fart now)...

 

I find the non-denali bose system in mine quite good. Will it blow out the windows from the inside with bass? Nope.

 

But, as a musician in a previous life, having perfect pitch, and the sort, I find that the sound, clarity and fidelity is pretty darn good out of the box (to me).

 

Beats the pants off of the system in my '07 (non bose). I find it quite good. (That is until I listen to AM... there is definitely a software update still "pending" to get the AM fidelity in check). It's not the speakers, as when you flip over to pandora, from AM, the difference is absolutely huge.

 

Maybe GM will figure that one out soon..... :dunno:

 

I was told I have the upgraded speakers up front, but no Bose system. So I opted for the Kicker AMP/Sub combo, since this only works with non-Bose systems.

 

It's the best add-on for this truck...besides the Borla Exhaust.

Toestrong Enthusiast

Toestrong

Posted
Posted

I think there is another thread like this with lots of replies about bose vs no. That aside I don't have the bose but I am very impressed with the stock audio. The best part is the amazing bass for having no real sub and on stock settings. I still plan to eventually get a sub so I can get better mids out of the speakers. This stock system sounds better than my Civic with premium sound "including sub" and my WRX with full OEM kicker upgrade. It has been a real bonus.

just got a Sierra 1500. Selling my wrx. Gonna miss it

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

mmwest Enthusiast

mmwest

Posted
Posted

I'm assuming that most that are commenting are using a sound source other than the crappy over-compressed XM radio? Using my USB stick sounds so much cleaner and richer in sound with the Bose system.

I have never tried the USB stick.

Can you just load music from you laptop to the USB and go from there?

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Boardmember Senior Enthusiast

Boardmember

Posted
Posted

I've got the Bose. I've got hearing loss in right ear that two surgeries couldn't repair. Damn Bose sounds great to me.

 

But what do I know? I saw Aerosmith when "Toys in the Attic" first came out. Stood right in front of the towering speaker column. The Bose ain't quite that good and my memory is better than my hearing.

 

Far out.

.

TenofMe Enthusiast

TenofMe

Posted
Posted

I've had both. Bose is 100% worth it. The base stereo system isn't bad, but the Bose is far better IMO. Now the Bose in my '93 and '04 Vettes were kinda sorry, so I didn't expect much from this one. I've installed MANY custom stereo systems over the years, and this is the best "stock" system I've ever owned. Not once have I wanted to upgrade it. Well, a little 'mo bass might be nice...

 

I like big butts and I cannot lie!

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Forum Statistics

    250.4k
    Total Topics
    2.7m
    Total Posts

  • Member Statistics

    342,864
    Total Members
    8,960
    Most Online
    fourhorses88
    Newest Member
    fourhorses88
    Joined

  • Who's Online   4 Members, 0 Anonymous, 875 Guests (See full list)

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • KARNUT
      Gas Prices

      By KARNUT · Posted

      I figured you would know about it.
    • Grumpy Bear
      Gas Prices

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      It added a cost layer to an already limited production supply. True that. 
    • Grumpy Bear
      Gas Prices

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      Swap costs and supply/demand balance. When a barrel comes out of the ground the entire range of products are present but not all at the same percentage.    Breakdown of Refined Products The following table summarizes the approximate output from a standard 42-gallon barrel of crude oil: Product Type Gallons per Barrel Percentage of Total Gasoline 20 gallons 45% Diesel Fuel 9 gallons 21% Other Products 13 gallons 31%   Most of that diesel figure is 'straight run' or cut from the barrel. Gasoline 'cut from the barrel runs 0 to 20% at the crude. So in the crude unit there is more diesel the gasoline, usually.  The full refining experience however gives the tabled values. Ego there is half the diesel than gasoline after the 'first crack' That could be an FCC unit, or Isomax or....   Those units take heavy products and break the big ones into little ones. Those numbers are harder to get hold of but directionally it ends up the same.    Really light products are very profitable. Ethylene and Propylene to name two. Those are cracked from slightly heavier feeds like NG and Propane and Ethane. The cracker harshness determines the feed for distillation. Those feeds come from less profitable products like diesel and gasoline.    So...there is a swap cost. How much market is there TODAY and what crude am I running TODAY..... what is my process capable of always.    There is this as well. The USA uses allot more gasoline than it does diesel so in the cracker the process is tilted to gasoline production which....limits supply of diesel. OTR uses the most and it has different requirements than automotive and agricultural.  Limiting auto products.    You are correct however. It is less refined, just less of it. Allot less. 
    • Grumpy Bear
      Transmission Temperature Hitting 220s

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      Most thermostatically controlled ATF systems use a 'wax' pill just like the one in your water thermostat. They work on the expansion volume of the wax and the pill is constructed in such a way as to limit the travel to remain within that range. This means it has an opening temperature often called the 'cracking temperature' and a fully open temperature. For whatever reason oil is designated by it's fully open temperature and water by it's cracking temperature.    Between the two it the "Regulating Temperature" The entire range is about 20 F from closed to open. In your example the lower limit, opening point of 145 F then has a fully open temp of 165 F and a throttling temperature of 155 F.    Thing is, the throttling temperature needs two things to work properly. Enough system load high enough to reach the minimum and a heat sink (cooler/exchanger) large enough to prevent any load applied from exceeding the fully open temperature.    If your system exceeds the fully open temperature it is screaming MORE COOLER.    Here is the silly part of the whole thermostat system where the oil is cooled/heated by the radiator. Nothing is flowing to that system until the oil temperature reaches the cracking temperature unless it is equipped with a minimum flow bypass orifice or a bypass built into the seating surface of the plunger. That system meant to get it up to temp quicker isn't doing a thing until WORK drives if from ambient to cracking temp. One a cold winter day, like zero F, it may never get hotter than about 110 F. Sometimes not even that.    People forget or are young enough to not know that until this millennia transmissions were cooled by the radiator cold tank alone and without a thermostat at all.  In the 50's they weren't even cooled. OEMs learn everything the hard way.    When an OEM tells you the trans "Works best" between 175 F and 220 F it means works best for THEM. The transmission thermostat is fuel play. If you watch you trans temps like I do you will learn that it may take a hundred miles if you are not towing and not driving more than say 55-60 mph on a zero F day to even reach 120 F and it might sit there all day if it's colder. Yet if functions perfectly over about 100 F. It may need to get a bit warmer for the fuel and spark maps to go without an multiplier.    Worry more about too hot. Use a cooler large enough to put that thermostat in range.         
    • KARNUT
      Gas Prices

      By KARNUT · Posted

      Around 2008 if memory serves they took sulfur out. That was when diesel went up. 

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...