Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

Edit: Going from 2020 Bose to 2023 Bose

 

Curious if anyone has gone from a 19/20 to "refresh" and can speak about the sound quality differences.  Less bass/more?  Is it any clearer?  I see some people saying the Bose is garbage but is there a significant change between the non-refresh and the refresh?  While not a "great" sound in my 2020, it suffices my needs

 

Bass is pretty easy to "fix" but if there's a ton of distortion etc, that starts getting pricy..... adding amps, speakers, etc etc

 

Thanks!

Edited by Rob Mugs
Posted
21 hours ago, Rob Mugs said:

Curious if anyone has gone from a 19/20 to "refresh" and can speak about the sound quality differences.  Less bass/more?  Is it any clearer?  I see some people saying the Bose is garbage but is there a significant change between the non-refresh and the refresh?  While not a "great" sound in my 2020, it suffices my needs

 

Bass is pretty easy to "fix" but if there's a ton of distortion etc, that starts getting pricy..... adding amps, speakers, etc etc

 

Thanks!

I seriously doubt they changed anything with the speakers other than upgraded the infotainment software/hardware. You won't see the kind of change you're talking about till the next major change if then.

 

Posted (edited)

Well, I had a 21 RST with Bose, got a 23 LT Trail Boss with non-Bose, its a huge disappointment with that downgrade. 

Edited by mrfarb
Posted (edited)

I've driven plenty of 19-22 at work and I myself own a 2022 refresh LT non-Bose.

 

The non-Bose refresh LT has better sound than the 19-22 non Bose LT by a good margin IMO.  19-22 non-Bose has a garbage base range to it.  I don't like full on thumping bass, but you set it to +12 and its like listening to a 14-18 non-Bose with default bass settings.  

Edited by newdude
Posted

My 2023 Sierra Denali Ultimate Bose system is night and day better than my 2019 High Country, I see a speaker in the windshield pillars and upper rear doors and center channel all of which I didn't have on my 19 HC and it's sounds much better to me.

Posted
On 5/9/2023 at 7:53 AM, David Sherill said:

Went from 21 AT4 to 23 AT4 both with Bose and neither sound great but the 21 was definitely better.  Will probably add Kicker sub in the future.

Interesting...... they're both the "refresh", right?  Is it just less bass on the 23?  I pick mine up Monday

  • 4 weeks later...
Posted

23 Silverado HC bose stereo was one of the least impressive systems I've ever heard... from any vehicle. It was somehow even worse than the 2020 Sierra Denali. Just very flat, under powered, no base, etc.

 

Now the upgraded Bose in the Denali Ultimate is on a whole different level. Much fuller sound, nice sound stage, and actually has descent base and treble. Although at this price point, it's basically mandatory. Then again, the Denali and HC aren't exactly cheap trucks either. They deserve better.

Posted

Interesting how some say the refresh is much better and some say it is much worse.

 

I've gone from '21 to '23 - both Denali. (not Denali Ultimate, which has a 12 speaker Bose vs the 7 speaker Bose in 'regular' denali

I've only run a 100 miles or so in the new one, but first impressions were that it was better. Not 'night and day' different, but improved.

So far just listening to my usual FM 'classic rock' station, and a little bit of SiriusXM.

Perhaps it is just the eq settings?  Maybe just placebo effect?

Haven't bothered to investigate settings too much yet. 

 

UQA    Bose Sound System, premium 7-speaker system with Richbass woofer 

UQS    Bose Premium Series with 12-speaker system with CenterPoint, Richbass woofer and AudioPilot

 

Posted

Audio source is a good point. Compressed and relatively lower quality source like FM or SiriusXM aren't going to sound great regardless of the stereo. In fact, they tend to sound worse on higher end systems. You might have one that gets a bit more base with some basic EQ adjustment and be perfectly happy with it. Even though it may or may not be the "lesser" system.

 

I stream with Google Play Music at the highest quality setting. Although whenever I do get a vehicle with a good stereo, I'll usually jump over to Tidal or something similar. If you can't tell the difference, the stereo is either not good enough, you just don't have an ear for it. 😉

Posted (edited)

Fwiw, it was much easier to judge the sound quality with these factory systems when they included CD players where you could run a solid known reference quality CD.  Now, it's much harder to figure out what the real capabilities are.  Although I haven't had the truck long enough to get to the audio, I've found so far that running the highest quality Spotify that is saved to my phone makes a noticeable improvement. 

 

Also, I pulled a number of albums and playlists that I had ripped from CD to 320kpbs which sounds pretty good as well.  I find that fading 2 notches to the back, and bumping the treble a couple of notches makes the system sound fairly decent.  If I find that the system can handle lossless like FLAC, I'll do another round of rips.

 

I had pretty good luck with my Vette replacing the Bose speakers with JL C2-******  series speakers, and will probably try that too, once I get some of the other more important mods done.

Edited by MrMagloo
  • 3 weeks later...
Posted

2019 SLT w Bose sounded much richer than our new 2023 AT4 w Bose

Until I added the GM Kicker subwoofer part #19417164

 

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • Welcome back! No, it definitely doesn't pass the sniff test. Even "ceasefire" needs an alternative definition these days.    $5.29 at Kroger today
    • That makes sense, and I think you are describing the real product problem. Capturing data is the easy part. If the owner or technician has to manually dig through five minutes of millisecond-level logs, the product has already failed. The device would be at the ECM harness, not at the OBD port, so I agree that data retrieval and event marking need to be thought through carefully. The way I am thinking about the architecture is: The recorder itself should not depend on a phone, app, Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, or cloud connection to capture the event. It should always keep a local rolling buffer and lock the event locally. A button, phone app, or small cabin device would only act as an event marker. If the driver feels a stumble and presses the button 10–30 seconds later, the pre-buffer has to already contain the useful data. For data retrieval, the practical options would be a sealed service USB lead, Wi-Fi download, or a phone/cabin companion device. I would not expect the owner to remove the ECM-side module or work with raw files directly. The cloud or AI side would be for interpretation, not for capturing the event. The truck may have no connection when the issue happens, so the evidence has to be saved locally first. After that, cloud processing could help decode the data, compare it against baselines, and generate a readable report. For the first version, I would keep the automatic triggers conservative and objective: driver event marker bus-off error passive voltage drop / brownout device reset FIFO or queue overflow a normally periodic message disappearing side-to-side communication mismatch, if the topology supports that For “learning normal,” I agree with your point, but I would not want to overclaim it as automatic root-cause diagnosis at first. A realistic first step would be learned baseline comparison for that specific vehicle and operating condition. For example, a value would only be compared against similar conditions: RPM range load / MAP throttle position gear / vehicle speed coolant and oil temperature battery voltage AFM/DFM state, if decoded and validated Then the report could flag things like: this periodic message disappeared compared with its normal timing this value deviated from this vehicle’s normal range under similar conditions the same abnormal pattern repeated after the same type of event the anomaly occurred together with voltage, oil-pressure, misfire, or communication changes But I would still call that “abnormal pattern detected,” not “replace this part,” unless there is enough validated repair data behind it. So the intended product would not be “here is a huge log.” It would need to be an event package: what triggered the capture how much pre/post data was preserved what changed before and after the event whether the device itself reset, overflowed, or saw a bus error selected graphs around the event raw data only as supporting evidence From your perspective, what would make this kind of report useful instead of just another datalog? For example: What are the top 5 parameters or events you would want highlighted first? Would you trust a learned baseline for that specific vehicle, or would you prefer fixed thresholds? How much false-positive flagging would be acceptable before you stopped looking at the reports? What would a one-page report need to show for an independent shop to take it seriously? For misfire, AFM/DFM, oil pressure, or U-code complaints, what would you want the tool to flag automatically?
    • 2024 Silverado 2500 HD LTZ grille no camera Parts list   84603331 84913656 84913657 84913654 84913655 84911567 84911568 85646092 85646093 85797921 85797922   11570637  x10-15   grille/bumper bolts 11546500  x10      grille clips 11571006  x10      push/retainer clips 11546454  x6       nut retainers 11611609  x6       M5 bolts 11610700  x6       molding/trim retainers
    • And use RA's 5% discount code if you buy from them.  google for the code, one is always available.
    • Just don't turn the steering wheel as much?
  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...