Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Bose has released API docs and opened the API for its EoL SoundTouch speakers

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 416 posts

Re: Bose has released API docs and opened the API for its EoL SoundTouch speakers

#211

Post by bartread »

juris wrote: post #159
bartread wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly this. "Bose blows" is a popular comment amongst the audiophile community but, to me, it seems like they don't blow at all[0]. In fact quite the opposite: this is a fantastic example for other companies to follow. Top marks, Bose! [0] What is actually true is that they are opinionated about sound reproduction in ways that a bunch of people don't agree with but which in the right context are often effective and…

not an audiophile but is it possible to tease out those aspects of sound reproduction if the software is open source?

My comment about sound reproduction was more a point on Bose's longstanding philosophy in building speakers than in anything about this specific software but, to answer your question... quite possibly. Bose intentionally colour the sound and apply, at the very least, EQ and some sort of active processing to it to get what they believe is the best out of the speakers and enclosures they use.

And I'm couching this all in very neutral terms, not because I have an axe to grind with them, but because I don't want to get into a flame war with the kind of audiophiles who hate Bose.

FWIW the Bose products I've heard and used all sounded pretty good. At the end of the day they're designed for people to enjoy music within a particular target context, not necessarily to be the most accurate at reproducing the recording exactly.

(I'll say this as well: reproducing the recording exactly isn't necessarily what you want to get something to sound good. A lot of albums from the loudness war era benefit significantly from rolling off some of the higher frequencies, where clipping occurs, for example. So I have one amplifier that includes - gasp, shock, horror - tone controls that I sometimes use and, on another system where the amp doesn't have tone controls, I've hooked up a [true] stereo graphic equalizer. You also have to take the listening environment into account and when you do that some element of processing the sound before it comes out of the speakers can also prove to be beneficial. Anyway, I shall now go and brace myself for some righteous abuse from the purists.)

Re: Bose has released API docs and opened the API for its EoL SoundTouch speakers

#212

Post by cjk »

DiabloD3 wrote: post #69
jeffwask wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This def needs to be celebrated and rewarded. I am more likely to purchase Bose now.

Bose hardware quality is rather low and, and their sound quality is sub-par, while forcing you to pay the Bose brand tax, riding the corpse of Amar around for profit. I'd avoid, even if they happened to do this.

If you're talking about their headphones, I agree they _feel_ cheaply-made, but they are by no means low-quality. When you make headphones with premium materials, they get heavy, and that makes them uncomfortable/painful to wear. Speaking from prior experience. It's an incredibly delicate balancing act. Bose optimizes for comfort, which is important for e.g. long plane rides.

Re: Bose has released API docs and opened the API for its EoL SoundTouch speakers

#213

Post by gaudystead »

FredFS456 wrote: post #114
riedel wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just to mention: Teufel has been even moving further with their fully open hardware design of MYND [0]. Hope others will follow. [0] https://teufel.de/mynd-107002004

I bought one just this week because of this. They really went above and beyond: - mechanical CAD, schematic and PCB files: https://docs.teufel.de/download/MYND/Open_Source_Hardware_Fi... - firmware: https://github.com/teufelaudio/mynd-firmware - Bluetooth API documentation: https://cdn.teufelaudio.com/image/upload/v1748589486/product... - battery repair/replacement guide: https://cdn.teufelaudio.com/products/MYND/pdf…

This is really cool! I'd be curious if one could 3D print different resonance chambers to get different desired sounds from the speaker.

Re: Bose has released API docs and opened the API for its EoL SoundTouch speakers

#214

Post by pardon_me »

vovavili wrote: post #187
giancarlostoro wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This this also good marketing, if other companies I currently buy speakers from follow their footsteps I'll keep supporting them, but I might otherwise just move towards Bose in the future. I wish Apple would do this for their ultra legacy stuff, Microsoft does it for their legacy stuff. Not sure if we'll ever get a fully open sourced legacy version of Windows (ignoring the source code leak) but it would be cool to o…

It would be an unwise business move. The moment that is done, Linux/WINE will be able to run the bulk of the software that keeps a substantial number of people locked into Windows. Most people don't need the newest version of their software to stay productive.

If society progresses as envisaged, people will always want newer and better technology. Living standards should improve for all, as the older technology is purchased second-hand by those who cannot afford the latest versions, and/or repaired as desired.

When a businesses chooses to drop support for a product entirely (hardware or spares no longer produced, and software no longer updated), they've presumably already made the business decision to drop the product for sale. If the product were still in demand and the existing devices still function, dropping product support could effectively render the devices useless or destined for landfill.

This often happens when: online services are dropped, devices cannot be repaired, or worse, software cannot be simply updated for security and compatibility reasons etc.

If manufacturers want existing users with working technology to upgrade, they should design compelling improved products, not force a load of e-waste and bricked devices. There's little reason for a manufacturer to quickly drop support without following this model of open sourcing, unless they know they are forcing existing customers to an unnecessary upgrade.

Manufacturers should support their products, innovate, or let them go over time. The "market" (consumer choice) should dictate when a product is obsolete. We own our products and should have the rights to maintain them. They should be paying us and taxed for damaging the environment for dropping support early and/or without open-sourcing.

Re: Bose has released API docs and opened the API for its EoL SoundTouch speakers

#215

Post by eadwu »

thewebguyd wrote: post #126
ryandrake wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. Open source is great and all, but all 99% of these devices need is simply a way to configure them to connect to a different server, when the manufacturer inevitably turns their own server down (usually) bricking devices. The open source community will happily reverse-engineer the protocol and clean-room develop their own server code.

> 99% of these devices need is simply a way to configure them to connect to a different server, when the manufacturer inevitably turns their own server down (usually) bricking devices. The same can be said about a lot of games, and should be the case with them as well. Big MMOs for example. See the plethora of WoW private servers as an example of how it can be done. I think the stop killing games initiative in the EU…

This is not applicable to games.

Bose's brand is built on audio quality. There is close to little negative impact open sourcing the API (server) in this case will bring to their brand.

For a game, open sourcing the server generally means anyone can basically mess it up and with the internet make it available to everyone to see. Then the responsibility is on the developer to protect their "brand".

The plethora of WoW private servers is not a good example. These are from individuals, or groups of people who willfully reverse engineered it on their own. This is different from a company expressly permissing and implicitly giving a grant on allowing a similar product to exist - the difference is that one gives credibility, which the other does not.

Re: Bose has released API docs and opened the API for its EoL SoundTouch speakers

#216

Post by soperj »

pardon_me wrote: post #214
vovavili wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would be an unwise business move. The moment that is done, Linux/WINE will be able to run the bulk of the software that keeps a substantial number of people locked into Windows. Most people don't need the newest version of their software to stay productive.

If society progresses as envisaged, people will always want newer and better technology. Living standards should improve for all, as the older technology is purchased second-hand by those who cannot afford the latest versions, and/or repaired as desired. When a businesses chooses to drop support for a product entirely (hardware or spares no longer produced, and software no longer updated), they've presumably already…

> newer and better technology

Most newer technology hasn't seemed better in a while. It's almost impossible to find a phone with a removable battery, or one that's easily fixable, and has a headphone jack. My galaxy S3 was all of those things. USB3 is good though.

Re: Bose has released API docs and opened the API for its EoL SoundTouch speakers

#217

Post by cjk »

DiabloD3 wrote: post #204
drnick1 wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Beyerdynamic DT1990s run circles around consumer-grade stuff.

Beyerdynamic announced earlier last year they're finally exiting pro and flagship tier stuff, and selling out to a Chinese equity firm. Their build quality is exceptional, and they're built like tanks. The only problem, imo, is the Beyer house sound is very shouty and fatiguing, especially with the "990" versions of the product line over the years. Disclaimer: I owned a Beyer DT880/600ohm (the neutral one of the 770/…

Oh man. I missed that announcement somehow.

Where'd you see they're exiting pro/flagship tier stuff? Everything I can find says they're continuing to hand-make their higher-end stuff in Germany. One such source: https://www.whathifi.com/headphones/100-year-old-headphone-b...

Re: Bose has released API docs and opened the API for its EoL SoundTouch speakers

#218

Post by notnmeyer »

ktg0215 wrote: post #8

This is how "end of support" should be handled. Instead of turning devices into e-waste, open-source them and let the community extend their life. Kudos to Bose for setting a good example. More companies should follow this approach - especially as right-to-repair becomes a bigger issue.

i’d love for this to be required by law. i’m probably not thinking of some great reason why that might be a bad idea, but it seems like an effective way to reduce e-waste.

Re: Bose has released API docs and opened the API for its EoL SoundTouch speakers

#219

Post by SoleilAbsolu »

bartread wrote: post #95
jeffwask wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This def needs to be celebrated and rewarded. I am more likely to purchase Bose now.

Exactly this. "Bose blows" is a popular comment amongst the audiophile community but, to me, it seems like they don't blow at all[0]. In fact quite the opposite: this is a fantastic example for other companies to follow. Top marks, Bose! [0] What is actually true is that they are opinionated about sound reproduction in ways that a bunch of people don't agree with but which in the right context are often effective and…

Well, Bose has a long history of continually hyping whatever they're selling as the complete & utter pinnacle of sound reproduction technology, whether or not that's actually the case. Before the internet it was through their print media ads, starting with their Direct/Reflecting home speaker tech, continued through the 800 series PA speakers, Acoustic Wave tabletop radio, etc. Not to say there were not benefits, but that the choices they made -- single driver size, requiring certain room boundaries/geometry for optimal sound, need for active EQ/processing to get full-range response before the tech was really there to do so optimally -- did not always equal great trouble-free sound as advertised.

That said their implementation of noise-cancelling headphones/earbuds was a legit game-changer. And good on them for open-sourcing these speakers!

Post reply on HN