Saturday, September 6, 2014

Bose-SoundLink-Mini-Bluetooth-Speaker

Bose SoundLink Mini Bluetooth Speaker



Here is my take on the Soundlink II vs. the Mini as I think there are a lot of people out there who might be considering the two. I posted a picture in the main description with the two of them side by side so you won't think I'm blowing smoke :)

I purchased both speakers because I wanted to see which one sounded the best because even though I was initially attracted to the small size of the Mini, I figured I'd keep the II and spend the extra hundred bucks if it sounded better overall. After testing the two, the Soundlink II is headed back to Bose.

I don't even know how to explain it to you but the Mini actually sounds better than the II and it is 1/3rd the size. This makes no sense to me because the II has four drivers and two larger radiators and the mini has two drivers and two smaller radiators.

When I played the Soundlink II, the first thing that came to my mind was that somehow this speaker was lacking--in more than a few ways. The bass was weak, it sounded rather flat, it wasn't as loud as I was expecting it to be (yes, I pressed the volume button on the speaker till I saw the flashing light which means it's on max), and it had absolutely no stereo separation because you could easily pinpoint which direction the sound was coming from even at louder volumes. Honestly, I'd be embarrassed to turn the Soundlink II up during a party with a group of friends because I know it wouldn't allow us to "feel the music" because the sound has no depth. I knew I was going to send the II back after about five minutes of listening but I listened to it a little more to see if I would change my mind. If you remove the Bose logo from the II, I don't think you would pay more than $30 for it based on the sound quality alone. Yes, it sounds that bad to me. It sounds so bad that it makes me angry that I even purchased it without listening to it in a store and even more angry that there are people out there writing reviews that think it is accurately reproducing their music when it is holding so much back. Some people fall into the trap of thinking "Wow!, so much sound from such a small speaker" when they fail to realize that the sound is missing so much of the dynamics you would otherwise get from a larger speaker. For example, think Bose Acoustimass Module vs. a 12 inch ugly, boxy conventional subwoofer. Yes, one might look neater in your living room tucked away behind or under your sofa but sound-wise, it's kinda like comparing a small aftershock to the actual earthquake.

I actually originally wanted to buy the Mini instead of the II altogether but it was back-ordered everywhere so I ended up buying the II first. The first thing that you will notice about the Mini is not the sound but the design and build quality. I'm actually still in awe of how nice this unit really is. The case is SOLID ALUMINUM!!! It actually feels more like iron! Sometimes I just stare at it because they just don't make stuff of this quality anymore. I like to hold it in one hand and tap on it with my knuckles and hear the solid sound that it makes! When you hold it in your hand you will just know right away that it is a high quality product. Now the II doesn't look that bad either but there is just something about the Mini that will attract and keep your attention. Actually, I take that back, the Soundlink II is built well but it looks ugly because it doesn't look like a speaker. It looks like a book? More specifically, a book that is about to tip over at any moment. It looks even uglier when you flip the bi-fold cover on and lay it flat. The Mini, on the other hand, really does look like a mini speaker. I actually can't imagine designing it any better. Bose must have hired a new guy or gal to design it! I even think the small detail like the painted Bose logo looks so much better on it than a regular metal logo. Build quality and design for the Mini gets 5+ stars!!!

Regarding sound, as I stated earlier I am still scratching my head as to how or why this smaller unit sounds better than the larger II. Since I can't explain it to you I will just say that there is nothing mini about the Mini's sound. It addresses all the issues I had with the II. I'm not saying that the bass is better with the Mini but it certainly is more than appropriate for a speaker this size. The reason I am happier with the Mini's sound is because the size/performance ratio is much better than the II. With the II, I kept saying to myself "it should be louder than this" and "where's the bass?" because the II should definitely be louder and more refined considering its larger size and price. When you crank up the II, it just sounds "sloppy." When you crank up the Mini, it sounds tighter. I also want to say that I actually enjoy listening to the Mini on my desk at lower volumes. That's actually what I bought it for. It's just nice to know that it can get loud if you want it to.

In all fairness, I didn't listen to the II for more than a few hours but I highly doubt there would be a night and day difference with any type of speaker break-in period. I have been an audio enthusiast for 18 years and I know that what I'm hearing with the II is pretty much close to how it was engineered to sound. I can't see a speaker break-in period getting the bass to go down another note on the II. Even without a break-in period with the Mini, I am very happy with the sound.

To give you some faith in my review and to prove that I'm not one of those people who looks at Bose and automatically thinks "Bose is best because it is expensive..." I sold my Acoustimass 15 speakers years ago for an NHT and Velodyne setup for my living room and never looked back. I'll even be the first to tell you that I think Bose's Waveguide technology is just hype with phenomenal marketing behind it and most of their stuff is probably marketed with a prestige pricing strategy. I don't think Bose is anywhere near the best as far as the sound reproduction of some of their larger stereo and home theater speakers go but there are some things that the company does right and the Mini is a perfect example. Sound quality is a major factor in picking a speaker but believe it or not it is not the only factor. Aesthetics, build quality, and size to performance are also equally important factors when choosing a speaker. Ask yourself if you would buy a boxy 300 pound tower speaker with a giant footprint and put it in your living room just because somebody rated it as the greatest speaker in the world? Why do you think so many people bought the Acoustimass speakers back in the day and still do today? For example, I wouldn't mind having a Lifestyle Acoustimass setup in my office. Not because I think it would make my music sound its best but the ratio of aesthetics to sound quality would be much better than a larger, more clunky setup with lots of wires. So that's why I am saying the Mini is an excellent speaker. Not because I think its the best-sounding speaker but because there isn't a Bluetooth/portable speaker on the market right now at this price point that even comes close to offering you everything that the Mini does. I know I said earlier that people make the mistake of thinking that loud sound from a small speaker somehow is an indicator of a good speaker but in the case of the Mini, I'm saying its a great product not because of sound quality alone but because it has other factors going for it as well. One of those just happens to be that it produces large, high-quality sound for its small size.

Having said all of this, I cannot find anything that I dislike about this speaker. I hope you understand how I evaluate speakers and how I am evaluating the Mini. Asking for more bass, greater dynamics, or louder volume, considering it's diminutive size, would be totally unwarranted and impractical. For what it is, I think you will be very happy with the Mini because there is nothing out there right now for two hundred bucks that can match it with regards to performance and overall quality. This is one of those Bose products (maybe the only) that I wouldn't even mind paying more for; it looks and sounds that good. Finally, I want to say that setup took about five seconds for both models as they both recognized my iPhone immediately. Another added benefit of the Mini compared to the Soundlink II is that the battery charge will last longer than the II. I also want to add that I actually don't care that either unit doesn't have a mic built into them or any other special features. After all, their primary use is for music playback. I mean a mic would be cool but I can live without it. Somewhere in the future I can see Bose releasing a Soundlink Mini II. Right now though, I really don't know what they could do to make the original Mini sound or look any better.

5 stars and highly recommended!

EDIT 8/20/13: I ended up buying the neon green cover for it. Personally, I think the speaker looks much better without the cover but you might think differently.

EDIT 6/5/14: Today, I was at Target and I noticed that they had the Soundlink Mini and the Soundlink III on display side-by-side so I thought this was the best opportunity to test the III against the Mini. I pressed the demo button for the III first and I thought it sounded pretty good; it definitely sounded better than the older II from what I remember. I then hit the demo button for the Mini and quite honestly I actually thought the Mini sounded the same or better than the new Soundlink III. I played both speakers at a reasonable volume for what I thought was appropriate. I wasn't about to blast both units while at the store but I'm sure the III would play louder than the Mini but then again, how many of us will listen to either unit at such high volume on a regular basis? I am so happy I bought the Mini and I'm still amazed how it manages to sound so good being that it is so small. I also want to add that they had the Beats Pill and Beatbox Portable on display side by side and I tested those out too. The Beats Pill sounded very disappointing to me; I just turned it off after a few seconds. Even though the larger Beatbox Portable sounded bigger and better than the Pill, interestingly it still didn't sound anywhere as good as the Mini. The Mini is really a well-engineered product and I'm happy I own it.

Norton has protected me well

Norton has protected me well

       

I upgraded from Norton 360 2013. The upgrade took about two minutes and I didn't have to reboot or uninstall the prior version first. It also activated automatically. One thing to note is if you enter a new key from a newly purchased version rather than renewing your current subscription through Symantec, the remaining time on your current subscription does not carry over. Although remaining time does carry over if you renew your current license through Symantec, I've found purchasing new licenses to usually be less expensive. Not only that but you can upgrade to the latest version using your current key by clicking the new version check link under the support tab. If you have a month or more remaining on your current subscription, I'd suggest first upgrading your current program to the newest version and waiting until you're close to the expiration date of your current license before entering the new key.

As for the program itself, other than a minor background color change from dark to light, the main interface is the same. The sub menus remain largely unchanged except for removal of the check vulnerability protection link for checking vulnerable programs you may have installed. Another change I noticed was the reputation scan link missing from the scan sub-menu. Reputation scans are just another scanning option for scanning files and programs based on their reputation in the Norton community. A new feature added is Norton power eraser. Power Eraser will now handle scanning for any grey area programs that don't register as viruses but still cause unwanted pop-ups and other annoyances or leave your system vulnerable. Norton also offers Power Eraser as a free download for anyone, even those without a Norton product installed.

Scanning times seem about the same. So really, Norton 2014 is, at least on the surface, a minor upgrade from Norton 2013. Other than whatever they changed under the hood to possibly improve scanning results, you'll be hard-pressed to notice any differences other than the changes I mentioned. I'm not sure if detection rates have improved but so far I haven't experienced any infections while using Norton 360 for the past year. There have been a few occasions where I almost entered reportedly malicious sites and Norton stopped me in my tracks. I never re-visited the sites to see if they were truly compromised or not. I'll take Norton on its word. As a precaution, I occasionally scan my system with other scanners just to see if Norton may have missed anything and my system so far has remained clean.


I can honestly say I'm happy with Norton 360. I have it installed on every PC in my household and plan to continue using it for the foreseeable future. I do browse responsibly don't recklessly visit high risk sites like those hosting illegal-downloads, porn, cracking tools or other questionable content. Unfortunately, for those who do frequent sites that have a high likelihood of being compromised, there isn't an antivirus in existence that won't eventually let something slip through or even be overpowered and disabled if you regularly visit risky sites. Norton 360 is great and effective if you browse responsibly but don't expect miracles if you're a high risk taker.