# B&O vs base on the TT worth the $$?



## m3cosmos (Apr 28, 2011)

I was thinking about the TTRS's tech package and since the TTRS come with the Virtual cockpit $3500.00 for the nav and stereo seems pricey. I was curious if the base stereo is decent or adequate enough for a weekend car or is the B&O a must and worth the $3500.00? 

The base bose on my previous TTRS was terrible but on the Macan GTS is excellent. My question is the new base radio as good as the prior bose on the last gen TT?


----------



## Vegas-RoadsTTer (Mar 17, 2013)

*It mostly depends on you*

Here are the power specs for the various TT sound systems over the years from the Mk 2 FAQ:
Mk 1 Concert - 80W
Mk 1 optional Bose - 175W
Mk 2 Concert - 140W
Mk 2 optional Bose - 255W
Mk 3 Concert - 155W
Mk 3 optional Bang & Olufsen - 680W

Notes: Perceived sound volume depends on many factors besides wattage and includes crossover network performance and speaker efficiency.

To my ear, the Mk 2 Concert, which I have now, has noticeably better music fidelity as compared to my Mk 1 Bose but the maximum volume is slightly lower.

I have seen several complaints about the B&O not being worth the $ on various Mk 3 boards. I am obviously not that picky and would probably love the B&O, or the Concert. As is true for almost any car, you can always get an aftermarket upgrade that has better performance for less $ than the factory version. I've never been a big car sound system guy. IMO you are trying to get concert sound inside a tin can, an impossible task. My son was really into it for several years and was always having electrical issues with his various aftermarket installs so I have stayed away. Based on what I have read in posts, if you consider yourself to be a big audiophile, you won't be happy with the B&O. Since you did not like the Mk 2 Bose, you certainly will not be happy with the Mk 3 Concert either.


----------



## m3cosmos (Apr 28, 2011)

Vegas-RoadsTTer said:


> Here are the power specs for the various TT sound systems over the years from the Mk 2 FAQ:
> Mk 1 Concert - 80W
> Mk 1 optional Bose - 175W
> Mk 2 Concert - 140W
> ...


Thank you, that is a lot of good info. To say $900.00 is not worth the $$ means it's not that much noticeably better since it's not expensive. I recall the A3 with the B&O sounds pretty terrible and the benz C300 Burmester sounds much better Watts doesn't say much about sound quality and clarity. If Audi charges $3500 for an outstanding sound system on par with the 2017 911 burmester system I would get it.


----------



## Vegas-RoadsTTer (Mar 17, 2013)

*Agree that the watts spec is a small part of the puzzle to a true audiophile*



m3cosmos said:


> Thank you, that is a lot of good info. To say $900.00 is not worth the $$ means it's not that much noticeably better since it's not expensive. I recall the A3 with the B&O sounds pretty terrible and the benz C300 Burmester sounds much better Watts doesn't say much about sound quality and clarity. If Audi charges $3500 for an outstanding sound system on par with the 2017 911 burmester system I would get it.


Based on what I often hear sitting in traffic from nearby cars, volume of the sound system is a major spec for many folks. For roadster owners like myself, you need some confidence that you can hear the sound system while cruising top-down at 80 and the Concert in the Mk 2 works for me in that regard while some would not be satisfied without CPR-level thumping. I've never seen other specs for TT sound systems, like THD and power bandwidth. If folks have this for any TT sound system, please share.


----------



## Woj (Oct 23, 2000)

I have a TT-S with the B&O upgrade and I do not feel that it is worth the upgrade. I have so much tire whine from the 20 inch rims and Pirelli tires that any stereo upgrade I believe is worthless.
The sound in my MB GLK 250 with HK upgrade sounds better.

You have to remember that B&O is more about aesthetics than about fidelity.


----------



## Vegas-RoadsTTer (Mar 17, 2013)

*Agree on the tires*



Woj said:


> I have a TT-S with the B&O upgrade and I do not feel that it is worth the upgrade. I have so much tire whine from the 20 inch rims and Pirelli tires that any stereo upgrade I believe is worthless.
> The sound in my MB GLK 250 with HK upgrade sounds better.
> 
> You have to remember that B&O is more about aesthetics than about fidelity.


On paper, 680W seems like a bargain but I have seen so many folks bitch about the system.

Every Pirelli I have had as OEM has whined badly after about 10K miles and got much worse with every mile. Don't think the rims are an issue. Very happy with low noise with my Michelin PSS.


----------



## Huey52 (Nov 10, 2010)

Indeed, it's the Pirelli's. Can't wait to replace with Michelin [or swap to my Winter Michelin's, whichever comes first].



Vegas-RoadsTTer said:


> On paper, 680W seems like a bargain but I have seen so many folks bitch about the system.
> 
> Every Pirelli I have had as OEM has whined badly after about 10K miles and got much worse with every mile. Don't think the rims are an issue. Very happy with low noise with my Michelin PSS.


----------



## caj1 (Feb 16, 1999)

It's a decent system that desperately needs a sub.. that, and the size of the interior doesn't lend itself well to good acoustics. I can't say whether it's worth the cost because I've never heard the base system in the mk3


----------



## caj1 (Feb 16, 1999)

Huey52 said:


> Indeed, it's the Pirelli's. Can't wait to replace with Michelin [or swap to my Winter Michelin's, whichever comes first].


I switched over to Michelin PSS and it's night and day..


----------

