Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 26 to 39 of 39

Thread: Bose 901's

  1. #26
    AR Newbie Registered Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    1

    Wink

    I just had to chime in on this old thread.

    I currently have a Klipsch HT speaker system with a Klipsch subwoofer (KSB 3.1, KSB 2.1, KSB 2.1, KSC-C1, KSW150). The sound is just awesome with a high current amplifier/receiver like the HK7300 (I wish HK made a 130W x 7.1 receiver in the current line... but HK specs are misleading due to the nature of the high current design and all channels driven specs. Pioneer Elite 94TXH clips at 61W when all 7 channels are driven, unlike the HK7300 which clips @ 111W when all 7 channels are driven).

    As much as I like my current Klipsch setup, I still MISS the pair of 901V's I used to own in the 80's and 90's. For those of you Bose 901 bashers... it's obvious you haven't gotten even the basics of proper speaker placement and room equalization for the 901's. The 901 speaker placement is CRITICAL, as is the proper equalization with the active 901 EQ that comes with the set. Once said and done, the 901's audio reproduction flows like no other speakers I've ever listened to. Nothing else I've heard so far within a $1,500 - $8,000 price range comes close to producing such an incredible soundstage... where if I close my eyes, I actually FEEL as if I'm at a live performance. The entire wall lights up with life-like sound and it really is amazing how the 901's just disappear into the music. Frankly, I never needed a subwoofer with the 901's, because the bass reproduction was just amazing in the way I had the 901's set up. I gave up my 901's when I got divorced, and settled on a Klipsch KSB 2.1 + KSW 150 subwoofer setup, which sounded awesome in the small confines of my new apartment. It then evolved to two more sets of KSB's plus a Klipsch center channel, but for ONE pair of speakers such as the 901's, I have NOT yet met an equal in the speaker industry for the overall soundstage characterstics that the 901's are capable of... and I've auditioned quite a number of prestigeous brands and well reviewed speakers in the last 20 plus years...

  2. #27
    NINJA TURTLE
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    DUGWAY, UTAH
    Posts
    11
    I owned the bose 901 v in the mid 80's and had STACKED pairs which sounded better than just one pair. I used sound processors like dbx expanders and carver sonic holography to make it sound even far better. The problem with bose 901's is that it does not produce tight punchy bass lines on most materials. If the music is chamber or classical it sounds more applicable for such material. Loudspeakers like anything else is always personal taste. There's not a single loudspeakers design that's goingto satisfy everyone. To simply say that bose 901 is the best thing one's heard compared to other is a bias opinion as much as the horn, planar, electrostat and dynamic line source designs ONLY users. I have owned so many designs like that mentioned including bose 901's and 601's, they all sounded different and have their strength and weaknesses. I find for me, the combination of technologies like using a pair of OHM walsh acoustics and mangepans or eminent tech planars to sound far more realistic than any bose 901 in every program material. Not even in the same category to my ears. I loved my bose 901
    s in the 80's and early 90's but until I discovered the world of planars, electrostats and CLS or coherent line source from OHM acoustics, to me it's not even in the same boat.
    Bose 901 lack real bass and voice reproduction. It only excels in reflections but coaxial designs have always been weak in performance compared to multiple ribbon and dynamic drivers and planar/ribbon or electrostat designs. bose 901's are ok, but it's a matter of what sounds good to your ears. Planars and electrostats are not for everyone either. some would prefer professional loudspeakers like JBL or mackie to produce recorded material because they simply like loudness and not imaging. Bose should have used better materials for their drivers like kevlar, metal, polyproplene etc. instead of the same paper material. They should have incorporated ribbons and line array to enhance their 9 driver only design and could have added additional larger woofers to their designs to create realistc bass and midrange response. Basically the 9 drivers act as a midbass transducers rather than as a multi driver crossoverless design.

  3. #28
    Forum Regular hifitommy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    sylmar, ca. in beautiful so cal earthquake country
    Posts
    1,442

    as i have mentioned before

    whereas one can get pleasant sound from the 901s, the image cast by them is not accurate. the bose theory is that the ration of direct to reflected sound at the listening position, and that is correct.

    however, that happens at the microphone so diluting it again at the speakers is INcorrect. a good direct radiator can recreate the captured soundfield and provide the acoustic image of the placement of the musicians therein.

    i agree that most people in the audience dont get that localization of each player that comes through on some of the best recordings but the microphones are many times right over the conductors head. the conductor DOES get to hear that and arguably has the best listening position in the house.

    the diffuse offered by the 901s would be welcome in the rear channels and i think a used pair of 901s would be ideal there.

    the eq is necessary to give the 901s the right frequency balance but might not be necessary for rear channels. the top has never been adquate, some things cant be amplified into existence nor can dynamic range or transparency.

    bose apeakers sound better than your tv speakers but thats about it. the cost of them is another mystery.
    ...regards...tr

  4. #29
    Phila combat zone JoeE SP9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA
    Posts
    2,710
    BizmanJoe, there are not many here who agree with your assessment of 901's. They are pretty much universally disliked. With that said, most Klipsch speakers aren't all that popular here either.
    ARC SP9 MKIII, VPI HW19, Rega RB300
    Marcof PPA1, Shure, Sumiko, Ortofon carts, Yamaha DVD-S1800
    Behringer UCA222, Emotiva XDA-2, HiFimeDIY
    Accuphase T101, Teac V-7010, Nak ZX-7. LX-5, Behringer DSP1124P
    Front: Magnepan 1.7, DBX 223SX, 2 modified Dynaco MK3's, 2, 12" DIY TL subs (Pass El-Pipe-O) 2 bridged Crown XLS-402
    Rear/HT: Emotiva UMC200, Acoustat Model 1/SPW-1, Behringer CX2310, 2 Adcom GFA-545

  5. #30
    Class of the clown GMichael's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Anywhere but here...
    Posts
    13,243
    For a second there, I thought that RL was back.
    WARNING! - The Surgeon General has determined that, time spent listening to music is not deducted from one's lifespan.

  6. #31
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    22

    Talking BOSE 901 series v !

    Quote Originally Posted by vandalfsens
    The lightning rod of controversy! Bose 901's! But how do they really work?

    What does the required equalizer actually do and how do they get away with all of the tiny little drivers?

    I've had them before, hooked up to my all-Carver system from the mid-90's and I thought they weren't too bad but I really just want to know besides the "direct-reflecting" stuff, how exactly are they different from a "normal" speaker?
    From:Errolvan
    I have had my Bose 901s with the Bose eq since the 80s when I was in the Army in Germany! They have been very good speakers for over twenty years and I have been running them using a 100watt JVC receiver along with DBX Sound processors and DBX eq. The speakers are not designed to sound like regular box speakers because they are designed for room placement and reflecting from the place where they are seated throughout the listening area. They do not give direct sound from the front because they are not designed that way!
    These speakers have been used by me for over twenty years and they cannot be compared to others because they are totally different in sound, power handling, and you must grow to love them by the positioning and room placement inorder to get the best from them! The Bose eq is designed to tune the bass and treble but you get the best sound in my opinion by adding an additional eq which I did about 20 years ago and I never turned to any other speaker brands because they fill the room with sound like no other speaker I've heard.

  7. #32
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    22

    Talking BOSE 901 series v !

    Quote Originally Posted by vandalfsens
    The lightning rod of controversy! Bose 901's! But how do they really work?

    What does the required equalizer actually do and how do they get away with all of the tiny little drivers?

    I've had them before, hooked up to my all-Carver system from the mid-90's and I thought they weren't too bad but I really just want to know besides the "direct-reflecting" stuff, how exactly are they different from a "normal" speaker?
    From:Errolvan
    I have had my Bose 901s with the Bose eq since the 80s when I was in the Army in Germany! They have been very good speakers for over twenty years and I have been running them using a 100watt JVC receiver along with DBX Sound processors and DBX eq. The speakers are not designed to sound like regular box speakers because they are designed for room placement and reflecting from the place where they are seated throughout the listening area. They do not give direct sound from the front because they are not designed that way!
    These speakers have been used by me for over twenty years and they cannot be compared to others because they are totally different in sound, power handling, and you must grow to love them by the positioning and room placement inorder to get the best from them! The Bose eq is designed to tune the bass and treble but you get the best sound in my opinion by adding an additional eq which I did about 20 years ago and I never turned to any other speaker brands because they fill the room with sound like no other speaker I've heard.

  8. #33
    Forum Regular hifitommy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    sylmar, ca. in beautiful so cal earthquake country
    Posts
    1,442

    if you are happy with the sound

    then there is no reason to change. i have heard the 901 "properly" set up and it was sort of fun but didnt resemble reality. for me, the limitations are clear.

    they DO require a fair amount of power (100wpc at least) and the pseudo-image they project puts sounds in mid space. thats the fun part. truly low bass frequencies dont happen, nor do the highest frequencies where overtones exist.

    we all look for something different in our sound systems. my needs are met with magneplanar MMgs and a hsu subwoofer. i sometimes alternate my spendor s3/5s or infinity primus 150s for different effect.

    i surround myself with dynaquad passive ambience extraction and its all driven with 200 wpc.
    ...regards...tr

  9. #34
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    125
    Letīs give credit where itīs due, or at least some of it: the ratio of reflected to direct sound seems to have been investigated by Bose and other speaker manufacturers and funnily enough they come up with different numbers! Bose insist on an 89% reflected to 11% direct sound whereas another well known manufacturer swears on a 70% reflected to 30% direct sound. In my adventures is speaker placement, I experimented with a lot of different ideas, taking into account the physics of soundwave propagation and a lot of speaker placement techniques including the Cardas, WASP, Audiorives, etc....but had to compromise on distances from the wall behind the speakers..... and the best solution in my case was with a substantial amount of toe-in, probably in line with a high ratio of reflected to direct sound......

  10. #35
    Forum Regular hifitommy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    sylmar, ca. in beautiful so cal earthquake country
    Posts
    1,442

    theories aside

    the bose dont sound like real music as a primary speaker. speaker placement is another philosophy.

    the bose 901s require a specific set up to allow the walls behind them to reflect what they were designed to do. most other speakers take some experimentation that eventually result in acceptable sound.
    ...regards...tr

  11. #36
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    22

    Unhappy sorry keep sipping your hatter aid!

    For the last twenty plus years I have had my 901s and the sound has not changed! From 20wpc to 450wpc these speakers are in a class by them selves so keep sipping hatter aid on the rocks and post when you have a set of twenty plus year old box speakers that can evolve to any amp or set up on the market today!

  12. #37
    Forum Regular hifitommy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    sylmar, ca. in beautiful so cal earthquake country
    Posts
    1,442

    sipping

    if youve been sipping yak urine for 20 years,and the taste doesnt change when you pour it into a different glass, then keep on sipping.

    you ought to try a different drink though.
    ...regards...tr

  13. #38
    M.P.S.E /AES/SMPTE member Sir Terrence the Terrible's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    6,826
    Quote Originally Posted by hifitommy
    if youve been sipping yak urine for 20 years,and the taste doesnt change when you pour it into a different glass, then keep on sipping.

    you ought to try a different drink though.
    LOL, now this was a good one......
    Sir Terrence

    Titan Reference 3D 1080p projector
    200" SI Black Diamond II screen
    Oppo BDP-103D
    Datastat RS20I audio/video processor 12.4 audio setup
    9 Onkyo M-5099 power amp
    9 Onkyo M-510 power amp
    9 Onkyo M-508 power amp
    6 custom CAL amps for subs
    3 custom 3 way horn DSP hybrid monitors
    18 custom 3 way horn DSP hybrid surround/ceiling speakers
    2 custom 15" sealed FFEC servo subs
    4 custom 15" H-PAS FFEC servo subs
    THX Style Baffle wall

  14. #39
    M.P.S.E /AES/SMPTE member Sir Terrence the Terrible's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    6,826
    I know that fans of the 901 will defend their choice of speaker till death, and will bury their collective heads in the sand about its drawbacks. But as a person who has measured these speakers, it starts off bad right there, and gets worse after that.

    I think the Stereophile review of that speaker pretty much sums it up. It is not a very accurate or impressive speaker, but it does add a pleasing amount of spaciousness to the sound at the expense of timbre and correct tonality. I am not sure I would give up those attributes just to get the spaciousness.
    Sir Terrence

    Titan Reference 3D 1080p projector
    200" SI Black Diamond II screen
    Oppo BDP-103D
    Datastat RS20I audio/video processor 12.4 audio setup
    9 Onkyo M-5099 power amp
    9 Onkyo M-510 power amp
    9 Onkyo M-508 power amp
    6 custom CAL amps for subs
    3 custom 3 way horn DSP hybrid monitors
    18 custom 3 way horn DSP hybrid surround/ceiling speakers
    2 custom 15" sealed FFEC servo subs
    4 custom 15" H-PAS FFEC servo subs
    THX Style Baffle wall

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •