Experiance with BOSE

[aimen]

hi
Friend of mine insists that i should buy BOSE 901s for my HT based on his experiance
he is into this stuff for years so i kind of had some advices on HT
Reading really bad comments abt BOSE and its speakers , i am kind of ???
here is his experiance and y he recommends 901s

901s r the most stubborn speakers....according to his experiance over the past years
he has 901s now for several years, they have been used for HT music Parties everthing

he a year ago made another HT with Acoustic Research AR1 ( 3way, 15' 500w sunfire sub) as mains and rears and B&W HTM1 center channel power by Denon A1SE amplifier ( 170 x 7). this setup isnt used much, was going fine, one day a small party was held and his friends were listening to music at high volumes, 3 of 4 AR1s now has blown melted mids producing scratching sound, HTM1 doesnt work any more. the sourrounds are blown also but which were expected as they were 150 max and were power buy 170 in all ch stereo, nothing special there but AR1s were supposed to handle 300watts cont. aswell as B&W , both of them were not overpowered but still they broke down. WHY???

the material used was a VCD which had bad recording so that can be a cuz. but same stuff have been used with BOSE 901s, 802s and never had any problems , they go loud without problem , OK they dont have much base, but buy a sub and ur done. These BOSEs have been used at much louder volumes for much longer periods but they never broke down, they have been used with Denon , Yamahas , carver , etc, never had a problem.

he also has old infinities and technics but they also start to distort at loud volumes
he uses old POLK LSi series speakers at his another theatre which is used daily for abt 3-4 hours powered by yammy 90x5, they also start to distort at high volumes but for HT they r doing excellent job, all they need is refoaming.
only other speaker which never gave him any problem is PSB center channel Model??

so wts the end result

BOSE 901s may not have best sound quality but they go loud without problem/distortion, have big soundstage, reliable, long lasting, needs a SUB, and slightly expensive

After all this i came to a conclusion that bose is not all that bad company as most of the ppl say here, am i right??
plz give ur input and thoughts
i shall really appreciate em weither they r for or against BOSE

Regards

[vivisimonvi]

I have the 401 floorstander model which are rare, and they only sound good at any volume using FLAT frequency levels, otherwise they don't sound like they're supposed to (at least in my opinion). My SVS sub with these make a really good setup (I'm only running receiver power here).

I've never heard the 901's but, I have these speaker brochures I've saved since I was a kid, one reviewer commented on the 901's:

"...the 901 VI sounds better loud - I mean really loud - than almost any loudspeaker around... In fact, the 901 VI is the first dynamic loudspeaker in some time that's been able to clip my power amp before running out of clean reproduction." - Daniel Kumin, Digital Audio & Compact Disc Review

These also have the specs listed for some of their models and the 901's (series VI) are for amp's rated from 10 - 450 watts per channel - 250 watts IEC - 8 ohms. Sounds like than take a LOT from just about any consumer power amplifier.

If you plan to buy a used pair, another reviewer from here STRONGLY suggested that you use the right equalizer for the correct series 901. If you have the series II model for instance, you must have the series II equalizer to go along with it, mixing them would likely give you unsatisfying results and incorrect equalization.

[skeptic]

Among my speakers, I have owned original Bose 901 for 35 years. I rarely listen to them. In some ways they are different from the current series VI version.

This is NOT an accurate speaker IMO, at least not in timbral accuracy of acoustic instruments. It also doesn't have the low frequency reach of the original version or of the best speakers available today. I don't think its high frequency capabilities are impressive either. You will need to take special care to place them in a room as the manufacturer recommends, 12 to 18 inches from a wall for their sound to reflect off of and you can't have lots of other furniture or objects interfering with the ability of the speaker to reflect its sound or its special sound quality will not manifest itself. Purchased new, they are not cheap, about $1500. In a HT setup, you will need 2 pairs and you MUST use the included equalizer in the way Bose recommends to get the flattest frequency response they have to offer. If you can overcome all of these objections, have the space, don't care about the price, and don't mind their sound coloration, then this may be the right speaker for you. But listen carefully first and be aware of their limitations before you take the plunge.

BTW, adding a subwoofer can be a little tricky because you will need to use the equalizer in the signal circuit for the 901s but you will not want it in the circuit for the subwoofer. This may entail additional equipment and careful planning. Give this consideration and discuss it with the dealer before you buy. If he tells you this is not a problem for adding a subwoofer, he is lying.

[F1]

Well if the championship of good speaker is based on how loud home speakers can output, I guess Cerwin Vega! floorstander with 15" woofer will win the trophy. It easily hits 100dB SPL from a mere 1 watt amplification. It goes lower and higher than Bose 901 and costs much less, too.

There is one reason why people don't recommend Bose: They are waaay overpriced for their sound. And there is another reason why people hate Bose: Many of their business practices are not ethical.

[Bryan]

Odds are your friends speakers blew because they were run extremely loud for a long time. They are not designed to be run 300W continuous RMS. They are designed for peaks of 300W. Odds are it was peaking quite often at the party which is why they blew.

Bose overall prices their products too high. Most of the grief they get is from their Lifestyle, WaveRadio, and AM series of speakers and that is deservedly so. They focus on the marketing rather than the products.

For the $1,400 price of the Bose you could get an excellent pair of speakers (Rocket RS550s for $699 plus shipping perhaps?) and an excellent subwoofer such as the HSU VTF-2 or SVS 25-31PCi to boot.

[trauski]

not really sure how you would use the 901's in a HT application as the EQ ive been told messes every thing up. plus a lot of current HT recievers wont even work with the bose 901. as for blowing the speakers, i blew out a few advents in my college days. todays recievers are a little harder to gauge dangerous volume levels. i had a nad 7140 reciever back then and my general rule of thumb was not much more than 12 o'clock on the volume dial. most dials are not calibrated like that any more. 1o'clock was my max and really anything after 1 o'clock didnt get much louder but caused distortion, and the amp to work really hard even with soft clipping enabled. of couse with alcohol and college students i came over to the stereo and some idiot had put it to 4 oclock and the next day my speakers where in the shop getting new tweeters and the crossovers unmelted. now the advantage to the newer multi stepping volume nobs is that when my 4 year old goes over and turns the nob 180 degrees it doesnt make that much difference in loudness as it steps in very small increments. my advice to your buddy is less alcohol and less volume.

[Hoho]

. . . no matter what anyone says, but they were designed for two-channel stereo, not for 5.1, 6.1, or 7.1 channel home theater. For one thing, the EQ will make it difficult to combine 901's with other speakers. For another thing, even some people at Bose Customer Service admit that the indistinct imaging of the direct-reflecting sound configuration isn't best for home theater. That presumably means that the 601 Series IV aren't good home theater speakers, either.

I've never tried it myself, but the Bose professional line is supposed to sound excellent in home theater. Put three 802's across the front, with their controller (the pro model is called a controller instead of an equalizer), with a Bose subwoofer and Panarray speakers for surrounds. The biggest problem, as I see it, is that the 802's are not styled for a home decor, unless you get the discontinued 802-W, which had a walnut veneer cabinet.

[joel2762]

don't really want too either but here's what I'm thinking....4" drivers- too big to reach high frequencies, too small to produce low bass..Wouldn't they just sound junky? Maybe the equalizer fixes this or something? But I know i'll NEVER buy a Bose product...

[goatspeed]

I don't think you can really speculate how they will sound due to their size. Bose acoustamass speakers are tiny, but are intended to be played in "Large" mode. When done so, they go remarkably low given how small they are.

That said, and being a Bose owner, I'd never buy them again. They are "good sound for dummies" but alot better sound can be bought with equal or less money.

[This Guy]

If that's the kind of speaker you want, just buy a pair of PA speakers, Big 15" woofers and a horn tweeter. Usually no Less than 96 dB 1 watt/meter, get down to about 50 hz, and up to about 18 khz. While easily handling around 400 watts continiously. Bigger power handling, bigger drivers, and much more efficient while remainging less than the 901's, oh and placement won't be such a ***** either with these. So why would anyone buy the 901's?

-Joey

[This Guy]

They aren't meant to play in Large mode, they're crossover to the bass module at 250 hertz. I don't know how remarkable 250 hertz is from a 2.5" driver, hell my cheapo altex Lansing computer speakers are 2.5" and they crossover to the "sub"woofer at 200 hertz.

[skeptic]

You only say that because you don't know that the original Bose 901 not only had flat response to about 23 hz but when enough electrical power was available and within its maximum loudness capability which was considerable, in deep bass response it outperformed every other speaker on the market bar none, including the champions of the day JBL Paragon D44000 and AR3a. Even by today's standards, that speaker will outperform most other speakers on the market in bass response. Bose abandoned the acoustic suspension principle with series 3 and thereby entirely sacrificed the lowest octave of audible sound in order to gain improved efficiency.

[E-Stat]

...the original Bose 901 not only had flat response to about 23 hz...

Which is not a particularly difficult task to accomplish when you simply apply copious amounts of EQ. Never mind the resulting doubling distortion. You speak of the feat as though Amar made some innovation. That is the approach taken by kids everyday with kilowatt car stereos.

rw

[vivisimonvi]

My Bose 401's sound good loud, but nowhere does it compare to my CV E715's in terms of raw power. They can put out a LOT of sound pressure with no audible distortion (these are capable up to a 126 dbs of sound pressure)... for some music bass heavy you can feel the bass pressure, almost as strong as my SVS 25-31 PCi (ok that's overstating a little but the CV's can handle low frequencies at high volumes down to 26 Hz)... Of course I only push my system's limits for no more than 5 minutes at a time as you may suffer permanent hearing loss.

I never use ANY volume dial past the 12 o'clock position, as I use the my low-power receiver's speaker-out directly to the input of Pioneer power amp (I keep the reference volume almost at 12 on the power amp). This is good for low output recordings, and you just use the receiver's volume control as the main controller (you don't have to turn that up too much to get a lot of output). There doesn't seem to be any danger doing this, I've been doing this for a long time.

CV's are the type of speakers you'd want that sound good loud and can handle high amounts of power, despite what others might say. I STRONGLY suggest a good pre-amp as they can sound dramatically better with one. I use Winamp and some DSP plug-in's as a pre-amp through my PC directly to my system, and they bring life to my CV's even at low listening volumes. Some of the best ones I've heard are Izotope Ozone, DFX, and OctiMax.

[skeptic]

Actually there was very little distortion if the amplifier could supply sufficient power. Certainly no more than you'd have gotten from AR3a or JBL Paragon at that frequency. The original Bose 901 may have had its limitations but it was a precision device. The equalizer was carefully tailored to the speaker system. The equalizer was unique in exploiting the linear falloff in response of an acoustic suspension system below resonance. Resonance was deliberately pushed up to 180 hz where Bose's tests indicated that the phase shift inevitable at resonance was no longer audible. This was a unique innovation for this design.

It is foolish to dismiss people, ideas, or devices out of hand if you don't know much about them or if you disagree with or don't like the outcome as a whole. Within many failures are the seeds of future successes.

[E-Stat]

Actually there was very little distortion if the amplifier could supply sufficient power.

Cite your source as Stereophile's test results from 1971 suggest otherwise. 4" drivers are not known for stellar first octave distortion measurements.

It is foolish to dismiss people, ideas, or devices out of hand if you don't know much about them or if you disagree with or don't like the outcome as a whole.

I agree. Informed commentary is always preferable. That's why I looked to see if your comments were supported by fact before I posted.

rw

[spacedeckman]

Original Poster:

The speakers blew up due to an amplifier driven into clipping for extended periods of time. He burned them up...I will make no comments about people who drive speakers louder even though they are screaming that they need to be turned down. They didn't break, they were broken...there is a difference. No, the 901s could have probably taken it, since you have 9 voice coils with aluminum formers to dissipate the heat. Score 1 for the 901, it is a good speaker for stupid people who like to break things. Besides, hearing loss would be advantageous.

The 901 would be a horrible speaker for home theater. You would have to buy 5, 6, or 7 of them. Placement would be a nightmare, and it would be hideously expensive. However, if you liked to play stupid loud and have a bunch of friends who aren't into audio and would think that was cool, maybe it wouldn't be that bad...status is often an important buying impulse. Just don't let them park their Harleys on your new driveway without little mats underneath them.

The 901s play louder than the Infinities and Polks because they are more sensitive (often called efficient). It takes more power to get them to play louder. A LOT more power. I don't know of anyone with some audio background who would argue that the 901s sounded better. Louder, yes. Due to equalization, subwoofer may be problematic.

Yes, 901s throw a very large soundstage, but exhibit very poor imaging (placement).

This is how it is with Bose. The less you know about audio, the more attractive they become. The less you know about audio, the more comfortable you are with paying the prices that Bose asks for their products. The less you know about audio, the more status a Bose purchase will bring in your own mind and amongst the friends you have that don't know much about audio...which is about everyone. No, they aren't the worst speaker company in the world, you need to chase down a white van for that. But they usually aren't the best choice if sound is more important to you than being somewhat indestructible (901s only, although they do use lightbulbs in many speakers to absorb power, sounds horrible but does it really matter on a paper tweeter?), or feeling like you joined an exclusive club due to their purchase. Bose speakers are what they are, and they do what they do. If you are new to audio, you aspire to own them like you would a Ferrari or a Mercedes. If you know a lot about audio, you look at them more like a rusty Yugo on cement blocks in your front yard. Depending on your neighborhood, that could be good or bad.

vivisimonvi:

I think it was Buck Owens who was interviewed once years ago who said he really loved his 401s...as speaker stands. Didn't like them plugged in at all. I sold them when they first came out. The Bose rep only changed the subject when you asked about 401s.

Goatspeed:

The AM product makes only a small fraction of the total sound from the cubes. It isn't the cubes that are allowing it to be played in Large mode, it is the bass module. The cubes are crossed over about 500Hz. They would last about 3 seconds by themselves in Large mode...on a good day...with a drama movie.

Is everyone trying to make this the most convoluted post of the month? Suffice it to say, "The less you know, the better they look". Someone else said the same thing. B&W is kind of the same thing for hifi newbies, IMHO.

[vivisimonvi]

vivisimonvi:

I think it was Buck Owens who was interviewed once years ago who said he really loved his 401s...as speaker stands. Didn't like them plugged in at all. I sold them when they first came out. The Bose rep only changed the subject when you asked about 401s.

Did the Bose rep want you buy the more expensive model instead? From this very website the 401 is has better reviews compared to most models. More importantly they are the most inexpensive floorstander. Despite the "Bose Bashing" reviews, I think most of those people where plagued with the marketing hype. Interesting you mentioned using speakers as a stand, one guy had a pair of 901's stacked upon his CV's (the 901's turned backwards). The sound brought out the best of both worlds to make up for each speaker's weakness (there's a review posted somewhere on this site). I actually use my CV's to hold my power amplifiers (whoever said speakers are just made for making sound anyways?) 401's make a terrible stand in my opinion, lol.

Btw, aren't 901's relatively cheap through Ebay? I've seen some older series models for as low as $300.

[aimen]

thx guys for ur input
i dont think i will buy BOSE 901s
i rather go for POLK RTi series, i can make the whole setup in that price
or i will go for custom built speakers, much better value , price/performance

regards

[skeptic]

Cite your source as Stereophile's test results from 1971 suggest otherwise. 4" drivers are not known for stellar first octave distortion measurements.


I agree. Informed commentary is always preferable. That's why I looked to see if your comments were supported by fact before I posted.

rw

There were three reviews in major consumer audio magazines of the time that were widely read, High Fidelity, Stereo Review, and Audio. After 35 years I don't remember which one of them it was. But all three came to the same conclusion. And at the time, Bose was a new company just getting into consumer audio, hardly a heavy hitter with the clout to bully all of the magazines into writing favorable reviews. The comments about the Bose 901 outperforming the JBL Paragon at low frequencies came in a reply to a letter to the editor in one of those magazines some months later. There is no reason to doubt the truth of it. It was an objective fact that was easily verified.


E-stat, when your academic credentials relating to electrical engineering and acoustics are equal to Dr. Bose's, I will consider your opinions and comments with the same degree of credibility I considered his...that is if they start making some sense.

[goatspeed]

They aren't meant to play in Large mode, they're crossover to the bass module at 250 hertz. I don't know how remarkable 250 hertz is from a 2.5" driver, hell my cheapo altex Lansing computer speakers are 2.5" and they crossover to the "sub"woofer at 200 hertz.

Read the manual.

[E-Stat]

E-stat, when your academic credentials relating to electrical engineering and acoustics are equal to Dr. Bose's, I will consider your opinions and comments with the same degree of credibility I considered his...that is if they start making some sense.

Successful engineering concepts survive the test of time and are often found incorporated elsewhere. Thirty years, later the 901 concept is a perfect example of one that did not, their current production notwithstanding.

rw

[skeptic]

I only wish I had failures as profitable.

[goatspeed]

It's a failure? I wouldn't go that far. I'm not a bose fan...but they have their niche. Again, they are "good sound for dummies". If you don't know alot about home audio, you can fork out money and get a decent sound system that is forgiving for poor speaker placement, wired in such a way that you'd have to really try to screw it up, and is good enough at the right frequencies to fool the non-discerning ear into believing it is great sound.

I would equate it to the PC world and stuff like Compaq's, Dell's, and Gateway's. Are they the best PC's out there? No way. They are just okay...a bit overpriced. You pay for name branding. But, for someone who doesn't know any better, they suit their purpose. They aren't failures for that.

[E-Stat]

I only wish I had failures as profitable.

There's no questioning the mass market appeal and financial success of Bose products. Last year, I presented at a seminar in Framingham nearby "The Mountain". Their impressive campus consists of several buildings, the main one of which is truly at the top of the mountain. You drive up a long winding road and eventually emerge at the top where you are greeted by the guard shack.

For some reason, I thought you were talking about engineering.

rw