-
Replacing Bose 901's with Magnepan 1.6's
After 20+ years, I am considering replacing my beloved Bose 901's with Magnepan 1.6's and adding a REL Storm III sub woofer. Is this a good move? All opinions welcomed. I will be using a Hafler DH500 amp and a Hafler DH110 preamp, both upgraded by Musical Concepts.
-
You'll find a lot of people here are not very fond of Bose, so I'm sure they'll say you have a solid move. I'm not personally familiar with Magnepan, but I've heard some good things about them.
On a side note, I'm in Streamwood- small world.
Enjoy and let us know what you decide.
Eric
-
I would personally stick with the BOSE 901, it can play louder and has more drivers.
-AD
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Florian
I would personally stick with the BOSE 901, it can play louder and has more drivers.
-AD
The body snatchers have Florian.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Florian
I would personally stick with the BOSE 901, it can play louder and has more drivers.
-AD
The stands are cool too! I know, I am an idiot for even asking such a stupid question, but I was actually looking for insightful feedback from people who can objectively analyze this situation and provide thoughtful analysis of the pros and cons.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Florian
I would personally stick with the BOSE 901, it can play louder and has more drivers.
-AD
Is it April Fool's Day already? Your shoe is untied.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by bbrunswick
The stands are cool too! I know, I am an idiot for even asking such a stupid question, but I was actually looking for insightful feedback from people who can objectively analyze this situation and provide thoughtful analysis of the pros and cons.
It seems you're a little bothered by his (more than likely) sarcastic response. I guess a good word of advice to newcomers to this forum is not to be bothered by such comments. This is a pretty small community and we joke around and try to have fun with it :)
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnMichael
You are just too funny.
Im only 1 post away from catching up to you, better run :)
EDIT: Too late
EDIT 2 : why in the world does it show me as having 3 posts in a row? This message board is messed up :)
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by bjornb17
Is it April Fool's Day already? Your shoe is untied.
You are just too funny.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by bbrunswick
The stands are cool too! I know, I am an idiot for even asking such a stupid question, but I was actually looking for insightful feedback from people who can objectively analyze this situation and provide thoughtful analysis of the pros and cons.
Sorry but we like to have fun. The two speakers you are talking about are as different as night and day. The Bose try to reproduce a diffuse sound field that you would hear at a concert. They have a very wide dispersion pattern with little imaging. The Magnepans with the ribbon tweeters will have better imaging. Planar speakers need to be set up rather precisely and Florian has some advice on that in the section for planar and ribbon speakers. One thing that is always stressed is that you listen to the speakers in which you are interested. If you love the Bose 901's you may not like the planar speakers. Take time and listen to all you can. I prefer a point source speaker over a line source or diffuse sound field. To each his own.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by bbrunswick
The stands are cool too! I know, I am an idiot for even asking such a stupid question, but I was actually looking for insightful feedback from people who can objectively analyze this situation and provide thoughtful analysis of the pros and cons.
You are probably right. I infer from the response that my ears are not large enough or that the audio response center of my brain is not sufficently developed to detect the differences that exist between my barbaric 901s and the obviously more elegant Magnepans. I was hoping that someone who at least acknowledges that there are two sides to the 901 controversy could give me their qualative opinion of the improvement my underdeveloped audio pleasure center might detect. Sarcasim is fun and I can take a shot, but I would also like to get a side order of useful information.
-
Quote:
analyze this situation and provide thoughtful analysis of the pros and cons.
Not to bust your bubble, but what cons? I would personally not buy them if i were you, just to ask this question clearly shows that you wont know what to do with a Maggie. Sorry, its not meant in a bad way but this post has to be the most different one ever.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnMichael
Sorry but we like to have fun. The two speakers you are talking about are as different as night and day. The Bose try to reproduce a diffuse sound field that you would hear at a concert. They have a very wide dispersion pattern with little imaging. The Magnepans with the ribbon tweeters will have better imaging. Planar speakers need to be set up rather precisely and Florian has some advice on that in the section for planar and ribbon speakers. One thing that is always stressed is that you listen to the speakers in which you are interested. If you love the Bose 901's you may not like the planar speakers. Take time and listen to all you can. I prefer a point source speaker over a line source or diffuse sound field. To each his own.
Good points, well taken. Thanks.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by bjornb17
Im only 1 post away from catching up to you, better run :)
EDIT: Too late
EDIT 2 : why in the world does it show me as having 3 posts in a row? This message board is messed up :)
You are so much younger, you can keep posting after I am dead.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Florian
Not to bust your bubble, but what cons? I would personally not buy them if i were you, just to ask this question clearly shows that you wont know what to do with a Maggie. Sorry, its not meant in a bad way but this post has to be the most different one ever.
Of course I know what to do with them. I would put one on either side of my chair and hook them to my iPod, just like I do with my 901s. Do you think I could lay them on their sides and lay between them?
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by bbrunswick
Of course I know what to do with them. I would put one on either side of my chair and hook them to my iPod, just like I do with my 901s. Do you think I could lay them on their sides and lay between them?
Enjoy yourself
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Florian
Not to bust your bubble, but what cons? I would personally not buy them if i were you, just to ask this question clearly shows that you wont know what to do with a Maggie. Sorry, its not meant in a bad way but this post has to be the most different one ever.
Thanks friend I suggested he go to your ribbon and planar site for advice. Never mind bbrunswick sorry I suggested it.
-
Bose 901's.
Keep them keep them keep them!I am not fond of Bose's lower model numbers,201's 301's 501's and 701's,but the 901's KICK ASS,i used to have a pair of 901 series III back in about 1985 and nothing in there size could touch them.Again i would keep them..Peace.
-
People are jerking you around
Quote:
Originally Posted by bbrunswick
After 20+ years, I am considering replacing my beloved Bose 901's with Magnepan 1.6's and adding a REL Storm III sub woofer. Is this a good move? All opinions welcomed. I will be using a Hafler DH500 amp and a Hafler DH110 preamp, both upgraded by Musical Concepts.
But don't be offended. Of course it is true that the Bose and the Magneplanars are very different as has been pointed out. On the other hand the "consensus" -- let us call it -- would be that the Magneplanars, with or without the sub, are far better for the serious listener than the Bose.
For the Maggies setup is critical, but not as difficult as it's made out to be by some. Three feet from the wall behind, preferably two feet from the side wall, toed in to aim directly at your listening position -- and your done under most circumstances. (Note that the quasi-ribbon models like the 1.6's are easier to set up than the true ribbon modes because the dispersion of the quasi-ribbons is narrower than the true ribbons, hence the reflections, both side and rear, are easier to control.)
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Florian
I would personally stick with the BOSE 901, it can play louder and has more drivers.
-AD
OK buddy, who are you and what have you done with the real Flo?
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by bbrunswick
After 20+ years, I am considering replacing my beloved Bose 901's with Magnepan 1.6's and adding a REL Storm III sub woofer. Is this a good move? All opinions welcomed. I will be using a Hafler DH500 amp and a Hafler DH110 preamp, both upgraded by Musical Concepts.
There is a huge difference between Bose 901's and the Mangepan 1.6's. Totally different type of sound and not in the same class at all. The 1.6's would be a great move if you have heard them and know what you are getting. Go check out their website and find some dealers in your area. Give them a listen. I think you'll be shocked at how real they sound.
-
This would have been a no brainer for me 20 years ago. Wouldn't have bought the 901's in the first place. I think your choice of Magnapans and REL sub is a pretty nice upgrade.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by bbrunswick
Is this a good move?
Yes. While those speakers are quite different from each other, they share similar requirements: lots of space behind them for optimum imaging and plenty of power.
I think you'll like the Maggies. I had some back in the 70s before moving on to electrostats.
rw
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by bbrunswick
After 20+ years, I am considering replacing my beloved Bose 901's with Magnepan 1.6's and adding a REL Storm III sub woofer. Is this a good move? All opinions welcomed. I will be using a Hafler DH500 amp and a Hafler DH110 preamp, both upgraded by Musical Concepts.
My question to you is, how do you listen to music?
My father has a pair of 901's (maybe series VI) and he loves them. He has no desire to sit in the "sweet spot" in an equalateral triangle with his speakers and try to pinpoint where every instrument is coming from. In fact, most of the time he's up and moving while he's listening to music: working in his office, exercising, cooking, etc. The 901's fit his needs perfectly for a small speaker that can play incredibly loud and send music to every corner of his home.
He'd be miserable with a pair of 1.6's. He'd complain that they can't play loud enough and he'd complain that as soon as you stand up from the sweet spot, the treble dissappears.
If you're looking for a speaker that sounds great from the sweet spot and can throw an engaging soundstage and give you the kind of resolution that allows you to tell a Taylor guitar from a Martin, then the 1.6's are for you. If you're looking for a speaker to do what the 901's do best--play loud and broad--then you might be happier with some of the offerings from Definitive Technologies or Mirage or another company that manufactures bipolar or omnidirectional speakers.
I'm very familiar with both speakers and would be happy to discuss further if you like (and if I remember to come back here and check in).
I hope that helps,
Adam
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam
He'd be miserable with a pair of 1.6's. He'd complain that they can't play loud enough and he'd complain that as soon as you stand up from the sweet spot, the treble dissappears.
Considering that the 1.6 is many times higher then the 901 i can guarantee you that the treble will definetly not disapear. The reason it doesnt happen on the BOSE is because it has no heighs. Also if you setup the 1.6 completely free in room, like 8ft from all sides or more and drive them correctly they will play louder, more control and definetly unqeualled by any BOSE ever made.
Its nice that your dad loves them but there is no advantage that the BOSE has exept for maybe being light, small and made of plastic.
-
The 901s aren't light, small, or made from plastic!!! I like the sound of 901s, particularly the older ones. They do have a completely different sound than the Magnepans. The 901s do work better when you're not sitting in the sweet spot. The 901s are more of a warm sounding speaker, not the clearest highs, but can be pleasant to listen to. The Magnepans with a sub will give you better frequency extension, both highs and lows, with clearer highs and more neutral mids while still sounding smooth in most setups, a more defined soundstage. May not sound as pleasing around the whole room / house. If I had to choose between the two, I'd choose the Maggies. Guess it just depends on if you're really looking for a change, or if you're pretty satisfied with what you have.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Florian
Considering that the 1.6 is many times higher then the 901 i can guarantee you that the treble will definetly not disapear. The reason it doesnt happen on the BOSE is because it has no heighs. Also if you setup the 1.6 completely free in room, like 8ft from all sides or more and drive them correctly they will play louder, more control and definetly unqeualled by any BOSE ever made.
Its nice that your dad loves them but there is no advantage that the BOSE has exept for maybe being light, small and made of plastic.
Don't you have a club for ribbon speaker lovers or something? If that's the case, it surprises me that you're unfamiliar with the basic ways these speakers work.
The larger a driver is, the narrower its dispersion pattern will be at a given frequency. This is one of the reasons tweeters are small in point-source designs. A tweeter has to be small in order to disperse high frequency sound evenly in all directions--the ubiquitous 1" dome.
The tweeter on the 1.6's is what maybe 60" tall and maybe 1" wide? This means that at high frequencies, the tweeter has a very narrow vertical dispersion pattern and a very broad horizontal dispersion pattern. This is intentional in the design of the Maggies. This narrow dispersion limits floor and ceiling 1st order reflections at high frequencies.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Florian
Considering that the 1.6 is many times higher then the 901 i can guarantee you that the treble will definetly not disapear.
The height of the speakers is exactly what makes the narrow dispersion pattern and exactly what makes the treble dissappear at standing heights.
I'm not saying this is an objectively good or bad thing, it's just a fact of the matter.
And in terms of SPL, I've had the 901's up over 120dB (with earplugs) without damage or apparant strain. Every published review of small Magnepans I've ever read notes that a significant downside to these smaller planars is their inability to play loud. If that's not enough for you to believe that they won't play at 120dB, I need simply point out that these speakers are so fragile, they are equipped with fast-acting fuses to stop the tweeters from being damaged by too much power.
Again, this is not objectively good or bad or important or unimportant, it is simply fact of the matter.
There are many many reasons to choose Magnepans over Bose, and no one will ever find Bose speakers in my home, but on these two points, you are just plain wrong. Now I hope that we can put this to bed without hijacking the original poster's thread--a thread to which you seem intent on adding nothing substantive.
-Adam
-
I think it's a good move.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bbrunswick
After 20+ years, I am considering replacing my beloved Bose 901's with Magnepan 1.6's and adding a REL Storm III sub woofer. Is this a good move? All opinions welcomed. I will be using a Hafler DH500 amp and a Hafler DH110 preamp, both upgraded by Musical Concepts.
Your amp should be able to drive them just fine.
-
Considering the 1.6 is 1.65m tall and your over that hight then yes you will loose some heighs, but you will definetly have more then on the 901 irregardless of where you stand.On my DIVA which is 6'3' tall you can stand up and walk around and loose absolutly nothing.
Also ribbon speakers have less drop off over a larger distance, but you knew that ;-) Here is an example:
Distance: 1m 2m 4m
Ordinary tweeter: 86dB 80dB 74dB
2 meter long ribbon: 86dB 83dB 80dB
Oh well i am not going to argue and i will never ever understand why someone would want a 901 (whatever series) over a any good quality speaker. Id rather have 90db of high quality "surface area" sound then ****ty 125db compressed sound at a close miced distance.
-
there's no way for this to end well...
-
"The larger a driver is, the narrower its dispersion pattern will be at a given frequency. This is one of the reasons tweeters are small in point-source designs. A tweeter has to be small in order to disperse high frequency sound evenly in all directions--the ubiquitous 1" dome"
The main reason for the dispersion differences between Magnepans and cone / dome drivers is simply that the magnepans are flat and mostly beam the sound waves straight out. The cones / domes are curved, giving the driver a wider dispersion pattern. For the same reason, the Magnepans have less drop-off at a distance because all their energy is focused in the same direction. A small flat driver (with no horn) won't have a dispersion pattern any wider than a large one.
Tweeters are small to better reproduce high frequencies.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Florian
Considering that the 1.6 is many times higher then the 901 i can guarantee you that the treble will definetly not disapear. The reason it doesnt happen on the BOSE is because it has no heighs. Also if you setup the 1.6 completely free in room, like 8ft from all sides or more and drive them correctly they will play louder, more control and definetly unqeualled by any BOSE ever made.
Its nice that your dad loves them but there is no advantage that the BOSE has exept for maybe being light, small and made of plastic.
I do not want to put myself in the position of defending the 901s, but, in a spirit of fairness, I must point out that the 901s are made nearly completely of wood, not plastic, weigh about the same as the 1.6s (35-40 pounds each) and do, indeed, reproduce high frequencies to the threshold of human hearing and beyond. As to how loud they play, my goal when I replaced my stacked Advents 20+ years ago was not to see how hard I could drive the 901's, but to be able to accurately reproduce the sound level I would perceive sitting in a concert hall listening to an orchestral crescendo without blowing a line fuse. Granted, the sound produced by my then amplifier, a Phase Linear 400, could have contributed to that particular problem. After graduating to the Hafler DH200 I have used for nearly 20 years, I was content. I have listened to Magneplaners at various points and was impressed, but not blown away. I never really knew whether the speakers or the exotic electronics that usually accompanied them was the reason for the improvement in sound. I now am improving my electronics to the point that an upgrade to my speakers would be logical. This is the reason I am soliciting the opinions of knowledgable people who are familiar with both technologies. Based upon the responses that you, Florian have provided, I feel it is necessary to ask about your level of familarity with the Bose 901s. I detect just the slightest amount of sarcasm in your responses, yet your grasp of the 901 listening experience seems to me to be, shall we say, a bit shallow. Forgive me if I am wrong about this.
-
Well your right about that. My experience with the 901's is properbly like your experience with electrostatics and planar magnetics or ribbons. I heard them several times but found the horrible at best in every area. But you shouldnt take my comments too seriously, i cant stand 99% of all the box speakers i have ever heard. For me music starts at 1.6 Maggies or Kharma 3.2, small Avalons or Acoustat 1+1's. I am an sort of outsider on these forums and many consider me arrogant or that my ego matches the size of my speakers. But i dont seek a sound i like, i seek whats real and colored boxes, different drivers, different volumes and uneqaul room loading speakers give me the shivers.
;)
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by royphil345
The main reason for the dispersion differences between Magnepans and cone / dome drivers is simply that the magnepans are flat and mostly beam the sound waves straight out. The cones / domes are curved, giving the driver a wider dispersion pattern. For the same reason, the Magnepans have less drop-off at a distance because all their energy is focused in the same direction. A small flat driver (with no horn) won't have a dispersion pattern any wider than a large one.
Well, I only posted here to give some helpful advice to the guy who had questions about the 901's vs. the 1.6's, not to give a physics lesson, but this is from the Sound Reinforcement Handbook by Gary Davis and Ralph Jones, an industry standard. (Paraphrased because I can't show the graphs.)
"The directional characteristics of a loudspeaker driver are dependent on the relationship between the size of the driver and the wavelength of the sound that the driver is reproducing.
"At low frequencies, where the wavelength is long compared to the size of the driver, the driver is omnidirectional.
"As the frequency rises, the wavelength gets shorter, and the directional pattern of the cone very gradually narrows. When the wavelength is equal to the driver diameter, the directional pattern is fairly directional: 45 degrees off axis, the level is approximately 6dB lower than it is directly on axis.
"At higher frequencies, the driver's directional pattern narrows very sharply. When the wavelength is half the diameter of the driver diaphragm, the driver is highly directional. The beamwidth will continue to narrow as the frequency rises."
You're right that shape effects dispersion. But the main factor determining the directional characteristics of all cones, domes, horns, ribbons and electrostats is the "relationship between the size of the driver and the wavelength the driver is reproducing."
Quote:
Originally Posted by royphil345
A small flat driver (with no horn) won't have a dispersion pattern any wider than a large one.
Nope. It turns out that's not true.
Now, getting back to the conversation about the Magnepan 1.6's... Let's assume the tweeter is 60" tall. By the definition in the Sound Reinforcement Handbook, that means they are "highly directional" over 500Hz.
Again, I state for the record this is not objectively good or bad, it's simply a design preference from the folks who created the speakers, and the 1.6's are very good speakers. They also happen to be the EXACT opposite in almost every way from the 901's. Which is my original point: to inform the person who started the thread that these are very very different speakers and some folks will like one better than the other. Most people here would prefer the 1.6's (so would I) but it would be a big leap to go from the 901's to the 1.6's and since the original poster asked for ADVICE, I tried to explain some of the reasons he might consider staying with the 901's.
-Adam
-
"You're right that shape effects dispersion. But the main factor determining the directional characteristics of all cones, domes, horns, ribbons and electrostats is the "relationship between the size of the driver and the wavelength the driver is reproducing."
ABSOLUTELY WRONG
"As the frequency rises, the wavelength gets shorter, and the directional pattern of the CONE very gradually narrows"
It's unlikely that you'll be giving anyone a lesson in physics anytime soon!
It's true that higher frequencies are more directional. It's true that a larger CONE driver (that's what it says in your handbook, read it again) will be a little more directional with higher frequencies than lower frequencies. But it's very basic physics that the direction sound waves travel in is governed mainly by the direction in which they are launched.
You read something about the characteristics of CONE drivers, had little understanding of what you read, twisted it into a physical law that just does not exist and proceeded to give us "lessons" on physics you obviously don't understand. The BIGGEST effect on the dispersion pattern of a driver is the frequency of the sound, followed by driver shape (or horn size / shape). Higher frequencies don't travel well through the cone on a large CONE driver, where the voice coil is in the center. Which is why a large CONE driver will be slightly more directional with higher frequencies than lower ones, mainly because it's too large to reproduce high frequencies efficiently (utilizing the full surface area of the cone). Or to put it another way... In a large cone driver, the higher frequencies are actually being reproduced by a smaller area towards the center of the cone (smaller area = tighter dispertion pattern). Lower frequencies are reproduced by the whole cone (larger area = wider dispertion pattern ). Are you starting to see things more clearly? This is only a characteristic of cone speakers. There is no law in physics where sound waves take off in different directions due to the size of the transducer that's producing them. You cannot apply this rule at all to FLAT PANEL speakers. A given frequency will have the same dispersion characteristics when reproduced by a smaller or larger flat panel driver, although efficiency will suffer if the panel isn't the right size for the frequency being reproduced. YEP, this is true.
Actually, I'll go a step further and say that a larger flat panel driver will (of course, just common sense) disperse sound over a wider area. This is why ribbon speakers are often designed long. To make up for fact they are flat and have poor dispersion, the ribbons are designed larger to cover a larger area.
"The tweeter on the 1.6's is what maybe 60" tall and maybe 1" wide? This means that at high frequencies, the tweeter has a very narrow vertical dispersion pattern and a very broad horizontal dispersion pattern. This is intentional in the design of the Maggies. This narrow dispersion limits floor and ceiling 1st order reflections at high frequencies."
The tweeter is long for the exact opposite reason. It is long to cover a larger vertical area. Where are you coming up with all this utter nonsense regarding the design of the Maggies?
-
-
The best thing to do with Florian...
...is to ignore him...unless your gear costs an arm and a leg or otherwise meets his "approval" parameters, it's just plain junk in his sagacious opinion...after all what do you expect from someone who uses the etymological nightmare and virtual non-word "irregardless".
His remark that Bose 901s are "...light, small and made of plastic..." is simply an example of the depths of his vast puddle of knowledge.
And, as someone poiinted out, he seems to be a "threadjacker" par excellence...IMO more of a high handed, ego-centric troll...
jimHJJ(...but, that's just my opinion...)
-
Thanks To All
I really appreciate the spirited debate my question generated. I learned a great deal from all of you. All things considered, I am glad I asked.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Resident Loser
...is to ignore him...unless your gear costs an arm and a leg or otherwise meets his "approval" parameters, it's just plain junk in his sagacious opinion...after all what do you expect from someone who uses the etymological nightmare and virtual non-word "irregardless".
His remark that Bose 901s are "...light, small and made of plastic..." is simply an example of the depths of his vast puddle of knowledge.
And, as someone poiinted out, he seems to be a "threadjacker" par excellence...IMO more of a high handed, ego-centric troll...
jimHJJ(...but, that's just my opinion...)
Thanks Looser, i do ignore you since you have no experience with good equipment and generally recommend everything that is cheap and the deal of the year. I have recommended several components and setups and talk to quite a few amount of members over the phone and they all were thankfull to finally get some real suggestion and not a general aproval of british and canadian deal speakers..
-
:o Settle down children and apologize :o
|