Bose 901's...Again?

dougy

Like c_corie in another thread, I too am considering a pair of Series VI 901's. I had a pair of IV's back in the late seventies, but never had a place to really set them up properly.

I do not intend to get rid of my Energy RC50's in my main 2-channel system, but I want to set the Bose up in another rig. I can put them in the AV room, suspended from the ceiling "high and outside" of the a/d/s/ HT400 speakers that flank the Sony TV.

What y'all think? Would that be stereo-foolish? All I've got to drive them right now is a mothballed old Akai 65W int. amp from the mid eighties. If the speaker/room sound quality is good enough, I could upgrade the amplification later. Actually, on second thought, I might be able to use the second room option on my Pioneer Elite A/V receiver to drive an external power amp. Something like a 200W Adcom might make 'em talk... Have to check that out!

dorokusai

The Bose flagship loudspeaker sounded as terrible as the rest of the lineup. Why bother? If you're looking for vintage sound, look elsewhere, as there are better options.

lightman1

I beg to differ, Mark.

dorokusai

And why would I care?

Systems

They may work ok placed in the rear corners as surrounds,otherwise as garage speakers.

lightman1

dorokusai wrote: »

And why would I care?

You seem to, because otherwise you wouldn't have posted such a comment.

nduitch

why are people so salty about Bose, like they never made anything that sounded decent?

Airplay355

I think it's not so much about the sound but the quality of sound to price ratio. Crazy expensive price for crappy products and crappy sound leads to people being salty.

kawizx9r

I will agree to a certain extent that Bose MADE quality audio speakers. Nowadays theres just too much hype with all their HTIB's and "small speaker" setups, and quite frankly they suck. Now when it comes to the much older respected direct/reflecting technology, that was a whole different ball park. I especially love the 601 IV towers or bookshelf models of that time frame, they were loud, clear, provided alot of imaging in a large room and had enough thump to make you think twice about adding a subwoofer to them. I've heard several 901's as well, and yes they sounded horrible. The common problem with that though was that they were poorly placed (can we say SDA's?). And another thing, most of them were being improperly driven by weak or low quality amps. They're a type of speaker that provides you with quality music in the background, not something you'd sit in front of in a mancave setup....although some people will in fact do that.

lightman1

GV#27 wrote: »

They may work ok placed in the rear corners as surrounds,otherwise as garage speakers.

901's are not a surround speaker...

nduitch wrote: »

why are people so salty about Bose, like they never made anything that sounded decent?

Thank you.

Airplay355 wrote: »

I think it's not so much about the sound but the quality of sound to price ratio. Crazy expensive price for crappy products and crappy sound leads to people being salty.

The **** that corporate Bose puts out today does not even compare to the sound of which the OP is asking about.

lightman1

kawizx9r wrote: »

I will agree to a certain extent that Bose MADE quality audio speakers. Nowadays theres just too much hype with all their HTIB's and "small speaker" setups, and quite frankly they suck. Now when it comes to the much older respected direct/reflecting technology, that was a whole different ball park. I especially love the 601 IV towers or bookshelf models of that time frame, they were loud, clear, provided alot of imaging in a large room and had enough thump to make you think twice about adding a subwoofer to them. I've heard several 901's as well, and yes they sounded horrible. The common problem with that though was that they were poorly placed (can we say SDA's?). And another thing, most of them were being improperly driven by weak or low quality amps. They're a type of speaker that provides you with quality music in the background, not something you'd sit in front of in a mancave setup....although some people will in fact do that.

and a tip o' the hat to you, sir.

kawizx9r

lightman1 wrote: »

and a tip o' the hat to you, sir.

Its just people nowadays bash a company simply because of said products.....that may be true NOW for lets say, Bose but they did have quite the reputation for building quality audio and people refuse to acknowledge that. :mad:

Systems

lightman1 wrote: »

901's are not a surround speaker...

I'm aware of that but with their direct reflecting driver arrangement/enclosure design providing a rather diffuse soundfield I think they would be well suited for the purpose.

lightman1

kawizx9r wrote: »

Its just people nowadays bash a company simply because of said products.....that may be true NOW for lets say, Bose but they did have quite the reputation for building quality audio and people refuse to acknowledge that. :mad:

I agree, kawitzky. Bose did build some great speakers way back then...

lightman1

GV#27 wrote: »

I'm aware of that but with their direct reflecting driver arrangement/enclosure design providing a rather diffuse soundfield I think they would be well suited for the purpose.

But only if you had a 3:1 power ratio back to front on the amps. And then they are overkill.

Systems

kawizx9r wrote: »

I've heard several 901's as well, and yes they sounded horrible. The common problem with that though was that they were poorly placed (can we say SDA's?). And another thing, most of them were being improperly driven by weak or low quality amps.

IMO the idea of using a bunch of small fullrange drivers and EQ'ing the s**t out of them to get any bass and treble is a flawed concept.

lightman1

GV#27 wrote: »

IMO the idea of using a bunch of small fullrange drivers and EQ'ing the s**t out of them to get any bass and treble is a flawed concept.

What are you basing that on?

kawizx9r

In terms of using the equalizer, it just makes them that much more environment friendly. We all here know how much a rooms acoustics affects the sound we hear from said speakers. As far as utilizing a bunch of full ranged drivers, it works doesn't it? I mean the technology behind it is it's enclosure.....I'll refer back to the SDA's, in fact 1C's since I personally own a pair. They use FOUR 6" drivers no? At first glance, and without proper placement OR power to run them, they sound like CRAP! We just happen to have alot of knowledge running freely regarding these things that just searching through the forum you can have ALL your questions answered. Regarding the 901's, the common thing I see coming from people who talk down about these speakers is their lack of knowledge for them. If funds+space would allow for me to own a pair, I most definitely would.

kawizx9r

Btw GV#27, I don't mean to 'attack' you or 'call you out' but I just think you're being very unfair about a product you have no experience with....in terms of it being properly setup and powered.

Systems

lightman1 wrote: »

What are you basing that on?

The flawed concept part ?see below.

kawizx9r wrote: »

In terms of using the equalizer, it just makes them that much more environment friendly. We all here know how much a rooms acoustics affects the sound we hear from said speakers.

In the 901 the EQ is not for room acoustics, but to force the little drivers to reproduce frequencies above and below their natural operating bandwidth.

As far as utilizing a bunch of full ranged drivers, it works doesn't it?

Well yes it produces sound.:)

SDA's, in fact 1C's since I personally own a pair. They use FOUR 6" drivers no?

SDA's and 901 are completely different animals.Unlike what Bose did with the 901's, Polk used drivers intended for the bandwidths they are reproducing,like a tweeter for the treble , midbass's for the mid's and upper bass and a passive radiator to augment the low bass.btw,All speakers need care in placement and selection of associated electronics to get the most out of them.

I see coming from people who talk down about these speakers is their lack of knowledge for them.

I have been a DIY speaker builder for many years and previously worked in the retail end of the buisness so I have a good idea of what the 901 is all about.

kawizx9r

Then, I guess you were yet another victim of a bad 901 experience. I'm no DIY'er but I grew up around quality audio and the 901's were up there on the top of that list. I know I'm not alone when I say that but you aren't either in regards to these "sounding like crap." To each their own...

lightman1

GV#27 wrote: »

I have been a DIY speaker builder for many years and previously worked in the retail end of the buisness so I have a good idea of what the 901 is all about.

But have you HEARD them?

Systems

lightman1 wrote: »

But have you HEARD them?

Yep;)

lightman1

GV#27 wrote: »

Yep;)

...In a retail setting??

Systems

kawizx9r wrote: »

but you aren't either in regards to these "sounding like crap."

To clarify I used the word flawed,not crap.

To each their own...

Absolutely ,there are those that like and enjoy listening to their 901's and thats what it's all about.

megasat16

Wow! A Lengthy BOSE discussion!

BOSE Was The ****!

Bose Now Is The Crap ****!

What's the Difference? It's just getting worse.

901 sounds good to some but lacking to others. The only 901 that I remembered sounds good was hanging from the ceiling.

If you think EQ is the way for a good sounding system, then 901 may be appealing to you. But to some who likes a bit more truthfulness in speakers, BOSE may be out of the picture.

Personally, BOSE, Polk, Klipsch, I don't like any of these. But I stick with Polk coz they give me bigger speakers than the others for less money.

Klipsch_Fan

Listened to the 901's way back yonder while in USAF, sounded ok, played loud, but went with Infinity RS II's. Much more natural and overall better sound. Just My opinion.

It's all about what Your ears like.

I searched to find what their sensitivity level was, but couldn't find. I'd say that 65 wpc won't cut it, unless You prefer low volumes.

Can't believe for basically $1400 they make one spend another $160 for stands. Oh well.

Fred

dougy

Wow. The Bose name is sure good for at least one thing: producing some strong responses!

Virtually all of my opinions regarding Bose are based on experience with the 901 Series IV. Like I previously stated, I owned a pair for awhile in the mid to late seventies. Prior to the Bose, I had a pair of "New" Advents, which were the Large Advents with the 10" woofer. I actually sold the Bose and went back to the Advents after a year or so, but like I also said, I had no place to properly set the Bose up. And few speakers other than the Klipschorn, are as specific about room placement as the Bose 901. I have also heard the 901's at various friends homes over the years and at Bose stores and outlets.

Which leads to this: There are many wonderful speakers I have never heard, I'm sure. But I can only make judgements on the ones I have heard, and in the context of the room and set-up, and of their impressions on me relative to whatever else I had heard up to that time. And I've heard a lot of impressive speakers. Either impressive for the money, or just impressive, period. And other than big ol' Klipschorns, Legacy Whispers and B&W 801D's, I don't know of any other speaker that has impressed me as much as the Bose 901, when properly set up in a favorable room.

I know that's a strong statement, but it's true. But then again, remember that in comparison to many of you, I've had very little experience with hearing high end speakers. I have heard Polk SDA's but only in an old style showroom, never in a finessed, properly set-up "listening" room. I've never heard Maggies except for a lower end pair once, probably twenty-five years ago.

And so it goes. The SDA's sounded great; the Maggies sounded beautiful, and I've heard wonderful sounds out of various speakers from Sonus Faber, Dunlavy, ADS, Infinity, ESS, Def-Tech, McIntosh, Klipsch and others. Yet I've never heard...Avant Garde, Quad, Usher, PBN, Von Schweikert, Joseph...and on and on.

I don't know that I would want Bose 901's for my everyday reference at all. In fact, I may join the vast hordes who ridicule the 901, if in fact I own a pair again, but what sticks in my head is how they sounded in the seventies cranking up zee rawk'und roll...and nothing I've ever heard sounded as much like being at a live concert -in the best and worst senses. Diffuse, yes, but so is the sound of live music! To me the 901 is not an audiophile speaker. It is an impact speaker, a wall-of-sound sledgehammer to drive the senses into max overload...in a good way!

Then again, auditory memory being what it is, and the seventies being what they were, they just may suck in 2009.

lightman1

megasat16 wrote: »

If you think EQ is the way for a good sounding system, then 901 may be appealing to you. But to some who likes a bit more truthfulness in speakers, BOSE may be out of the picture.

I don't use the EQ with them nor hang them from the ceiling.

dougy

dougy wrote: »

And other than big ol' Klipschorns, Legacy Whispers and B&W 801D's, I don't know of any other speaker that has impressed me as much as the Bose 901, when properly set up in a favorable room.

Ya know, I just remembered that some of the worst speakers I've heard...were also Klipschorns and Bose 901's...when improperly set up in unfavorable rooms!

Gee kids, what does that tell us? Set-up is EVERYTHING! ...especially with set-up specific speakers!!

Klipsch_Fan

Originally posted by Dougy

If the speaker/room sound quality is good enough, I could upgrade the amplification later.

Exactly what kind of "sound quality are You going for?

As far as the Klipshorn's, there is really only one way to set them up. And of course a "big" listening room would be good too.

Originally posted by Dougy

And so it goes. The SDA's sounded great; the Maggies sounded beautiful, and I've heard wonderful sounds out of various speakers from Sonus Faber, Dunlavy, ADS, Infinity, ESS, Def-Tech, McIntosh, Klipsch and others. Yet I've never heard...Avant Garde, Quad, Usher, PBN, Von Schweikert, Joseph...and on and on.

Based on the top quote, It truly amazes Me that You'd even consider the 901's, but then again, You'll be the one listening.

Fred