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?

[GV#27]

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

[lightman1]

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]

They may work ok placed in the rear corners as surrounds,otherwise as garage speakers.
901's are not a surround speaker...


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


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

[lightman1]

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]

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:

[GV#27]

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]

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]

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.

[GV#27]

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]

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.

[GV#27]

What are you basing that on?The flawed concept part ?see below.

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 :D but you aren't either in regards to these "sounding like crap." To each their own...

[lightman1]

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?

[GV#27]

But have you HEARD them?Yep;)

[lightman1]

Yep;)
...In a retail setting??

[GV#27]

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! :D

BOSE Was The Shit!

Bose Now Is The Crap Shit!

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. :D

[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]

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]

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

[HHStuart]

I remember back when they allowed you to listen to Bose Speakers along with other speakers. I listened to the Bose 901's with the POLK SDA 2's. There was no comparison. I bought the Polk SDA 2's.
If I were you I would throw out the 901's and buy something else. Anything else.

Just my 2 cents.

[megasat16]

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

hehe...Good for you! But doesn't Bose 901 has Equalizer with it already? :D

If you still have a pair, you should try hanging it from ceiling towards your listening position. The driver alignment works better that way. It's been a long time but I think I've heard (may be 3-4 pairs) and the ones hanging from the ceiling has the best sound field I remembered from BOSE speakers. :eek:

[dougy]

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

Good sound quality! Sorry, not trying to be a smarta$$, but essentially that's it. I guess the sound I'd be shooting for would be the sound I heard out of Bose 901's "back in the day", as they say. A huge soundfield in which the speakers disappear as sources. A big, dynamic, slammin' wall of sound; kind of like you might get at a good seat in a large auditorium. Sound that is not dependent upon the listener being in a relatively small sweet spot. Big bass and bright treble. Impressive sound! Not from the audiophile perspective, necessarily, but from a primitive sensory perspective, if that makes any sense. Audiophile sound is often refined and restrained. I'm looking for more slam, bam thank you mam, and to heck with detail and finesse...just for fun!

[gdb]

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

Good sound quality! Sorry, not trying to be a smarta$$, but essentially that's it. I guess the sound I'd be shooting for would be the sound I heard out of Bose 901's "back in the day", as they say. A huge soundfield in which the speakers disappear as sources. A big, dynamic, slammin' wall of sound; kind of like you might get at a good seat in a large auditorium. Sound that is not dependent upon the listener being in a relatively small sweet spot. Big bass and bright treble. Impressive sound! Not from the audiophile perspective, necessarily, but from a primitive sensory perspective, if that makes any sense. Audiophile sound is often refined and restrained. I'm looking for more slam, bam thank you mam, and to heck with detail and finesse...just for fun!

You're going to need a bigger boat....er.... make that BIGGER AMP !! I used to enjoy my seriesV when they had 250wpc feeding them but, if I'd known a good way to put a freestanding tweeter in the mix, I'da liked em even more.:)

[Flash21]

I sold audio back in the mid '80s and we carried Bose. We also carried Advent and Genesis among others, and they were far, far more speaker for the money.

The 901s were an interesting idea, but I generally preferred the detail of speakers with actual tweeters. The EQ just wasn't enough to compensate for that lack...

But what the hell, give 'em a try, should be fun no matter the outcome.

[RandyBox]

I recall my first reaction to Bose AM5... It was "Wow all that sound from those little cubes?" They sounded awesome. In fact, I replaced a set of Altec Lansing 312 in favor of the AM5 back in the early 80's...

All my friends had the same reaction when they first experienced them. The one thing Bose had was the ability to provide decent sound while not dominating any room with their presence...

As far as the active EQ in the 901's, I see it being very similar to the active crossovers in any speaker system... Just controlling which frequency goes where...

I just replaced an AM7 system with my current Polk stuff (Monitor 70, 40, CS2, and PSW505)... The Bose doesn't suck THAT much, takes up WAY less space and not that far over priced... IMHO...

Regards,
Randy

[dee1949]

....Bose 901's are a different animal. You don't sit down and find a sweet spot. The 901's are a party - crowd speakers. Hung from the ceiling above the crowd they display a very realistic sound. They were used in tons of bars , small theaters and even in Peabody Institute of Music for concerts(faced backwards) in the eighties.. It's a speaker for an active setting. You need the equalizer in path....I take it that it serves as an active crosser to the 9 drivers??

I had a pair back in my party days. Loved those Ames looking floor stands. I still have a pair....need to bring them out for my IMF cm 3's.

[GV#27]

You need the equalizer in path....I take it that it serves as an active crossover to the 9 drivers??

The 901's are crossoverless,all 9 drivers operate over the same frequency range.As I alluded to in an earlier post, the purpose of the EQ is to boost the levels of bass and treble as the 4" drivers do not have sufficient output in the top and bottom octaves on their own.Therefore they need some help in the form of electronic EQ.

[steveinaz]

Actually hanging them from the ceiling is a worst case scenario for the 901. Bass is already quite heavy in the 901 (35-50Hz notably), they'll sound much better on the pedastals, IMO.

If you like them, go for it. Screw others opinions as it's the latest fashion to bash Bose. For rock/pop & most jazz, they do quite well. Having said all that, the 901 is the only Bose I would own.

The drawbacks are that you need a good sized room, ability to reflect the sound from a backwall, alot of amplifier(s), and sans the reflective wall, you'll want a well damped room to really appreciate the dynamic range they are capable of. If you ever get cone break-up, you don't have enough amp. The 901 will play cleanly at insane SPL's.

[GV#27]

.. it's the latest fashion to bash Bose. Latest fashion?I think them and Monster have been the two favourite whipping boys for some time .

[steveinaz]

Bose 901's have a very distinct sound, it's probably why they are either loved or hated--there's not much middle ground on opinions. Set up optimally, connected properly (a loop circuit or other fixed output; not between the pre and amp), and provided plenty of power (can't emphasis this enough) IME they can be very satisfying, and damn fun to listen to.

If you are a "purist" and seek total neutrality, or listen to alot of classical music---look elsewhere. If you like some flavor and emotion in your music, you might want to try a set.

[kawizx9r]

Bose 901's have a very distinct sound, it's probably why they are either loved or hated--there's not much middle ground on opinions. Set up optimally, connected properly (a loop circuit or other fixed output; not between the pre and amp), and provided plenty of power (can't emphasis this enough) IME they can be very satisfying, and damn fun to listen to.

+1
But as I stated earlier in this thread, you've got to set them up properly. If you haven't heard them, don't bash them because they're Bose....they've produced quality respectable audio back in the day that gave them the reputation they had for so long.

[steveinaz]

Latest fashion?I think them and Monster have been the two favourite whipping boys for some time .

I would probably jump on that bandwagon had I not owned a pair for so many years, and have to admit in all honesty, I really enjoyed them. I'm just calling it they way I heard it...

[Phil Dawson]

As we used to say in the days when these were around quite a lot - No highs, No lows, Must be Bose.
Cheers, Phil

[NJPOLKER]

I will buy a pair some day. As I stated a long time ago, well not that long ago, when I joined CP I grew up with a pair and they were awesome. We used a Bi-Amp graphic equalizer, a Rotel receiver and a Dual turn table. Life was good back in the day and it still is. The biggest problem I'll have to over come is speaker placement and without have the right room it won't be right so I am going to wait till then. At worst case seven years till Drew Jr. goes off to Clemson for four year of college and them off to Wharton.
Thats right, they will go in his vacant bedroom. I'll probably move the Belles Amp to that system and buy a monster tube amp to go with the Anthem pre-amp for the Polks.
In the mean time my SRSII's and SDA2a's are sounding awesome.

I understand some of the feelings towards Bose but I believe there is nothing wrong with a company turning great profits, I hope they are. And why not?

[Flash21]

Screw others opinions as it's the latest fashion to bash Bose.
I wouldn't say latest...we bashed 'em pretty good back in the '80s when I was selling audio.

[megasat16]

Actually hanging them from the ceiling is a worst case scenario for the 901. Bass is already quite heavy in the 901 (35-50Hz notably), they'll sound much better on the pedastals, IMO.


My limited experience with 901 is somewhat different but I've heard it in a friend's place at a party and boy, they sings at loud volume and it was hanging from the ceiling. I also heard at least 2-3 times at other places but not impressed at those times.

I guess it has to do with Synergy and Room Size as you suggested. It seems it's important even for BOSE. :D

[thuffman03]

I had a set of 901 series III's and they did not sound bad they did not sound good to me either.

I replaced them with a set of Thiel CS3.5's and never looked back.

[GV#27]

I replaced them with a set of Thiel CS3.5's and never looked back.Not surprising the 3.5's are a fabulous design from the 80's.

[beemers417]

I would say get them if you want them. One could argue all day about speakers and get nowhere. If the price is right how can anyone complain.

[dougy]

Bose 901's have a very distinct sound, it's probably why they are either loved or hated--there's not much middle ground on opinions. Set up optimally, connected properly (a loop circuit or other fixed output; not between the pre and amp), and provided plenty of power (can't emphasis this enough) IME they can be very satisfying, and damn fun to listen to.

If you are a "purist" and seek total neutrality, or listen to alot of classical music---look elsewhere. If you like some flavor and emotion in your music, you might want to try a set.

Yup, that's where I'm at...not lookin' for exceptional tonal accuracy or pinpoint imaging - I get enough of that with my Energy RC50's - just lookin' to have some fun with an "old school" set-up that can co-exist in the same room along side my HT rig.

I don't think 65W per will be so bad to start...I recall the Bose receiver from the 80's that had a built in 901 EQ...seems it put out about 40W per side. My buddy had that with a pair of IV's - actually my old pair that I sold him - and he could rock the house pretty good. Still, if I like the sound I get, I will be looking to upgrade the amplification...as usual!

One thing I've noticed looking at 901's on eBay is that many of the black vinyl models seem to have lifted vinyl. And I always wondered why Bose charges the same for vinyl as they do for walnut wood veneer on new 901's. Hmm...

[sucks2beme]

A long time ago I thought about a pair of 901's. At the time, I didn't have
the space to set them up right. I went with a traditional monkey coffin.
The sound wasn't bad, but they certainly weren't the last word in
fidelity. 80-100 wpc should do the job nicely. That's what 95% of
what was being used to drive them back in the late 70's.
I'm sure we all have had "fun" speakers. It's kinda like high school,
you can never go back. It's never the same.

[Frylock]

Friends don't let friends listen to Bose.

[lightman1]

Friends don't let friends listen to Bose.
Why?

[lightman1]

Friends don't let friends listen to Bose.
Why?

[kawizx9r]

This thread is still going on? Please read the first page of posts before repeating what's been said. For all the bose bashers, I'm not pro-bose by any means but I do have respect for their older technologys and the 901's fit in that category IMO. If you don't like them then so be it, it can be a love or hate thing but don't discredit a company simply because you don't like said product :cool:

[megasat16]

Why?


Why?

Why and Why you need to ask Twice?

Once you let a friend listen to BOSE, he'll never look back at you again coz he is enjoying so much in the music? :D

[lightman1]

Left click is a little more sensitive. Hair trigger if you will.:o

[lightman1]

24 minutes apart???? WTF? A REALLY big hair!!!

[kawizx9r]

24 minutes apart???? WTF? A REALLY big hair!!!

You need to get off that 28k modem :cool:

[lightman1]

You need to get off that 28k modem :cool:

Roger that.

Come to think of it, I've let you slide. I haven't been cussed or sworn at, given my somewhat sideways opinion or just become beligerant at anybody in a while. Kawizowie...........

[kawizx9r]

Roger that.

Come to think of it, I've let you slide. I haven't been cussed or sworn at, given my somewhat sideways opinion or just become beligerant at anybody in a while. Kawizowie...........

Lol thanks. By the way, you should ride if you don't already...definitely a hobby to consider when you're not at home enjoying the crazy audio you guys have setup (that I will achieve in many years to come :confused:)

[lightman1]

Lol thanks. By the way, you should ride if you don't already...definitely a hobby to consider when you're not at home enjoying the crazy audio you guys have setup (that I will achieve in many years to come :confused:)
Laid down a Kawi Ninja in '89, walked away....for good. Officer said I did about 190 yards after I left the bike.;)
How bout them 901s!!!

[kawizx9r]

Laid down a Kawi Ninja in '89, walked away....for good. Officer said I did about 190 yards after I left the bike.;)
How bout them 901s!!!

Dam...least it wasnt a bigger bike like a zx-11 or something right? Biggest I rode was a Kawasaki ZRX-1200R eddie lawson replica (the guy also had a Hulk sticker on the front above his headlight).

[lightman1]

Dam...least it wasnt a bigger bike like a zx-11 or something right? Biggest I rode was a Kawasaki ZRX-1200R eddie lawson replica (the guy also had a Hulk sticker on the front above his headlight). My 14 year old son sat on a Hyabusa(?). He said it felt good. THAT scares the shit out of me! But I know I shouldn't tell him "No!"

...He's 5'11" now...strong, long legs.....a runner...

[lightman1]

Say... those 901s are some nice spekers.....

[kawizx9r]

Say... those 901s are some nice spekers.....

Aren't they? Especially sat on pedestals and powered correctly :D