I was in college and as a sophomore, one of the guys in the dorm had 901's. Pink Floyd, of which we all listened to, sounded amazing. I also remember Super Tramp so loud and so clear. So clear -- that's my memory of the 901's. Thanks for the review.
The 901 is not a bad speaker. I once bought a pair of speakers that were a very cheap Canadian brand called Acoustic Profiles. My girlfriend and I, along with some friends thought the sound was very good from these speakers. The bass was very deep and realistic. The cabinets were ported at the back. These were two way speakers. Eventually I blew one of the woofers out. I removed it to discover the woofers in these were $5 each and made in India. The point is that the drivers in a speaker system don't have to be $500 each to sound good. The Bose 901 speakers use 9 $5 drivers... And they sound good. I know because for years my dad used the original Bose 901s from 1968 in a dual mono setup with bridged Carver M400 amps and an Accuphase C200 preamp. They were used with the equalizer. Without the equalizer, they sounded terrible. You could do a lot worse than the Bose 901 speaker.
Never owned anything from Bose until now, as I was just given an old pair of 301's by a friend moving out of state. Have not tried them out yet, though. Back in the 80's and 90's I used to frequent all the Houston area clubs featuring original live musical groups. Since I was a musician and had a home recording studio, I was somewhat sensitive to the sound quality. The best sound in town, to my ears, was a club in the Montrose area called Corky's. The club had a somewhat convoluted layout and they had about a dozen 901's hanging from the ceiling around the club. The sound was amazing. It seemed like it was coming from everywhere, probably because it was! I'm not anything like an authority on Bose, butI know they also made the 801/802 series for live sound reinforcement. Heard they are about the same as the 901, just had a tougher external covering for durability on the road.
Have had a set running off an old Kenwood 200wt. Per channel. Sounds great and Bose backs there products better than any one in the industry. Just my opinion
I think you hit the nail right on the head when you said "he must have not been married" about the guy who built a brick wall in his house to showcase the Bose 901 speakers. Can any married music fan ever get through one song without being told to turn that noise down?
It was like with the Klipsch and Altec Horns. They where loud. Very loud. And actually that worked for PA systems. Nobody expects High End Sound from a PA System. And therefor, as students, we had a lot of fun. Every time. Till the police knocked on the door. Like we used an old lamp-Radio froim the Fifties as an cheap amplifier for a Bass-Guitar. These radios had a great Mono-Sound. Again. Pure fun. But of course no Hifi or High End. Music with an Baseballbat.😉
had a set of 501's in the mid 70's to the mid 80's. loved them but you had to place them carefully for the reflection. ran them with a Yamaha CR2020 I still have and use the receiver.
Spin them around, build them out of plywood, add a couple of bullet horns, use 4 ohm commercial grade drivers wired in series per side that is connected in parallel for an 8 ohm load, ditch the bandaid processing and you have a decent set of 802's.
I feel bad listening to you guys.. I love Bose speakers.. I have played live music all my life...and the sound on stage is always diffused and even sometimes hard to localize. Stereo separation came only when every instrument had their own amplifier..otherwise we all came through the main board.. even when I was Dj I used Bose for the.loudness and the too end.. I used subwoofers for the low end...never had a complaint.. I guess I am not an audiophile but I sure used the he knout of those speakers...well actually Bose 802.. similar .. easy to Carry and loud... 4 802s two super tweeter cabs and a sub... Usually covers a nice sized room... I guess I just proved your point....nevermind!
Yeah, I just couldn't resist being a smart-ass when I made my original comment but a lot of people purchased and lived happily with Bose speakers, and the direct reflecting thing did give them a unique and spacious sound. I don't think they would have sold as well as they did if they were truly as bad sounding as people make them out to be. I'm talking about the older original speakers. Probably most everything from the 1980's on deserves the disdain they get.
Got some 901 series 2 and I am hooking up with a nikko equalizer and yamaha ax 900 I always wanted a pair as I heard my friends 901 series 2 in 1975 in Cambridge ont so I got some because series two have cloth speakers surrounds not foam so they don't rot so I'm told I will let you know how I get the sound to go but my yamaha with my n h t sb3 speakers sound great
Love ‘em or hate ‘em, if you’ve heard the 901’s you more than likely remember the experience. My uncle had a pair and they sounded great and the smile on his face while listening to them was even greater. ❤
Back in 1980 a friend of mine bought a pair of 901s...and that same year I bought a pair of Klipsch Heresys. We were friends, but we didn't hang out that much together, maybe twice a month. This was before cellphones, obviously, and I don't even think either of us had a landline. Back then we would just show up where someone was living and if they were home, they were home. One day I showed up and he wanted to show me his new speakers. So, I listened to them and told him they sounded pretty good. Then I told him what I bought and we should do a side by side. About a week later I took my Klipsch to his house, and after a couple of hours listening to different music through both speakers he starting having buyers remorse. The Klipsch blew those 901s away.
I think that the BOSE amp was model 1801. I serviced one of these in the 1970s. I remember two things. It is one of the heaviest amplifiers I had ever carried upstairs to my apartment. The other was how very well this amp was designed to be easily serviced. I don't remember what was wrong with it, but the ease of service somewhat made up for the pure agony of carrying it upstairs. Edit: I just looked it up. This model weighed 82 pounds!
back in the days, those magnetic equipments were heavy because of the anvil-size magnetic transformer powering the system. Unlike digital audio today taking the power from a much lighter main capacitor... nice story. thanks for sharing!
I've heard of 901 speakers and I can say that the drivers are well built and of high quality. It all comes down to proper placement, equalizer tuning and application, just like any other speaker.
Bose 901s and 802s are a joke. There are technical reasons for this. All the drivers are in series, so the damping goes out the window. Bose admits how bad these are, by virtue of their crossover design. Yes, those speakers have a crossover inside. At low volumes, there are two sets of 4 drivers in series. The two sets are in parallel. There is a high pass on half the drivers. HOWEVER there is a light bulb in series with the crossover capacitor. So at loud volumes, the light bulb will turn on, putting all the drivers in series, without the crossover. Effectively Bose has admitted their design had poor damping, otherwise they would not need the crossover. They also figure that at loud volumes, no one could hear the poor damping, so the light bulb bypassed it. The amplifier was a joke as well. It was a rebadged paging amplifier. At the time Bose chose it, it was already an obsolete primitive design. Bose were built and marketed to the gullible. Good enough marketing and the naive public will believe anything.
Say what you want about Bose but while restoring my 1975 Marantz quad receiver I ran across some old Bose 601s and some 901s (with working equalizer), all refoamed, with cabinets and grills all in very good to excellent condition, and all for $500 picked up locally. It’s not entirely all in the sound when setting up a ‘70s replication but with the 601s in the front and the 901s on the sides hung from the ceiling, these speakers are perfect. The cabinet veneer matches the cabinet on the Marantz. With 50 Watts of true Clean restored and properly dialed in amp boards rom the Marantz 4400 they sound amazing, and recreate a true ‘70s era experience. These were the speakers I thought I wanted, but could not afford, in 1975. Yes, I love Klipse and use a newer Klipse surround system with TV and general listening. Still can’t afford the good new or good used that I would want in this setup. For me, I feel 30 years younger with the Bose system up to proper levels, and I like that a lot!
Hi-fi Choice in the UK did technical tests on speakers as well as blind listening tests with 6 people where the speakers could not be seen (behind a very thin veil). I still have the review of the 901 and it did terribly in both tests. High distortion, very spiky frequency response even with the EQ and aggressive sounding. The 301 in the same edition did rather better at a fraction of the price!
Bose 901 lousy speaker would not recommend it to any user. I rather go for Paul W Klipsh Cornwall or Bob Crites Corn scala and Bob helped me Design my Paragon Scala he did all the calculations for my Cabinets . I gave him the info on the Drivers. And he designed My Paragon Scala for me. They are still under Construction with a British Violin Maker.
The original Bose 901 used $5 CTS midrange drivers made in Paducah Kentucky. The hype of the original launch in Boston was such B.S. And Amar offered free trips to Hawaii for Tech Hi-Fi salespeople who could sell a certain number of pairs. Of course "gentlemen" in audio like Ed Villchur and and Henry Kloss didn't try to buy off/bribe audio salespeople. When I exposed this on the radio (WBCN) Bose tried to get me fired.
They also sued Consumer Reports for saying that the sound seemed to be bouncing along the wall. What they probably meant was that as you walked along the wall, the sound seemed to be bouncing. Normally, an "absence of malice" defense would exonerate them, but the judge in this case sided with Bose.
a friend remarked on mine that he heard "echoes" - perhaps my low level hearing is too poor to observe - also I'm used to Karlson cabinets where the sound rattles around a bit before exiting ;^) (Karlson called it "Controlled Ringing"
A girl in high school (early 80's) had a pair that hung from the ceiling in her mostly empty living room. We would crank them and party. I remember that they were kind of loud and harsh but something about their shape and placement in the room made them pretty special. More like a performance than your usual stereo.
I've got Bose 591 ceiling speakers throughout my house, unobtrusive and sound pretty good to me. But sound reproduction is a very personal thing for many people. As a guitarist nothing reproduces the sound as good as my laney vc2 Class A Amp with 2 celestion speaker's. No Transistorised amp can create the sound I want to hear with my own ears. As for listening in a car, I dont care as long as the radio works, I prefer to concentrate on exactly what I'm doing not get lost in some tonal navarna and end up smashing into the back of a truck lol
Its one thing to worry about your guitar tone, even after being mic'ed up, its another to hear it on playback. Especially with the rest of the band. Your comment is invalid.
That's a simple but solid reference point. If it's loud and your ears hurt, that's called heavy distortion = bad. If it's loud but you can actually talk to someone at the same time and hear them clearly, that's called low distortion = good.
I'm not an audiophile and never understood the hate Bose got from those guys. Didn't know if it was real or B.S. This is the best explanation I have found. Thanks.
Bose sound good to an untrained ear, because it plays to the frequencies the human ear is designed for, midrange. They fail when it comes to bass and treble. In a fair A/B comparison, the Bose sound constraint when trying to reproduce the sound of a bell, chime, or kick bass etc, which are the very things that add authenticity, and emotion to music
I was a dealer for Bose in the 70s and made quite a few trips to the factory in Framingham. Dr. Bose was one of the great snake oil salesmen of our times, and claimed credit for many acoustic innovations that existed before he was born. For example, he claimed that the folded duct in his table radio was his unique design. Paul Klipsch and many others used the same principle years before- Paul didn't complain about it. When the 901 was first introduced, state- of- the- art amps were capable of a maximum of about 60 watts RMS. The power demands of the 901 easily forced these amps to clip and distortion levels were horrendous. This did not stop buyers from plunking down $496 for the chance to hear ear splitting reproduction. In about 1974, Bob Carver introduced the first high power amp at 350 watts/ channel and that made the 901 marginally more bearable. I used to refer to the Bose amp as the " boat anchor"- it didn't last long. The inherent fault in the design of the 901 is obvious- trying to force one driver to produce the entire spectrum of sound. So far there is no single driver that can do this accurately.
Stromberg/Carlson made a speaker enclosure called Acoustical Labyrinth for their upright radio consoles around the late 30's or early 40's. It was a form of transmission line enclosure. That is the idea Bose copied for their wave radio.
The Bose Wave Radio enclosure in no way resembles a folded horn except maybe visually to someone who knows nothing about engineering. The Bose Wave Radio speaker enclosure is an acoustic labyrinth, something like a cross between a bass reflex enclosure and a transmission line.
Agreed Paul. A 'proper' transmission line speaker usually has a line that is at least a 1/4 wavelength of the lowest frequency to be produced. The wave radio 'line' is far too short to be a serious transmission line. It also has no absorbent material which a transmission line is supposed to have. The wave radio bass is very uneven and marred by some horrible resonances. It doesn't sound anything like a transmission line.
IMF and TDL were using a reinforcing transmission line in the 1970s and 80s.. Even the later Bailey design in the 60s had an open line. It was Bailey who came up with the formula to calculate the parameters of a 1/4 wave transmission line. The idea of the line is to absorb most of the bass sound from the main driver but allow the lowest frequencies through, which in that region will be back in phase with the main driver. The ones I have use a line of over 2 metres in length.
Well … 1) McIntosh MC2500 + MC450 to B&W 802D3 2) Line Magnetic + ZP3 Decware phono stage to Devore Orangutan 96 3) Marantz 2275 to Bose 901 series VI I have all these setups at my place . And the Bose 901s also sound amazingly different and are Fun to listen to. The whole point of this audio journey is to Enjoy the Music . I listen to Records , to CDs and also stream music . We all should be thankful for all the audio research that Dr. Amar Bose and his team have done over the years . I will not trash or despise any particular speaker or an amplifier. Everyone has their own likes and dislikes and everyone one should enjoy music with the gear they can afford.
The direct/reflect technology was based on the principle that live sound is both direct from the instruments (or PA system) and reflected off the walls, ceiling, and floor. But Bose chose to base their design on only one test in a highly reverberant hall. So the test itself produced very biased results. On top of that, when sound is recorded, microphones record both direct and reflective sound. So Bose 901 speakers are compounding the reverberation heard in the original performance. Bose is essentially a marketing company and a very good one at that. But to be fair, Bose is low-hanging fruit for the peanut gallery. There are plenty of very expensive high status brand name speakers that sound like crap or at best, mediocre. And for whatever reason, I don’t see anywhere close to the same degree of negative comments directed towards them. Unfortunately, this has led me to conclude that most people (including so called "audiophiles") have no clue as to what good sound even is.
The design of the Bose 901 is exactly why there is such controvery around them: they are specifically designed to do one thing, reproduce a live concert as realistically as possible. And they kind of do that, whether you either like it or hate it. Thing is, they are just mediocre in reproducing every other kind of music. While partially creating that sense of immersion in the music the direct/reflecting technology treis to bring, they just about take away all sense of instrument positioning, which is what stereo speakers try to reproduce. It all comes down to what you, as the listener prefer: do you like the instrument placement stereo gives you, or do you like the "sitting in the middle of a concert hall" feeling the 901's give you? Then there's the cheap drivers Bose used in almost all of their speakers, except the professional lines. A lot of audiophiles are simply offended that Bose charges premium prices for what in their eyes is a cheap to build speaker with cheap drivers. Another thing audiophiles hate is that Bose Equaliser or Sound Processor or whatever you may call it. Audiophiles believe in "pure" sound: as soon as you'll have to mandatory "equalise" or "process" the sound, to them it means that speaker basically is s***.
So called audiophiles are just that. And a lot of what they say sounds good, Alison sounds like junk. This review is nonsense. He’s re-hashing what the review that Bose sued over. A lot of Audiophiles sell a lot of snake oil also. And trash products they never heard. It’s also misleading what he’s saying here about the power hungry 901’s. The early versions required required a lot more power. They are pretty efficient in later versions that have been produced for decades. And I would probably never own or like what this guy who posted this so called review likes. There are “Audiophile” popular speakers produced to this day that are very inefficient. But that’s not a problem with the reviewers. But when i5 comes to the early 901 it’s sounds like a crisis. No matter what Bose would produce even if it was the best sounding speaker these “ Audiophiles” would cry fowl.
"Audiophiles" are the same as the "experts" or "geeks" in any hobby....audio, comic books, movies, cars, computers, gubs, etc. In the end it's all a dick measuring contest for these people. It truly is a personality disorder. People like what they like. Period. We just need to hear fucking music. 99% of people just want decent sounding music as background at home. They're not building an audio lab. Some people build billion dollar corporations and businesses selling people something they like while others sit on RU-vid telling you why it sucks. Go do it "better" yourself so that someone else on RU-vid can tell YOU how much it sucks. 😄
To me, the interesting idea behind the 901 was that a large number of smallish speakers could both move fast enough for the highs and move enough air for the lows. It stood in opposition to the prevailing notion that you should split the frequency range into three or more segments and use dedicated speakers for each. What other speakers try this?
The main problem is that you still need a lot of cone area to get the air movement for low frequency, but something very light to react quickly enough for high frequency. They do pretty good with multiple smaller speakers, but could also be better with the different dedicated drivers for low, mid, and high. Which is why most high end speakers have multiple speakers so each can do what they’re best at.
I have a friend who used to mess with Bose at CES, he would walk up to the reps and turn his head away from them, bounce his voice off of his hand, and introduce himself lol.
Justin Bieber sells a ton of records. Jerry Lewis movies are STILL very popular in France. Chrysler K cars flew off the lots in the 80s. None of which are convincing arguments defending their quality. Bose 901s can be considered a good choice if one has never had much experience with sound equipment or understanding of reproducing music. Explicitly, it is impossible for a 901 system to reproduce a phantom channel and for that reason alone the system is useless unless you want to vacuum the house listening to them. Let alone tonal response.
@@batvette I'm not crazy about Justin beiber or jerry lewis. But I liked France but spain was better I made a really good living as an auto tech and I don't like crysler in any letter and I've been messing with audio gear for 40 years I guess and owned many different rigs and I'll take 901s over any speaker I feel the same way about Bogen lenco turntables and Bogen amps and the old tube stuff from the Early 60s. Matter of taste I guess.
@@joelteague9446 for about 10 years until recently I had a pair of these: www.stereophile.com/content/infinity-composition-prelude-p-fr-loudspeaker Its a bit of a long read but the review is accurate. Picked up at goodwill for $175 like most infinitys all the foam surrounds were rotten took a weeks worth of spare time and $75 in parts to refoam all 12 mids and mid highs. Then another week damping the aluminum enclosures with sikaflex over thin rolls of modelling clay inside. (Old school car audio trick before dynamat) They really are everything the 901s arent. Perfect tonal balance very sensitive and incredible staging and imaging. I drove them with a 40wpc 70s yamaha natural sound receiver. 901s are impressive in their own way, they sound "big". But youll never close your eyes and utter those words, "at that moment, the system became transparent". The best equipment is that which can disappear and fool your mind that youre in the room with the source materials' artists. But then again thats not that hard for even cheap headphones, and if you achieve it in your living room you can only do it in one seat at a time!
Bose speakers did sound their best playing classical music. I remember hearing a string quartet over a pair of Bose 301s in a Rizzoli bookstore in Atlanta GA many years ago, and it sounded excellent.
I have a Yamaha tx2000 with a marantz amp pushing a set of infinity rs II,s. Its old stuff but ive rarely heard better! But to some that stuff is considered garbage.I think the little bose speakers making big noise is what impresses people, if thats what you like enjoy.
The best PA system I have heard used a pair of Bose speakers on stands, similar to the 901s. The equipment belonged to a gospel band that came to play in our high school auditorium. This was the first time I had seen a dedicated sound engineer doing his magic. He, with his gear, was positioned near the middle of the hall. The sound was natural and never fatiguing.
40 years ago i was using them in my kibbutz (which was demolished in October 7th) for PA. indeed a very good speakers which sounded almost the same volume from 1 meter to 20. they designed so u could put up to 8 i think on each other. they had a lid that u can close and carry it like a suitcase. back then this was very popular speakers and u could see them a lot on the TV all around the world. even saw them in a royal event in the UK
DID YOU.LISTEN TO ROCK? CAUSE IF IT WAS THAT HI FI BEHTOVEN CRAP, IT PROBLY DID SOUND LIKE SHIT , NOTHING CAN MAKE THAT "AUDIOPHILE " OPERA SHIT SOUND GOOD, BOSE IS ROCK SPEAKERS, AS GENE SIMMONS SAID YOU EITHER ROCK OR YOU SUCK, ALSO USE A SUBWOOFER TO BALANCE THEM OUT AND PLACE THEM LIKE BOSE SAYS, IVE HEARD SOME "AUDIOPHILE" SPEAKERS THAT SUCK WHEN PLAYING AC/DC ON THEM
Hi Paul, In my opinion, you were very kind to Bose in your description of the 901s. I'll leave it at that. Unfortunately, my most indelible memory is of their amplifier. I worked in the Walnut Creek branch of Pacific Stereo. In our "high end" room, at one point, we were using their amp as our primary power amp. One day, while connected to a pair of JBL L200s (probably about mid 90 db efficiency) the amp failed in such a way that it just shrieked/roared/screamed at what I presume was full output. Even with the door to the room closed (the room was empty when it failed), it pretty much cleared the store. I was elected to try to shut it off. I covered one ear with my hand and did the best I could to cover the other with my shoulder and went in and pulled the plug. Couldn't really hear right for a while. Smoked the amp and one of the L200's. Always felt bad that it hadn't been connected to the 901's.
Bose's entire claim to fame was getting good sound out of dinky boxes...and making it real expensive. A tiny speaker sounded like a medium size speaker and everyone said "wow...all from that?" But they never sounded as good as a big speaker. The old saying that us gear heads used to use when arguing big block/small block engines; "there's no replacement for displacement" and that holds true for pretty much everything. You can't fool physics...and common sense. And for all that "wow factor" of getting okay sound from a dinky speaker you paid dearly! I can see merit in the concept of using multiple small drivers to eventually push a large amount of air but it's so much easier to just go out and install a real woofer or two. Bose sounded "good", but never great. I always said you can get a lot better sound for the same money by staying away from Bose and their hyped up, techno bullshit.
I own 901Vs along with many other speakers. Having had my 901s in several homes over the years I can say their sound quality is highly dependent upon the acoustics of the room in which they are placed and most importantly where in the room they are placed especially with respect to the reflective wall. Everybody knows proper placement is important for any speaker to sound good. With 901s it is especially so and more challenging due to the reflective wall playing such a critical role. It is easy to make them sound bad. Real easy. However, when the room and placement are dialed in they sound excellent with an immersive sound stage unlike any other. Sound quality far better than all the bashing would lead one to believe. They do require amplifiers with serious muscle. Not so much for volume, more for headroom. There are 18 drivers which is quite a lot of cone/coil/suspension mass to control. Weak amplification can't be expected to control that much mass with accuracy and authority. If you haven't spent considerable time positioning them in the room or your reflective wall is wrong or you don't have at least several hundred watts per channel of clean power then you haven't really heard 901s.
Lol. There is a guy on RU-vid who was on the Audiophiliac channel proclaiming his Bose 901s were amazing and better than any other 901. A few months later he purchased Klipsch Forte IV and declared they were so much better than his beloved 901s. The 901s are garbage and even former 901 owners say so once they actually own decent speakers.
@@carlosoliveira-rc2xt LOL. So you based your expert opinion based on hearsay. Opinion of a guy who knows somebody who says something about something. LOL.
@@jayjay9932 He was a 901 owner. You saw him in his living room with his beloved 901s proclaiming how great they were. Months later on his own channel he realized they weren't so great and said as much. I spoke with him. Are you claiming I watched CGI and I spoke to a bot? I guess you can't talk sensibly to a Bose fanboy. I couldn't convince him that Bose sucked but he eventually found out on his own. Read what I wrote very very slowly as it may help your comprehension. If you can't believe a former Bose owner, who can you believe?
@@jayjay9932 I own a system more expensive than your home and have owned at least 200 pairs of speakers over the years. I auditioned 901s when I was 16 years old and rejected them then. My expert opinion is based on over 40 years in the hobby, 29 years in acoustics and designing and building Home Theaters. I figured you would accept a former Bose owner's authority over mine. Cheers!
@@byronmacdowell3732 says the founder and lead of facking Black Sabbath is “Bubble Gum” Metal. Like saying Pink Floyd is country because so many people listen to and love Pink Floyd, including country bumkins.
BOSE had their place thru the years of innovation. Lots of different toys came out from the 70's and 80's. It was a good time for music. And the combinations of equipment and speakers were endless, and ever changing. Even for the most modest of pocket books. (but money talked as always lol tear) But maybe I was just blessed to be living in the area of Carver, Speakerlab and Speaker Factory back then. And exposed to everything from Wharfedales, ESS, AR, and even Cerwin Vegas ability to Shake Your Seats watching EARTHQUAKE in the theatre from 18inch Strokers lol. (that was pretty cool back then : ) And of course, the Sonic Holograph ☺. I enjoyed them all. From reel-to-reel, to 8-Tracks and cassettes. Laserdisc to CD's. VHS to SVHS. PONG to Nintendo. Analog to digital. And Albums will never get old !!! And I Loved my 61inch MAGNETBOX (Simpsons: ) when it came out. Had a friend throwup on my couch from Motion Sickness. THAT WAS GREAT LOL. And I almost forgot the age of Car Stereos and Mobile Phones. 10-4 hehe. (sticklers probably prefer car Audio. Whatever. Wasn't what it was called then : ) But just because one thing may be better to one person than another. Doesn't mean it's bad. Especially if you Enjoy It. Like the many (older : ) people I know that have, And Love, their BOSE Radios. Just simple nice sounding music for them. So WELL worth their money. Their Happy. And you can't put a price on that. As the old saying goes. RELAX,.. It's All Good ☺
I used to have some Bose speakers, the 301's sounded MUCH smoother if you pulled the stock woofers out and replaced them with the radio shack 8" replacement. I also had the 501's and was never really satisfied with them.
Bullshit. You can't detune a tuned enclosure by arbitrarily replacing the woofer and expect better sound, unless you don't know what better sound really sounds like.
Knew a guy in the service had 301s on top of 501s they sounded great compared to my 901 series 4. Yea Bose is not quality they use reflection but the components are not as good as many other makers use. Smoke and Mirrors. Me a one time Bose fan. Got some Infinity SM 150s blew Bose away. Had some muddy JBL LX 55 too. Infinity made some good speakers. I did like the combo of 301 and 501 played together.
@@johnoberle9750 there seems to be a little subculture of 301 people who like them and apparently can get decent sound out of them. Don't think I've heard them in 20 years or so.
@@Assimilator702 The systems I have heard from Bose have had ALOT of bass from the bass modules (atleast the dual 6,5"). But the sound quality is something that's missing😅
Øystein They can have a good quantity of midbass. Especially when corner loaded which lets the room do much of the work. However there’s no deep tight authoritive and textured sub bass that will turn your insides to mush when the track calls for it.. That isn’t possible without a quality subwoofer system with an abundance of power.
So, Paul W. Klipsch (the creator of the Klipschorn and founder of Klipsch) was walking down the street one day, and he saw Dr. Amar Bose on the other side of the street. Paul stops, faces Amar, cups his hands around his mouth, and clearly yells, "Hello Amar!" Amar hears Pauls loud voice and stops. He immediately turns 180-degrees from Paul, puts his hands over his mouth, and mutters, "Hello Paul." Paul shrugs his shoulders and walks away."
I person I knew had a nice Bose setup...it was in his basement, where he had a listening room set up with *8* Bose 901 speakers. It was....ok for some types of music, but this person was a real pipe organ fan. And for that time (back in the early 1980s), it was probably the closest you could get to feeling like you were listening to a pipe organ without being *in* a pipe organ hall! But yes, a specialized speaker good for specific types of music.
Hi, Mr. McGowan, I have enjoyed your videos with thanks. Since 1996 I have been using Bose 901 type 6. I am very positive. If I didn’t have this model I must have bought two or three more speaker system additionally to satisfy my needs. This has ‘ muscle’ in sound and doesn’t produce any ‘scratch’ at the crossover area of the three or four way system. I think surely Bose has knowledge which sound makes human ear happy. As some say no highs or no lows may have been a merit for our enjoyment. But I had to pay a special attention to install properly. New Zealand
Still have a pair. Still love them. Their are certain ways to set them up and enjoy the sound. A brick wall is not one of them to get good sound. I've had my pair for 30 years now, and the speakers have not yet failed or dry rotted. I have them running on a Denon front end with a Hafler amp at 150 watts a channel. You should watch the curtains fly around in back of them when I play some ol school like Planet Rock. I've known people that hate 901's, but I love them.
Finally, someone that is not simply repeating the same old crap they've heard others so often repeat! Anyone that's invested the time and money in these are aware of the strengths as well as the limitations that will be inherent in any product that assaults the bottom lines of the "audiophile" equipment manufacturers whose products made the 901s such a "bargain' by comparison. (and still so...!)
What a load of bull. This aint no bandwagon of hate. Its people knowing the difference between good and bad speakers. I could go on but im busy putting in new walls to make my bose sound good. Lol
"I've had my pair for 30 years now, and the speakers have not yet failed or dry rotted." Consider yourself extremely lucky. The 901 uses paper cones. That's usually the first thing that needs to be repaired on the 901. Few people get more than ten years without having to re-cone or replace the speakers in a 901. (Usually, replace since the cost of re-coning a four and a half inch paper speaker is higher than replacing them.)
I owned a pair of 901s. Dissatisfied with its high end, I added a couple of tweeters to each one; one on the front and one on the side facing away from the listener. They helped a little. Finally, the foam surrounds dry rotted and I replaced them with a pair of Martin Logan Aerius 1.
Funny this would come up. I used to have a set of 901's which I liked a lot of some reasons and hated for others. The thing that was great about them was at a party I could have a house full of people and play music and it sounded alright no matter where anyone was. However like you said it definitely lacked focus for persona listening. Now I have gone to the complete opposite end of the spectrum with some Martin Logan's haha. They have a sweet spot the size of a golf ball but when you are in there it's magic!I despite their faults I do occasionally miss the old 901's...
There is no real sweet spot to the 901's their intent is to fill the room so that it sounds ok no matter where you are. I mean of course it's better in certain spots but you get it...
I love my Martin Logens but the sweet spot is the size of a pea not a golf ball. I get back and neck pain holding my head in the best position to listen in. As you leave the sweat spot the sound degrades rapidly.
Lol so true. But within that pea... one thing I would to add asap us a sub. I feel like the Logan's focus so much on clarity that they lise a little bit of feel. Could just by mine. Though as they are somewhat entry level.
Steve Huk I have a pair of Ascents and their descent sub. Sub doesn't help. The speakers are great for jazz piano trios. If the recording is bad , it sounds much worse through the logans. I still have the Logans but now I use triton 1's as my all around speakers. I use the old Logan sub with a pair of focal beryllium tweeter 2 ways. Sounds really nice together.
I sometimes do funny audio projects with a few of my buddies and I always wanted to build a huge pair of Bose 901 speakers using 12 inch drivers instead of the little blue drivers bose uses.
the first introduction to decent sound was at my friend Guenther's house where I heard the 901s playing Tres Hombres in 1974. They were the door openers that sent me on a bit of an audiophile journey and by 1979 I traded my kef 105.2's for the Model 19s that I still have, all thanks to Guenther and his bose.
My first audio money spent was a pair of 301 series II. Hung them from the ceiling just like the instructions suggested, 30+ years later it was those speakers that opened the door to this tone chasing journey.
My dad did this. He had a dual mono setup with Carver M400 cube amps (one for each speaker). This made the 901s play VERY loud. And clear. The Carvers would put out 500 watts RMS into 8 ohm speakers when bridged in mono operation.
Keep in mind that the vast marketing team at Bose routinely searches the Internet for any negative commentary about their 901s ,and their speakers in plastic cube nonsense ,then they flag the video in mass and have offending comments removed ,I'm a moderator at a large forum and I've been threatened with law suits from Bose PR dept at least 3 times I can remember ,and Bose is 1 of those companies who will sue everybody ,I'm guessing his more than overly generous review of the 901s comes from not wanting PS Audio to get sued ,even the Mcintosh Labs forum falls victim to Bose lawsuit threats and Mcintosh is prolly America's best audio manufacturer ,if you can afford it .
@@paulsebring6930 yeah really ,Bose has professional internet trolls being paid to argue in favor of Bose plastic cubes and 901s ,Bose also agressively attacks negative reviewers ,these are known doccumented facts ,Bose is only outdone by Monster energy drink for attacking citizens for opinions ,Google Bose threatens law suit .
@@michaelledford4751 how about monster cables? Dont know if they attack critics but their products are sold with similar chutzpah (think thats the term for bullshit) "Increased musicality" which of course can only be measured with a secret meter they have.
@@batvette Monster is worse than Bose by a lot,years back i remember a spot on NBC news where Monster forced a business to close down because their name was Monster children's clothing ,they know most can't afford to spend millions in court so they win.
901 is a very interesting and controversial speaker in audio history. The drivers were advertised to be matched to +/- 0.1dB with each other, which is unusually tight tolerance. It doesn't use $1 clock radio drivers as some online bose bashers claim. 901 VI Series 2 (the last version before discontinuation) connected to a 110W @ 8Ohm British hi-fi amp sounded good to me. Of course, the owner was an audiophile who takes care of speaker set up. While it is musically pleasant, it was also quite revealing or sensitive (perhaps due to crossoverless design - a design that some purists love -) to the quality of source component or recording. There was no lack of bass or high - well there was lack of bottom end, but it is common to most speakers except very large ones such as Paul's IRS that goes down to amazing 16Hz (901 VI has no output at 16Hz, really no) -. Though the high had some pleasant character, it was not as refined as some system with good dome-tweeter speakers. Note, however, that I did not do direct comparison in the same room with same amp. I guess the less-refined high was related to the easily measurable (controlled but existing) cone break-ups of the full range driver. Another serious problem that makes 901s unpopular is that it requires too much space laterally to sound good: the 55cm speaker width and 45cm or more on each of the left and right. Most wives would hate to lose so much space to speakers. There is about 20dB or more boost in high ("mid treble"(a misnomer, I think) slider at max. In the system I listened to, the treble slider was left from the center position. So the boost was less than 12 dB. I guess that only very absorbent room will require 20dB boost.). At low, the boost is approx. 10 dB at Bass 1 among 1 and 2 (1 means more 40Hz than 2) and almost independent of the mid bass slider position. Depending on the way of connection and the connected gears (max input voltage issue), there can be hard clipping somewhere in the audio path. Hard clipping sounds horrible. For an audiophile who understands all these issues, I think 901VI was a worthwhile crossoverless full-range loudspeaker to consider at $1400. I am an audiophile who does not work for any audio company. P. S.: In that audiophile's set up, adjusting the EQ for flat pink noise RTA response resulted in unnaturally bright high. I guess it is related to the larger amount of reflected sound than other speakers. It is known to PA sound engineers that in large room (large in PA sense, not home audio sense), where there are more reflected sound energy due to larger size of the room, the pink noise RTA response curve should slope down at high. Otherwise, the PA system will sound too bright. Again, 901 is not a system for a beginner such as some people who blindly aims at flat pink noise RTA response.
Would be interesting if someone made a dome tweeter add on that had the same dispersion pattern as the 901 or made a coaxial driver for the 901 that is as powerful as the stock driver.
@@ikonix360 Yes, that would be interesting. Avoiding crossover is a design concept of 901, and thus it would be very interesting to see what we get by braking that concept while preserving others. By the way, dome drivers do not have good dispersion to 20kHz.
@@azzinny Another option would be compression drivers on round lenses made the same size as the 901 drivers for the same dispersion. A powered sub or two would take care of the low bass. A DSP would be used for the crossover.
The Bose 901 is not linear over the full audio range, if you use their EQ and punch up the base the speaker is highly distorted, over modulated. I heard it when it first came out a bit before separate sub woofers were common, or even a product in stereo shops. The Bose 901 spatial effect is ok but not as subjectively pleasing as an open panel speaker like the Magneplanars, it is still a box and has box resonances. I believe an open flat panel of the same 9 speakers used in the 901 would sound better than their box and would create the effect in the listening room of a mix of direct and reflected sound. The later versions with the plastic vents do not address the design limitations if you expect them to function as your front main full range speaker. I agree with the many comments about Bose being a marketing company with over hyped products. But I have also encountered some people who are happy with their Bose speakers. You have to wonder if they have ever heard a decent audio system, or if they lack the auditory acuity to discern a good system from a bad one.
or maybe they like the sound better than your favorite brand? Sound quality is subjective. A pretentious asshole would assume only their opinion is valid.
I heard two pair setup for quadraphonic sound along with 4 18" Altec subwoofers back in the late'70s and at a reasonable listening volume it was spectacular ! The owner of the system had spent many hours setting up adjusting levels and placement tho. I still recall that as an introduction to how hard it is to get good sound out of your existing equipment Learned that no system is " plug and play"
Bose 901s. What a fun trip down memory lane. It was the early 80s and I was in college. Almost bought a pair of 901s when I looked at a used A700 Yamaha amp which was paired to a set of 901s. Got the amp but not the speakers, as the amp cost $500 and it sucked up all my beer money - probably for the better in hindsight. Used that amp for 38 years. A popular dance club back then had 901's mounted up by the ceiling with the "back" of the speaker with all it's drivers facing down at a 45 degree angle to the dance floor, which was ringed by large subs. They had several beefy Dynaco amps powering the system in the DJ booth. Out on the dance floor the sound, after more than a few shots and beers, was pretty awesome - haha... The thing I learned from those days of throwing parties at the fraternity house in the early 80's (I was the sound guy) - the speakers must be set up super "hot" on the top end, enough to sound horribly bright in an empty room, as all those dancing bodies absorb a lot of highs. The system "came in" when the room was full. My frat house's speakers were nice DCM "Time Windows" which often blew their tweeters under all of our beer stained party duress. My cheap quick and dirty solution was to replace the constantly blowing dome tweeters in with Radio Shack piezo tweeters. A terrible thing to do I suppose, but problem solved and in a full room full of dancing drunk chicks, the violated with Radio Shack piezo horn tweeter DCM speakers sounded great. I also don't think it is possible to blow a piezo tweeter, God knows we tried. Speaking of blown drivers, I spoke with the manager at the bar, he said they were constantly blowing individual drivers in the 901s as they ran that system hard. If I remember right, the manager said the 901s had a warranty and Bose sent them a box full of extra drivers.
Well, calling then "shit" might be a little harsh. Keep in mind that their design originates from way back around 1970/71. My Dad had 1st generation 901s and one thing they really did well was they could fill very large rooms with sound. It was amazing how deep on the bass they could go with nine 4" drivers. The imaging was just about non-existent due to the reflective nature of the design. Overall, not a bad effort given the technology available back then.
Yeah, "shit" was kind of a strong word. I experienced a pair of these back when I was about in my teens. I had seen them and read about them countless times before, and I had considered Bose to be a pretty good brand. When I heard them, to say I was underwhelmed would be putting it mildly. In the 20 years that followed that experience, I know a bit more about how audio works. Those 901's that I heard were not even close to being in an optimal setup, and so probably were at their worst. That being said, the idea of making a poorly implemented speaker and packaging it with an amp that is made to "fix" the speaker seems like a pretty good idea. I was always a huge fan of shelf systems, and I can remember them even being featured in audio magazines as viable options. Specifically, I remember seeing an Aiwa system with Bose cubs touted as a pretty legit home theater system. Regardless, these packages that included all the electronics and speakers were able to reproduce some decent sound for an obtainable price. I wouldn't mind seeing this kind of thing com back. The options for shelf systems seems to have been completely replaced with bluetooth speakers( which, in themselves, is the exact same thing of pairing amps with speakers), but it just isnt the same. Anyway, the original comment was pretty harsh.
Ah, I'll give you a Mulligan on the "harsh" line. I'm still quite old school on audio myself as I stick to 2-channel systems and drove a set of Infinity RSMs for ~ 38 years and still love them to death. Ran across a pair of Infinity RS-1.5s (RSMs with Watkins dual voice coil woofers and altered crossovers) and now enjoy them (RSMs are better for pure music whereas RS-1.5s fit better for home theater due to lower bass extention. Either of these Infinities would not pass muster against today's modern speakers but they are not fatiguing and they still get my toes tapping. I do have a 1st generation M&K Volkswoofer/S-1 satellite speaker system that is also musical but that speaker system really only gets the toes tapping on Jazz and large Orchestral music; not rock or home theater.
I find that the older stuff can be really good buys, so long as they haven't rotted out. I am using pretty much all second hand gear. I think I paid about $300 for my system, when it would have been closer to $2,000 if I had paid retail. It's nothing fancy, but does the trick. I had a pair of Infinity SM65 for a long time, and then ended up passing them along to a friend. They were awesome little bookshelf speakers. I am currently using some Polk bookshelf speakers as my mains. They do the trick when you add a little subwoofer help.
With the single speaker in the front, the image should be great if the high frequency went high enough. But full-range FR speakers lack the last few khz and you don't get an image even with the point source sound. Really expensive FR speakers go high enough for a good image but cost way too much. So there are way cheaper 2-way point source speakers that have a great image (like the KEF Uni-Q speakers) cos they have tweeters that go higher. With the KEF Uni-Q speakers the tweeters are phase aligned inside the woofers and sound just like one speaker (but with good hf response). You could try putting a piezo unit inside the Bose 901 single speaker for much improved image. Or even better, try inserting an ear-plug speaker in the core of the single front 901 driver (if you can do it). Resisted of course. I tried the piezo idea and the weak sound of the piezo became like a bullet tweeter sound when combined with the FR speaker (piezo fitted inside it's core). The combination of point source and hf response and non coloration seems to give the best image.
I place my 901s face down in my large waste receptacle. I've tried it with the lid up and the lid down. My professional opinion is they are better with the lid down and walking away with my back to the receptacle...
Audiophile and electrical engineer. I first heard the Bose 901 speakers when I was in high school many years ago. They are just loud with no bass no treble and all midrange. From that point on Bose speakers were at the bottom of my list of speakers I would recommend. To my shock and surprised Bose finally came out with a sub-woofer that had bass. With jazz music that has very deep bass and percussion or classical music such as the 1812 Overture Bose speakers were useless. Just to get really deep bass requires very large 18" woofers and the real break through were the rappers who are obsess with bass so someone came op with the bass canon sub-woofer for rappers. That was the real breakthrough with 18" drivers at both end with the PVC pipe and the resonance frequency tuned below 30hz. Emulating a pipe organ. The video gamers came up with the vibrating headphones whereas most headphones had no or some bass. Today I own Inland vibrating gaming headset that sound like my speakers with 18" cannon sub-woofers. Neodymium magnet speakers headphones and microphones were another breakthrough in audio. Thank you electro-chemists in researching the most powerful magnets. You gave us better sounding speakers headphones earbuds and microphones. Thank you rappers with your obsession with bass that brought us better sounding speakers although I don't like your music. Thank you extreme gamers for your obsession with bass in headphones. You gave us much better sounding headphones with full bass although I don't do gaming.
Leave the Europeans, especially the Brits (as they rule the waves) to create really good sounding speakers, Bose is one of the worse speakers ever made!
I have fond memories of Bose. My dad wotked there in the late 70's i was 10 or so and went to their employee open house. Was amazing. They gave me a broken meter from their Syncom? test computer(still have it). I still have my dads 1800 amp and 901s too. 1800 is a BEAST.
I hate when people bash Bose speakers. I own a variety of high-end speakers - B&W, Magnepan, Polk (Silvers), etc. I also own several Bose products (701, 501, SoundDock). I use them in my family room since they can be “abused” by friends and family who like big and bassy music and theatre. Non-Audiophile people love the sound because they sound big and juicy. Additionally they are easy to drive. I have listened to 901 ver 3, 5, and 6s. I think they are fun and entertaining speakers. Why not??? Life is short. As for my high-end equipment which includes a variety of DACs, tube amps, and solid states... they are amazing however to casual listeners, many times they prefer the Bose sound. I sometimes also prefer the Bose sound... ever listen to HipHop or 70s rock on a tube amp hooked up to a pair of Magnepan’s? Terrible. The same music on a Bose 701 with a cheap Yamaha 5.1 amp... boom boom pow! Problem with most audiophiles... they have limited taste in music. I like classical, jazz, vocal, single instrument solos... but also listen to ZzTop, Pink Floyd, Dire Straits... to EDM, Dance, Techno, Rap.
That's a fair enough pint. People don't all want the same thing with their audio system. If people like the sound of their Bose systems then fair enough. I prefer an accurate sound even if it doesn't mean it always sound 'nice'. The bass end of the Bose sound always seems uncontrolled to me.
I agree. I have been a collector for many years now, and that runs from Bose to B&W, and there are absolutely situations where a set of Bose 401s fit the bill better than my B&W floorstanders. I wish there was a perfect speake, but we have moods and tastes that change quickly...sometimes I want super accurate, pinpoint imaging where I can hear dust on a guitar string, and sometimes I just want to jam. I still even have a bit of taste for club music every so often...I suppose it's why I have so many different speakers. But yeah, Bose does it's thing and they do alright at it. I'm certainly glad they are around.
Yes, they are decent, but they aren't great. You are not paying for high end drivers, but eq and well designed enclosures. Who the hell want to pay good money for decent speakers where eq and design is what you're really paying for. No 5 inch driver will ever be as good a 12 inch driver. Not even 9 5 inch drivers will ever be good. Thats why no high end store sells them. Their sole purpose is to sell speakers to people who dont know better. Hence why they are sold at box stores.
Yes, you pay a lot of money for drive units that use paper cones and plastic frames. Most manufacturers design their speakers to be good from the ground up using sensible design and good quality materials. Bose don't do that and rely on huge amounts of EQ to make up for an indifferent speaker.
I had a pair of 901's a few years back and while they had decent sound I never could get the low frequencies where they sounded strong and articulate. Was very careful where I placed them measuring distances from walls etc as their manual said. Another thing I didn't like was every time I changed the input on my Carver amp the Bose active equalizer would disengage and I would have to physically re-engage the EQ again as there was no remote to accomplish this. I sold them after a few years and now use Klipsch which sound wonderful.
No real disrespect ,,,but WTF are you talking about?? Crossover pre--amp within those control boxes could only be shut-down by manual//phisical//hardware god-damn switch...There's NO FCKING way that they would turn themselves off,,back in those pure analog times..You are proving the point of old saying garbage-in results in garbage out.....AKA operators head-space misalignment. SMH in disbelief.
This is why I love this vlog Paul: your opinions are always nuanced and considered. Even when you don't really like a product, it comes out very nicely! For some reason a lot of people in audio-land always think they are right and are willing to defend their opinions with fire and sword ( not sure if this is correct English!). And why? Being an audiophile is supposed to be something nice; the ( personal) experience of enjoying music at its best. That's all.
Paul P. I think Paul was being kind. They were okay for early 70s but Bose kept making them for something like 45 years. They just recently discontinued them. They just didn't have the sound quality to compete with speakers far less expensive. They weren't audiophile oriented and audiophiles are a demanding bunch.
Paul is being very diplomatic, but he also doesn't curse much when describing stuff. :) "What do you think?" is the worst situation to be in. The correct answer is "I've never heard anything like it."
In the mid 80's I borrowed a pair of 901's for a barn dance, running off my Marantz amp/pre amp, about 150 watts rms per channel, they took the power but sounded terrible, well, it was a barn, so I went home and got my Audio Sphere Research living room speakers (250 watt 5 or 6 ways, 15" woofers) and rocked the place for several days. I later hooked up the 901's in my living room (18'x40), they still sounded loud and crappy, so not much love for that model. Over the years Ive had several smaller Bose, 301's were probably my favorites in a tight space, and still use a set of 201 gen II's as a second set on my chitty stereo, for mids/highs, on top of better base cabs, and for what I need for sound my old Harmon 50w amp makes them sing and the house is happy :)
My 1801/4401 + 901 series 1 setup is still my favorite for classical music. I’ve hated everything else for classical music. I also use it for 1950s and 60s orchestral led music in general. Wonderful.
Yeah, Bose have good engineers, in that they engineer the product to match a list of requirements, they come up with some great ideas to get there, but when it comes to the final product, they are generally bland, they lack dynamics, imaging, and life. I remember going into a stereo shop and they had a Bose rep there doing demos on their new stuff, he cranked it to 9 and was like 'Impressive isn't it' well I listened for a few minutes, it was at best, ok, so I turned it up to 10, that's where all the distortion showed up, so I turned it down to normal levels and continued to listen, I asked to put in one of my CD's, and yup, bland reproduction with next to no imaging. I've not ever bought anything made by Bose, though I did receive a Soundlink III Bluetooth speaker as a gift, I was actually impressed, lots of acceptable sound quality from a tiny box. Bose is a step above Nuance speakers, now those are complete junk, $10-$20 drivers and they have a demo disk that they use to show off their system and it's amazing imaging, well the demo disk is encoded with Q-Sound en.wikipedia.org/wiki/QSound www.qsound.com/demos/london-tour_wmv.htm Needless to say, they scammed many many people.
J-man72 b I never ever in the two decades I have been in this hobby. Never based my opinion on equipment on a "stereo shop" visit. Never will either, and trust me Bose is not my speaker either
1975 I was stationed in Puerto Rico while in the US Navy. The 901's were my first real HiFi speakers and I ordered them through Pacific Mail Order, an outfit in Guam of all places. When they arrived home from work (I stood watches at the Naval Communications Station) I come to find that the speakers had been spirited out of my housing quarters with my wife's permission and was the main source of the music that was blasting through the housing there at Fort Buchanan in suburban San Juan. Quite a block party. When they were in my home quite often after playing a song at substantial volume there would be polite applause for the surrounding homes. The 901's had 4 speakers mounted on each of the angled back sides of the enclosure and one mounted in the front. They were not efficient speakers and needed a lot of power to make them come alive. Bose later modified the speakers and wound the voice coils with square shaped wire replacing round. With square wire there were no air gaps in the coil windings as the coil was wound one layer on top of the other. The square wire allowed more wire in order to produce a stronger magnetic field for a given amount of space thus you didn't have to have a monster amp to drive them loud. After a few years I was transferred to San Diego and one day I was giving them a listen and I just wasn't satisfied. I guess what killed them for me was I had discovered Magnepans. I still have my set of speakers, they still work fine. I have overhauled the crossover too. They were a pretty big part of my HiFi life.
I own a pair of Bose 601 series III which many would argue were the greatest speakers Bose ever made. I also own a pair of B&W 683 s2, a great pair of speakers in their own right - from 2014. I did an A-B comparison using a classical SACD and a 130 wpc Yamaha receiver. The 1980s Bose trounced the 2010’s B&W handily.
Thats fine but the problem is their owners insist on telling others how good they are and dont want to hear how wrong they are. Bose has survived on marketing to pseudo audiophiles, people who know just a little bit... enough to be dangerous as they say. Bose stuff sounds okay, until you hear almost anything else and at half the price. Years ago i acquired the big wave system (not the little table radio) I admit the sound quality was amazing tho there were no tone adjustments at all. Had I paid the $1100 it retailed for and not $150 as it was used Id have been a sucker and any $3-400 ghetto blaster would put it to shame.
Thing that always blew me away was that Consumers Report gave them TOP MARKS, and recommended them for years and years!!! Said they were the most accurate speakers. That was the moment when I began to take CR with VERY LARGE grains of salt when it came to audio equipment!... and a lot of other stuff they tested....
I've been considering a pair of Bose 301-V and replacing the 8" woofers with Kicker Freeair subs. The old ones with the polymineral cones. I don't like the looks of those paper cones that come with the 301s
Won't work. Blindly replacing the driver with another (entirely different specs) will simply not work. Or work well. Paper cones can sound great, and have a lot of great properties. Keep the grills on.
Your opinion is very interesting, honest and objective, thank you. The Bose 901 speakers were the first I heard when I was young and I was shocked. Over time I learned more about the audio and I owned all kinds of speakers and brands. Bose 901 has always been a memory of my childhood.
The concept from multiple small full range speakers came from an audio magazine ....Amar copied it...and invented a story of acoustics thats not correct, the walls of a concerthall are not reflectif......and far away of the musicians
There was a saying in the audio industry - "There are two kinds of people who like Bose speakers; those who never heard them and those who already own them."
I 100% agree when it comes to 2-channel stereo systems. If we are talking multichannel home theater applications, they do a decent job for the masses (the problem may then really be about price-to-performance ratio). When I say "masses", you should realize I mean non-critical listeners (not audiophiles).
I had a friend that did work at Bose back in the late '90s. He was in the marketing department. He said Bose had two to three times the staff in marketing than in engineering. He also said that Bose does not publish the technical details like frequency response of their speakers or allow their speakers to be displayed with other brands of speakers in stores like Best Buy. Bose wanted stores to place their speakers to be as far away from other brands of speakers so they could not be tested head to head with other brands. Bose also had install teams that went out to stores and set up all the Bose speaker displays and made sure where the display was located was in accordance to their contract with the store. He also said that in the "outlet mall" Bose stores were specially constructed so they would be acoustically optimized for their speakers only. Each speaker system displayed in the stores had their own special amplification and equalization done in a back "amp room". This special amplification and equalization was different than what was in the Bose "master unit" that the customer bought. Bose even used their own specially equalized CDs and musical tracks for demo purposes. Customers were not encouraged to demo Bose speakers with their own CDs and music. The lawyer for the company I work for asked me to come over to his house and set up a Bose "surround sound" system his wife bought him for Christmas one year. I get there and the system consists of two 3"x5" "mid and high" modules to go on either side of his TV and a small "bass unit" has held the amplifier and a (maybe) 5" woofer. There were no rear or center speakers, no HDMI inputs or outputs, and no designation of any Dolby, DTS, or any type of surround sound processing. Just two 3"x5" speakers in a cheap plastic enclosure, a bass module (also cheap plastic), a stereo RCA input, and a Bose universal remote was all he got. He said his wife paid $2100 for it. It sounded horrible, but he acted happy and gracious to show his appreciation to his wife for her present. I remember his wife saying "People say Bose is the best and I wanted the best for my husband". I felt sorry for them. On the contrary, another friend of mine has a pro sound installation company. He actually installed a few professional grade Bose speakers in a few churches in our area and they sounded fairly good. Although he used equipment from other brands in the rest of the system (such as the amplification, equalization, and mixer boards), he said he was surprised as how good the Bose pro stuff sounded as compared to Bose home stuff.
When I told my mom I was going to Rocky Mountain Audio Fest where many of the worlds finest audio equipment can be seen and auditioned she said...you mean like Bose? Their marketing department sure did their job.
Chuck Music Bose professional equipment like their F1 speakers are pretty good. But the home audio stuff isn't worth your money. The brand Bose is mostly a marketing campaign it seems.
Way to go. If some one is willing to give you something, accept it with gratitude even if you wanted something different. You can always upgrade later and get the system you really want.
Back in 1995 i received an invitation in the mail to hear the hidden sound behind the curtain. The surprise was the big bold sound coming from a Bose acoustic wave unit. It worked, it made me purchase one.
Years ago I heard Bose PA speakers and absolutely DID like them. The multi-driver approach really kept vocals clean and natural. Much more than a single woofer / horn setup. As for home audio, I don't think they make particularly good products - much of their success I think is due to good marketing. Nice logo, decent slogan.. that's where it ends for me.
