AudioCircle
Audio/Video Gear and Systems => Single Driver, Wide-Bandwidth Speakers => Topic started by: HiFiSoundGuy on 3 Dec 2011, 07:35 pm
-
I did some tweaks to my new Bose 901's that made sound MUCH...BETTER !!...
I took off the front and back grills because these grills COLORED the SOUND TOO MUCH !
With the the grills OFF these 901's sound cleaner and much more open and more realistic too !
Another tweak I did to them was putting some self-adhesive foam insulation around the front speaker driver.
Everything now sounds SOOO SPOOKY REAL now !!...
These 901's don't sound anything like they used to sound, its a NIGHT and DAY DIFFERENCE !
I think these 901's would get a lot more love if they only knew how good these 901's can sound with these tweaks !!... 8)
I now love these 901's with most of the speaker drivers facing the front wall !.........
-
Single driver /wide bandwidth speakers??
don
-
What AMAZING!!!! product will you be telling us about next month?
Good grief! :duh:
-
Funny that someone would post something about Bose 901s. Yesterday Paul McGowan (PS Audio) posted this blog about his 901 llistening experience. I think it is very instructive.
Drink more beer!
My post of a couple of days ago entitled Like Bose? wasn’t meant to bash their products, just relaying a story. It sure got a lot of people talking so I thought, well, what the heck. Let’s go bashing!
I am reminded of a story years ago that involved the manager of our local Pacific Stereo store and a pair of Bose 901 Direct Reflecting loudspeakers.
So for those of you that don’t remember, the first big product Bose ever had was a speaker that used all small drivers (I think they were 5″) that were heavily EQ’d to increase the bass and treble to something close to “flat”. They then pointed the speakers at the rear wall to give a big concert hall effect. It actually wasn’t a bad idea and in some cases could sound pretty good. Not in this case, unfortunately.
The manager of the store, Bill, was a total Bose devotee who owned all Bose electronics, the speakers and then dedicated a room to the system. In a Bose dedicated room what you did was reinforce the rear wall to achieve maximum reflectivity. In this case a floor to ceiling set of bricks were cemented into place to act as a reflector for the sound.
The 901′s were notoriously inefficient because of the need to EQ them, so this required a huge amplifier (which Bose made) of which Bill had and was quite proud of.
One day, while in the store, he cornered a couple of us and was raving about the great sound he was getting. ”Concert hall performance” in his listening room. Had to be heard to be believed. We were taunted into coming to hear this because we were “Audiophiles” who made fun of Bose and we needed to be set straight on how music really could sound.
Came the big day we were ushered into Bill’s living room, offered a beer (which I declined) and spent the next 30 minutes listening to Bill talk up the system’s virtues.
Then he placed the needle onto the album and we started to listen.
I think I lasted through half of the first track before I went to cover my ears up. Seriously, this wasn’t Audiophile snobbery on my part this was pain avoidance.
“Bill, can you turn it down?” I yelled over the music.
“You can’t enjoy a concert with the volume down” Bill yelled back.
“Yes, but doesn’t this hurt your ears?”
“Yeah, but then I just drink more beer and it sounds great”.
By golly, best advice I’ve ever gotten for a tweak.
Harry Pearson responded to Paul's blog:
The creation of the Absolute Sound
After reading yesterday’s post about the Bose 901 system I got a note from Harry Pearson and I am reprinting it in today’s post (with his kind permission).
“Perhaps I should tell you how this very speaker system prompted the creation of The Absolute Sound.
hint: it started with the two page up front review (not in the review section) of High Fidelity written by Norman Eisenberg. Unprecedented coverage and yet no one seems to have thought of the obvious philosophical and intellectual reason it couldn’t work…the Bose “scientists” said the company’s men had made measurements of Symphony Hall in Boston and found a direct/to/reflected ratio of sound there and thus modeled the 911 on that.
What this meant if you think about it, even a recording made in the hall would be wrong, and a recording made in any other hall would have to be wrong.
….and moreover the Bose engineers, because of the company’s paucity of money at that point were seated under the balcony, the worst place to make a measurement.”
:beer:
-
It's funny because we've been talking about reviewing a pair on our Facebook page for about a week now.
And the OP here is always threadcrapping on Steve Hoffmans forum about how his Bose 901's are the most amazing speaker in the world, no matter what the topic.
So, much like the Klipsch Heresy's (which we found to be an excellent speaker) and the Technics 1200 (which, thanks to a number of people on this and SH's forum have found to have a lot of potential) I've ordered a new pair of Bose 901's to listen to.
I've only heard them in the Bose store, so curious to see what this $1400 pair of speakers is actually capable of. Everyone in the high end loves to bash Bose, so let's investigate!
-
It's funny because we've been talking about reviewing a pair on our Facebook page for about a week now.
And the OP here is always threadcrapping on Steve Hoffmans forum about how his Bose 901's are the most amazing speaker in the world, no matter what the topic.
So, much like the Klipsch Heresy's (which we found to be an excellent speaker) and the Technics 1200 (which, thanks to a number of people on this and SH's forum have found to have a lot of potential) I've ordered a new pair of Bose 901's to listen to.
I've only heard them in the Bose store, so curious to see what this $1400 pair of speakers is actually capable of. Everyone in the high end loves to bash Bose, so let's investigate!
You must let us know how SPOOKY REAL they are after you remove the drivers grills 8)
-
In all honesty, I am curious to see what they are all about. I haven't' heard them in a decent demo for years, so we're going to hook em up to a budget receiver, some decent separates that are still affordable and my Burmester amp, preamp and dCS stack to see where the limit of their performance is.
And we're even flying one of our readers out to sit in and give the whole thing a listen as well as getting some input from my next door neighbor, who thinks all this expensive hifi is crazy, but ends up usually liking the sound of the good stuff.
So, we'll see what's in store. We've had a lot of traffic on our FB page with a lot of varying opinions on the subject.
-
Single driver /wide bandwidth speakers??
don
With these 901's you are taking things to the next level !
-
It's funny because we've been talking about reviewing a pair on our Facebook page for about a week now.
And the OP here is always threadcrapping on Steve Hoffmans forum about how his Bose 901's are the most amazing speaker in the world, no matter what the topic.
So, much like the Klipsch Heresy's (which we found to be an excellent speaker) and the Technics 1200 (which, thanks to a number of people on this and SH's forum have found to have a lot of potential) I've ordered a new pair of Bose 901's to listen to.
I've only heard them in the Bose store, so curious to see what this $1400 pair of speakers is actually capable of. Everyone in the high end loves to bash Bose, so let's investigate!
Yes PLEASE do investigate !
-
You must let us know how SPOOKY REAL they are after you remove the drivers grills 8)
Your never here these 901's FULL POTENTIAL until you REMOVE all the grills and put some self-adhesive foam around each front speaker driver ! I used some of the foam that BOSE put on the back grills to put around the front driver.
Another thing with all the grills OFF these 901's is speaker placement is now NOT that important ! 8)
-
Another thing with all the grills OFF these 901's is speaker placement is now NOT that important ! 8)
Hmmm. With 901s I've always found placement very important.
In the next room often works. (badaboom) :)
I kid, I kid!
-
I have a single ambience tweeter facing rearward on my Opera floorstanders. Anything more than that just results in a huge jumbled mess of reflected sound.
Steve
-
Why should we be surprised that a tweak could significantly help a very medicore speaker?
9 cheap drivers versus 1 good one for the same price? How does that make any sense?
If (big if) 8/9th's of all sound is reflected, why multiple the effect with the speakers?
The amount of reflection will of course vary by venue (and I'll leave it up to the mastering folks to figure that out for a studio recording). And of course this could lead into the whole dipole/array debate. IMO bipole/omnipole is different from dipole/arrays and valid, but I've never owned anything but front firing speakers.
-
Funny that someone would post something about Bose 901s. Yesterday Paul McGowan (PS Audio) posted this blog about his 901 llistening experience. I think it is very instructive.Harry Pearson responded to Paul's blog:
:beer:
RE Harry Pearson's letter, Dr. Bose made his measurement of 89% reflected sound, 11% direct sound 16 feet from the performing stage, not under a balcony. This was from his white paper explaining the concept of 901. As you go further back in Boston Symphony Hall, the percentage of reflected sound increases to the point where that's practically all you hear.
Original 901 was not made of 18 cheap little speakers, the drivers were 30 watts RMS each manufactured by CTS. In the original and series II they were sorted into three groups so that the units in each enclosure would be a close match for each other. They were extremely inefficient because Bose deliberately pushed up the system resonance frequency above 180 hz where he said that phase shift associated with resonance became inaudible. The first 2 series were acoustic suspension designs which exploited the linear falloff below resonance at 12 db per octave. But the equalizer only supplied a 6 db per octave boost. At normal listening levels there isn't enough bass. That's one reason people play these at very loud levels. There's also an upper bass lower midrange peak of about 7 to 8 db which makes the midrange sound thick and heavy. And to make matters worse the speaker can't reproduce the top octave making the treble muffled. So the saying no highs, no lows, it's Bose has some validity to it.
It took me 4 years on my second try to successfully re-engineer my original 901s. I don't expect anyone to believe what I'd say about them but they don't sound anything like anyone else's 901s including Dr. Bose's.
Starting with Series III Bose manufactured his drivers himself and began using a ported enclosure. It seems to be some sort of transmission line design. It is much more efficient but it sacrifices the lowest octave of sound. From version III onward it is not a difficult load for an amplifier to drive even with the equalizer. I heard Series VI at a Bose store in Newport Beach Ca about 4 years ago while I was on a business trip and had some time to kill. It still sounded disappointing to my ears in much the same way the original as manufactured does. Still no high end.
-
Any small CTS driver that had a hard cardboard dust cover like the one on the original 901 has a quack in the midrange, in my experience, and the driver used by Bose I think fit that description. I made a Bose 901 clone back in '73 with Philips 4.5" drivers with whizzer cones which sounded substantially better than the 901 through the mids.
One thing Bose did that I wished I could do at the time was order the drivers with 64 ohm voice coils so he could parallel them.
Anyway, it's refreshing to encounter someone with as much inside knowledge on the 901 as you apparently do, Soundminded.
-
Bose are you f@cking kidinging me.!!!!! Get some real speakers like JBl's.
-
Wish I could remember the model, but my first "serious" speakers were JBL's from the 70's: large standmounts that used a single 8 inch driver with a 8 inch passive radiator.
-
Is taking off speaker grills considered a "tweak"?
-
Any small CTS driver that had a hard cardboard dust cover like the one on the original 901 has a quack in the midrange, in my experience, and the driver used by Bose I think fit that description. I made a Bose 901 clone back in '73 with Philips 4.5" drivers with whizzer cones which sounded substantially better than the 901 through the mids.
One thing Bose did that I wished I could do at the time was order the drivers with 64 ohm voice coils so he could parallel them.
Anyway, it's refreshing to encounter someone with as much inside knowledge on the 901 as you apparently do, Soundminded.
It was an interesting idea with many innovative features and it broke sharply with all prevailing opinions and methods. It was radical. IMO the design failed because it was inexpertly executed. When properly exploited it can actually do things that were never claimed for it, it can be re-engineered to reproduce the sound of musical instruments accurately, hard to believe. It cannot reproduce concert hall acoustics. That is far beyond the current state of the art.
The pair I bought in 1970 was used for a few years and then put in storage for decades. Rather than bash a product I find flawed but with some unique advantages, I looked to find out what I liked about it and fix what I didn't. It took a long time to apply what I had learned over a period of many years to figure it out and then two tries, the first one ending in complete failure. The second one as I said took four years even knowing exactly what I needed to do with it. I've re-engineered most of my speakers having found few that I like as they were manufactured. Even where I do like them, I find I have to equalize a system for each recording to get the instruments to sound right. I've had several successes and a few I'm still working on or haven't gotten to yet. In most ways this is my most successful effort so far.
-
so are you guys saying the original 901's actually sounded better then?
I do seem to remember a few bars where I grew up that used them with McIntosh gear that actually sounded decent in that environment...
-
so are you guys saying the original 901's actually sounded better then?
I do seem to remember a few bars where I grew up that used them with McIntosh gear that actually sounded decent in that environment...
I don't recommend it. I've eplained the flaws in the equipment as I see it. Most people who call themselves audiophiles don't like them. I think people should listen carefully before they buy loudspeakers. To get what unique properties these speakers do have to offer you have to set them up carefully. I'd bet most people don't even do that.
-
It's funny because we've been talking about reviewing a pair on our Facebook page for about a week now.
And the OP here is always threadcrapping on Steve Hoffmans forum about how his Bose 901's are the most amazing speaker in the world, no matter what the topic.
So, much like the Klipsch Heresy's (which we found to be an excellent speaker) and the Technics 1200 (which, thanks to a number of people on this and SH's forum have found to have a lot of potential) I've ordered a new pair of Bose 901's to listen to.
I've only heard them in the Bose store, so curious to see what this $1400 pair of speakers is actually capable of. Everyone in the high end loves to bash Bose, so let's investigate!
You paid $1400 for those particle board boxes...I meant speakers?. oh yeah I forgot They are Bose. :duh:
-
Single driver /wide bandwidth speakers??
don
Yeah, he doesn't let anybody else drive them... :green:
-
You paid $1400 for those particle board boxes...I meant speakers?. oh yeah I forgot They are Bose. :duh:
I think the current version uses an injection molded plastic enclosure with some sort of cladding. It was probably not a cheap or easy design to arrive at and could not have been built out of wood in quite the same way. Like their wave radio it is probaby a labyrinth transmission line loading.
One of Dr. Bose's stated goals was to avoid the shrillness he'd heard in other speakers. That was even a problem back in the 1960s. Cutting off the top octave wasn't the right answer IMO. Villchur's design for AR3 and Allison's design for AR3a did the same to a lesser degree. Those speakers can produce the top octave when properly equalized but normally have a high end rolloff. Was it deliberate or did they just rationalize it. They used the same false reasoning BBC is now using for rolling off the high end of their speakers.
In my experience if you don't get the treble right nothing else matters. That may explain why there are probably more different kinds of tweeters than all other drivers combined. So far no commercial design has gotten it right. At least that's how I see it.
-
so are you guys saying the original 901's actually sounded better then?
I do seem to remember a few bars where I grew up that used them with McIntosh gear that actually sounded decent in that environment...
I think you are on to something there. I've long believed people liked the sound of the older 901's because they heard them so often used as PA and house speakers in bars and music clubs back in the day (generally the utility cabinet version). I played and heard music in plenty of clubs that used these as house speakers.
-
Actually, I think one of the attractions to the original 901 sound was the unaccustomed mid range headroom inevitable with that many voice coils sharing the load.
-
Well, one big plus for the Bose 901's, no crossovers. It would be interesting to hook up a pure Class A amp to them and see how they perform then.
Anyone here ever used a pure Class A amp on the 901's?
-
Well, one big plus for the Bose 901's, no crossovers. It would be interesting to hook up a pure Class A amp to them and see how they perform then.
Anyone here ever used a pure Class A amp on the 901's?
However, they sound horrible without the required equalization.
-
However, they sound horrible without the required equalization.
Then no advantage there for the 901's. If they could get rid of the equalizer, they could possibly sound great.
-
I use DEQ with my single driver speakers, primarily to replace baffle step and allow a direct connection from monoblocks to drivers. I also consider the cabinet to be a form of EQ (just passive mechanical), so I'm OK with DEQ. It's still a single driver doing all the work.
But IMO the whole 901 concept is backwards. To compensate for 89% reflected sound you should provide 89% direct sound. That's what intrigues me about speakers using upfiring drivers, tilted up rear firing drivers, or bipoles with fewer drivers back firing. The 901 is just a goofy bipole design and I fail to see why so much effort would be put into a flawed concept (except the B*se made money with it).
-
Did the original 901s sound better or is it just nostalgia? I ask this as I recall a record store using the early 901s and at that time I thought they were great. This is probably 70 or 71 and I was 16 years old. But I really loved going to that store and listening while browsing the lps.
I still vividly recall hearing Layla by Derek And The Dominoes for the first time in that store and being blown away. About 15 years later I got a pair of the 901 series IVs. Kept them for a few years until the foam rot set in. Aah memory lane...
-
Did the original 901s sound better or is it just nostalgia? I ask this as I recall a record store using the early 901s and at that time I thought they were great. This is probably 70 or 71 and I was 16 years old. But I really loved going to that store and listening while browsing the lps.
I still vividly recall hearing Layla by Derek And The Dominoes for the first time in that store and being blown away. About 15 years later I got a pair of the 901 series IVs. Kept them for a few years until the foam rot set in. Aah memory lane...
Better than what, is the question, I think. I had a pair for a while, too -- Series II's. My first "serious" stereo (the speakers, a Kenwood amp, and Panasonic turntable for $1k from good old Stereo Larry in Columbus...). I thought they sounded pretty good too, and were the first speakers I ever listened to that didn't sound "boxy". And they had a very extended sound stage in comparison to most of the speakers around at the time -- to the point where I could close my eyes and be unable to point out the speaker location. That rig got stolen by some bikers a couple years later, sigh.
IMHO, they were competitive at the time. Beyond sounding familiar (the "house speaker" factor I mentioned previously), they had a nice punchy sound and enough dynamic range and bass to sound good for rock and roll. Layla, indeed, didn't sound bad on that system. I can't speak to what later versions sounded like.
I don't believe they were particularly accurate, and certainly were eventually eclipsed by many better designs at similar price points.
-
I sold audio back in the mid 70's. Guy who owned the store opened an account with Bose. We got in our initial order of 301's, 501's and the 901's. The 301 and 501 were ok and we sold quite a few, in package systems. The 901 we set up everywhere in the store that was possible. They sounded like crap. Bose dispatched a couple of their folks to show us how to set them up. They arrived, moved the damn things to every location we had tried, and didn't manage to make the speakers sound any better. We sent the 901's back and never sold them. We had that great big amp Bose made, too. Dr. Bose only published distortion specs to 10k, with the argument that the 2nd harmonic was 20K and you couldn't hear it. A valid point, maybe, but it just made the crap that much harder to explain and sell.
-
The back grill are pretty easy to remove on these 901's but for the back grills you need a hammer and a nail to remove the two staples on each side.
If you hit the nail at a 45 degree angle on the staple the staple comes out pretty easy.
Anyone that has 901's needs to try these tweaks to their 901 speakers. I think your going to be shocked :o at the difference these tweaks make !! 8)
-
The back grill are pretty easy to remove on these 901's but for the back grills you need a hammer and a nail to remove the two staples on each side.
If you hit the nail at a 45 degree angle on the staple the staple comes out pretty easy.
Anyone that has 901's needs to try these tweaks to their 901 speakers. I think your going to be shocked :o at the difference these tweaks make !! 8)
Find you a pair of the Mordaunt Short MS30 or MS 35 loudspeakers from the 80's. They show up on Ebay once in a while. Run them without the grilles, and you will be shocked on how much better they are than your Bose 901's.
-
Well, one big plus for the Bose 901's, no crossovers. It would be interesting to hook up a pure Class A amp to them and see how they perform then.
Anyone here ever used a pure Class A amp on the 901's?
Got a pair of Pass XA200.5's here ready to go...
:)
I thought the particle board comment was particularly funny. Name one $1400 speaker that doesn't have an MDF cabinet. They pretty much all do. Can't knock Bose for that.
-
Name one $1400 speaker that doesn't have an MDF cabinet.
http://gedlee.com/Harper.htm Ok. Over by $300.
-
Got a pair of Pass XA200.5's here ready to go...
I thought the particle board comment was particularly funny. Name one $1400 speaker that doesn't have an MDF cabinet. They pretty much all do.
The solid maple cabinet Salk/Jeff Bagby Continuum (http://www.salksound.com/continuum%20-%20home.htm) is $1200, but not exactly $1400.
But maybe the 901s are actually particle board? Doubtful, but particle board is a very different material than medium density fiberboard.
Steve
-
When I was first shopping for stereo in the early 70's, the 901's were pushed in most of the stores, and they definitely had a distinctive sound. But I actually heard them sound good on one occasion. A guy I knew set up a pair for the local community theatre, doing a production in a small venue. He had a Phase Linear amp and a DBX 3? expander. The music was a squeezebox playing a tune for a scene in a Paris outdoor cafe. The sound was expansive and holographic. Compared to my little Marantz 1060 integrated and large Advents, it blew me away. Nearly 40 years later I still remember it.
In the day, set up right, they could sound pretty darned good.
-
Excuse me, but 30 or 40 years ago we were all kids. What to h*ll did we know? What had we compared 901's to? How many truly audiophile experiences did you have as a teenager? What audiophile recordings did we "audition with? How good is aural memory after that much time?
I'm not discounting audio epiphanies (my first was in 1976), but we need to keep all this in context.
-
JLM you nailed it! The 901's were a starting point for most of us. We had no idea what good speakers should sound like. Their was one speaker from Bozak, the Concert Grand B-410 that hooked me into audio for life.
Pic of the B-410.
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=54568)
-
Excuse me, but 30 or 40 years ago we were all kids. What to h*ll did we know? What had we compared 901's to? How many truly audiophile experiences did you have as a teenager? What audiophile recordings did we "audition with? How good is aural memory after that much time?
I'm not discounting audio epiphanies (my first was in 1976), but we need to keep all this in context.
How about AR3a which I had intended to buy instead? How about KLH Model 6 which I owned? How about the New York Philharmonic which I heard live regularly among other orchestras. Piano in my own house which I played, school orchestras I played clarinet in. How about 2 live versus recorded demos I was lucky enough to attend. And BTW I heard all of the Bozaks and KLH Model 9 among others. However the point is well taken. I've become a much more critical listener over the years even if my hearing is no better...but not much worse either. Among other things I've protected it from loud sounds. Not much hearing loss over the years at all.
-
Got a pair of Pass XA200.5's here ready to go...
:)
I thought the particle board comment was particularly funny. Name one $1400 speaker that doesn't have an MDF cabinet. They pretty much all do. Can't knock Bose for that.
I had a pair of Kirksaeters (sp?) years ago when I was living on a boat. Their cabs were made from solid baltic birch ply, not sure if they still do it that way.
-
When I bought my first "real" pair of speakers in 1974, EPI 201s (cheap-ass 8" woofers, cheap-ass 1" inverted dome paper tweeters, cheap-ass single crossover capacitors), they sounded significantly better to me than the Bose 901s that I compared them to, both driven with the same Phase Linear 400 amplifier.
Edit: I believe that would have been the 901 Series II in 1974.
More bass, equal midrange, better highs and better image/focus. It could have had something to do with the room placement, but I doubt that any amount of tweaking and placement would have made enough of a difference to the disparity that I heard. The Bose equalizer also seemed to be adding some extra hiss to the system that I was not hearing on the EPIs, even though the EPIs had more extended HF.
Steve
-
Excuse me, but 30 or 40 years ago we were all kids. What to h*ll did we know? What had we compared 901's to? How many truly audiophile experiences did you have as a teenager? What audiophile recordings did we "audition with? How good is aural memory after that much time?
I'm not discounting audio epiphanies (my first was in 1976), but we need to keep all this in context.
Well, let's see -- AR3, KLH as another poster mentioned, also original Large Advents, pairs and stacks, Dynaco, Klipshorns (no room for them in tiny student apartment), JBLs of various types...
I'd say I had **some** comparison experience when I bought the 901's. I thought they did well against all of the above.
-
Look down this page at post number #45 and see what... Tony3d has to say about these 901's 8)
www.stevehoffman.tv/forums/showthread.php?t=156904&page=3
-
So, I'm confused. :scratch: Are the 901s the bestest speaker EVA or are they just plain awesome?
-
We'll find out next week, when they get here...
-
So, I'm confused. :scratch: Are the 901s the bestest speaker EVA or are they just plain awesome?
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
-
Wasn't aware that the grills are permanent.
It's a rule of mine to take statements like "a night and day difference" with a grain of salt.
-
Excuse me, but 30 or 40 years ago we were all kids. What to h*ll did we know? What had we compared 901's to? How many truly audiophile experiences did you have as a teenager? What audiophile recordings did we "audition with? How good is aural memory after that much time?
I'm not discounting audio epiphanies (my first was in 1976), but we need to keep all this in context.
The Acoustat X's came out about 1976 or 77. Those were the best production ESL's ever made. They were driven by DD OTL servo amps. They still stand up to anything out there you can listen to today. The LS 3/5A's have been out just as long or longer. Companies are still producing them. I remember the first time I heard the LS3/5a with McIntosh tube gear in 1977, My ears could not believe what I was listening too.
Then there are the 1957 Quad ESL's that I first heard in 1979. All of these speakers sound as good today as they did 35 years ago when I started playing audiophile then. The first time I heard the MBL's back in 1980, I knew those would be very special to ever own. My tastes have not changed much over the years.
-
HFSG - After prying off the grills, remove all 9 drivers for a truly night and day difference. You won't believe the improvement this tweak makes over the stock Bose sound. Likewise, this tweak eliminates the influence of amplification altogether. A $10 yard sale receiver will sound as good as anything on the Recommended Component List.
As an added incentive, you can sell those drivers for $3 each on eBay, which is $1.14 more than Bose pays for them. Tweaks are fun and profitable.
-
Tom, those Acoustat X speakers were awesome, I always wanted a pair myself. I'm told that the amps are available separately and that you can drive the later model acoustats with them. Now there's a DIY project I'd love to undertake.
-
Tom, those Acoustat X speakers were awesome, I always wanted a pair myself. I'm told that the amps are available separately and that you can drive the later model acoustats with them. Now there's a DIY project I'd love to undertake.
I tried the amps on the model Three's and Fours, but they were not as good as the X's or Monitor Three's. The older speaker side panels were more angled and gave better bass and imaging. I am sure Acoustat changed the newer ones so they were easier to ship. I never tried the DD amps on the 1+1 or 2+2's. That would be interesting.
I found a pair of the servo amps on Craigslist for $400 last year, but they were in Florida and he would not ship them. Shucks! Just be careful and don't get electrocuted if you work on the amps. Voltage is lethal.
-
I have my 901's toed-in with inter-edge of the speakers about 22 inches out from the front wall and the outer-edge of the speakers out about 27 and a half inches from the front wall and about 22 inches from the sidewalls about 22 inches from anything between my 901's. I also have my 50" plasma HDTV between my 901's and its about 25 inches out from the front wall. I have my 901's off the floor about 2 ft. on top of these http://www.yaffainc.com/products/itemized/952.html without the drawers and turned upside down . It just keeps getting better the more I move them around !! 8)
-
I have heard a lot speakers in my time and to my ears they still have not perfected the High Frequency yet !
If you don't get the Highs right then it does not matter how good the midrange or bottom end are because it just will not sound right...period !...
-
....so just don't try to produce the high frequency like the 901s. :? I've got a headache, guess it's time to decapitate myself. Throw the baby out with the bath water etc.
-
When I was first shopping for stereo in the early 70's, the 901's were pushed in most of the stores, and they definitely had a distinctive sound. But I actually heard them sound good on one occasion. A guy I knew set up a pair for the local community theatre, doing a production in a small venue. He had a Phase Linear amp and a DBX 3? expander. The music was a squeezebox playing a tune for a scene in a Paris outdoor cafe. The sound was expansive and holographic. Compared to my little Marantz 1060 integrated and large Advents, it blew me away. Nearly 40 years later I still remember it.
In the day, set up right, they could sound pretty darned good.
you got that right! MDF is way better than particle board!!! Bose is the only company that uses that kind of crab materials and charges a fortune.
-
HFSG - After prying off the grills, remove all 9 drivers for a truly night and day difference. You won't believe the improvement this tweak makes over the stock Bose sound. Likewise, this tweak eliminates the influence of amplification altogether. A $10 yard sale receiver will sound as good as anything on the Recommended Component List.
As an added incentive, you can sell those drivers for $3 each on eBay, which is $1.14 more than Bose pays for them. Tweaks are fun and profitable.
You are wrong sir!!! He can sell tose drivers for way,way more money like $30 each, remember they are Bose drivers made of lunar material that can reach a phenomenal 12khz with +/-10 db. :lol:
-
Whoa, this topic is getting heavy. :scratch:
-
JLM is absolutely right. We do need to keep this all in context. My first loudspeaker ever was my 1st year in college back in 1992, and it was a Bose 201. My best friend at the time had a 301. Of course, my 201 lasted about 2 months before, I took the grill off, removed the woofer and found that the woofer was run wideband without a crossover and the tweeter had an electrolytic capacitor in series with it. Entire enclosure was particle board. Of course, I moved on after I learned about the distinct association between marketing and sound quality in high end audio.
I have to thank Bose however for opening my eyes (and I got them for $150/pair so I wasn't screwed as much as some). I wouldn't have turned to DIY had I had a set of 'high end' speakers as my 1st speaker.
FWIW,
Anand.
-
When I was first shopping for stereo in the early 70's, the 901's were pushed in most of the stores, and they definitely had a distinctive sound. But I actually heard them sound good on one occasion. A guy I knew set up a pair for the local community theatre, doing a production in a small venue.
He had a Phase Linear amp and a DBX 3? expander. **emphasis added **
The music was a squeezebox playing a tune for a scene in a Paris outdoor cafe. The sound was expansive and holographic. Compared to my little Marantz 1060 integrated and large Advents, it blew me away. Nearly 40 years later I still remember it.
In the day, set up right, they could sound pretty darned good.
I bet that was due in large part to the dbx3 -- I had one in my system years ago for a while. It really made a huge difference, particularly at reasonable listening levels.
edit -- I believe they were actually called DBX 3bx compressor/expander. They had the Dolby noise reduction system for tape in there, too.
-
JLM is absolutely right. We do need to keep this all in context. My first loudspeaker ever was my 1st year in college back in 1992, and it was a Bose 201. My best friend at the time had a 301. Of course, my 201 lasted about 2 months before, I took the grill off, removed the woofer and found that the woofer was run wideband without a crossover and the tweeter had an electrolytic capacitor in series with it. Entire enclosure was particle board. Of course, I moved on after I learned about the distinct association between marketing and sound quality in high end audio.
I have to thank Bose however for opening my eyes (and I got them for $150/pair so I wasn't screwed as much as some). I wouldn't have turned to DIY had I had a set of 'high end' speakers as my 1st speaker.
FWIW,
Anand.
once I "upgraded" some 301 speakers for a friend, and I was shocked of the "POOR" quality of components and materials that these speakers are made. They try to save as much money as they can, but at the same time they try to price their products as high as they can. it is funny to see some people bragging about their Bose speakers, they think they have the pinnacle in speakers. Keep dreaming Bose lovers...keep dreaming! :lol:
PS: at the end...He sold those things and bought real speakers.
-
Once I "upgraded" some 301 speakers for a friend, and I was shocked of the "POOR" quality of components and materials that these speakers are made. They try to save as much money as they can, but at the same time they try to price their products as high as they can. it is funny to see some people bragging about their Bose speakers, they think they have the pinnacle in speakers. Keep dreaming Bose lovers...keep dreaming! :lol:
I have a friend with an older BOSE satellite and self powered subwoofer system. Somehow he slightly melted one of the two cubes, taking out one of the dual drivers. Anyway, he ordered a replacement driver directly from BOSE, more than $30 for a cheap 3" cone in a stamped frame, basically a $3 part. I did the repair for him and got to take a good look inside of them, bare bones cheap, really cheap. And to think that the entire three piece set originally cost more than $1000. What a rip off!
-
I never listened to a 901 but made an experiment recently. Use two single driver speakers and let them face the wall. Interesting: imaging is really better when the speakers are rotated outwards or inwards about the angle of the 901. Probably an accidental find by Amar Bose, but now I think the 901 is less of a joke article than one would think by looking at it. Sounds a bit too "psycho" for my taste, however, I like my Carlssons better.
-
You are wrong sir!!! He can sell tose drivers for way,way more money like $30 each, remember they are Bose drivers made of lunar material that can reach a phenomenal 12khz with +/-10 db. :lol:
When you add up the value of all of the drivers used in practically all TOTL speakers like those of Wilson and Von Schweikert they come out to a tiny fraction of the $150,000 they charge for them. You could easily reverse engineer them for a few thosand dollars if you are not obsessed wtih the finish of the cabinets. Their price based on the value of what's in them is a joke. The changes to the stock drivers if any the speaker manufacturers make when they order them from their OEM source is not due to some remarkable discovery they've made but to keep control over the replacement/repair market for them and to prevent exact reverse engineering, however substantially similar units are available from those manufacturers as standard stock items.
-
Bose, B&W, Wilson etc. are brands that most speaker manufacturers / businesses dream of ... look at that profit stream baby ... :green:
In the end if someone enjoys their speakers - let them ... :thumb:
heck I enjoyed music more when we had tapes ... now the system has become so revealing that the mind has taken over the the heart of the matter - music / not equipment ...
No, I am not a bose fan - IME they are over-priced ... in a certain year 2005?? they spent $100 mm on marketing and advertising ... most audio companies make a fraction in their annual sales revenue ... :duh:
Cheers
-
Whoa, this topic is getting heavy. :scratch:
This is not shocking... you just have to say BOSE 901's on ANY FORUM and watch what happens...
-
Does that make it 'controvesial'? Or is it simply that the 901s are garbage and everyone agrees about that, except for you and everyone who waxes nostalgic about an old/flawed design?
-
When you setup these >TWEAKED OUT BOSE 901's< and find their >"G-SPOT"< its just sounds like.. "LIVE MUSIC" !!.... 8)
-
When you add up the value of all of the drivers used in practically all TOTL speakers like those of Wilson and Von Schweikert they come out to a tiny fraction of the $150,000 they charge for them. You could easily reverse engineer them for a few thosand dollars if you are not obsessed wtih the finish of the cabinets. Their price based on the value of what's in them is a joke. The changes to the stock drivers if any the speaker manufacturers make when they order them from their OEM source is not due to some remarkable discovery they've made but to keep control over the replacement/repair market for them and to prevent exact reverse engineering, however substantially similar units are available from those manufacturers as standard stock items.
If you've ever toured the Wilson factory (and i have) the amount of time and expense that goes into every Wilson product is pretty substantial. You may think you can reverse engineer a pair of them for a couple thousand bucks, you can't. You can't even buy the product they make their cabinets out of.
Most of the driver changes are to get a specific performance parameter, and they buy in large enough quantity that it makes sense...
And you also forget that Wilson has one of the best dealer and service networks in the business. Even when you buy a $15k pair of Sophias, the dealer installs them in your house,etc etc.
There's probably a couple thousand bucks worth of just wire and caps in a pair of Sophias. Not even counting the drivers, the cabinets and the quality of finish, which is part of what someone buys a $15k pair of speakers for.
All of these things add up to why Wilson products also enjoy a high resale. I'm guessing that your $2000 wilson clone will suck.(and it will have zero value on the secondary market) There was a company at CES last year showing off their X2 Alexandria clone that sounded dreadful in comparison and guess what? They were $175k a pair.
If you can make a better speaker than a Wilson Sophia for $2500, I'll put it on the cover and give you a years worth of free advertising to launch your business. It won't happen.
-
If you've ever toured the Wilson factory (and i have) the amount of time and expense that goes into every Wilson product is pretty substantial. You may think you can reverse engineer a pair of them for a couple thousand bucks, you can't. You can't even buy the product they make their cabinets out of.
Most of the driver changes are to get a specific performance parameter, and they buy in large enough quantity that it makes sense...
And you also forget that Wilson has one of the best dealer and service networks in the business. Even when you buy a $15k pair of Sophias, the dealer installs them in your house,etc etc.
There's probably a couple thousand bucks worth of just wire and caps in a pair of Sophias. Not even counting the drivers, the cabinets and the quality of finish, which is part of what someone buys a $15k pair of speakers for.
All of these things add up to why Wilson products also enjoy a high resale. I'm guessing that your $2000 wilson clone will suck.(and it will have zero value on the secondary market) There was a company at CES last year showing off their X2 Alexandria clone that sounded dreadful in comparison and guess what? They were $175k a pair.
If you can make a better speaker than a Wilson Sophia for $2500, I'll put it on the cover and give you a years worth of free advertising to launch your business. It won't happen.
Jeff,
Just to keep it real....
If the Sophia is $15k retail then they are buying it 40-50 points off probably. Lets just say that they are $8k to the dealer. The cost of the actual speaker is probably in the $2500 range. Of course, throw in the overhead and it adds up very quickly.
I will add that I've listened to many Wilson systems and have NEVER been impressed. I always walk away extremely confused as to why people think they sound great. I went to a demo where the sysstem was nearly $500k and setup by Wilson and went home and hugged my system.
-
The Wilson Watts in the 1980's used the exact same cheap Audax tweeter that the $450 Spica TC-50's used. That tweeter had a peak in the high frequencies at 17Khz. Both brands of speakers would wear you out while listening. Wilson always showed them with Krell electronics at the CES shows. It didn't take me long to leave the room every year. I was told that Wilson could not hear that peak, so he would not change it to a better tweeter.
-
If you've ever toured the Wilson factory (and i have) the amount of time and expense that goes into every Wilson product is pretty substantial. You may think you can reverse engineer a pair of them for a couple thousand bucks, you can't. You can't even buy the product they make their cabinets out of.
Most of the driver changes are to get a specific performance parameter, and they buy in large enough quantity that it makes sense...
And you also forget that Wilson has one of the best dealer and service networks in the business. Even when you buy a $15k pair of Sophias, the dealer installs them in your house,etc etc.
There's probably a couple thousand bucks worth of just wire and caps in a pair of Sophias. Not even counting the drivers, the cabinets and the quality of finish, which is part of what someone buys a $15k pair of speakers for.
All of these things add up to why Wilson products also enjoy a high resale. I'm guessing that your $2000 wilson clone will suck.(and it will have zero value on the secondary market) There was a company at CES last year showing off their X2 Alexandria clone that sounded dreadful in comparison and guess what? They were $175k a pair.
If you can make a better speaker than a Wilson Sophia for $2500, I'll put it on the cover and give you a years worth of free advertising to launch your business. It won't happen.
Much of what goes into a very high priced loudspeaker is useless junk, installed to impress tyros rather than to offer substantive value that contributes to actual improvement. Among items in this category are expensive wires and capacitors. The material that goes into making the cabinet (the veneer on the outside is like the gold plating on a watch, it may look attractive but adds nothing to its functionality) can be duplicated in terms of performance such as being non resonant with any one of a number of alternate materials. Again if a very expensive product is specified, it is to impress the customer, not value engineered to provide the desired functionality at the best possible cost. The drivers may be modified versions of standard off the shelf models but comparable performance can be obtained not just from stock products but from competitor's comparables. There are no real secrets in this business.
The best way to reverse engineer a product is to acquire one, test its performance characteristics, and then carefully disassemble it to see what makes it tick. For someone who is going to go into production with this product, that is the cheapest way even if the retail price for one unit is $15,000 or $150,000. As there is little market and little profit to be made from manufacturing and marketing a clone of a $15,000 speaker even if it retails for $2500, Wilson is probably safe. But if you really really like Sophia or Alexandria you can build it yourself for a fraction of the cost if you don't care about the cabinet finish. It's not that tough a trick. Never having heard one myself, I have no incentive to try it. Everyone and his uncle makes and sells the world's best speaker system and every issue of the hobbyist's favorite magazine has a review of the world's best speaker system of the month.
-
I've always wondered how a $30,000 speaker can be placed beside a $30,000 car and called a good value. The complexity, materials, engineering, tolerances, durability, etc., etc., etc...... in the car are orders of magnitude greater than what is required by, and provided in, the speaker.
Personally, I think the ultra high end audio products are a shameless fraud perpetuated on a witless hobbyist elite. If you go far enough into the land of diminishing returns, you come up empty.
Maybe manufacturers have found that the paucity of new customers can be overcome by scoring deeper on the few willing remnants of their past customer base.
-
I've always wondered how a $30,000 speaker can be placed beside a $30,000 car and called a good value. The complexity, materials, engineering, tolerances, durability, etc., etc., etc...... in the car are orders of magnitude greater than what is required by, and provided in, the speaker.
Personally, I think the ultra high end audio products are a shameless fraud perpetuated on a witless hobbyist elite. If you go far enough into the land of diminishing returns, you come up empty.
Maybe manufacturers have found that the paucity of new customers can be overcome by scoring deeper on the few willing remnants of their past customer base.
When you buy a $30,000 car you are getting 20,000+ parts that would cost you more to buy than the car itself let alone the labor to assemble. When you buy a pair of Wilson Sophia series 3 you are geting a pair of 1" titanium Focal tweeters, a pair of 7" paper cone midranges, and a pair of 10" aluminum cone woofers in a rear ported box tuned to 25 hz. Hope you didn't make the mistake of buying the series 2, the series 3 is much much much better, at least according to David Wilson. Here's his sales pitch if you can get through all the yuck!
http://www.wilsonaudio.com/product_soph.shtml
But if you like them you'd better hurry so that you can enjoy them as long as possible before you feel badly when the Series 4 comes out that will blow away the Series 3. :lol:
Personally....I'd feel safer taking my chances with the car salesman. :icon_lol:
-
Say ----- you really are sound-minded.
-
Say ----- you really are sound-minded.
I would say that at best he is only half soundminded because he is only looking at one side of the coin.
More importantly the reasons why I bash Bose:
I get tired of hearing people ask if something suggested is "better than Bose", their question does not come from comparing the brand with other brands, but comes solely from advertising dollars spent. Also, what they say in their advertisements is, at times, ridiculous.
-
I would say that at best he is only half soundminded because he is only looking at one side of the coin.
Yeah, the buyer's side. Pity the poor seller. I won't give him an even break. Low volume high markup is the only way for him to make a living...if he can get some good reviews. Speaking of reviews, here's a link to Art Dudley's review of Sophia 3 in Stereophile
http://www.stereophile.com/content/wilson-audio-sophia-series-3-loudspeaker
From page 3
"For a few of us—lovers of analog sources and low-power tube amplifiers in particular—those days never ended: We continued to love Altecs and Audiovoxes and Klangfilms and Audio Notes. But for most audio survivors, the game changed in the earliest days of so-called high-end audio, as engineers took it on themselves to scrub the speakers' output clean of all but the signal. Their success gave us 30 years of the most boring shit imaginable, a situation not at all aided by the fact that the prices for such things just went up and up. And then up."
30 years of the most boring shit imaginable? You'd hardly know it from the endless glowing accolades month after month in Stereophile's speaker reviews.
Altec a high fidelity loudspeaker? Small wonder I don't subscribe to this magazine and rarely read it even for free.
Four years ago I heard Peter Qvortrop's best Audio Note speakers, a pair of $150,000 8" two way bookshelf speakers driven by a pair of $130,000 low power amplifiers, at the VTV consumer audio trade show in Piscataway NJ and I was completely underwhelmed. Interesting that in the review Dudley said he got deeper better bass out of the Sophia3 than out of the Audo Note speakers. But then what do you want for a mere $150,000, perfection?
-
Interesting.
The first time I heard a pair of Audio Note speakers I was also "underwhelmed". But after returning to the store many more times just to hang out with the guys (and not to analyze speakers or spend any more money :nono:), I realized that I was having a hard time getting up to leave. The record kept ending and I kept getting up to put another one on. "Hey, I'm only an hour late, I can stay a little bit longer." During this time in my life I was also aware that my tastes were changing and I was comfortable letting go of what I had embraced before. Not that any of this matters to anyone, but I didn't really care who made the speaker that I was enjoying, or why it worked the way it did. Ok,Ok,,, I cared who made it and I was curious to figure out why it worked, but I didn't really care in the academic sense since it made me feel so happy when I was listening to it. What is the true value of something that makes your life so much nicer? Do you skip out on a good thing just because it doesn't fit into the neat little box that defines your audiophile life? Do you know what I mean?
If you do know what I mean then I don't see the point in getting all uptight over what something costs, how or where it is made, and what it is made out of. And why would you trash someone for buying it because they can, or because they actually like it? Does that make your own system sound any better?
Hope to hear those 901s again someday HiFiSoundGuy. Glad you are enjoying yours. 8)
-
Four years ago I heard Peter Qvortrop's best Audio Note speakers, a pair of $150,000 8" two way bookshelf speakers driven by a pair of $130,000 low power amplifiers, at the VTV consumer audio trade show in Piscataway NJ and I was completely underwhelmed. Interesting that in the review Dudley said he got deeper better bass out of the Sophia3 than out of the Audo Note speakers. But then what do you want for a mere $150,000, perfection?
I know what you mean about being "underwhelmed." But you'd certainly hope, that a two way loudspeaker like the AudioNote would sound better than the BOSE.
-
I know what you mean about being "underwhelmed." But you'd certainly hope, that a two way loudspeaker like the AudioNote would sound better than the BOSE.
I've re-engineered my original Bose 901s. They are now a two way bi-amplified speaker using 4 equalizers. I'll put them up against Peter Qvortrup's best effort. Not particularly efficient power wise but who cares. Where's the virtue in being able to be powered by pee-wee amplifiers in an era when several hundred watts only costs several hundred dollars? Dollar wise they are far more efficient. They cost only about one three hundredth of what his does.
-
I'm sure he would love to hear them. Seriously. So would I.
-
Ultimately our listening experience is personal and subjective. That means essentially that it is only an opinion and, as such, carries no weight whatsoever. It can, however, derive credibility from the corroboration of others. So consensus is sought. Validation is prized and fads ensue. So called expert reviewers are granted immense power due to their endowed status and conferred expertise. They often are responsible for making or breaking a product and, too often, they confer dynasty upon favored brands.
The experience, however, is yours - it's personal. You get to decide whether or not you like your sound. You can make it easy on yourself by hearing a glass half full or you can condemn yourself to a lifelong quest to fill your half empty sound to the satisfaction you see advertised.
The whole matter is in your head. What tweak could be easier and less expensive than simply changing how you see things?
Harry Pearson engendered this disease by creating and perpetuating the myth of The Absolute Sound. I'm offering the cure. Help yourself.
-
I'm sure he would love to hear them. Seriously. So would I.
The purpose of that sound system is to reproduce the tone of acoustic musical instruments as they would be heard if they were in that room. It will of course play any type of recordeing but it works best for recordings of soloists and small groups.
All comparisons are based on memory of what real instruments sound like. I'm forturnte to have live references I can listen to any time I want to. For example about 8 or 9 string players will be at my house tomorrow to "rehearse" various string quartet music.
Like all of my systems they are based on my own mathematical models and engineered to the spot in the room they are installed in and then re-adjusted to compensate for differences from one recording to another. They don't sound like anyone else's sound system (over 95% of the high frequencies are propagated indirectly by an array of 6 tweeters per channel.) In my experience they will perform the function I've intended them for better on more recordings than other systems I've head including those I own myself.
-
Ultimately our listening experience is personal and subjective. That means essentially that it is only an opinion and, as such, carries no weight whatsoever. It can, however, derive credibility from the corroboration of others. So consensus is sought. Validation is prized and fads ensue. So called expert reviewers are granted immense power due to their endowed status and conferred expertise. They often are responsible for making or breaking a product and, too often, they confer dynasty upon favored brands.
The experience, however, is yours - it's personal. You get to decide whether or not you like your sound. You can make it easy on yourself by hearing a glass half full or you can condemn yourself to a lifelong quest to fill your half empty sound to the satisfaction you see advertised.
The whole matter is in your head. What tweak could be easier and less expensive than simply changing how you see things?
Harry Pearson engendered this disease by creating and perpetuating the myth of The Absolute Sound. I'm offering the cure. Help yourself.
You can deny reality, accept it and live with it, or go about changing it yourself. I'm an engineer. My job in life is to analyze problems and solve them. It is far more interesting and satisfying to understand sound and hearing and then design or redesign systems and equipment to make it perform the way I want it to than to run around with whatever money I can scrape up to by someone else's ideas I probably won't be satisfied with very long. People do this time after time after time in seeming futility. I have no plans to change or replace my design. I enjoy it because it does exactly what I want it to. If it didn't I'd go back to working at it until it did.
-
I've always wondered how a $30,000 speaker can be placed beside a $30,000 car and called a good value. The complexity, materials, engineering, tolerances, durability, etc., etc., etc...... in the car are orders of magnitude greater than what is required by, and provided in, the speaker.
Personally, I think the ultra high end audio products are a shameless fraud perpetuated on a witless hobbyist elite. If you go far enough into the land of diminishing returns, you come up empty.
Maybe manufacturers have found that the paucity of new customers can be overcome by scoring deeper on the few willing remnants of their past customer base.
I AGREE, the diminishing returns kick in very quickly !! 8)
-
Interesting.
The first time I heard a pair of Audio Note speakers I was also "underwhelmed". But after returning to the store many more times just to hang out with the guys (and not to analyze speakers or spend any more money :nono:), I realized that I was having a hard time getting up to leave. The record kept ending and I kept getting up to put another one on. "Hey, I'm only an hour late, I can stay a little bit longer." During this time in my life I was also aware that my tastes were changing and I was comfortable letting go of what I had embraced before. Not that any of this matters to anyone, but I didn't really care who made the speaker that I was enjoying, or why it worked the way it did. Ok,Ok,,, I cared who made it and I was curious to figure out why it worked, but I didn't really care in the academic sense since it made me feel so happy when I was listening to it. What is the true value of something that makes your life so much nicer? Do you skip out on a good thing just because it doesn't fit into the neat little box that defines your audiophile life? Do you know what I mean?
If you do know what I mean then I don't see the point in getting all uptight over what something costs, how or where it is made, and what it is made out of. And why would you trash someone for buying it because they can, or because they actually like it? Does that make your own system sound any better?
Hope to hear those 901s again someday HiFiSoundGuy. Glad you are enjoying yours. 8)
I'm really enjoying these Tweaked-out 901's a lot more now ! When you find the G-SPOT !
-
I've re-engineered my original Bose 901s. They are now a two way bi-amplified speaker using 4 equalizers. I'll put them up against Peter Qvortrup's best effort. Not particularly efficient power wise but who cares. Where's the virtue in being able to be powered by pee-wee amplifiers in an era when several hundred watts only costs several hundred dollars? Dollar wise they are far more efficient. They cost only about one three hundredth of what his does.
Believe you me, you could do way better than Peter if you had a $150K budget to work with.
-
Agreed, if audionote speakers are your competition.... I won't finish that sentence.
-
I've re-engineered my original Bose 901s. They are now a two way bi-amplified speaker using 4 equalizers. I'll put them up against Peter Qvortrup's best effort. Not particularly efficient power wise but who cares. Where's the virtue in being able to be powered by pee-wee amplifiers in an era when several hundred watts only costs several hundred dollars? Dollar wise they are far more efficient. They cost only about one three hundredth of what his does.
How do you get 4 equalizers in the setup? Are you dual-mono all the way from the source?
-
Jeff,
Just to keep it real....
If the Sophia is $15k retail then they are buying it 40-50 points off probably. Lets just say that they are $8k to the dealer. The cost of the actual speaker is probably in the $2500 range. Of course, throw in the overhead and it adds up very quickly.
I will add that I've listened to many Wilson systems and have NEVER been impressed. I always walk away extremely confused as to why people think they sound great. I went to a demo where the sysstem was nearly $500k and setup by Wilson and went home and hugged my system.
I've had a similar impression with Wilson speakers over the last 12 years. They are made very good. Always priced double of what I would pay for them (if I really liked them). But what I have always noticed is the bass range does not have the character of the upper ranges. I just heard this again at the Newport Audio show in Los Angeles (June 2011).
Aside from this, comparing Bose 901s to Wilsons or similar speakers is a little foolish. They each present a sound that many people will like. And if you're into modifying, the Bose 901s, and the active equalizer, will probably respond very well to mods.
There are accessories such as the Smith cell, by Nuforce, Bybee filters, Synergistic Speaker Cells, and MIT products, that would be fun to experiment with on the 901s.
Class D amp folks should have a blast!
-
There are accessories such as the Smith cell, by Nuforce, Bybee filters, Synergistic Speaker Cells, and MIT products, that would be fun to experiment with on the 901s.
BwaaaHaaaHaaaHaa. Oh man, cut it out, I can't take it anymore. My ribs are hurting :lol:
-
Jeff,
Just to keep it real....
If the Sophia is $15k retail then they are buying it 40-50 points off probably. Lets just say that they are $8k to the dealer. The cost of the actual speaker is probably in the $2500 range. Of course, throw in the overhead and it adds up very quickly.
I will add that I've listened to many Wilson systems and have NEVER been impressed. I always walk away extremely confused as to why people think they sound great. I went to a demo where the sysstem was nearly $500k and setup by Wilson and went home and hugged my system.
Not saying I'm in love with the Wilson sound myself, but FWIW, the two best sounding Wilson systems I have ever heard have been the X-2's in Dave Wilson's house and the X-2's that one of my staff members owns. More often than not, especially at shows, I've heard their speakers sound way too bright and way too forward (and demoed way too loud).
But again, having been to the factory and watching their product designed, tested and assembled, they aren't making junk, they aren't cutting corners and they don't make a product that you can build in your garage. The Wilson factory is full of state of the art machinery, and a highly skilled workforce that takes painstaking care in what they build. That's either worth something to you or it isn't. I've heard so many DIY speakers over the years that if I had $10 for every one that sounded great, I'd have an empty wallet. Sorry, I've yet to hear a great pair of garage built speakers. (though I'm really anxious to hear some of Wardswebs' creations..)
We could easily compare this to the world of expensive cars. Is a 250,000 dollar Ferrari F430 9 times better than a Subaru WRX? Probably not, especially if you ask the guy driving the Subaru, who will never be able to afford the 430 - it behooves him to say that the less expensive thing that he can afford is just as good. If you're someone that drives cars for a living (like a race car driver, a wealthy enthusiast or an automotive journalist) you know that the Ferrari is a better car that offers more performance, is much more beautiful to look at and succeeds on so many more levels.
Again, is it 9 times better? Who knows? But it costs what it costs and you can either afford one or you can't. You either appreciate it for what it is, or it doesn't matter to you. It's really ok either way.
And that's kind of how the top gear in high end audio is. Some of it is amazing, some of it is snake oil. But it costs what it costs because it's made in small numbers. Just like any other luxury item. And that's really what the stuff at the top is.
What I don't understand is why so many people make such a big deal out of this. If you don't want an expensive stereo system, don't buy one. There's a ton of great gear that won't break the bank. And the mfrs that are producing the expensive faire are doing so because there is a market for it. It's just like getting crabby about 300 thousand dollar cars or 50 thousand dollar watches. The people that can afford this stuff aren't sweating the mortgage, so their priorities are way different than mine.
I'll never have a 330 thousand dollar Aston Martin DBS, but that doesn't make it any less cool because I can't have one. No matter how many performance parts I hang on a Subaru WRX, it will never come close. And after spending four days with one, if I won the lottery, I'd buy one in a heartbeat.
-
For some reason bashing Wilson has become almost as fashionable for audiophiles to do as bashing Bose. The less time spent actually listening to a Wilson, the greater the bashing it seems.
While I haven't seen Wilson cabinet building in person, I have followed it in print. Although it's not quite the level of handwork and assembly of an Aston Martin, it is far from a slapped together MDF box. The same people who have a problem with its pricing often have no problem with thousand dollar cables, and I know what goes into those.
When I posted that I preferred the less expensive EPI 201s to the 1974 Bose 901s, that was a careful evaluation over several hours and was obviously a personal preference. On the other hand, I have spent numerous traveling hours with a number of pairs of noise cancelling headphones (including Sennheisers), and the Bose headphones were more enjoyable to me for noisy airline travel than the others.
Steve
-
But again, having been to the factory and watching their product designed, tested and assembled, they aren't making junk, they aren't cutting corners and they don't make a product that you can build in your garage.
A gold plated chariot pulled by a team of a thousand horses can easily be beaten in a race by a Volkswagen Beetle. The Chariot's flaw, it cannot go any faster than the fastest horse or in fact faster than the slowest. You can perfect a failed idea, an inherently limited paradigm to whatever extreme you like but that won't make it any better than the limit of the paradigm. The paradigm of the direct firing loudspeaker has inherent limits because it ignores the critical way real musical instruments propagate sound and cannot produce sound fields comparable to what those instruments produce. The defect is substantial and easily audible. A further defect of the audiophile concept is that there in no way without further equalization to get a sound recording/reproducing chain to have an overall flat response due to differences in program material. Having only the playback system flat isn't good enough, it must be flat back to the microphones.
The inherent flaw in original Bose 901 is that its FR isn't even remotely close to flat ever. It can't reproduce the top octave of sound at all and its lower bass, upper bass and lower midrange are not close to flat compared to its midrange.
High fidelity sound is not about woofers, tweeters, tubes, transistors, phonograph records, cds, it's about sound fields. Until those are studied and understood to a far greater degree than at present, sound system designers including speaker designers are shooting in the dark and miss every time.
-
How do you get 4 equalizers in the setup? Are you dual-mono all the way from the source?
One equalizer gets the Bose 901 into the ballpark as best as it can, that's the one supplied by Bose. A second removes the peak in the upper bass/lower midrange and boosts its low bass flattening its response. A third tweaks the tweeter array independently which is the most proactical way for this particular system. A fourth adjusts the input signal to compensate for different recordings. The array is designed with the room's acoustics in mind, the FR and loudness of the indirect array compensating for what will be absorbed/reflected by the walls so that the resulting reflections will be flat. The overall result is excellent imaging, great clarity and accuracy without any shrillness, a stable stereo image, no sweet spot, very deep bass (exceeded only by my AR9s)) and a far better performer than one would expect from Bose 901. I could theoretically build a better speaker/sound system for the purpose I indicated but not for anything like the cost of this one and not without far greater complexity. I don't know in practical terms how much better it would be either. As I said I'm very pleased with the results I've gotten and feel no need to make any further changes.
The system is designed to conform to a still proprietary mathematical model that explains sound fields in a novel way. It also shows the defect in other designs. For example AR9 cannot be made to perform as well (except in the deep bass) due to inherent limitations in its basic concept. It would have to be completely resdesigned from the ground up.
-
Soundminded - You wouldn't need all those EQs if you had just removed your grills. I read somewhere that that's the ultimate tweak.
-
Believe you me, you could do way better than Peter if you had a $150K budget to work with.
I don't need $150,000. I see the success of my designs as the triumph of brains over money.
-
Soundminded - You wouldn't need all those EQs if you had just removed your grills. I read somewhere that that's the ultimate tweak.
I started experimenting with that grill tweak 35 years ago when I was a dealer. I tried it on all the brands I sold back then. And yes, that improved every speaker I ever tried, simply amazing!
If anyone here finds a speaker that sounds worse with the grills off, please let me know.
-
Everyone keeps talking about this grill tweak. I'm intrigued and would like to try this on my speakers. I am confused though as to what is the best way to remove the grills. The two most logical ideas I had were to use a pair of scissors and cut the cloth off the grill. The other solution would be to use a blow torch and melt them off carefully. I think the second solution makes the most sense, I'd just have to be careful not to singe the speakers.
Thoughts?
-
Since no one responded I went ahead and tried burning them off. I forgot to mention this is for my car stereo. Unfortunately the grills caught on fire. Will these still sound ok?
(http://www.kiasoulforums.com/attachments/soul-general-discussion/2881d1279759706-speakers-caught-fire-today-005.jpg)
Thoughts?
-
Everyone keeps talking about this grill tweak. I'm intrigued and would like to try this on my speakers. I am confused though as to what is the best way to remove the grills. The two most logical ideas I had were to use a pair of scissors and cut the cloth off the grill. The other solution would be to use a blow torch and melt them off carefully. I think the second solution makes the most sense, I'd just have to be careful not to singe the veneer on my speakers.
Thoughts?
If removing your grills is too much trouble for you, you can always trade yours in for a new pair of speakers that have no grills.
-
Since no one responded I went ahead and tried burning them off. I forgot to mention this is for my car stereo. Unfortunately the grills caught on fire. Will these still sound ok?
Thoughts?
:duh: Niow you need a new car.
-
:duh: Niow you need a new car.
Correction, my neighbor needs a new car.
(http://olliestraining.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/ferrari_fire.jpg)
-
Since no one responded I went ahead and tried burning them off. I forgot to mention this is for my car stereo. Unfortunately the grills caught on fire. Will these still sound ok?
(http://www.kiasoulforums.com/attachments/soul-general-discussion/2881d1279759706-speakers-caught-fire-today-005.jpg)
Thoughts?
Looks good to me!
-
BwaaaHaaaHaaaHaa. Oh man, cut it out, I can't take it anymore. My ribs are hurting :lol:
Not to mention, I understand if you buy those pricey maple blocks and put one under and on top of each speaker, the sound improves exponentially. The top one should be weighted down with a gold brick (ok, you can use gold-painted lead) so it doesn't dance around from the extreme bass.
-
It seems like some of you guys just like to throw stones at other people and knock them down. Once the bar is lowered you feel obligated to inform us that you are an expert in your field. Usually you are an engineer or a scientist, but always you are the keeper of all knowledge and wisdom. You wear your certificate of expertise like a name-tag on your shirt, and it infuses your ever growing angry commentary. Should we ask an honest question or make a comment in order to gain a better understanding of a topic, you respond by throwing another stone.
What the Hell do we learn from that? Nothing.
I know some of you guys have something really important to say and there is always something that we can learn from you. But I would rather learn it while feeling included, not excluded. And I don't ever feel any taller just because I'm standing on top of someone I knocked down.
Not even sure why I typed this now. Maybe I'm just done with this shit.
-
Really Quiet Earth, you were about to learn something? Really? Come on, climb off the high horse.
-
Really Quiet Earth, you were about to learn something? Really? Come on, climb off the high horse.
Yeah, ilke how to keep my car's stereo running when global warming really gets out of hand :lol:
-
Really Quiet Earth, you were about to learn something? Really? Come on, climb off the high horse.
I certainly have been enlightened by Soundminded.
High fidelity sound is not about woofers, tweeters, tubes, transistors, phonograph records, cds, it's about sound fields. Until those are studied and understood to a far greater degree than at present, sound system designers including speaker designers are shooting in the dark and miss every time.
I am going to give away all of my equipment and recordings.
(how could I ever sell them knowing they are a shot in the dark and they all miss the target of high fidelity?)
Hopefully Soundminded will get this travesty all sorted out before my hearing goes so I can enjoy music in my home.
-
I certainly have been enlightened by Soundminded.
I am going to give away all of my equipment and recordings.
(how could I ever sell them knowing they are a shot in the dark and they all miss the target of high fidelity?)
Hopefully Soundminded will get this travesty all sorted out before my hearing goes so I can enjoy music in my home.
Form follows function;
http://www.wilsonaudio.com/product_soph.shtml
http://www.walmart.com/ip/Witt-Metal-Series-Wastewatchers-13-Gallon-Stainless-Steel-Receptacle-with-Rigid-Plastic-Liner/13401194
Classic! :green:
-
After more listening we thought these 901's sound more realistic without the foam around the front speaker driver.
In our room the best speaker placement was with the speakers toed-in with the inter-edge of the speakers out about 22 inches from the front wall and outer-edge of the speakers about 27 and a half inches out from the front wall. It just keeps getting better the more I move them around now !! 8)
-
Pics or it didn't happen.
-
Did the original 901s sound better or is it just nostalgia? I ask this as I recall a record store using the early 901s and at that time I thought they were great. This is probably 70 or 71 and I was 16 years old. But I really loved going to that store and listening while browsing the lps.
I still vividly recall hearing Layla by Derek And The Dominoes for the first time in that store and being blown away. About 15 years later I got a pair of the 901 series IVs. Kept them for a few years until the foam rot set in. Aah memory lane...
Forum member Tunah on the avguide forum traded his bose series 2 for some new bose series 6 mk2's and said the improvement was BIG ! 8)
http://www.avguide.com/forums/the-new-and-improved-bose-901-series-6-mk2s?page=1
-
Soundminded:
relevance of a Wilson Audio product in a Bose 901 thread I can sorta understand, but WTF's up with the garbage can?
-
WTF's up with the garbage can?
Maybe he is trying to tell us something. Like this whole thread is trash.
-
Maybe he is trying to tell us something. Like this whole thread is trash.
indeed :duh: the bandwidth and pixels forever committed to such nonsense
there must be better things to discuss
:beer:
-
Soundminded:
relevance of a Wilson Audio product in a Bose 901 thread I can sorta understand, but WTF's up with the garbage can?
You didn't notice that the Sophia III enclosure looks just like one of those trash cans with the triangular top and the lid that swings when you push in on it to dump something in it? It's the first thing about the speaker that struck me, it looks like a trash can. I wonder if it sounds that way too :lol:
-
I think HiFiSoundguy is just being facetious and we are giving his jokes too much credibility.
-
Great post. +1
It seems like some of you guys just like to throw stones at other people and knock them down. Once the bar is lowered you feel obligated to inform us that you are an expert in your field. Usually you are an engineer or a scientist, but always you are the keeper of all knowledge and wisdom. You wear your certificate of expertise like a name-tag on your shirt, and it infuses your ever growing angry commentary. Should we ask an honest question or make a comment in order to gain a better understanding of a topic, you respond by throwing another stone.
What the Hell do we learn from that? Nothing.
I know some of you guys have something really important to say and there is always something that we can learn from you. But I would rather learn it while feeling included, not excluded. And I don't ever feel any taller just because I'm standing on top of someone I knocked down.
Not even sure why I typed this now. Maybe I'm just done with this shit.
-
i would say that the old ones and the new ones are going to sound about the same. average.
-
You didn't notice that the Sophia III enclosure looks just like one of those trash cans with the triangular top and the lid that swings when you push in on it to dump something in it? It's the first thing about the speaker that struck me, it looks like a trash can. I wonder if it sounds that way too :lol:
First, how can you make such snarky comments about a product you've never used and second, if you're such a genius that knows so much about making speakers that Wilson and the rest don't , why aren't you in the speaker business? Wilson has built a pretty solid company out of their products, with quite a few units sold world wide. I'm sure that if you know how to make a speaker that is that much better than a pair of Sophia III's for no money, and you could make them consistently, while supporting a service and dealer network, you'd have the world beating a path to your door.
Much fun as it is to poke fun at them, you don't stay in business and grow to the point they have if you're an idiot and you make junk. But we're all just supposed to trust you, a guy with a pair of tweaked 901's as being the know it all.
I agree with Mike Nomad.
This kind of crap doesn't help anyone.
-
If you're such a genius that knows so much about making speakers that Wilson and the rest don't, why aren't you in the speaker business?
Making a great pair of loudspeakers and selling them are two entirely different things. The fact that BOSE makes such mediocre products and yet sells them prodigiously is the answer to that question.
Making them is easy, selling them is the hard part.
-
First, how can you make such snarky comments about a product you've never used and second, if you're such a genius that knows so much about making speakers that Wilson and the rest don't , why aren't you in the speaker business? Wilson has built a pretty solid company out of their products, with quite a few units sold world wide. I'm sure that if you know how to make a speaker that is that much better than a pair of Sophia III's for no money, and you could make them consistently, while supporting a service and dealer network, you'd have the world beating a path to your door.
Much fun as it is to poke fun at them, you don't stay in business and grow to the point they have if you're an idiot and you make junk. But we're all just supposed to trust you, a guy with a pair of tweaked 901's as being the know it all.
I agree with Mike Nomad.
This kind of crap doesn't help anyone.
Carp all you want, their appearance still has a striking resemblance to trash bins as I see it. Pretty funny I think. At least my speakers don't look like trash bins. I wouldn't own a pair of speakers that look like trash bins. OK my Teledyne AR9s look like coffins but that's not the same. Maybe if you grew a tree in front of it or hid it with a large potted plant people wouldn't notice. I wonder if anyone ever tried to stick a candy wrapper or a used napkin in one by mistake. Who knows, I might have done it myself by mistake :icon_lol:
-
Making a great pair of loudspeakers and selling them are two entirely different things. The fact that BOSE makes such mediocre products and yet sells them prodigiously is the answer to that question.
Making them is easy, selling them is the hard part.
Forty years later and still selling them. A billion dollars a year and privately owned starting out with just that. He must be doing something right. Somebody must be buying them.
-
Forty years later and still selling them. A billion dollars burgers a year and privately owned starting out with just that. He must be doing something right. Somebody must be buying them.
I had to substitute burgers for billions and now your statement makes more sense. Combine a brilliant marketing plan with convenient shopping to sell a passable product to the masses and you got yourself a winner.
Wayne
-
8)
http://www.epinions.com/content_4143423620
-
8)
http://www.epinions.com/content_4143423620
The first paragraph of the epinions link says, "The Bottom Line Audio is a wonderful hobby! Let's all respect one another's tastes and preferences. Anything otherwise would be both foolish and childish."
The problem I have with HFSG in this thread and on other forums where he posts the exact same thing is that he does not respect others' tastes and preferences. People say they don't like the Bose 901 sound, yet he tries to force the issue by telling them the VI sounds different, and they haven't heard them turned upside down and backwards or whatever. Easy to say that people are Bose bashing, but listen to the people. They've heard them, they don't like them.
-
Bose makes a lot of speakers. Honda makes a lot of cars, but I wouldn't want to own one. That doesn't mean Honda makes bad cars. Ferrari sends 800 cars a year to the US and there's a three year wait. I know what I'd rather own.
Just depends on what you want.
I'd be curious to see where Bose makes their money these days. I'd bet it's more in headphones and auto sound installations.
When we start the review on the 901's I'll be curious to see if they will reveal how much of their revenue still comes from speakers. I'd be amazed if they sell 2500 pairs of 901's a year. Won't know till we ask them.
-
Forty years later and still selling them. A billion dollars a year and privately owned starting out with just that. He must be doing something right. Somebody must be buying them.
I was referring to a new contender. Anyone can build them, selling them is the difficult part regardless of how excellent one makes them. You are competing against 400 other loudspeaker companies.
-
If HiFiSoundGuy used different wording in regards to how he feels about these speakers, he could have steered this thread in a different direction.
Not sure if I want to do this...
I'm really enjoying these Tweaked-out 901's a lot more now ! When you find the G-SPOT !/quote] :smoke:
-
If the Wilson Sophia III looks like a trash can, the Alexandria II looks like a robot with scoliosis
Warning Will Robinson, DANGER! DANGER! :roll:
http://www.wilsonaudio.com/product_alex.shtml
-
Looks like Bose might come out with a redesign 901 speaker some time in the future ..
http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/showthread.php?t=392444
-
If the Wilson Sophia III looks like a trash can, the Alexandria II looks like a robot with scoliosis
Warning Will Robinson, DANGER! DANGER! :roll:
http://www.wilsonaudio.com/product_alex.shtml
+1. Excellent reply!
-
Here's more pictures of these future 901's
http://www.coroflot.com/alexananin/BOSE-901-
-
These aren't "future 901's" this is someone's art school project....
-
HFSG has done everything in his power to identify himself as a shill for Bose. He rants. He raves. He doesn't converse, debate or compare in any meaningful way. He just continues to flail. Does anyone take him seriously? Isn't he in violation of some policy?
-
Still waiting for HFSG to coat the 901 drivers with quickset concrete. Wasn't that the ultimate tweak for speakers a couple years ago?
http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=49901.0 (http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=49901.0)
-
HFSG has done everything in his power to identify himself as a shill for Bose. He rants. He raves. He doesn't converse, debate or compare in any meaningful way. He just continues to flail. Does anyone take him seriously? Isn't he in violation of some policy?
... and not just for Bose...
He's gotta be in violation of something! :lol:
Seriously!
-
I kinda like his passion. The most prudent course on these forums is to lay back and not get too involved or upset over anything, which is right for most of us. But I love to have the couple of wild birds around to make the whole thing more interesting.
HFSG has done everything in his power to identify himself as a shill for Bose. He rants. He raves. He doesn't converse, debate or compare in any meaningful way. He just continues to flail. Does anyone take him seriously? Isn't he in violation of some policy?
... and not just for Bose...
He's gotta be in violation of something! :lol:
Seriously!
-
I just re-read some of his inane posts and it occurred to me that it is possible he is pulling all of our chains. He never rises to the bait of harsh rebuttals, just keeps on with his line. He always supports the most inane processes and products, the ones guaranteed to create an emotional response - Bose Wave and 901, concrete speaker cone treatment, clever little clocks, ceramic tiles in midrange enclosures:
http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=46819.msg419750#msg419750
and teflon tape mods, to name a few.
He may just be a brilliant jokester. Just maybe.
-
SOME OF YOU :roll: NEED TO..."GET A LIFE" !! :icon_twisted: :lol: :icon_lol:
-
[I'd be curious to see where Bose makes their money these days. I'd bet it's more in headphones and auto sound installations.
[/quote]
Here you go:
http://www.bose.com/controller?url=/bose_ride_system/index.jsp (http://www.bose.com/controller?url=/bose_ride_system/index.jsp)
-
Oh good grief! Bose is crap!
-
[I'd be curious to see where Bose makes their money these days.
At the prices his product sells for Amar must make the bulk of his money in home stereo and headphones!
An abiding side interest for years has been active car suspension.
On the positive side, apparently he pays his engineers and employees well.
-
I bet HFSG doesn't even have a system at all!
We've never seen a picture of his awesome system or room.
Seriously....
-
He appears not to have a digital camera, either, as he has complained of being up-load challenged.
-
sounding fishier all the time...
-
sounding fishier all the time...
Yes it does. They've had 40 years and more money than anyone else to figure out what's wrong with it and fix it. If they haven't done it by now the odds are they never will.The only question is whether it's because they can't or because they don't want to. Last time I checked this speaker is only available from them by special order. They consider it a legacy product not of special importance to their current offerings.
BTW, their noise canceling headphones seem to work very well on airplanes. I also tried a pair of Philips and they weren't nearly as good. But they are expensive.
-
Yes it does. They've had 40 years and more money than anyone else to figure out what's wrong with it blah blah blah
(http://chzmemebase.files.wordpress.com/2011/12/internet-memes-too-long.gif)
-
(http://chzmemebase.files.wordpress.com/2011/12/internet-memes-too-long.gif)
Pez, didn't....OR COULDN'T?" :lol:
-
wut?
-
He may just be a brilliant jokester. Just maybe.
Jokester? You are probably right. Billiant? I don't see it. Thorough? Absolutely.
-
Have you seen the Latest post over on the avguide forum yet?
Jdmccall56, is a BOSE 901 owner and he points out that in "Live Music" there is not any "Pin-Point Imaging" and I will also add that "Live Music" is not "Accurate" also ! 8)
http://www.avguide.com/forums/the-new-and-improved-bose-901-series-6-mk2s?page=1
-
In the link you provided you state that two pairs of 901s stacked is a "real ear opener". Is this your new and improved tweak that will blow our socks off?
We need to stop feeding the troll.
Have you seen the Latest post over on the avguide forum yet?
Jdmccall56, is a BOSE 901 owner and he points out that in "Live Music" there is not any "Pin-Point Imaging" and I will also add that "Live Music" is not "Accurate" also ! 8)
http://www.avguide.com/forums/the-new-and-improved-bose-901-series-6-mk2s?page=1
-
In the link you provided you state that two pairs of 901s stacked is a "real ear opener". Is this your new and improved tweak that will blow our socks off?
A pair of stacked 901s is strictly amateur hour. If you're really serious about audio you will want the tried and true triple stack of 802 Series II + 901 Series IV + 901 Series VI. Then hold on to your socks.
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=55052)
-
What do listening to 901's, humping fat women and riding mopeds have in common?
-
I'll try... Uh they are all things hifisoundguy does on the weekend?
-
A pair of stacked 901s is strictly amateur hour. If you're really serious about audio you will want the tried and true triple stack of 802 Series II + 901 Series IV + 901 Series VI. Then hold on to your socks.
Damn, I should have know better :duh: :eyebrows:
-
I will say I've always liked the looks of the 901 speaker stands.
-
...and I will also add that "Live Music" is not "Accurate" also ! 8)
Well that pretty well takes the cake - makes the whole thread worthwhile!
-
Are we so desperate for entertainment that we find HFSG amusing? Personally I think we should vote him off the island. He doesn't interact - he just acts stupid.
-
I'll try... Uh they are all things hifisoundguy does on the weekend?
I don't know about that. But i can tell ya there all tons of fun until your friends catch ya doing it......YAH
lol
-
Well that pretty well takes the cake - makes the whole thread worthwhile!
if only there was an experienced field recorder of acoustic/vocal music to offer some opinions on the subject
WTF how can live music be "accurate" or not? - with or without amplification , it is was it is - some certainly not very pleasant, but definitely "real". I'd rather hear an doctored (therefore "distorted") live recording of a performance at Hermann's Jazz club than one that accurately documented the wretched sonics you're likely to hear there on any given night.
-
A pair of stacked 901s is strictly amateur hour. If you're really serious about audio you will want the tried and true triple stack of 802 Series II + 901 Series IV + 901 Series VI. Then hold on to your socks.
Yeah, but to really get the sound out of them, you'll need to tri-amp each set with the appropriate equalizers.
-
I just re-read some of his inane posts and it occurred to me that it is possible he is pulling all of our chains. He never rises to the bait of harsh rebuttals, just keeps on with his line. He always supports the most inane processes and products, the ones guaranteed to create an emotional response - Bose Wave and 901, concrete speaker cone treatment, clever little clocks, ceramic tiles in midrange enclosures:
http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=46819.msg419750#msg419750
and teflon tape mods, to name a few.
He may just be a brilliant jokester. Just maybe.
If you are correct, the "joke" really is on us. . . But those types of posts, similar posts are a dime a dozen over at that "other" website. Why would he go to all the trouble of duplicating his posts at both websites when he'll only get a good laugh from fooling, messing with the participants at one of the websites?
Maybe he is conducting a psychology experiment and we are the control group.
-
The pot and the kettle. :|
I say dump this one into the IW and try again.
-
The pot and the kettle. :|
I say dump this one into the IW and try again.
+1
-
Are we so desperate for entertainment that we find HFSG amusing? Personally I think we should vote him off the island. He doesn't interact - he just acts stupid.
Gotta agree with you there dude! I'd still love to see a pic of the room.
Old, retired guy with nothing to do. Guess I can't get that mad at him.
-
Gotta agree with you there dude! I'd still love to see a pic of the room.
Old, retired guy with nothing to do. Guess I can't get that mad at him.
TONEPUB, age is just a number :weights:
-
I took my BOSE 901's equalizer apart and put 4 layers of teflon tape on the top and bottom plates like I did to my Yamaha a-s2000 and this made a nice improvement for my 901 speakers ! Maybe Jeff could try this teflon tape vibration tweak and let us know what he thinks about this in his upcoming review on these 901's. 8)
-
You really don't understand how audio reviews work. When reviewing anyone's components, you don't make bizarro tweaks to them. You evaluate what comes in the box.
Again, just like your bizarro outlet tweak, I tried a little bit of teflon tape on my ARC REF Phono 2. No difference.
I think the teflon lid tweak, like all your other tweaks are silly.
And again, I'd love to see a picture of your room with all your tweaked gear. But we won't be seeing any of that will we?
-
Maybe HFSG is really Corey Greenberg having fun. It's got to be something like that. There's no way anybody could really be as weird and worthless in real life. I'm sure there's a joke behind this ..... or something genuinely malevolent.
I'm ready to see pictures too. Show us you are for real.
-
You really don't understand how audio reviews work. When reviewing anyone's components, you don't make bizarro tweaks to them. You evaluate what comes in the box.
Again, just like your bizarro outlet tweak, I tried a little bit of teflon tape on my ARC REF Phono 2. No difference.
I think the teflon lid tweak, like all your other tweaks are silly.
And again, I'd love to see a picture of your room with all your tweaked gear. But we won't be seeing any of that will we?
:nono: Yes, you really tried to trash those Maestro ac outlets over there on the Steve Hoffman forum but we both know why you did it !
You better not try that with the BOSE 901 review.... 8)
-
You really don't understand how audio reviews work. When reviewing anyone's components, you don't make bizarro tweaks to them. You evaluate what comes in the box.
Again, just like your bizarro outlet tweak, I tried a little bit of teflon tape on my ARC REF Phono 2. No difference.
I think the teflon lid tweak, like all your other tweaks are silly.
And again, I'd love to see a picture of your room with all your tweaked gear. But we won't be seeing any of that will we?
It doesn't really matter if it works or not, just as long as they believe it does. Call it the placebo effect or slight of hand. It's really a psychological phenomenon, all it requires is belief/faith. They'll tell you wonderful stories, claiming all sorts of nonsense, never backing it up with credible, repeatable data. If you can measure it, see it on a scope or meter, then it is verifiable.
Like someone else said, it's virtually a free tweak, so let them have at it.
Knock on wood. Step on a crack, break your mother's back.
-
It doesn't really matter if it works or not, just as long as they believe it does. Call it the placebo effect or slight of hand. It's really a psychological phenomenon, all it requires is belief/faith. They'll tell you wonderful stories, claiming all sorts of nonsense, never backing it up with credible, repeatable data. If you can measure it, see it on a scope or meter, then it is verifiable.
Like someone else said, it's virtually a free tweak, so let them have at it.
Knock on wood. Step on a crack, break your mother's back.
Are you kidding? Removing the grill cloths lets the bad air out, dontcha know?
-
Are you kidding? Removing the grill cloths lets the bad air out, dontcha know?
Only if the cloth is hypoallergenic. :thumb:
-
If you are correct, the "joke" really is on us. . . But those types of posts, similar posts are a dime a dozen over at that "other" website. Why would he go to all the trouble of duplicating his posts at both websites when he'll only get a good laugh from fooling, messing with the participants at one of the websites?
Maybe he is conducting a psychology experiment and we are the control group.
Maybe we are the Out Of Control Group :icon_twisted:
-
Maybe we are the Out Of Control Group :icon_twisted:
No.
-
Maybe HFSG is really Corey Greenberg having fun. It's got to be something like that. There's no way anybody could really be as weird and worthless in real life. I'm sure there's a joke behind this ..... or something genuinely malevolent.
I'm ready to see pictures too. Show us you are for real.
Why do you need a picture? He has some BOSE 901 loudspeakers and a Yamaha receiver. Close your eyes and imagine them.
Do you actually think he would even know who Corey Greenberg is?
-
When setting up these 901's you first need to find out which speaker is your left speaker and which speaker is your right speaker.
These speakers will not sound right until you get this right first. 8)
-
just keeps getting funnier.
-
just keeps getting funnier.
Freaken hilarious. My quess he is having more fun than us. I think the joke is on us for responding.
charles
-
Here is my take on the Bose 901 speakers, lifted directly from my 1983 Audio Basics newletter set.
Design advantages: This type of system can, if properly located, produce a large and pleasing sound field on some types of music.
Design disadvantages: One cannot “turn off” the large sound field on music inappropriate for this (such as a solo voice in a small room).
We would also suggest there may be flaws in the logic supporting the claims for the desirability of a system with substantial “reflected” output. One could point out that if we took the orchestra outside, and recorded it playing on an open flat field and then played the recording back in our home on a “reflecting” speaker system that created a “concert hall sound field,” that we would then have a concert hall sound that did not exist. Although you may like this, it is a departure from the reality of the acoustic environment of the recording.
Another disadvantage is that many reflecting speakers, including the 901, are designed for active equalization. The raw system frequency response is down substantially at both high and low frequencies. The designers claim to overcome this by supplying with the system an active frequency equalization circuit, which, it is claimed, shapes the signal to the power amplifier to compensate for the raw response of the system, thus giving satisfactorily flat response.
The “catch” to this design technique is that for each 3 dB boost in acoustic output (an increase barely audible by most people) a doubling of amplifier power is required. Thus, if the boost at 20 and 20,000 Hz was in the area of 15 dB, for example, the amplifier would have to be thirty two times as powerful at these frequencies as in the mid-range where no boost was applied. Thus, if you were driving your amplifier to a 10 watt level on mid-range material, the equalizer would drive the amplifier to 320 watt levels at high and low frequencies, clearly beyond the capabilities of most amplifiers. Active equalization can only work well if the amount of boost is within the power capabilities of your amplifier. There ain’t no such thing as a free lunch.
Finally, remember that microphones are stupid. The mike cannot distinguish between direct or reflected sound in the recording process. The microphone picks up all the sound at its location, no matter whether it came directly from the instrument or was first reflected from the recording surroundings. This sound, a mix of direct and reflected acoustics, is sent on to the recorder, and if the engineering is good, will finally show up on your record. In a linear system, the output of front facing speakers will play back this mix of direct and reflected sound (what the microphones “heard”) in the proper proportion (assuming good judgement by the recording engineers in original microphone placement) and your system will play back the sound of the “hall” as it existed quite satisfactorily.
We would suggest that further deliberate “reflections” in your room is, at best, redundant. We prefer, in fact, a very “dead” and non-reflective listening environment in which we listen to the direct output of the speakers, with the acoustics of the listening room minimized. We desire to hear what is on the record, and only what is on the record. If the recording is bad, we want to know so, if it is great, we want to hear it, and nothing else. Fortunately, there are enough super recording engineers around (Jack Renner and Bob Woods of Telarc, for example) that our desires for well engineered records are met.
Frank Van Alstine
PS All back issues of Audio Basics are available as free .pdf downloads at our web site, www.avahifi.com
-
Here is my take on the Bose 901 speakers, lifted directly from my 1983 Audio Basics newletter set.
Design advantages: This type of system can, if properly located, produce a large and pleasing sound field on some types of music.
Design disadvantages: One cannot “turn off” the large sound field on music inappropriate for this (such as a solo voice in a small room).
We would also suggest there may be flaws in the logic supporting the claims for the desirability of a system with substantial “reflected” output. One could point out that if we took the orchestra outside, and recorded it playing on an open flat field and then played the recording back in our home on a “reflecting” speaker system that created a “concert hall sound field,” that we would then have a concert hall sound that did not exist. Although you may like this, it is a departure from the reality of the acoustic environment of the recording.
Another disadvantage is that many reflecting speakers, including the 901, are designed for active equalization. The raw system frequency response is down substantially at both high and low frequencies. The designers claim to overcome this by supplying with the system an active frequency equalization circuit, which, it is claimed, shapes the signal to the power amplifier to compensate for the raw response of the system, thus giving satisfactorily flat response.
The “catch” to this design technique is that for each 3 dB boost in acoustic output (an increase barely audible by most people) a doubling of amplifier power is required. Thus, if the boost at 20 and 20,000 Hz was in the area of 15 dB, for example, the amplifier would have to be thirty two times as powerful at these frequencies as in the mid-range where no boost was applied. Thus, if you were driving your amplifier to a 10 watt level on mid-range material, the equalizer would drive the amplifier to 320 watt levels at high and low frequencies, clearly beyond the capabilities of most amplifiers. Active equalization can only work well if the amount of boost is within the power capabilities of your amplifier. There ain’t no such thing as a free lunch.
Finally, remember that microphones are stupid. The mike cannot distinguish between direct or reflected sound in the recording process. The microphone picks up all the sound at its location, no matter whether it came directly from the instrument or was first reflected from the recording surroundings. This sound, a mix of direct and reflected acoustics, is sent on to the recorder, and if the engineering is good, will finally show up on your record. In a linear system, the output of front facing speakers will play back this mix of direct and reflected sound (what the microphones “heard”) in the proper proportion (assuming good judgement by the recording engineers in original microphone placement) and your system will play back the sound of the “hall” as it existed quite satisfactorily.
We would suggest that further deliberate “reflections” in your room is, at best, redundant. We prefer, in fact, a very “dead” and non-reflective listening environment in which we listen to the direct output of the speakers, with the acoustics of the listening room minimized. We desire to hear what is on the record, and only what is on the record. If the recording is bad, we want to know so, if it is great, we want to hear it, and nothing else. Fortunately, there are enough super recording engineers around (Jack Renner and Bob Woods of Telarc, for example) that our desires for well engineered records are met.
Frank Van Alstine
PS All back issues of Audio Basics are available as free .pdf downloads at our web site, www.avahifi.com
Mr. Van Alstine may be extremely talented tweaking the design of Dynaco amplifiers and preamplifiers but in this case he is badly mistaken. The speakers reproduce within their limitations of accuracy what is fed into them which in the case of commercial recordings is mostly the output of microphones located very near the sources of sound, the musical instruments. What's more most of the time the microphones are relatively directional. They pick very little of the reverberant sound field and in a form that is for all practical purposes useless. This is very different from where the listener in the audience sits far away and with each ear picking up an entire hemisphere of sound. There is no way Bose 901 or any other speaker can reproduce the sound of a musical performance heard in a concert hall from a commercial recording. The reverberant signal is not on the recording to anything like what is heard live and the reverberant sound field produced by Bose 901 in a home has nothing in common with the reverberant sound field heard in a concert hall. For all its flaws, Bose 901 is no better or worse in this regard than other speakers. Unless you live in an anechoic chamber all speakers reporduce some reflections in the listening room.
There are flaws in the logic of all hi fi speakers. That's why there aren't any that sound like actual music. Amplifier power today is cheap, you can buy an amplifiier with several hundred watts of output power for several hundred dollars. Equalization is a valid engineering technique without which LP phonograph records, analog tape, FM radio, and analog TV would not be possible. A crossover network is also an equalization circuit.
See my previous posting on this thread for a more complete and objective analysis of the strengths and weaknesses including the fatal flaws in Bose 901.
-
Mr. Van Alstine may be extremely talented tweaking the design of Dynaco amplifiers and preamplifiers but in this case he is badly mistaken.
In my experience, you are wrong on every possible level and account . The rest of your post thus rendered useless, to me.
-
. 8).
-
In my experience, you are wrong on every possible level and account . The rest of your post thus rendered useless, to me.
I like Frank`s account of the 901`s also. They are a speaker that do one thing rather excellently but everything else poorly. When properly situated especially high up there ability to become unlocalized is excellent. Better than anything out there i have heard. But they do everything else so poorly that they cant be recommended for anything other than generic pa systems like in a work out gym.
-
Frank is one of the most no-nonsense guys in hifi.
-
I think the >Tweaked-out 901 system.. version< are in a league of their own ! BEST SPEAKER MONEY CAN BUY....(PERIOD) !!... 8)
-
My most memorable experience of Bose 901 Speakers was in the late 1970s, when during a Bose demonstration, the sales rep in a local, hi-fi shop said, "Watch this!" and proceeded to fasten an electric cord (zip cord) to both terminals of the speaker's binding posts. He then took it one step further and plugged the speaker into the AC wall socket. For real!
It made an unearthly amount of noise, drove everyone out of the listening room and apparently didn't blow the speakers. Me thinks that was the whole point of the demo. :scratch: In other words, these speakers are so badass, that you can plug 'em right into the wall. Phil Spector eat your heart out.
I didn't stick around to listen to anymore "music" at those volume levels :no_hear:, and I haven't ever been interested in Bose since. Am I the only one to have seen one of these early Bose "demonstrations"? :wtf:
-
Hifisoundguy, can you try this with your 901s and report back?
-
Hifisoundguy, can you try this with your 901s and report back?
:rotflmao:
In my quest for a audio system this year, I went downtown Houston to a Bose store. Listened to them, got out of there in 10 minutes never to go back. what a piece of junk and overpriced those speakers are.
-
My most memorable experience of Bose 901 Speakers was in the late 1970s, when during a Bose demonstration, the sales rep in a local, hi-fi shop said, "Watch this!" and proceeded to fasten an electric cord (zip cord) to both terminals of the speaker's binding posts. He then took it one step further and plugged the speaker into the AC wall socket. For real!
It made an unearthly amount of noise, drove everyone out of the listening room and apparently didn't blow the speakers. Me thinks that was the whole point of the demo. :scratch: In other words, these speakers are so badass, that you can plug 'em right into the wall. Phil Spector eat your heart out.
Hey, no big deal. You can do that with many a loudspeaker. All you have to do is use a woofer(s) in an enclosure that has its impedance peak (fs) close to 60Hz! Let's do the math, Voltage Squared, Divided By The Impedance. Suppose you have a woofer with a Zo of maybe 60 ohms, then you plug it into your 115VAC wall outlet, the woofer only gets 220 watts. The trick is having the loudspeaker resonance at or near 60Hz.
I did this once with a really cheap three way loudspeaker that had a 15" woofer, the woofer just hummed loudly, producing a 60Hz tone. Then I deliberately put my hand against the woofer cone to damp it. The impedance immediately dropped down to its nominal value and pssst, goodbye woofer.
-
I think the >Tweaked-out 901 system.. version< are in a league of their own ! BEST SPEAKER MONEY CAN BUY....(PERIOD) !!... 8)
Well, isn't that ... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RmwqnqL3Hbg
-
In my experience, you are wrong on every possible level and account . The rest of your post thus rendered useless, to me.
My replies #13 and #18 on page one are based on 40 years of experience with this product, detailed engineering analysis of it, and two tries to re-engineer it, the second one taking 4 years. If you can't learn anything from the knowledge I gained about what is right with it, what is wrong with it, and how to fix it, that is your problem. As for Van Alstine's opinion, I don't know what that is based on but it is most likely based on superficial limited knowledge and and casual experience of the product as manufactured. He should stick to tweaking the bias on triodes and pentodes, he's way out of his league here.
-
Soundminded sounds very credible to me if, in fact, he really devoted 40 years of his life to converting the Bose 901 from the garbage that comes from the factory to something useful and enjoyable. You gotta question the ROI on that project though. Was it really worth so much trouble? And why start with Bose rather than something else that actually sounded good in stock form?
-
Hey, no big deal. You can do that with many a loudspeaker. All you have to do is use a woofer(s) in an enclosure that has its impedance peak (fs) close to 60Hz! Let's do the math, Voltage Squared, Divided By The Impedance. Suppose you have a woofer with a Zo of maybe 60 ohms, then you plug it into your 115VAC wall outlet, the woofer only gets 220 watts. The trick is having the loudspeaker resonance at or near 60Hz.
I did this once with a really cheap three way loudspeaker that had a 15" woofer, the woofer just hummed loudly, producing a 60Hz tone. Then I deliberately put my hand against the woofer cone to damp it. The impedance immediately dropped down to its nominal value and pssst, goodbye woofer.
Yea... know that. My point was simply the absurdity of attempting to demonstrate the "superiority" of a speaker by plugging it into an AC wall socket... 60Hz and all... as if this somehow demonstrates superior sonics, fidelity, frequency response, imaging, material build, musicality, et al. The experience was impressive, not in a good way. It was just so dumb ass, and it proved nothing to me within the realm of Hi-Fi. :rock:
-
Soundminded sounds very credible to me if, in fact, he really devoted 40 years of his life to converting the Bose 901 from the garbage that comes from the factory to something useful and enjoyable. You gotta question the ROI on that project though. Was it really worth so much trouble? And why start with Bose rather than something else that actually sounded good in stock form?
I bought this speaker in 1970 and listened to it for a few years. It was in storage for most of the time I owned it. I'd read Dr. Bose's technical papers about it and considered what he had to say. Some of it was ingenius, some of it ludicrous. I'm not going into a detailed analysis of it here.
I began redesigning my other speakers in 1989 based on applying a mathematical model of sound fields I developed for another purpose in 1974. Bose 901 was the ultimate challenge. It's one thing to have a model, another to successfully impliment it. My first effort to redesign 901 was in the 1990s. That ended in failure. After more experience with other speakers I tried again in 2004. I was not satisfied with the results until 2008. It now bears no resemblance to the way other 901 systems sound. I'd considered publishing a paper about my model many years ago but decided against it as there is no profit in it for me. I experiment with audio equipment as a hobby, I'm not in the business although among organizations I belonged to in the past are the Acoustic Society of America and the Audio Engineering Society (IMO this later organization has degenerated into a consumer group of audiophiles.) As I also said earlier, based on common experience with this model, I don't expect anyone to believe me.
BTW, IMO plugging a loudspeaker system into a 120 volt outlet is about as stupid a thing as you can do even if you're lucky enough not to destroy it. Not only isn't it desgned for it, it also happens to be illegal, a serious and reckless electrical code violation that could result in tragedy.
-
So you throw around society names and spout off about mathematical models of sound fields and then offer up no proof... Of course we believe you.
-
So you throw around society names and spout off about mathematical models of sound fields and then offer up no proof... Of course we believe you.
I don't expect you to and I said so. However I've also offered you a well reasoned explanation of what's wrong with this design and how it can be fixed. Care to argue substance instead of throw insults? Do you actually know anything about this product, it's history, what it can and can't do or are you just one of the endless throng who thinks he knows something about it but has no facts?
-
I think the skepticism is with the idea that ANY system using 9 cheap "full-range" drivers can sound anything but mediocre, no matter how configured.
-
BTW, IMO plugging a loudspeaker system into a 120 volt outlet is about as stupid a thing as you can do even if you're lucky enough not to destroy it. Not only isn't it desgned for it, it also happens to be illegal, a serious and reckless electrical code violation that could result in tragedy.
Illegal? So is suicide, but who is going to stop you. Here, I bet you'll get a jolt out of this.
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=55439)
-
I think the skepticism is with the idea that ANY system using 9 cheap "full-range" drivers can sound anything but mediocre, no matter how configured.
The original 901 drivers were anything but cheap. They were what today is called midwoofers and have a capacity of 30 watts RMS each. That was big in those days, KLH Model 6's woofer is only rated at 40 watts. They're long thow (for their size) acoustic suspension design. Parts Express charges $19 each for their knockoff of the current version manufactured in the far east. Even at just $10 per driver that's almost $200 of the $476 they charged for the original. What's outrageous is a speaker system containing an 11" Focal woofer, a 13" Focal woofer, a 7" midrange and a couple of tweeters in 4 bookshelf enclosures strapped together with some sort of magic dust thrown on them selling for $150,000 like this one.
http://www.wilsonaudio.com/product_alex.shtml
At that price they should throw in a Rolls Royce or a condominium in the deal. And did they have to make it look like a hunched over robot in a grade B sci fi movie?
-
The original 901 drivers were anything but cheap. They were what today is called midwoofers and have a capacity of 30 watts RMS each.
http://www.parts-express.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?Partnumber=290-922
(http://d2oiekhouywd6z.cloudfront.net/images/item_standard/290-922_s.jpg)
-
I don't expect you to and I said so. However I've also offered you a well reasoned explanation of what's wrong with this design and how it can be fixed. Care to argue substance instead of throw insults? Do you actually know anything about this product, it's history, what it can and can't do or are you just one of the endless throng who thinks he knows something about it but has no facts?
It's always funny to me when people like you post. You make a bunch of claims etc but when it comes down to putting the rubber to the road ie having someone actually listen to your setup or post pics or ANYTHING that would convince us otherwise that you are on the level you balk. So what is it? are you going to put you money where your mouth is and give us something tangible to look at/ listen to or are you going to continue to make outrageous claims?
-
It's always funny to me when people like you post. You make a bunch of claims etc but when it comes down to putting the rubber to the road ie having someone actually listen to your setup or post pics or ANYTHING that would convince us otherwise that you are on the level you balk. So what is it? are you going to put you money where your mouth is and give us something tangible to look at/ listen to or are you going to continue to make outrageous claims?
Exactly what did you have in mind? BTW, if you expect these to sound like big mother Cerwin Vegas or monster JBLs blasting rock until you are stone deaf....fageddaboutit. They were redesigned for range, clarity, and accuracy for hearing recordings of "serious" music. They'll eat 130 watts at low frequencies like it's nothin'. I'm not going to market them, they were designed for me alone. I'm just letting you know it can be done....if by no one else than at least by me.
-
Man, I gotta go with Pez on this one!
So, what is "serious music"?
-
About time for the Intergalactic Wastebin isn't it? :roll:
-
Yes indeed - bin time. In fact, a lot of efficiency is available here if you just route anything from HiFiSoundGuy directly to the IGWB. You lose a little drama but you save on stress and nonsense.
-
About time for the Intergalactic Wastebin isn't it? :roll:
We past that point when the first post was made in the SDWB forum for crying out loud.
-
Man, I gotta go with Pez on this one!
So, what is "serious music"?
Music that appeals to someone who has already gone through puberty, is older than an adolescent, and whose IQ is a larger number than his shoe size. So how many of you does that let out?
-
http://www.parts-express.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?Partnumber=290-922
(http://d2oiekhouywd6z.cloudfront.net/images/item_standard/290-922_s.jpg)
Bose does not use the same speaker drivers as they use to in these LATEST 901's.
:nono: The Grills on these 901's is what really holds these 901's back !!!!....they are made of FIBERGLASS !!! and your not going hear their FULL POTENTIAL with these Grills on...its a night and day DIFFERENCE !!.........
And the BOSE equalizer, when tweaked-out with teflon tape improves the sound of these 901's a good bit too !...
So this review coming up on these 901's MEANS NOTHING COMPARED TO A TWEAKED-OUT 901 system !!............ 8)
-
BOSE does not use the same speaker drivers as they use to in these LATEST 901's.
Yes, they now use even cheaper ones that were made in China.
The Grills on these 901's is what really holds these 901's back !!!!....they are made of FIBERGLASS !!! and your not going hear their FULL POTENTIAL with these Grills on...its a night and day DIFFERENCE !!.........
And for the absolute best performance plug them directly into any 120VAC wall outlet.
-
Music that appeals to someone who has already gone through puberty, is older than an adolescent, and whose IQ is a larger number than his shoe size. So how many of you does that let out?
I'm out, though I am older than adolescent (31) I still have yet to go through puberty. And though my IQ is on the lower side of normal (85) My shoe size is well above normal (92).
What state are you in soundminded?
-
Yes, they now use even cheaper ones that were made in China.
And for the absolute best performance plug them directly into any 120VAC wall outlet.
NO, they just use a different speaker cone and cloth surrounds for these LATEST 901's and they are made here in the USA ! 8)
-
I'm out, though I am older than adolescent (31) I still have yet to go through puberty. And though my IQ is on the lower side of normal (85) My shoe size is well above normal (92).
Thanks for your honesty. Having read your posts, that was my guess all along. :green:
No such problems here. I grew up a long time ago and I'm smart enough to be able to walk and chew gum at the same time. In fact even smarter than that. :P
-
Holy crap!! Bose is Crap!! Get it!!
-
Is the 901 not built in Mexico? Or is it SC? Don't really matter, they are fundamentally flawed.
-
NO, they just use a different speaker cone and cloth surrounds for these LATEST 901's and they are made here in the USA ! 8)
Assembled in USA, from foreign made (China or Taiwan) components.
-
Assembled in USA, from foreign made (China or Taiwan) components.
NO, they are made in-house at the new BOSE factory in Phoenix, Arizona USA... NOW ! 8)
-
and that information comes from...?
-
Music that appeals to someone who has already gone through puberty, is older than an adolescent, and whose IQ is a larger number than his shoe size. So how many of you does that let out?
Harsh!
-
Music that appeals to someone who has already gone through puberty, is older than an adolescent, and whose IQ is a larger number than his shoe size. So how many of you does that let out?
got some serious music here
Go ahead sing along to the melody of ACDC's TNT
here it is
Don't you start no fight
(Chorus)
Cos I'm
901s
I'm Dynamite
901s
And I'll win the fight
901s
I'm a power-load
901s
Watch me Explode
:lol:
-
:rotflmao:
-
Thats it!! I'm ordering the 901's. And bring on AC/DC. When they arrive the gills will be ripped off to improve the sound. Ripping off grills started this thread in the first place.
-
About time for the Intergalactic Wastebin isn't it? :roll:
:thumb:
-
Silly boys on both sides. STOP! 901 fanboys to the left, the rest of you travel to other AC topics. $&(&()*%&()&$*'n retards!
-
Silly boys on both sides. STOP! 901 fanboys to the left, the rest of you travel to other AC topics. $&(&()*%&()&$*'n retards!
901 fanboys? There is such a thing??
-
Seriousily weren't 901's rated at unlimited power capability at one time. Now i see them at 250w a side. Whats that all about?
-
Here's how I modified my BOSE equalizer with teflon tape. I put four layers of (Wal-Mart Brand) of teflon tape over top of the metal mounting posts for the circuit board. On the front and back metal parts that is connected to the circuit board I put four layers of around the edges of each metal part. I then put four layers of teflon tape tightly around the edges of the circuit board...around the whole circuit board and then putting it around one of the screws. I also put a little teflon tape around all the screws for the circuit board too. I also put three layers of teflon tape about six inches long around each AC plug's prongs too.
My friend told me that he took out most of the component parts inside his Yamaha a-s2000 integrated amp and put four layers of teflon tape under those parts. 8)
-
Carp all you want, their appearance still has a striking resemblance to trash bins as I see it. Pretty funny I think. At least my speakers don't look like trash bins. I wouldn't own a pair of speakers that look like trash bins. OK my Teledyne AR9s look like coffins but that's not the same.
If you think about it ( trash bins vs. coffins ), ultimately it really is kinda the same...
D.D.
-
With prices in this hobby getting WAY out of control these days !
I can understand why some forums would like a tweak like the teflon tape vibration tweak... to be kept.. "TOP SECRET" !... 8)
-
So whose AE are you anyway? :roll:
-
So whose AE are you anyway? :roll:
.I'm the "Forum's" ..Grim Reaper :icon_twisted:
-
With prices in this hobby getting WAY out of control these days !
I can understand why some forums would like a tweak like the teflon tape vibration tweak... to be kept.. "TOP SECRET" !... 8)
I'm guessing these type of posts WILL consign this topic also to the Intergalactic Wastebin, and perhaps HFSG will follow?
-
.I'm the "Forum's" ..Grim Reaper :icon_twisted:
Well, I guess everybody's gotta be something...
D.D.
-
Funny how Bose is that one word which can turn fully grown men back into children. :nono:
Who can fault them for that, everyone feel young again? :thumb:
-
Funny how Bose is that one word which can turn fully grown men back into children. :nono:
Who can fault them for that, everyone feel young again? :thumb:
. 8).
-
If you think about it ( trash bins vs. coffins ), ultimately it really is kinda the same...
D.D.
OK, I've looked at Wilson Sophia's again and they aren't quite in the shape of trash bins because they come to a point on top from all four sides while trash bins with swinging door lids are a triangle from two sides. The Sophias look more like the tip of the Washington Monument :lol: Sorry for the mistake. I hope it didn't cause anyone any inconvenience.
-
OK, I've looked at Wilson Sophia's again and they aren't quite in the shape of trash bins because they come to a point on top from all four sides while trash bins with swinging door lids are a triangle from two sides. The Sophias look more like the tip of the Washington Monument :lol: Sorry for the mistake. I hope it didn't cause anyone any inconvenience.
Not quite what I was getting at but sure...why not?
D.D.
-
Don't send this one in to outer space! :rotflmao:
:smoke:
-
Don't send this one in to outer space! :rotflmao: :smoke:
Nothing to worry about there. A 10" three way system for $16,700 that weighs 165 lbs each won't get off the ground. There's just no way to get the lead out of it. (What do they put in those things to make them so heavy, cement blocks?) :weights: :peek: :shh:
-
It's funny because we've been talking about reviewing a pair on our Facebook page for about a week now.
And the OP here is always threadcrapping on Steve Hoffmans forum about how his Bose 901's are the most amazing speaker in the world, no matter what the topic.
So, much like the Klipsch Heresy's (which we found to be an excellent speaker) and the Technics 1200 (which, thanks to a number of people on this and SH's forum have found to have a lot of potential) I've ordered a new pair of Bose 901's to listen to.
I've only heard them in the Bose store, so curious to see what this $1400 pair of speakers is actually capable of. Everyone in the high end loves to bash Bose, so let's investigate!
WOW ! Its sure is taking a "LONG TIME" to do that review on these 901's... :scratch: :scratch:
-
Jeff is probably searching for the right words to express his astonishment. :D
-
He's trying to find something positive to say. Apparently very difficult.
-
He's trying to find something positive to say. Apparently very difficult.
Maybe this review is taking so long is because he really likes these latest 901's with his.. "Reference Gear"... 8) :shh:
-
He's trying to find something positive to say. Apparently very difficult.
Maybe this review is taking so long is because he really likes these latest 901's with his.. "Reference Gear"... 8) :shh:
if i were a bettin' man, my money would be on macrojack's theory. 8)
this, spoken as a buyer of original 901's at the ripe old age of 13, back in 1969. i have learned a bit since then. :lol:
doug s.
-
if i were a bettin' man, my money would be on macrojack's theory. 8)
this, spoken as a buyer of original 901's at the ripe old age of 13, back in 1969. i have learned a bit since then. :lol:
doug s.
We will find out soon ! 8) I bet he likes them with his reference gear and cables... :dance:
-
We will find out soon ! 8) I bet he likes them with his reference gear and cables... :dance:
Oh, yeah!! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Q7FFjUpVLg
-
We will find out soon ! 8) I bet he likes them with his reference gear and cables... :dance:
well... it is possible he's either deaf or is getting paid to write a positive review. :wink:
doug s.
-
HFSG - You need to be more patient. This guy is a professional reviewer whose livelihood is dependent on clear, accurate evaluations and the protracted study necessary to be certain of them. He does not just pop off with a new favorite every time his services are engaged like, for instance, you.
-
These latest 901's are different from the 901's that were made in the past.
These latest 901's use a clear coat coating on the voice coils wires on the speaker cones because you can still see the solder that they put on the voice coils wires.
This improves the top end and bottom end performance for these speaker drives that they are using now.
I have no complaints with the performance of these latest 901's and my room is not small at 18 by 24 !
When you put good gear and reference cables with these latest 901's they really come alive and really SING !
It would be better if Jeff was using Crimson Music Link interconnects and speaker cables in this review because these cables are a perfect match with these 901's...these Crimson cables just might be the best on the market..period !.. 8) :dance:
-
HFSG - He does not just pop off with a new favorite every time his services are engaged like, for instance, you.
Well put, but wasted, apparently. You'll notice HFSG did not rise even to that bait. Perhaps it went over his head - or he doesn't read responses to his febrile blathering.
He did respond once, though, in another forum. He told me to get a life, I think - I wasn't paying very close attention.
-
We will soon find out how GOOD these "LATEST" 901's really are !
: If Jeff only had some of those Crimson Music Link interconnects and speaker cables for this review he would hear the true full potential of these 901's.. they really are a match made in heaven !!.. :dance:
http://stevehoffman.tv/forums/showthread.php?t=276693
-
Wrong!! I will never "discover" how good these new 901s are.......because I do not now, and never will, care.
If by some strange turn of events your perpetual pursuit of positive reinforcement should be met by something more positive and persuasive than disdain, the majority of us will question the merits and motives of your compatriot. Bose has made many millions selling crap --- why on earth would they choose to risk that successful formula? They don't care about making a better mousetrap because they already have the most effective mousetrap ad campaign.
-
How good are these 901's with these Crimson Music Link cables...
One of friends told me that he likes my 901's as much as his Quad ESL 2905's...but you can play the 901's louder and I think the 901's have a better bottom end... :dance:
Jeff, you should think about doing a another review in the future on these 901's with these amazing Crimson cables they are just so spooky real with these 901's... 8)
-
I had lost track of this thread...is it really 13 pages long now?
OMG, what a waste of time and bandwidth. We are gluttons; each and every one of us.
-
If you look at post number #76 in the link below Jeff says he is not going do any of these tweaks I posted here.
I have never heard any speakers that sounded BETTER with the GRILLS ON ! AND the Bose 901's Grills are made of Fiberglass...not GOOD !!
I'm sure Jeff knows this too !
I know Jeff don't want to take off the front grills that are not removable because he wants to resale them BUT.. he can take off the back grills off with no problems and find out that they DO sound better with the Grills OFF...
If Jeff would try tweaks and use Crimson R.M. Music interconnects and speaker cables I bet Jeff would not SELL these 901's....are you listening Jeff ??? :peek: :surrender:
http://www.stevehoffman.tv/forums/showthread.php?t=276693&page=4
-
Who's in charge here? Please dispatch this relentless shill now. Block him forever. Put us out of his misery.
-
Who's in charge here? Please dispatch this relentless shill now. Block him forever. Put us out of his misery.
It sure in the H@ll.. not you ! :lol:
I want to see these 901's get a "Fair Review" here !
I know what they sound like with the grills ON !
I bet you all reviewers take off the grills to review all speakers.. :roll: why should the 901's be any different !.. :scratch: :scratch:
-
Who's in charge here? Please dispatch this relentless shill now. Block him forever. Put us out of his misery.
Mr. Content is the facilitator, and hasn't been around since Dec. You might send a PM to Rim or George as I think they were also involved in management of this place.
And as far as this thread, you can't make a spammer go away by replying to him.
-
Mr. Content is the facilitator, and hasn't been around since Dec. You might send a PM to Rim or George as I think they were also involved in management of this place.
And as far as this thread, you can't make a spammer go away by replying to him.
:duh: So that's what you all call someone that just loves a product and likes to post about it a lot.. :scratch: :scratch:
-
If you look at post number #76 in the link below Jeff says he is not going do any of these tweaks I posted here.
I have never heard any speakers that sounded BETTER with the GRILLS ON ! AND the Bose 901's Grills are made of Fiberglass...not GOOD !!
I'm sure Jeff knows this too !
I know Jeff don't want to take off the front grills that are not removable because he wants to resale them BUT.. he can take off the back grills off with no problems and find out that they DO sound better with the Grills OFF...
If Jeff would try tweaks and use Crimson R.M. Music interconnects and speaker cables I bet Jeff would not SELL these 901's....are you listening Jeff ??? :peek: :surrender:
http://www.stevehoffman.tv/forums/showthread.php?t=276693&page=4
The 901s I owned years ago, as well as the 800(professional version) had grills that were removable via velcro tabs. If they are not removable now its because Bose did not intend them to be removed. Have you complained to Bose about this? I'm sure you and JD could come to some sort of an agreement provided you agree to purchase the test samples after the modification. Payment in advance of course. Otherwise it MIGHT be incumbent upon you to STFU.
-
The 901s I owned years ago, as well as the 800(professional version) had grills that were removable via velcro tabs. If they are not removable now its because Bose did not intend them to be removed. Have you complained to Bose about this? I'm sure you and JD could come to some sort of an agreement provided you agree to purchase the test samples after the modification. Payment in advance of course. Otherwise it MIGHT be incumbent upon you to STFU.
No, I already have 3 pair of these speakers and have no need for another pair.
It looks like if Bose made these grills removable in past 901 speakers they would have kept it like that with these latest 901's. :scratch:
These latest 901's don't sound that good with these grills on compared to them without...I don't know what Bose was thinking by doing this.
-
Who's in charge here? Please dispatch this relentless shill now. Block him forever. Put us out of his misery.
I just pulled the plug on my Satellite dish service a few months ago. Please don't block him forever, I need this thread!
-
Who's in charge here? Please dispatch this relentless shill now. Block him forever. Put us out of his misery.
Dude, you gotta realize by now, he's messing with you. Messing with your head. I was hoping that this thread would die. Let him be and he'll eventually get tired of replying to himself.
He lives in a fantasy world, let him have his fun. No harm, no foul. Sooner or later this thread will go away.
Or. . . post some heavy sh*t and the facilitators will certainly have to bin this thread!
-
Mr. Content is the facilitator, and hasn't been around since Dec. You might send a PM to Rim or George as I think they were also involved in management of this place.
And as far as this thread, you can't make a spammer go away by replying to him.
Uh... OK, any volunteers?
-
I just pulled the plug on my Satellite dish service a few months ago. Please don't block him forever, I need this thread!
:bowdown: :green:
-
The 901s I owned years ago, as well as the 800(professional version) had grills that were removable via velcro tabs. If they are not removable now its because Bose did not intend them to be removed. Have you complained to Bose about this? I'm sure you and JD could come to some sort of an agreement provided you agree to purchase the test samples after the modification. Payment in advance of course. Otherwise it MIGHT be incumbent upon you to STFU.
Could you ask Jeff over there on the Steve Hoffman Forum could think about trying some of these Crimson R.M.Music Link interconnects and speaker cables ?
These two together are just so musical and is a emotional experience rather than a listening experience !
They reproduce the artist as close to the recording studio production as possible.
Its very rare to find a pairing like this that makes you feel like it puts you in the recording studio with the artist !
Tell Jeff to let these Crimson cables break in for two weeks 24/7 before judging them.
Let's see what Jeff thinks about this pairing, the way they sound together....I think he will be shocked at the difference...
http://www.austinhifi.com/crimsoncables.html
-
Could you ask Jeff over there on the Steve Hoffman Forum could think about trying some of these Crimson R.M.Music Link interconnects and speaker cables ?
These two together are just so musical and is a emotional experience rather than a listening experience !
They reproduce the artist as close to the recording studio production as possible.
Its very rare to find a pairing like this that makes you feel like it puts you in the recording studio with the artist !
Tell Jeff to let these Crimson cables break in for two weeks 24/7 before judging them.
Let's see what Jeff thinks about this pairing, the way they sound together....I think he will be shocked at the difference...
http://www.austinhifi.com/crimsoncables.html
STFU
-
Could you ask Jeff over there on the Steve Hoffman Forum could think about trying some of these Crimson R.M.Music Link interconnects and speaker cables ?
ask him yourself. :roll:
i bought an original pair of 901's in 1969 at the ripe old age of 13. i got 'em to sound much better in ~1980, when i used a pink noise generator and eq to give them a flat frequency response. they were way off, it turned out. they actually didn't sound half bad. but, when i finally discovered what a real 2-way monitor and/or floorstander could do, the 901's never played another sound. there is absolutely zero imaging/soundstaging with them. yust one big mass of sound. some folks may still like that; it took me a while to discover really decent sound, in my audio journeys...
ymmv,
doug s.
-
ask him yourself. :roll:
i bought an original pair of 901's in 1969 at the ripe old age of 13. i got 'em to sound much better in ~1980, when i used a pink noise generator and eq to give them a flat frequency response. they were way off, it turned out. they actually didn't sound half bad. but, when i finally discovered what a real 2-way monitor and/or floorstander could do, the 901's never played another sound. there is absolutely zero imaging/soundstaging with them. yust one big mass of sound. some folks may still like that; it took me a while to discover really decent sound, in my audio journeys...
ymmv,
Why do people still think :roll: that all 901's are all the same and nothing has changed all these years... :scratch:
The imaging and soundstage are good with these latest 901's BUT you have to use GOOD interconnects and speaker cables to bring it out good !
Cables are very very very important with these 901's and I found out that they sound their very BEST with (solid core) pure copper interconnects and speaker cables !!..
The Crimson R.M. Music Link cables bring out the very best in these 901's...very emotional and very very addictive !!.... :violin: :drums: :guitar: :rock: :dance:
doug s.
-
Why do people still think :roll: that all 901's are all the same and nothing has changed all these years... :scratch:
The imaging and soundstage are good with these latest 901's BUT you have to use GOOD interconnects and speaker cables to bring it out good !
Cables are very very very important with these 901's and I found out that they sound their very BEST with (solid core) pure copper interconnects and speaker cables !!..
The Crimson R.M. Music Link cables bring out the very best in these 901's...very emotional and very very addictive !!.... :violin: :drums: :guitar: :rock: :dance:
sorry, hfsg, the one thing about the 901's that hasn't changed is the driver arrangement. the imaging and soundstaging will therefore be extremely diffuse - one big mass of sound, as i said before - and it will basically suck. i, too, thought it was pretty cool, when i was younger; i know better now. cabling will not make a difference...
doug s.
-
Since this Circle's Facilitator has been MIA for about 6-weeks, I am locking this thread down.
Admittedly, has been quite an amusing thread. . .
Paul