The Bose 901: A trilogy in three parts...

Wow. You answered my question just before I asked it. Clairvoyant much?

They do appear similar to the old drivers and are said to be replacement for 901 series III -- the ones I owned. Interesting.

 

Being that the new Bose 901 requires a different EQ box than the older models (it says so in the manual) I'd guess that the drivers in the older models or at least the port, is different.

I could not get anyone at Bose to return any of my calls during the course of this review. If someone will pick up and give me a bit more tech/historical data (which I would have loved to include in the review) I will put up a fourth part to the review...

 

To paraphrase Lily Tomlin: We don't care. We don't have to. We're Bose.

OH, WAIT, I GOT IT!

"Bose. Better sound through engineering. Better stockholder dividends through litigation."

 

What if you skip the cheap Bose EQ box and connect the speakers to a McIntosh C50 (built in 8 band EQ) preamp and a McIntosh solid state amp? Does high-end electronics like that make the speakers sound better? That over $8k in preamp and amp.

 

I was thinking that the Bose box doesn't do anything a good graphic EQ won't. Is the box active or passive? Anyone ever take one apart? Surely upgrading the parts in a circuit that's in the signal path would result in a better sound from the speaker.

 

1-ohm nominal impedance, holy wow!

There are better ways to create the proper EQ curve than trying to approximate it with a 1/3-octave graphic. And you'd need some measurements.

I would imagine they're all prohibited.

 

Are the 8 bands of EQ on the Mac adjustable for frequency or bandwidth?

Nothing short of a parametric filter set will be able to precisely duplicate what Bose is doing.

 

Near the end of the review, I did hook them up to the $34k pair of Pass XA200.5 mono blocks and ARC REF 5SE with good result. Probably a little overkill for any $1400 speaker, but they definitely do sound better with better source components.

We'll go into a few more variations on the theme in part three.

 

I wonder how much of that is down to Jeff's decidedly off-label speaker positioning? What do the new ones sound like when you actually place them (1) where the manual says, and (B) where your wife will put up with it? Certainly the target 901 customer will NOT be able to place them five feet out into the room, and placing them so does a lot to negate the whole Bose direct/reflecting ratio thing.

As the "ultimate party speaker" I doubt they'd survive one party placed that far out into the room.

PS: Jeff, is that your Aston in the avatar pic?

 

That was the DBS that I had on loan from Aston Martin for the review in issue 22. That was a long time ago. Time for another Aston review! The rest of your questions are answered in the review.

Most people can't put a pair of Magnepans five feet out in the room either, yet that's usually where they give their best performance, so that's kind of a moot point.

PS: I drive the white Fiat 500 Sport that we reviewed in issue 40...

 

Good review, Jeff! The best (most "fair and balanced") I've read of the 901. I pretty much concur with your findings, but I've gotta say they are capable of going much lower than 40Hz if you place them closer to room boundaries. Mine are 17" from the front wall and about 37" from the side walls and they go down solidly into the 25Hz band. Also, the two-postion bass button actually introduces a 6dB cut at 35Hz relative to the unfiltered setting. So it functions more as a low cut filter than a loudness compensation circuit. Looking forward to part 3!

 

I'm not really sure who the target customer really is these days. As far who will actually buy them, very probably not "purebred" audiophiles i.e. those that are looking for 100% Audio Perfection; and very probably not people who use music simply as sonic wallpaper while reading the newspaper.

So that leaves people that 1) have the room to set them up properly and 2) those that like music enough to blow $1,400 on a pair of speakers and a receiver w/tape monitor loop or a preamp/power amp. That's actually a lot of potential customers right there. Plus weighing only 35lbs and on stands they could easily be moved away from a wall when someone wanted to do serious listening, then shoved back when the toddlers came back from daycare.

 

Was that with or without the Bose EQ box?

Some room pictures in part three please?

 

Without....

 

Never really paid much attention to the Bose 901. I had always thought it was some 1980's design. Had no idea it dated back to the late 1960's. The style (especially the stands) all make sense now. Groovy indeed.

 

I've always want a "background" music speakers. Perhaps the 901 will fit the bill and it looks cool too.

 

^ you could also look for a pair of Design Acoustics D12s - twelve sides of omnidirectional fun. (that company went on to produce the respected PS-10 "point source" speaker, a rather unconventional but great sounding compact bookshelf speaker w/10" downfiring woofer).

I found this quote from the above link interesting, something that may explain why the 901s don't use tweeters:

Hmm.....

 

I remember those!

 

Enjoyed the review!

 

A difference is that the wife-approved position is the factory-recommended setting for the Bose 901, and putting the Magnepans closer than three feet to the rear wall is going against recommendation bordering on abuse.

 

Good review and good response from the folks here.

 

Since when is $1,400 chump change? I'd be willing to wager that at least 75% of our membership has never spent that much on a pair of speakers. Not going in the direction of class warfare, but shouldn't we expect more than "fun party speaker" for so much? I'd also wager that these could sell for under $700 and Bose would still be earning a tidy profit.

I'd love to hear a comparison of the 901s to, say, the self amplified Audioengine A5s. These also afford the owner flexibility with respect to wireless front end. On proper stands, you could be streaming from a hard drive to a SB receiver for under $1,000 (all in). Wouldn't this be a MUCH better value for an entry level system? And isn't there a pretty good chance that overall sound quality will be quite a bit better?

 

Since most audiophiles insist on heavy, spiked stands for monitors, one wonders if the microdynamics of the 901's might improve a bit if they were they to lose the Jetson's era supports.

 

Back in 1973 a friend was looking to blow his summer's earnings on a stereo, and he chose those DA speakers over the 901's that were then current.

 

Seriously.. do we have to start this EVERY time someone uses the words 'budget' or 'value'?????????????????