Bose 901 part 1 - No Highs, no Lows, must be Bose. Is that true? Let's find out!
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 15 ก.ย. 2024
- A comparison of the Series I and Series III model 901 from Bose. This shows the physical differences between these models. In a follow-up video, they will go head to head to see how different they sound.
Video: • Bose 901 part 1 - No H...
Email: stereoniche@gmail.com
#techmoan
I've always loved the distinctive and iconic vintage design aesthetics of Bose 901 speakers. :)
Agree. I think the Series III and above have a distinctive style and clean lines. The I & II look quite dated.
Had my series VI for years and LOVE THE SOUND! I have many other speakers and these are by far the best. No "controversy", just great sound on the tulip pedestals. I don't pay any attention to "audiophiles".
Thanks for commenting on your experience.
This is THE BEST Bose Video on TH-cam Doug. Excellent work. I use miniDSP on my 901's on the Series 1 & 2 only. I used to use the Analog EQ's and got quite good at rebuilding them and modifying the Heck out of them.
Love this Video and it deserves 100,000 views ! I own two pairs and a single 901. Series 1 x2, Series 2 x1, and Continental Series 2.
One thing that you may have accidentally missed (hey, I ain't gettin' any younger either). The Series 1's & 2's are power hogs. Properly EQ'd with a GigaWatt of power, they sound phenomenal. Excellent explanations on foam deterioration & the EQ's for the different series.
Thanks, I appreciate the kind words and you are obviously an early 901 fan! Thanks also for commenting on their power differences. I will be pairing them with my McIntosh MC2105 since that is my reference amp. Correct me if I am wrong, but the Continentals came with the wood face trim pieces that could also be purchased separately?
Heard these (one from the late 80s not sure what series for sure)
many times at a friends house, and while not the final word in resolution and so on, they are quite "Listenable" when you remove the audiophile bias that tells us, we must "Hate" these. A very unique and different sound, I can see the appeal, but simply not my type of sound.
They would be fine if they were 100 dollar speakers. But they are not, so the alternatives are easily found :).
I got the best results with DSP or an active eq, a sub and a supertweeter. Installing them on the pedestals as per the manual. The images of singers and small instruments was a too wide, but they gave an amazing sense of space. Flawed but enjoyable. Pretty, in a house with mid century furniture. They look and sound different. Mirage does space a little bit better now, but 901's are an icon. Gave them to my sister, the architect, together with a big A HK power amp. They need a steady power supply that does not flinch at low impedance. Replacing op-amps in the Bose Equalizer, as some others people posting mentioned, does help a little| or a lot with transparency, depending in the age of your equipment.
Thanks for the input and great details on some tweaks for them.
I almost bought a pair of Bose 901s many years ago on eBay when they were much more affordable (about $350 to $500 in total in terms of bid price and shipping) before the vinyl revival and vintage gear revival, but so many speakers for sale had speaker surround rot or they did not always come with the vital matching or compatible equalizer units, and in the end, I got a great deal on a pair of used Bowers & Wilkins DM 603 tower speakers that were far superior with the bid price as well as the shipping cost having been pretty much equivalent to or cheaper than what a pair of Bose 901s, the EQ, as well as the tulip stands would have cost me, but without the setup fuss, dialing in the sound, or dreading speaker surround rot or other issues that were not an issue with B&W's rubber surrounds. :)
I fixed a set in 1980. I used 2,15 in woofers ,big inductor coil ,vented cabinet , then added my xover to the bose with correct configuration an electrovoice horn tweeter , pointed the 8 drivers forward 2 amplifiers . Yep I fixed them I reversed the phase of the back driver and sealed the cabinet. 50x70 room ,sweet in southern fla
LOL, well, that was quite the "fix". 🙂
I had a pair of the original 901's from 1973-1995.
What bothered me the most about the 901's was their extreme power consumption and radical EQ curve.
I finally 'saw the light" and went with a "distributed" power system and multiple floor standing cabinets.
Added an external sub in 2003. (just upgraded the driver and plate amp last year)
Oddly enough, my current system has a maximum usable power rating of about 1000 watts (!)
...about 400 watts more than I had when I had the 901's.
Simple physics tells you that the Bose drivers aren't large enough to have extended lows, nor small enough to have extended highs (too much mass, too large in relation to the wavelength). That's why it was necessary to equalize the hell out of them. There's this invention that almost all other speaker manufacturers use: a crossover.
Hi. Just wondering Mr. Schneider, was the ❓ question regarding the title of the episode "no highs no lows" address Ed or answered? Spent some time on the technical aspects and generational features but little on your personal impressions regarding the series I/III sound quality. Remember Installation and correct room placement are key. I have a set of Continentals (III), IV and V. I'd say they're an awesome but frankly acquired taste. I was also in HiFi retail during the IV's and sold many sets including the 301's, 501's and 601's and Spatial Bose 100wpc receiver. Good show! 😊
Hey Dan. I was in a bit of a rush to get out the video and did not add my summary comments at the end to explain my plan, my mistake. There will be a Part 2 video that is more inline with my standard review format to review my listening impressions.
I had the series 5 in the 80's and loved them...We moved in 89 and never had a room big enough for them in the new house so I sold them...If you had a big enough room and could put them out a ways from the corners you could get quite a performance.
I read (years ago) they worked to get a composite frequency response. It was difficult due to the direct/reflecting nature. They came up with roughly 45hz-13.5khz but in a very erratic plot. the "treble"/ upper mids are very spitty and grainy. The bass sounds artificial. I had a set of IV in 2010. I replaced all the drivers with OEM parts express. I had the eq upgraded and refurbished by a place in Massachusetts. Better opamps and caps. While it sounded better than factory, it was still "Stereo everywhere, nowhere" and not fidelity for me. They gave me a headache since there is no solid imaging. For casual/background they are ok.
Scott, I'm glad you pointed out what is the correct way they are supposed to face. The front and the rear. Some seem to think that you're supposed to point the many drivers forward. Thanks for sharing
Yes, I thought it would be important to share how they are meant to be used.
I enjoyed this video on the Bose 901s. I am the original owner and still have a set of series 2 that I bought in 1972-73 (I think). They’ve always sounded good to me. As I’ve gotten older, I don’t get to listen to them very loud because of the dogs and my wife, they don’t appreciate the volume. LOL. This video is labeled as part one. Did you do a part two or part three? I did a quick search of your other videos and have it yet seen another one on the 901s. I would assume part 2 and 3 could be forthcoming. I just realized this was posted just one day ago. When I was a teenager, and bought these, I had no money left to continue experimenting with speakers. So my point of reference is limited to what I have. I began to spend, and still do, spend it on guitars and amps.
Hi Bill, thanks for watching. Part 2 will come out next Saturday.
I have a set of 901 VI on chrome tulip stands. Picked them up at an estate sale for $200 incl the EQ.
They are set up in a room with no furniture between them, + a small sub for augmenting the bass. It's been a nice 3rd system that offers a unique playback for 'live' CDs.
Not audiophile by many standards but it's a nice deviation from my other 2 sets of speakers and they still have the WAF in their favor 😊.
That was a heck of a buy!
I powered my 901s with 2x Yamaha M80s. Meters peaked during treble notes. 901s avoid SBIR issues, thus a very good midbass and bass.
Great video- enjoyed learning the differences between the Series I/II and the Series III/ IV. Do you need the equalizer box to use the speakers? Which pair do you prefer?
To hear them as intended, yes you need the eq box. They can be used without the box, but you'll be very disappointed in the sound.
You have the answer below, but do note that the EQ's are specific to each Series, but there is some overlap. The Series 1 & II can use the same EQ, III & IV can share EQs and the V & VI can share EQs. I'll share my preference in Part II of this series.
These feature commonly in discussions regarding "Music Lovers" Speakers v.s. "Audiophile" Speakers
Yes, they certainly do have that sort of polarization.
Love the 901s and the 802s. Had both since around 198??? maybe 82 or 83.
I really like your videos. I wonder if you could make a video on early solid state low watt amps/receivers from the late 60's to very early 70's? Maybe that's too specific but I have found that they are overlooked because people want the mid 70's big watt monsters. I love my low powered amps. Maybe it is best to not let people know, lol.
That is a timeframe of gear that is, for the most part, very overlooked. It is just after the tube era and many manufacturers were still perfecting their Solid State designs, but nonetheless, there were some fine models in this timeframe. I have pondered this era quite a bit, not a video on it specifically, but now that you mention it, maybe that is a good way to cover it.
@@stereoniche Very early low watt solid state Sansui and Hitachi receivers are pretty nice. Oh and Kenwood/Trio.
@@alanrogs3990 I have some early Sansui, like the Eight and 881, but not really any other brands of that era. I'll think on how I might be able to put together a video for that segment. I have added it to my list of ideas.
@@stereoniche I find them very pleasant to listen to but some might think they are lacking in detailed. I'd love to get the very early JBL solid state amp or an AR amp but I think they aren't easy to work on if they need it. And they are expensive.
Hi Scott, Thanks so much for the kind words. I have never heard the Bose 901's so I can't comment about them. I Did hear some Bose speakers about 10 years ago at a Best Buy and I thought they sounded good, but, just like the 901's, no bass, not much Treble, Maybe they were not set up correctly. Not sure. I could not help but notice that gorgeous turntable you have behind the 901's, I may be mistaken but I think you featured that recently in a video, but what a beauty of a turntable. Take care
Thanks for sharing Richard! You are correct, I featured that JVC QL-Y66F in a separate video some months back, she is a beauty!
I think it would be fair to say that Bose 901s in 10 different rooms would sound like 10 different speakers. Glass is supposed to be the worst thing in a room for acoustics. But the one time tbe Bose 901 (circa 1978 model) really sounded impressive, was in a showroom where the walls behind it and to the sides of it were glass. The speakers were at least 8 feet away from the glass however. Glass is very reflective. Maybe some rooms are not reflective enough.The saying you mentioned "No bass, no lows; it must be Bose," was probably coined by a higher end audiophile, whose preamps/integrateds don't have bass and treble controls anymore for the most part; some don't even have balance controls, which for years has been the norm. And we all know how dependable the opinions are of audiophiles like that!
They've proven themselves to be be gullible enough to think that over 5k components and over $100 audiophile lps are good values. "Give us back our bass and treble controls" is what they should have been shouting; instead of bashing Bose. They're foolish enough to fall for all this BS about how tone controls degrade the sound. If they do, it's miniscule, to the point of bordering on subconcious..Plus they could give them tone defeat. If audiophiles were smarter, they'd question why they took away their tone controls. Hint: if you can manipulate your sound more to your satisfaction, you'll be more satisfied and able to easily correct anything you don't like about your sound; instead of being on a continual audio upgrade Merry Go Round, hoping to finally get that right synergy between various components and speakers. "Maybe that next cable purchase will really lock the sound in" they think. If they try about a hundred different things and combinations, I think they might finally have a good chance of getting it right; after having spent a mint.
I'm sure there are people with Bose 901s whose sound quality is well better than those who enjoy dumping on Bose. But it's a real gamble buying a speaker so dependent on their rooms acoustic signature, to sound good. When I was a teenager I tried to emulate 901s by turning my conventional front driver speakers facing backward towards the wall behind the speakers, to bounce their sound off the wall .The sound was definitely more spacious but the focus went the way of the Edsel.
Given their nature, I think you are quite correct on each setup sounding different. Should prove an interesting comparison. Stay tuned.
It’s unfortunate that you fabricated a false dichotomy. There are many, MANY audiophiles (including me) who find Bose vastly inferior by any objective measure, as well as subjectively inferior, who have no interest in “over 5k electronics, over $100 audiophile lps”, or exotic speaker wires, etc. and who don’t hesitate to use room correction. We use documented science as well as comparative listening (isn’t it interesting that the Bose demo rooms NEVER had other speakers in the room to compare) to make our decisions. Bose uses marketing, as well as the threat of lawsuits (they sued Consumer Reports for daring to express an opinion that offended them).
@Robert. C'mon now! There are loads and loads of speakers worse than Bose. They are picked on by audiophiles because they were extremely successful. They probably sold many many many times more than the speakers you own. Lots of people liked them, bought them and lived happily with them for years. There were many clever design concepts of the Bose 901s. There were many drivers, splittting up the volume. Each individual driver was breezing and playing at a very low volume. The lower the volume a driver plays, the less distortion. The Series V I believe had a power rating of Infinite. And probably the series VI too. They filled the room like a lamp as opposed to like a flashlight. There were a lot of good things about them. I didn't say only high end audiophiles made fun of them. But I think it is mostly them. Consumer Guide Stereo & Tape Equipment back them judged the Bose 901s to be THE speaker to which all others must be compared. Their estimated best speaker of all the hundreds they tested. Single speaker deminstration rooms were common back then. The Scottish company of note, Linn, was very strict about only one speaker set allowed in a a demo room. Linn dealers could lose their dealership by having another speaker in the room while a speaker set was playing. The sound from one speaker can cause the drivers of a non hooked up speaker to vibrate and make sounds and degrade the sound.
@@sidesup8286 “C'mon now! There are loads and loads of speakers worse than Bose.”
Who said there aren’t? Saying “A,B,C,D,…” are worse than Bose doesn’t make Bose good. It just means it’s not the worst.
“They are picked on by audiophiles because they were extremely successful.”
Nonsense. AR speakers (and the Advents), for example, were also fantastically successful, and there wasn’t the same kind of negativity towards them.
“There were many clever design concepts of the Bose 901s. There were many drivers, splittting up the volume.”
As if Bose invented the concept. What a laugh. Speakers had multiple drivers years before the 901s came out. I use speakers with THIRTEEN drivers each. The - 3 dB points are 14 Hz and 45 kHz (WITHOUT equalization). And they are FAR more efficient than the Bose could dream of being (not to mention the woofer surrounds are made of high quality rubber that doesn’t rot).
“Single speaker deminstration rooms were common back then.”
Wrong. I went to SEVERAL stereo stores in the 70s with MULTIPLE speakers being demoed in the same room.
@Robert. You wouldn't be a good debater in Tin Pan Alley. Also saying stuff like "What a laugh," is indicative that you not only laugh at Bose, but at other people, even on Labor Day, where people with real lives are enjoying the opposite of negativity with their friends and loved ones. In logic circles, your ligic would be classified as "Either Or" logic", which is reminiscent of childhood logic. A horse notices he's running, so he thinks he must be running from something so he starts to run faster. That sort of thing. I never even said anywhere, that the Bose 901s were a real great speaker. I don't really know if they are or not, because of not enough experience with them. Show me where I said that the Bose 901s are great speakers. I said what others said like that Consumer Guide magazine. The only thing I ever said about my direct experience with them, was hearing them at length in that huge very reflective windowed room, with them far enough away from the acoustically degrading windows. They impressed me even in there.
As you said, there were successful speakers like the AR's that they didn't make fun of like the Bose. Perhaps people like you made fun of Bose (and other people) because they were not only successful, but "very different". And the Bose certainly were very different. "Different" somehow attracts negative people. By the way, AR (Acoustic Research) copied Bose 901s by coming out with the AR. LST model which looks like 901s, right down to the pedestals, when they saw the Bose success with the 901s were cutting into their profits. The Bose was infinitely more successful than the LST by AR. The AR models 3, 3A, and 5 are some of the worst speakers ever for rock music. They do a little better on Jazz and quite a bit better on classical. A speaker that sounds that subdued and lacking in presence in the midrange is lousy with rock. Also AR's had more cabinet resonance than a whole section of cellos. Most of the better speakers nowadays, properly brace the speaker cabinets internally, so they don't sound like there are deep voiced demons inside the cabinet.
Yes there were speakers with many drivers before the Bose 901s. Notice again, that I never said there weren't. Noy JUST bad logic on your part when you said what you did. Just you, looking for things to pick on which aren't even there; on your lonely Labor Day .Have a nice one.
Never heard the 901 to be honest but when I was young, a local discotheque used four 802's ceiling mounted driven by two HH Electronics V800 mosfet power amplifiers and to this day it is the only 'hifi' disco I have ever heard. The sound was out of this world which was the name of the club ironically. It really did sound very good and was so clean, undistorted and amazingly loud. I've always liked the smaller 301 mk2/3 especially on movies. If only Bose had built and finished them better, it was all a bit flakey.
Yeah there were lots of clubs that used the Bose 901s speakers, turned upside down...Here in NYC n Long Island.
@@limomangeno That's interesting, thanks for that. A good environment for 901/802's as they were virtually unburstable. A lot of the smaller pubs used 301's around here in the UK. They always sounded ok to me.
I would be really interested to know how these sound set up backward, with the 8 drivers facing the room. Bose made a "Pro" speaker called the 802, with just 8 drivers facing out. I've not heard the 901's but have heard most of their "pro" stuff. Some of it, if set up properly, and with their black box EQ, does sound great. If not set up properly, I've heard better, except their plastic compression driver. That one was awful.
Interesting. I may have heard them in a club in my youth and not known it, but otherwise, I cannot recall ever having seen a pair.
Does anyone know what a KR 9600 is or what brand? My grandma recently passed within the past year and she still had it in her possession my grandfather's receiver with something like a JBL paragon hooked up to it (looked more like a coffee table). Both sat in the garage for years collecting dust. I had to make room so finally I just went ahead and donated them to Goodwill.
A KR-9600 would have been a Kenwood. Unfortunate you had to donate it, but sometimes that is the only choice.
Like those minimus 7’s behind you I like the design of the 901’s never could afford then now Advents were my favorite speaker hands down. Nice video
I'll review the 901 and Advent comparison in an upcoming video.
@@stereoniche great I’ll look for it
V do rot as well i just bought a pair the first week of September and they are mint but foam are dry rotted. Not as bad but they all need to be done. Just ordered the foam kit for the V’s
Thanks for the update. And, have "fun" with that refoam job. :-)
Nice Heathkit AA-100 in the background!
Thanks! They are lookers.
My college roommate had a pair of either 901 series 1 or 2. At the time I thought they sounded super but I hadn't heard many good speakers at the time so wonder what I would think of them now?
I inherited a set with equalizer. Not impressed in a small room placed directly in the corners. No lows, no highs is a good description of my experience. Mine are series VI. Plan is to drop them at Goodwill.
Thanks for commenting on your experience.
I had a set of series 1 when they first came out. The only problem I had was that the equalizer broke several times. I sold them when I moved became my new music room wasn’t compatible with them. If set up correctly, they sounded great with plenty of bass. If set up wrong, they could sound terrible
Tulip stands also come in black.
Ah, I was not aware, thank you for the confirmation.
It says ONE it is BETWEEN THE Com and 8ohm logo.
LOL, well, true, but that is to designate One and Two. One box contained the EQ, so each buyer needed a One and Two speaker box to ensure they received the correct 2 speakers and one EQ. All other series were the same, each speaker is denoted with a One and Two, but also include the II, III, IV, etc. after the 901.
When do we get to see 901 Part 2 ?
My plan was to have it ready yesterday, but unfortunately, other events happened that got in the way. It is "Coming Soon" though.
BTW, that's a gorgeous Heathkit over your shoulder.
Thanks! And I agree. I wanted one for many years before finding that unit.
Great video. Terrible speakers. Still informative, though.
Agreed. I had the series I and then the VI series. Large Advents easily blow them away. Now they are just a collector's item for those who own them just to say they have a pair and you don't.
What happened to comparing them to the Advents? Or did I miss something? On my channel, I compare the 2's and 4's, and after reading all the hype I sold both. They sound exactly as advertised, reflecting kaos. Imagine the singer turning around against the audience facing towards the drummer, thats exactly how they sound. I prefer direct in your face firing speakers to reflecting gimmicky speakers.
Part 2 will have the direct comparison.
I remember when the Bose came out and I hate to say it but they were the worst sounding speakers I had ever heard. I even had the chance to hear a pair that were hooked up to a amp that had a separate 24 band EQ and they still sound terrible. The story was Bose sounds best for classical music only.
Well, I plan to give them both a full listen on varied music genres, so let's see how they compare.
Sono particolari nel suono,direi piacevole,ma devono piacere!!!
Sono d'accordo con te!
Bogus
Overpriced
Speaker
Equipment
They have accumulated many names over the years. Had not heard that one though.
Series 3 much nicer design the piano black finish were awesome not pictured here
Well, if I get any Series 3, I will see about doing a comparison. I do have an early set of 501 which I also plan to review at some point.
Well I had a,pair of Bose 901,2s that had surrounds the disintegrated away... so they must gave been foam, they were bought used in 1974....So you have to beware...
Yes you do. And refoaming them is a CHORE! 18 times = No Fun at All
I saw a repair set of treated cloth surrounds on Amazon for the 901s that should last the life of the speaker.
They can be used on foam surround 901s but may slightly change the sound character because they're a little more restrictive.
If you don’t talk about the sound of the 901s, your whole video is pointless
Part 2
i once had a nad 165/275 combo that was too forward for my triangle speakers my freind had a nad m3 & s3 bose 901 we did a deal the 165/275 combo was a perfect match for the 901 & the m3 was a perfect match for the triangles the 901s can sound really good with careful system matching same with the triangles with their beryllium tweeter
Sometimes there are synergies that are quite obvious between gear. Great you had a friend with such gear! A win-win for both of you.