Bose 901...really

I have owned all sorts of speakers and I hate to admit it,but the Bose 901s are certainly one of the better ones.

From an audiophiles perspective they cannot be taken seriously but that does not mean they can't be immensely enjoyable.

They certainly can sound horrible in the wrong positioning or room-but if you have the right space for them nothing I have heard does orchestral music as well.Many great audiophile speakers sound pathetic on orchestral whereas the 901s come much closer to the vastness of the sound you get at the real thing.Music that can sound great on audiophile speakers however can sound a mess on the 901s-and this of course is where they cop criticism.

They are what they are and you need to enjoy them for their strengths.

Well, I finally got the room to the point where it was worthwhile to hook up the 901s and give them a try. I am driving them with an Adcom 5503 amp that I fished out of a closet. The speakers, which are on the Bose stands, are set up on the 26 foot end wall, about 6 feet from the end and side walls. Between the speakers is a very large window unit...about 11 ft wide, 7 ft high, with a circle window above it all. I had intended to use the 901s for surround, but at the moment, and perhaps for ever, they are Fronts.

With the right kind of music the results are very good. One recording, ARTS 47605-6, "New Years Concert in Vienna"(lots of Strauss) is spectacular. Huge sound field. Several other Orchestral and organ recordings were also tried with good results. A solo piano recording was just OK. Imaging is not as bad as one might expect from these speakers, and would probably be better if they were not so far apart. I need to try a whole bunch more recordings.

I would not recommend 901s for the typical living room, or even the typical dedicated music room, but if you have a small gym, or a pool house like me, the 901s are made to order.

Who among us has a 'typical' living room or listening room? I knew that the 901s would do well in your 'special' environment. As for imaging, especially for solo instrument, you need to orient the speakers with 'opposite' toe-in, i.e. the inner four speakers relecting more to the center.

Salut, Bob P.

More interesting findings about the Bose 901s.

I hooked up a Behringer DEQ2496 equalizer to see how they were doing. This equalization was in addition to the Bose equalizer supplied with the speakers. The frequency response was aweful! It was a big hump, with the peak at about 630 Hz. 10 dB down at 5K. 15 dB down at 10K. 25 dB down around 18K. On the low end, serious roll off started around 100 Hz. 12 dB down at 40 Hz. This was surprising to me because they really were sounding quite good in my pool room environment.

So I ran the automatic equalization process in the Behringer, and the result was even more surprising.
Perfectly flat from 30 Hz to 15 KHz. Like a different speaker.

Since the Bose 901 comes with its unique equalizer one wonders why they left the frequency response so bad. Most likely Bose engineers found out that the average guy likes that midrange emphasis. I did observe that when playing some music with a lot of bass really loud there was some obvious overload of the speakers. I will probably roll off the bass a bit to avoid this problem. The break around 100 Hz would play well into use of a subwoofer.

All in all I find these speakers near-ideal for the environment I am using them in.
.

Eldartford, I think that your results reflect (excuse the pun)more your room than the overall response of the Bose. In my secondary system where I use the Bose 901s, I did not find the 630 peak nor the severe rool-off in the highs. I did find, however, a +6 db peak at 40 Hz and about a 6db/octave rolloff in the highs starting at about 8000 Hz.

My room is a typical 14 by 12 room with 10 ft ceiling, not the very 'special' room that you are running the Bose 901s. The larger the room, I think, the more the highs will be rolled off.

I am a bit surprised, however, at your comment on the loud bass. What makes you think that the bass is 'overloaded'?

Curious,

Bob P.