I work with a couple of guys who own Bose stuff, -and I always enjoy giving them a hard time (imagine that!)
However, I do have to be careful though since one of the guys is my supervisor, -and could technically fire me at will!
I was told today by my supervisor that his 901's "make really good low-end bass", -to which I responded "I guess it all depends on what your definition of what good low-end bass is".
Obviously, that didn't earn me too many points with the boss. He has a good sense of humor though and started bashing me because of all my home-made speakers and running "obscene" amounts of power, etc.
I have heard 901's before, and was never that impressed.
They certainly didn't live up to all the hype that so many people gave them.
Can anyone here on this forum tell me how these multi-weenie drivers can even work at all? I know about the special EQ thingy, but what exactly does it do?
I am merely curious.
Oh, and if anyone has any "additional comments" about the 901's, let 'em fly! I could have a lot of fun with this, -right up until the point where I get fired!
Rich.
However, I do have to be careful though since one of the guys is my supervisor, -and could technically fire me at will!
I was told today by my supervisor that his 901's "make really good low-end bass", -to which I responded "I guess it all depends on what your definition of what good low-end bass is".
Obviously, that didn't earn me too many points with the boss. He has a good sense of humor though and started bashing me because of all my home-made speakers and running "obscene" amounts of power, etc.
I have heard 901's before, and was never that impressed.
They certainly didn't live up to all the hype that so many people gave them.
Can anyone here on this forum tell me how these multi-weenie drivers can even work at all? I know about the special EQ thingy, but what exactly does it do?
I am merely curious.
Oh, and if anyone has any "additional comments"
about the 901's, let 'em fly! I could have a lot of fun with this, -right up until the point where I get fired! Rich.
http://www.stereophile.com/loudspeakerreviews/425/
More ammunition than you'll ever need.
edit : sorry they seem to have removed the measurements,
which speak for themselves, the review is polite to a fault.
sreten.
More ammunition than you'll ever need.
edit : sorry they seem to have removed the measurements,
which speak for themselves, the review is polite to a fault.
sreten.
From watching "discussions" turn into nasty arguments on these pages, I suggest not discussing this much, but instead inviting him over to hear your rig. Then it's easier for him to back down, and you might find that you guys become "audio buddies" likely to help maintain your job
BUT be prepared to find out that he isn't "blown away " by your system. Usually people are immedietly aware that the sound is vastly superior, but sometimes they still just don't care.
Anyway good luch keeping your job
BUT be prepared to find out that he isn't "blown away " by your system. Usually people are immedietly aware that the sound is vastly superior, but sometimes they still just don't care.
Anyway good luch keeping your job
hi
well here goes , i am not at all a bose fan though i can explain a few of the concepts behind the 901 drivers and the enclosure
firstly the drivers - all are 0.9 ohmish edge wound al with an x- max of about 3 mm
all are 25 mm in dia and wired in series there-fore the power hungry nature
will get back to the eq thing and why he had to include it !
its my assessment that it has no place in re production of demanding sound applications , the phase and the timing has been too much messed with to be any where but accurate
but it has the potential of astounding sterio imaging , playing extremely loud - yet amazingly distortion free , - to the limited bandwith it covers as the - 3 db and - 6 db points are all over the audio range
this is does due to the driver placement concept
it has a very impressive sound and plays different since inside that wooden enclosure there is a - poly moulded - matrix enclosure
this enclosure is responisble for the low end - which is not actually taking the driver to deep lows but devolops a impressive mid bassish , fullish bass which for comparison to size to low end impressiveness strikes a cord
what the matrix does - and how the drivers are loaded :-
firstly each driver fires into its own individual (mini) enclosure , avoiding loading problems , then 4 of these (mini) enclosures open into a chamber , this chamber is in turn ported
other than the advantages over porting this also helps increase power handling of these short coil drivers and also helps reducing distortion when playing loud
the centre driver too has its own (mini) enclosure
now this poly - plastic matrix enclosure is made of a accoustic material which its-elf resonates and produces a impessive mid bassish sound
(this concept has been exploited by JBL in the conlrol series and bose 802 wher the exteriors enclosure is of this material)
this sandwiching of materials have been done very carefully where it also reduces the wooden enclosure resonances
due to this sandwiching bose had to go in for polymer chassis spk s way back as metal chassis will ring and present it s own probs
now the c/o - basically if you compaire the drive unit to any - other good drive unit - its very flimsy ,
over - boosting dbs ie thru a graphic eq / active tone controls will drive the drivers hard
plus the drivers do not cover the entire audio spectrum linearly there-fore people may attempt to boost those frequencies to correct speaker performance
in doing so again driving the drive units hard
therfore he has given his own c/o for the user to play around with - whose frequency of operation - q - matches with the driver/box optimum efficiency points - yet keeping the driver s from being over - loaded
i guess he could go in for heavier drivers - yet may be the entire concept will not work if you go in for heavier drivers
and bose s unique life-style appeal will cannot be met
over a period of time ive left the bose owners on their own as i think through his research in physio - accoustics - he simulates a phychological viel over the customer - that bose is it - in speakers !
personally i would advise that in the end of the day if speakers size is of concern throw out Bose and go in for Meyer sound or KRK
suranjan das gupta
transducer design engineer
well here goes , i am not at all a bose fan though i can explain a few of the concepts behind the 901 drivers and the enclosure
firstly the drivers - all are 0.9 ohmish edge wound al with an x- max of about 3 mm
all are 25 mm in dia and wired in series there-fore the power hungry nature
will get back to the eq thing and why he had to include it !
its my assessment that it has no place in re production of demanding sound applications , the phase and the timing has been too much messed with to be any where but accurate
but it has the potential of astounding sterio imaging , playing extremely loud - yet amazingly distortion free , - to the limited bandwith it covers as the - 3 db and - 6 db points are all over the audio range
this is does due to the driver placement concept
it has a very impressive sound and plays different since inside that wooden enclosure there is a - poly moulded - matrix enclosure
this enclosure is responisble for the low end - which is not actually taking the driver to deep lows but devolops a impressive mid bassish , fullish bass which for comparison to size to low end impressiveness strikes a cord
what the matrix does - and how the drivers are loaded :-
firstly each driver fires into its own individual (mini) enclosure , avoiding loading problems , then 4 of these (mini) enclosures open into a chamber , this chamber is in turn ported
other than the advantages over porting this also helps increase power handling of these short coil drivers and also helps reducing distortion when playing loud
the centre driver too has its own (mini) enclosure
now this poly - plastic matrix enclosure is made of a accoustic material which its-elf resonates and produces a impessive mid bassish sound
(this concept has been exploited by JBL in the conlrol series and bose 802 wher the exteriors enclosure is of this material)
this sandwiching of materials have been done very carefully where it also reduces the wooden enclosure resonances
due to this sandwiching bose had to go in for polymer chassis spk s way back as metal chassis will ring and present it s own probs
now the c/o - basically if you compaire the drive unit to any - other good drive unit - its very flimsy ,
over - boosting dbs ie thru a graphic eq / active tone controls will drive the drivers hard
plus the drivers do not cover the entire audio spectrum linearly there-fore people may attempt to boost those frequencies to correct speaker performance
in doing so again driving the drive units hard
therfore he has given his own c/o for the user to play around with - whose frequency of operation - q - matches with the driver/box optimum efficiency points - yet keeping the driver s from being over - loaded
i guess he could go in for heavier drivers - yet may be the entire concept will not work if you go in for heavier drivers
and bose s unique life-style appeal will cannot be met
over a period of time ive left the bose owners on their own as i think through his research in physio - accoustics - he simulates a phychological viel over the customer - that bose is it - in speakers !
personally i would advise that in the end of the day if speakers size is of concern throw out Bose and go in for Meyer sound or KRK
suranjan das gupta
transducer design engineer
I might be one of the few Bose-neutral people on this forum.
To be honest, I have not had the time to audition the 901 for any length, although I have heard them.
Bose goes for a different goal than most speaker designers. Frequency response with those drivers is bound to be ragged, even with equalization. But by bouncing the sound off the walls in all directions, Bose has a power distribution that is far different, and some might sense, far better, than average speakers whose output falls off quickly 30 degrees off axis.
Want to know why tweeters were made smaller? They used to be two or three inches across. It was found that sound that is focused too tightly directly at the listener, with a very reduced output outside of a certain "sweet spot", sound harsh. Many people prefer a sound that it not so focused in one area.
That is what Bose does with the idea of bouncing the sound all over the place, to be reflected back to the listener.
This is an unconventional idea, and most loudspeaker people treat it badly. However, the 901's sales figures show that at least some people find it preferable to the conventional way of diong things.
As SY said, they are indeed power hungry. Frequency response charts look awful, even with equalization.
I suggest you do what Variac suggested. Invite him over and tell him to bring some of his favorite CD's or records. Then let him critique your system. He might find some good things about your system that he doesn't hear in his own. Or maybe not, but at least you two will have heard each other's system when you argue.
PS: Your boss isn't one of those guys that everything he buys is the smartest buy in the world type guys, is he? In which case, an invition over would yield little. Not to pick on Bose, but since it is the most famous name in loudspeakers, some people buy it with the idea that they have bought was is generally recognized as the world's best loudspeaker. And people who feel they have bought the best might not react well when that status is challenged.....
To be honest, I have not had the time to audition the 901 for any length, although I have heard them.
Bose goes for a different goal than most speaker designers. Frequency response with those drivers is bound to be ragged, even with equalization. But by bouncing the sound off the walls in all directions, Bose has a power distribution that is far different, and some might sense, far better, than average speakers whose output falls off quickly 30 degrees off axis.
Want to know why tweeters were made smaller? They used to be two or three inches across. It was found that sound that is focused too tightly directly at the listener, with a very reduced output outside of a certain "sweet spot", sound harsh. Many people prefer a sound that it not so focused in one area.
That is what Bose does with the idea of bouncing the sound all over the place, to be reflected back to the listener.
This is an unconventional idea, and most loudspeaker people treat it badly. However, the 901's sales figures show that at least some people find it preferable to the conventional way of diong things.
As SY said, they are indeed power hungry. Frequency response charts look awful, even with equalization.
I suggest you do what Variac suggested. Invite him over and tell him to bring some of his favorite CD's or records. Then let him critique your system. He might find some good things about your system that he doesn't hear in his own. Or maybe not, but at least you two will have heard each other's system when you argue.
PS: Your boss isn't one of those guys that everything he buys is the smartest buy in the world type guys, is he? In which case, an invition over would yield little. Not to pick on Bose, but since it is the most famous name in loudspeakers, some people buy it with the idea that they have bought was is generally recognized as the world's best loudspeaker. And people who feel they have bought the best might not react well when that status is challenged.....
sreten said:http://www.stereophile.com/loudspeakerreviews/425/
More ammunition than you'll ever need.
edit : sorry they seem to have removed the measurements,
which speak for themselves, the review is polite to a fault.
Not trying to hijack this thread- but that article is interesting about the comb filtering- however this is the same thing that happens with us dipolar owners. Hmm. But ours dont use a ton (or any) electronic EQing to boost the bass and boost the treble.
However I believe I read somewhere that bose IS the largest consumer audio speaker company. They have a good marketing department and even in PA systems they use unconventional methods (802 series as well as the new Cylinderical line source live music system).
As for the 901s themselves, Ive never really used them but Ive used their pro audio counterparts 802II. The same principles are used, multi small drivers with alotta EQ. I never liked the idea of using such heavy active EQing. THeir OEM car audio systems do the same thing.
hunter audio said:
I read your entire post. Wow, thanks for all the info. That is exacty what I was looking for.
I have to tell a deep dark secret..........
I used to own a pair of 301 series 2's. The main complaint I had with them was the 8" drivers being too flimsy. I exceeded x-max on them too many times to count
, and had to have the 8" drivers replaced (the first time covered under warranty, -if you can believe that!) The tweeters sounded nice (as I remember), and as for the reflected sound out of the corners, -I only ever used them in my small bedroom as a teenager, -so they made the small room sound much bigger.Knowing what I know now, and hearing what I have heard (since then), I would never pay out any money for another bose speaker, but to be fair and honest, back when I had the 301's, they fit the bill pretty nicely.
Rich.
hi
thanks , another info is that bose 302 and whats that model with double 8 firing skywards !
the tweeters sound different - distinct and out of the box - since he need not maintain phase responce accuracy ets
- the tweeter lines are delayed through the passive cross over - its a gimmick !
nothing great in the tweeters they are normal CCAW wound light wt paper cone tweeters
oh another thing if any one is really looking for some one with more knowledge in wave teachnology than bose and not worried about speaker size should go for Duntech
oh by the way this thread may help with the boss as you can point out -
i am not only the place from where Bose is but also the same town and Language ets.
instead of being proud i can only take lessons from his marketing policy - ( this strictly is restricted to his speaker company and profit margins) - otherwise i am well aware of his knowledge - path breaking research and applications - softwares - noise reduction (military equipment) and accoustics application as is evident in the Mercedes S series ets (yet his spks are ????????)
suranjan das gupta
transducer design engineer
Ratman542,
It may just be that your boss doesn't really care what it sounds like but having paid a lot of cash for it he assumes its good.
I am constantly amazed by how uninterested in sound quality some people are, my girlfriends sister is completely unmoved by my fairly good Hi-Fi system compared with a junk boom box that she listens to, she claims its doesn't sound much different !!!!
It may just be that your boss doesn't really care what it sounds like but having paid a lot of cash for it he assumes its good.
I am constantly amazed by how uninterested in sound quality some people are, my girlfriends sister is completely unmoved by my fairly good Hi-Fi system compared with a junk boom box that she listens to, she claims its doesn't sound much different !!!!
wytco0 said:
I jave also encountered this phenomenon, I played some of my friends music for her on my system to demonstrate what a big good hifi sounded like. She didnt say anything positive all she did was try and pick holes saying that she couldnt hear the backing singers which is what she likes to listen to. I just didnt bother to argue, A w15cy doing mids is not gonna produce more detail then ure little boombox I DONT THINKS SO. besides at the beggining of the track there was this noise produced and she said what was that, having never heard it before, kinda disproving her theory that she cant hear what she wants to as she hears things she has never before.
I think its the same thing as mentioned before, she by no means thought her boombox was the best money can buy. But its a pride thing some ppl dont like to admit it sounds THAT much better. The gf sister probably new it sounded better and could hear it but didnt want to admit it for some reason.
One last thing is the brain. Some people i think just do not know what to listen for, they dont know what good sound is and even when presented with it they dont know how to recognise it, soundstage whats that? even when there is one they dont notice it because they are not listening for it.
kelticwizard said:
Not to worry, I myself am pretty neutral as well. I could never bring myself to spend the money, or fall for the marketing hype of any bose product, however, that does not mean that I am so closed minded that I don't find their products interesting. I have always enjoyed people who think "outside the box". The bose commercials have a tendency to insult my intelligence, therefore I will never give them any of my hard earned money.
kelticwizard said:
Yeah, I could see that being the case.
kelticwizard said:
I'm sure I'll get flamed for saying this, but what I find interesting is that most "audio" people will always agree that the "ears" have the final say in regards to ANY system being set up, be it a home Hi-Fi, PA, etc. What I find even more interesting is just how "blah" a lot of the "dialed-in" high-end systems sound. I for one have never really cared for the way a "dialed-in-flat" system sounded. Maybe it's just me, but like almost everybody I know, I don't enjoy a "true" flat-response Hi-Fi sound, so maybe there's more to this than most of us think? -Who knows. As far as I am concerned, there are so many varying opinions on this matter that I have pretty much formed my own opinion that everybody has their own taste, -and that mine or the "other guys" may or may not necessarily be "right" as far as instrument measurements are concerned.
kelticwizard said:
He's actually a pretty open minded person. I'm sure he'll have comments, positive and negative. One thing's for certain though, I will re-define what he thinks is bass! I will have him sit on the couch and watch him melt and drip onto the carpet! I will have my two Tempests by then, and with 500w a side going to just the 15's, I think he will go home with his tail between his legs and probably never talk smack about my "home-made" speakers ever again!
kelticwizard said:
Uh, well, sort of, but not totally
kelticwizard said:
EXACTLY!
-Actually, my goal is to open his mind a little and show him what is within the reach of most modestly-skilled people. It isn't very hard to build stuff that is in most cases far far superior to what you can buy. Besides that, I enjoy the learning curve, -and it is a lot of fun. On the other hand, there are those that will just never "get-it", -if you know what I mean.
Rich.
5th element said:
I think you're spot-on on this one!
Like I even admitted to in an earlier post on this thread, sometimes I don't prefer a flat-tuned system (depends on the mood...........,
, 
, 
, ........and the material being played). For me, exceeding X-max only seems to be a problem after The most important thing is to play, learn, enjoy, -and most important, have fun!
Rich.
kelticwizard said:
Bingo!.
This (not marketing gimmickry) is the reason for Bose success.
Decent power & FR dispersion. It's one common thing that nearly all his designs try to achieve & for many applications he has rightly concluded that many other parameters such as flat FR & even low distortion are over rated in comparison & can be compromised. He is a master of compromise & finding a niche market application in a sense. I remember when the similar PA line Bose 801's 1st hit the scene. There was nothing commercial available @ the time that appropriately addressed the need for a small PA with wide even dispersion for live bands doing small club gigs. Bands were hauling Voice of the theater cabs & other horn loaded systems into little clubs & bars, blowing holes in the side of peoples heads that happened to be close in front of the PA, just to get enough off axis SPL for it not to sound like the PA had a blanket over it to the people off to the side.
At that time, for that market, the 801's were rightfully an immediate success. They were power hungry... they needed extensive EQ... & distortion wasn't low.... but... they distributed all those flaws more evenly to a small audience than just about anything else available at the time.
I've not seen anything from Bose that I would classify as high fidelity though & don't expect to. I don't think that's his general target.
:
All I do is let folks listen to my Magnepans for a few minutes. The response is always some vaqriation on "Holy s**t, dude!!!" Then they ask the price and since we're talking MMGs I get a lot of disbelief. Of course, they often fail to notice the unimpressive black box over in the corner (i.e., a Dayton Titanic sub).
Many moons ago. A cousin had a 301. 8" woofer 2 x 2" cone tweeters. the 301 woofer died. i got a replaement fro $7 from A&S. I estimate Raw Material costs for a 301 (circa 1985-6) was about $35. Selling price (discounted was $300). Of course there are string of margins for Bose, teh wholeseller, the retailler, marketing costs etc... but.....&^%$!
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.