Bose 901 Response Graph

[R-2-R]

The truth of the matter....

Basically it all comes down to a matter of opinion. Any manufacturer can put down all kind of sh#t on paper and make their product appear as if it is the ultimate in sound performance, some of it maybe true some not, keep in mind there just words on paper. Though, the truth of the matter is anyone can say whatever they want to make their speaker sound as if it is the very top of the line and thats where one's opinion comes in. But in reality the 'only way' one can actually determine this, in their opinion and judgement, is to actually listen and hear them for themselve's.
As for the 901's well these weren't designed to be used outside (earlier someone posted something about frequency response on the Bose 901 outside performance so that really is useless info.) they were strickly designed for indoor use. If you want outdoor use from a Bose speaker try the 802 speakers models (Series I, II & III) these are designed for outdoor use as well as indoors.
In my opinion there are three (3) things that are of importance to consider when hearing the 901's. 1) Proper placement 2.) matching the correct Active Equalizer Series for each particular Bose 901 Series used and 3.) using a good quality power amplifier to deliver that power, start off slowly then crank it up.
Like I mentioned in the beginning. This is all a matter of opinion on each individual so if you really want to find out, hear them for yourself and make your decision then.

 

[wsissons]

I had a set of 901 series 2 for a short time thank goodness all but one of the drivers pointed away from me........honestly in my opinion a horrible speaker just not for me......But nice job restoring those though. It kind of reminds me when I was young I thought pussy cat wine tasted good........Its not west coast sound not east coast sound not English sound its a sound of its own I guess.....

 

[bshorey]

There's a reason they don't post the response...

Well, that's not really a fair measurement.

Here is an aftermarket 901 driver from Parts Express:

http://www.parts-express.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?Partnumber=290-922

Freq response is listed as 83-15k hz. I'd allow a little lower for all the drivers, but generally speaking this should put you in the ballpark.

bs

 

[Mmaxed]

At least if we had some kind of "expected response curve within the ideal room setup" for these speakers and I would be quite happy. At least something that I could compare to.

Are we supposed to be reflecting the speakers against a concrete wall or a wooden wall? How thick should that wall be? How would someone even go by setting these up since there isn't any ideal setup with a comparable response to go by?

There has to be some way to set them up to make a good sound stage where you could measure the flatness of the response. Otherwise what the hell are people listening to? Even if it would be mostly a measurement of the room, at least we would know of what they are capable in the most accommodated listening room.

I'm definitely going to steer clear of these unless they're below $100.

I have a pair of series II. While I can't answer your questions I will tell you that placement is critical. In my room a few inches can be the difference between total crap and way above average. Not only can positioning change the frequency response that you here but the imaging, sound stage, everything.

Do they lack highs? My kid thinks they do, but since my ability to hear anything above 12k is gone I don't notice.

Do they lack bass? Yes deep bass is not there, but fed right they will move enough air to move the drapes.

Are they picky about amps? Yep. M80 is a nasty match. A lowly HK680 sounds much better, but won't shake the walls.

Are they my favorite speaker? Nope. But give them the right amp and setup in the right room and they don't deserve the bashing they get.

 

[TerryO]

Well, that's not really a fair measurement.

Here is an aftermarket 901 driver from Parts Express:

http://www.parts-express.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?Partnumber=290-922

Freq response is listed as 83-15k hz. I'd allow a little lower for all the drivers, but generally speaking this should put you in the ballpark.

bs

I certainly wouldn't buy those aftermarket drivers. I checked them out and here's PE's specs:

Specifications: • Power handling: 30 watts RMS/60 watts max • VCdia: 1" • Le: 0.11 mH • Impedance: 1 ohms • Re: 0.76 ohms • Frequency response: 83-15,000 Hz • Fs: 83 Hz • SPL: 91.5 dB 1W/1m • Vas: 0.24 cu. ft. • Qms: 2.41 • Qes: 0.43 • Qts: 0.36 • Xmax: 0 mm (full range driver) • Dimensions: Overall diameter: 5.20" (circle drawn around the three points), Cutout diameter: 4.02", Depth: 2.17".

It's obvious to me that it would be hard to have any dynamics from drivers with "0 mm" x-max!
OTOH, the blackness between the notes would be astounding!

Best Regards,
TerryO

 

[rnorton]

At least if we had some kind of "expected response curve within the ideal room setup" for these speakers and I would be quite happy. At least something that I could compare to.

Are we supposed to be reflecting the speakers against a concrete wall or a wooden wall? How thick should that wall be? How would someone even go by setting these up since there isn't any ideal setup with a comparable response to go by?

There has to be some way to set them up to make a good sound stage where you could measure the flatness of the response. Otherwise what the hell are people listening to? Even if it would be mostly a measurement of the room, at least we would know of what they are capable in the most accommodated listening room.

I'm definitely going to steer clear of these unless they're below $100.

Klipsch did all of his curves outdoors in an L shaped corner of the factory.
My main objections to 901's is that they make narrow sound sources sound much too wide in the soundstage. A piccolo shouldn't sound 8 feet wide.

 

[TerryO]

Klipsch did all of his curves outdoors in an L shaped corner of the factory.
My main objections to 901's is that they make narrow sound sources sound much too wide in the soundstage. A piccolo shouldn't sound 8 feet wide.

Or make a Bosendorfer sound like 96 feet wide.

A few people on the old Bass List used their's for parties. They'd turn them around 180 degrees and blast away.

Best Regards,
TerryO

 

[GordonW]

Or make a Bosendorfer sound like 96 feet wide.

A few people on the old Bass List used their's for parties. They'd turn them around 180 degrees and blast away.

Best Regards,
TerryO

I have a feeling that so many people did this (turn them around 180 degrees and blast away), that someone at Bose said "hey, we could sell this as a PA speaker!"... and hence, the 800 and 802 were born!

Regards,
Gordon.

 

[Hoho]

"I'm after a response curve of the speakers and if they fall within 3db from let's say 40hz to 20Khz. It seems there is no such thing on this planet."

From soundandvisionmag.com, written by Brent Butterworth:

"Here are two speakers with essentially flat frequency response: the Revel Salon2 and the Paradigm MilleniaOne. I haven’t seen a less-than-glowing review of either one." The Paradigms are affordable.

 

[Soundminded]

I can only talk about the original and series II which for all practical intents and purposes are identical. The only real difference between them is Series II offers more equalization curves which boost treble relative to what it calls flat and the original offers more curves which are cuts. Set flat the two are identical.

There is a misunderstanding about the bass response which Bose went into great detail explaining. These first two versions were acoustic suspension loudspeakers. Like all such speakers they have a linear falloff of 12 db per octave below system resonance. Bose claimed that phase shift associated with resonance was only audible up to 180 hz so he made the cabinet smaller to push the resonant frequency above 180 hz and applied a boost below that to compensate for the falloff. The problem as I see it is that the boost is only 6 db per octave. e/e magazine reviewed 901 and said it had a 7db peak at 250 hz which it claimed was inaudible. Mine sounds like it has about an 8 db peak at around 500 hz and it is very audible. Also deep bass is inadequate unless the system is played very loud. The falling LF response seems to equal the 1 khz output at around 90 hz in my room. The fix is to equalize out the peak and the falloff to compensate making the system flat. This creates even greater demands on amplifier power. My 138 wpc Marantz receiver can easily be overdriven in a small room like my 14 x 14 sun room where they're installed.

The other problem is at the high end. Bose 901 to my ears doesn't have one. I don't care what the measurements say, I don't hear the top octave. I agree with Gordon Holt who said the 4" drivers have too much inertial mass to produce HF. And even if it could, a 4" driver would respond only on axis at those frequencies. The reviews that mentioned HF rolloff as I recall said it began at 12 khz and was gone by 14. The fix for that is to add tweeters and turn the system into a 2 way biamplified system. But because of the difference in absorption of high frequencies and lower frequencies by the room boundaries, the system must have a rising output for its reflective components as frequency increases to compensate. When properly corrected (it took me 4 years to get it right) it can be made into an outstanding speaker system, more accurate at reproducing the sound of acoustic musical instruments in the room they're in than any other speaker I've ever heard. Of couse equalization to adjust for differences in each recording is also required. That is very tedious and can be frustrating. So it can be done. But I don't expect anyone who has ever heard Bose 901 as it is manufactured to believe it.

 

[klama2006]

I have a set of series II, and they can sound just as good as any speaker I have collected from that time period.

Most speakers have flaws, and the 901 also have there share. They can also do somethings very well. In my concrete wall'd basement, I've never heard a better classical music speaker than the 901's.

Take it for whats it worth........ I have no agenda.

 

[DaveElton]

I have a set of 901 series 6 with the EQ that I was able to pick up localy and cheaply hooked up in my Mom's living room. I honestly have no idea what a response graph on them would look like (I leave the Bose EQ set at "flat-midpoint) but in comparing them with other fav speakers I have on hand (NLA's, Cizek 1's, DCM Timewindow A's, KLH 6's) the highs and lows contained in the music I listen too are all "there" in realistic porportions (to my ears anyway) Placement of course plays a big factor with this speaker, and everyone's mileage may vary, but I enjoy listening to music from them:yes:

 

[Soundminded]

I have a set of series II, and they can sound just as good as any speaker I have collected from that time period.

Most speakers have flaws, and the 901 also have there share. They can also do somethings very well. In my concrete wall'd basement, I've never heard a better classical music speaker than the 901's.

Take it for whats it worth........ I have no agenda.

A concrete wall is the best possible reflector for these speakers. They will reflect practically all of the sound at all frequencies that comes out of them. But most of us have walls made of more absorbent material such as 1/2 inch sheet rock on wooden 2x4 studs. The results are less than satisfactory for most. IMO the saying No highs, no lows, it's Bose has a certain degree of validity to it. Other speakers including some very expensive ones like the highly regarded Quad have similar limitations. In the current era where people prefer sizzle boom sound, Bose 901 usually disappoints even when it is correctly installed. I think for most audiophiles the lack of high frequencies is the most disappointing. I heard a pair of series VI three years ago at a Bose store in Newport Beach Ca and it had the same muffled high end every other series I heard has. I'm no Bose basher, I've owne my pair for over 40 years. I just judge them for what they are without any illusions or preconceptions. BTW, the original and series II systems using CTS drivers remained in perfect condition all these years. All I had to do was reseal the cabinets. I used GE clear silicone caulking where the metal frames joins the cabinet and on the screw heads. I was careful not to get any on the suspensions.

 

[Hoho]

At last

Here are two response graphs for the 901 Series VI system, from The $ensible Sound magazine, Feb/Mar 2003, and from Digital Audio magazine, Apr 1988.

 

[kconnor]

in comparing them with other fav speakers I have on hand (NLA's, Cizek 1's, DCM Timewindow A's, KLH 6's) the highs and lows contained in the music I listen too are all "there" in realistic porportions (to my ears anyway)

My experience with the 901 VI was much the same. They compared well against my Klipsch KG4 and Forte 1. Actually in my room the 901 produced deeper bass than either of them while giving up nothing on the high end. I bought the Bose mainly out of curiosity and I was impressed with them. I no longer own them.

The response graphs Hoho posted look very ragged and Bose bashers will no doubt point at them as evidence to bolster their position. In actuality, in-room and ungated curves of a high quality direct radiating system will look as ragged as these are.

 

[Hoho]

The response graphs Hoho posted look very ragged … .

Actually, the graph from The $ensible Sound is fairly smooth: +5/-4 db from 31.5 Hz to 12.5 Khz, with only five humps in between. More than four or five peaks can be considered spiky. But the OP was hoping for better.

 

[jindra]

My main problem with bose is the lack of relevant information to the speakers. It should be listed in the instructions what is the perfect setup for them, what kind of wall to reflect from, since the wall plays such a huge part of how these speakers will sound, they must have had some kind of ideal setup in mind. Hopefully those response graphs were done with reflected sound, not direct and outside somewhere. It's a shame that bose doesn't publish this, since it's left up to others to test with likely a different setup than bose's ideal setup. The 801's don't look too bad, but such better things can be had for the same price range imo.

I really shouldn't be, but I'm stuck comparing these to the DQ-10's, which go 37-27k +/-3db. Maybe I got a really good deal on the DQ's but it seems the Bose 901's and the DQ-10's are in a similar price range and it doesn't make sense to me.

 

[Hoho]

Here are two graphs for the Bose 601. One is for the Series II, from Audio magazine, ca. 1982. The other is for the Series III, in Digital Audio magazine, in Jan. 1987. Different models, different magazines, different years, but the measurements are almost the same. This demonstrates that measurements from direct/reflecting speakers don't necessarily have to be inconsistent.

 

[Hoho]

My main problem with bose is the lack of relevant information to the speakers. It should be listed in the instructions what is the perfect setup for them, what kind of wall to reflect from, since the wall plays such a huge part of how these speakers will sound, they must have had some kind of ideal setup in mind. Hopefully those response graphs were done with reflected sound, not direct and outside somewhere. It's a shame that bose doesn't publish this, since it's left up to others to test with likely a different setup than bose's ideal setup.

The booklet does include guidelines for installation. The Series VI EQ was designed for what Bose considers to be the average room, not the ideal room.

Amar Bose, billionaire, is said to have built his home with no parallel walls, for perfect acoustics. But I can't do that. Can you?

The T$S test was conducted moving the mike around the listening area. The speakers were farther from the walls than Bose recommends. However, I believe that the people at Bose Corp. wouldn't object, because the room was larger than average.

The caption under the 901 graph from Digital Audio does explain how it was measured, and says that the measurements are difficult to interpret.

 

[jindra]

I think ive gotten the information i wanted. I might be overthinking this and Im probably mistaken that they are around the same value as dq-10's. If the price is right i might still try them out.