It's likely that the Bose 901's spatial performance, in a well configured environment, is also enhancing the perceived sound quality despite the frequency response irregularities.Ī REW sweep at my listening position playing stereo sweep through ASR's record holder for worst 5W SINAD was actually quite impressive given that this technology was fundamentally available in 1968. Science has shown us that listening in stereo can make it harder to hear differences between speakers (as compared to mono). In a way, it sounds like a Magnepan without a true ribbon with less transparency and much more bass. When compared to a traditional audiophile system, I would describe the Bose as a third spatial presentations beyond headphones or dynamic speakers. When appropriately compared to a lifestyle speaker peer, I can confidently state that I prefer the 901's sound presentation over a Sonos speaker or Devialet Phantom. For all the harassment that Bose received from audiophiles, especially in the era of the Acoustimass 5, the actual in-room sound quality of the Bose 901 can best described with a simple "Wow." Maybe it was because my expectations were so low going into my listening tests, or I've simply lost my audiophile credibility card or suffer from early dementia, but I thoroughly enjoyed the in-room experience from the 901.
#Bose 901 equalizer series#
I recently tried a Series VI in my own home and came around incredibly impressed with the audio. In Erin's measurements, he noted that the equalizer added an extreme level of distortion. The Bose 901 Series V has been measured on the Klippel NFS. I hurt my ears on one of those, young and dumb I was.īose 901 Series VI Active Equalizer Measurements They did have fantastic commercial Bass bins that worked very well and I don't think they were all that expensive. I saw the train wreck coming and couldn't stop it. They actually killed the company with management decisions that were terrible for the marketplace. They would burn out the resistor light protection device from cooking it to death. People over drove those until failure all the time. The cubes actually did a pretty good to great job, but that left all the heavy lifting to the acoustimass modules and they were very, very weak. The Acoustimass systems were the final nail in the coffin. But, it seemed to everyone that they cheaped out on the non-901 speakers in an attempt to just make a bunch of money and it helped kill the company. If the cheaper speakers had been better, I think Bose would have been a much more respected name.
Bose tried a lot of interesting stuff back then but clearly, they put about 90% of the company money into the 901s and the others got under funded by a large margin. Way back then we knew you had to have the Bose EQ box or you were just getting garbage sound. The 301s were on the curb specials and the 501 was perfect for someone who really is not into high quality music but wants sound. IMHO the 901 was a fairly good speaker the would take some abuse and play loud. I tested way, way back in the day 35 years ago or more the 201,301,501 and 901.
0 kommentar(er)
