Why no Bose forum ?

[Andy]

I'm not a fan of Bose speakers, but was wondering why there is no forum for this New England brand ?

[pmsummer]

>I'm not a fan of Bose speakers, but was wondering why there

>is no forum for this New England brand ?

Because they aren't "classic" speakers.

[Guest russwollman]

We always called them "Those" speakers. Seems like Bose was heavier on hype than valid engineering even though there was some innovation in the product. But they did not seem to deliver the sound that the old-line New England speakers did and still do.

[Andy]

I tend to agree with those comments, The Bose hype is still going strong today....they must spend millions on advertising the wave radios, headphones, etc. Though I would think the early speakers from the 1960's have developed a 'classic' status. I see folks spending pretty good money on ebay for the early Bose items. Do any of their speakers stand out as a "decent" loudspeaker ? I'm unfamiliar with what's out there but have seen the Model 901 actively bought and sold online.

[dynaco_dan]

Hi Andy;

I think you've seen the support for a Bose forum expressed here already.

I heard Bose 901's a few times in stores back when they were new.

In one home I saw a pair on the floor at each end of a couch.

At a local pub, I told management they were facing the wrong way.

It was a strip bar, I don't think anyone even noticed the improvment in sound dispersion when they were re-hung.

There is at least one member here who owns Bose 901's and from my memory he is still satisfied with them.

Consumer Reports was taken to court over their published report on the Bose 901's.

I vaguely remember that review, there was a slight mis-description on how instruments were moving about the wall of sound.

Bose won the first case, but I understand it was disolved because it was proven that there was no malice towards Bose.

The original Bose 901's were a very impressive speaker to listen to.

With the correct sized room and adequate electronics to support them, they would give a very large stereo image.

I did not have a long enough time with them to comment more on their transparency, bass or transient response.

There has been numerous versions since with changes in technology.

I do own a few Bose 201's, but do not use them anymore.

It is possible that 901's have a cult following, I do not know that for sure.

[soundminded]

"There is at least one member here who owns Bose 901's and from my memory he is still satisfied with them."

For those who are not familiar with the original Bose 901 loudspeaker system which appeared on the market around 1967, it was a radical departure from all other loudspeaker designs of the day and in some ways is still unique. It presented many engineering innovations which were ingenious and every bit as valid today as the were then. It didn't look or sound like any other speaker before it. It gained widespread popularity and professional acclaim and if you consider its five subsequent incarnations as essentially the same model (they aren't quite), then its nearly 40 year history (it's currently only available by special order) probably makes it the longest produced single model of consumer electronics hardware in history. It was also the launching platform for a privately owned company which grew to generate over one billion dollars a year in sales for its owner, a remarkable business feat by anyone's reckoning.

By today's standards, the sound it produces is seriously flawed. There are many who would say the same of speakers like AR3 and AR3a. Victor Campos of KLH once said, what speaker you like depends on what kind of distortion you are willing to put up with. But if you read the reviews by respected reviewers of the time, you will see that almost universally they held this speaker in very high esteem. There is at least one good reason for this and why it gained so many other followers and that is that all other factors aside, when properly installed, it did not sound like music coming out of a box.

Having owned an original pair I bought brand new in 1970 and being an owner of other fine speakers as well, I can say this about it, it was manufactured to extremely high quality standards, about as high as anyones. In its time, with enough electrical power and within its loudness limitations, it could reproduce deeper bass tones than practically any other speaker including JBL's biggest monsters and easily better than speakers like Altec A7, Tannoy dual concentric monitor, Bozak Concert Grands, and Klipschorn. It gave AR3a a run for its money in bass performance and was approximately the same price. It solved some engineering problems many other speaker manufacturers never even began to address such as finding a way to eliminate the secondary resonances of individual drivers. But as I said it was flawed and those flaws became more apparant and unacceptable with time as other manufacturers moved on. It could not reproduce high frequencies satisfactorily, its FR was subject to considerable variations depending on how it was installed often resulting in an upper bass peak, and few people had sufficient amplifier power for it to achieve its full potential. Nevertheless, in comparison with other speakers of its day including many more expensive and larger ones, it held its own or better.

In a way it was unfortunate that Bose chose to evolve the design along commercial lines rather than technical lines making it more commercially successful by being attractive to a mass market not particularly concerned with accuracy than to those for whom accuracy was of primary importance but the sales and profits figures have proven that as a businesman, Dr. Bose made the right decision. This leaves us without a super 901 to look up to as an audiophile reference standard today. As I've posted elsewhere, I've analyzed what IMO are its most serious technical shortcomings and corrected them to the point where I am very satisfied with their performance. They still retain their unique direct reflecting character which enhances the enjoyment of many recordings. I've "improved" other speakers to my satisfaction too including AR9 and AR2a. As I see it, it is foolish to dismiss something which except for a few flaws is otherwise excellent as being worthless when they are highly amenable to correction with some patience and effort. On the bright side, some peoples' oversight is an opportunity for others.

[dynaco_dan]

Hi there;

An excellent commentary from a Bose 901 owner, thank you.

[Guest Americain]

>In a way it was unfortunate that Bose chose to evolve the

>design along commercial lines rather than technical lines

>making it more commercially successful by being attractive to

>a mass market not particularly concerned with accuracy than to

>those for whom accuracy was of primary importance but the

>sales and profits figures have proven that as a businesman,

>Dr. Bose made the right decision.

Well said. They've been around for forty years so I do find it puzzling how someone could say they weren't "classic". Of course they are! They made decisions that would allow themselves to adapt and survive in a changing market. One has to admire how Bose was able to survive while other manufactureres fell by the wayside. To not admit them to the club strikes me as a kind of audio elitism. With proper equalisation the Bose 901's could be an awesome pair of speakers as many musicians and audio professionals have witnessed. They aren't everyone's cup of tea but neither are JBL's. While I still consider myself an AR man, I wouldn't mind owning a pair of properly set up 901's. Bring on the Bose forum!

[Carlspeak]

I think there may be a natural aversion to full range drivers by those seeking accuracy.

18 four inch drivers are roughly equivalent to one 18" driver. Hence the great bass. However, getting a 4" cone speaker to operate in the 10 kHz - 20 kHz range is a lot to be expected if response accuracy is essential.

Bose was very clever to make the design appealing to the general consumer by making it a reflecting type, aided with electronic equalization to help balance the frequency spectrum and let the reflected sound "mask" the speakers small faults.

The earlier cloth surround version is the one of choice as you won't have to worry about spending a couple of hundred dollars having someone refoam them. Of course, cloth refoamed speakers are also available now.

If any of you have had occasion to drive by the Sheraton-Tara hotel in Framingham MA on RT 90, there's a huge shiny silver building on a hill drectly behind the hotel. That's Bose's corporate offices. It's been dubbed "Bose Mountain".

Bose, once an engineering professor at MIT in Boston, was smart to hire bright engineering graduates right out of MIT to help develop new concepts beyond the direct/reflecting type. Take the Acoustimass bass module for instance. It's development spurned a whole new era of subwoofer designs - many of which were incorporated into autos, just in time for the rap generation.

Remember, it's all about the music

Carl

Carl's Custom Loudspeakers

[soundminded]

>I think there may be a natural aversion to full range drivers

>by those seeking accuracy.

Funny, there seems to be a new breed of audiophiles who are attracted to the fad of a single high efficiency driver connected to a tube amplifier, often an SET. It's one of these strange audiophile niche subcults which have emerged.

>18 four inch drivers are roughly equivalent to one 18"

>driver. Hence the great bass.

There's more to it. These were no ordinary table radio drivers, they were extraordinarily robust for their day and they were designed as acoustic suspension "midwoofers." The small enclosure deliberately pushed the system resonance frequency up above 180 hz where Bose said you would no longer hear the phase shift associated with resonance. The linear falloff below resonance was exploited by using the equalizer. However, the equalizer only increases output by 6db per octave. Had it been 12, the power requirements would have been staggering by 1967 standards. Only Crown DC300 would have met them.

>However, getting a 4" cone

>speaker to operate in the 10 kHz - 20 kHz range is a lot to be

>expected if response accuracy is essential.

IMO, it's more than a lot to ask, it's too much to ask, the speaker simply isn't up to the task. And even if it were, the dispersion of its front driver which is the first arrival playing an important role in stereo imaging at those frequencies would be awful.

>Bose was very clever to make the design appealing to the

>general consumer by making it a reflecting type, aided with

>electronic equalization to help balance the frequency spectrum

>and let the reflected sound "mask" the speakers

>small faults.

The individual resonances peculiar to each driver was masked by the fact that their were 8 others playing the same signal whose individual secondary resonances were different. This meant that Bose only had to equalize for the overall average frequency response.

>The earlier cloth surround version is the one of choice as you

>won't have to worry about spending a couple of hundred dollars

>having someone refoam them. Of course, cloth refoamed speakers

>are also available now.

Mine have stood up perfectly after 36 years. Remarkable.

>

>If any of you have had occasion to drive by the Sheraton-Tara

>hotel in Framingham MA on RT 90, there's a huge shiny silver

>building on a hill drectly behind the hotel. That's Bose's

>corporate offices. It's been dubbed "Bose Mountain".

>

>Bose, once an engineering professor at MIT in Boston, was

>smart to hire bright engineering graduates right out of MIT to

>help develop new concepts beyond the direct/reflecting type.

>Take the Acoustimass bass module for instance. It's

>development spurned a whole new era of subwoofer designs -

>many of which were incorporated into autos, just in time for

>the rap generation.

>

A lot of very jealous people who made far less money with fruits of their own ideas were quick to criticize Dr. Bose and his innovative design. It's very foolish IMO to write off a professor of electrical engineering and acoustics from MIT as not knowing anyting as so many audiophiles have.

>

>Remember, it's all about the music

>

>Carl

>Carl's Custom Loudspeakers

[ToastedAlmond]

The company has what appears to be ONE heralded design in 40 years that they didn't want to take as far as it could be taken, and the company deserves its own forum?