OT- Did Bose 901 speakers improve over the years ? - Page 3
Close
Login to Your Account
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 41 to 60 of 60
  1. #41
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Massachusetts, USA
    Posts
    790
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    250
    Likes (Received)
    519

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tnmgcarbide View Post
    "Did Bose 901 speakers improve over the years"

    no. they continued to suck.

    no highs...no lows...

    better have 200 wpc+ to push those soggy things , or you're wasting your (our) time . that
    fancy crossover'd better be completely recapped too, as well as the 18 little speakers refoamed.
    unless you have a huge amp (100 wpc isn't even close) it doesn't matter what they sound like-you'd never hear it. they
    are the least efficient things , after maybe a pair of bricks.

    if you insist on listening to period stereo equipment with gimmicky imaging..... get some Polk SDAs .
    I still have a pair of Polks hanging around SDA1Cs (I think) as well as the amp that drove them, a Soundcraftmen PM1600 (600 w per channel at 4 ohms) I think those speakers are around 6 ohms though, but still some serious wattage.



    And yes, I could shake the windows in the house if I was so inclined....They are just sitting there now due to the SWMBO factor...maybe someday they will come back to life if they are still functional.

    They are somewhat monolithic and maybe gimmicky but the sound stage does project beyond the speakers and the image is clear.

    898466-amazing-polk-audio-sda1c-studioreal-wood-fantastic.jpg

    This one is not mine...just lifted from the internet to give you an idea what they look like.

    Unghh...The good old days. Maybe I'll play some Black Sabbath or Pink Floyd today at work...or possibly Mozart's Requiem and freak everyone out

    JR

  2. #42
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    RSA
    Posts
    935
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    219
    Likes (Received)
    148

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SeaMoss View Post
    All I know is, I hate CD's. I don't know if it is digital losing information or if it's because the record companies always feel compelled to "remaster" any re-release but I swear, fifty year old wornout records sound better. Even with the rumble and scratch and occasional pop.
    In the beginning it was the technology and the remastering. Technology was sorted out around 1995 or so and since then it's only remastering. They can't keep their hands off the knobs and most of them are clueless.

  3. Likes JST, digger doug liked this post
  4. #43
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Vista, CA
    Posts
    871
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    151
    Likes (Received)
    207

    Default

    For me? JBL all the way. I use them for my live music PA equipment, shop music playback and home. Crisp, clear and with punch. Never was a Bose fan and never understood why people liked them.

  5. #44
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    erie,pa
    Posts
    7,977
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    14733
    Likes (Received)
    3754

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AlexO View Post
    In the beginning it was the technology and the remastering. Technology was sorted out around 1995 or so and since then it's only remastering. They can't keep their hands off the knobs and most of them are clueless.
    There's only a few song's I feel should be "worked over", a couple of when "stereo was new" and the
    lead singer was left down in the mud.

    The drums really, really don't need to be heard that much....

  6. Likes AlexO liked this post
  7. #45
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    California
    Posts
    3,652
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    69
    Likes (Received)
    587

  8. #46
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Louisville, KY
    Posts
    2,664
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    6128
    Likes (Received)
    2205

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Wild West View Post
    Never was a Bose fan and never understood why people liked them.
    Marketing... They really were very good at it back in the day. - Before MY day that is... My dad (also a machinist BTW,) had a set of 901's in the early 80's, and later bought into the Acousti-mass satellite speakers. I remember him telling us about seeing the Acousti-mass setup in the store for the first time.

    The Bose rep had a table setup with a pair of bookshelf speakers playing some music. He would turn it up and draw in a crowd, and then lift up the "speaker" - which were actually cloth box/covers - to reveal the tiny satellite speakers making all the noise. The subwoofer was hidden under the tablecloth. A pretty good party trick, and it worked...

    As a kid, it took me a long time to realize how much sound was missing from those. Impressive how loud they could be, but poor sound clarity, a missing mid-range, and a muddy low end. I actually remember seeing a brochure for that system touting the subwoofer design as being superior for masking/hiding distortion. Sort of easy to read between the lines there...

    In my high-school years, I got into car-audio, and developed a real appreciation for soft, clear highs of silk-dome tweeters, and how difficult it is to actually get a healthy mid-bass sound in a car. That made me appreciate how "easy" it is to have a good home audio setup.



    Like someone else mentioned as well - pretty easy to lose the forest thru the trees, and forget to enjoy the music as you fiddle with the setup. I've certainly been guilty of this, and never got close to the level of gear that most of you have... But I can also understand it too. As a (former) musician, it's frustrating to listen to poor audio, knowing how good the live stuff can sound. (Human powered music that is, with no need for amp's & monitors...)



    Milacron's probably going to be pretty frustrated that in 3 pages, no one's shown his 901's much love... lol

  9. #47
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Maryland
    Posts
    2,382
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1213
    Likes (Received)
    1392

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JST View Post
    No "outdoing" involved. We were making what we intended to be really good PA speakers, not studio monitors. Our amplifiers were good, but not intended to sell to the Mark Levinson crowd. So anyone with a true specialty in that aspect is going to know a good deal more than I do. I had to be the guy who took on anything. I finished up my tenure there with a 2500W (about 3 HP) bass amplifier, Class-D, with SMPS and input power factor correction. Jack of all trades, expert at none.




    Indeed they are.

    That deal with the point and line source is of course, perfectly true.

    The "3D" question is actually involved in this.

    With one speaker. you get one point source, maybe. Probably it is a bit spread out just because of multiple speakers NO "sound stage". It has "no dimensions", because it is a "point"

    With two speakers, you get position along the line between them (generally horizontal), but you CANNOT get any information about the vertical position... It just is not "in" the recording. If the sound is too low, put the speakers higher... you are not losing anything, the info is not there. The sound is arranged in one dimension, along a line.

    If you had 3 or 4 speakers, you could , if the recording was done right, also get that vertical placement, so certain instruments would be "located" at a different height from others, depending if the player is seated or standing, and what sort of instrument it is. That would have the sound stage in two dimensions, which is all you really need.

    But you cannot get that from two speakers, and anything you DO get due to the speaker size or position is just a "simulation" there is no actual data available from the recording.

    And, anyhow, unless the recording was done with crossed mics for true stereo, it probably is from a bunch of microphones, and positions of instruments were "assigned" during mixing, probably by simple amplitude adjustment with the "pan-pot" on the mic channel of the mixing board. Now, with digital signal processing, it would be possible to do a time-based positioning.
    I hear the can opener whining up, and the worms are crawling out....Audio is part physics and part black magic. Actually it is easier to produce good soundstage with two or three speakers than with 5. I heard many horrid 5.1 and 7.1 recordings in my life, and heard amazing 2 channel AB or XY mic recordings. I did help with sound reinforcement for a local theater group and a few garage bands, totally different animal than recording in a space or playing back recordings. We have no clue what really works under all circumstances and all spaces, sometimes things that do not make sense actually work well, and sometimes all the science is failing to make belief. The most realistic audio reproduction i ever heard was the Ray Kimber isomike demo. He used 8 Soundlab Majestic 948 speakers arranged in groups of 2, with 8 Pass lab amps and demoed his own recordings form a 4 channel SACD. the effect was uncanny, you were part of the sonic space. Yeah but you were surrounded by a 160K worth of speakers driven by 80K worth of amplifiers. If you ever get a chance treat yourself to hearing it .

    dee
    ;-D
    Last edited by dcsipo; 12-07-2017 at 10:13 PM.

  10. #48
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Bowling Green, Ohio
    Posts
    295
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    93

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SeaMoss View Post
    All I know is, I hate CD's. I don't know if it is digital losing information or if it's because the record companies always feel compelled to "remaster" any re-release but I swear, fifty year old wornout records sound better. Even with the rumble and scratch and occasional pop.
    I agree that the 33 1/3 stereo records and 2 channel tapes sounded better than the CDs. The separation is much better. My unprofessional opinion is that stereo was 2 discreet channels electrically separate. Now with multi-channel mixing boards the producers think they can accomplish the same results by fading multiple microphones from left to right by a single fader control for each microphone channel and re-create the original sound stage. The channels are no longer electrically separate. There is some interaction in the electronics. Power supplies and a whole bunch of electronics are shared between channels. We have only 2 ears and the brain is pretty good at putting the sound stage together.

    Bob
    WB8NQW

  11. #49
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Central Ohio USA
    Posts
    3,357
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    18
    Likes (Received)
    1451

    Default

    Channel separation of stereo LPs is about 30 dB max. And they're essentially mono below 200 Hz or so. Physics and all. CD separation is essentially infinite. That said, some LPs sound better than CDs for reasons ranging from mastering expertise (massaging each individual tune -- sometimes recorded in different studios or on different continents -- on an album so they sound more cohesive) to the fact that LPs can have better HF response than CDs. Phono cartridges, amps, and speakers can reproduce it. Whether ears can hear it is subject to exhaustive debate.

    Once you can synchronize two 24-track recorders, you can afford the track space to record individual instruments in stereo, if you want. I did that mostly with multiple percussion instruments, standing in an arc in front of a stereo pair of mics. Soundstage preserved.

    Some engineering compromises from the LP days aren't necessary now... things like mono bass summing and certain phasing effects. Of course, with the resurgence of vinyl, everything new is old again.

    Chip

  12. #50
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    MA
    Posts
    96
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    26
    Likes (Received)
    33

    Default

    I'm surprised nobody has recommended Magico Q series speakers. I think they are the first fully machined metal speakers and I've heard they sound great, but have not heard them my self.

    Magico Speaker with one of its sides taken off... Wow! : audiophile

  13. #51
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    St Louis
    Posts
    16,377
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1299
    Likes (Received)
    2405

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chip Chester View Post
    Channel separation of stereo LPs is about 30 dB max. And they're essentially mono below 200 Hz or so. Physics and all. CD separation is essentially infinite. That said, some LPs sound better than CDs for reasons ranging from mastering expertise (massaging each individual tune -- sometimes recorded in different studios or on different continents -- on an album so they sound more cohesive) to the fact that LPs can have better HF response than CDs. Phono cartridges, amps, and speakers can reproduce it. Whether ears can hear it is subject to exhaustive debate.

    ...
    Some engineering compromises from the LP days aren't necessary now... things like mono bass summing and certain phasing effects. Of course, with the resurgence of vinyl, everything new is old again.

    Chip
    As with many things, it may be less about the final product (the vinyl LP) and more about the process, and the equipment commonly used to get TO the vinyl LP back when they were "the" medium for music. The tape recording process, especially with some older equipment, had some inherent qualities of compression, etc that worked well with the LP and gave a very good result. With an LP (but not so much with CDs as usually recorded) you can hear the music even in parts that are down into the noise, and, presumably due to compression effects of the tape recording process, the headroom seems good as well. People do not really notice background noise, but are often very sensitive to certain types of distortion.

    As newer equipment came into use, in some cases it was better, but in other cases it added new flaws. There have been some spectacularly bad electronics created for and used in recording. In other cases, the equipment with less actual distortion also did not do some of the compression that people had come to expect, whether they know it or not, and the result may have had more bad types of distortion than older recordings on "inferior" equipment.

    I heard some old tube type amplifiers years ago, which had, at full power, something like 5% or 10% harmonic distortion. They were spectacularly GOOD sounding despite that. I don't know if they would have convinced me to like Bose, if they had been used with a Bose setup. They were not powerful enough to get any volume out of the old Bose units in any case.

  14. Likes dcsipo liked this post
  15. #52
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Maryland
    Posts
    2,382
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1213
    Likes (Received)
    1392

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JST View Post
    As with many things, it may be less about the final product (the vinyl LP) and more about the process, and the equipment commonly used to get TO the vinyl LP back when they were "the" medium for music. The tape recording process, especially with some older equipment, had some inherent qualities of compression, etc that worked well with the LP and gave a very good result. With an LP (but not so much with CDs as usually recorded) you can hear the music even in parts that are down into the noise, and, presumably due to compression effects of the tape recording process, the headroom seems good as well. People do not really notice background noise, but are often very sensitive to certain types of distortion.

    As newer equipment came into use, in some cases it was better, but in other cases it added new flaws. There have been some spectacularly bad electronics created for and used in recording. In other cases, the equipment with less actual distortion also did not do some of the compression that people had come to expect, whether they know it or not, and the result may have had more bad types of distortion than older recordings on "inferior" equipment.

    I heard some old tube type amplifiers years ago, which had, at full power, something like 5% or 10% harmonic distortion. They were spectacularly GOOD sounding despite that. I don't know if they would have convinced me to like Bose, if they had been used with a Bose setup. They were not powerful enough to get any volume out of the old Bose units in any case.
    One thing is for sure we do not know how to measure everything we hear, and we have no clue why we do not always hear things we can measure. other than that audio is perfect.

    I still have a pair of OTL Tube amps, probably the best tube amps i ever heard but, they just poop out with some speakers (the A1s are one of them ) even though they are 140 W mono blocks. This is an interesting place to talk about this. We are talking about this with a bunch of guys with tinnitus from constant noise exposure. I have some of it too, it comes and goes. It still gives me pleasure to listen to one my many LPs CDs SACDs downloads, streaming, the radio, or whatever, after all it is all about the music. Put on a good Ben Webster, or Petrushka, or Coupering or Frank Zappa....list goes on. I listen to almost anything except rap or country (with very very few exceptions)

    dee
    ;-D

  16. #53
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    gloucester ma
    Posts
    1,523
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    43
    Likes (Received)
    877

    Default

    Tube electronics distort in a way that does not annoy you. They also tend to have other things aside from THD that are pleasing, like more headroom[they tend to make more power although distorted, rather than clipping, which is more pleasing to the ear

    Vinyl is a commercial product and it was mostly crap

    My kids ask what all that noise is, the surface noise you tuned out.

    It is rare to find anything engineered for vinyl that has any bass. I have a ton of WAV audio in the car[over 150 hours], and there is a slope from the early 70s til the late 80s in bass response that determines how loud I can listen to music.

    Something engineered for vinyl sounds decent on vinyl, harsh and bass less on CD, properly remixed to take advantage of CD it sounds decent again.

  17. #54
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    St Louis
    Posts
    16,377
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1299
    Likes (Received)
    2405

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gustafson View Post
    Tube electronics distort in a way that does not annoy you. They also tend to have other things aside from THD that are pleasing, like more headroom[they tend to make more power although distorted, rather than clipping, which is more pleasing to the ear

    Vinyl is a commercial product and it was mostly crap
    ......
    That can opener is in high gear now.......

    However, "tube electronics" covers a lot of ground. Trust me, the audio folks have NOTHING on the music people when it comes to tube stuff...

    However, there is some really BAD sounding tube equipment. Tube equipment when properly designed, can sound good, which simply means that the nature of the distortion is more like the natural harmonics of most musical instruments, so your ear does not pick it out as being a "foreign" sound.

    Best not to "go there", it involves a huge kitchen full of industrial grade can openers.

    As for vinyl, a lot was not done carefully. Of course. And a lot of nearly anything you can name is not done carefully, or well. Vinyl, CD, tape, consumer products in general.....some industrial products. In the music area, look at the 8-track..... pretty bad from the very beginning....

    I have never figured out if I class the Bose 901 and its relations as in that category or not. I guess the theory is just one that "can work out well", but usually does not.
    Last edited by JST; 12-08-2017 at 09:21 PM.

  18. Likes Yan Wo liked this post
  19. #55
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Central Ohio USA
    Posts
    3,357
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    18
    Likes (Received)
    1451

    Default

    Tidbits re: above posts...
    I believe tube distortion is even-order harmonics, and solid-state is odd-order, ie 2nd harmonic vs. 3rd harmonic distortion.

    A good example of getting the mastering process wrong between LP and CD is the two-volume 'Goodbye Yellow Brick Road' by Elton John. LP sounds good, CD is thin and un-even. Seems like they forgot to adjust anything.

    Getting it right is Michael Jackson's 'Off the Wall'. Both LP and CD sound great. Quincy Jones as producer has been around forever, working with the jazz greats throughout his early career. His engineer, Bruce Swedien (sp?) was a 50 year old white guy with a handlebar moustache. Not someone you would expect to find in a pop studio with Michael and Quincy, but he knows his stuff.

    My interest in metalworking was sparked by seeing the elegant precision of old-school tape decks, spooling 15 lb. reels of 2" tape at 2000 rpm with 1 hp. motors, then stopping it quickly without damaging the tape. That and Scully record cutting lathes and their associated support equipment and operators.

    Chip

  20. Likes Yan Wo liked this post
  21. #56
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Idaho
    Posts
    2,833
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1554
    Likes (Received)
    1838

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by digger doug View Post

    The drums really, really don't need to be heard that much....

    Huh? Huh? Huh?

  22. #57
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Idaho
    Posts
    2,833
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1554
    Likes (Received)
    1838

    Default

    To the original question "And can you get absolute 3D sound illusion with just a pair if placed correctly in the right size/type/shape room ?"

    Yes,BUT,after making everything perfect for that one excellent recording of one song,,next song won't be as good without more jiggling all the settings

    Not talking settings for the average to mid-hi priced systems
    Your pre-amp has everything to do of how your speakers perform
    I got a Theta Cassablanca 3,,,not a pre-amp for the weak hearted,,lot's to learn,,,,,,but yes that is the start of a great 3D sound experience
    When I listened to Bose years ago,they did sound clean,,,but,but,but to really have the music experience at your home you need to feel the music,,in your body.
    If I was tasked to make Bose work in the home and be great,a great pre-amp is a must and you absolutely need a couple of beasts like JL audio Subs with built in 2400 watt amps.
    Speaking of amps,better to have more than you will ever need
    when a system is lacking but you push it anyways,,,it becomes very tiring to listen to
    Surround speakers and I mean done right is necessary to complete the set-up
    That is where it can be tricky
    a great pre-amp to make adjustments to all speakers is needed
    Not talking old shool equalizer (junk)
    good pre-amps offer the ability to tailor the sound
    Characteristics such as speaker levels individually,speaker delays,dolby digital,DTS,Circle Surround,ability to post process signal,adjust the phase,choose from different crossovers and adjust each one,example Butterworth,Linkwitz-Riley,Phase Perfect

    So yes,with the right shit,Bose could be implemented into a fairly good system for your home

    Depending on budget and how good is good enough,I would seriously look into Klipsh for speakers,,,not their cheap shit,size matters,,,for the dollar they give the most back.

    And of course there is much better out there

    On edit,like to add,,your only as good as the weakest link,,,so true with stereo systems

  23. #58
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Idaho
    Posts
    2,833
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1554
    Likes (Received)
    1838

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chip Chester View Post
    . That and Scully record cutting lathes and their associated support equipment and operators.

    Chip
    I am guessing your not talking about GodSmack

  24. #59
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Central Ohio USA
    Posts
    3,357
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    18
    Likes (Received)
    1451

    Default

    "Your" guessing correctly. That's Scully with a "c", see?

    Historic Scully LS-76 Lathe Goes Up For Sale - Vintage King Blog

    Chip

  25. #60
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    erie,pa
    Posts
    7,977
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    14733
    Likes (Received)
    3754

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jrmach View Post
    Huh? Huh? Huh?
    Not during the geetar solo....


Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •