To say the 901 is high end is rediculous. To say that one is an audiophile because he is a musician is also ludicrous. You can take the Bose design and replace the drivers with anything, and the design is still junk.
I am a concert pianist, and I can instantly hear the Bose have no capability in the Treble, above 16.5khz.
The only way Bose can be called high end is in compare to Fisher or Kenwood speakers,
Other than that, NO studio would use a BOSE product to monitor because the mix would NEVER come close to being correct. That alone says the noise they make is a trick.
as far as Aussie high end: Australia produces high end speakers that decimate anything Bose can do.
If I was going to build myself a system, I would use real components from Focal and Dynaudio...oh wait, I did that for less than a set of 901's cost,and I have a sub to boot!
The 901's sound sad and grainy with doppler blur galore by compare. I listen to low distortion, powerful audio to the lowest octave, where Bose cannot even reach.
901's are to real audio what David Copperfields smoke and mirrors are to reality.

Bose is a mysterious and inexplicable phenomenon. Not the man, the company. The man is very clever, a great businessman, and provider of thousands of jobs. His products; painful. I have owned 901's as a curiousity, and find them well suited to listening to old recordings, particularly vinyl in less than perfect condition. Their lack of response (time & freq.) is ideal for this.
I have a reasonable understanding of the pro-sound industry (making, recording, and performing music) and no matter how carefully you look, you will never find any Bose product in a professional environment. Ever.

Yet despite their crippling shortcomings, they are a household word. A great many people, when asked to name a high-quality speaker, would say Bose.

An incredible study in Marketing and Promotion. Shop carefully.

I've found the 901's to work quite well as surrounds in a dolby pro logic based system. The unnaturally ambienct soundfiels these speakers generate is far superior to dipole type speakers that THX recommends for pro logic. For this specific purpose, Bose 901's rate a 5.

For stereo or use in newer digital dolby systems, 901,s are a abysmal failure that don't even deserve a single star. Over all rating is thus a 3.

I would add another analogy. Everyone has seen the cheap telescopes in department stores and discount stores. They advertise high magnifications, 900x, show colorful photos of distant galaxies, up close color photos of planets! Anyone who has done any astonomical observing with these can tell you they are garbage. Plastic lenses in the eye pieces, poorly ground primary lenses. Star images won't focus to a point, no contrast, fuzzy images, tube bouncing around because of unstable mounting on a flimsy tripod, etc. There is no comparing these to a high quality telescope with a florite or three element primary lense. But these require real design efforts, precision ground lenses. But to someone who has not looked at the sky with both, they appear to be similar devices.
I have said this in a Bose AM10 review and repeat it hear. IF YOU DON'T USE LIVE MUSIC AS A REFERENCE, IF YOU DON'T COMPARE BOSE SPEAKERS TO OTHER WELL ENGINEERED DESIGNS BY LISTENING TO THEM YOUR REVIEW IS POINTLESS! Compared to similarly priced, well engineered speakers, these things are garbage.

To Bill Wilkins: The M&K sub your friend has must have damaged circuitry.
There are low notes on Enya's Watermark [Longships cut #10] that sound pathetic on even properly set up 901's. I have a digital reference test disk with tones and so forth from 20hz to 20 khz.
Bose seems to be strongest at making it's distortion it calls sound between 40hz and 16.5 khz. There was no significant energy below 30hz, but there seems to be trickery amidst the Bose electronics. It seems lower fundamentals might be interpolated by the crossover to a higher octave, ergo the illusion of lower bass response, it all sounds artificial to me. The 9 4.5" cones do not equal even a good 10" dual voice coil sub enclosure for response.
The M&K sub you referred to, give a room that is at least 20'x20' with a solid floor will produce true low bass far beyond the feeble capacity of 901's.
I submit: I purchased a sub capable of a clean 18hz [20 at less than 10%thd], and a pair of high end [Focal] monitors that cost me less than a pair of 901's. Needless to say, for my paltry investment, they are embarassingly cleaner and more holographic than 901's.
901's represent the WORST value of any speaker at any price. The 901 basically scatters the sound to simulate a widescreen theater type effect similar to a "hollywood bowl" setting.
There is no law of physics that allows Bose to be clean at 20-30hz, or above 16.5khz. That's all psycoacoustic trickery and adveratising.
I believe another poster listed several subs and options to the 901. ALL of them are valid and true. They all outperform 901's by a WIDE margin.
So either your friends M&K product was set up wrong, damaged or you have severe hearing impairment of the worst kind.

I started looking into this site at the recommendation of a co-worker who had been bitten by the home theater and audio bug. He had chosen the components that he would audition after reading glowing reports of them here. I looked through, checking to see if there were any reviews of my old equipment (I hadn't bought any new audio components in over ten years). When I finally got to the reviews on Bose products (I am the proud owner of a pair of 901 series III speakers purchased used almost twenty years ago), I was dismayed at the large number of negative comments - not just negative comments - but downright hostility, that I was seeing. Why so much anger? In retrospect, I can see now that any animal, when faced with a genuine threat, will become hostile. Apparently Bose products are a genuine threat to high end audio. I would not have thought so, because the technology they use is now so old (they haven't come out with anything radically new and different since the Wave Radio, which everyone seems to like). I even broke out my old 901's and gave a listen again (they were in the closet for over five years due to not having a suitable place to set them up) and was a bit disappointed in what I heard. The bass and highs were great, but the midrange was weak, and as a result they lacked "presence". I can remember during all the
years that I listened to them my brother-in-law would walk into the room and say "those speakers sound over-equalized". Now, after over five years of not hearing them, I can hear what he meant. But still they did not sound as bad as most reviewers are writing.
Now we come to the threat part, and I have seen it with my own eyes. After having seen the home theater my friend put together, I have started collecting components of my own. Just last week I bought a KLH 12" powered subwoofer (ASW12-120 at $180 - I'm going on the cheap). I used a CD by Enya as a
reference to hear how low this sub would go (she likes very low notes!). Boy was I disappointed! The lowest notes were so quiet with respect to the other bass notes, they were barely audible! My 901's can play these notes no problem, and I am used to hearing these songs this way. Just then, my friend called to tell me he had upgraded to an M&K sub (M&K 105 at nearly $1000!). I told him about my sub, and he said to bring it over with my CD and we would compare subs. Great! Finally a chance to hear my CD on a REAL subwoofer. These notes should be no problem for this sub! The next evening, I packed my sub, my CD, and my 901's (just in case!) and went to my friend's house. We popped in the CD and listened, and to my surprise it sounded about the same as my $180 KLH! No low note! What?! A $1000 subwoofer and no note?! My friend didn't believe the note was there and as loud as it should be until I set up my Bose in his living room and played it for him (how can T.A. from WA say the design does not allow very low bass?!). Imagine, his $800 Yamaha reciever, $600 Toshiba DVD and $1000 M&K sub could not play a note as low and loud as My 20 year old 901's, a vintage 1976 Kenwood amp with 40 watts per channel, and a portable Discman! To make a long story short, the sub went back to the dealer on Monday (I don't blame him - $1000 sub and no note?!). So this was one M&K dealer that just got stung rather severely in the pocketbook by Bose.
In their day (1975-1985 maybe?), the Bose 901's were THE BEST speaker at any price bar none. Now technology has advanced, and especially in the last five years, product engineering and manufacturing techniques have made it so we can enjoy much better products at a much cheaper price. Maybe Bose has not kept up (or maybe they have, I have never heard the 901 series VI), but the products they make are not as bad as most reviewers are painting them. I personally do not like their satellite-sub systems, or anyone elses for that matter. I never did like a subwoofer with the speaker inside and only a hole to deliver the sound. It always sounds like "bass in a box" to me (besides, with 901's, who needed a sub anyway?). Now I have to solve my problem - I have a KLH sub that will not play the "note". What to do? ...Hmmm, If I take the amp off the KLH sub and put it on my 901's - Wow, Imagine that! 901 subwoofers! What a novel idea! (For reference purposes, the CD I am using is Enya's self titled CD "Enya" from Atlantic Records: #7 81842-2 cuts 4, 5, and 14. The frequencies used appear to be around 25 Hz. Test your sub! You WILL need to listen to it on a pair of 901's for reference - I have yet to find another speaker that will play it properly, though I'm sure some exist.)

Bill,
It is amazing that there are people on this planet who think like you do. I suppose that is why Bose is still in business. People such as yourself bought these speakers 20 years ago and have not been on the market since to appreciate how much better newer technology is. I can name so many speakers which are superior to the Bose in every regard and will play the "low notes" far better than your dusty old 901's and will retail for less than your 901's. Here are a few examples:
1) Paradigm Studio 60/80/100's
2) Paradigm Monitor 70P/90P, Active 20's
3) Pinnacle Classic Gold Reference, Tower, Aerogel's
4) Dynaudio Audience 70/80
5) Polk RT2000P
6) NHT 2.9
there are also many models from Energy, JMlabs, Tannoy, B&W that will also play the "low notes" and be much more musical than the 901 coffins.
All of these speakers I mentioned will easily play below 30Hz which the 901's could never dream of doing, and cost less than the 901's.

It is a shame your product knowledge is so limited that you must resort to sweeping generalizations on products you obviously know nothing about.

Subwoofers that will play the "low note" for under $1000
1) Paradigm subs
2) Energy subs
3) RBHsound subs
4) Velodyne subs
5) Pinnacle subs

all of these subs can easily play in the 25Hz or below range and cost under $1000

I will go one step further and list speakers for under $300 that will outperform your 901's with ease.
1) Paradigm mini monitors
2) Pinnacle AC-650
3) NHT super ones
combine any of these speakers with a $300 sub and you will beat any Bose product with ease in every frequency range, not to mention in fidelity as well.

Absolutely none

They try to produce music

I ran these power hungry crap heaps with Classe mono block 1000's. 1000 watt rms amplifiers and their EQ box. These things got very loud and made a lot of noise. but they had no idea how to make any form of music. They had no bass,the trebble fires into your listening room walls so there is very little high frequency information that is accurate. It mystifies me why doctor BOSE wrote a paper saying it was impossible to get full sound range with a single diamiter driver and then proceeds to build one . These are for people that only know loud. they are not clean and it is impossible to get stereo seperation with them because of the dispersion pattern. If all you sant is sound save some money and buy a cheap pair of asian made speakers. these things will not satisfy anyone that knows what music should sound like.

Similar Products Used:

No one else is stupid enough to make anything like this

none

I bought my Bose 901's in 1983, and they're still providing awesome sound after years of loving abuse. In fact, I'm going to buy another set of 901's for a DD 5.1 surround system soon.

All frequency ranges are clear, distinct and vibrant. The bass is so deep and clear that I don't plan to use a subwoofer for the 5.1 system. I've used an old Marantz receiver for years, and am buying a new SR-19 for the new sound. I can't wait to hear what the 901's sound like with that unit.

Don't listen to these mindless Bose Basher remarks, the 901's are worth the price. Any of you BB'ers interested in selling your 901s, please let me know. I'll gladly take them off your hands.

Similar Products Used:

Didn't have to

The ability to turn it off.

The ability to turn it on.

Hey! The Doc is right! He actually cured me! Once upon a time, I was a self-described Bose zombie, who thought that Bose speakers were great. I bought 'em, played 'em, loved 'em. But after a suggestion from my audiophile friend, who, believe it or not, was convinced the Bose 901's actually swallowed my soul, I visited Dr. Sporkzmoofin, to see if anything was wrong. Unfortunately, Doc discovered that I had an illness, and that Bose had indeed possessed me. He provided me with six months of care, which consisted of listening to countless speakers by companies other than Bose. Eventually, after much physical stress, I recovered. I can't thank the guy enough.

Anyone who thinks Bose is the best should get checked out. Anyone who thinks Bose is the industry leader must seek out this Doctor IMMEDIATELY. Becuase Bose ain't leading but two things right now: Jack and S%!&. And Jack just left town.