What kind of EQ does Bose use on the 901s?

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

Does anyone know what the equalizer does for the Bose 901s? How do they
sound with and without EQ? Are they usable without the EQ? Note: I'm not
asking for a speaker review here...

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

Pooh Bear wrote:
> Karl Uppiano wrote:
>
>> Does anyone know what the equalizer does for the Bose 901s?
>
> It boosts the bass and treble.
>
> Here's a link for the controller for the 802 - which basically does
> the same thing.
>
> http://audiorail.home.comcast.net/802_controller.gif
>
>> How do they
>> sound with and without EQ?
>
> Like small 'radio speakers'.

Correction. LIke small CHEAP radio speakers.

geoff

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

gregs wrote:

> In article <412A8DDC.7350622D@hotmail.com>, Pooh Bear <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >Karl Uppiano wrote:
> >
> >> Does anyone know what the equalizer does for the Bose 901s?
> >
> >It boosts the bass and treble.
> >
> >Here's a link for the controller for the 802 - which basically does the same
> >thing.
>
> The 802 lower boost is higher in frequency, where the 901 peaks at 30 HZ
> with an even higher boost level. If you additionally subtract a couple db at 300 Hz, they sound
> better.

I guess that'll be 'cos the 802s were intended for SR. Using that much boost @ 30Hz on an SR speaker
would invite instant disaster !

BTW, I had no preconception when Bose entered the market. I was curious when my local venue hosted the
band 'Alberto Y los Trios Paranoias' many decades back. Mid 70s maybe.

I had already heard that they were using a Bose P.A. and was interested to see the result.

The result accounts for the derision poured on Bose ever since by SR professionals.

The 'rig' was being used only for vocals.

There were several / many 802 cabs either side of the stage. Maybe 5 ( 1kW ? ) Bose amps each side too.

The clip leds were almost permanently lit ! Just on vocals ! And it was way quieter than most rock gigs I
ever went to ! Not just quieter, the balance was a joke too. The audience shuffled uncomfortably.

Basically totally pathetic.

Back then there was little to beat a good Martin rig. Arguably, those old designs would still hold their
own in audio quality terms in selected applications against more modern designs that are designed simply
to get in and out of the venue as fast as possible.

Bad live sound is just as ( if not more ) prevalent now as 30 yrs ago. Sad really.


Graham

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

In article <djwWc.4828$zS6.534427@news02.tsnz.net>, geoff@paf.co.nz-nospam
says...
>
>
>Pooh Bear wrote:
>> Karl Uppiano wrote:
>>
>>> Does anyone know what the equalizer does for the Bose 901s?
>>
>> It boosts the bass and treble.
>>
>> Here's a link for the controller for the 802 - which basically does
>> the same thing.
>>
>> http://audiorail.home.comcast.net/802_controller.gif
>>
>>> How do they
>>> sound with and without EQ?
>>
>> Like small 'radio speakers'.
>
>Correction. LIke small CHEAP radio speakers.

What did you expect? They are small, cheap speakers.
-----------------
Alex

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

Isaac Wingfield wrote:
> In article <cggvj8$qg$3@newsmaster.cc.columbia.edu>,
> Alex Rodriguez <adr5@columbia.edu> wrote:
>
>
>>In article <djwWc.4828$zS6.534427@news02.tsnz.net>, geoff@paf.co.nz-nospam
>>says...
>>
>>>
>>>Pooh Bear wrote:
>>>
>>>>Karl Uppiano wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Does anyone know what the equalizer does for the Bose 901s?
>>>>
>>>>It boosts the bass and treble.
>>>>
>>>>Here's a link for the controller for the 802 - which basically does
>>>>the same thing.
>>>>
>>>>http://audiorail.home.comcast.net/802_controller.gif
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>How do they
>>>>>sound with and without EQ?
>>>>
>>>>Like small 'radio speakers'.
>>>
>>>Correction. LIke small CHEAP radio speakers.
>>
>>What did you expect? They are small, cheap speakers.
>
>
> Bose story:
>
> Some years ago, a friend had a couple of 901's and a Crown DC-300
> (that's the output wattage rating) to drive them. He complained to me
> that they sounded "pretty good" but he couldn't get them to play very
> loud. He wondered ifthere was something wrong with the amp. I told him
> that, among it's many other problems, the 901s had absolutely wretched
> efficiency. He disagreed.
>
> I inivited him to bring the amp over to my place. I had (still have) a
> couple of Klipschorns. The DC-300 driving the K-Horns generated an
> absolutely *stunning* sound pressure level in my fairly large living
> room -- you could yell and not be able to hear yourself. I had to use a
> tape deck for source, because the turntable was susceptable to acoustic
> feedback at the levels involved. There was intermodulation distortion,
> but if you stuck your fingers in your ears, it would go away, because it
> was being generated *in your ears*.
>
> He went away convinced that 901's were not very good speakers after all.
>
> Isaac
That's a wee bit of an unfair comparison because Klipschorns tend to be
extremely efficient speakers. They'll make a 10 watt amplifier sound loud.

CD

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

"Alex Rodriguez" <adr5@columbia.edu> wrote in message
news:cgir2k$36l$7@newsmaster.cc.columbia.edu...
> In article <412cc280$0$2481$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au>,
> TonyP@optus.net.com.au says...
> >Not at all. Look up *CHEAP* in the dictionary, you will find that "cheap"
> >and "expensive price" are mutually exclusive terms.
>
> An average widget sells for $10. I buy a widget for $2 and I sell it to
> you for $100. Is that a cheap widget or an expensive widget?

See, even you agree it's one OR the other. You're just not sure which.

TonyP.

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

"Don" <TAKE-OUTdobrien25@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:vy8Xc.310344$a24.205018@attbi_s03...
> and/or are brainwashed by the Bose reputation.

Is that the one that goes : "No highs, No lows, must be a Bose"?

TonyP.

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

normanstrong wrote:

> It should be noted that the word "cheap" means low in price over in
> the UK. In the US, the word carries an additional suggestion of low
> in quality as well.

That is true to a degree also in the UK.

Often the word is used to mean *either* inexpensive or poor quality. Not
necessarily both at the same time. A context thing I guess.


Graham

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

On Fri, 27 Aug 2004 02:57:16 GMT, TAKE-OUTdobrien25@comcast.net (Don)
wrote:

>"Look at that Marantz receiver... blue, purple, pink and green lights...
>That'll get you laid, man!" I swear- an actual quote by a customer to his
>buddy.

My prized collection of 1960/70s mens' magazines contain many glossy
"lifestyle" advertisements for really ordinary hi-fi. But my
favourite is a "Playboy" which portrays a group of Beautiful Young
Things (was the term "Preppy"?) orgasming over a motor-cycle. A
Harley? Vintage Triumph? No - a Honda 50 :-)

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

"Pooh Bear" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:412E7E6E.789ACB20@hotmail.com...
> normanstrong wrote:
>
> > It should be noted that the word "cheap" means low in price over in
> > the UK. In the US, the word carries an additional suggestion of low
> > in quality as well.
>
> That is true to a degree also in the UK.
>
> Often the word is used to mean *either* inexpensive or poor quality. Not
> necessarily both at the same time. A context thing I guess.

Yes, the humpty dumpty defence. Nobody has quoted which dictionary they are
referring to so far.

TonyP.