Bose 901

Bought my 2 pair of 901s in 1974 from a Pacific Stereo salesman  that got a special deal on them and the amp. He only wanted the amp so he sold me the 2 pair for less than a single pair at the time. First speakers I ever owned and paired them with Phase Linear 400 amp. I too suspended them from the ceiling two in the front and two on the sides. To me at that time, my 19 yr old self thought they were great. We put Rick Wakeman’s Journey to The Center of the Earth on the turntable and you were immersed in that world.

Sold one pair, gave one pair to my brother. The 901s came back to me after my brother passed and I still have them boxed up. Kept the Phase Linear to drive Dahlquist DQ-10s and still have it today.  Just a couple of years ago one channel started having issues, so it’s going to be rebuilt. Say what you will about the PL but 40+ years without a problem is pretty good run.

Point being the 901s were my gateway drug into better speakers, and everyone sure loved coming over to listen to them.

The first time I ever heard hi end audio was in college when a senior on our floor had a pair of Bose 501s.  Later I heard the 901s; I thought the 501s were much better, before I knew anything about hifi. 

The 901's were so terrible that Bose reps pulled their products from dealers who set up demos to compare them too decent speakers.  I saw this happen when B&W came out with the DM 14 to specifically target the 901.  For $100 more than the 901, the B&W had good, accurate bass, a bigger, more accurate midrange sound (although a bit slower than 3 way B&W's with a dedicated midrange), and an really good tweeter.  The frequency response was within a half decibel of flat from 80 cps to 19000, and was down only 3db at 65 cps.  Although I ran no tone controls on my 4 that were powered by a Phase Linear 400, when I sold a pair to a pal who was given an old Marantz 125 wpc receiver,  I realized that a some bass boost was a good thing.  There is a reason Bose quit selling through good audio stores:  The 901 was very famous and made just about anything sound good when compared to it.  They were great for making a lot of noise, but not so good for most music.

I will bet the B&Ws over time only played certain genres better and were more fatiguing.....A smart Demo is not set on whole buy the seller....the buyer often unaware due to inexperience falls in to the trap.  To call the 901s terrible?  Really?

I had three formative hifi experiences in the late 70s and early 80s, my early teens in the suburbs of St. Paul.  In chronological order, hearing 901s at the house of one of my parent's friends - I couldn't believe music could sound so big, like I was in a concert hall!  Second was the stereo system in the office of my junior high school band teacher - cool blue meters and big speakers in the corners of the office - I didn't know then what I know now, and I could be totally wrong, but I like to think McIntosh and Klipsch?  Sounded so real.  More importantly he introduced me (us) to jazz.  And his daughter, but that's another story, let's just call it music + girls = heartache + mix tapes.  Thirdly buying my first low end music reproduction system - Pioneer receiver, Advent speakers, Technics turntable, at a little strip mall store in the Twin Cities called Sound of Music (they morphed into something much different over the years, also another story), off the sale/discount/used rack.  I loved it of course but that's when I started wondering why my stereo sounded like this and their stereos sounded so much better?