Which Receiver for Bose 901 Speakers? - Page 2

BOSE buys endcaps because end caps help move product (any product). I have heard am-15's in a large room and for the size of the speaker the accoustimass technology sounds quite good.

I wasn't directing the 901 comment to you specifically but doubt most of the "parrots" have heard them.

So if you decide that you want to keep the 901's you should also add the H/K 3390/3490 to your list for stereo receivers. The 3490 will give you digital connections and either will also allow the use of 1 or 2 subs if wanted.

That does not make it true. People simply repeat what they have heard.

Happy Bose 901 owner since 1976.

if you read my next post, my comparison with the yammie, onkyo and pioneer was the yammie drove them best but the 1065 has bigger ratings and probably alot better power.
hooked all of the same receivers to jbls, jm900v, avg speaker and pretty old. the yammie drove them best of all. you could be right on the anology of hearing it many times on these forums that you may tend to repeat what youve read. but maybe a brighter sound is just around better, cleaner power. ive sensed ive hit a soft spot and that wasnt the intention. wasnt this thread for sjabosi, a young kid trying to help his old man out with some 901's and a receiver. BTW, id say that the end cap sales manager at bose has done a pretty good job with 3.5 billion in sales last year. kudos to the end cap salesman. i think sjabosi might be a little green to jump back in and thats not what his thread is supposed to do. sjobosi are you out there.

I agree with those who say not to listen to the 901 bashers. I have a set of 901 series V that were paired to an old Sansui 6300 that rocked. I would recomend paying attention to placement. Mine were hung from the ceiling slightly downward at the rear. You also need to pay attention to the side wall and rear wall distance. Sorry I can't remenber what the distances are but can look it up if you need me to.

When was the last time you saw a "tape loop" on a AVR unit, I can't recall ever seeing one.

He's wanting a stereo receiver. The H/K 3390/3490 have them. Don't know about the others mentioned. He may also want to look at the Marantz 4023 at accessories4less for a good deal on a refurb that's well within his budget.

Actually, I believe the preferred position for the 901's re-equalization processor is after the [if any! Surround Processor plus] Control Amp stage, that is, in place of a Pre-Out/Main-In coupler--although those too have fallen out of favor on modern AVRs (in part because there are fewer '901 style' speaker 'systems' that use re-equalization processors . . . and also because there is less demand/availability/need for consumer versions of separate speaker sound processors like, e.g., the dbx 120A Subharmonic Synthesizer). And of course serious audio fans can always 'create' their own "Pre-Out/Main-In loop" by using a separate Power Amp...!

The Denons you love to hate have them. My 789 has them.

right except when you get a perfect measuring speaker that sounds like crap--especially in a poorly treated room. What bose knows is that most people don't prefer a flat frequency response because it sounds bright. SO they avoid publishing specs that would lead to criticism over these deficient specs despite the fact that most people prefer highs rolled off a little and a little boost in the midbass.

sounds like you have the resources to measure them and report back before making such pejorative statements without objective data. You do realize that cables have capacitance and resistance and that long runs require larger cable diameter with larger amounts of current, right? Not everyone can do with a 10 ft run to each speaker. and you should be careful about the dbt's to which you refer. Their merit is dubious at best. Not to say that I think they do make a huge difference myself but I think the data people point to are not nearly as concrete as some would purport.

Any speaker can sound like crap due to room characteristics. If your room is poorly treated, it would be a lot better to treat the room than try to "fix" it through speaker selection.

And if "most people" prefer certain speaker characteristics, any company should be proud to publish the specs that prove their products are optimized to meet those preferences.

I can't seem to fine it on my 1909 which it the same as your 789, could you please point it out to me. I believe the real term we need to use is " tape monitor " which was used to monitor 3 head tape decks as they were recording, you could hear the tape and compare it to the source in real time. This in/out was also very useful for adding EQs. This has disappeared, which is really to bad for it had many uses.

You could also use a receiver with a rec out switch. The Yamaha RX-Z7 has a REC OUT switch I believe.

Mark

Folks the official document from Bose

I bet if we put you in a room and blind tested the receivers, you would be most likely unable to tell them apart......

As for Bose, it mostly marketing and very little substance.........

Sure, you have a good point. But the 901's are the flagship of the Bose Line. Even gets good reviews Here

There has to be some substance there.

The Yamaha RX-797 has a pair of PRE-OUT| MAIN-IN couplers separating the preamp and power amp stages. One specific and intended use of these couplers is to allow for the insertion of a speaker pre-equalization processor such as is employed with BOSE 901 speakers. Inserting a speaker pre-equalization processor in the coupler loop--immediately before the power amps--provides the LEAST restricting mechanism for insertion because it leaves the complete pre-amp signal selection+processing chain unmodified (though the volume control), unlike, e.g., insertion into a TAPE MONITOR LOOP.

I don't own any Bose speakers myself, but for 2-channel music only, every Bose 901 that I have heard in the past sounded very very good when powered by a good amp and quality source material.

Now, are a set of 901s worth the $1,400 that Bose.com sells them for? ... Well, you can get lots of other speaker brands in that price range and even much less cost that sound just as good.

However, the OP already has a set of 901s ... So, I would recommend that he keep them. Selling them at a reduced price might be a mistake.

Forget the home theator for now, and just buy a quality integrated 2-channel amp in the 150-200 w/ch @ 8 ohms range, and a good CD player and enjoy the music.

If possible, keep those 901s spaced pretty far apart and at least a couple of feet from the wall (3 feet from the wall would even be better), and they will sound great when driven by at least a 150 w/ch or more amplfier.

Just my opinion
_____________________________

EDIT: So as not to have your thread get into a big debate about Bose 901s, you might just title a new thread:

"Recommend an integrated 150-200 w/ch amp in the $____ range"

.
Edited by Flt Simulation - 6/10/12 at 11:05am

yes please kindly go for denon hi current amplifier 150 watts per channel hope will happy with ur pair of speakers


make sure denon stereo amplifier master series

I wouldn't argue against putting the 901Eq, or any Eq or processor for that matter, between the pre and power amps, as that is about the only practical way to do it these days. But, I would say that whenever I have tried that myself, I always hear a layer of hiss at lower volumes, that I don't hear when the Eq or other ext. processor is inserted in a proper tape monitor or external processor loop (which are the same thing other than the label on the button). This is why, when I went back to 901's for my main 2-channel speakers in '09, I bought a NAD preamp with a tape monitor function. There are other options: the Parasound pre-amps still have tape monitor loops, but they (monitor loops) are getting rare as hen's teeth. I think along with the H-K's mentioned, that big and beautiful 150W int. amp. they sell has them, too.

The bose 901 series could be one of the finest stereo speakers ever made. I drive my pair with a Sony integrated amp taf808es. All the statistics listed above don't mean a thing as long your ears are happy. Everyone hears sound in a different way. Everyone has a preference based on experience. I like my 901 's because they sound great, not because they are made by a certain company.

Everyone hears sound in a different way. Everyone has a preference The former is not correct while the latter is correct. We ALL hear sound the same way...with our ears. We ALL have a preference as to how we like to hear what we hear.

And yes, while I certainly agree the 901 are top shelf speakers (EQ'd of course ) they have never had the distinction of being the "best" speaker; rather one helluva great speaker (tho pricey as sin) they surely don't disappoint but for the hardcore purist which they were never targeted for anyway...