We, who know and appreciate the 901s, love to hear discussions like this. The fact is that all speakers benefit from room treatments as all rooms are different. And that includes the 901s. Although most of the sound is reflected, it's even more critical to be careful with the placement of diffusion and absorptive materials. To say that the reflective nature of the 901 is redundant since recorded sounds were reflected anyway shows just how little some people know about recording; as it's a fact that all recorded sounds are tightly controlled during the recording process. When I hear my 901s using a test disc for stereo separation, voices recorded in the left channel, the right channel and the center are all clearly defined within the space that a normal human being would occupy. Stereo separation and placement within a sound stage are all well defined. And speaking of bass, it appears that detractors who complain about no low bass are talking about wavelengths beyond the range of human hearing. When I hear an upright bass, I can hear the strings vibrating against the board. It sounds like an upright bass. You'd have to spend a prohibitive amount of money to get better sound than the Bose 901s in a properly treated room. Room treatments for Bose 901? Yes, absolutely.
Bose 901's in an acoustically treated room?
Curious - has anyone tried the 901's in an acoustically treated room? If so, your thoughts?
I've thought about trying out my 901's in my music room, but since it's got a bunch of GIK acoustic treatment throughout, I've never done it. I think the Bose needs a more reflective set of walls behind and to the sides.
But I think I'm going to give it a try soon and just wanted to see if anyone else has done the same (and are willing to admit to it publicly).
Cheers.
- ...
- 30 posts total
- 30 posts total