The Absolute Sound: Klipschorn is one of the 12 most significant speakers of all time

[sebrof]

jdm - I could not agree more with what you said...All lists should be 10 []

Here's my Bose 901 experience: I was 19 or so in the military. I just got a pair of used 901s to mate with my Marantz receiver. I set them up and WOW, awesome! My buds would come over and we would rock out and ohhh and ahhh (or maybe it was just me). Great speakers.

Then one day I picked up the equalizer that comes with every pair and wondered if that would make a difference if it was plugged in. Now, if any of you have heard the 901 sans EQ you are almost certainly laughing at this point, because they probably sound as bad as a turntable without the RIAA equalization of a phono preamp. Horrible. After I hooked the EQ up and they sounded SO MUCH BETTER, I realized how we all (could it really have been just me) assumed the 901 sound was awesome just because we all knew it was supposed to be awesome.

I've taken this lesson forward with me today as I listen at new stuff - Just because it's supposed to sound good doesn't mean a thing. Use your ears.

[Don Richard]

TAS mentioning the Khorn is breaking news, indeed, considering their editorial bias against horns, except Magico's of course. Robert Harley must have been moving into his new house or on vacation or something.

[boom3]

I think the reason the Bose 901 didn't make the list is because it had no significant off spring apart from watered-down versions (now mostly extinct) in Bose's own line. IIRC, only LDL produced anything like a 901 clone and it was short-lived crap. I think Bose, even now, would go after anyone who tried to market a 901 wannabe.

The other speakers mentioned (and I have not seen the complete list) all were influential on subsequent designs and the legacy can be clearly traced through the "family trees" of speakerdom.

[artto]

The latest, September 2010 issue of The Absolute Sound prominently displays the Klipschorn as one of "The 12 Most Significant Loudspeakers of All Time."

That does it. I'M SELLING ALL MY KLIPSCH!

[]

[seti]

The latest, September 2010 issue of The Absolute Sound prominently displays the Klipschorn as one of "The 12 Most Significant Loudspeakers of All Time."

That does it. I'M SELLING ALL MY KLIPSCH!

How about the Luxmann []

[Cut-Throat]

I actually own a pair of 901s. I got them free and re-foamed them. I keep them around to let people compare them to my Horn speakers.

My take on 901s is they can produce LOUD Music So for people that equate volume for quaiity sound, the 901 will fit the bill. This is not unlike a resturant that people rave about that serves mediocre meals that are 5 times the size of a normal portion.

You can play a 1000 watts into them and crank the volume. the little buggers will handle it. They're not terrible speakers, but they shouldn't be in any ones top ten list either.

[jdm56]

I actually own a pair of 901s. I got them free and re-foamed them. I keep them around to let people compare them to my Horn speakers.

My take on 901s is they can produce LOUD Music So for people that equate volume for quaiity sound, the 901 will fit the bill. This is not unlike a resturant that people rave about that serves mediocre meals that are 5 times the size of a normal portion.

You can play a 1000 watts into them and crank the volume. the little buggers will handle it. They're not terrible speakers, but they shouldn't be in any ones top ten list either.

True, the 901 will rattle the rafters. So will big ol' horns. (The 901's just need more juice to do it.) That attribute alone does not a great speaker make, but it's certainly necessary if you like to hear music reproduced at life-like levels of volume and dynamics in your home. And it's one of the cornerstones of music reproduction that klipsch has built it's brand on. The 901 does dynamics, and it also does space, something horns often have trouble with. Low distortion? I dunno about that for the 901 as I have not seen a lot of published specs. All I know is they sound clean to me. I would not be surprised if they do have high levels of low frequency distortion, but subjectively, to me, they sound great. All speakers should be so distorted.

I agree with whoever it was that said the reason there is not a world full of 901 clones is that everyone knows Bose will sue the bejeebers out of you. Geez, I think they even sued someone for using "901". Like they own the number!

[texas42]

Actually, they did threaten once to sue Thiel Speakers for use of a 'number'. Thiel was going to release the CS 2.2 speakers once (the followup to their successful CS2 speakers). Since Bose had (at that time) recently released a series 2.2 speaker of their own, Bose threatened to sue over use of the number. Bose would not have won had it gone to court, but the mere threat of making Thiel go to court for years and having a FAR larger legal budget than Thiel, it didn't make a difference. Thiel gave in and removed the period (".") and renamed the speaker the CS 2 2, with a space in between. If that doesn't show you how 'thuggish' Bose is, nothing will.

I actually own a pair of 901s. I got them free and re-foamed them. I keep them around to let people compare them to my Horn speakers.

My take on 901s is they can produce LOUD Music So for people that equate volume for quaiity sound, the 901 will fit the bill. This is not unlike a resturant that people rave about that serves mediocre meals that are 5 times the size of a normal portion.

You can play a 1000 watts into them and crank the volume. the little buggers will handle it. They're not terrible speakers, but they shouldn't be in any ones top ten list either.

True, the 901 will rattle the rafters. So will big ol' horns. (The 901's just need more juice to do it.) That attribute alone does not a great speaker make, but it's certainly necessary if you like to hear music reproduced at life-like levels of volume and dynamics in your home. And it's one of the cornerstones of music reproduction that klipsch has built it's brand on. The 901 does dynamics, and it also does space, something horns often have trouble with. Low distortion? I dunno about that for the 901 as I have not seen a lot of published specs. All I know is they sound clean to me. I would not be surprised if they do have high levels of low frequency distortion, but subjectively, to me, they sound great. All speakers should be so distorted.

I agree with whoever it was that said the reason there is not a world full of 901 clones is that everyone knows Bose will sue the bejeebers out of you. Geez, I think they even sued someone for using "901". Like they own the number!

[Groomlakearea51]

I placed a "personal wager" with myself about where this thread would head.... I won... (a nice Cohiba!). The bet? Once the 901 was mentioned, it would become a dominant center of discussion. What does that mean? I guess that whenever Klipsch fanatics gather, and someone even mentions the Evil One, the conversation will head for the jugular in a variety of fashions - some direct, and some oblique.... Although in the case of this thread, it appears that from the comments, the 901's are not attacked in the "blind hate" fashion that has occurred in past threads. Notably, and to everyone's credit, the comments are generally based upon actual listening experience.

Regardless of any arguable merit as being "good", or placing in any list of the "best", etc. I still stand by my definition of "significant". Remember... the Edsel and the Corvair? Good? Nope, Significant for a variety of reasons? Yes, given design innovations, etc. Now I would not categorize them as an audio Ford Pinto... what with the exploding gas tank, etc. They "is what they is"...., an engineering attempt to use the reflective surfaces of a wall to properly propagate sound. Before the 901 (and really since the introduction of the 901), there has been no really significant (pun intended...) further attempts to pull it off with any real degree of success. Several other things stand out that support the "significant" category. First and forememost is the continual production by a rather large company as their "flagship". Second, is that they have sold a bajillion of the things; and third (and whether we like it or not...), there's alot of folks out there that like that sound. What also is "significant" is that Bose has a "buyback" or trade-in policy for the 901's. Buy a new pair and send them your old pair, and they will give you about $650 - $700 credit which significantly reduces the cost of the new pair. Unusual? Not really. As far as they are concerned, and knowing that folks who own them undoubtedly will have guests/ visitors who may have other speakers, they want the 901's being used or listened to be the latest version. Marketing? You bet! What better marketing tool than to quietly turn every owner into a audio sales gallery. Smart? You bet. Keeps the price low enough for the owner to upgrade without going bankrupt.... While it's not practical for Klipsch to do the same thing inasmuch as the sales volume for Heritage is not as large, I would sure jump on that bandwagon and trade all my "ancient" H-I's in for H-III's in a heartbeat. If but for the new warranty alone!!

[texas42]

Hmm...not sure if you were referring to my previous post or in general as I DID include the Bose 901 on my list of significant designs. I'm certainly not a Bose Basher as I have owned several pairs of 901s in the past. They give a HUGE soundstage but nothing is clearly defined within it. My remarks (in my last posting) was Bose's predatory business nature which is widely known (talk to Consumer Reports). I've had read online in the past that some have them set up optimally (concrete walls, close to the corners, huge amounts of current with big amps, etc) and say they are stunning and better than anything they have ever heard. I haven't experienced that with them but then I don't have the right room for them either. I'm not snobbish enough to tell anyone what they should (or shouldn't) like to hear. We all have our own ears, listening preferences, musical tastes, budgets, WAF issues, etc, so there will never be a universal standard. If there was....would we even have audio threads?

[jdm56]

I placed a "personal wager" with myself about where this thread would head.... I won... (a nice Cohiba!). The bet? Once the 901 was mentioned, it would become a dominant center of discussion. What does that mean? I guess that whenever Klipsch fanatics gather, and someone even mentions the Evil One, the conversation will head for the jugular in a variety of fashions - some direct, and some oblique.... Although in the case of this thread, it appears that from the comments, the 901's are not attacked in the "blind hate" fashion that has occurred in past threads. Notably, and to everyone's credit, the comments are generally based upon actual listening experience.

HA-HA!! Yeah, I was thinking along those lines too! The 901 does seem to have a polarizing effect. Ya love it or ya hate it...and EVERYBODY's got an opinion!

Regarding Bose customer service: My first pair of 901's, Series IV's from the late 70's, were sold to a friend. Later, when the foam surrounds rotted out, Bose fixed them (or replaced them - I forget) free. And a friend at work was telling me a similar story. When the rot hit his, Bose just replaced both speakers for free (if I remember right), with the latest series upgrade (IV to V in his case). How can you beat that?

[jdm56]

I'm certainly not a Bose Basher as I have owned several pairs of 901s in the past. They give a HUGE soundstage but nothing is clearly defined within it.

Excellent point. I think we can become too enamored of pinpoint imaging, where you can tell the exact location on the soundstage of every voice or instrument. It's a cool effect and I've been seduced by it too, by I just don't think you get it that much with live music. Maybe sometimes, but I find the best sounding live music has always been when it just energized the air and it seemed electric. All around you and alive. And that's what the 901 brings to the table. It's not a "front-row center" speaker, for sure. For that, there's nothing better than Klipsch, IMHO. The 901 is more of a mid-to-rear hall speaker. And I find I like that with a lot of music. In a perfect world I'd have k-horns in their corners and 901's suspended from the ceiling...Yin and Yang!! The Dynamic Duo!!!

[boom3]

I'm certainly not a Bose Basher as I have owned several pairs of 901s in the past. They give a HUGE soundstage but nothing is clearly defined within it.

Excellent point. I think we can become too enamored of pinpoint imaging, where you can tell the exact location on the soundstage of every voice or instrument. It's a cool effect and I've been seduced by it too, by I just don't think you get it that much with live music. Maybe sometimes, but I find the best sounding live music has always been when it just energized the air and it seemed electric. All around you and alive. And that's what the 901 brings to the table. It's not a "front-row center" speaker, for sure. For that, there's nothing better than Klipsch, IMHO. The 901 is more of a mid-to-rear hall speaker. And I find I like that with a lot of music. In a perfect world I'd have k-horns in their corners and 901's suspended from the ceiling...Yin and Yang!! The Dynamic Duo!!!

I have to agree with the substance of this. I used to frequent a bar where there were four 901's suspended from the ceiling, a large (EV?) subwoofer,and a mid and tweeter horn over the bar. It all sounded very good once I was past a certain BAC. In other words, the 901s were always great party speakers, but for critical listening I will stick to my Corns in the living room or my DQ-10s (newly recapped) in my study.

Interesting that Bose does not seem to promote the 901s any more. Can't recall the last time I saw an ad for them in any audio mag.

[jdm56]

I'd like to see Bose promote the 901 more, too. The pair I have now, I bought in the fall of '09. I don't know how to determine date of manufacture from their serial number, but all the literature was dated '06 or '07. I would guess they are still a decent seller, but they may just be keeping them around because they're Amar's baby. Actually, I'd like to see them do an upgrade to Series VII status, since they've been stuck on VI for twenty-two years and counting. A more exotic cone material and an updated EQ would be nice. Maybe for their 50th birthday in 2018!

Cornwalls and DQ-10's huh? A bit of a yin and yang there, too! Let me guess: Dahlquist for acoustic and corns for electric?

[garyrc]

I think we can become too enamored of pinpoint imaging, where you can tell the exact location on the soundstage of every voice or instrument. It's a cool effect and I've been seduced by it too, by I just don't think you get it that much with live music. Maybe sometimes, but I find the best sounding live music has always been when it just energized the air and it seemed electric. All around you and alive.

• Agreed. Even from inside the orchestra, you don't always get pinpoint imaging. In our living room, I closed my eyes and listened to "live" violinist who was visiting; she was not emiting a narrow precise image either.
• On the other hand, from our balcony seats, what the British call "orchestra bells" were precisely localized in an Oakland symphony concert. It may have helped that we were looking down and could see the player clearly. That time I didn't think to close my eyes.
• Imaging is far less important to me than the whole musical Gestalt, tonality, dynamics, texture, etc.
• That being said, I wish soloists -- especially violinists and singers who don't have hand held mikes -- would STOP turning their heads in various directions (singers) or swaying back and forth or twisting their bodies (violinists) ... that drives me as crazy as stomping on the rostrum or conductors singing to the music.

[jdm56]

Our local juco has a small (probably less than 500 capacity) performing arts center with really nice acoustics. I've been there and seated mid-hall or there-about and the music from the orchestra sounded wonderful, just energizing the air all round. With my eyes closed I could not differentiate left, right or center of any soloist or section. Now, I'm sure if I had been seated up closer, it would have been different, but the point is 2-channel stereo can impart an unnatural degree of imaging precision that usually does not exist in most live music.

Even amplified music, in a nice sounding reverberant acoustic, often does not exhibit pin-point imaging: We were recently down to Branson, and we finished up the day down at "The Landing". One of the local eateries had a duo (keyboards & electric guitar) playing some bluesy rock on their patio area. They were using a couple of big JBL stacks and the sound was LOUD & CLEAR, but from my perspective about 50 feet away, there was no left and right point-source. Those big JBL's just disappeared as sources of the music. It sounded great, but very non hi-fi as far as imaging goes. OF course, they may have been running both instruments into both speakers, but be that as it may, the sound was huge and reverberant and wonderful.

It may sound like I'm advocating mono, which I'm definitey not. I'm just advocating "live"-like sound!

[Rudy81]

All these discussions on the Bose 901 are cracking me up. My first 'good' set of speakers were the Bose 901s and it was they who introduced me to Klipsch! It went something like this. I was in the military and had purchased a nice pair of 901s. I loved them and was fairly confident I had a nice set of speakers that could do most everything. CD's were a pretty new invention back then and I had started to build my CD collection.

One day I ran across a CD with the Overture of 1812, featuring digital canons. Real canons! The CD even came with a warning that loud volumes could damage your speakers and the CD manufacturer would not accept liability. Well, that meant I must have it and I must play it loud since the 901s would supposedly not be damaged by such things. So, took the new CD home and played it. Much to my surprise the digital canons sounded like pop guns...just horrible. The music was fine, but the canons left a lot to be desired. It didn't matter how loud I turned it up, the canons were not even close to 'real' sounding. I know what real canons sound like.

I spent the next few weeks tearing my system apart figuring something was wrong with the amps, the CD player or my wiring. Long story short, I could not find a problem. I knew even less about audio back then than I do now so I called an 'expert' that was somewhere in California. Had to give him my CC number over the phone so he could help me diagnose the problem. Told him this story and he had me check a few things and then assured me that there was nothing wrong with my system. He indicated it was simply a matter of physics. Trying to move a lot of air with 4" drivers was just not going to work.

I was bummed! He suggested that if I really wanted to hear the canons, I should go find an audio dealer that had "Klipsch". I had not heard of Klipsch, but went the next day. He recommended I listen to a set of Khorns, Belles or La Scalas.

I found said dealer and asked if I could listen to my CD in his demo room. He took me to a room that had one chair and a pair of La Scalas. He smiled and said I could turn it up as loud as I wanted and to enjoy. Well, the rest is history. I did hear the canons and I ordered my first set of Belles that day.

I tried selling the 901s for the next few weeks and had no takers at all at any reasonable price. One day a nice gent came by and said he could not offer me much in the way of money but was wondering if I would be interested in a trade for one of his guns. After looking at his collection, I selected a Colt full size .45 in stainless finish. Best deal I ever made. I still own that gun and it is still worth more than the 901s.

So, I'm really glad I once owned Bose 901's.

[jdm56]

One little detail to keep in mind: Bose 901's list for around $1500. Last I looked k-horns list for $8000, LS2's for $6000. BTW, I owned k-horns for six years, but I admit, I don't listen to a lot of Cannon recordings.

[emmvette]

Wow, you were right, this thread has taken a little turn! I also had a nice pair of 901 series VI, that I did like quite a bit. I can confirm after changing from 200 watts / channel to 460 w/ch the speakers do indeed sound better with more power. Placement is also important. Even though they were much smaller, the WAF was not high at my house because they had to "stick out" 18" from the wall, and the stands weren't liked either. They were replaced with my current set of Cornwalls downstairs and a pair of KP201s upstairs. When comparing the Klipsch and the Bose, to my ears the Klipsch have a more defined sound, with the Bose being pretty good, and the Klipsch being excellent. However, that is just my ears and my tastes. I never make fun of the 901s. They are a great speaker, especially for the price you can pick up a used pair in good shape.

[Guest David H]

I thought the List was good, I am surprised nothing from ESS made the list. Dr Heil was the inovator of so many designs, I am surprised they were overlooked

The Dahlquist DQ-10 is a given, great sounding speaker, too bad it took 1kw to get them to sing.

ESS Transar, not the best peaker of all time, but certainly signifigant.

I am fortunate enough that my Father is a music lover and I had the oportunity to audition most of the speakers on the list. I would have like to have heard the KLH-9s, I saw a pair once, one broken in half from shipping the other one was beat.

Dave