Bose 901

Interesting review. I could certainly quibble about placement, but he seemed to not have other options. Also, the point of measuring outdoors, what is in effect a quasi-omni-directional design, seems questionable. I do admire and respect the reviewers efforts, if not all his conclusions.
I had a pair of Series IV 901’s in the 70’s. In 2009 I bought a pair of Series VI’s, which I still have, and use in my main two-channel rig. Yes, the 901 is not a perfect design and I would never claim such. But boy, oh boy can they deliver the raw power and scale of live music into a room! I think that considering all the trade-offs and compromises inherent in loudspeaker design, most of us "weight" distinct parameters of sound reproduction differently. If dynamics, scale and space are high on your list, it’s hard to beat the 901’s for the money. True, there’s nothing like them (for better and worse), but man are they a lot of fun to crank! I listened to my remaster copy of Van Halen’s first album this morning. I have the 901’s on 26" stands, 15" out from a short wall in a 15 x 22 x 9 room, and crossed over at 80 Hz to a pair of Velodyne 12" subs sitting in the corners behind the speakers. Cranked up, not to "11", but to around 95dB peaks, the sound is awesome. Visceral and enveloping, just like live music. They may be relics from a bygone era (so am I) but I still love’em.

Reading all the posts so far, I’m struck by the level of vitriol some manage to work up, simply over a speaker that they personally happen to not care for. Perhaps the marketplace success of the 901 challenges their own notion that if what they like is right, everything (and everyone) else must be wrong. I think many audiophiles just prefer their "audiophile" sound sterile and hyper-detailed, rather than a sound that more closely resembles that of live music.  Also, it’s amazing how much misinformation still remains about a product that was in production for 48 years or so. In the end, it’s really all subjective, anyway. Personally, I value a speaker that puts a smile on my face more highly than one that pushes all the audiophile buttons.

I'm not calling anyone out personally for being vitriolic.  That was just my overall takeaway from the thread: much vitriol among the naysayers. 

It's one thing to say you prefer one speaker to another or that it sounds better in your opinion.  But it's then quite another to empirically state that "speaker a is better than speaker b".  It begs the questions:  With what amp, with what music, in what room...and better in what regard...and so on and so forth. 

Maggies are good speakers but they have glaring weaknesses, IMO.  Bose 901's are also good speakers and have glaring weaknesses.  But I can tolerate the 901's weaknesses much better than I can the Magnepan's.  I prize dynamics, powerful bass and lower mids, effortlessness and unfettered sound -sound not tied to a speaker.  The 901's give me lots of all these.  Maggies, not so much.  But really, with me it always comes down to the "big goofy grin" factor.  Whatever speaker can put one on my face wins!  Klipsch Cornwalls can do that and so can Bose 901's.

Anybody notice how that to some "audiophiles", measurements don't matter if the subject is LP vs. CD, analog vs. digital, tubes vs. solid state?  But if the topic turns to Bose vs...well, anything else, suddenly measurements tell the story!