I was under the impression that the good Doctor decided, through analysis?, that a lot of the efforts, that designers and manufacturers were putting in to achieve the lowest "noise, distortion etc), was in audible and that good commercial common sense required a good sound to the ear not the eye on the graph, hence the Bose products.
I'm looking into it. To keep costs reasonable you don't have many options given you need 18 drivers.Thought, if one was to tackle a home brew version of the 901, what drivers might be worth looking at?
Oh, I’d assume crossing them to one or more subs and applying liberal amounts of Dirac-type correction.
Apologies if someone has already taken up this thought elsewhere
I'm looking into it. To keep costs reasonable you don't have many options given you need 18 drivers.
I'm looking at these Dayton TCP woofers which are around 10 dollars and have a very smooth top end which would be preferable to the breakup. Output with 9 drivers is no joke, my simulations show that.
You'd need a front tweeter though. Or a couple of them.
This one? https://www.parts-express.com/dayto...ated-paper-cone-midbass-woofer-4-ohm--295-415
Yes, I could see that working.
Personally I'd do a sealed cabinet to avoid port complexities and nasty upper range resonances.
I'd also probably do a straight 'sub' plinth for it to sit on...
Regardless, I'll follow with interest your thoughts on this
I had a pair of Type IVs for years..even hung them from the ceiling at one point. They were fun but a pain to move.
Back in long ago Internet days there was an audiophile who made a pretty good case for Bose...or Bose-like -- setups. He had a bunch of them arrayed around a room. Also reportedly his Bose-style speakers outperformed other speakers in a well-designed shoot out. I forget his name now...though I think his last name started with Em..something?
I don't get why you toed yours in though....it's not what Bose recommends....
Btw I knew a guy who preferred to listen to his turned around (i.e., the array and rocket ports facing forward). It takes all kinds.
I think the good doctor saw dollar signs in mediocre mass-produced stuff, usually with good WAF. Turns out, he had a good head for business.I was under the impression that the good Doctor decided, through analysis?, that a lot of the efforts, that designers and manufacturers were putting in to achieve the lowest "noise, distortion etc), was in audible and that good commercial common sense required a good sound to the ear not the eye on the graph, hence the Bose products.
I'm also realizing that it was the Series V that I owned -- the same as in this test.The audiophile was Gary Eickmeier, the improved version of the 901 that he had built was the 'IMP'. It won out in at least one blind preference test against some interesting competitors.
Google these words to read all about the IMP:
Gary Eickmeier bose