Best battery for 2017 Subaru Outback

I do believe that I said Alpines were among the better sounding heads…meaning just the tape deck. During that era, I would have hooked it up with a PPI amp. These amps were not known to most car stereo enthusiasts, but they were the cleanest around…and cost a lot less than the bigger name guys.

Yes, I know the Klpsch family owned transition. But I did not know that they made car stereo speakers. Was it under Klipsch or after? Thank you.

Consumer guide at the time, voted the 901s to be one of the best speaker systems available. Their main criteria was accuracy. They noted…in use with the EQ, they covered the frequency range of sound better than any other speaker tested. Note: a base frequency that bottoms out before reaching the low 20 range may sound like good base to some (because it is booming base)…but not true base frequency. But yes, room acoustics is so critical for them. And I have had arguments with others regarding room environment limits for not choosing them. My joke about that then was…if you don’t have the proper room environment for them…then just move. That’s how much I loved them. Still to this day, when all the necessities they must have are satisfied, I have yet to hear anything as pleasing to me.

Maybe…Could also have meant “Head”-Unit. Mostly it’s the head-unit.

Consumer guide is good for presenting statistical data based on survey results. Their testing of Audio and many other things can be extremely flawed. Consumer guide was the ONLY audio magazine that rated the 9901’s very high. Could it be because the reviewer owned a pair (which he did).

Not even close. Bose 901’s could NOT produce deep sound below 60hz. Below that they the base gets extremely muddy. Do NOT listen to classical music or a pipe organ with the 901’s. Around the same time that CR did the review of the 901’s, they also did a review of the famous Altec’s Model-19 speaker. The reviewer was the same on both speakers. What really stood out was the reviewer’s remark of how lack of base in the Model-19 compared to the Bose…Yet when they published the speaker response graph (which no one reads) - it clearly showed the Model-19’s base response was significantly superior to the Bose. As you’d expect from an extremely well built 15" woofer.

The other thing most people hated about the 901’s was it was a power hog. At the time the efficiency rating was a mere 80db…while a speaker like Klipsch or Altec were 98db (or higher). The Bose would have to have an amp pushing close to 200 for the same sound levels at Klipsch or Atlec being pushed by a 1 watt amp.

From what kind of battery to buy to audio speakers . OK fine.

3 Likes

For short, the term Head was used for decks w.o. an external amp. But I won’t quibble on that

CG used lab tests and a panel of listening judges (not surveys) for spec figures and sound. Most other audio magazines are promoters of the manufacturers product; they get paid via advertisements. So, of course they are going to say nice things about a system, depending on who the sponsor is.

Like said, I have had the same arguments with others, regarding the audiophile worthy aspects of the 901s. Having acknowledged that part, one really needs to explore all the tweaks with the system and environment setup to get what the 901s have to offer.

Power hog? Not really. I pushed mine with a 80 watt Kenwood receiver…sounded super. Added Monster cable, and could not have been happier, as EQ tweak is important too. I once had a pair of inefficient Bozack LS400’S that need at least 100 amps per/c just to get going.

Audiophiles can be very subjective when it comes to defending what they already have against something some other critic may have.

For a most fair minded and impartial review, I suggest this link: https://www.tonepublications.com/review/we-review-the-bose-901/

The only thing I would like to see is a scientific statement from any battery manufacturer that claims the battery brand affects the sound. And keep in mind that the battery voltage is always in a state of flux…

3 Likes

Isn’t the word of self appointed expert Rick good enough ?

4 Likes

And that’s why every other review on the planet said the 901’s were decent speakers, but not even in the high end.

There are MANY independent audio testers not associated with any magazine for sales. Have been for decades. Youtube is not loaded with them. 30 years ago there were many audiophile organizations across the country. They did a lot of their own testing and wrote papers/reviews.

Yes Power Hog. Later versions may be better…but I clearly stated at the time of the CR review they were power hogs. Efficiency of 80db’s is a power hog. What’s the efficiency rating of your 901’s? My home speakers have an efficiency rating of 96db’s. That means the 901’s would need 160 watts of power to sound as loud as mine at 1 watt.

You also have to wonder if the 901’s are the end-all to audio speakers, then why aren’t they made anymore?

What I will say about the 901’s - for their price - they are very very good. If you want to listen to modern rock from the 80['s to today, then they fill that purpose very well for the price.

When I look at reviews I don’ just cling to ONE source. I get multiple sources and make my own conclusions. For audio - I do a lot of my own testing since sound is so subjective. What may sound good to you may not sound good to me.

CR is great for gathering data for statistical analysis. But even that has some problems, but overall it’s good. Their testing is not what I’d call reliable or objective.

Older people in this forum might remember CR’s review of oil filters a few decades ago. They got sued for their testing techniques and LOST.

Mike, Rick’s referring to Consumer Guide, not Consumer Reports.

I always get those two names mixed up. But my comments stand.

Consumer Guide accepts paid advertising, which nullifies any pretense at impartiality, IMHO.

In the early '90s, Consumer Guide tested all of the compact car that were being marketed at that time, and declared that the Olds Achieva was the best compact car, hands-down. About 2 pages following that questionable article, there was a full-page ad for the Olds Achieva.
:smirk:

1 Like

I agree, CG was not on my list of audio mags. At one time or another I subscribed to Stereo Review, Audi, Hi Fi, and The Audio Critic, kind of like my many car mags. Now none, they’re gone.

I recall asking the school’s librarian why CG was one of the magazines that they had available.
She replied that it was free-of-charge to schools, and that she would not have paid for that semi-worthless publication masquerading as an impartial source of information.

1 Like

I stated CG (Consumer Guide), you’re confusing it with CR (Consumer reports). Yes, I had the later version 901…recommended required watts were at 10 watts. If loud sound is what you are after, I guarantee you that these 901s will handle anything you pump into them with ease…and without straining or losing the great subtleties of sound reproduction. Most any other speaker would break into distortion at some level. Read a lot of audio or stereo magazines? So have I. If you recall, had you poured through the pages of most, you would have noticed an add or two. Those magazines in question, probably are giving a great review on that product, while maybe bashing the competitor’s product; that was/is how these review magazines help pay the bills. And who knows how independent the so called independent ones are; what connection they may have via their review.

I don’t have them anymore. They were damaged in a home fire. I moved, and no longer have the ideal acoustical environment for them…if I had wanted them again. Perhaps it is the reason also of why they were discontinued. Who knows. Why was Betamax discontinued in preference to VHS…when Betamax showed better quality…few people knew/know that Betamax was a better quality tape over the VHS format. But VHS had the longer playing time…hence the death of Betamax…a little food for thought. And thank you for yours.

AH - I admitted that. And as stated…Consumer guide sells advertising…so any review they do must be taken with a grain of salt.

Let me give you a lesson in audio. Never once did I say I was looking for LOUD. Efficiency is NOT the same as loud. High efficient speakers have a very nice feature in also having a wide dynamic range.

That’s because they’re inefficient. How much wattage a speaker can handle means absolutely NOTHING. I can show you speakers that are rated at only 65 watts. But at about 30 watts in a home environment they’ll put out over 140db’s - which is more then enough to blow your ear-drums. They have an efficiency rating of over 107db’s. The other nice thing of efficient speakers is you don’t need to spend gobs of money on high-powered amps. My home theater amp is a 5 channel Tube amp pushing out 12 watts/channel. I seriously doubt they’ll even drive the 901’s.

I’m not the one who’s saying any speaker is great based on a magazine article. You’re the one who’s doing that. You’re the one who argued that CG rated them them the BEST speaker. If you don’t put much faith in magazine articles, then why use it as an example? I just pointed out that since you put so much faith in magazine articles - there are other magazines that did not care for 901’s.

I’ve visited many high-end audio places in the past 40+ years…and I’ve NEVER EVER seen one that carried Bose. Even the high-end shops in Boston (Bose’s back yard) don’t carry Bose and never ever carried Bose. As stated if 901’s are the BEST speaker ever made…then surely they would have been in every high-end stereo shop in the world.

Saw the admission mistaking CR for CG after the fact…but okay.

Check our dialog, you were the first to mention loudness. That is why I answered as I did.

Maybe CG now just advertises on their website. But on all the pages of CG that I have ever read, I did not ever see an ad for any product. And I am talking back then when the Bose 901 and other products were reviewed.

I also have visited those private backroom (by appointment only) audio places. I laughed to myself all the way out the door at the pretentiousness from them and their gullible customers. Those places exist for premium profits. Good stuff in some cases…they had better be, but not necessarily the finest or the best.

All I can say is you didn’t comprehend what I was saying. I wasn’t saying loud was good. Just that it was achievable.

And that’s why musicians and sound engineers buy Bose …NOT.

Glad you like the Bose 901’s.

If you’re only arguing to justify why you like them…go at it.

Another audio lesson… That’s not Accuracy. It’s called flatness. The ability of a speaker to produce the same loudness across the frequency spectrum. The flatter the speaker the more ACCURATE the speaker at reproducing the sound correctly. Bose are very flat within a very specific frequency range. But roll of sharply at 60hz and after 16hz.

My first job out of college (actually I was a senior when I started) was designing software for a professional sound reinforcement company. He designed systems for theaters, music halls, auditoriums, churches…etc…etc. This was 45+ years ago…so it was pretty leading edge back then. I got a good lesson on how good systems should sound. And what to listen for and what to appreciate.

I can’t speak to their current policy, but during the period ('70s through '90s) when I occasionally perused that semi-worthless publication, CG always carried full-page display ads, and many of those ads were for products that were highly rated in the same issue.

Major red flag!

1 Like

It’s like when MotorTrend rated the Chevy Vega as car of the year in (73 or 72)…The magazine was splattered with ads from GM. Probably will go down in history as one of the most unreliable vehicles ever made.

1 Like

I took various auto electric courses over the years. Back in the 70s and while not related to my job I took night school electronics (self help you could say) which involved solid state and vacuum tube. Vacuum tubes are generally out of date but not in the music amplifier world. Not once did any instructor ever say that electrons vary from one source to the other. That is the only way you would get a tonal difference.

This guy knows something about sound. Lifelong guitarist, an amplifier tech very proficient in repairing and modifying amplifiers, and dwells on the intricacies of tone. Applicable part is 4:50 to 8:40…and he does address audiophiles while not letting guiarists off the hook either.

1 Like

Sears’ brand of binoculars was “Tower” - my mother has a pair we gave my grandfather, probably in the late 50’s.