[Steven Sullivan]

c. leeds wrote:
Steven Sullivan wrote:
... I don't think the 901 was what any
consumer particularly wanted.

Really? How to you account for their enduring popularity?

It's a big, ungainly beast with peculiar
placement requirements.

There are bigger speaker systems by far,

And did I say oor imply therwise? No. Could it be
you're just spoiling for an argument?

and all speakers must be
properly place for best performance.

And again, did I say or imply otherwise? No.

901s are more fussy in that regard than, say, Mirage's
omnipolar designs, or the NHTs I currently use.

Then too there's the requirement for an outboard EQ
just to make them peform to factory spec. That's
rather peculiar too.

Btw, I speak from that direct experience you usually
demand when someone makes a comment on component
sound. I owned a pair of 901s Series IVs for about a decade, using
them in four or five different rooms during that time.
So I presume you've done your share of 'auditioning' 901s too,
right? I'd hate to think you were being hypocritical.

The amusing thing about the 901 system is that they're reviled by many
of the subjectivists and subjectivists alike. Yet, they remain in
continuous production for 40 years. It's proof that the marketplace
doesn't care about the opinions of the self-appointed experts in this
group.

Though of course, most of ink spilled against them has come from subjectivists
....and subjectivists. I've made more than one post to Usenet and
other fora, arguing that not ALL the bad rap 901s get is entirely
fair or justified.

___
-S
"When great musicians play aimless and the lack of ideas continues into despair, give birth to
songs in that way." - unknown