Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site druxu.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!ahuta!drutx!druxu!mohler From: mohler@druxu.UUCP (MohlerDS) Newsgroups: net.audio Subject: Re: Reply to Dick Grantges & Andrew Koenig (Bose Article) Message-ID: <1480@druxu.UUCP> Date: Wed, 24-Apr-85 13:18:30 EST Article-I.D.: druxu.1480 Posted: Wed Apr 24 13:18:30 1985 Date-Received: Thu, 25-Apr-85 04:07:41 EST References: <260@moncol.UUCP>, <3612@alice.UUCP> <264@moncol.UUCP> <334@petrus.UUCP>, <1098@hound.UUCP> Lines: 116 This note is a reply to Dick Grantges on his comments to my Article, also to Andrew Koenig and whoever else demanded sources and anyone else who is interested. It is also a list of references from which I formed my opinion. First, I have no axe to grind. I meant what I said in Article 3838, that there is absolutely nothing wrong with liking BOSE 901's for non-critical listening. Second, in Article 3838 I offered the following invitation; "If anyone still needs evidence of the flaws of this design, send me mail, there is tons of documentation on this speaker". I received no mail to date, just some postings. Third, I suggest that you Dick, go back in the postings and notice that it was George and Ben whom you challenged, not I. Lastly, several individuals George Labelle, Herb Chong, myself and several others have taken the approach: to explain the issues and facts behind the BOSE design flaws and allow you to think about it. Herb's articles were the most thorough and accurate I think. Instead, Dick and Andy seem to desire a Quote from some magazine where a Technical writer, with possibly limited credentials, draws a conclusion for you. This is not intended to slam technical writers, it merely refers to the fact that very few audio magazine reviewers have the training of some engineers and students on the net. Most engineers would rather know the issues and the theory behind the issues, so they can draw their own conclusions! Several of you either didn't read the explanations of the BOSE flaws or you didn't understand why it is important to the test results or you just ignored them. What was given is evidence, if you took the time to think about it. Dick, in my case you said: "I am not a partisan of the BOSE 901. Neither do I believe in your brand of sweeping denunciation backed only by hot air". This is the first time I have heard facts and physics called "hot air". I take offense at statements like this that are so obviously intended as a personal slam and are not true. I further take offense at you printing that Ill-conceived garbage on the net when I offered my own time to reply to any mail. In addition, Judging by your comments, I suspect that you can't refute any of the technical arguments several people took the time to write. I apologize to those that feel that comments like the above don't belong on the net, but I took Dick's comments as a slam without basis, so I chose to expose it. In a speech J.F.K. said something that applies to you Dick; "Too often people exercise the privilege of opinion without the discomfort of thought!". I originally brought up a private study about CD audible differences, for those who are interested it was Article 3800. I chose at that time to (nicely) mention some of the BOSE design flaws. My point then and now is that if you use any transducer to evaluate very subtle differences in sound between two CD players you had better be very sure that it doesn't exhibit major flaws in those areas that you are searching for differences in. For those that are interested there have been several professionally conducted CD tests and audible differences have been shown for example: Article 3800. For those that have asked for sources, in defense of my own thoughtful opinion, I offer the following technical references: 1. Perception and Geometry, Richard C. Heyser, Audio June 1977 2. Time & Frequency in Loudspeaker Measurements, Richard C. Heyser, Audio July 1977 3. Doppler Distortion in Loudspeakers, James Moir, Audio August 1976 4. Results on the Audibility of Midrange Phase Distortion in Audio Systems, Stanley P. Lipshitz et al. University of Waterloo, Ontario Canada, Audio Engineering society 67th. Convention October 31, 1980 (This university is where Herb is from they do a lot of first rate audio research!) 5. Audibility of Phase effects in Loudspeakers, H. D. Harwood BBC Research Department, Wireless World January 1976 6. Stereophonic Image Sharpness, H. D. Harwood, Wireless World Volume 74 1968 7. Phase Shift in Loudspeakers, James Moir, Wireless World April 1976 8. Time Alignment in Loudspeakers, Ed Long, Audio August 1977 9. Frequency Modulation Distortion in Loudspeakers as a Frequency design Criteria, Stephen Kurtin, Audio December 1977 10. The Speaker and the Listener, Roy Allison, Stereo Review August 1976 11. Acoustics, L. L. Baranek, This is a masterful and still relatively accurate text book on acoustic theory. 12. Journal of the Audio Engineering Society Loudspeaker Preprint Book. Any of the articles on dispersion, driver control and effective mass, driver diameter vs. dispersion etc. would be good. Please note that these are articles defending my previously mentioned Bose design flaws, they do not specifically mention the BOSE design. I chose articles that are relatively easy to find, so no-one can accuse me of using un-verifiable references. Before any of you say ahah! no articles specifically about the BOSE design please see the following: 1. The BOSE 901, Boston Audio Society speaker, you can look up the issues! 2. How to Have the right sound in the right place, Amar Bose, House and Garden, October 1975. I suspect this was the only magazine at the time that would publish his propaganda - what a laugh!! 3. The BOSE 901, Martin Colloms, The Loudspeaker Anthology - Hifi Choice older issues will have reviews. 4. The BOSE 901, High Fidelity, you can look up the issues! 5. Further evidence is the complete disregard for this design in not one but every High - End audio magazine. Once again I chose some of the easy to find articles. I chose not to waste any more time looking up information on a meaningless debate. There are many other possible references including some real zingers from Japan, however this should be a reasonable cross-section for those who were genuinely interested. To those who feel this is inadequate I must reply; go to the library I wasted enough time on what is simply an open and shut case. I do not plan to reply to any additional requests for information, unless it is a serious request. Also, anyone who got their nose out of joint by reading this can feel free to use the mail and reply privately. This information wouldn't be on the net except that is where Dick decided to dump on someone else. Lastly, I don't intend to further discuss this issue on the net. In parting, lets try to remember that the net is intended to be a relatively factual and friendly place to publish general interest articles. Once again I apologize to the general net readership, maybe this will be the end of this fruitless discussion! I certainly hope so. David S. Mohler AT&T - ISL @ Denver !druxu!mohler