BOSE 901 (seriously)
|
Lisa Webb Unregistered guest | I know that most of you hate these speakers, but has anyone actually heard the 901's? What was your opinion? (not in a bang for buck way, but from a strictly listener standpoint). I would especially like to hear from someone that liked the sound of them. Thank-you |
|
Gold Member Username: Project6Post Number: 6156 Registered: Dec-03 | Well count me out, I have actually heard them and I did not like the sound. Really weak and unrefined and really expensive. Bass notes have no presence and very subdued. There is a strong mid-range presence but still harsh. If you want to read from people who liked them go to a Bose forum, not a place where people actually talk about other speakers and more than likely ACTUALLY heard Bose. The dislike for Bose is not unfounded and not merely opined for opinions sake. (But then again there is the mob mentality) If you really like them, no one who hates it will ever be able to convince you otherwise. If you want to hear from those who like them, you really won't need any convincing, now, would you?? |
|
Bronze Member Username: JethroLansing, Mi Post Number: 14 Registered: Jan-06 | i like the sound of them as well, but like u said there is no bang for ur buck. simply put, i do like the sound but would never buy them because i think they are a ripoff. for instance, for the same price i could get speakers that i would like the sound of a whole lot more. So my opinion is that no one in there right mind should buy them *unless* they like the way they sound better than that of other speakers in their price range. Problem with ur question is that u say not in a bang for ur buck way... which to me is saying you don't mind paying more money for an inferior sound! BTW, anyone on this forum and anyone in general will equate a speakers sound quality somewhat with its value or pricetag. To a great extent, you still get what u pay for, in this case it seems to me that u get a less for what u pay for them. |
|
Silver Member Username: GavincummNew York USA Post Number: 602 Registered: Feb-05 | the bose 901's will produce a huge wall of sound that will give you the illusion of an 8' guitar or 8' singer's mouth due to the way the drivers in the speaker are positioned. I also thought the bass was terribly boomy, and had middling highs. They DO, however, have an ENORMOUS enveloping sound. However, this comes at the expense of accuracy. Speakers can produce this same type of sound, and do so accuratly. MartinLogan is just one example that comes to mind. |
|
Lisa Webb Unregistered guest | I guess my point was "without knowing how much they cost" would you be impressed by the sound? I've heard equipment that sounded good, only to balk at the price when presented with the info. Much like riding in a new/different car without knowing that it costs and arm and a leg. It was nice, but not THAT nice of a ride. Ever see a movie that was good but not worth paying for parking and tickets in New York City? That's all I'm asking, price aside, how do they sound? |
|
Silver Member Username: Touche6784USA Post Number: 927 Registered: Nov-04 | gavin just gave you an account without mentioning price. do you not know how to read? |
|
Gold Member Username: Project6Post Number: 6212 Registered: Dec-03 | Have you listened to these 901s for yourself? Why not do yourself a favor and take the experience on your own. There are plenty of Bose stores out there and you should be able to audition a pair and then you decide. If you decide that you like without looking at the price then that's the end of that. There is no point in knowing who likes them or not. Unless you're doing some sort of marketing survey or this is some sort of experiment and sick flame bait I never pay for parking and tickets in New York City, those that do are either tourists or from New Jersey. |
|
Jon I Unregistered guest | Bose is really about effective marketing. I've heard the Bose 901 and all I can say is for the price they don't perform very well at all. Bose makes a really neat clock radio, my Dad payed over $400 for one. I agree with Gavin about the Bowers and Wilkins, specifically their loudspeakers with transmission line enclosures. On my website I review ed a interesting transmission line design by Nucore Electromagnetics called the Cathedral Sound LR45. I own a pair of these loudspeakers and the sound quality is top notch but cost around $3,000, half the price of any pair of loudspeakers with equal or better quality sound. I did get a chance to test out the Bowers and Wilkins Nautilus loudspeaker at definitive audio in Bellevue WA. The Nautilus looks great and sounds great but the price $20,000 was not worth it. For around the same price as Bose 901 $1398.00, you can buy a Meadowlark Kestrel 2 $1,500 a much better choice. |
|
New member Username: RobertsRedmond , WA USA Post Number: 7 Registered: Feb-06 | I don't hate Bose, I just like a lot of other things I also wouldn't buy alot better. |
|
Silver Member Username: GavincummNew York USA Post Number: 613 Registered: Feb-05 | if you couldn't figure out that I wasn't impressed by them... ***I WAS NOT IMPRESSED BY THEM*** The MartinLogan Montage will wipe the floor with them, and they sell for only a hair more when you consider what they cost to begin with. I have spent an extensive amount of time listening to both speakers, and the montage is by far and away more accurate. For $1495, which is roughly $100 more than the price of the Bose 901's, it becomes clear that the 901's really are terrible for the price what should a high end speaker perform like? they should not be overpriced, and need to get out of the way of musical reproduction. which bose does not do as effectively as most other speakers of its price range. here is a link to the montage: http://www.martinlogan.com/montage_speaker.html here is a review: http://www.avrev.com/equip/martinloganmontage/index.html |
|
mantaray Unregistered guest | OK, my take on 901's is it's what you do with them. I happened to get a great deal on a used pair ($300) in mint condition. I have a vaulted ceiling in my living room and I bounce the sound off an angled vault. I run them off a vintage Marantz quad 4400 for the 4 separate channel capability which allows me to use some vintage Altec loudspeakers on the floor. With the "dimension" feature of the 4400 you can get really impressive, interesing "panoramic" sound out of the 901's, especially in combination with the altecs and a 3rd bookshelf pair. Are there better speakers? Sure. But if you can find a great used pair they're worth the money if you don't want to spend a ton of money. Personally, I'm pretty happy with them, but I'm using mine in a very unconventional manner, and for the effect I wanted to create, the direct/reflective is great for a big atmospheric sound. |
|
Silver Member Username: KanoBC Canada Post Number: 839 Registered: Oct-04 | Get some Mirage Omnisats for an in home trial, listen to some of your favorite material, you will hear aspects of the music the 901s buried, while maintaining the dispersion you like. |
|
Silver Member Username: GavincummNew York USA Post Number: 721 Registered: Feb-05 | hell kano, for that matter Im certain a pair of Fluance will uncover information that the 901's bury. |
|
Silver Member Username: KanoBC Canada Post Number: 845 Registered: Oct-04 | "Mirage Omnisat Speakers use Omnipolar technology that utliize natural room reflections to produce a greater sense of realism as well as create a deep, wide and tall soundstage. This phenomenon is accomplished by recreating the same ratio of direct to reflected sound found in nature; 70% reflected and 30% direct. It is the required additional reflected sound provided by an Omnipolar speaker that creates the Omnipolar three-dimensional sound experience." Reflected sound with a complete frequency response. |
|
Silver Member Username: GavincummNew York USA Post Number: 730 Registered: Feb-05 | I am aware of that kano. I myself am a mirage fan. I was being sarcastic... eluding to the fact that the bose suck, and was hoping that you'd get it. |
|
Gold Member Username: Project6Post Number: 6571 Registered: Dec-03 | ah...erm...ahem! But seriously folks...isn't this thread about Bose 901s(seriously)! |
|
Bronze Member Username: PbdrPost Number: 95 Registered: Apr-05 | Good lord, so much hostility whenever someone mentions bose. |
|
New member Username: Armyscout42DUGWAY , UTAH USA Post Number: 3 Registered: Sep-04 | I AM LOUDSPEAKER COLLECTOR OF VINTAGE AND SOMEWHAT CURRENT AS MY INCOME CAN AFFORD. I CONSIDER MYSELF AN EXPERT AUDIOPHILE WITH MANY REVIEWS ON FORUMS AND LEGITIMATE BUSINESSES ENDORSING PRODUCTS. I HAVE 28 YRS EXPERIENCE AS AN AUDIOPHILE AND A FORMER HIGH END HOME THEATER INSTALLER WITH AN ELECTRONIC TECH EDUCATION/BACKGROUND. MY FORTE ARE TWEAKING OR IMPROVING SOUND REPRODUCTION ECONOMICALLY. I AM FORMER OWNER AND USER OF BOSE 601 SERIES 2 AND "STACKED" 901 SERIES V. The arguements made by some critics of bose do have merit and so does the SUPPORT of those who own and praise bose. I do not see as any SIDE having ALL the truths about the controversies of the BOSE 901's. Bose 901's the way it was designed on a technical level was to use the adjoining room enclosure however big or small as the EXTENSION of the loudspeaker to create the PROPER deflection/reflection dispersion produced by the 9 helical drivers that uses air ducts for ports to produce the extended bass. The problem that bose 901's face regarding the USER who most of the time DO NOT FOLLOW the guidelines of the INTENDED instructions for these UNCONVENTIONAL design. I stand neutral on the controversies regarding this loudspeaker because I do find it enjoyable to listen to PROVIDED it has proper ROOM ACOUSTICS, environment and appropriate amplification, cables and tweaks. The mistakes MOST users make on these speakers that do not like them is ALL THE WRONG elements involved in setting up this loudspeakers. I have seen this loudspeakers USED wrongfully in so many applications, you can pretty much do the same to even more advanced and better designed systems that have been made and that are out there currently. These are DISCO OR DJ LOUDSPEAKERS WHICH I have seen some people do in a club in the U.S. AIR FORCE in the 80's and few establishments outside the military. The 802's were designed for commercial applications not the 901's, and even thouse required say a JBL, ALTEC LANSING,ELECTROVOICE SUBWOOFERS. You use wrong equipments for the wrong purpose and you will have a disaster at your hands. That is what I see here on the controversy. You cannot do an A/B test bench comparison with these loudspeakers to most of the HIGH END more expensive loudspeakers out there. The more extoic drivers and transducers and cabinet designs are going to be more favorable in every frequency response test, spl's, db, pink noise, oscilliscope wave graph in every tests. I do not believe the intent of DR. BOSE was to compete with other designs of esoteric engineering, but rather his philosophy was to create the most unique, affordable, lifelike imaging, IMAGING not necessarily CLEANEST AND PURE reproduction of the original recording. Unless you are to live chamber or orchestra music, ANY AMPLIFIED CONCERT OR HALL performances are going to have SOME SORT of DISTORTION from those amplifeid equipment in a LIVE EVENT! The concept of bose and designs like it was to produce or EMULATE such events without SPENDING 2 MILLION DOLLARS to create it as what they did with the only SYSTEM ABLE TO DO SO IN THE HISTORY OF AUDIO IN 1994, designed in 1992 by KHARMA...try 30 CABINETS ON EACH SIDE and an amplification of 30,000 watts rms per side? ON A HUGE MANSION! Dr.Bose like DR. klipsch which is even older, DOWNSIZED to living room design and at affordable costs. $1500 is really not that much for the HIGH END AUDIOPHILE. They have turntables from LINN that is just entry level at that price point. Sure it is overpriced for the MID FI AND HI FI consumer which it was designed and market for, but in the HIGH END WORLD, that's only a BOOKSHELF PRICE for some manufacturers. Now on the defense of the HIGH END AUDIOPHILES, it is absolutely absurd for ANY bose defenders to even compare the bose 901's or any bose to far more expensive, better engineered, craftmanship and exotic drivers and scientifically applied engineering to FLAGSHIPS OF MANUFACTURERS that spend decades simply designing and researching for the NO COST APPROACH. It is an INSULT to the many wonderful and hardworkng AUDIO ENGINEERS for anyone to MOCK their patented designs which contributes to the ADVANCEMENT OF audio engineering. The truth is, there is NO LOUDSPEAKER IN ANY TIME THAT CAN PLEASE EVERY SINGLE LISTENER, NEVER! The reason for the many designs and concepts is for the very reason there are HUMAN BEINGS with different hearing. You cannot compare a $1500 bose 901 to a MCINTOSH XR2T flagship of 110 drivers in line source configuration, or 60 plus driver configuraiton of a GENESIS flagship or GERMAN PHYSIK 1000lb gaub or lorely DDD bending wave coherent walsh design or a MARTIN LOGAN electrostat STATEMENT e2, ALTEC TOLTEQ electrostat or true ribbon/push pull 33 plus mid/bass drivers such as a TRANSMISSION AUDIO FLAGSHIP or in HORNS, AVANT GRANDE flagships. It would be complete outrageous. It's like comparing a nissan 300zx to a lamborghini countach, both excellent sports cars at different levels or a p-51 mustang to a F-16e jet fighter...all great fighters but different and advance technology. I do not see any excuse for BOSE BASHING by the arrogant few who really should be sticking to their JBL'S, POLKS, ALTEC LANSING, ELECTROVOICE, CERWIN VEGAS, MACKIE, GMI rock enthusiast to the audiophile purist who should be listening to QUADS, VANDERSTEEN'S, VON SCHWEIKERTS, B&W, dali's, kharmas, wilsons, SWANS and I can name so many...like MAGICO, MBL'S, duevels, REL, SNELLS, JUST TO NAME SOME... There is a LOUDSPEAKER FOR EVERYONE FOLKS! For those who can't afford neither bose or any of the high end, They can always go to manufacturers like FLUANCE, STREEM, acoustic research, BIC, audio pro, yamaha and the likes. I see bose 901's as the MID POINT loudspeakers designed in the MIDDLE between budget and NO COST! So in essence, it really was and is a revolutionary product that was designed to satisfy THOSE IN THE MIDDLE not those in the LOW END and DEFINITELY NOT THOSE IN THE HIGH END... For those who is in the high end who endorses so much is because they SIMPLY LIKE THE SOUND AND various other variables of it and no matter what you do or say will convince them otherwise, the same arguement with the FANATICAL BASHERS. Don't get me wrong, many of them have THEIR MERITS, that's why THEY REALLY SHOULD NOT EVEN WASTE TIME TRYING TO CONVINCE ANYONE HOW MUCH THEY HATE BOSE. They are comparing it apples to oranges. The very few loudspeakers that you can really compare the bose 901's too at the $1500 price range of NON PLANAR/ELECTROSTAT design is the OHM WALSH 2'S or the newer 100 mk2 and possibly ELAC, which all use the surrounding walls to extend their dispersion. These are more affordable omni directional designs that creates a live soundstage like what bose claims and DOES! I do not see any comparison between bose and any conventional designs of dynamic drivers because the CONCEPT is complete different in it's approach. You cannot compare a TOWER FLOORSTANDING DYNAMIC DESIGN LIKE BOSTON, NHT, ENERGY'S, JBL'S, AXIOM, etc...to BOSE 901'S because they are totally different conceptual designs with different reproduction capabilities...You compare tower to tower...BIPOLAR TO BIPOLAR, DIPOLAR TO DIPOLAR, PLANAR TO PLANAR ETC...IT'A MATTER OF CHOICE of what ONE wants to hear in the final reproduction. This the best assessment you can make on an OBJECTIVE NOTE. Most of the reviewers are simply OVER EMPHASIZING THEIR STANCE AND BIASES FOR BOTH PROS AND CONS without really making an objective review that both CRITICIZES AND PRAISE the accomplishments and failures of this much controversial loudspeakers. I can CONFIDENTALLY AND WITH EXPERTISE disagree WITH BOTH SIDES on this issue, because the ARGUEMENTS ON BOTH SIDES REALLY ARE EITHER MERITTED OR MERITLESS, because YOU can have PROS and CON'S on all DESIGNS AND PRICE RANGES!!! Why would you want to spend $3999 on an unknown pioneer new floorstanding 3-way HT loudspeaker is on one end of the scale and or spend $50k krell loudspeaker that is all for CABINET AND BASIC DYNAMIC DRIVER DESIGN which expertises on AMPLIFIERS not loudspeakers....it's the same arguement... At least with BOSE, they are innovators of loudspeaker designs like many other manufacturers. A much more fair arguement would be BOSE AMPLIFIERS/RECEIVERS COMPARED TO CARVER, DENON, ONKYO, MCINTOSH, MARK LEVINSON, PARASOUND, ADCOM, KRELL and others. The bose loudspeakers I think that really should be under scrutiny are the LIFESTYLE/ACOUSTIMASS systems costing as much as $4000, with those cheaply made CUBES and SMALL BASS modules. I find those OUTRAGEOUS for the price. $800 is a good price for the $4000 system. You can get 901'S, 301'S and a decent center, AND A SUBWOOFER FROM INFINITY OR KLIPSCH for that price just for BOSE and other mixing or even get a whole set of MAGNEPANS or AXIOM, ANTHONY GALLOS that will blow away the BOSE ACOUSTIMASS/LIFESTYLE... The outrage of the bose bashers is in the WRONG PRODUCT, it shouldn't be the 901'S cause of all the bose designs, it's the most reputable and well reviewed by true experts and users. The critics should be criticizing the BOSE HT PACKAGES instead of the 901's. The 501's, 601's and 701's degraded in design and performance over the years, not like the 901's which either maintained or improved. I just don't like the idea of comaring it to HIGHER END, NO COMPARISON THERE. Trashing it is not a fair review either. If you are going to trash based on price and construction, where the merit is, is on the LIFESTYLE/ACOUSTIMASS MODULES! |
|
Silver Member Username: ShantaoHomewood, IL USA Post Number: 137 Registered: Apr-04 | Emmanuel; you wrote: "I do not see any comparison between bose and any conventional designs of dynamic drivers because the CONCEPT is complete different in it's approach. You cannot compare a TOWER FLOORSTANDING DYNAMIC DESIGN LIKE BOSTON, NHT, ENERGY'S, JBL'S, AXIOM, etc...to BOSE 901'S because they are totally different conceptual designs with different reproduction capabilities...You compare tower to tower...BIPOLAR TO BIPOLAR, DIPOLAR TO DIPOLAR, PLANAR TO PLANAR ETC...IT'A MATTER OF CHOICE of what ONE wants to hear in the final reproduction. " Not exactly. You compare the speakers; the whole package. Towers, planars, bi-polars, mean little if the sound quality is poor. I am not comparing design concepts, I am comparing the sound that I hear. Either it is good, or it is not. When I listen, the design, etc. is not the issue. It is how it makes you feel, the experience of it. The attention to the design and hoo haa come later. While the 901's are certainly better than the awful bose ht speakers, they just don't give me the experience and feeling I am after. That bose 901 sound feels forced, artificial, omnipresent in a saccharine way that natural sound is not. That is a personal subjective response..... just my experience of it, nothing more or less. |
|
New member Username: Armyscout42DUGWAY , UTAH USA Post Number: 5 Registered: Sep-04 | TO SHAN TAO, my point was to NEUTRALIZE the PROS AND CONS of "ANY" DESIGN. I have been stressing that there are LOUDSPEAKERS for EVERYONE because there are different designers as there are DIFFERENT EARS! You missed my point. What sounds to the person purchasing or buying or using the lOUDSPEAKER is WHAT counts and that is going to vary from person to person. Some people like the bose sound, some people like bowers and wilkins and some of us like mangepans and martin logans which are planars/electrostats. I own and owned many of these different designs and I test them with or without tweaks such as sound processors. Your view is your view anymore than the view of the bose bashers make their view and those bose supporters who make their view. My view is that of an audiophile and collector, in the NEUTRAL ZONE. You and I may not like those bose HT'S, but some people do, like my brother in law with those acoustimass. I would rather they get ORB, KLEGG, ANTHONY GALLOS OR even picture frames like ACOUSTIC ART. People hear things differently. You may not agree with my comparison issue, but some DO! For many audiophiles, design concepts IS an issue, it may not be to you or average consumers or even some in the high end world, but some prefer planars/electrostats over dyanmic designs, some like coherent line source like the walsh design. Design concepts may not be an issue to you, but to others it is because the way the sound is reproduced. Planars/electrostats which I own also do not create the same boxy sound as dynamic drivers you find on floorstandng towers of conventional design. Bose 901's which i owned for over 15 yrs sound different from any of my electrostats/planars, push pull, flat panel like srslabs and my OHM walsh coherent line source. I also have OPTIMUS LINAEUM which don't sound like bose but produces a combination of the dynamic sound along with the 360 degree OHM walsh coherent design. None of these speakers all sound the same and they are all of different drive design. THAT WAS POINT, but you are not getting the picture. Being different sounding for as long as it sounds good to the listener is the objective. Not everyone wants to drive an S.U.V or TRUCK, why would you compare say like an economical car that is small to an S.U.V if your purpose is different even though the RIDE FEELS GOOD ON BOTH.... My point is you cannot make the kind of comparisons people are making here based on the arguements made by both sides. YOU WILL ALWAYS HAVE PROS AND CONS ON ANY SYSTEM PERIOD! Some people here like BOSTON speakers, I don't like them, too boxy for me, so comparing them to something I like, like my eminent technology lft 8a which is a push pull magneplanar would not be a fair comparison because that person likes boxy dynamic drivers, i happen to prefer planars and electrostats. That is why even if I had the money, I would not buy a B&W which I think is overpriced and many of the other BOX type dynamic drivers unless I want to use it for DJ applications in which i would rather get a GMI, MACKIE, ELECTROVOICE, cause different speakers for different use or applications. You use monitors for monitors, and so forth. I never said or discourage anyone from mixing floorstanding, monitors etc....it's UNFAIR COMPARISONS that i read in these forums all the time especially when it comes to bose vs high end. I do not consider bose as high end, at the most low high end, but not high end mid level to higher end. I pointed out there are other models of different makes either hifi or high end that are far more controversial in PRICING than the bose. I don't agree with it's pricing either anymore I don't agree with some of the pricing of the flagships of some of the more conventional designs. In fact there are people whom I come across who built their own speakers which sounded much better to them than manufactured ones and some who are knowledgeable, MODIFY their existing loudspeakers, not a bad idea either cause I do it from time to time just to improve the sound to MY taste. |
|
Bronze Member Username: Armyscout42DUGWAY , UTAH USA Post Number: 28 Registered: Sep-04 | many of you bose critics are CORRECT in many of your assessments regarding boomy, unrefined, and lacking in dynamics. Unfortunately bose 901 was not designed like most any other types of loudspeakers. as much as I defend the high end world and other designs, I can also safely back up those admire bose 901. I make many comments of the 901's because I feel it is either praised way too much or bashed way too much. To me, bose 901's can only sound good if it's in the right room enclosure that has solid walls or surroundings and I repeat, good tweaks. did the bose enthusiasts here me, tweaks. i owned them for over 20 yrs from the 601's to 901's which i owned for over 16 yrs. 901's stacked not separated, stacked in two pairs with the proper tweaks sound great in my ears and may change a few critics if they heard what i experimented on. a good amp, good walls, stacked in pairs, and sound processors for you bose enthusiast makes the bose 901 sound great but not compared to any of the higher end stuff which is endless. cause you can stack them too double the impact. my point is, the bose 901 for the critics can be made to sound to one's liking, not all but to even some who may generally reject it. I think with good subs, the bose with tweaks can really sing. by itself, i do not like the bose 901's even when you have the equalizers properly set and proper room enclosures. I'm able to improve all the frequencies with expanders, equalizers, sonic holography with the 901's, with it being stacked it puts in another level. It's a similar concept as those who stack quads, eminent technology for example but not at the same level. Of course i'd rather have stacked quads or eminent technology. my point is that bose 901 can even be made to sound even better for the admirer and for the critic might change some opinions. the critic's technical criticism is with merit for those who are admirers, but since it's not their forte, no amount of convincing can change their minds. until i heard other high end designs like planars and electrostats and line transmission, i didn't think the way high end audiophiles thought. Unfortunately not everyone can experience the nirvana that high end owners who can afford great systems can. so please don't knock on the high end side if you are bose lover and tell them that bose is superior, that's far from the truth. bose 901's are recommendable for the average consumer who cannot afford higher end stuff or who have no interest in high end stuff, because lots of tender loving care is needed for the high end world. it's an art you know. I like other critics feel bose 901's could have been made with better materials such as drivers and possibly sub extention but then the designers would have to reinvent it and i don't think mr bose will change that concept if it's already working financially. why fix a something that is not broken. I think though the high end world can benefit by doing an occasional giving away like auto manufacturers of 50k loudspeakers and up...including amps! that would boost the average person from having curiosity of the fortunate few who can afford such beautiful engineering. Those who mock high end don't know what they are talking about. I will defend the mid fi and hi fi because that's the general consumer, but it is very shameful for anyone to mock the high end crowd of being snobbish, maybe some, but they have the right to be because they hear and experience something that is of another level of fine engineering that most of us can only dream of experiencing since we don't have the finances to afford such technology. The way can describe the high end community would be like comparing the mid fi crowd to say a regular southwestern flight to experiencing the cockpit of an SR-71 blackbyrd cruising at mach 3.3 |
Main Forums
Today's Posts- Home Audio Forum
- A/V Receivers Forum
- Amps Forum
- Cassette Forum
- CD Players Forum
- CD Recorders Forum
- DAC & Transports Forum
- DVD-Audio & SACD Forum
- Equalizers Forum
- Integrated Amps Forum
- iPod Docks Forum
- MiniDisc Forum
- Mini Systems Forum
- Digital Music Systems Forum
- Phono Forum
- Preamps Forum
- Speakers Forum
- Subwoofers Forum
- Tuners Forum
- Home Video Forum
- Home Theater Forum
- Car Audio Forum
- Accessories Forum
- All Forum Topics