Bose is just a bad value. With the exception of there home theatre systems, they are not bad sounding speakers. The home theaters are horrid. The little Polk system I vultured from Circuit City for $300 outperforms those. Their bookshelves and even the wave radio don't sound bad, they are just really expensive for what you get. But that is what you get from a company that spends millions of dollars on direct response advertising in print and on television. Compared to PSB, Monitor Audio or Peachtree with speakers at a similar price, Bose is just a bad value.

I feel that B&W suffers from the same problem, though to less of an extreme. Particularly on their iPod streamers like the Zepplin or alternatively on the 600 series where they sell most of their volume.

Not that Bose speakers are bad or not worth their money but the fact that Bose is litigious and tries to defend their speaker's sound in court, instead of in the market.
Well, when a company (and I mean any company) tries to prevent me from criticizing their products by fist-in-the-mouth tactics I will hate them, simply because they do not accept the normal scrutiny all products go through.

My point was that Bose is a bit expensive for what you get which you seem to agree with. Your point was at the $1400 you pay for them, they aren't worth it but we be a good speaker at $700 to $1000. Overpriced, but decent speakers and I happen to think the driver of pricing is the monstrous marketing budget. However, I don't think the 901s are driving peoples hatred.

I do not agree that the Acoustimas line is on par with other audiophile grade systems. The tiny drivers just don't output a very low frequency. The issue is that the subwoofer needs to produce a frequency that is so high that it becomes directional. You can follow the soundtrack for a movie or a show on the subwoofer. Literally, you can hear someone talking, clearly on the subwoofer.

Bose is aware of this and encourages retailers to display this line in a way to highlight it most favorably. I have never seen this system displayed in a way that overlaps with another system. It is always displayed and auditioned in its own retail space.

When you look at the Acoustimass product, the retail practices around it combined with the litigious nature of the company in general, it is pretty easy to hate Bose.

If I am understanding your commentary on B&W, the rising animosity toward them has nothing to do with marketing budget but a product that is of deteriorating quality.

See, ironically I perceive the rising animosity toward B&W coming from their success combined with mass availability at Best Buy. All of that must mean that they are lying or cheating to win because they have an inferior product but have managed to build up a reputation based on other products that they are a serious audiophile brand.

I am in no way disagreeing with you on the 901s. Your saying, the 901s are good speakers so people shouldn't hate Bose. My point is that you have to look at the entire line of products and although one item may be fine, others may be polarizing and generate negative emotional responses. In this case, I believe a large portion of that animosity is driven by the Acoustimass system.

I agree the Acoustimass is marketed as a lifestyle system and the theoretical benefit is uncompromised sound in a package that is extremely discreet. My point is, the sound is compromised relative to other speaker systems.

This has nothing to do with single like drivers vs. multiple drivers. It has nothing to do with paper speakers vs ceramic vs Kevlar. It has to do with the fact that their 2" speaker can't produce anything deeper than about a 225hz sound. Above 225hz, it sounds very good. Everything below that is produced by the subwoofer and when you listen to the system, it is distracting to hear the soundtrack including speech coming from the subwoofer. Watching a movie in my friends house was difficult because I kept wanting to look at the subwoofer.

This is not inherently problematic. The issue is the average consumer perceives Bose as having developed advanced technology that lets there speakers do what other speakers can't, which in this case is defy the laws of physics. They don't discourage this perception by talking about "patented technology" and the fact that it can "deliver a fuller range of cinema sound and effects." They then set merchandising requirements at retail that make it hard for consumers to identify the shortcoming.

Now, one could argue that anyone should be suspicious when very few other speaker company produce a "satellite speaker" that is much smaller than about 4" x 8" which are all giant compared to Bose. Even the Cambridge Minx are a bit larger and they only deliver 150hz. When I put in my theatre, my wife wanted an Acoustimass system because it is tiny. I had to do my research and explain to her why I thought we shouldn't get it and saying "the guys on Stereophile think it sucks" wasn't going to work.

That research led me to understand that system quite a bit better and that their is a significant, vocal group of people who bought it and have a nasty case of buyers remorse. I personally know two people who bought it, hate it and are quite vocal in their hatred. It rubs off on people.

That is the most coherent reason I can find for why people hate Bose so much. I am not saying it is right or justified. I am saying the majority of Bose haters I know and the additional research I have done tells me a big part of it is driven by that Acoustimass system.

My first. I bought the hype I was a product of mass marketing and so bought "the worlds greatest speakers" I agree that my 55 watt realistic reciever pushed them nicely and they produced the best bass I ever got out of that room after much positioning but listening to symbals decay gives away the 4 1/2" drivers don't make the best tweeters. I never measured them but i'd bet the top end rolls off quite a bit before the average listeners hearing does. I totally recommend them for rockin party speakers though, I can remember no other speaker that had neighbors calling the police on me like those 901's

I have 2 sets running 2008 series 6 in front, 1988 series 5 in the rear. I bought both sets new. Using a Yamaha RXV595a reciever and 1 series 6 EQ. I like the aluminum sides on the 5's. I got the Black 6's , the base response is mucher warmer. I like the size and being able to mess around with the placement and angle. The 88 series 5's have never failed in 27 years. I play them in surround mode with a yamaha subwoofer and center channel mode also and they mostly sound fantastic to me. I want to find a fifth series 6 for the center because the eq does boost the normal tweeter too high. The reliability factor combined with the size, design and weight, call me a relatively cheap Audiophile type, but I just don't need a bunch of boxes with drivers pointed at me. with 4 901's , it made all the difference and you can switch to each set for specific types of sound. I don't use the pedestals and I have them up high, say 3 feet from the ceiling in the corners due to a crowded Wreck Room. Anybody else with a similar setup?

Nothing wrong w/ the Bose 901. It is a very nice speaker for teh non-discerning audiophile. To set up properly, each speaker requires 8ft of wall space- this is the only caveat (that turns off most people).