Who has Magneplaner Speakers? (1 Viewer)

[Arup]

Magnepans are very good speakers and are truly affordable considering their performance. If Yamaha did not make speakers I would be using Magnepans for my Yamaha amps as they truly compliment each other.

 

[Burke Strickland]

After auditioning a wide range of speakers of different designs and price levels, the previous contenders suddenly became “also rans” when the Magnepan MG 3.6s won me over with their convincing sense of being in the same space with the performers, more so than with any other speakers I’ve listened to in a home music system (as opposed to sound reinforcement at a concert where I actually WAS in the same space as the performers). The Maggies’ clarity, detail, sense of space, wide and deep soundstage, cohesiveness of sound all up and down the frequency range are a few of the qualities that make daily listening to them with any type of music that you happen to like such a rewarding and enjoyable experience.

When I bought my Magnepan MG 3.6s, it was with the intention of using them for music, while retaining a Def Tech home theater speaker complement that included BP 2000s up front and BP-20s in the rear and a C/L/R 2000 center. I had already found that a separate stand alone sub was necessary to get the deepest bass, so I had added a Velodyne FSR-18 to the mix. But my dealer suggested that as an experiment I might want to try the Maggies on a movie soundtrack. After I finally got around to doing that, the Def Tech BP-2000s never got back into play as the front mains for HT (they are now my side speakers in a 7.1 configuration) and eventually I swapped out the center for a Magnepan MGCC1.

I had originally set up the systems separately all the way up and down the chain, but having decided to incorporate the Maggies into my HT setup as well as use them in their original role as magic acarpet to the music venues, :>) I also set out to converge the electronics. I had started out using an Acurus 3x100 amp for the Maggies, since that was what was at hand at the time they were delivered and installed in my home. But about a year later I invested in the amp my Maggie dealer recommended as “the” amp for use with Maggies – the BEL (Brown Electronics Lab) 1001 Mk V. This amp is a match made in heaven for the Maggies, with sufficient current to drive the Maggies cleanly to insane sound pressure levels and render measurable dynamic response that some people assert mistakenly that Maggies are incapable of. Sonically, the BEL amp enhances the positive characteristics of the Maggies like no other amp I’ve heard with them. Although they can be used as monoblocks, I only bought one and am using it in stereo mode. In my fairly small room (16 feet x 18 feet with cathedral ceiling starting at nine feet and peaking at twelve feet, and with openings to other parts of the house), one is sufficient.

Also converging the rest of the electronics, I stopped using the separate pre-amp I had started with and made do for a while using the pre/pro section of a Yamaha DSP-A3090 (all channels of amplification were handled external power amp – the BEL for the front mains and the Acurus for the rears and center) until I finally finished my search for the “holy grail” of pre/pros with acquisition of the Integra Research RDC-7. It has performed admirably as a front end for music playback and has all the surround facilities needed for movie playback. It also allowed implementation of a 7.1 configuration, so the Yamaha is back in service for its amps only this time. :>)

Every time I audition other speakers, I am always glad to get back home to my Maggies. This has even been true a couple of times returning from live concerts where the sound reinforcement wasn’t properly rendered. They basically “disappear” and let me enjoy the music without calling attention to themselves. Although they are quite capable of pleasing bass down to about 35 hz, I enjoy having the Velodyne in the loop for deep organ pedal tones and other instruments probing the depths of sub bass. (Of course it is a necessity for movie soundtrack “slam” and LFE, but I’ve found that to be true with virtually all speakers.)

Assuming you are willing to team them up with appropriate electronics and take a little time to set them up properly, (please, NOT right up against the wall), you simply can’t go wrong with the Magnepan MG 3.6s.

Enjoy!

 

[RichardHOS]

I'm pretty excited about having an all Maggie HT this time next year. Well, I suppose I have one right now (SMGc mains, MMG surrounds, MGCC1 center), but I plan on making a substantial jump in quality and available power. I'm pretty set on 3.6R mains, with my SMGc and MMG's being demoted to side and rear surrounds, and a pair of maggies for the center (either MG10, MG12, or MG1.6's... depending on what I can afford and the auditions I do over the next few months). I currently have 12 channels of good clean power (six Rotel RB-981's), and plan on adding another eight or so channels to complete the HT.

Unless I change my mind and with some boxy sounding speakers instead... nah!

 

[Lee Scoggins]

Thanks for the great responses firends.

I'm not sure which is more responsible for the unique sound (planar element or dipole radiation). In the bass, as I stated, I believe it's the dipole wavelaunch, and not the planar element as such, which is responsible for their inherent "rightness".

I believe the sound is inherent in the design but three things work for me...

1. The ribbon tweeter on the 3.6 is the most accurate tweeter one can buy. Now we see Aerial and others going to the ribbons for a tweeter because these things capture pure HF sound like no dome tweeter on a dynamic speaker can.

2. There is no box to produce distortion so the waveform comes out unhindered. Also, image size is large which is just like real life. Listening to better recorded jazz or classical is enveloping.

3. The midrange is exceptionally accurate and fast. One hears transient detail that I have not found in dynamic speakers. And the bass on the new speakers is as good as any dynamic (except that which is real low). Maggies probably do the mid-bass region (very important for jazz) as good as any speaker.

To answer a question from Chris, I think you don't think you need a subwoofer for the better Maggies since the bass goes down to 25-35 hz.

They are one terrific value in the world of audio.

 

[Burke Strickland]

Lee --

You've pretty well cataloged the Maggies' major attributes. There are probably folks who would read a list like that and shake their heads in disbelief -- until they have a chance to listen to the Maggies for themselves and confirm that what you say is true. Of course, that also assumes that the Maggies are properly set up, and driven by appropriate electronics.

I agree that for most music, the Magnepan MG 3.6s do a superb job without a subwoofer. In fact, there have been times that, for some reason or other, my sub has been turned off, and I didn't even realize it for quite a while while listening music AND movies, until I happened to see that the subwoofer's power light was not lit. :>)

Like I mentioned before, these Maggies handle a strong bass presentation quite well down to 35 hz or so without assistance and actually have useful (audible) bass even lower than that. For instance, I can hear the 20 hz organ pedal note during the opening 45 seconds of Also Sprach Zarathustra just using the Maggies. But the sofa doesn't move unless I plug in the subwoofer. :>)

Of course, some material where you really want to "feel" the bass (actually getting to the sub-bass region), such as the rolling fundamentals of the deepest organ pipes like you would experience in a cathedral, or the body-slam of the sonic concussion from a building detonation in a movie, :>) the subwoofer comes in handy. But that material is actually a small subset of all the material most of us play anyway.

The Maggies' cohesiveness of the bass with the rest of the frequency spectrum can be startling to those who have experienced dynamic speaker set ups where the "hand off" isn't really very smooth.

The Maggies' value is nothing short of stunning. I have auditioned speakers costing five times as much which I felt were not nearly as pleasing musically, and the only other set of speakers I considered as serious competition were up to three times as expensive (depending on finish). I ended up getting the Maggies because I prefer their sound and overall presentation. Their remarkably affordable price vis a vis their quality was just icing on what was already a very nice cake. :>)

 

[Scott Oliver]

I agree that Magneplanars are very good speakers, in fact they were at the top of my list for future speaker contenders for a long time. Then realized that in my current space big Maggies like the 3.6R's would totally overwhelm and probably not react well in the space.

I do not however agree with statements like no box speaker can match Maggies or even statements along the lines of no other tweeter can compete with ribbons.

As I said "I love the sound of Maggies" but in all my listening I have found speakers that compete with them in sound and not all of them cost 5 times more in price, nor are all of them boxless or ribbon filled. I think you guys are making statements with way to broad of a brush.

For reference my favorite 4 speakers that I have either audiotioned or owned are:
Soundlab M-1's
Magneplanar 3.6R's
JM Reynaud Offrande's
Avantegarde Duo's

 

[Scott Oliver]

oops Double Post.

 

[Doug_B]

I auditioned 1.6's and 3.6's back in 2001 when speaker searching. I noticed definite improvements with the 3.6's; a cleaner, more natural overall presentation, and better low freq extension to boot. I would probably have gone with the 3.6's except I really couldn't support two 2-foot wide speakers in a 13 foot wide room that's also used for HT (unless I used a 20" display ). Went with a pair of Soundline Audio SL3's, based on a BG ribbon. Would be interesting to do a face-off of these two, as the BG ribbon's span from the high end all the way down to 250Hz provides a very seamless presentation that I think would give the 3.6's a run for their money.

Off topic somewhat, I'm breaking in a pair of MMG's for a second setup that is TV-centric. Would love to compare these to a box speaker (such as Paradigm Studio 60's). Thus far, I think vocals can be better with the MMG's; hopefully add'l break-in will help.

Doug

 

[John Kotches]

Doug,

Wow, I finally bumped into someone else on one of the forums that's using Soundline Audios...

Welcome to the club!

I'm upgrading the center speaker to a matching SL-2 sometime this summer, after everything else for the new theater room is finished. Maybe I'll put the SL6-6 in as a rear surround....

I'm glad you're enjoying the Soundlines. As far as comparisons go, in the end it would be personal taste

Regards,

 

[Lito]

is SL audio still around??

the google search i did points to a missing website.

edit: never mind, my ISP's having DNS problems.

 

[Doug_B]

John,

I'm glad you're enjoying the Soundlines. As far as comparisons go, in the end it would be personal taste

Definitely. Although aural memory is fleetingly short, I suspect the final tally, from my perspective, would end up with pros on both sides.

Doug

 

[Joe Casey]

Doug,
Regarding break-in for Maggies, with regular listening, I'd say about 6 months. Don't really know what that equates to in hours if one were to set up a break-in loop (300-400 hours?). I've noticed the highs get a little smoother (for both the ribbon and QR), but the major improvements are in the bass panel. They seem to loosen up and go lower, with some added fullness. Of course, over a 6 month period, you also get to fine tune the positioning.

 

[Doug_B]

Joe,

Thanks for the feedback. I'm glad the bass panel has more breaking in to do. I've been looping material for about 12 of every 24 hours at low to moderate volume with them connected in my media room (as opposed to final resting place) to get it broken in more quickly. I'm surprised at how much juice they need.

Doug

 

[John Kotches]

Doug,

I have so much stuff going through my mailbox that the discussions had completely slipped my mind. Don't take it personally, I go through about 300 personal e-mails a month, and another 400-500 business related messages.

I'm glad you are enjoying them long term though, as I am as well.

As far as hiding a 6' tall CC, what will hide it is an electric rolldown screen from Stewart for movies

For multi-channel music, I'll raise the screen

Regards,

 

[Lee Scoggins]

They seem to loosen up and go lower, with some added fullness. Of course, over a 6 month period, you also get to fine tune the positioning.

Joe, this has been my experience as well. I also find the midrange seems to settle in a bit.

Joe mentions something else that is important. Room positioning. I have been using the Cardas speaker placement formula with great results and I mark off the speaker spot very precisely. See www.cardas.com for more data. Also works on dynamic speakers and for other planers like the Soundline. Check it out.

 

[John Kotches]

Lee,

You should try CARA (Computer Aided Room Acoustics) as a software tool. I'm using it to model the new multi-channel/theater room so that I have a fairly sound starting point for all speaker placements.

From there, I'll tweak by ear.

You can take a look at the product, at http://www.cara.de

I've tried the Cardas method as well, and it is another effective method for a starting point.

As always, any of these should be considered starting points, not absolutes.

Regards,

 

[Doug_B]

Joe mentions something else that is important. Room positioning. I have been using the Cardas speaker placement formula with great results and I mark off the speaker spot very precisely. See www.cardas.com for more data. Also works on dynamic speakers and for other planers like the Soundline. Check it out.

Interesting reading Lee, thanks. Unfortunately, the use of my room in a shared mode with HT and my damn L-shaped sofa limit my placement flexibility. I guess I'm going to need a dedicated audio room .

BTW Lee, do you think you have enough votes on this thread to justify moving up to the 3.6's?

Doug

 

[Mark Dickerson]

I just purchased the MMGs, my first purchase of a Maggie, and I love them. Although I read that room positioning is important, I must say that these Maggies are no worse than any other speaker, and in many cases, a whole lot more tolerant of the compromises one often has to make in a room that is used for other things than just audio and HT.

I am currently running these speakers with an 16 year old Kyocera receiver (an honest 100 wpc) and they sound great, but I am looking to build a home theater using the Maggies. Can anyone suggest a quality AVR receiver that I can use to drive a Maggie HT? My budget is about $1K. Thanks

 

[Doug Fogle]

Mark,I've been debating whether to go with offer on the MMG so I'm very interested in your opinion.What were you using before?And for anyone,how do they compare to $1500 box speakers(Paridigm,Monitor,Polk,etc)?

 

[Kevin T]

how are the 3.6 for metal / industrial music? my tastes range from tori amos and grieg to deicide and bile. can anybody comment on how maggies (specifically the 3.6) handle the harder side of music? for reference, i'm using aragon palladium ii monoblocks so clean, copious power is not an issue. thanks.

kevin t