What's new

Who has Magneplaner Speakers? (1 Viewer)

Mark Dickerson

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
May 10, 2003
Messages
128
Doug:

I originally had some DCM Time Windows which I purchased in law school some 24 years ago, but replaced them with some B + W 601s when I moved into a smaller house in California (The DCMs needed more room!). I have had the B+Ws for the past 12 years and they really have not been satisfying after the DCMs, but we had our family in the meantime and I really couldn't find what I wanted.

As for comparisons, I went to a local dealer and heard the smallest pair of Maggies (MG12s) that they had on hand that retailed for $1050US and compared them to some Paradigms (Monitor 7s, I believe) that retailed for $1200US. I heard the Paradigms first and I liked them very much--they were balanced, accurate, and very smooth. I could listen to them and enjoy them for a long time. But I only had to hear the Maggies for about 5 minutes and there was no comparison for me--the Maggies sounded clearer and much more lifelike. The speakers disappeared and the performers were now in the room. By comparison, the Paradigms sounded "veiled" and a bit boxy (something that has bothered me about my B+Ws for years). I remarked to the salesperson that it sounded like a wet blanket had been thrown over the Paradigms.

I have also heard several of the Polks, and I found their LSi Series to be interesting and enjoyable, but again, they sounded boxy by comparison, and not quite as seamless. By "boxy", I mean the soundstage is relatively small and compressed, when compared to the Maggies. I have wanted to hear some Monitor Audio speakers for years, but I am new to Colorado and I have not found a dealer for Monitor yet.

Other speakers that I listened to before buying the Maggies include the jm Lab Cobalt 816s (too bright for me, but pretty nice otherwise), KEF Q7s (too coarse, and unfocused, especially for the price), KEF Reference Model 203 (very nice and enjoyable, but at over $2K, too expensive), and Thiel CS 1.5 and 2.3 (very nice, and somewhat close to the Maggies, but I thought they sounded a little clinical compared to the Maggies).

When I ordered the MMGs, I did not know if they would be comparable to the MG12s that I heard at the dealer or not. In particular, I originally feared the MMGs would not have the bass compared to the MG12s and thought about putting in a subwoofer before I ever got them. However, when I actually got the MMGs wired up, I was very satisfied and a bit surprised. Bass is no problem! The top end was nice from the beginning, but I must say that as I play them (and I am playing them a lot), they are getting even smoother. Best of all, the imaging is absolutely first rate, just like their bigger brother. Now, while I do not have the bass to rattle the roof in the explosions in my action DVDs, they have more than enough for the music I listen to. (I will add a sub to my HT system after I purchase a receiver). Supposedly, the bass rolls off at 50 Mhz, but I am able to hear everything on my prized recordings. Most importantly, the string orchestras sound warm and mellow, without sounding edgy, there is no "chestiness" in male voices, and female voices sound right without sibilance. My wife, who has faithfully tolerated my obsession with buying new stereo equipment for the past 23 years, but who was never much impreessed with it, told me that she now understands. In short, I consider the MMGs superior to the Paradigm and Polk speakers I have heard in your $1500 price range, and the MMGs cost about 1/3 as much.

I consider my purchase of the MMGs to be the best HiFi purchase I have ever made. In fact, they are a steal. I am now a devoted Maggie owner and I have only had them for four and a half weeks! For those who have purchased the bigger Maggies, they must really be in Nirvana. But I am very pleased with my MMGs. Now if I could only get the right receiver to drive a whole Maggie HT system, I would be really happy!

:D
 

FrantzM

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Feb 9, 2003
Messages
69
Mark

I will repeat it the Magneplanar whole line is the best deal in High End. Thiel are nice too very nice.


Frantz
Port-au-Prince, Haiti
 

Lee Scoggins

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Aug 30, 2001
Messages
6,395
Location
Atlanta, Georgia
Real Name
Lee
can anybody comment on how maggies (specifically the 3.6) handle the harder side of music?
I can say that they have good bass on the 3.6s and they work well on early to late Pink Floyd and heavy Led Zeppelin. I think you will like them on heavy music and also get something special for playback of Grieg.

:)
 

Kevin T

Screenwriter
Joined
Jul 12, 2001
Messages
1,402
lee:

thanks for the input. i've never demoed maggies before and i'm starting to kick myself. i listened to the thiel cs2.3 at sound and cinema but totally missed on the maggies they had there because my ex-gf doesn't like speaker demos. i think my next opportunity will be in florence when i go to visit my parents in a few months. i'll definitely bring a nice demo disc to listen too. thanks.

kevin t
 

Ken Stuart

Second Unit
Joined
Jan 31, 2000
Messages
468
I heard my first pair of Magneplanar speakers around 32 years ago (mated with an ARC3a preamp and Empire turntable - I don't remember the amp, probably also ARC) - it took me another 14 years to be able to afford my own, and I've had Maggies as the front speakers in my living room ever since.

By the way, the area around my TV monitor is very crowded - not possibly enough room for a Magnepan center speaker - and I'm wondering if anyone has found any other speakers that might have similar timbre as a center withe the Maggies?

I had the thought of trying those "Monsoon" (IIRC) computer speakers that are planar but only 10"-12" high (assuming they reach down to where the subwoofer takes over).
 

RichardHOS

Second Unit
Joined
Mar 11, 2003
Messages
454
Hey, fellow maggie guys... this is the perfect place for me to get your opinions!

As I wrote earlier, my current plans for my new music/HT room are to use 3.6's as mains. I have two questions:

(1) The room is 30' x 21' x 10' and will be a bit more damped than a "pure" music room since it will be both music and HT. Bass will come by way of stereo infinite baffle sub systems. Question - will 3.6's be, to be blunt, lound enough for that size room, especially considering they will serve HT duty as well? For amplifier choices I'm leaning towards either a Rotel 1090 or pair of 1080's actively biamped.

(2) I'd like to use a pair of maggies for the center (have the MGCC, don't think it's going to be up to the challenge of that large of a room). Plans are to place them tweeter to tweeter (perhaps even removing side rails to achieve closer placement and reduce comb filtering effects) with each angled out a couple of degrees to aid horizontal dispersion. Keeping in mind that cost is a concern (I'd like to keep the center pair at $1000 or less), what maggies would make appropriate centers? MMG's, MG10's, MG12's? Occasionally a pair of 2.5 or 2.7's will come up for sale around $1000. How do those stack up to the new 1.6's (which also come up quite often, sometimes around $1000)?


I've asked these questions over at AudioAsylum, but I don't think I'm enough of a snob to get questions answered there. ;)
 

Burke Strickland

Second Unit
Joined
Jul 31, 1997
Messages
271
(2) I'd like to use a pair of maggies for the center (have the MGCC, don't think it's going to be up to the challenge of that large of a room). ...
Just a suggestion -- if your current MGCCx pleases you in your present environment, why not give it a try in the new room? It might pleasantly surprise you. OTOH, if it isn't up to the challenge of the larger space and you end up going for a pair of floor standing Maggies at the center, I think I'd opt for the MG 1.6s if you can get them for the same price as the smaller and/or older models you listed as alternatives. Mostly because I think they'd voice better with the MG 3.6s than older models, and have more of a chance of "keeping up with" the MG 3.6s than the smaller floor standers.

You might also want to try the forthcoming MGCC3 center. It is supposed to take care of a number of the perceived limitations of the MGCC1 and MGCC2, and, being a single speaker, would also avoid the need for the special placement considerations you've outlined for the pair of "center" speakers you are contemplating.

Good luck -- and enjoy!
 

RichardHOS

Second Unit
Joined
Mar 11, 2003
Messages
454
Thanks for the tips. The Rotel amps are pretty high current amps (especially the 1090, but I think I'm going to opt for a pair of 1080's instead). A pair of 1080's will effectively be a monoblock solution with 600 watts per speaker. I'm am fairly set on actively biamping everything, and simply can't afford more expensive amplification than something along the lines of the Rotel components.

I think I'm going to make a deal for a pair of MG10's for the center channel. They are the same height as the 1.6 but only 10 inches wide, and have a very similar midrange/tweeter panel design and crossover point. They lack the bass panel area of the 1.6 and the low frequency extension is cut off around 60Hz~80Hz, but from all indications should voice very much like the 1.6's. Their narrow width should greatly help horizontal dispersion and lobing/comb filter distortion that I would expect from a pair of 1.6's.

I do like the MGCC1, and would expect the MGCC3 to sound even better, but for the anticipated price I think a pair of vertical maggies (since my installation allows this not so common configuration) would be a more cost effective solution (and likely better sounding as well).
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest Articles

Forum statistics

Threads
356,814
Messages
5,123,752
Members
144,184
Latest member
H-508
Recent bookmarks
0
Top