|
Post by strindl on Dec 3, 2009 10:20:23 GMT -5
Thanks for all your help. It looks like I'll start out with a pair of 1.6's. I'll probably head over to Tampa and get a new pair. Looking forward to listening to my favorite music all over again. You are going to love the 1.6's with the XPA-1's. I tried mine that way. It was actually easier for me to carry the maggies down to the room my XPA-1's were in than to carry the XPA-1's to where the maggies were. I normally drive the 1.6's with a Threshold S500e stasis amp which is rated at 500 watts per channel at 4 ohms, and that combination sounds wonderful. The XPA-1's sounded better on them though.
|
|
|
Post by slbenz on Dec 3, 2009 10:49:39 GMT -5
Thanks for all your help. It looks like I'll start out with a pair of 1.6's. I'll probably head over to Tampa and get a new pair. Looking forward to listening to my favorite music all over again. Great choice and I am sure you will really enjoy them. If you do get the upgrade bug for them, don't forget getting a pair of Mye Stands for them. Let us know how you like the 1.6 once you have them set up.
|
|
bootman
Emo VIPs
Typing useless posts on internet forums....
Posts: 9,358
|
Post by bootman on Dec 3, 2009 18:26:55 GMT -5
They will sound their best after about a month of break in.
|
|
|
Post by strindl on Dec 4, 2009 0:39:27 GMT -5
They will sound their best after about a month of break in. The bass definitely gets deeper after some break in. The mylar needs to loosen up a bit.
|
|
ntrain42
Emo VIPs
Smoke me a kipper, I'll be home before breakfast!
Posts: 2,969
|
Post by ntrain42 on Dec 4, 2009 13:20:33 GMT -5
In a room that size 1.6's will be fine, you could even run the 3 series as well too, thats a good sized room to work with them. As for durability, Maggies are somewhat delicate. If you have the money I actually recommend a brand new pair. 1.6's arent really that expensive new. The ribbons will need to be replaced over time. The way they are built, they just don't hold up long term unless your very careful with them, drive them with clean power. For those who want a sturdier speaker with that electrostatic/planar/ribbon sound I would actually recommend a set of Martin Logans. True, Martin Logans would be more durable over time, but Magnepans are easy to repair. When my Magnepan IIIa midrange panel quit, I contacted Magnepan for the midrange panel kit which cost $50 to repair two Magnepans. Actually, there is enough material to do two pairs of Magnepans and is an easy DIY. I like the idea that I can repair the Magnepans myself and not have to send them in for repairs. Also, to replace the true ribbon tweeter, you need to desolder two wires and the cost of the true ribbon is $99 each. I am still running the original true ribbons on one of the sets I have and is now 23 years old! Having owned a set of Martin Logans, you do need to regularly clean the panels with a vacuum cleaner or you will be hearing arcing sounds because of the accumulated dust which is why a number of Martin Logan owners have an air cleaner in the same room with their speakers. I personally feel the replacing the panels is easy, but I have seen people botch the job, LOL! In terms of longevity, I have seen 30 year old maggies on their original ribbons work flawlessly, I have seen unfortunately a number of toasted ribbons on products with minimal use and less than 5 years old. Kind of a mixed bag in that dept. Again, good clean power(and lots of it, XPA-2 or 2 XPA-1's would be my recommendation when it comes to Emotiva amps)in the 500 watt per channel range minimizing the potential for square wave clipping is pretty much needed with them to ensure long life.
|
|
|
Post by rudiepoo1 on Dec 4, 2009 14:38:45 GMT -5
Good luck on your venture with the 1.6's. I went and auditioned them at the end of summer and agree with what others have said.....there are an absolute sonic marvel and reveal things box speakers just can't unless your ready to shell out some serious coin. The one thing that surprised me was the bass and believe me there was some serious bass with these panels. I listened to them without a sub through an all Rotel front end and wow.....truly amazing!
In the end I just didn't have the room to let them properly work their majic and decided to go a different route.
|
|
|
Post by audiodragon on Dec 4, 2009 15:59:12 GMT -5
I haven't heard Magnepans, but I am curious, do they have a narrow sweetspot? When auditioning speakers, I listened to some Martin Logan Claritys, they sounded fantastic when I was sitting, but the moment I stood up and walked around the room the volume dropped dramatically and so did the quality of sound. They had no real vertical dispersion above the top of the panel. The salesman told me that this is a characteristic of electrostatics. I no longer considerded them because the speakers were going in our living room and a lot of listening would be casual whill doing other stuff around the house. But I have been curious if this was limited to the Claritys, or if it is a electrostatic characteristic. I really did like the sound comming from the MLs, just wasn't practical for our use.
|
|
|
Post by dreadpiratemarc on Dec 4, 2009 18:11:01 GMT -5
That is true of any panel speaker. The best way to create a sonic spotlight is to have it come from a flat surface larger than the wavelength of the sound. In fact, that is the principle behind most non-lethal sonic weapons used as deterrents against pirates off the African coast. (with less-than-stellar success)
I think Martin Logans are better than Magnepans at dispersing horizontally, due to their curved panels. But neither disperse vertically. In critical listening, that's considered a good thing because it prevents unwanted interactions with floors and ceilings. But this limitation is one reason why many speakers from both manufacturers are so tall. My Martin Logans are taller than I am, so sitting or standing they sound the same.
|
|
|
Post by slbenz on Dec 5, 2009 0:39:44 GMT -5
I haven't heard Magnepans, but I am curious, do they have a narrow sweetspot? When auditioning speakers, I listened to some Martin Logan Claritys, they sounded fantastic when I was sitting, but the moment I stood up and walked around the room the volume dropped dramatically and so did the quality of sound. They had no real vertical dispersion above the top of the panel. The salesman told me that this is a characteristic of electrostatics. I no longer considerded them because the speakers were going in our living room and a lot of listening would be casual whill doing other stuff around the house. But I have been curious if this was limited to the Claritys, or if it is a electrostatic characteristic. I really did like the sound comming from the MLs, just wasn't practical for our use. Having owned and demoed both, I would say that the Martin Logans have a narrrower sweet spot when compared with Magnepans. I have IIIas which are six feet tall and I do not experience a sound shift from a sitting to standing position. I have heard the Claritys and Prodigys and both had a sound shift when I went from a sitting to standing position. Both Martin Logan and Magnepan have their strengths and weaknesses. I am now in a Magnepan stage in my audio life.
|
|
ntrain42
Emo VIPs
Smoke me a kipper, I'll be home before breakfast!
Posts: 2,969
|
Post by ntrain42 on Dec 5, 2009 15:50:32 GMT -5
I've auditioned all three. The 1.6 is a marked upgrade to the MMG. The 3.6's are enormous in size and require a very large room. You will need a powerful amp to drive the 1.6 and 3.6. Ive got to make a few comments here. The MMG, MG 12 and MG 1.6's literally sound identical in the CORRECT room sized environment. They are all quasi ribbon designs. They all use a similiar xover(which is built really, really CHEAP)point. The only real difference between them is SIZE. Room size is very critical and matching your magnepans to the room size is what should be your determining factor in which model you choose between the 3 mentioned. If you have a large/larger room in the 24-28x14-16 range the 1.6's would most likely be the best choice. 16-20x10-14 range is optimal for the 12's. 14x10 roughly or less I would recommend the MMG's. When in doubt, ALWAYS go with the smaller Maggie! Use the money saved and upgrade those xovers!(See below) All 3 sets have different room placement requirements due to their respective sizes in said rooms. Horizontal first reflection points should have proper treatment appointments due to open baffle design to maximize imaging potential. All 3 sets greatly benefit greatly from a single or pair of dedicated subs playing the last octave(20-50/60hz range)roughly. All 3 speakers GREATLY BENEFIT from an amp capable of a solid 500 watts per channel at 4 ohms. All 3 speakers GREATLY BENEFIT from a crossover upgrade. BIG TIME. The weakest link in all 3 speakers is the horrible passive crossover they employ. There is literally less than $6.50 worth of corssover parts in all 3 sets(this is no exxageration). If you love they way your maggies sound now. Go to one of the 3-4 places that offer external xover upgrade options online, spend an extra $2-300 dollars on a quality external xover that features Mills resistors, Sonicaps and Erse Low DCR inductors. The difference is literally night and day in the sound quality. I love Maggies, and there is so much upside with them when they are correctly mated to a proper sized room and the crossovers have been upgraded to allow for their full potential. Love your Maggies? Instead of wasting money on a useless exotic power cord set for your amps or overpriced interconnects and speakerwire, put that money back into the Maggies crossovers and pick up a sub or 2 to mate up with them, and realize their full potential. ;D
|
|
|
Post by strindl on Dec 5, 2009 15:59:41 GMT -5
I am intimately familiar with all three of those speakers...they really don't sound identical. Your statement that because they all use "quasi ribbon" designs that means they all sound the same is equivalent to saying that all Polk speakers sound the same because they all use cone and dome designs. They don't.
|
|
ntrain42
Emo VIPs
Smoke me a kipper, I'll be home before breakfast!
Posts: 2,969
|
Post by ntrain42 on Dec 5, 2009 16:27:56 GMT -5
I am intimately familiar with all three of those speakers...they really don't sound identical. Your statement that because they all use "quasi ribbon" designs that means they all sound the same is equivalent to saying that all Polk speakers sound the same because they all use cone and dome designs. They don't. I am more familiar with them than most people, I sold and set em up for years. Room size is paramount to their sound frequency response interaction. The design fundamental between all 3 sets is identical. From the low midrange on up they all have the same identical frequency response. The difference is their low frequency extension due to the size. And this is why room size is so critical with them. So, of course they won't sound identical in the SAME ROOM. You cannot do an apples to apples comparison with a more forgiving closed box loaded design(like the polks) to what is basically an infinite/open baffle design speaker setup like the maggies. Infinite baffle type speakers are much more sensitive to room volume and placement for their overall response and low frequency extension. 2 different animals altogether. A closed box designed speaker uses its own enclosure for its main tuning characteristics, an open/infinite baffle design speaker like the maggie uses the ROOM for its enclosure literally and for its main tuning characteristics.
|
|
|
Post by strindl on Dec 5, 2009 21:42:16 GMT -5
ALL speakers rely on room interaction. The only difference in that regard between the magnepan design and a conventional box speaker is what happens to the rear sound wave from the drivers.
|
|
ntrain42
Emo VIPs
Smoke me a kipper, I'll be home before breakfast!
Posts: 2,969
|
Post by ntrain42 on Dec 5, 2009 21:59:36 GMT -5
ALL speakers rely on room interaction. The only difference in that regard between the magnepan design and a conventional box speaker is what happens to the rear sound wave from the drivers. You have quite a bit to learn. I honestly suggest you do a search on open baffle full range dipole speakers and how critical room size and placement is for them in relationship to their overall response compared to a traditional front radiating box speaker. But to give a simple explanation, a traditional box speakers PRIMARY loading and response for the enclosed drivers is the box itself. THe room is the secondary loader. But with open baffle style speakers like the maggies, the room itself is the PRIMARY loader. The room itself IS the enclosure literally.
|
|
|
Post by strindl on Dec 5, 2009 22:43:33 GMT -5
Ok ntrain, may I call you N for short? You don't really know as much as you think you do. I knew the first time I saw your know it all style of posting that you and I would end up butting heads here. I don't have any desire to turn this into a public bash fest though.
I'm done with you.
|
|
ntrain42
Emo VIPs
Smoke me a kipper, I'll be home before breakfast!
Posts: 2,969
|
Post by ntrain42 on Dec 6, 2009 1:09:54 GMT -5
Ok ntrain, may I call you N for short? You don't really know as much as you think you do. I knew the first time I saw your know it all style of posting that you and I would end up butting heads here. I don't have any desire to turn this into a public bash fest though. I'm done with you. You should never have started to be quite frank. Do people with more apparent knowledge in certain subject matter that you obviously lack in give you an inferiority complex or something? Seriously, time to grow up(and the PM you sent me was childish at best). If you really didn't want a public "bash fest" you wouldn't be posting the jibberish that is now cluttering up this thread. Why don't you take the wasted time and effort you put into arguing with me, and put it into something useful like knitting and tea time.
|
|
bootman
Emo VIPs
Typing useless posts on internet forums....
Posts: 9,358
|
Post by bootman on Dec 7, 2009 8:16:00 GMT -5
Please take this to the sandbox. Or better yet start an engaging debate where ideas can be shared in another thread.
|
|
|
Post by jmilton on Dec 7, 2009 8:37:32 GMT -5
...boob.
|
|
oneliterpeter
Emo VIPs
The Older You Get... The Faster you Were
Posts: 1,004
|
Post by oneliterpeter on Dec 7, 2009 9:47:16 GMT -5
I haven't heard Magnepans, but I am curious, do they have a narrow sweetspot? When auditioning speakers, I listened to some Martin Logan Claritys, they sounded fantastic when I was sitting, but the moment I stood up and walked around the room the volume dropped dramatically and so did the quality of sound. It's easy to get the impression that ML's lose sound quality once you get up out of the sweet spot but that's only because they sound so much better than dynamic speakers. If you were to do a standing comparison of ML's to other dynamic speakers you'll find that they sound about the same. Ahhh... but once you're in the sweet spot (which is where any critical listening occurs) they just leave the others in the dust. BTW... Clarity's are at the bottom of ML's line up. If you should revisit demoing ML's... Vista - Vantage - Spire - Etc. would be a better choice.
|
|
|
Post by bigred7078 on Dec 7, 2009 10:12:11 GMT -5
ALL speakers rely on room interaction. The only difference in that regard between the magnepan design and a conventional box speaker is what happens to the rear sound wave from the drivers. You have quite a bit to learn. I honestly suggest you do a search on open baffle full range dipole speakers and how critical room size and placement is for them in relationship to their overall response compared to a traditional front radiating box speaker. But to give a simple explanation, a traditional box speakers PRIMARY loading and response for the enclosed drivers is the box itself. THe room is the secondary loader. But with open baffle style speakers like the maggies, the room itself is the PRIMARY loader. The room itself IS the enclosure literally. You should never have started to be quite frank. Do people with more apparent knowledge in certain subject matter that you obviously lack in give you an inferiority complex or something? Seriously, time to grow up(and the PM you sent me was childish at best). If you really didn't want a public "bash fest" you wouldn't be posting the jibberish that is now cluttering up this thread. Why don't you take the wasted time and effort you put into arguing with me, and put it into something useful like knitting and tea time. Did you also attend the "condescending tone makes you sound smarter" workshop? I couldn't make it past the first day after i heard it takes a lifetime of admiring yourself in the mirror/ any shiny surface, stuffing socks down ones pants to appear more "masculine", daily reading of this website www.iambetterthanyou.com/, and just in general becoming "that" guy. But good for you Sir. You have quite the dedication and for that you should be applauded.
|
|