Followup-Magnepan 1.7s in a 10x13' dedicated room?


Well I brought the demo MG12s home from the dealer for the weekend and they actually worked very well in my small listening room. Everything I love about Maggies was there with a couple of surprises. First, I ended up with the speakers fairly close to the side walls, though the walls are treated. Second, I obtained the best imaging with the tweeters on the outsides. I assumed they would work better on the insides considering their close proximity to the side walls. The sound stage was wide, deep and well defined. I was able to hear and feel bass in the low 40s, which was another surprise. I give credit for that to the 4 inch thick bass traps I made myself. It's amazing what those have done for a room that literally sucked bass out of the room without them. Some recordings were a little bright, but I think I could remedy that with resistors applied to the tweeters. The dealer didn't supply with resistors to take with me. The MG 12s worked so well in fact that I'm seriously considering the 1.7s. Especially since I hope to be moving to a larger room in the future.
linesource
Where the the conversation from this thread has gone is interesting. Especially interesting is the statement that Magnepans and therefore any large flat panel speakers is flawed due to it's design being physically impossible to be time coherent from the top of the panel all the way to the bottom. Though speakers employing drivers that range from 1 to 3 or 5 or 6 or 12 inches to reproduce the wave launch of a piano, a cello or a harp recorded in a large space are not flawed. When you think about it, the sound from an instrument as large as a piano isn't time coherent either and would get worse the closer you are to it. Just think of the tilt of the top of a piano that's played open. It's the reproduction of the size of instruments and the transient response of planars and electrostatics that draws me to them. The effect is very obvious and easy to hear. I have yet to ever experience listener fatigue from Magnepans. I have experienced plenty of it from speakers employing conventional drivers however, time coherent and not.
07-28-14: Linesource
Where the the conversation from this thread has gone is interesting. Especially interesting is the statement that Magnepans and therefore any large flat panel speakers is flawed due to it's design being physically impossible to be time coherent from the top of the panel all the way to the bottom.
Linesource, I NEVER said that "any large flat panel speakers is flawed due to it's design being physically impossible to be time coherent from the top of the panel all the way to the bottom."
this is a statement YOU are making by taking this huge leap just because Magnepans are a flawed design. Let's be clear about that....
if you go over to the "Sloped Baffle" thread also running in parallel with this thread here in the "Speakers" forum you will see in one of my many posts (which was a reply to Bifwynne's question to recommend time coherent speakers) I wrote that Eminent Tech LFT8b, the Sanders 11C/10C, some Quad ESLs & some older Martin Logans were time coherent. Many of the speakers cited by me in that post were planars.
So, it's very much possible to make a planar time-coherent; just that Magneplanars are not.
Just wanted to ensure that you were not putting words into my mouth.... :-)
Thanks
Bombaywalla, sorry, guess I was making assumptions. Wife says I do that a lot. So I'm confused, how can the Lft-8bs be time coherent? Doesn't the length of the panels cause the same problems? BTW, do you have any experience with them? I've considered them also and they offer a generous trial period for those who don't have a nearby dealer.
"When you think about it, the sound from an instrument as large as a piano isn't time coherent either and would get worse the closer you are to it. Just think of the tilt of the top of a piano that's played open."

That's an excellent point, but it doesn't hold up. A pair of speakers and a piano are not interchangeable. The purpose for which they were designed are different. Playing a piano live, in real space, is the absolute sound. There can be issues as to the sound quality of the piano just like you have with an audio system. Depending on the room and how the piano is set up, SQ can range from good to bad.

A speakers job is to take the recording of the piano and reproduce it as accurately as possible. So if the piano didn't sound very good live, the speaker is expected to sound the same event; and not sound better or worse.

With regards to the piano and speakers being time correct, its 2 completely different things. If you have a recording of a piano that has some sound quality issues, timing or otherwise, there's nothing that you can do about it. Sometimes you get music that's well recorded and sometimes you don't. If you have a speaker that is time and phase correct, its a design feature. Having that feature allows you to reproduce the recording so that its a more transparent window to the source. Its another step forward in trying to get the most accurate playback possible. And that means hearing the timing flaws on the recording, but not creating new ones due to your systems short comings.

I hope that helps. I'm in a hurry and typed this out really fast, so If I'm not clear on anything, post and I'll try and fix it.
Linesource, no problem! :-)
don't know how the LFT-8b are made to be time-coherent. Same question re. the Quad ESL & the Sanders ESL...
No experience with the LFT-8b personally.