Magico A3 to A5

I own a pair of A5s. They are very good speakers but accompanied by a couple of caveats. First, despite employing three 9” woofers (and driven by 600 watt mono amps), they are really bass deficient. One, or better, two subwoofers are a necessity. The two SVS SB17 I use are good complements. Second, you are only getting what you are paying pay for. These are not $50K/pair speakers. I recently compared the A5s recently (same equipment essentially and same playlist) with Wilson Sasha Vs. The A5s lack of sonic refinement and absence of deeper bass is immediately apparent. 

I disagree with jmeyers.

I have owned A5's for three years, and I also own Wilson Watt/Puppy's, Devore Fidelity 096's, and Joseph Audio Pulsar 2's.

I have good friends who own Magico M3's, TAD Reference, Wilson Audio Alexia V's, and Marten Coltane's.  I recently auditioned Rockport Orion's.  So I have a fair bit of experience with various high end speakers.

Bottom line: the A5's are excellent and punch above their weight.  Are they perfect?  No.  No speaker is perfect at any cost.

Bass deficiency is more typically a room or set up issue; the A5's go down to the mid 30's in my room. 

Yes, the other much more expensive speakers I've listed above can outshine the A5 in a few particular ways, but in no way is the A5 outclassed in this company.

Cost does not equal quality.

Just IMHO.

@jmeyers

This is factually incorrect; the A5 bass profile is similar to that of the Sasha (actually goes slightly lower). You can check SP measurements on both. What the A5 does not have is the typical boost around 80Hz a ported design gives, which some can confuse with “more bass”. It is simply a less linear design than the A5, which may not be to your liking. Also, the Sasha distortion measurements are substantially higher than the A5 (check hifi news for that - all available online), which questions your assertion that the Sasha is more refined (certainly not to my ears).