I heard the Magico V3 at Sound by Singer. Was distinctly unimpressed. I believe it was set-up with VTL and Esoteric. It was in a small room, listening near-field, with much toe-in. Perhaps that is the reason for the poor showing, but why would a dealer try to sell something not properly set-up.
The one thing revolutionary about Magico is the price. They are breaking new ground in that department. I just don't see the value. The list price of the Mini 2 is staggering.
Kharma is also not a good value. Perhaps it can partly be blamed on the Euro. |
I was reading this thread along with others regarding Magico speakers and as usual everyone has there fav's. I currently own MBL 101E's and recently recieved a pair of Magico 2's and have to say what's all the fuss?
I had three others over to hear them, they are supose to be all this and that. These same idividules have heard my MBL set-up along with other set-ups in the past, we are all just left scatching our heads wondering what every one else is hearing because they don't even come close to what the MBL 101E's. I can go into great detail but why? possibly the other Magico speakers within the line would be better for comparision.
I have to ask as there have been alot of opions here, have any of you who are responding with your opinion actually owned MBL 101E's or had them in your own system and then got a pair of these other speakers and compared directly as I have just done because this just isn't making any sence to me as the difference is just to far apart how does one compare. I guess if you put the Magico's in a small room or with sub's but if I had such a room my choise of speakers would not be MBL 101E's.
I like the look of Kharma speakers but that's about it, anytime I listen to them I find them very fatiguing and when I go and listen to live music performances it's not that way to me so somethings wrong.
|
I heard the Mini 2 at Singer and loved them, but felt that there would be no way (for me to own them) if I didn't run a sub as well. |
Magico mini much more musical more natural Kharmas in your face must have tubes to tame forward ceramic sound People love to knock #1. If you dont like Magico you have NOT heard them set up right!! |
First off,I happen to like Kharma speakers,very much!!Personally,and from quite a bit of exposure,I believe they definitely do much better with tube equipment.
Yet,the Magico Mini,driven by "elite" SS amplifuication is simply an astounding speaker!!I've heard it loads of times,at a friend's home,where I helped set them up.
The "driver" business we speak of(ceramic,or otherwise)is better employed on the Mini,because(IMO)the actual nature of the driver materials allow for less "aggresiveness" at louder volumes,versus ceramic types,or really many other types.
The "only" other speaker that compares to the type of inner detail and tonality the Mini portrays(at good volumes,but not overtly loud)is the Avalon Ascent Mk-II.Another overly built,sealed design,yet with a bit more upper mid air.....THIS is "just" opinion,from careful personal evaluation....Nothing written in stone!!
I happen to like the inner details that ceramic drivers allow,but "sorry",they can sound a bit "too much", when played at volume,necessitating a smoothe(but quite nice,to my tastes)tube amp.The Lamm 2.1(which is a fabulous amp)"does" Kharmas to the N'th degree,IMO!Yet,ceramic lacks the "last word" in tonal truth,to my ears!
However this is easily overlooked,because it can still sound SO DARN GOOD!!
So,back to the Mini.....with a "good" powerful SS amp design(assuming you have a superb pre),you can get the type of dynamics,and surprisingly good timbres(not unlike tubes)that many lust for.
Yet,the design allows for very good inner textures,that is "only" available on ceramic drivers,with extreme care in matching componentry.You've got a better shot of getting the textures right,with the Mini,compared to a ceramic based design.
The Mini,IMO,is easier to get "right"!
Forget about any "bass" issues,unless the room is LARGE!!
Just some thoughts. |
Ceramic drivers do sound dry, and ring a bit at high volumes, esp when partnered with wrong equipment usally SS amps I agree - what you say is "generally" true of rigid light weight drivers, however, as Mike points out - the C79/6 accutons are extremely good because of the rubber dots which apparently help reduce the out of band ringing below audibility (they are not just ceramic). Just a bit limited dynamically thats all - otherwise one of the best drivers in the world and used on several top of the line speakers. They have a nice flat response and very low distortion. |
in this order..mbl(or just opt for the most expensive ohm), sonus, kaharma |
i hope everyone realizes the obvious fact that kharma midi exquisite speakers retail for about $80k (maybe more). i believe that the MBL speakers are over $40k (retail of course). at one time i would "kill" for a used pair of the kharmas, but after being forwarned about system and room synergy issues, i relunctantly lost interest. i don't think anyone, even rockport, makes a better box (maybe denser/heavier but not necessarily better). even THINKING about them is making me a little dizzy- i already HAVE a good set of loudspeakers! the fact that they are made in Holland, a place, like Denmark et.al. which does not cut corners when it comes to esoterica like loudspeakers (or wooden shoes), makes me even more envious of someone who has a pair of these gorgeous speakers. but a simple reminder of the day i compared the lowly Andra-ONE'S to a speaker costing over SEVEN TIMES more, and the andra's sounded more like real live instruments (quite a bit more actually) almost knocked me off of the chair i was sitting on. when i agreed to buy them on the condition that they would sound just as good in my living room, i was equally impressed- and this is without being able to place them "just so". and you should know this- i NEVER liked the way they looked- i wanted wood veneer or Wilsongloss, sonus faber or usher, avalon burled walnut or- well, you get the idea. but music wise, i was really so happy deep down, where you have really deep tuneful bass, detailed without shreiking solo violins, and cellos and Joni Mitchell sitting a few feet away, second only to Magnaplanar's transparency and presence.
blah blah blah, right? Get a good deal, OR go for the "gold"?- only the gold may be too heavy, too "something".
Free Will- it's a Bitch... |
Having heard Marten Coltrane, Magico Mini, and MBL 101E, though in different setup, I will say you are out of luck trying to find answer here.
They are so different, all three of them.
MBL 101E, or any MBL to be exact, still works well close to wall but does sound better if you have them far away from back/side wall. To my ears, the bass is a little muddy at times and high does not have as much air/extension compared to the best tweeters out there. I also don't like the low efficiency fact, you lose some jump factor no matter how many watts you feed them.
Marten Coltrane can be fatiguing over time, unless you spend mega bucks on upstream which can produce details and no grain. I find the diamond tweeter easier on the ears than ceramic, but those ceramic midrange still sound dry and analytical. I heard the big Avalon ISIS, Lumenwhite, and Avalon Eidolon, same impression. I rather lose details over musicality in this case.
Magico Mini left me not too much impression, I sure didn't think it was worth the asking price. The dealer even told me he was glad to sold his pair.
Some speakers you might also want to consider: Tidal acoustic, Burmester, Gryphon, and Usher BE. |
Mikelavigne,
Not disagreeing with you abt the ceramic drivers. And I do know the Mini's don't use ceramic drivers. My post was to point out in my experience, all the Kharmas i have heard have never sounded "aggressive" compared to the Mini's. It was always the other way round for me. But perhaps due to partnering equipment. |
Alectiong,
the Mini's don't use a ceramic driver. (after re-reading your post i may have mis-interpreted your comments, you may not have intended to say the Mini had a ceramic driver, so i added this note) the original Mini used titanium in a constrained layer sandwitch. likely due to feedback that it sounded a bit dry with certain amplification the Mini was reworked and now the Mini II uses a 'Nano-tec' mid-woofer. i think Nano-tec is carbon fibre.
ceramic drivers are not inherently dry. but they have remarkable stiffness to weight and therefore are very linear. with their accuracy they do require very good amplification; and will not tolerate edgy or dry amplificiation. the top level Accuton ceramic mid-range used in the Kharma Midi Exquiste and the Marten Coltrane have black resonance discs on the cone that eliminate the ringing you refer to.
the best implementation of ceramic drivers uses two of the top Accuton ceramic drivers. using two ceramic midrange drivers increases dynamics and slam (ceramic's lone weakness) and makes them even more linear. the Evolution MM2 and MM3 and the top level Kharma and Marten use this approach. i have yet to hear better mids than i hear from these speakers. accurate, transparent, quick, rich, organic.
it is a mistake to generalize about ceramic drivers. |
French Fries Actually all of these speakers, with the exception of the SF, have a street price of about 30K. I hope to here all of them at this years RMAF.
|
Sirspeedy
In my experience, the Magico Mini sounded more aggressive than all the different Kharma's I heard, even grating. Perhaps due to partnering equipment. The Martens use mostly ceramic drivers too, and i haven't heard people say they sound aggressive. Ceramic drivers do sound dry, and ring a bit at high volumes, esp when partnered with wrong equipment usally SS amps. |
with all due respect this is the most bizarre and inconsistent choice of speakers i have seen both design wise, sound wise, and price wise. personally i think the sonus fabers produce the most room friendly and un-fussy results of the speakers on your list, just for starters. another speaker which comes with adjustability std. to help conform it to most any room is the von schweikert vr-5se, and i feel it can compete with the best speakers available (except for "monster-size"). otoh, maybe you "like" the particular sound of one of the aforementioned speakers, even though from the above comments each conform to one person's tastes but not another's. so MY suggestion at the end of the day is- buy what "I" like, and be done with it! in point of fact, if you buy a pair of eggleston andra-2's for your 16X22 room, and you don't like them, i would really be surprised. all you would be giving up compared to "Very Expensive Speakers" is a bit of resolution through the midrange frequencies- which you might never miss since they sound so enjoyable on virtually every kind of music that is out there. but feel free to spend as much as you like- i did, and i was more-or-less ready for an upgrade. but the improvements would not make the egglestons sound "broken" or insufficient. |
I liked Martn Coltrane's with Einstein OTL's 60W monoblocks, and with Vitus SS101. Spectacular speakers, and they have worked superbly in smaller room then yours with Vitus. |
FWIW,my close friend recently sold his Kharma 1.0 and moved to the Magico Mini.He does not have a large room,and we all felt the Kharma was a bit too much for it.
The ceramic driver seemed to get irritating upon loud volume,but I also think partnering equip was a factor(a superb,but non tube amp,which all Kharmas like,IMO).The 1.0 was superb,but many friends felt it got aggressive when played at volumes not all that loud.
The "Mini" is a different story.In his room(12.5 x 20 ft) I personally think it is almost perfect!The bass is about as deep,and with real(surprising)impact.
BUT it never sounds aggressive,and can "DO" loud to an amazing degree,while all the while keeping all musical lines "perfectly" in place.
I've tested it at low levels too,and this speaker(the Mini)is just perfect for the environment it is in.
Good luck |
I have heard them all (your list), and now use a modest Kharma 3.2.2. The Amati is the one I would immediately rule out for MYSELF. I tried it out at home and found them highly colored for my taste. |
i would add the Marten Coltrane to that list. it's very similar to the Kharma in character, price and quality.
i had the original version of the Kharma Midi Exquisites in my room for 5 months three years ago; it's an excellent speaker; very natural and balanced top to bottom. very refined, detailed and microdynamic. the original Midi diamond tweeter was just a bit prominent although it never bothered me and would not prevent me from considering them. the newer ones are slightly different. you would need to check with the distributor to find out which version you are getting.
the Kharma is an easier load than the Mini and a much easier load than the MBL's. even though you have elminiated the price of electronics; the Kharma (or Marten) will be more dynamic with the best sounding amps to my ears (which are low to mid powered). some Mini owners do use mid-powered amps in small rooms and like it. your room is not small.
overall all these speakers are very special and different enough that you should choose them based on which character you like. i could live long-term with either the Kharma or Mini; maybe not that long term with the MBL.
i'm not that familiar with that Amati to comment. |
Being I am partial to Kharmas ( Caramique 1.0 ) I love the Kharma sound so it would be the Kharmas for me...Easy choice for me....... |
