Magnepan 3.7

Bimmer, if you can swing it, the 3.7 or 20.7 should do better in the dynamics department. If you want more than that and have the space, you can do what I did and get a used pair of Tympanis.

I would consider magnepan down the road due to the infinity's age and difficulty to find parts. They seem to be very good for the price, but I would miss the dynamics especially the low end frequency. I know this can be handled by a good sub but i dont want to deal with that in my stereo setup. The rens are a very balanced speaker but very dependant on the equipment and room placement. They also are very non-fatiguing and sound dull with poor recordings and come to incredible life with great recordings. The maggie 1.7 are an upgrade to the 1.6 because of the full range quasi-ribbon and super-tweeter for more detail and coherancy. I've heard some say they can become fatiguing with extended listening.

Hi Bimmer 8

I own also a pair of Renaissance 90 and I agree on almost all the points with you. But I was shocked the day I heard the Magnepan 1,7 by a dealer with my Cds and almost the same set-up I have home for the Infinitys. The 1,7 are without any doubt much more resolving, I could for example hear the space in which the recording sessions of my Cds had taken place ...

I own a pair of infiinty renaissance 90 speakers as well as b&w nautilus and magnepan mmg's. I must say the infinitys have continued to amaze me. They continue to sound better and better as i've improved the system around them and it makes me wonder what their ceiling is. I've auditioned the magnepan 1.7 that I thought sounded beautiful but they were a tad bright and lean in the bass. The infinitys are incredibly dynamic with tight deep bass, beautiful mids and natural highs, musical and non-fatiguing. Their best quality however is their ability to disapear wth 3D soundstage and great spaciousness, but again they need enough power, top source equipment, cables and proper setup. The comment about them having less resolution than the maggies may be because of their more laid back presentation. The maggies and especially the b&w's tend to be more forward especially on the top end.

Mn2hifi, congrats on 3.7s. I love mine. They come into their own at about 300 hours. Especially the bass. Drastic change there where it is like subwoofers turn on. I tried different jumpers and best to my ears are emperical designs custom tweeter and midrange jumpers for maggies. I also use supreme hi-fi tuning fuses and those helped too.

Browns fan,
Thanks, I actually have been using anti able jumpers for a few years on my MGIIIAS but may try the audio magic since you have experience with both.

When I sold them I kept the anti able jumpers :-)

Still debating the Mye stands. My buddy does custom home set ups and has acoustic panels I can try along with a computer program to help tame the room.

Haven't looked forward to set up adjustments for a while so this will be fun

Take care,
Mike

Mn2hifi, congrats on the new 3.7's. Let me suggest that you replace the jumpers and fuses asap. Jerry made me up a pair of Audio Magic liquid air jumpers, but while I was waiting on those I sacraficed an old pair of Anti-Cables and made my own, which were a huge, huge, improvement over the stock jumpers. I also got some of the Audio Magic Liquid air fuses which substantially reduced grain. Both of these tweeks produced immediate, obvious improvements.
I also bought Mye stands, which were an improvement over the stock feet, but not the same order of magnitude as using Mye stands with my old 1.6's.

I think you will find you probably get 90% of the break in at about 50 hours.

I too want to hear the 20.7's. I'll be in Minnesota in May and i would love to stop in and give them a listen.

Enjoy!

My 3.7s arrived and must say an improvement over my old bi-amped MGIIIas. The tweeter no longer seems so distinct from the total speaker if that makes any sense. Need some time for the to break I and still want to swap my old Velodynes subs for a pair of JL Audio F112s. Regardless it is a wonderful speaker right out of the box.

Down side is I am already starting to want to hear the 20.7s but will wait a couple months. Magnepan wants you to come to MN to audition and depending on what the 3.7s sound like after break in and new subs, I may take them up on that. This will likely be my last speakers but 20.7s with the 2 subs is close to 20k.

I knew getting the "upgrade bug" again might get expensive :-)

I owned the 3.6R's and thought about the 3.7's after a demo. Very nice, but I was still disappointed in their micro dynamic limitations and slightly obscure/inflated soundstaging. Inevitably they sound a bit flat and unexciting unless pushed. I have to admit dynamic speakers deliver, well, dynamics better.

I listened to my brother's 20.1s and then the 1.7 and 3.7s at local Maggie dealer here in Portland. So different electronics, but still fairly easy to discern things like coherence (3.7s win) and dynamics/bass (20.1s win).

I live about 15 minutes from Gifted Listener in Centreville Va which is outside DC more mid-Atlantic than southeast.
Tom Unger the owner has carried Maggie's for years and as of two weeks ago he had his floor 20.1s still. He had them on sale when I was there and he has the 3.7 and 1.7 with system driven by nice Ayre gear

Tom is a very nice guy and his store is where the 20.7 reviewer bought his 20.1s

Mike

Gentlemen, where are you getting to hear/audition the 20.1's vs the new 3.7's? My local dealer has a new pair of 3.7's but no 20's so I can't make that comparison. Is there a dealer in the southeast that has both?

Completely agree with Mike's assessment. My ears told me the same thing when comparing 3.7 to 20.1.

Mn2hif, now you've done it. As much as I've liked the Maggies in the past, that discontinuity you've so aptly described, was my biggest objection to them. Now I just have to go listen to the 3.7's.

I also listened to to 20.1 but am buying the 3.7 although I may wait to hear the 20.7 or insist on full trade in.

The 20.1 will go deeper but using subs with 3.7 takes away any advantage in that area acknowledging that sub choice ans set up are critical.
Sound stage is slightly larger but seems to me at least some of that is little bigger physical size.

To my ear even the 20.1 has that "I can hear the crossover point and mild grain" between ribbon and midrange. I can and have lived with it since I had owned Maggies for over 25 years, but this is virtually absent in the 3.7 so while the 20.7 might beat the 3.7 I will take the 3.7s with a pair of JL Audio F 112s over the 20.1 and that set up is almost 11k and I can have the dealers demo 20.1 for that

I appreciate opinions will differ but n this guys opinion, the ".7 series" eliminates a flaw I have always heard in Maggie ribbon/mid coherency and for that alone I am buying 3.7 and passing and passed on 20.1

Mike

Mike, I couldn't agree more. I auditioned a lot of speakers and I thought the 3.7's easily played in the Wilson's league. Let's see, $5500 or $17000? Gee, that's a tough decision.

I'm also intrigued by how the 3.7's with subs would stack up against the 20.7's. At the time I bought the 3.7's, the 20.7's were only a rumor, and I ruled them out based on fears about my room being to small. But, based on how much better the 3.7's integrate with my room that my 1.6's did, I wonder if I should rethink that assessment.

Magnepan has just hit it out of the park with the 3.7's in my opinion.

I finally got to hear the 3.7s and have to say, after hearing Wilson's and Avalons In the last month, when it comes to low level resolution at least, the Maggie Ribbon kills both. Of course just one man's opinion.

Listening to Diana Kralls "look of love" cd, track 5 "cry me a river" you hear the pressure of the drummer's brushes change as it swirls around snare and call follow the circular motion.

For 5500 I think they are an audio steal and always sound musical. So much so I am finally going to upgrade my bi-amped, MGIIIAs. Will likely add at least one JL Audio sub to replace my current old velodynes because let's be honest the Maggie's will only go so low and if you want true low bass a sub is needed. Since I can not bi-amp the 3.7s i may used the Marchand I have to set up 3 different bass crossover points and slopes.

I haven't heard the 20.7 yet but 3.7s with twin subs is going to be hard to beat by the 20.7 which will cost more by itself than the 3.7/subs combo

Also, perhaps I am lucky but I have never experienced delamination on the IIIAs and I am the original owner and have had them over 20 years.
With my original MGIIBs they has warnings about not having them in direct sunlight but again never experience it with the MGIIIAs

Mike

I was looking for the source that said that Mylar was less resonant than Kapton, but couldn't find it. I did find an old post from Mart at Planar Asylum to the effect that Magnepan uses Mylar because it's less expensive.

By the way, I just saw the price of the Genesis 1.2 -- $235,000! Guess I won't be using them for surround. :-)

Kapton is much stronger than Mylar and being that it is stronger you can make the panels much thinner making them lighter, you made some good points, i wonder why magnepan didn't make the whole panels quasi back then, maybe they felt that the cost would be to high, you have to remember that back in 69 they didn't have the equipment to easily make the panels like they do today and it probably would have cost a fortune to make the speaker full quasi.

Epsilonman,

As you point out, the IRS V -- surely one of the greatest speakers ever made -- cost $60,000, and that was when it was new. The priciest Maggie goes for 1/3 of that, 1/6 when you factor in inflation. So you're comparing apples and oranges.

I can't agree with you on comparisons with the smaller Infinity models. They had their virtues, and their problems. So did the IRS V, like any speaker, but it's virtues were so overwhelming that it's hard to argue with it.

I think the big Genesis 1.1's, the speakers most comparable to the IRS, are over $100,000. For that, you could get five pairs of 20.1's and 20 pairs of 3.7's! For which reason they are of practical interest to more of us.

Magenpan had the quasi ribbon before Infinity and Jim Winey apparently wanted to use it in his original production model but didn't, for reasons I'm not clear on. In any case, it's being used now. And it's worth noting that nothing, including the IRS V, has ever equaled Tympani midbass. Sure, the Infinites went lower and louder (although the only time my 1-D's ever bottomed was on cannon shots on the Telarc I812), but the servo woofers couldn't keep up with the planar mids and tweeters, and to my ears, the Tympani woofers are the best ever made, combining as they do planar clarity with dynamic slam. If I did want to go lower and deeper, I'd just add a sub -- one contributor here actually has Bruce Pick's rotary woofer mated with his Tympani IV panels! That goes down to 0 Hz.

By the way, I understand that the 1.7 and 3.7 no longer suffer from the "Mylar sound" that bedevils large planars. That at least is what the reviewers say, I haven't heard them. The foil conductor/Mylar sandwich seems to do a better job of damping traveling waves than the wires. It's never bothered me; I can hear it if I listen, but normally I just tune it out. Unfortunately, all speakers have self-noise of one kind or another. This of course is a matter of taste, it's a sonic flaw and if it bothers you, it does.

Also, as I understand it, Mylar is actually a better sounding material than Kapton for planar drivers. The reason Infinity and other manufacturers used/use Kapton in smaller drivers is that they have to dissipate more heat, and Mylar has a lower melting point.

The reason the smaller Maggies aren't push-pull is, again, one of cost. The 20.1 is push-pull. I don't think you can get away with single-ended in a small driver like the EMIM's and EMIT's, the distortion would be too high.

My ears must be less evolved or i didnt hear the 20.1s set up properly. I prefer the sound of the 3.7s. Money/pocketbook had nothing to do with it. I was looking at and willing to buy speakers that cost more than the 20.1s. I agree the 20.1s have a bigger soundstage and go deeper.

That's because the ren 90's tweeters are known to roll off a bit, the ren 90 is a good speaker but not in the class with the IRS series speakers, i know i had the ren 90's and compared them to my sigmas and epsilons, the crossovers that were used in the ren 90's were built with a budget in mind and were compromised to lower the cost of the speaker, when i listen to the big magnepans the first impression i get is that of a big sheet of plastic when you shake it back in forth in your hands, that sound is so prominent on them, maybe owners get use to that coloration but i can't, i think that is why infinity designed their drivers to specific frequencies so that they would not be to large for the delicate and faster high frequencies, thus adding less coloration.

Epsilonman

I am an great Infinity "lover" and admirer of what Arnie Nudell achieved .
I still have a couple of Renaissance 90 which sounds beautifully, but I had occasion to compare them (on same electronic, cables with my Cds) to the Magnepan 1,7

... the resolution in middle & high frequencies of the Magnepan 1,7 (yes the little one) goes far beyond the resolution of my Renaissance 90 ... this is simply a fact !

I must confess I was very surprised, is it because the surface of Magnepan's membrane is far larger that the Emit & Emim of the Renaissance ?

That being said, it's a real pity Arnie Nudell stopped developing speakers. He was some kind of a genius.

Since we are arguing things that can't really be proven and are off topic, I'd like to join in the fun.

In the 80's the 'best speaker' was Beveridge, not Infinity, although the Infinities were quite good.

For subs you want something with no ports, and if it is highly adjustable that is good too. Hsu has a good cube woofer with no ports that you can get two or four of, and then placement of two or four of those can provide bass that can't be beaten in certain aspects by any single woofer because of the way the waves interact. They also have a relatively cheap more traditional (Rel) looking woofer that had adjustable q factor, and with low q may be a better match than most woofers. Oh, and it will work in 'sealed' mode, so it can be used with no ports.

While it is massive, at it's price level, you can get two if space allows, whereas their smaller cube one is easier to implement 2 or 4.

Johnny53 did you ever hear the Infinity IRS V or the IRS beta or IRS epsilon or the rs 1b's, i did and i have listened to all the magnepan models and none of the current or past models can compete with any of the above mentioned infinity speakers, if you did a blind a and b test the results would be embarrassing, infinity was bought by harman kardon in 89 that's why all the current infinity models sound like crap, one of the founders/designers of infinity went to genesis speakers
[img]http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7167/6387001843_29bd2c1119_z.jpg[/img] and some of the genesis speakers look and sound very much like the infinity IRS V, also i bet you that the magnets used in those old infinitys were much stronger than the ones used in the current magnepans, i know that they are twice as strong as the ones used in the current VMPS speakers because i measured the strengths of them with a gauss meter, also the magnepans still use the heavy mylar backings that deform with heat and age were as infinity started to use kapton before they sold the company to harman, kapton is half the weight of Mylar and it doesn't deform as easy, infinity was way ahead of there time, all the above mentioned speakers were designed with cost is no object in mind, all of their planar drivers were push pull designs too, if you never auditioned any of the infinity speakers that i mentioned i suggest that you do, i think that you will be amazed at how good those old speakers sounded, the one pairs specs are 15hts to 40khts +or- 2db, some people think magnepans are light on bass so they add a very high quality sub to them, well if you think that one 12 inch sub sounds good for two speakers imagine how good twelve 12 inch servo controlled woofers powered by 3300 wpc would sound, they sure can move allot of air, i don't know of any magnepans that go down to 15hts with enough earth shaking bass and punch and dynamics to be convincing.

09-19-11: Mikesclee
Like the new 3.7 but would like to add a subwoofer for that 20hz low. Would like to know what's the best sub to go with it.

There are several powered subs that would do what you're looking for. You'll want a sub with a special driver with exceptionally rigid frame, long voice coil for linearity through long excursions, acoustically dead cabinet (usually very heavy), and lots of power. A sealed enclosure may be preferable too.

Two brands that fit this and have proved to mate very well with Magnepans are the ones from JL and the Velodyne DD+ series. A third possible candidate is SVS. I have an audiobuddy who has 1.7s teamed up with a pair of these and he likes his rig a lot (especially since he switched his amplification to a Rogue Cronus Magnum). This model sub may be a little light for your requirements, but I suspect something from SVS would work well too and would cost a bit less than the JL and Velodyne DD+ offerings. Most of SVS's other subs are ported but include foam plugs to change the damping and the lower rolloff profile. The driver for their best box sub looks to be built to about the same level as the JL drivers.

11-21-11: Epsilonman
infinity made planar speakers in the 70's too, i'm talking about the newest magnepan designs with the aluminum traces glued to Mylar 1.7's,3.7's, infinity had that type of planars in the 80's that's why ... etc.

Infinity abandoned the technology and Magnepan kept developing it. We're talking about the SOUND of current production Magnepans here, not the history of the technology behind it. If Infinity had a competitive product in that realm, we'd be listening to Infinity panels today. Do you think--for even a moment--that the 1980's Infinity panel could equal the performance of today's Magnepans? If not, then the point is moot.

Given the development of magnet and membrane technology in the past 15 years (stronger magnets, lighter membranes) it would be hard to find a panel element from 30 years ago that could compete with what we take for granted today.

infinity made planar speakers in the 70's too, i'm talking about the newest magnepan designs with the aluminum traces glued to Mylar 1.7's,3.7's, infinity had that type of planars in the 80's that's why i said it took magnepan along time to design what infinity had many years ago, infinity made the irs V speaker in the mid 80's that sold for $60,000.00 back then, these are considered to be one of the best speakers ever made, it would be embarrassing to compare any magnepan speaker ever built to them as the irs v's would put them to shame, i have a pair of infinity IRS epsilons that i thought about replacing because they're getting up in age with the magnepan 3.7's but when i auditioned them a few times i always felt like something was missing and was very disappointed, they're not even in the same league as the epsilons, not even close, check out these.
[img]http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6060/6380912979_79a8db596e_z.jpg[/img]
[img]http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6054/6380968449_774007251a_z.jpg[/img]

Well, Magnepan had this technology in the 70's, so I don't really know what you are getting at?

Are you really comparing 80's era Infinity's, which were inferior to the comparable Magnepan's then, to the modern improved Magnepans?

You obviously never heard them.

BTW, the Magnepa Tympani's from the 80's are about the best speaker I have heard from that era, and some of the best ever made.

Another aside to Podeshi and his crew, I recently went back to a dealer and listend to the 3.7 and 20.1 both with Bryston electronics all around (VPI Classic 3 table) and if you are pimping the 3.7 over the 20.1 you are talking your book; your pocket book. If you can afford the 20.1 it's in a whole differnt league. Deeper for sure, and every bit as fast or faster, bigger soundstage.

It's one of the best speakers ever built. The 3.7 may be as well, but it's not on the same level. Enjoy your 3.7's but when/if you can afford it, buy the 20.1's.

I Don't see what all the hype is about the new magnepan speakers, infinity speakers had that technology back in the early 80's, just search for infinity IRS betas the one with 4 12 inch woofers per side and planar mid bass panels, midranges and tweeters with aluminum traces glued to Mylar or the IRS epsilon too for that matter, they were also push/pull designs way back then, their drivers were improved a step further when they replaced the Mylar with kapton in their renaissance speakers and their IRS series speakers omega/sigma/epsilon, so to me the new magnepan technology is not so new at all, it's actually quite old and i'm surprised it took magnepan that long to figure out what infinity knew way back in the day.

My Velodyne DD+15 blends perfectly with the 3.7s. A pair of DD+10s would be an even better choice. I bought mine from David Weinhart Designs in California....he's amazing....

Like the new 3.7 but would like to add a subwoofer for that 20hz low. Would like to know what's the best sub to go with it.

Thanks. That was a great blog. Loved the "listen for crickets"

@Pod: Excellent! Thanks. That makes two of you now. LOL.

RE: OP, I've been tweaking out my Maggies, too. Chokes, upgraded resistors, ceramic fuses. Taken individually, they're ... ah ... subtle. Taken as a whole, however, I think the speakers sound more refined. Interesting experiment and given how cheap most of those bits are, recommended.

Thanks! Very informative. By the way via my RSS reader I am now subscribed to your Internet blog/site.

Nordost Heimdall, Clarity Cable Organic, Cardas Clear, Synergistic Apex, Blue Jeans Cable. Odd collection!

Cardas was full in the mids and rolled in both extremes. I think Clear is their best cable, but still not transparent enough to be a match for the Magnepans.

Synergistic was almost as full in the mids as Cardas but more extended in the extremes. Very nice. The "old" version is what I heard, so they may be available at a discount.

I thought the Nordost had great bass and sparkle, but was a bit flattened through the mids -- especially when compared with the Cardas. Moving up the line, according to Nordost, does not give you more mids -- instead, the focus is on refinement. So, this cable loom definitely has a "house sound". The Leif series is brand new, however, and may well be the part of the line that offers something different, but I haven't heard any of them yet.

Blue Jeans was surprisingly similar in extension to the Synergistic (that is, not as extended as Nordost), but not as refined in any frequency band. Of course, the price differential is ludicrous. At this price, this is a go-to cable loom.

Clarity was very full and rich, and very extended in the bass. This is a great cable loom. A favorite.

WyWires (w/the new speaker wires) definitely had more extended bass than Cardas/Synergistic but still warm/full through the mids. Like the Clarity, the Wywires (with "hot sauce" intereconnects) had great, grainless highs. Maybe the WyWires had a touch more sparkle in the treble? Overall, it seemed balanced. No sins.

All in all, I'd thought maybe that I preferred the Clarity sometimes & the WyWires other times (the WyWires were still breaking in at that point), but the WyWires are much cheaper, so there you go. Oh, and they're way easier to use, too.

Thanks. What cables competed against it?

It's the new WyWires speaker cable. I'm not sure if this is a special version or the new version, or what. If you're interested, send Alex a note. I haven't finished a more formal review, but I think it's fantastic.

Which new speaker cable is it?

After demoing a bunch of cables, WyWires has come out clearly on top. The new speaker cable has truly excellent bass while maintaining the full mids and extended treble.

I now use Virtue Audio Nirvana speaker cables and interconnects,you can find a review at Stero Mojo.com very good value for the money a big step up from Anti cables.Replaced all power cords with Shunyata Research except the one on my cd player.Replaced the standard Rel 505 speaker cable with Signal speaker cable very nice step up.

I think I will stick with Harmonic Technology Pro Reference 9 SE, and just go from external bi-wire to non-biwire. The Harmonic Tech cabling in my current system performs flawlessly -- it has 9 gauge so good for long run.

I'm very happy with my DH Labs Silver Sonic Q-10 Signature speaker cables. Mine are set-up as an external bi-wire but they can also be wired by DH Labs as an internal bi-wire. (Since the 3.7's only have single inputs). They are silver coated copper I believe. I also use single runs of thier T-14 speaker wire on my KHorns.

The Q-10's sound great, the outer sheathing looks impressive and well made, and they are very good values for the money. Highly recommended!

http://www.silversonic.com/docs/products/Q10.html

I am supposed to receive my new 3.7s this Friday. Will be driving them with VAC 300.1a. I hope that has enough grunt to bring out what the 3.7s have to offer. I auditioned the Maggies with 150 wpc Ayre amp and for my listening levels was more than enough. I also noticed these were the first Maggies i have heard where low level listening was as robust as 90dbs+.

Any advice on what speaker cable mates best with 3.7s?

+1: what Podeschi said.

I agree with Socrates7. Magnepan 3.7 is the only Maggie I have heard in the past year (versus 1.7 and 20.1) that I want to buy. More balanced (not tilted to upper frequencies but coherently delivers across the full spectrum; I found 1.7s to be a little shrill for my ears). Punchier more dynamic (and perceived deeper) bass response. More seamless/coherent "voice." And while soundstage it throws is enormous, the instruments and vocalists no longer seem to be of gigantic proportions. To me the 3.7, if a planar speaker/sound is to one's liking, is a no-brainer stand-out selection. It did a couple things better than 20k to 100k speakers I've heard. That Maggie immediacy and speed is addictive. I found the 3.7s to be musical with great flow (some of that was probably the equipment driving them too).

What convinced me? Price. The 3.7 was half the price. I thought it was quite a bit faster and punchier in the mid-bass (and down) than the 20.1.

Don't get me wrong, I loved the 20.1. And it does reach deeper than the 3.7. It's just lighter "down there" than it's newer stablemate.

Socrates7,

tell us more about that listening session and your choice to go with the 3.7's. What convinced you to go that way?

I heard the 20.1 and the 3.7 back to back. Bought the 3.7 on the spot, no question at all.

Macdadtexas is making good sense I think. Before I would move to the 3.7's (for $5,500) I think that I would take a serious listen to a good pair of used 20.1's...

Not sure when Magnepan will update the 20.1's but I am guessing it will be in the next year or so...Once that happens there will be many used pairs to pick and choose from.

A move to 20.1's is conditional of course upon having a room large enough to accommodate them properly. Visually too, the 20.1's are much larger than 3.6's so you must decide if all that extra size will take-away from the sonic disappearance act...

Still, when the used 20.1's go on sale, it will be a good opportunity to move up!