Steve Guttenberg finally reviews the Eminent Technology LFT-8b loudspeaker.

Ah, okay @john65b, the confusion is cleared up.

I have a pair of the LFT-4, each of which contains two of the three LFT drivers the LFT-6 contains, with an integrated tweeter segment (the LFT-6 has two separate tweeters). If I wasn’t so far away from Chicago I’d snap up your 6’s!

@john65b: Eminent Technology made both a model LFT-4 (also sometimes referred to as LFT-IV) and a model LFT-6 (or -VI). The LFT-4 stands 56" tall, the LFT-6 78", and both are 18" wide. Which do you have? Less than 1,000 pair of each were made.

Great plans Ric. Let me add the suggestion of using ASC WallDamp in place of Green Glue when making the 3-layer open baffles. WallDamp is very effective at killing panel resonances, and is not expensive: $43.75 for a bundle of twenty-five 4" x 4" squares, enough for the treatment of twenty-five square feet.

@tonnesen: If you call Eminent Technology, Bruce Thigpen will get on the phone with you (actually, he often answers it himself), and answer all your questions about the LFT-8c. He's a very friendly, down-to-Earth kinda guy.

You as well Jim! And all others reading along---Eric.

Danny Richie has a Dodd battery-powered pre-amp in his system, but not power amps. My tinnitus is bad enough that reducing system noise is of no benefit for me. 😭

Yeah, seeing tat x/o would be of interest to me as well. Thigpen shows a diagram of his LFT=8b x/o with values on the ET website, so duplicating it with higher quality parts is not difficult.

One application where I am pretty serious about hardwiring is in the tonearm. All my arms have single uninterrupted length of wires, from cartridge clips to RCA jacks. With a signal that low in level you really don’t want any extra joints (so to speak ;-) .

I thought you might have something to say on this subject Ric. ;-)

I'm unaware of the WBT Nextgen post, though I do have some of the RCA's on ic cables. Gotta check those out.

One participant on the Planar Speaker Asylum Forum wrote that he spoke with Bruce Thigpen about upgrading the speakers' crossover parts, and that Bruce was not at all offended, actually encouraging him to do so and providing some technical advice.

If you'll notice, in the pics @harpo75 posted above you can see that he has replaced the stock binding posts with the best ones Cardas makes: the CPBP model. If you look at the expanded pics of that post on the Cardas website, you will be able to see what makes them so. That post is as close as you can get to the Electra Cable Tube Connector by GR Research without forfeiting your ability to use speaker cables with spade connectors. 

A day or two ago Guttenberg posted a video entitled Top 10 Audiophile Speakers And Amplifiers Of The Year (meaning of those he has reviewed this year). One of them is of course the ET LFT-8b, and he again says he found the LFT to outperform every Magnepan he has had in his room, which includes not just the LRS and LRS+, the .7 and 1.7, but also the 3.6 and 3.7i.

That’s right, Steve considers the $3200/pr LFT-8b superior to the $8000/pr 3.7i. Having not heard the 3.7i I can neither agree nor disagree with that opinion. For me that opinion is of value not necessarily just in and of itself, but also for bringing the LFT-8 to the attention of anyone considering the purchase of any Magnepan. Just know that there is another contender in the planar-magnetic loudspeaker field, one very worthy of consideration.

The LFT-8b is around the same price as the 1.7i (I compared the two, and like Steve was very surprised at how different the two sound), and less than half the price of the 3.7i. As I stated in my OP, I consider the LFT-8b the greatest bargain in hi-fi today!

@ricevs: Yeah Ric, in one of his YouTube videos Danny Richie speaks about New Record Day Ron having found the Sapphire to produce "faster" bass than the Rythmik/GRR OB Sub (just for the record, Ron's opinion carries little weight with me). Danny contacted Ron to find out what the heck was going on, as in Danny's opinion that was most unlikely.

Turns out Ron was running the Rythmik/GRR OB Sub with its' Extension Filter Damping control set to "Low". With the 3-position Damping control knob set to "Hi" (Q= 0.7 Bessel filter), or even "Mid" (Q= 1.07 Chebyshev filter),  the OB Sub produces considerably tighter bass, at the expense of reduced output. 

So Ric (@ricevs), you’re no longer a fan of the GR Research/Rythmik Audio OB/Dipole Sub? That too can be used in place of the stock LFT-8b woofer.

The 2-woofer version of the OB Sub kit is available from Rythmik for $999, and from GR Research with the required OB H-frame (in flat pack form) for $1660. Both prices for one sub, two required of course.

If you can build your own H-frame (or the smaller W-frame), a pair of the OB Sub kits will run you $1998, about $400 more than the pair of LFT-8c woofers. The difference between the two is the Rythmik/GRR is an open baffle version of a dipole sub---with two 12" woofers, and the LFT-8c has a front-firing 8" woofer and a rear-firing 6.5"---in a sealed enclosure. Both are powered, the LFT providing DSP not included in the OB SUB. But the Rythmik plate amp does provide all the controls necessary to mate the OB Sub with the LFT-8b planar panel.

Damn, you’re right @gktaudio! I have both the LFT-4 and LFT-8b in my room, and use the latter with it’s grill cloth frames in place. The LFT-4 didn’t come with (a) grill frame(s), and it is the LFT-4 which has the LFT driver assembly (containing bass, midrange, and tweeter sections) attached to a solid oak frame. No wonder the LFT-8b is so heavy! Actually, so is the LFT-4. I thought the weight was a result of all those bar magnets ;-) .

@ledoux1238: Yeah, the listeners ears really have to be within the height of the tweeter, that’s how a line-source tweeter behaves. The original version of the LFT-8 had the tweeter strip at the top of the panel rather in the middle, and people were complaining that the high end dropped off when they sat down. In the a or b revision Bruce lowered the tweeter to it’s present location.

But there is a solution to the tweeter being too high with the Townshend Pods in place: put shims under the Pod(s) at the rear of the 8b, which will then point the tweeter down towards your ears. Little blocks of something stiff will do, like birch plywood (painted black). Adjust the height of the rear of the LFT-8 until you get the center of the tweeter to be aimed at the height of your ears. That's how the tweeter pods in the big Wilson speakers are aligned.

Right @audiophilejunkey, the LFT-18LS. That was mentioned back on page 1 of this thread, where the same video (which you filmed ;-) is posted as well. But thanks! I followed your build of the NX-Treme on YouTube, which is one reason why I didn't build a pair myself ;-) . Building the OB/Dipole Sub was pretty easy, but the EX-Treme looks to be quite a bit more daunting. Plus, I really like the ET LFT-8b!

@gktaudio: Thanks for that info on the 8c. Using the DSP for the woofer only is how I too would run the 8c. I have a First Watt B4 x/o, a nice little unit from the mind of Nelson Pass.

The rational for the struts of the Mye stand is to brace the planar panel, not specifically from vibrations of the woofer enclosure, but just for any flexing of the wood frame of the panel. The struts secure the planar panel onto the stand's base, to which the bass enclosure is also secured. The Mye stand for Maggies features the same struts, which the Maggies really benefit from (those Maggie MDF frames are not nearly as structurally rigid as are the LFT-8 solid wood frames).

As I have described for the benefit of non-LFT owners, the LFT driver has it’s magnets and Mylar diaphragm built into a very stiff metal (aluminum?) frame assembly (which is bolted onto the panel’s wood frame), while Maggies are constructed with the Mylar diaphragm (and magnets?) stapled and glued onto the speaker’s MDF frame, far inferior to the construction of the LFT-8.

By the way, though the 8c’s bass system is a dipole, it is of course not an OB. Though an open baffle dipole woofer has it’s own challenges, it also has rewards unique to it. The GR Research/Rythmik Audio OB/Dipole Sub costs a little more than the 8c bass system, but offers those rewards. An interesting alternative, at any rate.

@harryz: I too wondered if the woofer enclosure of the 8c has the same footprint as does the 8b. The rear of the 8b woofer enclosure is sloped, the 8c not. Perhaps both enclosures have the same bottom dimension, the 8c just having a square shape, for greater internal volume. A call to Thigpen would get the answer to that question.

For those who don't want the 8c (with it's digital processing), but like the idea of a dipole woofer, a separate dipole woofer can be used in place of the stock monopole 8b woofer. For those interested and not adverse to a little DIY, look into the OB/Dipole Sub offered by GR Research in conjunction with Rythmik Audio. It's sold as a kit, but is not much harder to build than an IKEA dresser (I assembled one for my sister ;-) .

@harryz: Nope Harry; I'm a huge procrastinator. ;-)

My correspondence regarding the Mye stand for the LFT-8 was with a swell guy named Scott (I'll keep his last name private, as he may not want it made public). He contacted me after seeing my posting on the LFT a coupla years ago, telling me about the Mye stand. He told me the stand made a noticeable improvement in the sound of the LFT, well worth the cost of a pair.

I gave Grant Mye a call, and he said sure he'd make me a pair, to send him the locations/dimensions of the mounting holes in the bottom of the speaker. The mounting holes in the Mye stand will presumably be the same as that in the Sound Anchor, but a measurement is of course a good idea.

The stand isn't pictured on the Mye website, and neither is the stand Grant makes for the Quad ESL, which looks incredible (he sent me a pic). It is also not included in the Mye price list, so I don't know what the current price is.

Oops: that should have read 1.5" wide, not 1/5".

That’s a great idea Albert. From the pics it appears the only difference between the Sound Anchors base and the Mye stand are the struts. I had thought of cutting some 3/4" Baltic Birch plywood into appropriate length strips (maybe 1/5" wide), screwing two of those homemade struts onto the top of the bass enclosure and back of the planar panel (at each top corner). Not elegant, but then I’m not an elegant guy. ;-)

I too am mystified by the low profile of the LFT-8b. Everybody knows about Maggies, very few about the Eminent Technology speaker. Of course ET having only five U.S.A. dealers and not advertising doesn’t help! I was lucking in having a great dealer who actually had a pair of LFT-8’s in his listening room.

Brooks Berdan was one of ET’s biggest dealers, installing a LOT of ET arms on Oracle, VPI, and SOTA tables. Brooks was also a Music Reference dealer, and the RM-9 Mk.2 and RM-200 Mk.2 amps work splendidly with the LFT-8. Both tube amps, 125w/ch and 100w/ch respectively. Unlike the 3-4 ohm Maggies, high current not needed.

Okay Albert (@ledoux1238), two pics sent---Eric.

For others interested, the Mye LFT-8 stand looks just like the Sound Anchor bases (including the two front "legs" which extend out from the bass enclosure), with the addition of support arms (I believe Grant Mye calls them "struts") that are attached to the back corners of the stand and reach up to the side rails, right at the middle of the tweeter’s length. The two arms clamp onto the side rails just as seen in the Mye stands for Maggies.

I suppose one could just add support arms to the Sound Anchor bases, but it would take some fabricating ability and tools.

@ledoux1238: From what my correspondent told me, the Mye stand bolts onto the bottom of the woofer enclosure, the support arms reaching from the back of the base of the stand up to about the middle of the planar panel (similar to the Mye Maggie stands). The Sound Anchor stand is not used at all.

I need to go back through my emails and find the pics of his Mye stands my correspondent sent me. Send me your email address and I will forward them to you (give me a few days ;-).

I spoke with Grand Mye, and he told me he had made only the one pair of LFT-8 stands, those my correspondent ordered. Grant asked me to send the details on bolt hole locations on the bottom of the bass enclosure when I was ready to go ahead with an order. The stand is hollow tubes, which can be filled with sand.

My correspondent told me the Mye stand improves the sound of the LFT-8 in terms of low level resolution and details, overall clarity. Because the LFT-8’s planar panel is attached to the bass enclosure, it doesn’t "sway" as much as do unbraced Maggie panels. But the LFT planar panel is about 3-1/2' long, so it may exhibit a little flexing.

The LFT (Linear Field Transducer) driver has the Mylar diaphragm attached to a very stiff metal frame, to which the fore-and-aft magnets are also attached, that frame bolted onto a solid wood frame. Maggies are constructed with the Mylar glued and stapled directly onto an MDF frame. I don’t remember how the magnets are secured to the MDF.

Amen @kot! The value of the LFT-8 was my motive for bringing them to the attention of Audiogon members. For he who questions the varacity of the opinion of Steve Guttenberg (and/or Robert E. Greene, as well as a number of UK hi-fi critics), you're missing the point. You needn't consider his (and their) stated opinion(s) as fact, but merely as evidence that a consideration of the speaker might be of interest and/or benefit.

As for all of Guttenberg's reviews being positive.....both he and his pal Herb Reichert have stated that there are so many good components they want to bring to the attention of audiophiles, they are not going to waste our time on bad ones. If you find that a specious argument, fine, ignore them. Your loss!   

@kot: I’m green with envy! I for awhile unsuccessfully attempted to get myself a pair of the LFT-6. I was however able to find a pair of the smaller LFT-4. Interestingly, the LFT-4 has sloped "side wings", a technique for tailoring the tonal balance of the speaker’s output (the wings prevent dipole cancellation, the frequencies of which are determined by the dimensions of the wings), which Danny Richie also employs in some of his GR Research open baffle loudspeakers. The LFT-3, -4, and -6 are rather rare, Bruce Thigpen having made only a few hundred pair of each.

By the way everyone, Grant Mye will make you stands for the LFT-8, with support arms that extent up to the top half of the planar panels. I have heard from one LFT-8 owner who got a pair, and he found the Mye stands to provide a worthwhile improvement over the Sound Anchor bases. I’m gonna get myself a pair, soon as I sell my ARC line stage.

Oh, and I recorded the sound of my two year-old son and then-wife’s voices, using those recordings to evaluate loudspeaker freedom from vowel coloration (thank you JGH ;-), and midrange transparency. A brutally-revealing test! That led me to---of course---the Quad ESL.

I recorded my Gretsch drumset (with a 26" bass drum) with a pair of small capsule condenser mics plugged straight into a Revox A77 reel-to-reel, using that recording to scrutinize and evaluate the sound of loudspeakers. For years the Magnepan Tympani bass panels came closest to replicating the live sound of that bass drum of all loudspeakers I auditioned: freedom from bloat (caused by driver "overhang"), percussive impact (i.e. attack), tonal timbre, texture, etc. For the sound of my Paiste 602 cymbals, it was ESL and ribbon tweeters.

The sound of a bass drum (even a 26" one) is more mid-bass than deep-bass, but those Tympani bass panels were very, very good at mid-bass. The sound of open baffle/dipole woofers is the closest dynamic driver equivalent to planar bass I’ve heard, the sound of the Rythmik servo-feedback subs second. For context, I own a pair of transmission-line loaded KEF B139 woofers (used by David Wilson as mid-bass drivers in his original WAMM loudspeaker), and owned Infinity RS-1b loudspeakers in the past, which had woofer towers containing six 8" servo-feedback controlled woofers.

@ledoux1238: I myself am opposed to the proposition of subjecting the output of analogue sources (phono, reel-to-reel and cassette tapes, FM tuner) to digital conversion, so won’t be getting the 18LS.

However, for those wanting one of the other advances of the LFT-8c and upcoming 18LS---that of dipole woofers in place of the 8b’s monopole woofer, there is another route available: just use separate dipole woofers, leaving the LFT-8’s woofer disconnected.

A dipole woofer system has been in development at Magnepan for quite a while now, and is reportedly about to be introduced (price not yet known). And then there is the Rythmik Audio/GR Research OB/Dipole Sub, which is two or three (your choice) 12" free-air woofers installed in an open baffle "frame" (@ricevs mounted them on a flat open baffle---3 layers of MDF!), the woofers powered by a servo-feedback plate amp. The plate amp controls include those for phase/time-alignment for woofer/loudspeaker mating, and of course output level (again for mating with the speaker), x/o frequency and slope, 1-band EQ, etc,., but accomplishes those jobs electronically, not digitally. It’s a great bass system, but is available only as a kit. You can get a CNC-cut flat pack that is a breeze to build (just wood glue and clamps, finishing of your choice) from a Canadian woodworker connected with GRR, and he will even build and finish the frames if you pay him.

And if you have the room, you can use the two bass panels of the Magnepan Tympani’s as woofers for the LFT-8b. They won’t play as low as the OB/Dipole Sub, but with enough power (and bracing) will get down to the low-30’s. Harry Pearson’s favorite bass reproducers!

@ledoux1238: It's understandable that a Maggie owner might feel---I don't know, maybe threatened---when a competing and somewhat similar loudspeaker is suggested as an alternative to consider. But if I had just spent $2995 on a pair of MG1.7i's, and then heard the $3200 LFT-8b, I'd be quite pissed off.

For those who love their 1.7i's, fantastic, enjoy the music. I went out and listened to a pair, and they didn't give me what I need. As Guttenberg said, the LFT-8b sounds surprisingly different from the "smaller" Maggies (those below the 3.7). To move up the Maggie line, you have to spend $8,000 for a pair of the 3.7i's, and need to have an amp that can drive them. I would try a Sanders amp with them.

I can't wait to hear the upcoming LFT-16LS, as well as the Magnepan concept speaker, the "30.7 For Condos", which like the 16LS will have separate dipole woofers and DSP. Like I said above, exciting times.

@krelldreams: I know of only one guy who has had both the MG3.7i and LFT-8b in his room and said he preferred the LFT. I’m sure I could happily live with either! While Guttenberg states in his video that he prefers the LFT-8b to every Maggie he has had in house, I don’t know that that includes the 3.7i. I would think the the MG3.7i and the LFT-8b are loudspeakers for two different groups of listeners: the MG3.7i retails for $8,000 and requires a very substantial amplifier (to get both high current and high sq is not cheap), the LFT-8b $3,200 and a more modest amp. I’ll bet the MG3.7 will better fill a larger room, the LFT-8 better in medium sized rooms. While the LFT-8 looks well proportioned in my 14’ 4" x 21’ room; I think the MG3.7i might overwhelm it.

I was active on the Planar Speaker Asylum site for awhile, and some of those guys really take their Tympani T-IV’s to the next level. Replacing the midrange driver with multiple NEO 8 drivers, rebuilding the crossover with boutique parts, bracing the panels to the wall, using 1,000-2,000 watt pro amps on the woofer panels, etc. I merely got myself a First Watt B4 crossover to use in place of the stock passive one (it’s an external box, which goes between the power amps and the connectors on the planar panels, not the optimum way to bi-amp), and used a 200w/channel PS Audio ss amp on the woofers and a 100w tube amp on the m/t panels. Sounds fantastic, but I just don’t have a room with the required width (a minimum of about 20 ft.: 4’ for each speaker, 8’ between them, and 2’ on the outside edge of each to the side walls).

@boxcarman: Bruce Thigpen openly expressed his admiration for Jim Winey's invention of his planar-magnetic design. I myself was an early adopter, buying a pair of Tympani T-I in 1973. Thigpen went on to study the Magneplanar, and had an idea for his own version of the planar-magnetic driver.

In the 1980's Thigpen introduced three loudspeaker models: the LFT-3, LFT-4 (of which I have a pair), and the LFT-6, all of which featured the Eminent Technology LFT planar-magnetic driver, which is a push-pull design (the idea Thigpen saw as a way to improve on Winey's design). For years all the Magnepan drivers were single-ended, and the lower cost Maggies continue to be.

Keeping the conductors that are attached to the Mylar diaphragm within the magnetic field of the planar-magnetic design is a means of eliminating the distortion inherent in single-ended designs (in his TAS review, Greene talks about the low-distortion character of the LFT-8b). The more expensive Maggies now have push-pull drivers, the 20.7 and 30.7 for sure, the 3.7i I'm not sure about.

How much this has to do with the sound of the 1.7i I can't say. All I know is that that model sounded---as I said above---"wispy" to me, images lacking body and substance, more like a ghostly apparition than a flesh and blood image. And whatta ya know, Guttenberg characterized the sound of the LRS+ sitting next to the LFT-8b in his living room just that way when comparing the two. I haven't heard the 3.7i, and very much want to. Until I have room for my Tympani T-IVa's, the LFT-8b will just "have to do." ;-)

@soix: Years before Steve Guttenberg had a listen to the LFT-8b, Robert E.Greene gave the speaker a very interesting review in TAS (in 2014). Sure, one can also ask "Who really cares about Robert E. Greene?" To a degree I do (we both like the Quad ESL, which I also own). If you don't, fine, ignore him. Is it okay for the rest of us to discuss what Greene and Guttenberg (and a number of reviews by UK critics, also pretty interesting) think of the LFT-8b? You're free to state your opinion if you wish.

@krelldreams: Yeah, a comparison of the LFT-8 (b and c iterations) with the MG3.7i would be fascinating. As I said, the MG1.7i didn't suit me, but the 3.7 is a very different animal. Both the MG3.7i and Tympani T-IVa have the Magnepan ribbon tweeter, about as good as tweeters get. If I had a big enough room I'd still be listening to my T-IVa's, which I love.

Considerations in choosing between the 3.7i and LFT-8b/c---apart from their basic inherent sound characteristics---will include:

1- Room size. The LFT-8 measures 13" wide and 60" tall, the 3.7 24" wide and 71" tall, quite a bit bigger. The 3.7 can be rather imposing in smallish rooms. With either speaker sufficient distance from the wall behind them is non-negotiable; the common wisdom is a minimum of 3', but more is better. 5' just barely meets the distance needed for the returning rear wave to arrive back at the panel delayed in time 10ms, which is the difference needed for our brains to hear the two waves---direct and reflected---as separate events, rather than the rear wave being perceived as the smearing of the front wave. I fortunately have that 5' distance available in my current music room.

2- Choice of amplification. The MG3.7i is a pretty difficult load for most tube amps, while the LFT-8 is a relatively-easy one. If I was thinking about getting into the MG3x series Maggies, I would look for a 3.6. Why? Because the 3.6 has a parallel cross-over so can easily be bi-amped: a beefy solid state amp on the bass driver, a tube on the m/t drivers. The 3.7i has a series crossover, so the drivers cannot be driven separately without internal surgery.

The LFT-8 has dual binding posts, making bi-amping pretty easy (Bruce Thigpen endorses the idea, and provides instructions on how to do it in the owners manual). The m/t panel driven separately is, as I said above, an 11 ohm load, great for tube amps. In moderately-sized rooms the LFT-8 does not require a brute force power amp, but being very transparent is revealing of faults in amplifiers. But, I want to add, not so ruthless-revealing as to make less than great sounding recordings unlistenable. 

Ah, okay Ric. More powerful neodymium magnetic structures makes for a whole new ballgame, and explains the higher sensitivity. It strikes me as surprising how after all this time (33 years since the LFT-8 was introduced) Thigpen suddenly shifts into higher gear and gets ambitious with his LFT loudspeaker. And then Magnepan is getting ready to introduce their new model, which will also include powered dipole woofers and DSP electronics. Pretty exciting!

@willywonka: It may be the prototype Eminent Technology speaker shown in the two videos linked above by @ricevs, tentatively named the Model 18LS. It is the midrange and tweeter drivers from the LFT-8b and c, with separate dipole woofer towers (6 woofers in front, either 2 or 4 in the rear). Also included in the 18LS will be power amps for both the m/t panels and woofer towers, plus DSP/room correction electronics with related measuring microphone..

Excellent point @dynamiclinearity, I had forgotten that fact. That difference in drop off in output level with distance is one reason why monopole subs are not ideal mates for use with dipole loudspeakers (also the opinion of Magnepan’s Wendell Diller): if you balance the two at 1 meter, the balance will be different at greater listening distances.

I’m sure that was one reason Bruce Thigpen decided to design a dipole woofer system, now offered in the LFT-8c. If you already have a dipole sub such as the Rythmik Audio/GR Research OB Sub, you can use it in place of the woofer in the LFT-8b. You merely don’t connect speaker cables to the LFT-8’s woofer binding posts (or use the provided jumpers), using the controls on the dipole sub to create the required 180Hz low-pass filter. Of course very few subs will play up to 180Hz; the Rythmik/GRR OB plays up to 300Hz!

Excellent Ric (@ricevs), thanks; I hadn’t seen those videos. For those who don’t know, Ric at EVS was in the past offering a line of loudspeakers employing NEO planar-magnetic drivers mated with the fantastic open-baffle servo-feedback woofer offered by Rythmik Audio in conjunction with GR Research. I have a pair of the OB subs, with two woofers in each W-frame I built from flat pack kits.

By the way Ric, I still have the Audible Illusions Modulus 2 pre-amp you "modified" (redesigned is more apt ;-) for me back in the 90’s ;-) .

Exactly as @aniwolfe states. Looking at the impedance versus frequency chart on the ET website, you’ll notice the impedance of the LFT-8b remains above 10 ohms all across the spectrum, with the exception of dropping below 10 ohms only between 55Hz and 180Hz (the crossover frequency). Unlike Maggies, a good candidate for tube amps. I had already sold my pair of Atma-Sphere M60’s by the time I got the ET’s, but I’m sure they’d work great, especially on the m/t panels themselves (with as I said above ss on the woofers). In contrast, Maggies never rise above 4 ohms, dropping sightly below 3 ohms at some frequencies.

As far as sensitivity goes, we have to keep in mind that sensitivity measurements are always lower with dipoles than they actually perform in a room. Those measurements ignore the back wave, fully half the speaker’s output! Add 3dB to the stated figure. Still low, but not enough so to cause it to be extremely amplifier-fussy, unlike ribbons, which are low in sensitivity, low in impedance, and reactive in nature (magnetic-planars are pretty much a resistive load). That is why I cringe when I hear Steve (and others) characterize Maggies as quasi-ribbons. No, they’re not. They are planar-magnetics, with the exception of the Magnepan true-ribbon tweeter. The tweeter in the LFT-8 (reproducing the top octave only---10kHz and up, though with a shallow 1st-order high-pass filter) is also a ribbon, the midrange driver a planar-magnetic---as Steve mentions, push-pull in design (most of the Maggies are single-ended.).

You’re correct @aniwolfe, Steve didn’t mention just how wideband the midrange driver is: it does 180Hz up to 10kHz, crossover free within it's bandpass! For a small room the 16a would be a nice choice, though you still need some space between it and the wall behind it.

A good suggestion @decooney. I can recommend both the RM-9 Mk.2 and RM-200 Mk.2 Music Reference amps, which put out 125w/100w (respectively) into 8 ohms. If you bi-amp (the dual binding posts make that fairly easy)---with a tube amp on the panel (the m/t panel presents an 11 ohm load to the amp) and a 100w ss (it need not be expensive, just good) on the woofer, that is probably all you need for just about any size room, program material, and listening level.

You will be rewarded with a loudspeaker in the same league as many ESL’s in terms of transparency, but with greater maximum volume (I also own the Quad ESL), besting all the Maggies except that company’s fantastic ribbon tweeter (contained in the Tympani T-IVa, and current MG3.7i, 20.7i, and 30.7). Ans without the Maggies’ lack of dynamics and resolution at low listening levels.

For dipole planar lovers, it’s a heck of a loudspeaker package! That it has remained such a well-kept secret for so long has been a mystery to me for years. Another factor that led me investigate the LFT-8b was reading what Harry Weisfeld of VPI had to say about; he said he considered it’s midrange reproduction the best he had ever heard, from any loudspeaker, at any price. I don’t know if I’d go THAT far. ;-)

@hilde45: While the LFT-8c is an advanced version of the LFT-8 in terms of low frequencies and room correction (it contains DSP), the -8b remains available. Not everyone may want or need what the -8c offers, the -8b being a cheaper and sufficient alternative