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

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.

@ricevs What you are describing for the 8c ' Extreme' is certainly interesting. I already have the 8c; however, I would be interested in knowing if Bruce would be willing, at a minimum, to provide a neodymium mid range panel replacement. Please keep us posted. 

What will be the benefits of the neodymium upgrade? The lighter weight of the neo is moot as the moving part is the mylar in a planar system.  Will the more power magnetic field generated translate into more clarity and detail?

@bdp24 It certainly would be informative to listen to your set up vs 8c. The main difference being DSP vs electronic x-over. But as @mijostyn mentioned you are a purist on this issue. While I don't always agree with @mijostyn, especially his adamant refusal to accept the merits of under slung tonearm ( he he ), digital signal conversion, even on analog source, is something I have come to accept. I don't understand why it works, but......

@ieales The timeline of your 8b upgrade around 2021-2022 coincided with Bruce's upgrade work on the 8c. Did he mentioned anything to you about it? It seems such a coincidence!

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.

@mijostyn Back in the mid to late 80's I had Tympani 4's. The earlier version where the 3 panels did not separate.

I converted my garage with advice from the Winey's to have one wall built on a slight angle to eliminate parallel walls. I then installed 2 layers of 1/2" drywall that were glued and screwed to the studs with glue between the layers along with 3 sets of headers between each stud location. The headers were about 20", 45", and 72" approximately above the concrete carpeted floor.

The amplifier for the bass panels was a Levinson ML-3 with dedicated 20 amp circuits for each of my 3 amps I was using at the time.

The bass performance was rock solid that it's equal I have never heard.

Describing the bass as flabby leads me to believe you have not heard the true bass potential of this speaker.

@bdp24 I convert everything to 24/192 and RIAA correct the phono stage in the digital realm. I use digital crossovers, EQ and room correction to amazing effect. You have no idea what you are missing. But, I understand the purist approach. I drive an old 911. I have own new ones and do not like them, too darn refined. 

@ieales , You are not imagining anything. The bass of the Tymps is flabby at best. In total I think the 20.7 is a better loudspeaker. It still has less than optimal bass.

You are 90% of the way there with your speakers. IMHO your next move should be to disconnect the woofers in the speakers and build four 10 or 12" passive  subwoofers and space them evenly out on the front wall flanking the ETs. I would drive them with two amps and keep the channels separate, not mono. The crossover point I believe is 180 Hz. If you use a steeper slope (10th order) with your digital crossover you can safely push the crossover point down to 160 Hz. Time align everything and your bass energy will simulate a live performance. I use my old JC1s for subwoofer duty but I use to use a pair of QSC  commercial AB amps to great effect. Much less expensive. Dayton and Parts Express make incredible subwoofer kits at great prices. You can build for 12" subs for less than the cost of some commercial 12" units. Their drivers are absolutely top notch. I use 8 of their 12" Reference HO DVC drivers in my new subs. Each enclosure gets two drivers. I will be publishing the photo history of their construction on Imgur shortly.

@mijostyn 

As a former Tympany user myself just what are you doing now? The system you described above? 

Yes

Harry Pearson’s favorite bass reproducers!

I thought the Tympany were OK at the very bottom, not great. BUT, at the time I owned them, I was a recording engineer. Perhaps my perspective was colored by the awesome low end in some control rooms. OTOH, the Maggies' midrange and top were sublime.

Properly setup and configured in a good room, the LFT-8b, as I mentioned to Bruce, are "Merciless on bad material and sublime on well recorded."

@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!

@ieales , As a former Tympany user myself just what are you doing now? The system you described above? 

There is now an LFT-8c. It has a new woofer and a price jump to $4800 pair.

First off, this is the speaker value of the century. It is a Line Source Dipole (for the most part) with a force over area drive. All points of the diaphragm are controlled by the signal unlike regular dynamic speakers. It creates way less room interaction than a regular dynamic speaker.  It will create a much more life like image. The width of the drivers was properly chosen to create even horizontal dispersion. It's transient response is excellent. 

Like every loudspeaker out there, it is not perfect. When you stand up the high frequencies disappear as soon as your head gets above the tweeter. The vast majority of us listen seated so it is a quasi problem. But, the same thing happens if you are on the floor having fun with the wife listening to Sade.

The woofer is not a line source. It is a point source radiator. It is going to loose acoustic power with distance much faster than the rest of the speaker which is line source. Consequently, the balance is going to be right only at one distance. For most rooms this is a trivial problem because you can not get that far away from the speaker. The driver is actually a subwoofer driver and is capable of very long excursions vibrating the heck out of the rest of the speaker. The woofer set up was a compromise ET had to make to keep the price down and the morphology of the speaker more acceptable to most people. You have to be able to sell speakers. Ideally there should be four subwoofers spread across the front wall creating a line source and isolating the rest of the speaker from direct involvement with the woofer driver. 

As suggested by ET I would definitely biamp this speaker. It is not very efficient and two lower powered amps are probably less expensive than one very high powered one. You also get to lose an analog crossover that is probably limiting efficiency to some extent.

Mr Guttenberg has not heard 8 foot ESLs with a line source subwoofer array. But, that speaker system costs $100,000.  The ET  LFT 8c is accessible to just about all audiophiles at a very reasonable price. I hate the tonearm but I love the speakers!

ALL equipment reviews are specious and designed to sell product to the naive.

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).

TAS reviews are the worst on the planet. They love everything and do no equipment comparisons because it makes their lives much easier and the ability to crank out reviews because they do none of the hard work that would constitute a real review.  They’re total hacks.  Ok, maybe hifi+ is worse.

...just hook 'em up to a nice amplifier and enjoy.  

The LFT-8b can be turned into a world class speaker that has few equals... for those who appreciate coherence and staging. They play loud enough and only change level, not character no matter the request.

Replace the passive XO with active DSP. Time align the system. Drive the mid and tweets with very good tube gear. Replace the woofer drivers if they are original Usher or Tymphany with the Dayton RS225-8 and drive it with 200WPC of good SS. Roll the bottom octave from the woorfers w first order HP. Add a pair of subs with controls to integrate properly: multiple XO slope, polarity inversion, continuous phase.

Add in a decent cable loom and put them in a very good room.

They will "float like a butterfly and sting like a bee" when required.

Former bi-amped Tympany IV owner - a long time back...

See ieLogical Audiophilia Redux

I am going to contact Bruce about creating an updated LFT-8b and C......like an EXTREME version: the new 90db Neo drivers, new woofer to match and all upgraded parts: WBT posts, cryoed wires and super xover parts. Probably would be at least 2-3K more......but can you imagine?......Way, way more transparency and dynamics!!!...add the C part and super bass too......would not need another speaker.......ever! The older ones could then be upgraded to the latest since all the drivers are the same size as the older ones (I am assuming here).

Yes, the new 18LS would be even more dynamic.....but who has the room and money?.....and you can always add super subs to the 18b Extreme or C Extreme.

Will see what he says.....certainly what I would do if I were him.......it would blow the roof off the industry.....90db....easy to drive maggie beater.......send one to Steve Guttenberg and he will use it as his reference for years.

Yes, looking forward to the release of LFT-18LS. The videos links provided by @ricevs really gave a good glimpse of the new speaker. Did I hear correctly? It is a fully powered DSP speaker system, without the need of amps? 

I wrote to Bruce asking him about the use of DSP. He replied that deploying DSP tech is the lesser of two evils, the other being passive x-over. And digital tech has advanced such that he could do things that he couldn't just ten years ago. I personally find the DSP part of the 8c a quandary. How can a plate amp / DSP digital processor that retails in the $250 range make such an impact? I am in effect putting analog play back through a A-D and D-A conversion every time I use the speaker. And analog still comes out sounding like analog!? I guess my question is if 'cheap' digital tech can be deployed to such good effect in speaker design, then why are we chasing digital playback tech in the $10k + realm. Or is it that Bruce is in fact moving up the digital chain with the LFT-18 for even more superior sound in addition of the neodymium magnets?

Sanders Sound System also uses DSP, though a more sophisticated / expensive kind. And Robert Greene in his review of the Sanders speakers claims not to 'hear' the DSP degrading SQ. In fact, he felt it would be the future trend in speaker design. I did not understand that part of his review But having lived with DSP, I can honestly say it woks without degrading SQ, having 8b as a compare.

FWIW...The LFT8b's are lovely. During 2020, 2021 and 2022 I had alot of time to evaluate my small collection of panel speakers including, Quad 63's, Lft-8b's and ML ESLs. Evaluation was done in a constant rotation, using an upgraded (resistors, caps, transformers) ELEKIT push/pull KT120/KT77/EL34 amp. I found the 40 - 50 wpc to be lots of power for my listening, in a Treated but smallish (11'.5" x 13'.5") room.

I still rotate between the LFT 8s and the ML ESL (with Spetz Zeros). I prefer the ET LFT8 but the vast majority people who have heard both, including our Vinyl Club members,  like the Logans...

I sold the 63s...

@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.

@mrdecibel I think the comment you found objectionable should be be qualified as follows: " there aren't many speakers that can reproduced all of the properties of sound and music...... with such a high level of competence at a price of $3200". La Scalas' retail for $ 6,500 and up depending on the vintage...just saying.

And the 8c at $4200 goes further. 

It's interesting the tone of this thread expressed by non-ET owner....kinda negative and questioning in general....something about the LFT 8's that just don't get no respect.

Speakers ( and the room ) are the most specific of importance, in contributing to the sound one achieves, and it boils down to what you like, and what you want. I have owned Maggies, Apogee Duettas, and ML CLSs, and I understand why people love them. My buddy had a pair of the LF8bs ( for a short time ), and I understand, again, why people like them. A good bubby of mine owns, and loves, his "63s. I will take my Lascalas over any of them, because, for what I WANT, they do more for me, and satisfy my listening, more than anything else....especially at their price point. All of this means, like what you like, but don't knock it, if it is not your cup of tea. And the ridiculous comment " there aren't many speakers that can reproduce all of the properties of sound and music ". Name me ONE speaker that does it all ? Enjoy ! MrD.

@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." ;-)

@bdp24 : I have considered all the points that you mentioned. What gives me pause to replace them are the following: I have very little to complain about with my current set up, so why upset the apple cart? I have worked out my room, best location for “these” speakers, the delicate balance of input sensitivity/output voltage, impedance (I use Speltz Zeros between the amp & speakers), etc. to the point where I’m very happy with what I’m hearing. Aren’t we sometimes thinking about what’s “better” out there though? I’ve tried many other speakers, and many other amplifiers, and lots of source components and source material, and I know the possibility exists that I’ll “upgrade” only to find myself missing what I had! Been there…. I’d like to repeat what some others have pointed out, regarding the ET 8b’s “specified speaker sensitivity”, it’s almost impossible to make a judgement based on what’s on paper because there are too many factors involved in how a manufacturer lands on that “spec” number… also critical is how the speakers interact with an individual’s room and amplifier. As just one example, I purchased a pair of speakers for a second room to use with a small tube amp. The speakers I was already using were PSB alpha B1 - bookshelf speakers (rated @89 db/watt/m), the new speakers were Tekton Mini Lore - small floorstanders (rated @96 db/watt/m). Looking at those specs, one would expect the more sensitive floor stander to sound louder and beefier than the bookshelf speakers (all else remained constant), but surprisingly (to me) that was not the case at all… the PSBs were a better fit in that system. I have no doubt that for many listeners, the LFT8bs will sound great with many high quality amplifiers. It is very important to try things in your own system, or at very least, listen to what you’re considering so you can make a fair judgement. Specs on paper can be very misleading!

@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.

The comments regarding tube amps being a good match with the LFT 8 correspond with my own experience. With the 8b, I preferred a 100W triode tube amp with 6550's. Now a 20W amp with 300b's in push-pull mode is sounding better than the higher watt amp. And in my 250 s.f. room, they can go over 100db without stressed. 

Who really cares about Steve Guttenberg?  Honestly.

@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. 

There are probably thousands of Maggie owners that are completely satisfied with them [I an one of them] and the fact that they can hardly fill the demand for them should tell you something.  Just because they might not be someone else's cup of tea doesn't mean they do not deliver what a lot of what we like.

@jazlft8b 

This was a very important comment you made:

The first point to tackle is the poor crossover components that is built to a price point! I have updated with Clarity caps together with Jupiter caps as by pass caps together with duelands and Jantzen copper foil caps. I can only say that it's worth the cost. Also I am now experimenting with a larger 15" paper bass unit open baffle to improve the bass response as the supplied 8" driver is really useless and does not work with the ribbon unit! 

From these comments, it appears that the Eminent speaker may be a good starting point for those who want to take a good design and press it into great shape. But it won't be close to "done" for some.

@tablejockey :  Agreed! The discussion starts with someone trying to raise awareness about a speaker that may be a good fit for others… aka - trying to be HELPFUL!… and out come the people trying to shoot down something they have zero experience with. I for one am glad that @bdp24 posted this. I’ve owned and loved my Magnepans - several different models - for over three decades, and these speakers (the ET 8bs) have definitely been on my radar. Btw, I did see the Steve G video yesterday, and added his take on them to my mental database. I’d like to hear them and compare them directly with my 3.7s… so I can decide for myself. Maybe it’s time to take the leap….

The recording has to have the ability to be 3 dimensional. Next speaker placement and room acoustic treatment needs to be dialed in. Amp/speaker/cable/synergy and clean power is need for a 3D effect. Purchasing a Monitor Audio Platinum series speaker will not guarantee a 3 dimensional effect if all the mentioned parameters are not in effect. FWIW I heard the Platinum 3 series(100/200) at Axpona and they were disappointing. The sales rep claimed the room was to small for the 200 model and why were they were using mid-fi electronics Arcam SA 30? My take is the Platinum series is very sensitive with room placement and electronics. At $14k for the 200 is a lot for a Chinese made speaker when the Acoustic Energy AE 520 at $5k outperformed it at Axpona.

Geez,

Tough crowd in here.

Topic is a  speaker which performs above the price point, and perhaps under the radar.

The discussion about how it performs as is, out of the box is what matters-thats all.

whipsaw,

I'm not peddling anything sorry to burst your bubble lol

whipsaw,

sorry but that's not an assertion that's a fact and in fact most stereo salespeople are so dumbo they don't know how to set up a system properly and 99.9% of speakers out there are two-dimensional and flat sounding there's not very many speakers out there that can reproduce all the properties of sound and music.

@hilde45 .."The key issue, it seems, is how loud people want to play them."

---------------

Yep, desired volume levels, room size, and placement options matter in order to decide on the type of preferred amplification and whether these are the speakers are for you (or maybe not). I’ve heard the 8s and 16s placed in different locations in a room, and they tended to sound their best to me out from the front wall a little bit. Was involved in attempted listening sessions with nice 10w, 20w, 60w tube amps. Me, I’d go with 60wpc push-pull tube amps for these, imo. Very few SS amps need apply. I’d still pick really good mono tube amps over most good Class-A SS amps for these particular speakers. .

imo, its not the same type of hollow sound co-mingled/blurred and spread all across the front such as I’ve heard with some of the Magnepan speakers. It’s more of a directed and forward (at you) type of sound when the speakers are slightly tilted to the listener. The speakers, particularly the 8s provide some added upper end detail you don’t hear with most conventional cone speakers. Some may not like this. Really good tube amps, and with big-iron behind them would totally be my preference for these.

Selecting the correct amplification for the room and for these speakers is key, imo. If (decades late on these) Steve Guttenberg does not review them with different amplifiers in different size rooms, and placements, the test and review will be somewhat limited imo. Having heard these speakers at least 15 different times, with different amplifiers. Your hearing, rooms, and experience may vary.  Best of Luck to anyone who jumps in on these.  

Hi, all

I own a pair of eminent technologies Lft8bs, had them for a 1 year now. After reading all the reviews on the forum. The first point to tackle is the poor crossover components that is built to a price point! I have updated with Clarity caps together with Jupiter caps as by pass caps together with duelands and Jantzen copper foil caps. I can only say that it's worth the cost. Also I am now experimenting with a larger 15" paper bass unit open baffle to improve the bass response as the supplied 8" driver is really useless and does not work with the ribbon unit! Good luck with your upgrade.

That is a fact , just do the Math , U.S labor is 6x more , and look at the industrial look .my uncle has worked for over 10 years in Asia , they build them ,they may do some assembly testing here that is all . Iowned a audio store for a decade.

rule of thumb for speakers and electronics on 90%  , 25% goes into the build including packaging, the rest R&D overhead, and markup , it’s a business.

that’s why the vast majority of low cost items are mfg overseas  it’s all about $$ 

To stay in business!!

I have been listening to the 8C for six months now, upgraded from 8b. For $1500, the upgrade is a no brainer, absolutely!

The plate amp / DSP is from Dayton Audio and houses a 250W amp, class D (? ). The initial concern was that the A-D and D-A conversions would degrade  SQ. I know there are person here who claims to be able to hear and dislike a DSP in the signal path. I had some problems initially with the sound from the vinyl side of my system whereas the CPD played wonderfully from the get go. But now as I listen to records, I cannot tell what the DSP is doing negatively to the sound. 

There are a couple of settings that Bruce has left to the listener's discretion: the volume of the woofer is adjustable relative to the panels and there is a Time Delay setting to time align the woofer and the panels. I have left the other adjustments ( a total of 7 ) as factory settings. But a fellow over at the AudioKarma forum who is a sound engineer has fine tuned the other settings with measuring software, and he claims the quality of the bass goes up a few notches. 

Compared to the 8b, the  8c is a new speaker. It is  full range, holographic in soundstage, blends better with the my room, and much more matured  / sophisticated.

It would be very interesting to see what Steve Guttenberg has to say about the 8c since he mentioned that a follow up to the 8b will be in a future installment. 

@audioman58 

Where is the evidence they are made in China?

And isn't it the case that some things made in China are of excellent quality? Or are you making a political point?

As for your claim that they "absolutely need a minimum of 150wpc into 8 ohms" we already have @decooney testifying to the contrary and Steve G. also explores several different amps with these.  The key issue, it seems, is how loud people want to play them. 

Not a huge fan of Steve almost everything sounds good , not true 

Eminent  technologies , myself and 2 others I know have had panels go out ,

they are made in China  and found out these cost less then $800 including boxes .

you get what you pay for , you absolutely need a minimum of 150wpc into 8 ohms 

if you don’t want to tax the panels into distortion ,which is the killer of these panels on transients thepower demand can climb many times ,look at the 83 sensitivity.

that’s why you need a minimum of 150 clean power the  Parasound 23A is a good match the 21A much better still with plenty of current on demand . Much better then  tubes especially if you want R&R levels of music over  a long play session .

my friend had a Emotiva and didnot workout too well too much distortion at upper levels. Keep that in mind if you plan on buying them quality counts.

@magnuman : the Linkwitz tri-amped open baffle speaker may have the best 3-D imaging of any dynamic system. I doubt that any Monitor Audio speaker can compare.

@magnuman 

When you make an assertion as ludicrous as this:

all speakers no matter how much the cost are crap they're all very two-dimensional sounding and they don't throw a very wide three-dimensional and enveloping sound stage

readers will be far less likely to look into whatever you are peddling.

all speakers no matter how much the cost are crap they're all very two-dimensional sounding and they don't throw a very wide three-dimensional and enveloping sound stage there's only one speaker out there that does that exceptionally well, and that's the monitor audio platinum series, get in touch with audio facts in the Netherlands and they'll tell you why and they have 7 $8,000 worth of testing equipment to prove it.

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!

When the 18LS Protos were unveiled the info sheet said " features new push pull neodymium planar mid and highs".......and the guy there said they were 90db efficient.....and the speaker could play super loud (110db).  You can see/hear what what I just stated in the above first video posted.....so, everything is new with this new Proto.  The mid/high planars look the same.....but apparently....are not.  $15K for everything. We will see what might change when it hits the streets.

@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..

At Axpona they were playing an unreleased ET speaker that sounded very good. Unfortunately, I don't remember the details. 

I watched SG today. First time in a while. I think they were at Axpona?

$3k or so. I just received a pair of LRS+ I had ordered last December.

They are quite a disappointment considering all the rave I had heard.

When I placed the order Magnepan offered a 60 day trial period.

Now I see no mention of any on their site.

Anyone know anymore on this?

Thanks,

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!

There is a second reason why planars seem more efficient. They drop in level at 3 dB as you double listening difference and regular speakers drop at 6 dB when doubling. The standard efficiency is measured at the same distance for both planar and point sources but we rarely listen at 3 meters, usually more than 6 meters so there the planar plays louder for the same input. 

I saw the Steve Guttenburg review and thought of those here - particularly that had mentioned the Eminent Tech’s before. Very impressed. I’m with @aniwolfe in considering the LFT16a’s for my 10x14 room. Just been corresponding with Bruce about them. Really nice guy, very responsive as he just got right beck with me today. He explained that they have new woofers, of which I was curious  as the Stereophile Atkinson review of them back in 2008 (he had complained about a low mid bump in his measurements).