Spatial Audio M1 Sound open baffle they sound like a planer on steroids |
Well, here's another thought. This thread started and had seemingly died over nine years ago. It was only resurrected three days ago.
The original post is sort of irrelevant now because it predates the current *.7 and *.7i Magnepans, whose improvements minimize the negative dogma that accompanied Maggies for so long.
I've had 1.7s for two years now. They are dynamic, they play well at lower levels than the .6s before them. Their volume sweet range kicks in at a lower SPL than before. You can get really good sound out of them with a current production 150wpc NAD amp. I'm using a 30-yr-old Perreaux PMF1150B that I picked up for under $500. It's a good match. So they aren't as amp-picky as before either.
You still need 40-50 inches behind them. I'm sure the DWMs help flesh out the bottom, but I already had twin Mirage MM8s. The modern high powered sealed box subwoofer can integrate very well, despite what many people say.
So in 9 years, dynamic speakers have improved to where their speed, dispersion, and lower box resonances challenge panel speakers. But the panel speakers haven't stood still in that nine years either. Jim Winey's son has taken over design and product launch. It appears that Maggie models will be upgraded and improved far more often than they were before.
In very little time the 1.7 and 3.7 have become the 1.7i and 3.7i respectively. |
I'm an old planer guy ... Acoustat IIIs, Acoustat IV's, and Martin Logans. I never thought I'd ever leave the planer camp even with their hunger for power.
Then, I had the opportunity to buy a pair of used Legacy Signature III's. Original cost of the Sig III's in the finish I have was around $5000. If you can find them, they can be bought today for under $2000 per pair.
At 93db one can drive them with a 25 watt receiver. My ARC Ref-75se just coasts with the Sig III's. With good electronics they just disappear, and they're every bit as transparent as any planer I've had. They have a ribbon tweeter for the upper highs making for a sweet treble, and they move tons of air.
If your room would allow, I'd even go for a used pair of the ORIGINAL Legacy Focus speaker. Don't go for the newer "A" version. The originals sound better. A good used pair should go for around $3000 to $4000.
The Focus is more relaxed sounding (more natural) than the Sig III's, but they need more room to breath. Still a very efficient speaker so there's no need for tons of power from an amp. I think they are 93db efficient too.
Here's the thing about the Legacy sig III's and the Legacy Focus speakers. A lot of guys bought them and used solid state electronics to drive them. Big mistake. They don't sound their best with solid state, so onto the used market they went.
Tubes are the only way to go with these two Legacy speakers. The first time I heard the Sig III's was at a friends home being driven by a modified Dyna 70. It was enough to convince me to sell the Martin Logans and go for the Legacys. I've never looked back. Every time I upgrade my system these speakers improve right along with the upgrade. At this date, they are amazing.
If I had to get rid of the Legacy speakers, I'd seriously consider the Harbeths.
Happy listening ... |
Eminent Technology, Sanders. |
I moved from Magnepan to Triangle and Ohm. |
I have to agree with 04-05-06: Rkeman above - any of the Linkwitz speakers will meet and exceed your expectations (if you can find them used, or build the kit)... but... so will the Emerald Physics and Spatial Audio speakers.
Or, you can have your Maggies modified into Magnestands, which improves their sound to make them sound a lot more dynamic with bass, while retaining their great staging and imaging.
I've tried all of these... and... settled for the Linkwitz Orion's and LX521's. But, the rest are superb! |
Maybe VMPS would fit the bill. |
Not necessarilly a personal recommendation, but, perhaps more of a thought for consideration: Eminent Technology. |
pro-ac reponse 3. Imaging is the point source's forte. Of course the draw back is that the highs have to be excellent because they tend to beam the high frquencies. |
I have owned the 1.4 and MMG with sub. I now own the Triangle Celius (I like tube amps now)
3 speakers have blown me away over the years.
mbl - every time I hear them they amaze me - nothing is close
ProAc Response 3's - heard them in a heavily treated room and the imaging was awesome
Triangles - for the money I have heard nothing close (especially with medium power tube amps) |
The only speaker that would get out of my Maggie 3.6/Vandersteen 2WQ combination driven by the 500wpc @4 ohm Classe'25, would be a big Apogee such as the Diva. In my current room which is fairly spacious(4500 plus cubic ft)but quite live, planar speakers just sound right. In a more acoustically dead room, I would probably choose a Vandersteen speaker. Perhaps a 2CE or 3a Signature or maybe the basic Quattro. The 5a is wonderful but beyond my means. |
My new GMA Calypso's are stat-like in the mids and highs but with more slam in the bass than Maggies. My jaw has been transplanted permanently on the floor I do believe. |
VR4-JR's were the first speaker that really got me out of my Maggies. My living room is my listening room and Maggies are just not a possibility. I'm not sure I could go back to them after having the JR's because I have really gotten used to the really great bass they deliver. |
if youve enjoyed maggies for that long, stay with maggie. you are now officially a maggiefile. |
No cone speaker has ever sounded right to me, just my preference, properly amped and it's really not that hard, I don't think anything touches Maggies. That is why there are so many Audiophiles with relatively cheap Magnepan speakers (3.6R's) matched to obscenely expensive systems.
But, other speakers that I have heard that you may like? I think the Quad 988, and 989 are sublime. I love the way they match with the Quad amps, really something special. Also, a properly set up Klipschorn can be sublime. A very different, but really involving sound. I love the sound of these for Rock music, and heard them recently with the ASL Hurricane's and was very impressed. Vandersteens are a really special speaker up and down the line.
A great idea up near the middle of this string is the option of single drivers. I love those sytems. There is a great muscial coherence to them, and depending on the driver/cabinet combination they can play at surprisingly loud volumes. Additionally, I find them incredibly involving on delicate pieces and with jazz vocals.
I downsized my system tremendously recently, and sold my Maggie 3.6R's and I miss them everyday. But if you want to try something else, I would move to the Klipschorn or Klipsch La Scala. A very different, but very involving sound. I think I am going to move that direction myself soon.
Thanks. |
The top cone speakers today happen to be Spendor, Harbeth, ATC, PMC, Living Voice, Goldmund, Eggleston, JM Reynaud, JM Labs and yes it would include Avalon, Kharma, Vandersteen, Von Scheikwert, TAD, Thiel, Proac.
I don't think it's silly to compare the S8e to MG12 as they have similar bandwith and price is very arbitrary in this hobby. I have heard the MG1.6 and 3.6 at the dealers and still prefer the Spendor. I would even compare th S8e to the highly rave Kharma 3.2 FE $20,000 an heard the Dynaudio Evidence Master $80,0000 and still prefer the S8e in communicating the music with natural timbres/texture. Sure the Dynaudios play louder and have more bass but you can't replicate the live sound of an intrument by making a speaker with just more drivers and bigger cabinet no matter how high quality the parts are. Bigger speakers bigger distortion and you need more amplifer power to drive those speakers again more distortion. That's why when you hear the big Dynaudio play a simple event like a drum stick hitting a wooden block tey do the dynamics but you can't hear the wood/texture just some synthetic sound. The only speaker technology which comes closest to replicating live music would probably be a custom 3-way horn system. Commercial designs would be Avantgarde (bass integration is terrible) or Acapella. A funny story, a friend of mine whose colleague has a daughter (13 yrs old) who plays cello was looking to buy speakers so she can hear her own music. She heard Quads, Martin Logans, Vandersteen, etc. Do you know she said sounds closest to her instrument. She said a vintage pair of Klipsch Cornwall I which she got and driving it with Quickie Triodes. And yes, vintage Klipsch speakers like La Scala are still viable today.
I've heard Maggies with tubes and SS.I agree that when juiced up the Maggies come alive dynamically but the inner detail is just not there. And I feel nothing is lost going to a fine cone/horn speaker.
I have not heard the Soundlab A1s so I can't comment but did hear the hybrid, I believe, the Dynastat many years ago. Still couldn't resolve the sound of the hall but leading edge on guitars were convincing as wth most electrostats.
And I would disagree that the A1 is in a whole diffirent sonic league than the S8e but Soundlabs would be better than the Maggies. The friend I talked about did hear the bigger full range Soundlabs and he still prefers his Quad 988 saying more musically balanced across the spectrum. Soundlabs will play louder and have more bandwith but what would you rather have one cup of gourmet java or 10 cups of coffee from Dennys. He says they are way overpriced and has known people who owned Soudlabs and have had their panels go down. But he says that about his Quads too (nature of the technology I guess) and that's why he still appreciates what his vintage modded La Scalas can do. When he sits down to listen he doesn't have to worry, is this the day the speaker will shut down. He does like the Quads though that's why he has one pair for back up. Also he has been playing piano since the age of 5 and plays most keyboard instruments even to this day and has helped his friends record music. He is still fond of going to his friends house tinkling the keys of the big Boesendorfer.
Good Luck!*>) |
"I believe panels had their advantages back in the 80's ad 90's but top cone speakers have surpassed them today."
That's one heck of a bold statement with the Magnepan MG12's as a reference to judge all other panel speakers. And what exactly is a top cone speaker model? .... Avalon, Vandersteen, Wilson, or ...... gasp, the Spendor?
A more realistic comparison to have been made before such a blanket statement would be the Spendor to the 3.6.
I too have found the Spendor products over the years to be excellent. But to compare a $3k+ Spendor to a $1k Magnepan is kinda silly. After owning the 3.3 and 3.5 Magnepans (the series 1 and 2 did nothing for me) for 6 years, I know that these speakers excel in areas that the Spendors do not and vice versa.
And if you're listening to the Maggies with a solid state amp like the Brystons, you are not hearing the Maggie magic. A speaker can not ultimately be judged on its own...its interface to the amplifier is critcial.
The problem with Maggies is that they need to be pushed a little to be awakened and play their magic. They are not a good choice for low-level listening as their dynamics and resolution just don't getting going at such levels. It is this ultimate lack of dynamics that always had me wanting to change....but then so much is lost when going to a box speaker at anywhere near the cost.
Since owning Maggies, I have moved onto SoundLab A1s ..... another panel speaker. These are in a whole different sonic class than the Spendors .... but then again, they are 5x the cost. And they do not have the Maggie limitations described above. |
Hi Photon46,
I am also using box speakers now, Spendor S8e, and have no regrets moving from MG12/QR.
The S8e is better in every catergory than the Maggie.
I believe panels had their advantages back in the 80's ad 90's but top cone speakers have surpassed them today. But still they are musical speakers. To get the most out of them they sould be in a room with symetrical left and right sides.
The most fatal flaw I found with the Maggies is they can't resolve the sound of the hall and when playing small inimate solos they always sound big and spacious. |
The timing of this threads renewel is interesting, as I've finally gotten off the fence and jumped into the dynamic speaker side of the audio pasture. As the only thing I heard in dealer auditions that really moved me more than my Maggies cost $13k (Nola Reference Vipers,) I was despairing of finding affordable satisfaction. I tried to audition higher level Maggies, but the local Maggie "dealer" is a joke. They don't stock the Maggie 3.6 and are only interested in selling Wilsons and B&W's in a home theatre context, so I couldn't audition those. I took a look at consumer direct marketed speakers like Tyler, Salk, ACI, etc. I was looking at the same models Bartokfan has been ruminating over in his threads. The only thing that chilled me out on his product was the 10% restock charge if they didn't suit me. That, plus truck shipping both ways would add up to a $1000 audition. In spite of that, I almost ordered from Ty. In the meantime, I started looking at the just discontinued ACI Talisman Se's ($5k.) They are 4 way towers, look a bit like coincidents but have integrated self powered subs ( two low pass 2nd order crossvers, phase & level controls.)
After speaking with Mike Dzurko about what I was looking for, I decided to take a chance even though practically no info is available about them. All I had to risk was one way shipping if they proved unsuitable. In many, if not all respects, ACI's product design goals sound very similat to Tylers. They've been installed in my listening room a week now and have about 40 hours play time. There's no point in prematurely yapping about their sound until they're broken in, but my initial impressions are VERY positive. They maintain the big and expansive Maggie soundstage but add the positves of more realistic dynamics, better frequency extension at both ends of the spectrum, more delicate dynamic shadings, higher resolution of ambient clues, and better "slam" when called for. After I've lived with them a month or so, I'll put the Maggies back into my system because I want to compare them again. Eventually I'll post a more indepth review here or over at Audioasylum. |
Pet what did you pay for the Wilson's? |
i heard the maggie 1.6, Cabasse, Spendor 8, with a ARC amp + pre and a super crummy Cal Labs cdp, last week.
I suggest you try a Tyler. |
I've heard Vonschweikert VR4-SR, B$W 802D, Wilson Watt Puppy 7, VMPS RM 40 and a few others. Nothing can send a shiver down my spine and bring tears of emotion to me like Magnepan 20.1's. Lots of speakers I've never heard. I've heard good things about the Wilson Benesch but haven't heard them. Their may be something more to an individuals taste out there and who knows there may be something out there I would like more, but for the life of me I simply can't imagine anthing more realistic sounding than Maggie 20.1's. When I see a live show. It's BIG. It's not pinpoint defined. It's just BIG. The imaging the 20.1's have is focused enough to believe. To be overly impressed with any one particular thing is certainly a personal choice but is it real? When I close my eyes or turn off the lights at night the image of a real band or singer is life like and simply offers an emotional meltdown of satisfaction that is undescribable unless you've witnessed it. I know they cost more and it is not the purpose of your thread, but moving up to the 20.1 level and staying with the Maggies may be a long term consideration for you. |
Do I miss my Maggies. Yes at times .I had 1.4s and 1.6's for about 16 years.I somtimes miss the openness and full life picture they produce.
But the weaknesses altough few were enough for me to go another way.For my ears I needed an more accurately produced soundstage.ie double bass image does not all of sudden become bigger than the rest of the group because of its amplitude,same for trumpets or voices.
Now I spent 6 times the price to get the Wilson Benesch ACTII's but these babies are so damm convincing that the performers are real.Scary .
What about intimacy. How can you get better at intimacy than the Maggies?
Well when I gave the Wilson's a listen there was no question.
Now that is not to say there is likely many many speakers that provide fanatastic sound.Just how can to audition all of them.So many out there I have not heard and can imagine they do sound good.
I just happened to hear and fall in love with the Wilson's.
Would I go back, not very likely.
Anyway you slice it 'It's all about the music and what flows in your mind'
Cheers. |
Zu provides the big soundstage, paper cones, high efficiency, boxless sound, etc. that have been mentioned in the previous posts and they are not especially pricy, although they will cost you more than JBL 4312's.
The presentation is fast and precise, tonal balance near perfect, and the sweet spot very wide. They have the strengths of panels and dynamic speakers combined in a compact and very well thought out design. I think they will convert you. |
I would try to hear paper cone speakers - they have warmer sound than metallic sound of the maggies. In fact, many audiophiles still think the paper cones give the best tone.
Try to hear classics like Tannoy, Jensen, JBL, Klipsch, and EV. I fell in love with their sound of alnico magnets. They don'
t build them like they used to, unless you pay mega-bucks these days.
I love their wide and deep sound stage of 15 incher coaxial.
Try to hear Tannoy coaxial big ones - not the plastic ones. If you like the sound, you probably like other ones I mentioned as well.
They do sound different from Maggies - warmer.
If you are into rock, JBL 4312 might be good for you - you can get them for a couple of hundred $ used. Not as good as Tannoy, but rock fans seem to like them. |
Jafox, thanks. You seem to get it. My only point was that proac is diametricaly opposed to maggies. Which I thought was the point of this thread. |
I've always loved the Maggie's sound. The Eminents Techs aren't bad either. Yesterday I listened to a friends Eminent Techs powered by a Classe 300..what a monster amplifier!!! Well to say I was disappointed is an understatement.
I came home and played the same recording on my system..which isn't perfect..whose is? Well what I noticed before I ever listened at home was how muffled the pianos sounded. They aren't as distinct as what I've become accustom too. Neither was the upright bass which sounded slow and wooly. The music sounded some what disjointed, I really can't explain it. The Eminent Tech is a 1st order speaker.. I still heard the lag in timing of the crossover. The bass ever so slightly dragged behind the mids and the tweeter seem to lead the way. If you're accustom to it..you won't notice it. A year and half ago I wouldn't have noticed this.
Single Drivers aren't perfect but there are somethings they do I just haven't heard from planars I've spent time with.The planars do throw a large and open soundstage, with that non-boxy sound..which I like very much.
I've always loved the planars sound ..until I spent a year with single drivers. There's just so much music that you never hear with those complicated crossover networks. Also there's the dynamic contrast. It wasn't there with the Eminents and the Classe.
The music didn't have that start and stop jump factor. This is where the music climaxes and brakes quickly without compressing. I don't mean playing loudly. What I mean is when someone plays a piano live. The notes jump at you at different volumes depending on how intense the pianist is playing. If it stays at one volume ...somethings wrong!
Maybe this is a product of fairly efficient speakers ..I don't know. What I do know is, I can't live without that part of the music. Without it ..it doesn't sound as real too me.
So single drivers converted me from the maggies. Especially the larger cabinet based SDs..infact the larger the better. |
As a huge Maggie fan I agree with Greg on the shortcomings of the Maggies. I had Maggie 3.3 and 3.5 and they were so incredibly musical but Greg nails it with their weaknesses. His comments are not absurd at all as they are relative to other speakers as noted.
It is interesting that Greg describes the pinpoint imaging of Proac speakers. I would describe the Proac 2.5 as the most pinpoint-imaged speakers I tried in my room when I borrowed many speakers from 3 different dealers here in Minneapolis. This was initially impressive and yet it did not sound natural as musicians occupied almost no space; I knew exactly where they were and yet they were a point, not a 3-dimensional object. It did not matter as the Proac 2.5s had a tonality that was all over the darn place which made them way too unacceptable anyway. Perhaps the Proac 3.5 are a different matter in this regard. There will always be tradeoffs and for me, the Maggies at that time were the clear winner in sheer terms of musical enjoyment over the many speakers I had tried in the $3-4k range.
When I changed from Maggie 3.5 to SoundLab A1 speakers, it was very evident how much more low-level information existed in the music that I had missed for many years. The Maggies are good but now with the SoundLab, it's a whole new world of detail at low and high sound levels. Until we hear something, we do not know what we have missed; and once we hear it, it is darn tough to go back. This describes the Maggie-to-SoundLab transition I made early last year.
And on the issue of diffused imaging, with the Maggies, you can not walk around the room and expect the performance (images) to be in their same locations. This also results in very different tonality as you walk around. You can walk across the back of the room with the SoundLab and everything stays much in place. This is very impressive.
I would add one additional weakness of the Maggie as bottom-octave extension. They do fairly well but against the SoundaLab, it's not even close. Just the difference in the amount of air moved is significant.
John |
Hi Dave,
If I ever went back to a planer type...it would surely be an Apogee with updated XO's and ribbons! Puts Maggies to shame IMO.
Now..take your meds! ;-) |
Warrenh
Glad you brought that up buddy, I better take those before I forget again!...Wife will be home soon.
Dave |
Dave, you're scaring me. Did you forget to take your meds, today? lol.. |
I'd sure like to see some mis-guided audiophile invite a live band into their home...try to have them setup all their gear between their speakers...HeHe. You might get the drum set to fit?
Or do some of you guys listen to little tiny bands with little tiny drum sets?...how about a nice little 3" trombone?...oh, and that piano is really cute!...do they make um that small?
If you spend to much time in your box, you start thinking inside one.
Dave |
I had a love affair with 1.6's for a while, then began to see the shortcomings of them. Switched to Eminent Technology LFT-8A's, and did a 'stacked' E.T. speaker system with biamping all around. ENORMOUS fun! Finally, tried out the Apogee Calipers.
None of these were enough to save me from being drawn to a dynamic speaker again. One of best kept secrets in audio are the Chapman T-7's, which I would love to hear A/B'd against the much lauded Von Schweikert's. Not that I'm itching to switch; I just think it would be interesting...
Stuart (Chapman) Jones is better known on the West coast for his speakers, and they are sonically beautiful. He can customize his speakers to your listening preferences. His number is: 206-463-3008 There is not much on the net in terms of pictures. The T-7 is a three way capable of great bass down to about 28hz. I have heard many quality dynamic speakers, including Vandersteen, ProAc, Sonus Faber, Krell, Wilsons, and a host of other very popular brands like Paradigm, Dynaudio, etc. and these are among the best in their price category in terms of absolute sonic purity and musicality. Check out the reviews that do exist on the net and you will find almost universal praise for them.
Observations from ownership of these products:
-The 1.6's were the least precise, least complete of the three planars I owned.
-All of them improved with passive vertical biamping
-People searching for a great planar should consider the Eminent Tech. LFT-8A's; considerably better imho
-Pursue Apogees at your own risk; very easy to get burned by obtaining speakers with defects to ribbons and you'll have little recourse to fix without spending inordinate amounts of time/money.
At first, I thought I had lost a portion of the sound stage by moving to a dynamic speaker. Now, with experimentation with cabling, I'm finding that the majority of soundstage is recaptured. In addition, the imaging has become truly a joy, something none of these planars did all that well.
Finally, I will always enjoy the planar sound; I am sorely tempted to repurchase another pair of E.T.'s just to have on hand for when I feel like hearing that sound. |
No names were called. Absurd describes your post, not you.
First I apologize for my misunderstanding of your meaning of "low level resolution". In my mind it meant resolving information that is normally not heard, such as sounds well into the background. The maggies do this just fine. I guess inner detail would be a better term. But you are correct in that they do need to played louder than most other speakers to achieve this. But I stand by my contention of the diffuse imaging. In a large enough room and properly set up they image as well as any speaker. Not the unnatural pinpoint accuracy of a Thiel, but who wants that anyway. Music does NOT sound like that in real life.
Oz |
Had the 3.6's for 5 years before selling them for the Gallo Ref3.1's, they perform and do everything you describe that you want. They just don't have the expansive sound of panels if that's what you're use to. But the Gallo's to be properly played need to be fully broken in, and make sure to have the feet's on or other points. Piano music are surprisingly much more realistic on the Gallo's then the Maggies. I do miss the Maggies for movies and their wall of sound. |
warren, perhaps I should have stated what a huge maggie fan I am. I think the 20.1s may be the perfect speaker for those with a large enough room and whose musical taste do not require the ultimate in low level resolution. |
So many of our forum arguments seem to involve assertions about the superiority of one preference over another. I've had ample experience with panels and point sources and I prefer the point source. It's more to the point, so to speak. But the Magneplanar wall of sound is also enjoyable. Does it really matter if somebody likes Bose? Statistics say a lot of people think they are great. When I hear them, I'm usually waiting for someone to hand me a menu. Can't see why anybody would prefer such a product. Clearly they are less discerning than my esteemed self.
All of us seem to agree that audio evaluation is subjective and yet a goodly number of us insist that there exists a hierarchy and that we know what sits at the top of the pile. Isn't that hypocritical? |
Low level resolution not a problem with Maggies? News to me...I have to agree with Greg. |
Absurd ? No need for name calling. Anyone who has lived with large panel speakers (I have a 30 year old pair of maggies and have lived the m/l cls off and on since '85)has a fairly good sense of the sound of panel speakers. The fact that maggies have to be played loud to resolve properly is so well documented that I don't neeed to waste time arguing the point. Because panel speakers have such a large radiating area they tend to present images that are larger than life. This has prompted comments like "the singers mouth was ten feet wide". These are areas in which a point source excells.
These are all shortcomings I am willing to live with. If you are not then follow the suggestions above. |
>lack of low level resolution
diffuse imaging
need for power<
Only your third point is correct. The first two are absurd.
Oz |
maggies have three short commings-
lack of low level resolution
diffuse imaging
need for power
So you need a high efficency, low level resolving, point source.
a good example-proac 3.5 |
as a former maggie and electrostatic owner hieff horns did it for me and after hearing hieff I havnt been able to go back though I tried with a 3.6 ,cool loudspeaker but hieff horns sound so real if set up right something the maggies just cant do YMMV |
I too am a Maggie lover--have left but keep returning, but. . . I did recently audition a pair or Verity Audio Parsifals and I think they may just be capable of most of what magneplanars do so well. That said, they're pricey but can be had on the used market. |
A pair of 20.1s biamped with two very high quality high watt amps with an active crossover. I get the chills thinking about it. Of course you will require some serious space to have them 4 to five feet from the wall. Is that still in your budget? lol... |
I owned a pair of hot rodded 1.6s a few years ago and loved them. After straying from the maggie sound for a while I picked up a pair of 3.5rs last weekend and just took delivery of a Classe CA-200. Boy does this combo just plain make music. Before letting go of the 1.6s, I would suggest snapping up that CA-300 that just popped up on the Gon. I shuddered at the thought of going back to any SS amp, but knew I would have to with the maggies. So far, no regrets, the Classe is by far the best sounding sand amp I have had in my system to date. Bottom line, you might not have wrung all the performance you can get out of your 1.6s. A good high powered amp and possibly a xover upgrade might just change your mind about changing your mind.......
Oz |
Thanks to all for the suggestions so far. Several of those mentioned are models that I have on my short list and there are others that are new to me. There is certainly quite a range of varied technologies represented amongst those mentioned. Re: 55doc, I'm not unhappy with my amplification, but as to whether something much better would extract more, I don't know. After being bored with Adcom and Belles Hot Rod 150's, I bought a PS Audio HCA-2, and that really seems an excellent synergistic match. So much so that I recently replaced it with a fully modified Reference Audio Mods HCA-2 that's even better. If I decide to keep the Maggies, I'll definitely invest in the Mye stands. |
For me it was the Usher 6371's...Ive owned many Maggies...Never go back. |
From my own experience I was set to buy the 1.6 Maggies, which I think are a great great speaker. In looking for some tube gear to use along with them I came upon and fell hook, line and sinker for the Von Schweikert Audio JR4's. To my ears they gave me the magic of maggies in the top range and added a quick and solid bottom end. The tube integrated amp I am using is about 50 watts per side. And the combo really sings. Just for the heck of it I also have used my 250 watt SS amp. Sounds great with SS gear as well. One day I yet hope to obtain a pair of maggies as well. But I would not give up my Vons. |
Any full range soundlab or apogee.
I used to have Tympani IVa's with active crossovers - also worth aspiring to if you 2 amps for bi-amping and are willing to get an active crossover. |
stay in maggietown. with acoustic suspension designs and pure ribbons/electrostats becoming anomalies in speaker design(the hybrids and the ported designs make for a great 30m audition), stay where you are....you're not missing a thing at ten times the price. |
