Magico Comparison

Teeshot, just ignore the posts that have nothing to do with your original topic, or move the discussion over to Whatsbestforum. That is a generally more serious, less contentious forum.

I happen to think that your original question is pretty interesting. The speakers do sound different and they are quite different in size. Perhaps the size of the room and the amount of power that your amps have could be the determining factors. The Q3 is an easier load to drive and might be more appropriate in a slightly smaller room. The M5 is less efficient, has lower extension and will pressurize a larger room more easily. The M5 and Q3 are also quite different aesthetically.

Then there are resale and repair/support issues that you might consider also.

Marvi26,
You post expresses genuine emotion but is poorly reasoned.New and innovative with much R and D is admirable but doesn't ensure good sound in the end, different sound, sure. People who like Magico have no more valid opinions than those who've heard them and rejected the product. The automobile analogy doesn't hold up to scrutiny. TheMagico is no Ferrari to a Rockport's chevy (maybe a Ferrari to a Rolls Royce). Both exotic and exclusive yet very different appeal.Those who have posted their opposing viewpoint dont seem jealous, ignorant or closed minded, they simply don't find the speaker special or to their taste after hearing them, that's ok.

Magico will have its strong supporters as do other successful brands, why should they be an exception to critical assessment? You assume too much to suggest others are closed minded (they just don't get it) if they fail to appreciate the Magico as you do.To some listeners the Magico is amusical and sterile andto others it's pure sonic bliss. Both camps re entitled to their polar verdicts.
Regards,

Sorry Charles, it is the 21st century, and the world is no longer flat. Building loudspeakers is a science. Science is about facts, not opinions. If it is better, it is simply better, not just different. Now if you don't like better, that's a whole nother story...

Marv,
The entire purpose of audio components is to reproduce music in our homes and hopefully sound good doing so. Don`t misunderstand my point, I`m not crtical of anyone who likes the Magico speakers. That`s nothing more than preference.The idea you put forth that simply 'new' and innovative engineering automatically means superior is wrong.New directions can also lead to failure and steps backward.If someone auditions the Magico they either like what they hear or they don`t. If they really are drawn to their sound and decide to buy them that`s just individual choice,the converse is also true.You can tout the most impressive test bench specifications and razzle dazzle engineering applications.It doesn`t change this point,it does or doesn`t sound good to a given listener.

Do you mean to say that by virtrue of new/different approach it is by default better? That isn`t sound logic. People choose a speaker based on how it sounds,that is the only point of placing them in an audio system,sound quality is the bottom line. Who built them, materials used,construction methods etc. are irrelevant if the final result is poor sound( a subjective decision). If the Magico sounds great to you then that`s certainly a good sensible reason to buy them.If you don`t enjoy listening to them then you`d simply reject them.
Regards,

There are other high-tech, exotic material, speakers aside from Magico and they sound completely different. If modern technology has "objectively" improved speaker design there should be a convergence in the sound of such speakers. But, just listen for yourself and you will find that YG Acoustic, Magico, Vivid, etc. do NOT sound the same.

We have a wide range of products in the market not entirely because the consumer is stupid and easily duped by hype, but, at least in part, because tastes differ, and priorities in sound reproduction differ. Even though scientific research has correlated subjective preference with specific measurement in speaker design (e.g., Floyd Toole and the Research Council in Canada), that remains a crude measure of what the majority like--designs based on this research vary widely, and certain people (myself included) simply don't like the sound of designs based on those principles. Why do people buy such a wide range of different ornamental plants and flowers--shouldn't they just buy the one objectively superior variety?