Magico Q1 versus ...

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. Read 25091 times.

WGH

Re: Magico Q1 versus ...
« Reply #20 on: 17 Feb 2012, 08:57 pm »
I never looked behind the Odyssey speakers so I don't know. As for the bass, they definitely sounded like full range speakers that went down to at least 40 Hz. I went into the Odyssey room because Klaus always has good sound and was surprised by what was coming out of the monitors. As a general rule as I cruise the halls at RMAF I skip the rooms with small monitors because even though they are detailed the bottom octave is missing and the music is ultimately unsatisfying but not so with the Reference Monitor's.

The TAD Reference One uses a Beryllium tweeter, admittedly a custom design but it's all in the implementation at this point of the game.

Would I trade my Salk HT2-TL's for the Odyssey Reference Monitors, the price is practically the same? Hell no!
The Salk's have a certain je ne sais quoi that other brands lack (and they play lower effortlessly).

wilsynet

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1228
Re: Magico Q1 versus ...
« Reply #21 on: 17 Feb 2012, 09:20 pm »
I tried going to the Odyssey site and clicking on the speakers selection under Kismet.  Clicking doesn't do anything for me.  Just sits there inert.  Maybe it only works for Internet Explorer.

WGH

Re: Magico Q1 versus ...
« Reply #22 on: 17 Feb 2012, 09:26 pm »
The Odyssey site sucks and it hasn't been updated for a long time. Try a Google search for the Odyssey Reference Monitor, even then reviews are few and far between.

here is one: http://www.dagogo.com/View-Article.asp?hArticle=944

wilsynet

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1228
Re: Magico Q1 versus ...
« Reply #23 on: 17 Feb 2012, 11:15 pm »
LFD Zero IV, eh?  Very cool.  I'd be surprised if it wasn't great with the Vapor.  I'm in the process of selling a Zero Mk III - I love the LFD sound, but with streaming audio (which is my main way of listening right now), I just needed a remote control. I've ended up with an Aaron No.1.a, which I'm very happy with as well.

You had made a couple of posts about how happy you were with your LFD, and it was one of the reasons why I took a leap of faith with it.

The Aaron has an input sensitivity adjustment feature, which I think is pretty cool and I would fine useful.  But I'm not jonesing to replace the LFD any time soon, plan to keep it for awhile.  Although if I were to come into a lot of money, I'd probably think long and hard about the Aaron.

How do the Aaron and the LFD compare in your system?
« Last Edit: 18 Feb 2012, 12:28 am by wilsynet »

standub

Re: Magico Q1 versus ...
« Reply #24 on: 17 Feb 2012, 11:18 pm »
I'm pretty sure the Odyssey isn't ported, but the Revelator is a bass monster for it's size.  It wasn't lacking any bass for the music I heard with it at RMAF.

groovybassist

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 629
Re: Magico Q1 versus ...
« Reply #25 on: 17 Feb 2012, 11:42 pm »
wilsynet:

LFD amps are definitely something special.  To me, they just make music sound right - natural, unforced, transparent, and they really communicate the emotion in the performance.  This is what I really loved about the amp - not fussy and all about making music.  Those that haven't heard them really should. 

When I decided to move to primarily streaming, it became very apparent very quickly how different the volume level is on virtually every cd.  I like to shuffle play and it was becoming a real chore to constantly adjust the volume, which is what sent me on a quest to replace the LFD.  If you're lucky enough to have the amp near you and speakers elsewhere, no problem, but my gear is across the room.

A number of things led me to the Aaron - the Aaron uses two output devices per channel, same as the LFD; in reviews, writers mentioned the transparency of the Aaron, which is a characteristic I loved about the LFD; reviews also mentioned PRaT as one of the Aaron's strength, which is also a strength of the LFD; and of course the remote.

Luckily, I was able to buy a used one, in perfect condition, on Audiogon.  So how does it sound?  Interestingly enough, not so good at first.  It sounded wispy, lacking body and with weak dynamics.  I couldn't get a handle on why what I was hearing was so different than the reviews.  While trying different things, I realized I had the leads crossed between my DAC and the Aaron - I was running it out of phase!  As soon as I corrected that issue, it became a different animal.  The transparency is to die for - a notch better than the LFD if you can believe it.  It's got more drive, deeper bass and better articulation in the bass than the LFD.  Each of these differences is small, but collectively they're very meaningful.  I'm running them right now with Harbeth Compact 7ES-3s and am very confident it'll sound great with my Evolution Acoustics MMMicroOnes when they (hopefully) arrive in April.  The LFD is a great piece, but the Aaron takes things up another notch, all in the positive direction, with no drawbacks that make me reconsider the switch.  Hope this helps.

-Mike

ken

Re: Magico Q1 versus ...
« Reply #26 on: 18 Feb 2012, 02:17 am »
Shelby+Kroll Nano monitors.  Amazing speakers regardless of cost.

JohnR

Re: Magico Q1 versus ...
« Reply #27 on: 19 Feb 2012, 04:14 am »
If any more manufacturers try and steer this thread in the direction of their product, I will give them an instant 14-day timeout.

Carl V

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 571
Re: Magico Q1 versus ...
« Reply #28 on: 19 Feb 2012, 04:06 pm »
there are many fine 2 way monitors available. The OP asked about a"hi-performance"
monitor, the Q1 by Magico.  An expensively spec'd, engineered, finished & priced speaker. 
Fair enu'ff.
If you were in the market for a nice Piano I dare say you'd put in some seat time playing
& listening.  You would also consider where in your home you intended to place this fine
& expensive instrument.  And while at a Piano showroom you will be greeted with an
array of new & used instruments from all over the world.  It comes down to preferences.
Pride of ownership. Performance needs or expectations. Price ....in about that order.
Value is the sum total of all the above & only you determine that

You should consider Peak Consult, Raidho, Wilson, Focal, Gamut, Vapor, GR, Salk etc.,


wilsynet

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1228
Re: Magico Q1 versus ...
« Reply #29 on: 19 Feb 2012, 05:23 pm »
Thanks for all of the suggestions.  For what it's worth, it's OK with me if fit and finish are not at the very highest levels.  The primary question I was trying to get answered is "Some people say the Q1 is overrated, others say it's terrific." 

For those who say it's overrated, what's better or more affordable out there.  Because a lot of criticism of the Q1 is "$25K, are you kidding me?" without much additional comment.

Like many other people out there, I'm wondering what represents better value.

As for price ... personally for me, less than $5K, might be willing to stretch to less than $10K, and in an alternate universe, perhaps as high as $15K.  As usual, it depends greatly on what the down ramp looks like for diminishing returns.

Whether the Q1 represents state of the art in a small monitor, I couldn't really say.  But the Q1 that I heard sounded an awful lot like a full range speaker in a way that I had never heard before.  But like a good monitor, it really disappeared.  And it's reportedly reasonably efficient for a monitor and an easy 8 ohm load too.  If this is only because I'm ignorant about other high quality monitors out there, then so be it -- that's why I've posted and I'm asking.

As for me, I'm coming from Zu speakers.  I've also had the Paradigm S20 which sounded just like how it's priced, and a pair of Mark and Daniel monitors which sounded constrained and small.  If not the ultimate in resolution or extension, the Zu Superfly is fast, dynamic, coherent and easy to drive.  The 60 wpc LFD integrated I have happens to be overkill from a watts per channel point of view.

But it's not all about me.  Happy to have this thread talk about all sorts of high end monitors, whether high end includes expensive fit and finish or merely state of the art sonic reproduction.

Carl V

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 571
Re: Magico Q1 versus ...
« Reply #30 on: 19 Feb 2012, 06:33 pm »
less than $5K or less than $10K
that's quite a spread....sorta like
$25k sports car or $50K....both are fun
but there is a difference. Again Pride of
ownership, performance expectations etc.,

if you had a magic wand what would you
change or "improve upon" your Zu speakers?

wilsynet

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1228
Re: Magico Q1 versus ...
« Reply #31 on: 20 Feb 2012, 01:20 am »
I don't understand what is meant by "pride of ownership".  Being proud to have spent more money is an absurd proposition, although I'm sure there are people who feel this way.

It turns out that there are real quantitative and qualitative differences between a 25K Acura RSX and a 50K Porsche Boxster, not just pride of ownership and fit and finish.  The Boxster is a better car in every performance metric save fuel efficiency.

But I think I've decided.  The Vapor Cirrus will be my next speaker.  Time to start saving pennies.

S Clark

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 7362
  • a riot is the language of the unheard- Dr. King
Re: Magico Q1 versus ...
« Reply #32 on: 20 Feb 2012, 01:34 am »
The Boxster is a better car in every performance metric save fuel efficiency.

... and longevity. The Acura will still have compression after the Porsche has worn out.

But everyone values features differently.  If you the Magicos are what you want, and the cash isn't a problem, by all means get them. 
I haven't heard the Vapor Cirrus, but have had many discussions with Ryan and know that he is passionate about quality.


wilsynet

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1228
Re: Magico Q1 versus ...
« Reply #33 on: 20 Feb 2012, 01:38 am »
Oh, yes, that's certainly true.  I've generally found that Japanese cars last longer while spending less money on maintenance.  The German cars can last a long while too, but at considerably higher cost.

SoCalWJS

Re: Magico Q1 versus ...
« Reply #34 on: 20 Feb 2012, 02:09 am »
Vapor Cirrus - good choice  :thumb:




....... OOC, have you actually heard them?

lowtech

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 497
Re: Magico Q1 versus ...
« Reply #35 on: 20 Feb 2012, 02:28 am »
While not a monitor, you might consider something "less conventional" like the Linkwitz Pluto.  They occupy less floor space than most monitors placed on a stand and accomplish something sonically that no box speaker can regardless of cost.  Many Pluto owners' have previously owned highly regarded speakers such as Quad ESL, Magnepan, ML, etc.

Lots of folks DIY them (and save a lot of money) but they are also available fully assembled.

wilsynet

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1228
Re: Magico Q1 versus ...
« Reply #36 on: 20 Feb 2012, 03:41 am »
....... OOC, have you actually heard them?

Perhaps quite foolish of me, but no.  Going to roll the dice.  If they're only 3/4 as good as people say, I'll be happy given that you don't need to take out a second mortgage to buy them.

wilsynet

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1228
Re: Magico Q1 versus ...
« Reply #37 on: 20 Feb 2012, 03:47 am »
The Linkwitz Pluto is certainly unconventional.  No pricing information though.  Even so, he isn't far from where I live -- maybe I should arrange an audition.

The Pluto looks like it needs subs.  Is that right?

lowtech

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 497
Re: Magico Q1 versus ...
« Reply #38 on: 20 Feb 2012, 03:55 am »
The Pluto looks like it needs subs.  Is that right?

It depends on your expectations.  They do have very good (natural) bass response.  I think most use them on their own, but Linkwitz does have a stereo set of woofers available that are designed specifically to work with them.

I believe the assembled price from Wood Artistry is $2995.

JohnR

Re: Magico Q1 versus ...
« Reply #39 on: 20 Feb 2012, 03:57 am »
No pricing information though.

Plans and boards are $240 from Linkwitz, drivers are $224 from Madisound. That's the DIY version obviously.