Magnestand: made in America

medium jim · « **Reply #120 on:** 3 Mar 2012, 04:48 pm »

The only mod that I would consider to my 2.5's would be to go active and bi-amp them. The go to guy for me for advice would be Davey from reading his knowledgeable posts on the other forum and now here.

Jim

Rclark · « **Reply #121 on:** 3 Mar 2012, 07:42 pm »

Hoping one day to compare my mod to his mod. When I get my new amps we'll do it then so there's a level playing field.

Davey · « **Reply #122 on:** 4 Mar 2012, 01:30 am »

Quote from: Rclark on 3 Mar 2012, 07:42 pm

Hoping one day to compare my mod to his mod. When I get my new amps we'll do it then so there's a level playing field.

I initially made the offer, yes. But after our PM exchange and reading some of your postings on various Circles, I don't see any point to it now. You already have a much superior set of speakers to anything I could achieve.

Cheers,

Dave.

Rclark · « **Reply #123 on:** 4 Mar 2012, 01:38 am »

Actually I made the offer but you turned it down because you didn't want any Peter Gunn speakers "in your home."

I am holding out hope that we might compare, in the interests of.. Uh science

Davey · « **Reply #124 on:** 4 Mar 2012, 02:08 am »

Yeah, that's right. You made the offer to come over to MY house and demonstrate your fantastic speakers next to mine. (I wasn't remembering correctly.)

I'm sure there would be much "science" involved in your evaluation.

Cheers,

Dave.

Rclark · « **Reply #125 on:** 4 Mar 2012, 04:39 am »

Lol, well

we have a good three months until I have those amps (unavailable), so maybe we can discuss it in the interim.

medium jim · « **Reply #126 on:** 4 Mar 2012, 05:18 am »

Quote from: josh358 on 12 Jan 2012, 10:39 pm

I think subs, like main speakers, have to be put into perspective -- a good ported sub will sound good, it's just the ones that are aligned primarily for home theater that don't (which happens to be a lot of them). A lot of high-end speakers use ports. So if you're satisfied with your sub, no reason to go with something new. If you do get the itch, all other things being equal (driver quality, box construction, alignment, etc.), you'll hear the difference in a sealed sub, and even more of a difference in a dipole sub -- a big increase in realism (but less slam and extension).

Josh:

Pretty much sums it up for me, I was ready to spend 3k for a pair of REL subs, they sounded wonderful, but I was floored by a small ported 8" sub, a B&W ASW300 that was as fast and was more musical....I had the salesman hook a pair up to A/B against the REL's, which were 12", and set them at the same x/o point and same spl. I couldn't tell which was which...I saved over 2K and my ears are happy as a lark.

Funny thing, I have both realism and extension and with nice slam.

It did take some trial & error to get them seamless with the maggies, but I did and haven't had the itch to go and spend big on the flavor of the month subs.

There is nary a hint of smear...placement is key, get them low, on the wall, behind and slightly outside of the panels. The key is to be realistic with how much bass you load. I used downloaded test signals that I then put on a CD....it took some time to get the upper bass match to the mid/low bass...nothing good is easy!

Jim

josh358 · « **Reply #127 on:** 5 Mar 2012, 12:04 am »

It doesn't surprise me that you didn't hear a difference. If both subs are musical (i.e., reasonably flat, damped, and undistorted), the difference between the two shouldn't be obvious unless you're playing very loud and very low. There are few musical fundamentals below 40 Hz! Never mind 25 Hz, where a smaller sub might start to roll off. So we're talking about the very occasional pipe organ note or drum thud.

What dipole subs would buy you is smoother in-room response and more naturalism, because they trigger room modes less.

Rclark · « **Reply #128 on:** 5 Mar 2012, 07:35 am »

--- there it is. I'm listening to The Verve, Northern Soul, track 10 "Life's an Ocean", and there are , not sure of the instrument, some sort of rattly hand instrument like maracas, and they sound like they are coming three feet to the side of my left speaker. Depending on the song, the soundstage does indeed extend pretty far past the speakers.

Pretty cool.

These are just lovely to listen to. So textured and engaging and precise. And the bass is truly to die for. So are the highs and everything in between.

I wish I could share the experience with someone here. I've got my RL buds but everyone on AC lives on the east coast just about. There's always Davey, but he isn't exactly in the neighborhood. He lives where the Bremelo's roam

(yeah Davey you know what I'm talkin' about)

I live on the Eastside where it's only 10's.

jk@home · « **Reply #129 on:** 5 Mar 2012, 12:58 pm »

My wife has an old "Madonna - The Immaculate Collection" CD that was recorded with the QSound effect, that does the same thing. On one track, the bongo drums almost appear coming from phantom side surround speakers. Neat effect, and it helps that the album has been fairly cleanly recorded.

Rclark · « **Reply #130 on:** 5 Mar 2012, 10:10 pm »

I remember that CD,the only Madonna cd I've ever been near, sounding exceptional and lots of bells and whistles as far as the music part.

TitaniumTroy · « **Reply #131 on:** 6 Mar 2012, 03:54 am »

Hey RC, have you ever thought about using baffles/wings on your MMG's to extend the bass response? I tried it with limited success but others have good luck with them.

Also here is a quote from friend and audio guru, and his opinion on sealed vs ported subs and SVS subs.
In fact, the term "musical" is itself not something we all clearly understand and can use in our speech to accurately describe anything. What is "musical" to one person might not be to another. Musical doesn''t mean anything specific. The same goes for the term "tight". To most people (as I have experimented with in the pas) the term "tight" is more often associated with a roll-off in the bass response rather than the transient response of a woofer system.

Sealed enclosure based subs tend to inherently have a more accurate transient response, which is something requiring extra effort on the vented woofer designers to overcome. Vented designs can easily get out of control when transient response isn''t addressed properly. However, when the tuning of a vented design is right on, the transient response can be every bit as good as a sealed design - it just takes extra effort.

The SVS subs I have tested provide the absolute best transient response when one of the three ports are plugged with the provided foam port bungs. Most people don''t use those port bungs and as a result end up with "fatter" and "looser" sounding bass which is louder and more impressive. Generally speaking, comparing an SVS sub with no port bungs to a high end sealed subwoofer with an extended response, the sealed sub will often sound "tighter" and "faster". However, plug one port and that difference is less noticable. Plug two ports and the sound is even faster (but the peak output at the lowest octave goes down).

This is my subwoofer, overkill perhaps but very fast and powerful http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/volume_11_3/svs-pb2-ultra-subwoofer-9-2004.html crossed over at 40hz, with two bung ports inserted to keep the response fast.

Rclark · « **Reply #132 on:** 6 Mar 2012, 05:43 am »

Pretty nice sub

Yeah I'd do wings but I don't think I need em, plus if you saw my speakers in real life... I think I have the prettiest MMG's ever, dont wanna mess with that by adding some cheap material.

no I'm just going to add some King Kong amps

So far this is my plan (life keeps stepping in front of my hobby, but I am relentless), pair of Epik Legends. Nothing but good things about these. Then they will go to the living room and I will put OB subs or Tympanis on this rig.

if I have a very good year I may try one of those Spatial Black Hole active basstraps too.

TitaniumTroy · « **Reply #133 on:** 6 Mar 2012, 06:27 am »

I like the Typanni's and OB sub idea, please give us feedback on how it works out. And yes your MMG's look fantastic.

Just curious have you heard any of the Maggie's with the True Ribbon Tweeter? I really like the one's on my 3.6's it's dispersion, speed, detail and correct pitch, make it sound awesome to me anyway.

Rclark · « **Reply #134 on:** 6 Mar 2012, 06:31 am »

I have not heard them, no, but the way it was described to me is that it isn't necessarily better, but a different sort of presentation, and that some people actually prefer the sound of the quasi tweeter. And I've actually seen people post and say they prefer the quasi over the full ribbon.

Imagine I'm in for a treat whenever I get to hear larger models either way

When the day comes and I have a bigger room to deal with, we'll see where I stand then. Speakers will probably come and go in my life, and I'll get into some neat stuff, but these Magnestands are true works of art I will never part with. They really are gorgeous!

I think part of the increase in bass is I think that the frame kinda does act as wings in a way, a bit like that. A better sounding board I guess and more surface area of wood. Just a guess, I could be totally wrong.

Rclark · « **Reply #135 on:** 6 Mar 2012, 07:15 am »

I gotta also say it wouldn't have been any big deal to have 1.6's or a different bigger model, but everything said about the MMG, and what PG said about the modded revision (that it doesn't give up much to any stock model) made it seem the coolest.

Most of the modded Maggies in here are MMG's as well. They vary from homebuilds to mine to Davey's with active crossovers. But lots of serious people running modded MMG's as their main speaker.

Whod'a thunk that?

josh358 · « **Reply #136 on:** 7 Mar 2012, 02:55 am »

Quote from: Rclark on 6 Mar 2012, 06:31 am

I have not heard them, no, but the way it was described to me is that it isn't necessarily better, but a different sort of presentation, and that some people actually prefer the sound of the quasi tweeter. And I've actually seen people post and say they prefer the quasi over the full ribbon.

Imagine I'm in for a treat whenever I get to hear larger models either way

When the day comes and I have a bigger room to deal with, we'll see where I stand then. Speakers will probably come and go in my life, and I'll get into some neat stuff, but these Magnestands are true works of art I will never part with. They really are gorgeous!

I think part of the increase in bass is I think that the frame kinda does act as wings in a way, a bit like that. A better sounding board I guess and more surface area of wood. Just a guess, I could be totally wrong.

The larger the baffle, the more bass you get. That's true whether the baffle is extended by making it larger or adding wings (or putting the speaker against a wall, which effectively doubles the baffle size because it creates a reflected image) -- what counts is the path length between the front and the back. Wings will tend to make the radiation pattern somewhat cardioid rather than dipolar, though, because their asymmetry means that the path length at the front and back is different. Also, wings can cause problems with reflections, diffraction, and even cavity resonances. Some people have had good luck with small triangular wings near the bass, where they don't have much of an effect on higher frequencies. Also on the woofer side, but not on the tweeter side.

Another problem with wings and Maggies is that they can make them sound boomy. The resonances are tuned to counteract dipole cancellation, and when the wings lower the point at which the 6 dB/octave rolloff begins, the curves no longer quite complement one another. So they have to be fairly small, or they require electronic equalization. Also, any change to baffle dimensions can potentially affect amplitude response even at higher frequencies, again because of dipole cancellation.

Because of all these effects, it's best to experiment first with a material like foam core when changing baffle size or adding wings.

medium jim · « **Reply #137 on:** 7 Mar 2012, 03:49 am »

Quote from: TitaniumTroy on 6 Mar 2012, 06:27 am

I like the Typanni's and OB sub idea, please give us feedback on how it works out. And yes your MMG's look fantastic.

Just curious have you heard any of the Maggie's with the True Ribbon Tweeter? I really like the one's on my 3.6's it's dispersion, speed, detail and correct pitch, make it sound awesome to me anyway.

TT:

I know your ? was for Rc, but I have had both quasi and true ribbons and the difference is dramatic. The 1.6's were my awaking to magnepan's other than hearing them in the 1970's and being my first pair, was in total awe.

I sold them and went to conventional box speakers with the KEF 104/2's which were better than the 1.6's. I still had the itch for planers and when I saw the 2.5's that now own it was a no brainer, price and the true ribbons.

The ribbons takes them to the next level. If I hadn't bought the 2.5's, I was ready to by a pair of 3.6's. I have no regrets with the 2.5's as they are better than the KEF's which are a lengendary speaker in their own rights.

Jim

Rclark · « **Reply #138 on:** 7 Mar 2012, 04:40 am »

Thank you JOSH,

Wings were something I would definitely consider for the stock mmg, as they can use all the help they can get as far as output. I don't think the same for Gunn'd. It's the same speed highs to bass, very fast, and nice and round. To my ears extremely pleasant bass. Jazz bass is out of this world. So I would say it's a very full, round sound, very recording dependant. Lots of bass in the song, lots of bass from the speaker.

The new amps should still improve things further. In all aspects, not just bass. so pretty excited for those. Reports are they are world beaters.

josh358 · « **Reply #139 on:** 7 Mar 2012, 06:34 pm »

That's great, enjoy.

BTW, I did try wings on my MMG's, and they made them too boomy. But it was a quick experiment, the wings were larger than what you'd want to use (about the size of the speakers). Wendell said somewhere that they haven't had very good results with wings.