MMG to 1.7

michaelkingdom · « **on:** 24 Mar 2012, 12:56 am »

Hello everyone,

I am considering moving up the Magnepan chain from MMG to 1.7. My room is 12x16. Electronics are an Outlaw RR2150 used as a preamp feeding a Behringer EP4000 (700w RMS).

What could I expect from moving to the 1.7? Is the higher end less congested? Bass characteristics? Larger sweet spot?

Thank you

SteveFord · « **Reply #1 on:** 24 Mar 2012, 01:14 am »

Better everything.

michaelkingdom · « **Reply #2 on:** 24 Mar 2012, 01:17 am »

Please indulge me.

SteveFord · « **Reply #3 on:** 24 Mar 2012, 01:34 am »

I own both so a comparison is pretty easy.
With the 1.7s you'll get superior dynamics, a larger soundstage, deeper bass, they come "alive" at a lower volume, the top end isn't too shabby, you can play them louder - in a medium sized room, such as the one you described, the 1.7s sound very similar to the 3.7s.
MMGs don't sound bad by any means but the 1.7s are quite a step up.
Hope this helps some.

kevin360 · « **Reply #4 on:** 24 Mar 2012, 03:24 pm »

I completely agree with Steve. The 1.7 images better too - yes, a larger sweet spot. It's a definite step up from an MMG, which is an amazing speaker for the price. Actually, they both are (as are all Maggies). The 1.7s deliver more bass, but not what I'd call sufficient for use without a pair of subs - YMMV.

jesphoto · « **Reply #5 on:** 24 Mar 2012, 10:34 pm »

I currently have the MG12s and went to audition the 1.7s yesterday. I was amazed at how dynamic they were even at moderate listening levels.

mgard · « **Reply #6 on:** 25 Mar 2012, 03:25 am »

I have the 1.7's too and they are great but I would agree that a pair of subs really rounds them out. I am using two JL Fathom 110's. They give me all the bass I want.

~Mike

Rclark · « **Reply #7 on:** 25 Mar 2012, 09:24 am »

I haven't heard the 1.7, but hope to soon.

In defense of keeping your mmg's..

There are people who will say though that if you follow some diy and put your mmg's into frames (not stands, but frames), or have someone do it for you, and also upgrade the crossover, or go with active crossovers, among other things you can do to them, you can achieve performance perhaps even better than a 1.7 or above. Something to consider. There is actually a laundry list of tweaks for this speaker. Lots of guys here with modded MMG's as their main speaker. More than a handful of people here, that's for sure

.

I'm auditioning a pair of GR N1X's right now, but am instead fondly thinking of my MMG's out in the other room... surprised, I actually was worried these would have me reconsidering my decisions when they showed up.

My philosophy is find something good for the application (MMG - small to medium rooms, that's ME, 1.7 is for bigger spaces ideally), max it out (mods, good amplification, Ncores to come soon).

I guess what I'm saying in my long winded way is to not discount your MMG's just yet, if you want you can still squeeze a surpriseable amount more out of them.

Better in every way. Without buying a model perhaps not suitable for your room.

But if you get the 1.7's please post a review!

medium jim · « **Reply #8 on:** 25 Mar 2012, 02:13 pm »

Why spend 2K to make the MMG's better, when you can get 1.7's for the same price or less and or used 3's with true ribbons?

Yes, if you have a small room...

Jim

berni · « **Reply #9 on:** 25 Mar 2012, 03:27 pm »

Quote from: medium jim on 25 Mar 2012, 02:13 pm

Why spend 2K to make the MMG's better, when you can get 1.7's for the same price or less and or used 3's with true ribbons?

Yes, if you have a small room...

Jim

Exactly, buy as much Maggie as you can, your room or your WAF let you.
Later you can still tweak them if you want.

Rclark · « **Reply #10 on:** 25 Mar 2012, 03:56 pm »

Like I said looking forward to hearing the bigger models too. Perhaps even bringing mine to the demo.

One day I'll need a larger speaker, but I'll sure tweak the hell out of those too. But during my research, people were adamant not to get too big a model for your space.

Anyway, to the op, good luck and make sure to let us know how it goes!

josh358 · « **Reply #11 on:** 25 Mar 2012, 04:15 pm »

Quote from: Rclark on 25 Mar 2012, 03:56 pm

Like I said looking forward to hearing the bigger models too. Perhaps even bringing mine to the demo.

One day I'll need a larger speaker, but I'll sure tweak the hell out of those too. But during my research, people were adamant not to get too big a model for your space.

Anyway, to the op, good luck and make sure to let us know how it goes!

Well, if you get a big model in a very small room, sometimes the bass will bloom. And the WAF can be low. But as Wendell points out, the acoustic size of the larger models can actually be *smaller* than the small ones, so they can be listened to closer. And while audiophiles seem to have a cow when you mention it, if the bass blooms, you can always EQ it down. I'd go so far as to say that there should always be EQ on the bass anyway, because even bass trapping can't completely control room modes. EQ can be problematic higher up, but below the Schroeder frequency (maybe 300 Hz in a typical room) I've never seen a situation in which it didn't improve the sound.

rollo · « **Reply #12 on:** 25 Mar 2012, 04:17 pm »

Yes sirre Bob, great advice " buy as much Maggie as you can" When we moved from SMG to 3As oh my !. Modded the 3A crossovers, changed ribbons to 3.6 ribbons [ Larry Smith ] great improvement yes. Are they 20.1s ??? no. Just better than the original 3A.
Step up and save the tweaking dollars for music. Or like I did move up to Pipedreams.

charles

rollo · « **Reply #13 on:** 25 Mar 2012, 04:22 pm »

Quote from: josh358 on 25 Mar 2012, 04:15 pm

Well, if you get a big model in a very small room, sometimes the bass will bloom. And the WAF can be low. But as Wendell points out, the acoustic size of the larger models can actually be *smaller* than the small ones, so they can be listened to closer. And while audiophiles seem to have a cow when you mention it, if the bass blooms, you can always EQ it down. I'd go so far as to say that there should always be EQ on the bass anyway, because even bass trapping can't completely control room modes. EQ can be problematic higher up, but below the Schroeder frequency (maybe 300 Hz in a typical room) I've never seen a situation in which it didn't improve the sound.

Equalize that bass baby. I'm with ya 100%. The Behringer is just the tool [ for bass only], mucks up the rest. Using thre subs at the moment. Two up front one behind[[ 6ft.] The room fill is incredible.

charles

josh358 · « **Reply #14 on:** 25 Mar 2012, 04:27 pm »

Yeah, I think the Behringer's a great way to go. There's also the little DSPeaker, but I don't know of anyone who's tried it on Maggie bass.

Rclark · « **Reply #15 on:** 25 Mar 2012, 05:23 pm »

Quote from: rollo on 25 Mar 2012, 04:17 pm

Yes sirre Bob, great advice " buy as much Maggie as you can" When we moved from SMG to 3As oh my !. Modded the 3A crossovers, changed ribbons to 3.6 ribbons [ Larry Smith ] great improvement yes. Are they 20.1s ??? no. Just better than the original 3A.
Step up and save the tweaking dollars for music. Or like I did move up to Pipedreams.

charles

Rolloa, I certainly don't want to start any ridiculous debates, and I know there are people who would love to participate in one, not me!

I just want to ask you something though, you say save the tweaking dollars, but have you ever heard a modded maggie? And have you heard the transformation from stock to modded? It's pretty substantial.

Right now I am listening to a very highly regarded box speaker with a B&G planar/ribbon tweeter and I can say that I definitely have a much more dynamic speaker (yes, even with rock music), a liveliness, power, and bass quality is superior in the modded mmg by a pretty large margin.

I understand the larger models have a better tweeter, but after that, it's just mylar and wires, same as the rest of them

And Jim, even you know it doesn't have to cost 2K to get them done if you do it yourself.

I'm just sayin'.

I do like the idea of having a big panel in the room though, with eq'd down bass, but at the same time my mod has shown me the inferiority of the mdf frame and its effects on the panel. So tweaking certainly has its merits.

Just ask Davey, among others.

Again, for a small room. Jim, doesn't look like yours is all that big either. If I had a bigger space, all bets are off and I'd probably be saving pennies for some 20's right about now. And I'd still want to mod the frame!

Davey · « **Reply #16 on:** 25 Mar 2012, 05:45 pm »

Michael is asking about the differences between 1.7's and MMG's. Since you've never heard 1.7's I'm unsure why you're commenting in this thread.

They have a set of 1.7's at Advanced Audio in Tacoma if you'd like to take a listen.

Anyways, I think the 1.7's sound very good. The MMG's have a similar sound but are limited, obviously, in SPL capability and bass extension compared to the larger models. I've only listened to MMG's at my house and the 1.7's only at Advanced Audio......so, two difference listening spaces obviously.

Cheers,

Dave.

Rclark · « **Reply #17 on:** 25 Mar 2012, 05:54 pm »

Commenting because, duh, he has mmg's, and modding them is an option.

jk@home · « **Reply #18 on:** 25 Mar 2012, 05:56 pm »

Quote from: josh358 on 25 Mar 2012, 04:15 pm

... But as Wendell points out, the acoustic size of the larger models can actually be *smaller* than the small ones, so they can be listened to closer...

Explain please. I'm in a 12 x 15 room, would love to fit in some 1.7s, but have been leery. (and already have eq in the system)

Are you saying the larger models can be placed the same or more nearfield to the listener than the MMGs? It would be 7' in my case, w/ the panels set up ala Cardas.

josh358 · « **Reply #19 on:** 25 Mar 2012, 09:19 pm »

Quote from: jk@home on 25 Mar 2012, 05:56 pm

Explain please. I'm in a 12 x 15 room, would love to fit in some 1.7s, but have been leery. (and already have eq in the system)

Are you saying the larger models can be placed the same or more nearfield to the listener than the MMGs? It would be 7' in my case, w/ the panels set up ala Cardas.

Yep. The reason for this is that in the larger 3-way models, the acoustical center of the midrange is closer to that of the tweeters than it is on the two ways, where it's in the center of the woofer panel up to about 1 kHz. And midrange and highs are more important to imaging than bass. So you can sit closer to get a given angular separation between mids and highs.

The question I'd have in your case has to do with the crossover points in the 1.7. Rather than woofer-mid-tweeter, it's a 2.5-way that runs midwoofer-tweeter-supertweeter, with the supertweeter and tweeter overlapping. I'm not sure what the midwoofer/midrange crossover is but I don't know that you'd get the same benefits you'd get from the 3-ways. However, I can tell you that I wouldn't hesitate to put a 1.7 in a room your size. If worst comes to worst, you can always run them tweeter out to keep the midwoofers from getting too close to the wall, which would give you that bass rise (though if you add EQ, that rise is actually welcome because it will increase extension and output).