[SteveFord]

Play nice of I'll feed thunderbrick's birdie a bowl full of cherries and have her strafe your car.

The better the speakers the better the other gear has to be or else it'll get shown up.  As Wendell put it as you move up the line-up what you're buying is increased resolution (amongst other things).

Tonepub knows his beans (and his stereo gear, too).
I don't own a house big enough to house 20.7s but if I DID I'd bite the bullet for a pair of Manley 500 monoblocks and call it a day as far as amps go.  That way I wouldn't have to worry about running out of steam when I'm entertaining the neighbors.

I have heard Maggies sound real loud but not real good and it was the amp.  They'd play loud enough to drive you out of the room but the sound was just two dimensional.  When you wander away from your stereo after about ten minutes or so something is wrong.
That's how I ended up with two pair of VTLs but that's a story for another day.
Right now I've got about 30 snakes to clean up after and feed and then it's off to see what's new in Baltimore.  No kidding.

[ajzepp]

AJ, you rock man  . But in this situation, while you're, as you said, "having a hard time believing it", Tone has been there done that.

 It is often said that Maggies get better and better with better power. I don't own 20.1's. You don't own 20.1's.... Jim doesn't own 20.1's.

 ..Tone has probably heard 20.1's with all kinds of amplification. He can back up his opinion with first hand experience. 

 ...Jim doesn't like me because I'm a Magnestand customer and my speakers are prettier than his  . I can see now that that will never go away.

Well your speakers are prettier than mine, too, then! 

I didn't mean to comment on the 20s, cause I've never even seen a pair. It sounded like TONE was referencing the Maggie line in general where he discussed having owned everything in the line at some point. Up to the 3.6s, I just can't imagine there is any amp on earth that I could swap into my system and have it be a truly significant performance jump. For my speakers, they have plenty of juice on tap to drive them properly. I don't have the 20a dedicated circuit like I had before I moved into my apartment, but in terms of amp juice I didn't have to spend 5k in order to give them what they need. I consulted with both Wendell Diller and B.K. Butler before I made the purchase, so I feel like I consulted with the experts and their direction matches up well with my experience since owning the amps and the 3.6s.

I'm just rambling...back to you guys

[rw@cn]

I think Tone has a point. Over the past 1-2 years I have travelled a long and winding road towards the goal of replacing my present amp (Levinson 335, which is now about 10 years old). I have 1.7s and also installed 3.7s (for about 4 months).

During that time a good number of my friends' and local dealers' amps have passed through and most didn't hack it. (To clarify, I don't want tubes or monoblocks. Nothing against them but maintenance and space are factors.) Most of the lesser expensive amps just didn't equal the sound of my present amp. Many other amps just haven't put a smile on my face.

As I have posted here and the Asylum, there are a few remaining candidates that I haven't heard and will have hear them within a few months. The gist of it is that somewhere around $10k (new) there is a marked improvement in the sound. There are many less expensive amps that have plenty of power but don't really "play" the music.

So my journey continues. Oh yes, I am considering buying a demo or used (under certain circumstances) amp.

[medium jim]

AJ, you rock man  . But in this situation, while you're, as you said, "having a hard time believing it", Tone has been there done that.

 It is often said that Maggies get better and better with better power. I don't own 20.1's. You don't own 20.1's.... Jim doesn't own 20.1's.

 ..Tone has probably heard 20.1's with all kinds of amplification. He can back up his opinion with first hand experience. 

 ...Jim doesn't like me because I'm a Magnestand customer and my speakers are prettier than his  . I can see now that that will never go away.

Yet again you make assumptions, I have no animosity towards you over your speakers.  While it is true that I don't own a pair of 20.1's, I do have a pair of big true ribbon Maggie's that would compare to 3.6's.   Moreover, I have been through the amp mill until I was offered a pair of Marantz 9's that does the trick for me.   

If I were to listen to your reasoning, anytime Tonepub chimes in, his word should be gospel and the conversation should end and any and all other real life experiences recounted should be summarily dismissed.  Yet, you chime in when you have no experience of the subject.  That is why I don't take you seriously nor personally, rather take you as someone who wants to be and I will leave it at that.

Jim

[kevin360]

AJ, you rock, indeed! Those Butlers are awesome amps – Butler was on my short list. I noticed you also have a McCormack MAP1, which is my preamp as well – a brilliant device that was delivered to me straight from SMc's 'finishing school'. Why don't more manufacturers build devices like that? It's the best way to do multichannel , IMO (and I'd love to give CJ's tube unit a try).

I'll give TONEPUB the benefit of the doubt as a generalization, but not as a sweeping statement of absolute fact. I don't see anything wrong with a statement like, 'In order to achieve the full potential of a pair of 20.Xs with a single amp (or pair of monos), one has to spend big – on the order of tens of thousands.' That still leaves open the possibility of achieving excellent results with more affordable gear as well as (with non .7 models) the biamping strategy that Satie outlined (which could well be better ).

20.7s are just a tad too large (about a half inch too tall) to work in my room, but I love the supplemented 3.7s. There is no way I'd ever implement a pair of 20s the way I have my 3.7s – using a sub XO to relieve them of producing anything below 60Hz. That does, however, have a dramatic impact on power requirements. My 3.7s are being driven by a VAC Phi 300.1 – yep, a $19k amp (and it's built like a brick sh...se) that I was lucky enough to find used (~3 years old) for less than half that amount. As wonderful as the Pass X350 was, the 3.7s reveal that the VAC sounds more natural. If that is TONEPUB's point, then I must agree.

Jim, it must be pointed out that we are cheating. We aren't driving our 3-series speakers full-range. That changes things – we can have finesse without serious brawn, because our amps aren't being called upon for the grunt work. That is precisely how I ended up with the amp I now have – the original owner bought a pair of VAC's new 450 monos for his Wilsons because the 300.1 didn't have the muscle he needed. It works for me because I'm cheating.

For the record, I demoed a pair of 3.6s with my Pass X150. Even driving them full range, the little Pass acquitted itself quite well – showed no sign of strain and sounded very refined, indeed. My Maggie dealer was certainly impressed. So, I see absolutely no reason why anyone should have to spend a fortune for happiness.

-----

Getting back to the OP – I couldn't agree more. The MMG/REL hybrids I have in the bedroom are astoundingly good and MMGs are downright cheap! There aren't many speakers I'd rather have than my 3.7s, and they are all way more expensive (except for the 20.7s).
 

[medium jim]

Kevin:

I agree that we have quasi employed a bi-amp, bi-speaker setup to achieve tonal excellence by utilizing subs to take much of the steam on the LF.  However, with any less than 20 series Magnepan, I would use subs and have total respect for Satie's post. 

My amps are also in the over 10K range, in fact were $8400.00 when issued back in 1997 and actually have appreciated in price over the years.   This doesn't negate the fact that tonal bliss can be achieved at an even less price point. 

You support my contention that those who gravitate to Magnepan are not the typical buy the name of the month club cache buyer and is one who does their due diligence before plunking down the green.  This goes back to the same "Core Values" espoused by Magnepan to begin with. 

Josh358 said something a while back that pretty much sums it up for me, that any world class amp would even make a $200 pair of speakers sound good and that was my premise here, any or most $10,000 to 40,000 amp(s) would make any speaker sound better.   Yet, this is not to say that there aren't some fine contenders in the 10K and under category, especially on the used market where the have to have it first at any price crowd buys them and then in a short time gets the itch to keep up with the Jones' with yet another purchase. 

Jim

[Davey]

Josh358 said something a while back that pretty much sums it up for me, that any world class amp would even make a $200 pair of speakers sound good.....
Jim

I think I would disagree with Josh on that statement. 


Folks,

Opinions/statements from people who run audio magazines or other folks 'in-the-biz' are the least believable.  All opinions from people in this hobby....and especially those making money it....should be read with a raised eyebrow.

Tonepubs opinion has less weight (with me) than a cross-section of consensus from fellow users like myself.

Audio "publications" (and the advertising dollars that go with them ) are one of the reasons this "industry" has got completely out of hand.

When I see silly statements like Tonepubs, I just view it as entertainment value and don't take it seriously.

Cheers,

Dave.

[rw@cn]

Kevin:

<<snip>>

Josh358 said something a while back that pretty much sums it up for me, that any world class amp would even make a $200 pair of speakers sound good and that was my premise here, any or most $10,000 to 40,000 amp(s) would make any speaker sound better.   Yet, this is not to say that there aren't some fine contenders in the 10K and under category, especially on the used market where the have to have it first at any price crowd buys them and then in a short time gets the itch to keep up with the Jones' with yet another purchase. 

Jim

I somewhat agree, you can make them sound their best but IMO not necessarily sound good!

[rw@cn]

I think I would disagree with Josh on that statement. 


Folks,

Opinions/statements from people who run audio magazines or other folks 'in-the-biz' are the least believable.  All opinions from people in this hobby....and especially those making money it....should be read with a raised eyebrow.

Tonepubs opinion has less weight (with me) than a cross-section of consensus from fellow users like myself.

Audio "publications" (and the advertising dollars that go with them ) are one of the reasons this "industry" has got completely out of hand.

When I see silly statements like Tonepubs, I just view it as entertainment value and don't take it seriously.

Cheers,

Dave.

With all due respect. Why silly? Tone made a statement that is based on his opinion and experience. I tend to value honest opinions from both some of those in the business and some other hobbyists. The trouble is in deciding which some to value.

[medium jim]

One thing we all can agree on, those who do own Magnepan's are free to share their opionions

Jim

[ajzepp]

You see what you started, Steve? 

Kevin: I totally agree about the MAP-1...unbelievable build quality and a true solid performer. I had never even heard of multichannel analog preamps until a few years ago, but I'm glad I did...

[djcxxx]

Magnepan has always provided excellent value, but as the price of high end gear has risen into the stratosphere the notion of discussing Magnepan and Magico (for example) in the same sentence amplifies ( ) the point.  A thread here about speaker placement got me motivated to get off my a** and move some furniture and really try to get the placement of my 3.7s right w/ the the room. What I had before was very good, but after really working on the placement the results were even better. The improvement in imaging, soundstage,  and particularly bass response was more that I would have obtained by replacing my amplifier. If I've learned anything over the last 30 years w/ Magnepans is that even the most expensive gear can't fix poor placement, and even modest gear can be satisfactory with proper placement.

[josh358]

Thank you, Wendell Diller and the Winey family, for having some sense and keeping your products within reach of mere mortals.

http://www.stereophile.com/content/upward-price-spiral

Amen to that.

[josh358]

I think I would disagree with Josh on that statement. 

So would Josh, because he didn't say it!

For what it's worth, to my ears, the differences between speakers far outweigh the differences between amps, unless, perhaps, we're talking about something underpowered or with a very high output impedance. Well, even then.

Of course, there are those who disagree, and I respect their right to be wrong. Seriously, there is a range of opinion on this, mine just happens to be in the speakers add more distortion than a good amplifier camp. But of course that assumes the two are appropriately matched, and I haven't heard everything -- forex, I've never heard Maggies with the costly amplifiers that Tonepub is talking about, so can't judge his claim on the basis of personal experience.

[josh358]

Satie, I think Magnepan had to change the X/O's and discontinued multiple binding posts to allow for bi-amping due to the quasi ribbons now being used on the 3.7 & 20.7's.

Apparently it proved impossible. Something to do with the crossover, I assume. Series crossover? I haven't seen a schematic for either, but I gather they're both first order, or mostly so.

Of course, someone who wanted to biamp could just open them up and attach the drivers directly.

I agree with Satie that bi-amping is advantageous, particularly with the 20.7. I don't know what percentage of owners bi amp but if online impressions are any guide, a higher percentage of 20.1 owners bi amp them then the smaller models.

[rw@cn]

So would Josh, because he didn't say it!

For what it's worth, to my ears, the differences between speakers far outweigh the differences between amps, unless, perhaps, we're talking about something underpowered or with a very high output impedance. Well, even then.

Of course, there are those who disagree, and I respect their right to be wrong. Seriously, there is a range of opinion on this, mine just happens to be in the speakers add more distortion than a good amplifier camp. But of course that assumes the two are appropriately matched, and I haven't heard everything -- forex, I've never heard Maggies with the costly amplifiers that Tonepub is talking about, so can't judge his claim on the basis of personal experience.

I agree about the speakers, but I would add that once you have settled upon your speakers (especially maggies) finding an amp that suits you (and your finances) isn't easy. 

I have tried a number of amps at home and can attest that they sound different. Not as different as various speakers, but different enough to warrant careful selection. These maggies (while not a difficult load as the old Logan CLS) can make an unsuitable amp sound pretty bad when stressed. Also there are a number of amps that just don't like the 4 ohm load.

[Davey]

Josh,

Maybe you could ask Wendell, but do you know what the Magnepan policy is for making schematics available to the public?  It would be interesting to take a look at the new schematics for the 1.7, 3.7, etc.  I haven't seen anything anywhere.

Cheers,

Dave.

[medium jim]

I want to think the Josh is correct, that the .7's have series x/o necessitated by the use of quasi-ribbons in the bass/mid's. 

Jim

[kevin360]

Dave, here's how Wendell answered me: We didn't tell HP when he inquired, so...

Someone is going to have to look inside. I probably will cave at some point, but I've resisted the temptation so far – largely, because the 3.7s are just so satisfying as Magnepan delivered them.

If I may speak on behalf of the ridiculously expensive for a moment, may I proclaim that I adore build quality? My experience with a wide range of amps confirms Josh's statement about the sonic differences between well-engineered amplifiers – not much. I was shocked at how much the VAC sounds like the Pass, (tube to solid state) but also at how close the two Pass amps are to one another, as well as how similar they sound to an Acurus and a Parasound amp I have. It's a hell of a lot of money for subtle improvements, but the build quality is a different matter – even the Pass amps fall short of the VAC in that metric.

To make a sweeping comment which implies that one must spend huge sums of money for an amplifier to very satisfactorily drive any pair of Maggies is ludicrous, but it may be that the last little bit of refinement does cost pretty dearly. My system has never sounded better than it does right now.

[Davey]

I don't think the QR bass-mid would force series crossover use.....or vice versa.  Previous (non-QR) speakers used a series crossover, and current QR (tweeter-only) speakers use a parallel crossover.  However, the series crossover does prevent bi-wiring, passive bi-amping, and other types of fiddling that (maybe) Magnepan was uncomfortable with.

Contrary to popular belief, series crossovers have no inherent "magic" or any other qualities that allow the laws of physics to be breached.  A parallel crossover (configured equally) will create the exact same tonal balance as a series crossover.

Nonetheless, it would still be interesting to take a look at the series schematics.

Cheers,

Dave.