[SteveFord]

You could do much worse than 1.7s!

I'm sitting here waiting for UPS to show up with a preamp so I can get my 1.7s going again. 
Where is that guy?  He's probably doing something inconsiderate like delivering other people's packages or eating lunch or something. 
It's aggravating.

Oh, congratulations on your upgrade!  Let us know what you think once you get past the dreaded break in period.

[michaelkingdom]

They are pre-broken in by a fellow audiophile - which is different than used -  And FedEx might break them a little too so we'll see how they are pretty soon.

[jult52]

"I very much enjoy them but they don't captivate me the same way the MMGs did despite all the extras they bring to the table."

Michael K - That's a courageous thing to conclude.  Could it be that the emphasis on detail that the larger Maggie models bring isn't always preferable to the MMGs broader perspective on the music? 

[SteveFord]

I'll throw in my 2 cents.
The MMGs are comfortable sounding speakers; they don't do anything exceptionally well but they're like that Old Brown Shoe that George Harrison made famous. 
Maybe they do something exceptionally well, after all - they're exceptionally easy to listen to.  No matter what you throw at them they don't cause listener fatigue.

[josh358]

I don't know that this is what Michael was talking about -- he referred to crispness -- but I think "musicality" is an important quality that isn't easily reduced to a formula. And this for me means that there's a disconnect between what you can describe in terms of specific qualities and whether a component is something you love.

[josh358]

You could do much worse than 1.7s!

I'm sitting here waiting for UPS to show up with a preamp so I can get my 1.7s going again. 
Where is that guy?  He's probably doing something inconsiderate like delivering other people's packages or eating lunch or something.

I happen to know exactly where he was -- jumping up and down like a gorilla on the package I got.

[medium jim]

  ... .... ....

Jim

[Davey]

There isn't anything conceptually different between the MMG's and 1.6's.  I believe if one has a preference for MMG's over 1.6's (for whatever subjective reason) it could be attributed to the crossover network.

Modification of the network in 1.6's could/should yield the same subjective qualities of the MMG with the improved SPL and bass capability the 1.6's provide.

Cheers,

Dave.

[medium jim]

There isn't anything conceptually different between the MMG's and 1.6's.  I believe if one has a preference for MMG's over 1.6's (for whatever subjective reason) it could be attributed to the crossover network.

Modification of the network in 1.6's could/should yield the same subjective qualities of the MMG with the improved SPL and bass capability the 1.6's provide.

Cheers,

Dave.

Size matters

Jim

[jult52]

There isn't anything conceptually different between the MMG's and 1.6's.  I believe if one has a preference for MMG's over 1.6's (for whatever subjective reason) it could be attributed to the crossover network.

Maybe from an engineering viewpoint but from a music listening viewpoint, the level of detail and focus on the detail accentuated by the larger Maggies have major listening ramifications.  Audiophiles - myself included - usually consider more detail good and tend to focus on the way background portions of the music are brought out, but those traits aren't necessarily preferred by all listeners. 

[SteveFord]

I'm not saying that this is the OP's issue but in many cases you're unwittingly put on the upgrade path.
The more resolving the speakers the better the associated gear has to be to keep up with them.
What works on my MMGs would not sound very good on my 1.7s, what works on the 1.7s doesn't fare too well on the next step up, you get the idea.

[medium jim]

I'm not saying that this is the OP's issue but in many cases you're unwittingly put on the upgrade path.
The more resolving the speakers the better the associated gear has to be to keep up with them.
What works on my MMGs would not sound very good on my 1.7s, what works on the 1.7s doesn't fare too well on the next step up, you get the idea.

Very true...

Jim

[josh358]

Ditto.

There are other issues too -- each speaker has its own character and one may work better in a certain room or with a certain type of music than another. So sometimes it isn't a matter of right or wrong, but of suitability or taste. A speaker with poor HF dispersion forex might sound best in a room that's bright and IMO a lot of people don't take the measures they could to ameliorate problems like that, e.g., playing with tweeter resistors, adding HF absorption, or using EQ. Also, different speakers have different crossover lobes and if the polar response does something unpleasant to an early reflection it can color the sound.

[Davey]

Maybe from an engineering viewpoint but from a music listening viewpoint, the level of detail and focus on the detail accentuated by the larger Maggies have major listening ramifications.  Audiophiles - myself included - usually consider more detail good and tend to focus on the way background portions of the music are brought out, but those traits aren't necessarily preferred by all listeners.

Are you saying that if we could very accurately modify the MMG or the 1.6 crossover to match the other the results would still sound different owing to some level of improved detail/focus/etc that's inherent in the 1.6 transducers but not the MMG's?

Cheers,

Dave.

[SteveFord]

That would be my guess simply because there's simply more of the speaker itself.
The fellows at Magnepan would be the ones to ask as I'm only speculating.

While I'm taking a short recess, I'm getting used to a "new" AVA AVAStar preamp and it's just astonishing how rotating the 1.7s a few degrees makes such a change in the bass output.  I'm not big on a lot of bass so I've got them facing straight ahead instead of toed in a bit like I had them before with the Sonic Frontiers pre.
Some tube rolling is in the cards but I think I'll get smart and test them before just plugging them in with my fingers crossed this go around.

[I.Greyhound Fan]

While I'm taking a short recess, I'm getting used to a "new" AVA AVAStar preamp and it's just astonishing how rotating the 1.7s a few degrees makes such a change in the bass output.  I'm not big on a lot of bass so I've got them facing straight ahead instead of toed in a bit like I had them before with the Sonic Frontiers pre.
Some tube rolling is in the cards but I think I'll get smart and test them before just plugging them in with my fingers crossed this go around.

Steve, how do you like the Avastar Preamp?  I run an AVA Ultra II plus hybrid tube preamp and the Ultra II plus hybrid tube DAC both with NOS Sylvania and Raytheon black plate tubes from the 1950's with my 1.7's.  I have heard just about all of AVA's gear.  I live 3 min from Mr. Van Alstine and have reviewed some of his gear.  The only preamp that I did not get to take home was the Avastar.

[SteveFord]

It's pretty close to how I want it.
It has great detail retrieval, a really good soundstage, there's great dynamics but there's too much bass with the VTLs.
I've got a bunch of guys scouring their tube stashes for different tubes and if that doesn't do it, I'll go with adaptors and 6SN7s.
If all else fails, I'll ask Frank for some help with cap values and perform a little surgery on the dining room table.
Once I get it dialed in it should be really good!
I see why he has a loyal following on this site.

[medium jim]

Just to bolster what Steve was saying about placement, I recently put a new amp in my main system and have been going through the joys of burning in new tubes.  I foolishly moved the panels in an inch each to adjust the soundstage.  Only problem was that when the tubes started to relax I was experiencing too much highs and the bass to subs integration was really off. 

I moved the panels out to their original placement and backed off the toe-in slightly.  Nirvana again, the soundstage was back where the walls and speakers disappear into pure music.  A few minor adjustments to the sub settings and that too was cured. 

It was so bad that I even considered changing the capacitor values in my preamp or evening rolling different tubes to smooth things out. 

Mark where your panels are at all times and especially once you hit the Feng Shui spots.

Jim

[medium jim]

It's pretty close to how I want it.
It has great detail retrieval, a really good soundstage, there's great dynamics but there's too much bass with the VTLs.
I've got a bunch of guys scouring their tube stashes for different tubes and if that doesn't do it, I'll go with adaptors and 6SN7s.
If all else fails, I'll ask Frank for some help with cap values and perform a little surgery on the dining room table.
Once I get it dialed in it should be really good!
I see why he has a loyal following on this site.

Have you tried the 6SN7's that I sent to you (a long time ago)?  I have a single GE that is real nice if you need it.

Jim

Jim

[I.Greyhound Fan]

Steve, I have gone through just about every 6CG7 tube available.  Give some NOS RCA Black Plates a try along with NOS Sylvania's.  I have a couple of pair of the RCA's as well as amperex, Tung Sols grey and black plates, RCA Clear Tops, 1950 GE Black plates and Mazda Brimars.  If you are interested in trying any of them, let me know.  The RCA Black plates, Sylvania's and GE Black plates are lighter on bass.
As I said before, I use the nos 1950s Sylvania and Raytheon Black plates which have a warmer sound and tone down sibilance.  They have a very musical sound and a liquid midrange.

Regards,

Larry