[a.wayne]

Without researching I have to guess Bob Carver made the first....

The beauty of Planars/Magnepan's for me is their life size soundstage and the fact that they can disappear into nothing and that includes the walls if you really have them positioned right.  This is not to say that they are the most revealing, coherent speakers that I have experienced that also have insane clarity, speed and the best damn mids and highs out there.

Jim

Bob Carver ......Err no , lol ....   

[kevin360]

Sorta looks like a 1 bdrm apartment to me.

To me, it looks like a trailer. Look at that door. Look at the ceiling. Look closely at the junction between the floor and wall (or the wall and the ceiling). Look at how low the ceiling is...

[a.wayne]

Harbeth. Not knocking what the guy said, just his speakers. For how much they charge for those, they are fugly. Unrefined 70's style box, on a footstool.

Usually with a high priced speaker they put some effort into making it not look like puke. Usually, but not always. I'm never one to complain about aesthetics of gear but in this case Harbeth's baffle me.

+10

[a.wayne]

I have loved dipole planars since I heard my first pair of Acoustats. The presentation of the recording space in height, width ,depth and transparency was a revelation. They were not the speaker of choice for slam or high spl's  or many of the other things on the audiophile checklist...but what they did was so good,  I knew they would not be my last. They were followed by a variety of others , Maggies, Quads, Sound Labs. All had their own attributes and I should have gotten off the audiophile merry go round a few times.. namely my Quads driven by a pair of McIntosh 40's with 6l6 tubes. People talk about being fooled by a pair of loudspeakers,, for me it was with that Quad setup ..I was in the next room when a male speaking voice came on...I turned around quickly wondering ..who was in my house ?! That was spooky.
Since contracting the audiophile bug,  I have been an avid speaker builder and subjected any speakers I have owned to varying degrees of prodding, modification or hybridization. It has been a lot of fun. My latest effort has produced a speaker I believe has all the things I love about dipoles and what I love about box speakers, namely deep bass and dynamics .  Greg

Agree an Hybrid is the best way to go  ...

[jhm731]

jhm731, what are you using for loudspeakers now and what do you think a double magnet version of a MG3.7 would offer.
By the by, your system links are not functional.
Scotty

I think a double magnet version of a MG3.7 would offer 20.7 performance in a smaller package.

Those Sanders look pretty nice - is that what you have?
We do like pictures...

No.

You could build one of those yourself.  Buy two sets of used 3.6's and take the main panels from each and mount them back-to-back with the transducers facing each other.  Attach the tweeter from one set and you've got yourself a symmetrical 3.X speaker.  You'd also have a spare set of tweeters you could sell. 

I've done this with two pairs of MMG's and it worked fine in that application.

Cheers,

Dave.

 

[Davey]

A little too.....out there, eh?

You gotta think outside the box.

Dave.

[jhm731]

A little too.....out there, eh?

You gotta think outside the box.

Dave.

It's a very risky investment, with no proof that it would out perform a stock pair of 3.7s.

[Davey]

Obviously.  But it does achieve the symmetrical arrangement you noted you would prefer and pay more money for.

No risk no reward.  That is the nature of DIY most times.

Cheers,

Dave.

[SteveFord]

To get back to RClark's question, why do you LOVE your planars, I know what it is for me:

They're time machines. 
I can put on an album or stick in a CD and I've got early 70s Jethro Tull in my living room.  Joe Cocker,  The Doors, whomever.
It's not sound coming out of boxes one over here and one over there, they fill the room with life sized musicians.
I let the tubes warm up, give the volume knob a twirl, close my eyes and they're right there in the room.
Remember Ray Davies great song, Celluloid Heroes, and how they never really die?
Musicians don't, either.  They don't age, they're always in their prime and they're only as far away as my music library.
And that is why I love planar speakers.

Marc Bolan and Flo and Eddie just decided to drop in so I have to go.
Enjoy your planars!

[twitch54]

Not exactly how I pictured the listening room of reviewer for a major audio magazine.

is it a 'dump' or frat house ??

[twitch54]

To get back to RClark's question, why do you LOVE your planars

they make great 'privacy curtains' as well !

[dB Cooper]

Marc Bolan and Flo and Eddie just decided to drop in so I have to go.

I'm coming over shortly, because I am a portly...

[medium jim]

I'm coming over shortly, because I am a portly...

16 Tailors, Eddie are you kidding....

Jim

[SteveFord]

Okay, you talked me into it.
Off to the record cleaning machine I go.

[josh358]

I think a double magnet version of a MG3.7 would offer 20.7 performance in a smaller package.

It would have some advantages, to be sure, but baffle size is important, so the bass performance wouldn't be as good. You'd get better linearity at large amplitudes, and somewhat higher efficiency.

I do agree that Magnepan should make a smaller high performance speaker, but I think the way to do that is to offload the bass, which is what most of the area of a full-range planar is devoted to, then upgrade the rest.

PS -- I wouldn't laugh at Davey's proposal -- I remember reading that someone had modified his Maggies with dual magnets. I think it was the 3.x series. One caution, though, when doing that, by increasing motor strength you increase damping and planar woofers are intentionally underdamped to compensate for the 6 dB/octave dipole rolloff. As I recall, the guy who did it ended up with less bass response.

[SteveFord]

Maybe that's what the MMG Revised and DMW package offers?
When is somebody going to get a set of the new MMGs?

[josh358]

Maybe that's what the MMG Revised and DMW package offers?
When is somebody going to get a set of the new MMGs?

Someone got a pair on the Planar Asylum, but since he's never had old MMG's he wasn't able to shed much light on the changes!

I think Wendell would say that as good as the combination is, it's still basically an appetizer for what the bigger models can do.

To get something comparable you'd need a separate, quasi-ribbon midrange (dual magnet in the case of the 20.7's) and a true ribbon tweeter, and it would have to be full height so it behaved as a true line source at all frequencies and the sound came from the right height. My MMG's imaged a lot better after I put them on stands.

[jhm731]

It would have some advantages, to be sure, but baffle size is important, so the bass performance wouldn't be as good. You'd get better linearity at large amplitudes, and somewhat higher efficiency.

I do agree that Magnepan should make a smaller high performance speaker, but I think the way to do that is to offload the bass, which is what most of the area of a full-range planar is devoted to, then upgrade the rest.

PS -- I wouldn't laugh at Davey's proposal -- I remember reading that someone had modified his Maggies with dual magnets. I think it was the 3.x series. One caution, though, when doing that, by increasing motor strength you increase damping and planar woofers are intentionally underdamped to compensate for the 6 dB/octave dipole rolloff. As I recall, the guy who did it ended up with less bass response.

I'm glad we agree on something.

The bass on a smaller high performance speaker could be off loaded to multiple DWMs.

Based on everything you and others have posted about Magnepan in this thread, I doubt we'll see a smaller or larger high performance speaker from Magnepan anytime soon.

I'd love to hear the 20.7s, but I don't want to fly 4K miles to do that.

[SteveFord]

jhm731,
I know that the dealer network has been shrinking but 4,000 miles? 
Where do you live?

[jhm731]

jhm731,
I know that the dealer network has been shrinking but 4,000 miles? 
Where do you live?

PM sent.