[SteveFord]

http://www.enjoythemusic.com/the_show_newport_2013/saturday/

I think that we'll be hearing more about these soon enough.

[Rclark]

Oooh. $1200 MMG's. My attention is had.

[Freo-1]

I read some very positive initial reports on them.

[jarcher]

Super MMG = MMG + DWM?  Anything else I'm missing here? Still don't understand the point of the DWM except with MC1, CC5 /CCR, mini maggies MMG-W. At max 40hz seems unnecessary with any floor standing Maggie.

[SteveFord]

The Super MMG is not the same as the MMG and a DMW - more details will be forthcoming (one can only hope).
I'm pretty sure that I know what the deal is but I won't speculate which is why I posted the Sgt. Schultz picture a while back

It does turn out that you can get the DMWs/3.7 combo to go to around 25 Hz if the reports are to be believed.
I've never known the fellows at Magnepan to say something that isn't the truth so I'd believe it.

[Davey]

The MMG portion of the "Super MMG" is not the same the same thing as a regular MMG?

It's really irritating the way Magnepan teases these types of updates on various platforms before finally divulging the product.  For crying out loud, I'm no marketing major, but this gets really old after a while. 

Cheers,

Dave.

[SteveFord]

All the girls say that Wendell's just a big tease so I guess they're right.
I'll have to finally go up there later on this year and hold his feet to the fire.

[SteveFord]

Here's all I could get:

All we are saying is---"Better bass, midrange and highs. If you don't agree, send them back."

[Philth]

Would like to know if this is true over the "new" MMGs from this year as well, or only the years prior. Visually they look exactly the same. Also if the sub that comes with this is the same as a stand alone DWM?

My MMGs are 2.5 months old. So I'm confused of what I should do.

[SteveFord]

From my very limited understanding I believe that these are a brand new model, the DMW is the same as before.
You'll notice that they didn't make any ruckus over the recent improvements to the "normal" MMG which is the third series in the model's history. 

I'm sure that more details will be forthcoming once the dust settles from returning from the recent audio show.

[Brad]

Do you think the Super MMGs are the 1.2 replacement?  That would be in about the same $ range.

[SteveFord]

That's what I was thinking as they say the 12s only sell well in Europe and to do a 12.7 would price them too close to the 1.7 to make it a good seller.

[josh358]

Super MMG = MMG + DWM?  Anything else I'm missing here? Still don't understand the point of the DWM except with MC1, CC5 /CCR, mini maggies MMG-W. At max 40hz seems unnecessary with any floor standing Maggie.

Well, the MMG only goes down to 55 or so so 40 Hz would be a big improvement -- basically makes it a full-range speaker in that there are so few musical fundamentals below 37 Hz.

However, as someone pointed out, the combined response of the MMG and DWM can go significantly lower, as low as 25 Hz. This is apparently room and setup dependent -- my best guess is that the baffles and their reflections are in effect combining acoustically to create a larger virtual baffle, much as the baffle and its reflection combine when the speaker is within about a foot of the side wall (equivalent to 2' spacing acoustically) or like adding wings. So you can see that that would be dependent not just on room modes but on the spacing of the speakers relative to one another and the wall. Since it's variable, Magnepan is emphatic about not making 25 Hz an official spec -- the spec, and what you can reasonably expect to achieve, is 40 Hz extension.

Another thing to consider is that midbass has more of an effect on subjective quality than the bottom octave and the MMG's suffer from Allison Effect cancellation between 100-200 Hz. The DWM could potentially mitigate this.

Looks like this special version (apparently) of the MMG looks the same inside as the old one -- tweeter and tuning dots seem to be the same. So maybe they modified the crossover for smoother mating with the crossover built into the DWM? If so, it might be possible to tweak an existing MMG to better mate with the DWM using the same approach. All speculation, of course.

[josh358]

BTW, I saw a show report later that said the tweeter had been improved. I'm never sure whether these reports are accurate. I was wondering idly if they might have added a 1.7-style supertweeter to the Super. I don't think they've done that on the new MMG. But -- with the woofer relieved of bass duty it really becomes a giant midrange. Which isn't that good sonically, at 1000 Hz you're talking about a 1' wavelength so anything wider than 6" or so is going to beam and muck up the power response at the crossover point. So -- since woofer driver area is no longer critical, you could widen the tweeter some. This would allow you to lower the crossover point, reducing midrange mass, improving power response, and also extending the benefits of the QR ribbon further down. Then you would use the supertweeter segment to restore dispersion at the high end and in fact improve it over the original MMG. All with the addition of a single cap.

[kevin360]

Indeed, Josh, I was pondering the same thing. In my view, it's even better. After all, the midrange was already being produced by a driver that's too wide (you alluded to the improvement over stock, but didn't outright state it). I think the Super MMG will also benefit from being relieved of low end bass duties by reducing IM distortion. If your speculation is correct, that is truly a Super MMG!

[josh358]

I'd stress the "speculation," though! It's fun to guess but between possibly inaccurate show reports and never even having seen the thing, it's just a game of thinking of some things they might do. In my experience, they usually come up with something clever than I do, e.g., while I recognized that it would probably be necessary to improve the power response in the 3.7 when they went to a single-pole crossover I was thinking in terms of an electrical .5-way as in the 1.7, and they seem instead to have used a clever acoustical .5-way (substituting tuning dots for the clamp).

[kevin360]

It should be understood that all we can do is speculate – on many things. I have to agree with Dave about the irritating nature of Magnepan's product introductions – always teasing us with intriguing catch phrases that run short on details. That's why we end up speculating so much. The cynic in me would have me believe they're fishing in our pond when they do that – perhaps, they are curious about what we would do (you may have just described the Super-Duper MMG, to be introduced in 2018). Who knows? I doubt there's much we could imagine that they haven't. I'd be concerned that such a speaker system would scavenge sales from the 1.7s (lots for a manufacturer to consider). At any rate, the one thing on which we can rely is that they don't toss those catch phrases around without proving them to themselves first. Whatever it is, it improves upon the MMG – even if it's no more than a simple crossover change (that we could do with little fuss) in combination with the DWM, I'm sure it still deserves the designation: Super MMG.

Eventually, the details will be uncovered. Then, we'll know just how super it is.

[josh358]

Wasn't "super MMG" what we were calling Wendell's low mass mod?

I've asked Wendell about the issue of more complete product descriptions and specifications, BTW. My sense is that he very much dislikes the meaningless tech talk that is so often used to promote audio gear. You know what I mean -- "With its triple iridium-diamond alloy carbon nanoparticle tweeter, the SPG-70 maintains flat frequency response into the 200 gHz region." The point being that these descriptions are great at pushing our covet buttons but don't actually say anything about how the component actually sounds. They're techie porn of the sort and potentially misleading. His feeling is that he wants the sound of the speaker to speak for itself. He says, and I think it's a valid point, that his wife's technically-naive subjective description of the improvement in the sound is more meaningful in terms of the ultimate goal.

So I think there's a stubborn integrity behind what could easily be interpreted as arrogance. Either that, or, in some cases, a new development that they want to keep proprietary.

My own feeling is that most of us are geeks. And we feel a bit apologetic about it, which is why you'll always see disclaimers that the music is the most important thing. Well, sure -- if we weren't music lovers to begin with, we'd likely choose another techie hobby instead -- photography or computers or motorcycles. But as it happens, most of us are music lovers who also love technology. We aren't *just* in it for great sound. And so there's a natural curiosity about what's changed.

It's also true that there are sometimes practical concerns, e.g., someone who just bought New MMG's and is wondering whether the Super MMG's would be a worthwhile improvement.

[SteveFord]

Perhaps the only change is the silkscreening and color of the socks?

[SteveFord]

TAS just showed up today and they've already got a review in the next issue.
The teaser was something like $799 giant killer or something like that.