[jarcher]

This is more of a comparative review / commentary on Magnepan center channel speakers based on personal experience than a detailed single model review, but here goes.

I get the feeling that Magnepan owners are more 2 channel guys based on the lack of review and comments on Magnepan speakers in home theater use.  Or otherwise the market finds magnepan center channels either too big or too expensive.  Magnepan center channel options run (from least to most expensive) :

MMG-C : $299 factory direct
MMG-W pair : $325 factory direct.  Seems to be Magnepan preference, short of the CCR
CC5 : $1095
CCR : $2995! ouch. 

I personally have owned / tried the MMG-C, MMG-W (not for center channel duty though), and the CC5.  For those impatient for a final conclusion : the best, most cost effective Magnepan center channel in my experience has been...................a regular MMG speaker on it's side!  I've not heard the CCR - and now way I'm spending $3K on a center channel! For those curious for more detail, read on.

MMG-C

The MMG-C is designed to match the MMG speakers w/ a single similar midrange panel (no crossover).  Per Wendell Holmes @ Magnepan comment to me, it's meant for more of the best buy crowd who might buy a MMG as their main two channels.  Per a tech at Magnepan, they don't have the power handling of the other center channels, which I found to be true.  On my processor I found it needed to be at least at +3 (db?) vs my main channel 1.7's to match levels. 

MMG-W

The MMG-W can be used as dual mono center channels flanking the left / right of the screen. Magnepan devotes many lines on their website to how great this is, but haven't seen a lot of enthusiasm from others.  For one thing, if you have a big screen or worse yet a large projection screen, it's unlikely you will have the physical space to do this - particularly w/ large Magnepan main channels flanking the screen!  Lastly, though I'm using MMG-W for the least critical rear surround channels, I don't think these are the best sounding speakers.  This maybe due in part to their being wall mounted, and even at 20-30 degrees tilted forward from the walls, I just don't think dipole maggies sound that great that close to a wall.  I've heard MC1 on walls, and basically felt the same way.  So I may be prematurely dismissing the MMG-W's as dual mono center channel speakers, but my experience so far has not been that positive.

CC5

The CC5 is designed to be the matching center channel for 1.7's, using a quasi-ribbon mid-range panel, + supposedly a QR super tweeter.  Even though it's 3 vs 4 ohms, I did find it to be more efficient, with the processor setting actually 5 (db?) LOWER than the 1.7's.  Overall I found the CC5 to be clearer / more transparent / detailed than the MMG-C : basically the differences you'd expect between the QR and regular mid-range panel.  I didn't find the differences to be as pronounced as between the MMG & the 1.7 though - maybe it's the smaller surface area of the panel.  Physically the CC5 is only slightly taller than the MMG-C, and the outer cloth material is of a somewhat shinier more plasticy feel than the MMG-C, but basically seems like the same screen material on the 1.7.

So to me, though the CC5 did sound better than the MMG-C, and was a better match level & timbre-wise to my 1.7's, I personally don't think it's worth 3.5 times the price of the MMG-C! 

Side Technical Note : Magnepan helpfully includes a center channel white noise DVD to help you fine tune the level / tone vs your main channels (be they MMG's, 1.7's, etc).  Despite trying different levels & placement, I could never get the CC5 to sound so identical to the 1.7s.  Obviously they didn't reproduce the bass of the 1.7's, but the CC5 always sounded brighter / higher pitched than the 1.7s. Running Audessy on my home theater processor did help to bring the CC5 sounding closer to the 1.7's, mainly apparently by dropping some of the mid frequencies by as much as 6 (dbs?) on the CC5.  For whatever reason I think the CC5 maybe "voiced" to project more the mid-range : maybe that's what folks expect from a center channel, but not what I like. I want my center channel to sound like my main channels - otherwise why would I bother buying the same make to match them?

CCR

Designed to match the 3 and 20 series w/ a "true ribbon" tweeter panel & QR mid-range panel.  Don't have these speakers, and frankly at $3K minimum (black), I think it's very pricey even for the presumably well-heeled 3 / 20 maggie owner.

MMG-C / CC5 Design Issues

My main gripe w/ the MMG-C and the CC5 thus far has been that they don't sound as good, natural or matching to the MMG & 1.7 they are supposed to be based on.  Which is the whole point : you buy a center channel from the same manufacturer / model to best match your main L/R channels.  Mostly this difference I notice as more "nasality" particularly on mid-range / vocals, which doesn't go totally away no matter where I place them. I don't hear this nasality when the same sound information is played on the 1.7.

I have some conjectures on why :

1. These center channels have different enclosures unlike the MMG & 1.7 that I think is degrading the sound.  For one they both have bigger curved upper & lower frames to fit the curved panel which I think is getting in the way of the sound.  Secondly, they both have a plastic grill in front and in back along with some solid center plastic plaque that I think is getting in the way of the sound.  These grills presumably are to protect the panel - but if they are not used / necessary on the MMG & 1.7, why on the center channel counterparts?  The center "plaque" I think is something they did later in the evolution of the magnepan center channels to make it less "beamy" / center focused.  I think it was a design mistake.

2.  Despite the panels being made of the same construction as the MMG / 1.7, I've noticed that looking closely w/ a flashlight that they are not "gapped" the same as the MMG / 1.7.  Mainly, the gaps seems thinner like on the tweeter panels than on the mid-range panels of their MMG / 1.7 counterpart.  I.e. as if they used the tweeter panel on the MMG / 1.7 for the MMG-C / CC5 vs the mid-range panel.

That should be enough reason why the mid-range is not going to sound the same between an MMG and a MMG-C or CC5 / 1.7.

3.  It's possible that you simply need more surface area for a planar magnetic panel to sound good for mid-range.  I.e. something in the MMG regular minimum size.  The MMG-C is rated down to 100hz, the CC5 only 200hz, which is why they recommend at a minimum that you set up your processor / receiver to run the main channels full range so the frequencies below 100 / 200 from the center channel can be run to the main channels (MMG / 1.7), which will not only add that missing bass from the center channel, but presumably be a faster / better match than a subwoofer. The MMG-C / CC5 panel size should presumably be large enough for vocals / mid-range, but maybe not.  Maybe you really need to go regular MMG size to get down to 40hz to give the mid-range more warmth.  Maybe that's why Magnepan keeps trying to get you to buy a DWM bass panel........

I can understand that Magnepan may have "voiced" these center channel speakers making assumptions about placement, etc, so they are not direct matches to their MMG / 1.7 counterparts.  Forgive the hubris : I think this is a mistake.  If I'm buying a magnepan center channel, I want it to sonically match as much as possible my MMG / 1.7, particularly in the critical mid-range!

Conclusions :

I may be slamming the MMG-C too hard : at $300 direct it's a pretty decent center channel - i.e reasonably transparent & decent mid-range reproduction, which is what you want in a center channel. The physical size and the set-up requirements as mentioned above for bass management may make it too awkward for some though.  And there is competition even at this price range.  E.g. I have a used Totem Dreamcatcher center channel that cost similar money and does a very good job of reproducing the mid-range in a more compact & attractive enclosure.

I'll be a bit harder on the CC5 : at $1100 retail it should sound awesome with no substantial flaws. That is, it should sound pretty damn identical to a 1.7 from the mid range on up, particularly when it's priced the same as one 1.7 speaker.  Unfortunately it doesn't, for the reasons mentioned above.  Close, but still not close enough : not for $1100. Fortunately I didn't pay that much used, and audio-nervosa would set it in if I tried to downgrade back to the MMG-C as it's not as close a match to my 1.7's as the CC5 is.  But even at the substantially lower price I paid, I still think it's not good enough & too much money.

So what to do if you have maggies & want a center channel? Previously I mentioned a regular MMG........

At one point before I got my MMG-C I had a pair of regular MMG's lying around (which have subsequently been DIY wall mounted as side surrounds).  I tried using one on it's side as a temporary center channel.  I was surprised how good it sounded, and it was quite a good match for the 1.7s.  I was subsequently disappointed by comparison w/ the MMG-C, but kept thinking it just needed more breaking in.  Nope.  Then I upgraded to the CC5.  Better - but that main "nasality" has not completely gone away - even using Audessy EQ (which helped a bit).  I don't recall that nasality w/ the regular MMG on it's side.

Magnepan doesn't really recommend the MMG on it's side : for one the fact that the panel is straight supposedly means that it might be too "beamy / directional" for those outside the center / main listening position (which is the point of the curvilinear center channels to better displace the sound off-center).  Maybe - but I doubt it.  The panel is so big that it projects a wide enough sound.

The main obvious problem is the sheer physical size of an MMG on it's side.  The MMG-C and CC5 are not exactly small center channels as it is.  But if you've got the space, I'd still recommend the MMG on it's side as the best & most cost effective center channel, particularly considering you can pick up a used pair of MMG's for under $400. 

And Holmes / Winey @ Magnepan - if you're listening - I think you need to go back to the drawing board w/ the MMG-C / CC5 / CCR.  Make the enclosures thinner / more form fitting, remove those plastic screens obscuring the panels, make the driver panels themselves more of a match for the corresponding floor standers, and lastly, price the damn things more reasonably!  Magnepan floor standers are an awesome value.  I can understand that the center channels are going to be a lower volume / less profitable product than the floor-standers, but maybe if the center channels were better, you'd sell more of them allowing a lower per-unit cost!  I.e. make them more attractive as a product to non-Magnepan floor stander owners.

In the meantime, if anywhere out there wants to split with me an MMG pair for center channel duties - let me know!  Or if you have a single regular MMG - I'll swap my MMG-C for it!

[NIGHTFALL1970]

Thanks for this review.

[brj]

Nice review, jarcher - thanks!

[Tubo]

I agree with your review—at least, with respect to the MMG-C which is the center channel I have. To remedy its bass defficiency I added a DWM. It helps a lot. MMG-C + DWM working as a center channel gives you a nearly full-range speaker, going a bit lower than a regular MMG. However, there is still a slight prominence in the upper midrange and lower treble, along with the inherent beaminess of the treble, despite the MMG-C's curved panel.

[Maritan]

I have pressed the MMG-Ws into duty as a dual centre and I quite love it. But then again, I'm comparing it to the crap speakers on my flat screen, so really anything would be better.

My HT room is a large untreated space, so I know things aren't as good as they can be, but I'm plenty happy with the set up.

[jarcher]

I could see the MMG-Ws maybe working well as center channels if you have them mounted on the sides of a home theater cabinet w/ some decent space between them and the back wall.  For my limited listening experience it just seems like no magnepan, whether it's MMG-W / MC1s / etc or floor standers are really that happy being too close to a wall. 

[Russtafarian]

I have also have used MMG-Ws and a MMG-C for multi-channel.  The MMG-C is now in storage and I run a 4.1 setup.  That tells you how well it worked for me.  Aside from the sonic limitations mentioned by jarcher, the panel crackles when pushed beyond mid-80s db spl.  And that’s with bass management taking all the bass out below 120hz.  I talked to Wendell about it and he insists my bass management is not working right and the speaker is fine.  I’ve thought about selling it but can’t bring myself to pass this piece of crap onto someone else.

The MMG-Ws, on the other hand, make a terrific surround speaker for the money. The MMG-Ws have no bass and need a 4 ohm capable amp to sound right, so those two issues have to be accounted for.  But for the price ($325 pr), I don’t think you can find a more coherent, natural sounding surround speaker that will blend with just about any speaker used up front.  I’ve had them for nearly 10 years and used them with Gallo, VMPS, and Zu front speakers.  The MMG-Ws worked well with all of them to create a convincing surround mix with good source material (SACD and DVD-A).  The overall coherence of the system with the Zus and the MMGs is stunning. 

I think part of the reason they work so well is that instead of mounting them to the walls, I mounted the MMG-Ws to the ceiling.  My listening couch is centered and up against the long wall of a 16 x 20 room.  The MMG-Ws are mounted to the ceiling on either side of the couch, about 2 feet from and parallel to the side walls.  I tilt them back toward the side walls about 45 degrees so they fire directly at the listening couch.  When positioned like this, they sound washed out everywhere except when sitting on the couch.  Also getting speaker polarity correct between FL/SL, FR/SR, and SL/SR is critical.  But once polarity and level are locked in, they open up a huge sonic soundscape with big solid front to back images spread across each side wall.  It’s pretty awesome.

One of the gripes I always hear about doing multi-channel music playback is the expense of extra amps and speakers.  To this I say: a pair of MMG-Ws, any moderate amp capable of driving them, and an Oppo player will deliver a mind-blowing surround experience for a little over $1k.

Russ

[SteveFord]

I've often wondered if a 1.6 or 1.7 on it's side might be the ideal center channel speaker to use with the 3.7s.

[SteveFord]

I have a question with the MMG as a center channel - how do you find the off-axis response to be?
I was told to go with the CC5 as the dog was sitting in the sweet spot - imagine that.

[jarcher]

My seating area (as can be seen in my gallery) is pretty dead on straight for the three positions (now just two power recliners), so I didn't really have an opportunity to go far off-axis.  I can't imagine it being much worse than a usual MMG standing straight up.

Placing it on its side does bring more of the planel closer to the floor, and that could present it's own problems.  I made sure to have the tweeter at the upward position.

Best of course if you had a perforated projection screen and the space would be to have the MMG / 1.7 center channel standing up & dead center.

[gwing]

Good review; I'm running 1.6's for the mains and MMG's for the surrounds and haven't seen a need for a dedicated center channel. The screen is 100" and using a MMG as a center localizes the sound a bit much for my tastes.  Splitting the center into the 2 mains allows the sound to transition from side to side of the screen (i.e. walking from one side to the other) far better than the single center channel did. My receiver does a very good job of handling the split.

[Tubo]

As I wrote above, my center channel was an MMG-C paired with an MWD woofer. It worked reasonably well, specially with the MWD filling in between 200 and 60 Hz. However, I wondered whether a true-ribbon Maggie might offer better resolution, specially for dialogue intelligibility. I could not afford the $3,000 CCR center speaker so I looked to the Mini Maggies as an alternative.

Since I already owned the DWD I asked my local Magnepan dealer (Stereo Design in San Diego) whether I could buy the Mini Maggie satellites by themselves. The answer was yes, but the sale had to be approved by Mark Winey himself.

I know that the intended use of Mini Maggies is as nearfield desktop speakers, and as such, they offer unparalleled resolution and musicality.

My main concern in setting them up as a center channel was whether they could play loud enough in a 11x16 living room that opens up to a 9x13 dining room and an 8x8 kitchen. Well, they can!

I have the Mini Maggie system below my 50-inch Pioneer Kuro plasma monitor. The DWM is in the center on a 8-inch stand, with the two satellites one either side on 16-inch solid ash stands, about 3 feet apart. The Minis are toed in, with the ribbon tweeters on the inside, creating a larger sweet spot than the MMG-C. The Mini Maggie system is driven by a bridged Coda 10.5 amp which produces 50 watts in Class A and 200 watts in Class AB into 4 ohms.

In Cigala & Tango, a concert DVD in Dolby 5.1, Diego Cigala introduces his guest musicians in a low voice, mumbling a bit. With my old center speaker I had trouble understanding what he was saying (in Spanish) and had to raise the volume. With the Mini Maggies as center channel his introductions are clearly intelligible even at low volume. There is a big step up in resolution!

[jarcher]

The "phantom" center channel if your receiver / processor allows it also makes a lot of sense.  At one point I was thinking of going that route as well.

Tubo : interesting experiment.  How much did the mini maggie satellites set you back?

[Tubo]

Tubo : interesting experiment.  How much did the mini maggie satellites set you back?

The satellites alone are $700 (although I received a small discount from Stereo Design for being a repeat customer). This means that Magnepan is not charging anything extra for ordering them separately. The MWD alone is $800. The two together equal the price of the Mini Maggie system.

[sadcaper]

I'm looking at picking up some Magenpan 1.7s and have been struggling with a center channel option. The do seem to image the sound in center very well, so perhaps a 4.1 setup would work. However, just curious about the MMG on it's side setup. Are you saying to lay it on the floor? If so, in a makeshift stand? Pointed up at the couch? Or just wall mount it? Did you have it below the TV and pushed away form the wall at all?

Thanks for the answers. I know it's an old thread so hopefully jarcher is still around!

Thanks!