[Chris Adams]

Need some help.
I am having a room built to accommodate my two channel system, music only.  The new room will be 23x14x9.  It's in the basement and will have one door and one small awning window.  I plan on using Quiet Rock and or some other system for the walls and GIK treatments in whatever form or fashion needed to take care of room issues.  Not much furniture, cork floor, an area rug or two.
Here's the question.  Would I be better off with 20.7s or 3.7is for the size of this room?  If I get the 3.7is, I will also be able to add two more subs ( to the one I own already; total three) to smooth out the bass. Won't be able to add subs with 20.7s.  I'm thinking I'm better off with the 3.7s and the extra subs.  I like to play music at realistic levels or slightly louder.  I have plenty of power.  My current speakers are Magnestand MMGs, and I don't think they have enough surface area to fill the room adequately. What say ye?
Thanks for any input.

[SteveFord]

I think you're right with the 3.7s.
If you could squeeze another 4' in width I'd go with 20.7s.
The big ones wouldn't need any subs.

[Chris Adams]

Thanks for the conformation, Steve.  Yes, the width is the issue with the bigger speaks.

[SteveFord]

I think you'd be forever wishing you could get them just a bit further apart although you've certainly got enough length to the room.
Is there any hope of widening the room?  The 20.7s are a big step up in the sound department.

[thunderbrick]

My 20.1s sing in a 22x26x10 room.  I can't see them in a room that's just over half that size.  Oddly enough, aside from a lack of bass the 1.6s did almost as well in this cave. 

[Chris Adams]

I think you'd be forever wishing you could get them just a bit further apart although you've certainly got enough length to the room.
Is there any hope of widening the room?  The 20.7s are a big step up in the sound department.

No, I'm stuck with the width. I think I'll be happy with the 3.7is, just have to be sure not to listen to 20.7s.

[SteveFord]

Maybe whatever it is that they've been cooking up at Magnepan will bring them closer to that 20.7 sound which is as close to the actual event as anything I've ever heard.
I asked about a smaller 20.7 but was told that the price would be the sticking point.
Oddly enough, the speakers which I like the best in my house are the 1.7s.  I think that I just hit the perfect size which is always an issue.  The 3.7s are better but it seems like I'm missing something and I don't get that with the upstairs system.

[kevin360]

I asked about a smaller 20.7 but was told that the price would be the sticking point.

Reducing the size of the speaker would barely affect the cost of manufacture. How many customers would be interested in purchasing a smaller speaker for the same price? The answer must be sufficient to justify 'tooling up' for another model.

Oddly enough, the speakers which I like the best in my house are the 1.7s.  I think that I just hit the perfect size which is always an issue.  The 3.7s are better but it seems like I'm missing something and I don't get that with the upstairs system.

I have to admit that I am quite fond of my little system, which is my benchmark for proper bass. It's a completely different presentation from the big rig. I can't praise Magnepan's ribbon enough - it's enchanting. On the other hand, the QR isn't bad and I can imagine that the single loop section really is a game changer (not some marketing BS). A planar source radiates sound uniformly for wavelengths longer than its dimensions. At wavelengths shorter than those dimensions, the driver becomes progressively more directional. My MMG's tweeters are 0.04445m wide. That translates to an onset of beaming at 7.65KHz. A single loop of that tweeter is but 0.0127m wide, which becomes directional at 28.33KHz. That spectacular ribbon is only 0.003962m wide, and that means the radiation is as near as possible to ideal through 85KHz!

Anyway, the little guys sound great in my nearfield setup, even if the 3.7s sound far more 'real'.

Maybe whatever it is that they've been cooking up at Magnepan will bring them closer to that 20.7 sound...

I actually suspect something about what the 'i' suffix could do for the 3.7s. I'm really keen to find out what it is. I sincerely hope meaningful information on that front will be released, but I'm breathing normally.

[Chris Adams]

Well, now I'm wondering if 1.7s might do the job.

Steve, your comment on the upstairs system with the 1.7s caught me. Do you get plenty of volume and dynamics in that room? And what is it about the 3.7s that's missing?

[klao]

Hi Chris,

If you could spend the kind of money on the 20.7's, may I suggest you also look into acoustical consulting services, rather than doing your own guess work on room treatments?  I'm satisfied with what Rives Audio has worked on my room, so far.  They're well experienced with all sorts of speaker systems, Maggies and electrostatics included.  Their advises and solutions made a lot of sense and economical.  Their Level 1 service package could be quite right for your situation.

Go with the 3.7/3.7i, if budget allows.  Or you might invest in the room first, and get the just 1.7's.  The RivesAudio application form would leave the space for you to tell them of possible future upgrades.  Their design will somewhat accomodate future changes too.

Cheers!

[Chris Adams]

klao,

Thanks for the info!

[SteveFord]

I guess that I should have added that the 1.7s sounded ridiculously puny in the downstairs!
They work great upstairs because the room isn't that wide so they fill it up just right.
Your basement will dwarf the 1.7s.

What is missing from the 3.7s (in my living room) is the gigantic soundstage that the 20.7s provide due to the size of the panels and the depth of soundstage that only the big bruisers provide due to their different construction.
The model that I proposed (a 20.7 just a little larger than the 3.7) was guesstimated to run around 10 grand and they felt that there wouldn't be sufficient interest in it.
My next question was how can I get that 20.7 sound out of my 3.7s and the answer was you can't.

The living room system doesn't sound bad by any means but you know that you're listening to a pair of speakers.
With the 20.7s you close your eyes and it feels like somebody in the audience is going to bump into you. 
That's the difference.

[NIGHTFALL1970]

Steve,
Didn't you have 20.7s and got rid of them because of room size?

[SteveFord]

Yeah, that was a real tough one but yes, they went off to a fellow in California with a larger room and I got his 3.7s and cash and then bought the same model of motorcycle that I sold in order to get the 20.7 deal going.
It all went around in a big (audio) circle, so to speak.

There was just no way I was going to take out a second mortgage to make the house fit the speakers so if anyone saw my New Year's Resolutions, one of them had the 20.7s in mind.  I know what I want but I can't get there from here so why drive myself crazy?     

Sometimes you just have to face facts and go in a different direction.  In my case, it was the guitar - I have a few, I know how to play and I used to be pretty good at it so why am I just letting them sit there?  What sense does that make?

I did consider 20.1s thinking that perhaps I'd be less overwhelmed by the bass output but decided that I was just kidding myself, I'd be in the same boat with oversized speakers in an undersized room.

I should add that I'm sure that what this "i" modification that they're doing to the 3.7s is pretty significant or else they wouldn't bother to announce it.  I don't wish to denigrate whatever it might be as the people at Magnepan are pretty clever and are continually experimenting with their product.

[Elizabeth]

Steve, Just need to ask what was bad about the 20.7s in your 18 by 30 room? If you wrote about it please just stick a link.
I am considering 20.7 in my apartment, 11'8" by 32' long.
Currently have 3.6s 42" from back wall....