Salks v. Maggies

ajzepp · « **on:** 15 Jan 2006, 08:44 pm »

Okay, these speakers have my attention.....

Over the past year and a half, I've grown to love the realism, transparency, and HUGE soundstage of the Maggies. They truly bring music and movies to life like no other speaker I've heard. That being said, they do have their shortcomings.

Anyway, I'm just wondering if anyone has experience with both Magnepans and either the Veracity HT-1 or HT-3.

Any comments would be greatly appreciated

-AJ

Bingenito · « **Reply #1 on:** 15 Jan 2006, 10:57 pm »

What model Maggie (1.6, 3.6, 20.1) would we be comparing them too?

Thank you

ajzepp · « **Reply #2 on:** 15 Jan 2006, 11:04 pm »

Well, the ones I've owned the past year and a half are the MMGs, but I'm pretty familiar with the 1.6s and 3.6s. The problem is that they are so detailed and so transparent that pretty much everything I've listened to in the past year and a half has really just not appealed to me. That includes some pretty good speakers, too (e.g. Paradigm Signature, JM Labs, Von Schweikert).

I keep reading how the Veracity models throw a nice, big, holographic soundstage while also maintaining the detail I like. I just like to gather as much info as I can before commissioning Jim to make me a pair

Right now I have modest gear:
Outlaw 950 pre/pro
Outlaw M200 monoblocks x4
Denon 2900 universal player

But I'm planning to upgrade my gear no matter what speakers I choose.

zybar · « **Reply #3 on:** 16 Jan 2006, 12:16 am »

Very, very different sound.

The Maggies can sound darn good when set up properly and driven with good electronics, but I wouldn't call them very detailed. They can be very musical and enjoyable, but don't have the same level of resolution as the HT3's.

One thing you will lose in going to the HT3's vs. the bigger Maggies is the height of the soundstage. Since the Maggies are so much taller, they will have a taller soundstage and make things seem bigger.

While I have never heard the 20.1's, I have owned 1.6's, 2.7's, and listened many, many times to the 3.6's in different settings - I wouldn't give up my HT3's for any of them!!

George

Bingenito · « **Reply #4 on:** 16 Jan 2006, 12:33 am »

Quote

But I'm planning to upgrade my gear no matter what speakers I choose.

If you are planning on upgrading your gear and you like detail the HT3 is a top performer. You will hear changes in any component or cable through the HT3. I found this to be true with other rigid cone mid-bass and ribbon speakers as well.

I have never heard the MMG but have heard the 3.6r special edition which I thought was a great speaker once placed properly in the right room. To "me" the HT3s do not sound as big as the 3.6r but they are not 6ft tall and 2 ft wide. The soundstage is very good on the HT3 but you get some more depth on the 3.6r because it is a dipole. I think that the HT3 is closer to reality on the soundstage especially on vocals. It is also more pinpoint in imaging. The Maggie’s dipole bass is very appealing but lacks that bottom octave impact of the Salk HT3. In the right room using a good amp I would take the HT3 bass any day.

Even with the 85 db spl rating I find the HT3 easy to drive with my 150 watt Blue Circle BC204 hybrid amp. I can shake the walls with no trouble at all.

Comparing different speakers in a general manner is difficult. I can tall you that the 3.6r was one of the best speakers I have heard when setup properly. Even after hearing that I purchased the Salk HT3 and have no regrets.

As with any quality speakers using the right gear will make the speakers shine. It looks like your system is setup for Home Theater. If you have an interest in 2 channel music I would recommend using the HT bypass loop on the pre/pro and start off with an analog 2 channel preamp. There are several good source components to consider as well.

Bryan

ajzepp · « **Reply #5 on:** 16 Jan 2006, 12:52 am »

Thanks guys, that's the kind of info I'm looking for. So being that my room is not huge and I do have an SVS sub that I'm quite fond of, do you think it's wise to start with the HT-1s and go from there? I keep reading about people trading in their speakers to Jim for better ones. What exactly is his policy on that?

And Bryan, what you described with the HT bypass is exactly what I plan to do. I spend much more time with movies than I do music, but I want the time I DO spend with music to be spectacular.

Bingenito · « **Reply #6 on:** 16 Jan 2006, 01:01 am »

Quote

So being that my room is not huge and I do have an SVS sub that I'm quite fond of, do you think it's wise to start with the HT-1s and go from there?

Glad that we could help!

Do you mind sharing the dimensions of the room?

ajzepp · « **Reply #7 on:** 16 Jan 2006, 01:53 am »

Sure thing....my room is 16x25 with 10' ceilings. It doesn't really have openings into other open areas, and the back of the room is sort of caved in with a fireplace.....so it's not REALLY a full 16x25. The back wall is actually closer to like 10-12'. I have a 120" projector screen on the main wall where I have my gear, so the speakers would be a good 9' apart. I don't like center speakers, so I rely on my mains to be of such quality that they can produce a rock solid center image. The main listening area would be approx 12-15' from that wall.

Bingenito · « **Reply #8 on:** 16 Jan 2006, 02:02 am »

My room is 14w x 24L and the HT3s work perfectly. I use plenty of room treatments made from 8lb density mineral wool.

The HT1 + Sub or HT3 would work well in that room. Based on what others have said the HT3 would have better mids and bass integration but by how much I do not know. Maybe Marbles can share his experience since I know he has heard it both ways.

If I had to choose I would go HT3 and keep the sub for movies but that is just me

Marbles · « **Reply #9 on:** 16 Jan 2006, 02:22 am »

Quote from: Bingenito

My room is 14w x 24L and the HT3s work perfectly. I use plenty of room treatments made from 8lb density mineral wool.

The HT1 + Sub or HT3 would work well in that room. Based on what others have said the HT3 would have better mids and bass integration but by how much I do not know. Maybe Marbles can share his experience since I know he has heard it both ways.

If I had to choose I would go HT3 and keep the sub for movies but that is just me

Either will be a big step up from what he currently has. Both would work great. If he never heard the HT3's, he wouldn't be able to imagine them better than the HT1/sub combo....but the integration of the woofers in the HT3's is so seemless, that it is a better way to go IMO.

You might want to see if Jim can send you a demo pair of HT1's so you can listen for yourself what they're like.

ajzepp · « **Reply #10 on:** 16 Jan 2006, 02:24 am »

Thanks again guys.....I actually did check with Jim and he said the demo pair will likely be tied up for about a month or so. So I may follow-up with him in a couple weeks and see where it's at. All I know is those are some damn fine looking speakers

mcrespo71 · « **Reply #11 on:** 16 Jan 2006, 02:25 am »

I've not heard the Salks, but I'm sure they are excellent as people whose ears I trust (i.e., Tito/lonewolf) had very nice things to say about them. I will say you may want to post this on a less biased forum and I'd tell you the same thing if you posted this ? on a maggie forum.

Michael

ajzepp · « **Reply #12 on:** 16 Jan 2006, 02:31 am »

I hear what you're saying, but in all honesty it's hard enough trying to find people who have heard Maggies.....trying to find people who have heard BOTH speakers, however, is truly a challenge.

mcrespo71 · « **Reply #13 on:** 16 Jan 2006, 02:34 am »

Gotcha!! For the record, I've always liked Maggies, but unlike others, haven't heard both. I will say that Magnepan has always provided excellent service to my father, who has owned many, many iterations of Magnepans since 1977 all the way till now. Not much went wrong over these almost 30 years of Maggie ownership, but when something did, it was taken care of incredibly quickly.

Michael

ajzepp · « **Reply #14 on:** 16 Jan 2006, 02:40 am »

That's awesome, Michael.....and if I'm being completely honest here, I'm about 90% sure I'll end up having bigger Maggies in my place sometime very soon. It's just that before I drop some cash on an upgrade, I like to make sure I've done my homework. I'm sure that the Salk speakers are kick ass.....and I'm dying to hear them. But that being said, it's typically very hard to go from planars back to boxes....no matter how beautiful the boxes may be

It's just that with the amazing value that Jim Salk seems to offer, combined with the ribbon tweeter, I'd really like to see if they appeal to me. I think anyone would be proud as hell to have that kind of craftsmanship in their audio rig. But alas, I'm ultimately true to my ears, and they want what they want.....so I'll just have to give 'em a try and see, you know?

mcrespo71 · « **Reply #15 on:** 16 Jan 2006, 02:49 am »

Where do you live? Maybe you can arrange a Salk audition through one of the circle members. I'm assuming you are familiar with the maggie sound and no doubt a 3.6 will be a HUGE upgrade to the MMG and though I haven't heard them, I'm sure the Salk's will be a HUGE upgrade as well.

Michael

ajzepp · « **Reply #16 on:** 16 Jan 2006, 02:51 am »

I'm about an hour north of Atlanta.....and yeah, I'd love to find someone down this way who had some Salks!

Bingenito · « **Reply #17 on:** 16 Jan 2006, 03:08 am »

Quote

I'm about an hour north of Atlanta.....

Charlotte is only 3 hrs from Atlanta as along as you avoid rush hour traffic on 85N.

Since you are 1 hr north of that you are welcome to take the 2 hr drive and hear fully loaded Salk HT3s. PM me if you are interested.

Bryan