[James Tanner]

Hi All,

A number of people have asked me to comment on Magnepan speakers.
Sorry I have been so long in getting to this but last night I hooked up my Maggie 3.6's in my 23x16x8 room with the 28B's and WOW I had forgotten how BIG and SPACIOUS these speakers can sound.

I will spend some serious listening time with them over the next week and try and give a detailed analysis of my observations.

james

[Crimson]

Hi All,

A number of people have asked me to comment on Magnepan speakers.
Sorry I have been so long in getting to this but last night I hooked up my Maggie 3.6's in my 23x16x8 room with the 28B's and WOW I had forgotten how BIG and SPACIOUS these speakers can sound.

I will spend some serious listening time with them over the next week and try and give a detailed analysis of my observations.

james

You betcha! I use 7B's in a biamped setup (with a 10B) on my 3.6's. How much for 4 28B's? 

[mr_bill]

Hi All,

A number of people have asked me to comment on Magnepan speakers.
Sorry I have been so long in getting to this but last night I hooked up my Maggie 3.6's in my 23x16x8 room with the 28B's and WOW I had forgotten how BIG and SPACIOUS these speakers can sound.

I will spend some serious listening time with them over the next week and try and give a detailed analysis of my observations.

james

I look forward to your comments - that would be very helpful to us!!

[James Tanner]

Hi All,

A number of people have asked me to comment on Magnepan speakers.
Sorry I have been so long in getting to this but last night I hooked up my Maggie 3.6's in my 23x16x8 room with the 28B's and WOW I had forgotten how BIG and SPACIOUS these speakers can sound.

I will spend some serious listening time with them over the next week and try and give a detailed analysis of my observations.

james

You betcha! I use 7B's in a biamped setup (with a 10B) on my 3.6's. How much for 4 28B's? 

Hi Crimson,

What are your thoughts on Biamp vs Passive with the 3.6's.

james

[Crimson]

Hi All,

A number of people have asked me to comment on Magnepan speakers.
Sorry I have been so long in getting to this but last night I hooked up my Maggie 3.6's in my 23x16x8 room with the 28B's and WOW I had forgotten how BIG and SPACIOUS these speakers can sound.

I will spend some serious listening time with them over the next week and try and give a detailed analysis of my observations.

james

You betcha! I use 7B's in a biamped setup (with a 10B) on my 3.6's. How much for 4 28B's? 

Hi Crimson,

What are your thoughts on Biamp vs Passive with the 3.6's.

james

Hi James,

IMO, two deficiencies of the 3.6 are 1)they require lots and lots of power to sound effortless 2)they are a little dark i.e. are slightly lacking in lower mid-range energy (which I attribute to the passive crossover). Active biamping fixes the first issue, and the use of an adjustable active crossover lessens the second. My preference is to biamp as I'm able to take their already fabulous sound to the next level. I've even gone a step further 'effectively' triamping them by rolling them off at about 60Hz using a shallow sloped high level crossover to powered subs. In a word, the sound is sublime with no audible issues in the crossover region(s) (not to take away from them in stock passive form).

[niels]

I believe these are the speakers George Cardas had, or still have, I dont know. His were tweaked slightly I believe.
James, look up the Cardas site, look at placement of a speaker in a rectangular room under Insights, and try it out. You wont believe how well this works with almost every speaker ! You havent heard what speakers can do before trying this setup.

[James Tanner]

I believe these are the speakers George Cardas had, or still have, I dont know. His were tweaked slightly I believe.
James, look up the Cardas site, look at placement of a speaker in a rectangular room under Insights, and try it out. You wont believe how well this works with almost every speaker ! You havent heard what speakers can do before trying this setup.

Hi,

Thanks - I am aware of George's setup technique and it certainly is a good guide to start with in a rectangular room.

james

[James Tanner]

I just learn no post can exceed 10,000 characters so 2 posts required.

MAGNEPAN 3.6 REVIEW:

Hi All

Below are my comments on the Magnepan MG-3.6 loudspeakers in my demo room. I have included the same preamble I gave with the review on the Thiel 3.7’s last month so you can skip PART 1 and 2 if this bores you or you have previously read it.


PART 1:
Listening Bias
I have been very fortunate having been involved in this business in two very distinct but unquestionably related areas. Most people in our industry typically sit on only one side of the
fence and never experience the other. Bryston has been involved in audio at the Professional as well as the Consumer level for over forty years now. It has been my good fortune over these 40 years to be able to sit in both Professional and Domestic camps and experience first hand the Recording end and the Playback end of this business.  Being able to follow the recording from the studio to the playback in my home has provided me with a wealth of experience in how music translates from the studio to the home.                         

My first experience was many years ago when Jack Renner of Telarc records came to Canada to do a jazz recording with Oscar Peterson at Manta Sound Studio in Toronto. He called me and asked if I would bring down some Bryston amplifiers to the studio so they could use them in the recording (he did not like what the studio was using at the time). Anyway, I gladly volunteered BUT only if I could come down and sit through the 3 day session.  My pleading worked and I was able to go out into the recording hall and listen first hand to Oscar and Ray Brown then back into the control room and listen to the recording playback, then 3 days later take the master home and listen to it on my home audio system.         

Since that time, I have sat in on hundreds of recordings and many film scores in Hollywood (and other obscure places around the world) where I got to hear the LA Philharmonic close-up and personal in a recording studio. Anyway, the point of this ramble is to give you some idea of how I evaluate audio equipment in a home playback system. The ability to translate the live experience is critical for me.  Music is TRANSIENT in nature –it changes rapidly - (stop-go-stop-go-stop-go) and the ability of loudspeakers and audio equipment to follow that ever changing tempo is the first condition that has to be met for me to move on to other issues like resolution, soundstage, imaging, tonal balance etc. So there’s my bias right up front.       

PART 2:
Room Acoustics
I would like to first talk about the most critical part of any speaker system evaluation and that is the ROOM/SPEAKER INTERFACE. Without recognizing how the room imposes it’s boundaries on the speaker there is no way to truly assess a given speakers performance. I have demonstrated the same speakers and amplifiers over the years in many different audio/video shows and believe me the ability to make a specific speaker work in a specific room is no easy feat. The dimensions and structural influence of the room is critical to the understanding of the overall performance. Also different speaker designs, Dipoles, Omni, Bi-poles, Line sources and the ever sought after Point Source being the most recognized versions of a theme.

I have been trying to come up with an analogy of how to best understand how a speaker and room interact.  I think the best one I have so far is to think of the speakers drivers as individual light bulbs. So for purposes of this discussion let’s consider a 3-way system with the tweeter, midrange and woofer being light bulbs and being rated at tweeter-25 watts, mid-50 watts and woofer-100 watts. Also the light bulbs can be either a FLOOD light or a SPOT light or anything in between. So the 25 watt bulb (tweeter) has a limited amount of light it can put out and it also has a specific light radiation pattern. So we will consider the light bulbs watt rating to be our tweeters power capability and the light radiation pattern to be the speakers POLAR- on an off axis frequency response. The same analogy will hold true for the midrange and woofer.

Given the different speaker designs out there the room/speaker interface will produce specific interactions based on the polar response and the integration of the drivers in the speaker as well as in the room. Generally it is accepted among most designers that the better the integration of the drivers to one another the better response a specific speaker will attain in the average room.  If we think about our light bulb analogy what you want is the light from the tweeter overlapping with the mid in a very controlled way. You want those two different light sources to merge on and off axis at just the right amount to have a seamless, uniform light pattern. In other words it looks like it is a single light bulb with uniform light emission rather than two independent bulbs. You want there to be no dark areas or overly bright areas in the room. Same goes for the light integration between the mid and the woofer. The light now appears to be one large light with uniform dispersion of light equally in all directions from the speaker. 

I should mention that because different frequencies behave differently in a room getting all drivers to behave similarly is almost impossible.  Bass radiates out from the speaker in all directions like a Flood light. Tweeters on the other hand generally radiate forward like a Spot light and midranges radiate like a combination of flood and spot lights. Because this uniform and equally distributed light pattern is almost impossible to achieve most designers attempt to get as close as possible to this goal given their choice of speaker design. In my demo systems at home the PMC’s (IB2’s) and the Thiel 3.7’s represent the point source approach. The Magnepan’s (3.6’s and 1.6’s) and the Quad’s (2905’s) represent the Dipole approach.

Getting back to our light bulb analogy, the PMC’s and Thiel’s are  very wide dispersion (FLOOD) designs so the integration and off- axis polar response of the light is as wide as possible from the front of the speaker. Recognize that when you’re listening to a speaker in a room you are always listening to a balance between the ‘Direct Sound’ and the ‘Reflected Sound’ from the boundaries of the room – this is called ‘POWER RESPONSE.’ It is that balance between direct and reflected that changes depending on the frequency radiation pattern (polar response) of the speaker.

The Maggie’s and Quad’s are dipoles so their radiation pattern looks more like if you took two ‘spotlights’ and placed them back-to-back so the radiation pattern (light) looks more like a figure eight. As a result of this figure 8 pattern the ‘power response’ in the room is totally different because there is hardly any energy (light) striking the walls, floor and ceiling - just the forward and back sound energy is to be considered.

Ok, the point of this entire preamble is that when I do my assessments of a speaker all of the above conditions have to be taken into account.  What works well for a ‘Spot’ light does not necessarily work well for a ‘Flood’ light. If I have meticulously set up my room to accommodate a specific type of speaker – let’s say a Point Source – then dropping a Dipole in is not a fair way to judge the Dipole or any other speaker with a totally different radiation pattern.

[James Tanner]

PLEASE SEE PREVIOUS POST


PART 3:
MG3.6 Speaker:

I have generally preferred a good Active speaker to a Passive speaker because in my opinion the critical transient information I hold so dear always suffered when passive components were inserted between the driver(s) and the amplifier output stage.  I think that is why I have gravitated to panel speakers such as  Quad, Apogee, and Magnepan over the years because even though they may have had other issues, they came closer to providing the transient response and detail I was looking for in home-playback. Good panel speakers, for me, have always had that believe-ability that only comes when you’re not sure if that sound you heard was in the recording or somewhere else in the room. It is what I call “startle effect”.  Some refer to it as “suspension of disbelief” which means that the playback system transcends the medium and you are ‘transported’* to a live venue. I think we all instinctively know when a sound is live or recorded.

So here are my thoughts on the new Magnepan MG-3.6 speakers:

The room is 23x16x8. The speakers are 4 feet from the front wall – angled in at about 30 degrees – tweeters on the outside.  They are 3 feet from the side wall and 10 feet apart center to center. I am sitting 10 feet back. As I stated in my earlier posting the speaker/room interface has to be considered in totality when evaluating a specific speaker in a specific room and the Magnepan 3.6 is a very good example. The speaker is a Dipole so the radiation pattern looks like a figure ‘8’ pointing at the listener (see part 2 above for more detailed information). As a result there is NOT a lot of reflected sound energy bouncing back from the ceiling, floor and side walls. The energy is concentrated to the front and rear of the speaker. With tons of reflected, though delayed, energy from the back wall.

The MG3.6 speaker is not very efficient (85 dB) so you do need a reasonably high- powered  amplifier to drive them. The impedance dips to 2.7 ohms on the ribbon so an amplifier with high current capability is a good choice. The good thing about the Maggie’s though is that although the impedance drops fairly low on the ribbon tweeter the speaker is a very ‘resistive’ (4 ohm) load over the rest of the frequency range. Electrostatics, on the other hand, may have low impedance loads but they are also very ‘reactive’ loads. They tend to behave like a capacitor and store energy which can play havoc with some amplifier output stages.

I have stated above that I tend to prefer speakers that have an ability to respond to transient information accurately. The MG-3.6, being composed of a very light planar diaphragm and ‘true’ ribbon tweeter design, is very good at getting the leading edge of the transient correct.  I ran some impulse tests on the speaker and I was pleasantly surprised not to see a lot of ‘ringing’.  The waterfall plots look good with very little overhang after the signal stops. A speaker with the ability to stop and start relatively instantaneously has always, in my opinion, been able to provide me with a more life-like presentation and delineation of fine details. Little auditory clues that tell our brains if a sound is real or reproduced has (IMO) a lot to do with how a speaker handles transient information.

Tonal balance on the Magneplaners relative to other tradition box speakers leans towards the mid and top end. The way your room reinforces or interacts with the speaker can greatly affect the overall tonal balance in a room. So if your room tends to reinforce the low end (below 60Hz or so) the MG-3.6 will usually come off sounding very well balanced sonically. If your room tends to dissipate the low frequencies quickly then you may find the MG3.6’s extreme lows and mid bass a little light. You have to be real careful here though because the bass from a dipole can be excellent and because it has great transient capability and does not drone you may think there is less bass than there really is. So the box speaker may in fact sound like it has more bass but in fact is simply exciting specific room nodes that appear to give the speaker more apparent bass. The MG3.6’s in my room are very flat to 40Hz and then roll-off at about 6dB per octave.

Many people feel that dipoles are difficult to place but if you take into account the fact that they need to be positioned some reasonable distance from the back wall they are actually very easy to place.  I say that because given the figure 8 polar response the MG3.6 will ‘excite’ far less room nodes than a conventional box speaker. So although they need some distance from the rear surface you will be rewarded with far less room effects screwing up the sound stage and tonal balance.

I have owned many different Magnepan’s over the years ( MG-2’s, MG-3.s, MG-20’s,Typani IV’s etc.) and the knock against them has always been (1.) a kind of  ‘plastic’ coloration that really does remind one of the driver material (mylar) used in the speaker and (2.) a lack of mid-bass impact. The best way to ameliorate this coloration was to use lots of power and in some cases actively bi-amp those models that allowed for it. With lots of power the Maggie’s would ’open up’ and sound much more controlled and effortless.

The 3.6’s (and the MG1.6’s which I also have) do not seem to suffer from this ‘plastic’ coloration issue. In fact, the speaker sounds very coherent and very well-balanced with little coloration. The stage and image is big and wide –maybe the image can be a little too big at times – but never in an unpleasant way.  They do present a bigger than life-size image compared to a traditional point source speaker but I have to say the bigger presentation is really addictive.  You never find yourself straining to hear into the stage – the images just float around in front of you. And don’t get me wrong the image size is not exaggerated in a way that suggests it is incorrect just in comparison to a point source type loudspeaker. In fact, at the recording studio level there has always been the discussion of image size in a ‘produced’ recording vs. the image size in the real world in a good concert hall. The presentation – at least in my room is one of placing the listener about 25th row center as opposed to some of my other box speakers which are more immediate and move you closer – more like 12th row center. I really like the way they ‘layer’ the sound. You can instantly tell that certain instruments are in front of or behind other instruments.  The stage in my room goes back about 20 feet.

The other positive quality I found was the MG3.6’s ability to go from very soft micro sounds to loud concert hall levels with little strain. Owning previous models of Magnepan’s I usually found they could sound detailed and quick but if pushed they tended to ‘harden’ up and sound as if there was some serious dynamic compression going on. I do not find this as much with the MG3.6’s – in fact the opposite – with my 28B’s they just sail through the big bombastic climaxes with ease. Don’t get me wrong- they will not compete with horn speakers or big multi-woofer box speakers, but relative to most dynamic type speakers on the market they come off very well indeed. I think one of the advantages the 3.6 has is the very large radiating area that each driver has. When you think about the relative size of a dome tweeter or midrange driver in a conventional speaker and the huge radiating area in the MG3.6’s ribbon tweeter and planar magnetic diaphragm the ability to put large amounts of acoustic energy at low distortion into the room must have a significant advantage.

By the way, a further consideration to be aware of is that the Mylar membrane used in all the Maggies is 'stretched' when the speaker is manufactured.  It takes about 6 months for this stretch to 'relax' and as it does the lower end of each driver’s frequency response improves. With that relaxation comes an improvement in transient attach and integration.  So the moral of this story is to not be too quick to judge the speaker in the first few months of use as things will change for the better as it matures.

So, all in all, I find the MG3.6’s speakers superb in a number of areas:

1. Their ability to disappear and provide a huge soundstage with well- defined focused images floating in space is excellent.
2. Their ability to respond to transient information is a major benefit in providing inner details and a ‘you are there’ presentation.
3. Their ability to go from very soft micro sounds to loud concert hall levels with little strain is exceptional. 

I think what I enjoy overall though is when I go into my sound room –turn out the lights and sip on my favorite red wine – I am transported*.

james

[KCI-JohnP]

Very nice and informative review James, thank you!! I enjoyed reading it quite a bit.

Is there a new version of the 3.6 out??

John

[Brad]

Nice read - thanks to you JamesT

[James Tanner]

Very nice and informative review James, thank you!! I enjoyed reading it quite a bit.

Is there a new version of the 3.6 out??

John

Hi John,

No new version I am aware of - my pair are about a year old.

james

[mr_bill]

James,
Thanks for your comments on the Mag 3.6.  They were very informative and well written.
I'm assuming the 3.6 is much better than the 1.6 with the larger radiating area and ribbon tweeter.
Is the Mag 3.6 like a line array in its design (I know it's a dipole) or does it behave like a line array in the way that it launches music forward?
Thanks,
Bill

[James Tanner]

James,
Thanks for your comments on the Mag 3.6.  They were very informative and well written.
I'm assuming the 3.6 is much better than the 1.6 with the larger radiating area and ribbon tweeter.
Is the Mag 3.6 like a line array in its design (I know it's a dipole) or does it behave like a line array in the way that it launches music forward?
Thanks,
Bill

Hi Bill,

The 3.6 is better in terms of dynamic capability and frequency extremes but I have to say the MG-1.6 has a terrific sense of coherence about it. I think the simple 2-way design and the integration of the drivers is exceptional. In a smaller room they would sound great. Need a good size amp with them though.

The MG3.6 has two different driver types so the ribbon tweeter acts like a line source and the rest of the speaker is a dipole. The MG-1.6 is a straight dipole.  All it really means is you have to be more carful with side wall placement with the 3.6 vs the 1.6.

I am using my 1.6's as rear channels at the moment with the MG3.6's up front and it is really a superb match.

Also something I should have mentioned in my review:  I was speaking with Jim Whiney - the designer of Magnepan -and he mentioned something I should have relayed.  The Mylar membrane that is used in all the Maggies is 'stretched' when the speaker is manufactured.  It takes about 6 months for this stretch to 'relax' and as it does the lower end of each drivers response improves. Also the transient attach and integration improves. 

So the moral of the story is to not be to quick to judge the speaker in the first few months of use as things will change for the better as it matures.

james

[James Tanner]

Hi Crimson,

What are your thoughts on Biamp vs Passive with the 3.6's.

james

[/quote]

Hi James,

IMO, two deficiencies of the 3.6 are 1)they require lots and lots of power to sound effortless 2)they are a little dark i.e. are slightly lacking in lower mid-range energy (which I attribute to the passive crossover). Active biamping fixes the first issue, and the use of an adjustable active crossover lessens the second. My preference is to biamp as I'm able to take their already fabulous sound to the next level. I've even gone a step further 'effectively' triamping them by rolling them off at about 60Hz using a shallow sloped high level crossover to powered subs. In a word, the sound is sublime with no audible issues in the crossover region(s) (not to take away from them in stock passive form).
[/quote]

Hi Crimson,

Tried the MG-3.6 with a 10B and 4-7B's in active bi-amp mode this weekend - I agree it takes it up a notch.

james

[Crimson]

Hi Crimson,

What are your thoughts on Biamp vs Passive with the 3.6's.

james

Hi James,

IMO, two deficiencies of the 3.6 are 1)they require lots and lots of power to sound effortless 2)they are a little dark i.e. are slightly lacking in lower mid-range energy (which I attribute to the passive crossover). Active biamping fixes the first issue, and the use of an adjustable active crossover lessens the second. My preference is to biamp as I'm able to take their already fabulous sound to the next level. I've even gone a step further 'effectively' triamping them by rolling them off at about 60Hz using a shallow sloped high level crossover to powered subs. In a word, the sound is sublime with no audible issues in the crossover region(s) (not to take away from them in stock passive form).

Hi Crimson,

Tried the MG-3.6 with a 10B and 4-7B's in active bi-amp mode this weekend - I agree it takes it up a notch.

james

James,

I'm assuming this was compared to a pair of 7-B's. How did it compare to a pair of 28B's? Did you use the recommended crossover frequencies and slopes? BTW, I use the 7B's on the bottom and tubes on top.

[James Tanner]

Hi Crimson,

What are your thoughts on Biamp vs Passive with the 3.6's.

james

Hi James,

IMO, two deficiencies of the 3.6 are 1)they require lots and lots of power to sound effortless 2)they are a little dark i.e. are slightly lacking in lower mid-range energy (which I attribute to the passive crossover). Active biamping fixes the first issue, and the use of an adjustable active crossover lessens the second. My preference is to biamp as I'm able to take their already fabulous sound to the next level. I've even gone a step further 'effectively' triamping them by rolling them off at about 60Hz using a shallow sloped high level crossover to powered subs. In a word, the sound is sublime with no audible issues in the crossover region(s) (not to take away from them in stock passive form).

Hi Crimson,

Tried the MG-3.6 with a 10B and 4-7B's in active bi-amp mode this weekend - I agree it takes it up a notch.

james

James,

I'm assuming this was compared to a pair of 7-B's. How did it compare to a pair of 28B's? Did you use the recommended crossover frequencies and slopes? BTW, I use the 7B's on the bottom and tubes on top.

I am trying it a number of ways.  So far the 7B on the bottom and the 28B on top sounds the best. Going to try 2-14B's as well.

I am also experimenting with crossover slopes - started at 200 on the highpass at 6dB and 250 on the lowpass at 18dB-gain at 0.

james

[Voncarlos]

One of the biggest improvements I made to my IIIa's was to add floor spikes to the end of each stand leg. Big improvement to the sound! Just drill and tap a hole in each end and insert your favorite spike.

Carlos

[andyr]

I've even gone a step further 'effectively' triamping them by rolling them off at about 60Hz using a shallow sloped high level crossover to powered subs. In a word, the sound is sublime with no audible issues in the crossover region(s) (not to take away from them in stock passive form).

No crimson, you haven't "effectively triamped them" ... that involves removing/bypassing the internal mid LP/ribbon HP passive XO (under the sock) and using a 3-way active XO.

What you are doing is adding a sub to 2-way active Maggies.

Regards,

Andy

[andyr]

I am also experimenting with crossover slopes - started at 200 on the highpass at 6dB and 250 on the lowpass at 18dB-gain at 0.

james

I believe the Bryston XO has preset frequencies ... but you can change the slopes easily, right?

You might like to try the following active setups:

a)  to use the stock 24dB bass LP/6dB mid HP slopes, set the following -3dB frequencies (as near as you can get them):
     * bass LP: 24dB @ 180hz
     * mid HP:   6dB @ 270hz.

b)  instead, use an 18dB bass LP/6dB mid HP arrangement with these -3dB frequencies:
     * bass LP: 18dB @ 180hz
     * mid HP:   6dB @ 220hz.

I believe b) will sound better.

Regards,

Andy