[James Tanner]

Hi Folks - got notice today that my MG1.7's are on the way to my listening room

james

[vegasdave]

Cool. Will you give us a report as usual?

[alexone]

...some guys got all the luck! keep us updated!

al.

[Phil A]

I'd like to hear updates too.  I have not been to my local audio store in a bit and it is on my to do list.  I'd imagine they have them in by now.

[sonicboom]

James,

If memory serves me well and unless I've missed something, the last planar/stat you had over was the Sanders Sound model 10.  I don't think you gave us your impressions of it beyond just a few words.  Could you be so kind as to give us your latest thoughts (even the abridged version will do) on the Sanders Sound ESL?

[James Tanner]

James,

If memory serves me well and unless I've missed something, the last planar/stat you had over was the Sanders Sound model 10.  I don't think you gave us your impressions of it beyond just a few words.  Could you be so kind as to give us your latest thoughts (even the abridged version will do) on the Sanders Sound ESL?

Hi

Yes I still have them in room 2 with two 14B's. I will try and give you a general overview on them.

James

[Russell Dawkins]

Slightly OT, but does anyone know how Magneplanar Tympani 1 Ds stack up against current models? These are from around 1980 and came up locally for $500 for the pair.

[Bill Baker]

We are looking at Stats to have as an option for testing gear and the Magnapans are on our short list. I really like what I have seen about the 1.7's but they will be too small for my room. I will ahev to loo into the larger models. On teh plus side, I will be able to give this type of speaker pleanty of room to breathe.

[I.Greyhound Fan]

I've got a pair of 1.6's and the 1.7's sound very similar.  The 3.6's however are in another league.  The true ribbon tweeter makes a huge difference as does the larger bass panel in the 3.6's and MG20's.

[Bill Baker]

The 3.6's however are in another league.  The true ribbon tweeter makes a huge difference as does the larger bass panel in the 3.6's and MG20's.

 That's what my research has told me as well which is good as I need one of the larger models anyway.

[James Tanner]

That's what my research has told me as well which is good as I need one of the larger models anyway.

One point I will make - and I have owned every one of the Magnepan models including Tympani's - there is something really special about the MG1.6 and I hope the 1.7 when it comes to COHERENCE.  By that I mean you get a sense that the sound is all cut from the same cloth or everything is coming at you from the same space and time.  I think its because the driver(s) are all on the same plane and are made up of of similar if not identical materials.

james

[rob80b]

One point I will make - and I have owned every one of the Magnepan models including Tympani's - there is something really special about the MG1.6 and I hope the 1.7 when it comes to COHERENCE.  By that I mean you get a sense that the sound is all cut from the same cloth or everything is coming at you from the same space and time.  I think its because the driver(s) are all on the same plane and are made up of of similar if not identical materials.

james

Hi James

In case you have not seen this review.
http://www.avguide.com/review/magneplanar-17-loudspeaker-tas-205?src=Playback
"What makes the 1.7 such a landmark—and a departure—is that every driver in it, from its super-tweeter panel to its tweeter/upper-mid panel to its lower-mid/bass panel—is a quasi-ribbon, making this the first Magneplanar to use ribbon technology in all of its drivers."

"I have now listened to the 1.7s for almost four months, and I can say with confidence that they are worthy successors to the 1.6s"...

Robert

[SteveFord]

Congratulations on your new purchase!
If I were to replace my 1.6s it would be with the 1.7s.
I agree that Maggies need to be sized to the room - the 1.6s are too small for the downstairs here and the 3.6s would sound terrible upstairs. 
I can't offer anything about the Tympanis but if they're local why not swing by and give them a listen?

[ajzepp]

Always nice to see some Maggie love on the AC! I'm eager to hear the OP's impressions, too. I have had 3.6r's for the past year and a half (had MMGs for two years a while back) and don't see myself ever going away from Maggies again. 

[I.Greyhound Fan]

I got to hear the first pair of 1.7's released to an audio store at Audio Perfection here in Minneapolis and was able to A-B them with the 1.6's.  There was a noticeable difference in sound but it was not dramatic.  Certainly its a nice upgrade to a model that has been around a while.

I had a chance to buy the 3.6's when I bought my 1.6's.  My wife told me to go with the 3.6's but I was worried that my room was not big enough- 17'x17 with 10' ceilings.  I made a mistake, the 3.6's would have been just fine.  Maybe I'll wait for when and if they become 3.7's to upgrade.

[ajzepp]

I had a chance to buy the 3.6's when I bought my 1.6's.  My wife told me to go with the 3.6's but I was worried that my room was not big enough- 17'x17 with 10' ceilings.  I made a mistake, the 3.6's would have been just fine.  Maybe I'll wait for when and if they become 3.7's to upgrade.

Cool wife! 

And yeah, that's plenty of room for them. I had them in a 16' wide room initially, now they are in my apartment in a 15' wide room (by 18') with 9' ceilings. They sound great!

[werd]

Hi James

What will you be running them with?

[James Tanner]

Hi James

What will you be running them with?

Hi Werd,

The normal suspects; 4B, 7B and........ 28B'S JUST TO MAKE THE REST OF YOU JEALOUS

james

[rob80b]

Hi James

In case you have not seen this review.
http://www.avguide.com/review/magneplanar-17-loudspeaker-tas-205?src=Playback
"What makes the 1.7 such a landmark—and a departure—is that every driver in it, from its super-tweeter panel to its tweeter/upper-mid panel to its lower-mid/bass panel—is a quasi-ribbon, making this the first Magneplanar to use ribbon technology in all of its drivers."

"I have now listened to the 1.7s for almost four months, and I can say with confidence that they are worthy successors to the 1.6s"...

Robert

After a little foot work I see I'm totally out of the loop, time to do some homework and then ask questions.

Robert

[FredT300B]

I've owned the 1.6's and the 3.6's in the past, and I recently heard the 1.7's in a demonstration hosted by Sound World for the Houston Audio Society. Sound World also represents Bryston, but the day we heard the 1.7's they were being driven by a Krell integrated and an Arcam player. The 3.6's were also demonstrated that day driven by large Krell monoblocks and an Esoteric front end.

The overwhelming consesus was the 1.7's sounded better than the 3.6's, but we felt that was due to placement and room effects. In any event, the 1.7's, to my ears, sounded amazingly good for a $2K pair of speakers. I believe this impression was the result of a total lack of box coloration combined with a bit more treble clarity and air than I recall with the 1.6's. If I were in the market for a $2K pair of speakers the 1.7's would be no-brainer choice for me. Also, for those who need wife approval for a speaker purchase, the 1.7's are large, but their 2" depth combined with their improved styling over the 1.6 gives them a surprisingly high WAF.

I've also auditioned the Bryston equipment at Sound World, but with a different brand of speakers. Based on this experience I believe one could assemble a system with the Bryston CD player and preamp, a 4BSST, and the Maggie 1.7's that would rival many "reference" systems. It wouldn't have quite the resolution of a carefully assembled $100K system, or quite the bass impact and extension, or the ability to play at ear busting levels, but in most other ways it would be highly competitive with the megabuck system. The one enhancement I recommend with the 1.7's is a music oriented subwoofer. I found even a highly affordable Hsu VTF-2 integrated nicely with my 1.6's and added the bottom octave weight that's so important for some classical music.