[SteveFord]

I wish that I could comment on 1.7s vs 3.6s but I do own 1.6s and 3.6s (and MMGs) if that helps any.
What will sound the best depends on room size: you can have Maggies that are too big and will sound terrible in a small room and ones that are too small in a big room which won't give you that wall to wall (and sometimes beyond) soundstage.
Last year I had some IIIAs in the downstairs and 1.6s upstairs and wanted to see what the differences would be so I swapped them around.
The IIIAs turned into a wall of mud in the smaller space and the 1.6s seemed kind of lost in the larger downstairs room.
I hope that this makes sense and helps some.

[NekoAudio]

Dipoles in general produce a certain soundstage due to the rear wave reflections.  This can sound great in a stereo setup, IMO:  that "performers in the room with you" ambience of dipoles.  (BTW, I'm a Magneplanar MG 1.6QR user myself and I do love it.)

If the rear wave reflections aren't your cup of tea, you can always install absorption panels behind so you still get the other benefits of dipole and planar designs without the acoustic reflection.

[jtwrace]

Well, I went back yesterday for a listen.  I brought my own material and  they just didn't cut it. 
The salesman kept telling me I must wait for the 3.7...

I've pretty much ruled out the Maggie's and still don't understand why people purchase Wilson Sophia's.   

[Wind Chaser]

If the rear wave reflections aren't your cup of tea, you can always install absorption panels behind so you still get the other benefits of dipole and planar designs without the acoustic reflection.

It's pretty much a given that any panel will sound much better with damping on the front wall.  Also panels need to be pulled out further into the room.  3' is too close to the front wall - 4' is much better but if you have the room, I wouldn't stop there.  When I had maggies they were pulled out 11' into the middle of the room and they sounded best there.  Needless to say it really helps if you have a big dedicated room.

[SteveFord]

Jtwrace,
What didn't you care for in the 1.7s?

[mr_bill]

Well, I went back yesterday for a listen.  I brought my own material and  they just didn't cut it. 
The salesman kept telling me I must wait for the 3.7...

I've pretty much ruled out the Maggie's and still don't understand why people purchase Wilson Sophia's.   

Interesting comment on the Wilson Sophias.  They've sounded great to me.  What did you hear or not hear, that made your comment?
Thanks,

[bpape]

I've personally never been a Wilson fan either.  Don't get me wrong, they're better than a ton of stuff out there, just not my taste.  While they're very clean and can be very dynamic and extended, to me, they're just kind of sterile and non-'real' sounding.  They fall into the category of 'hifi' to me.

The Maggies on the other hand, I love.  Haven't heard the 1.7's yet but I know what 1.6's will do IF driven properly - and that takes a lot for a speaker at this price point.  Put a big, solid state bipolar amp biased heavily into Class A on them and they will shock you.

I had MG IIB's years ago and loved them.  I only got rid of them to move to the Acoustat Monitor IV's. 

Bryan

[jtwrace]

Jtwrace,
What didn't you care for in the 1.7s?

Oh boy.   

I will say that the setup was not ideal.  The first time I heard them they were driven with Bryston and this time it was Rotel.  The rooms were very different as well.  Setup is key like any system.

In the end, they lack the fun factor to me.  Like any most speakes they have great qualities but lack in some.  The one they lack are the deal killer for me. 

I'll be interested in hear the 3.7's when they come out. 

[jtwrace]

Interesting comment on the Wilson Sophias.  They've sounded great to me.  What did you hear or not hear, that made your comment?
Thanks,

I think Bryan hit the nail on the head.  They ALWAYS sound shrill to me.  I sit down and always say these aren't bad....10 minutes later I can't wait to leave.  Absolutely no "warmth" with no musicality. 

I find this in every Wilson though.  Luckily there are many speakers of all flavors. 

[Tyson]

I'm with jtwrace, I've heard Maggies many times and they did some things very well, such as sounding very open and spacious, but had terrible mid/upper bass and lacked in the whole rhythm and pace area.  Even the big 3.6's.  I felt the same way about all the Apogee's as well, and to a lesser extent, Martin Logans.  These experiences turned me off to open baffled speakers in general until very recently, as I just figured this was the typical sound of bipole and/or dipole radiation patterns.  But, I heard a pair of Emerald Physics at last year's RMAF, and while I disliked their tonal balance and their "hot" sounding tweeters, the areas of spaciousness and openness were just as good as Maggies and Apogees, but they had the bass slam and rhythm of really great dynamic speakers. 

Since the C2's are too big for my room, and the similar GR Research V1's are also too big for my room, I settled on the smaller V2s.  And, luckily they do in fact still maintain that great sense of openness and space while having serious bass quality and output.  And the tonal balance is a lot better than the C2's (thank goodness). 

I think part of the problem is that many planars are run too far down into the bass.  I've never heard them set up with open baffle subs (or even better, servo controlled open baffle) and crossed over at 200hz.  I bet this type of setup might actually give you a lot of that fun factor back to you.  In my experience, planars are great at mids and highs, but mediocre on bass, so it'd make sense to get a couple of OB subs in stereo configuration and relieve them of ALL bass duties.  Martin Logan attempts to do this, but using a sealed bass woofer with and open baffle mid/high is doomed to failure in the upper and mid bass regions.  For really low bass, a sealed or ported sub is fine, but push it any higher than the low bass and the sound is just discontinuous, IMO.

[stereocilia]

Oh boy.   

I will say that the setup was not ideal.  The first time I heard them they were driven with Bryston and this time it was Rotel.  The rooms were very different as well.  Setup is key like any system.

In the end, they lack the fun factor to me.  Like any most speakes they have great qualities but lack in some.  The one they lack are the deal killer for me. 

I'll be interested in hear the 3.7's when they come out.

As a happy 1.7 owner, I will concede that they do not do everything better than more traditional speakers; not everybody is willing to trade what maggies lack for what they do well.  But, whenever I hear point-source box-type speakers in my room I have a harder time suspending my disbelief because the sound always seems like it's just coming from two points rather than from a larger surface area as it would in real life.  I have heard systems in different rooms where two point sources work well, but the 1.7s are the first maggies I could afford that make the sacrifice of some dynamic contrast well worth gaining a vastly larger radiating surface.  It just sounds better to me that way.  I admit that some days, I feel like maybe dropping some big honkin' Klipsch speakers into the system, but mostly not.

[trout2]

Yes the difference in the 1.7 & 3.6R is huge. Larger bass panel,  but the real difference is the 'R' .. True ribbon - not a quasi ribbon. Nothing beats that tweeter. The 1.7 is a bit better than the 1.6 - but it's not as dramatic as the press is saying .... IMO.

[raindance]

Not to introduce too much controversy, but I prefer the QR Maggies to the true ribbons any day. The true ribbon tweeter is so much better than the bass section that they tend to sound a bit disconnected to my ears. The QR series sound more seamless IMHO.

The biggest issue with Maggies is their placement reqirements. They don't behave like conventional speakers, obviously. Too close to the wall behind them and they get shrill due to lots of reflection. So you have to get them away from the wall. The double whammie comes when you get them away from the wall - if your room is conventional in size, you end up sitting too close and then they are not seamless. Planars and other line source speakers are not suitable for nearfield listening especially if they have crossovers and multiple drivers.

I am planning on going back to Maggies (1.6's) now that I've tried ClassD amps and can get affordable amplification for them.

Also, if you need a sub, consider a small, sealed box sub with at least a 12" driver. I use a Final S220 sub. It has a good crossover section and an awful amplifier, so I have modded it to use an external amp. It sounds pretty darn good and gets down to 20Hz easily in my room.

[DustyC]

The ribbon tweeter in the 3.6 is the best thing about the speaker. Unfortunately it can get a little "hot" sounding with less than competent amplification. To deal with it I tried running an active crossover with tubes on top and SS on the bottom. It seemed to tame the "brightness" that sometimes was evident.
It only whetted my appetite for a full range electrostatic. 

[trout2]

As a happy 1.7 owner, I will concede that they do not do everything better than more traditional speakers; not everybody is willing to trade what maggies lack for what they do well.  But, whenever I hear point-source box-type speakers in my room I have a harder time suspending my disbelief because the sound always seems like it's just coming from two points rather than from a larger surface area as it would in real life.  I have heard systems in different rooms where two point sources work well, but the 1.7s are the first maggies I could afford that make the sacrifice of some dynamic contrast well worth gaining a vastly larger radiating surface.  It just sounds better to me that way.  I admit that some days, I feel like maybe dropping some big honkin' Klipsch speakers into the system, but mostly not.

The thing about stock Maggies is they are a great value compared to any other speaker in it's price range. The other 'really good thing about Maggies' is that with some simple tweaks (Mye Stands, Fuses, No fuses etc) and not so simple tweaks (Bi amping, custom crossovers, complete rebuilds like what Peter Gunn does) Maggies can compete with speakers that cost 2-3 times as much. For example, by adding Mye Stands and having new crossovers built, the dynamic slam factor is now a positive vs what used to be a negative with the stock 3.6R's....

[trout2]

Oh boy.   

I will say that the setup was not ideal.  The first time I heard them they were driven with Bryston and this time it was Rotel.  The rooms were very different as well.  Setup is key like any system.

In the end, they lack the fun factor to me.  Like any most speakes they have great qualities but lack in some.  The one they lack are the deal killer for me. 

I'll be interested in hear the 3.7's when they come out.

So - who has told you that Magnepan is bringing out this new model?

[stereocilia]

Not to introduce too much controversy, but I prefer the QR Maggies to the true ribbons any day. The true ribbon tweeter is so much better than the bass section that they tend to sound a bit disconnected to my ears. The QR series sound more seamless IMHO.

The biggest issue with Maggies is their placement reqirements. They don't behave like conventional speakers, obviously. Too close to the wall behind them and they get shrill due to lots of reflection. So you have to get them away from the wall. The double whammie comes when you get them away from the wall - if your room is conventional in size, you end up sitting too close and then they are not seamless. Planars and other line source speakers are not suitable for nearfield listening especially if they have crossovers and multiple drivers.

I am planning on going back to Maggies (1.6's) now that I've tried ClassD amps and can get affordable amplification for them.

Also, if you need a sub, consider a small, sealed box sub with at least a 12" driver. I use a Final S220 sub. It has a good crossover section and an awful amplifier, so I have modded it to use an external amp. It sounds pretty darn good and gets down to 20Hz easily in my room.

I should mention that I run my 1.7s with subs, Emotiva Ultra Sub 12s, and the results are great.  I bought them when they were on sale recently and they are every bit as good as I had hoped.  I don't think I need subs, but I do miss them when they're off.

In my room, the 1.7s make more bass when they are closer to the wall.  I have a weak suspicion that they benefit from being a little closer to the wall than the 1.6s.  I could be wrong since it's been awhile since I've heard the 1.6, and that was in a different house.

[jtwrace]

So - who has told you that Magnepan is bringing out this new model?

Post #31

[josh358]

Ah yes, the famous Magneplanar haze.  I've never been bothered by it, but you can clearly hear it, especially in direct comparisons like your set up.  It's like within the finely detailed presentation, there's a little bit of fog between the notes.  I noticed it again last year when for S&G I switched my PSB home theater speakers for the stereo system's Maggies.  While playing music in the stereo room I never hear the haze, but when playing film tracks in the HT room (ok, living room) it became bothersome.  Perhaps someone might offer a technical reason for the haze.

"Mylar sound" -- resonances in the mylar/metal sandwich. If you lightly tap the diaphragms with the socks off, you'll hear the sound. Electrostats have their own version, in my experience at a higher frequency, and so, depending on diaphragm material and damping, do cones, frequently at a lower frequency.

[josh358]

I don't know about m/c music, but with HT I couldn't disagree with you more. Maggie Magic with movies is maybe the most addicting aspect of this hobby for me. I used to have about 20' of side wall between my MMG mains and MMG-W surrounds a few years ago. The soundstage was so amazing that I often had effects seeming coming in from the side of the room, even with there being that much distance between the front and rear speakers. Vocals are crystal clear, you hear every little detail of the soundtrack, and there are plenty of dynamics to be had when you take the time to set them up properly.

5.1 Maggie Magic with movies is 

The best theater sound I've ever heard, bar none, was with my old Tympani 1-D's. They had the bass slam that smaller Maggies, even 20.1's, lack, along with a naturalness in the midbass that to the best of my knowledge has never been equaled. You could play the Tympani IVA bass at 120 dB at the listener's seat, and while I never measured them the 1-D's had similar slam, though not as much extension.

The problem with planars is that to get that kind of bass, you need a lot of surface area . . . more than I can fit in my current room. So I've gone the sub route. But alas, it's never going to have that realism.