or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Speakers › The Official Magnepan Owners Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Official Magnepan Owners Thread - Page 5

post #121 of 3491
Quote:
Originally Posted by s.bradford View Post

Anything done to make the speaker's frame more rigid in space will have an improving effect. As to whether the listener will feel this is a groundbreaking improvement will of course vary depending on both them and their setup.

I'll remain skeptical until I see some before and after testing that clearly demonstrates the improvement and that it's audible. Oddly enough, there seems to be a dearth of objective testing of that assertion.
post #122 of 3491
Quote:
Originally Posted by imuesmail View Post

Hello friends,

I enjoy my MMGs both for stero and HT. I currently have some cheap Insignias as Center and surrounds. My sub is a klipsch Sub10. All with Yamaha 661 and Emotiva UPA-7.

Any recommendation for center and surrounds? The surrounds have to be mounted on side walls. How is the MMG-C with the MMGs?

Thanks in advance,
imu

Hi Imu...

Don't take this the wrong way, but having that Insignia as a center with the MMGs should be a CRIME lol. Have you ever tried setting the center speaker to "off" on your Yamaha receiver and running movies in phantom mode? Thats what I did when I had MMGs and I was quite happy with it. Having a far lesser speaker as a center, particularly a non-Maggie, ought to be sticking out like a sore thumb! I have a CC3 on the way soon from a fellow AVS'er, cause I want to see how it does with my 3.6s, but if it doesn't work out then I'll just go back to phantom. The size of the Maggie sound stage makes phantom mode a very attractive option unless you have others sitting off-axis. Give it a shot...you might like it!

As for the Maggie centers, I've heard neither, but the CC3 is widely considered a far superior speaker. That being said, they have an in-home trial on the MMG-C just as they do the MMGs, so you may just want to try it out for yourself
post #123 of 3491
Quote:
Originally Posted by imuesmail View Post

How is the MMG-C with the MMGs?

Quite good. It does not have the extension of the CC3, but in some ways I actually prefer it.
post #124 of 3491
Quote:
Originally Posted by dgmerrill View Post

I'll remain skeptical until I see some before and after testing that clearly demonstrates the improvement and that it's audible. Oddly enough, there seems to be a dearth of objective testing of that assertion.

That's where I'm at with a lot of this stuff too, in all honesty. I know beyond a shadow of a doubt that I love tubes, but I'm not sure how I feel about stuff like interconnects and speaker wires. I know a lot of people also feel that amplifiers are sonically indistinguishable, and I don't know how I feel about that either...but I know that HYBRID amps are more to my liking that solid state. I also know that I like a tubed DAC better than a SS DAC. But I'm with you...I'd really like to see more objective data and DBX testing in this hobby.
post #125 of 3491
Quote:
Originally Posted by dgmerrill View Post

I'll remain skeptical until I see some before and after testing that clearly demonstrates the improvement and that it's audible. Oddly enough, there seems to be a dearth of objective testing of that assertion.

It is simple physics really. Anything projected from a shaky platform is going to be less sharp. Video or audio. But you can test for yourself to see if you'll hear the difference.

Put a plank across the back of your Maggies feet, and lay a heavy sandbag on it, tucked up close to the frame of the speaker. Use some clamps to attach some 2-by's near the top of the speaker and the plank (or even the wall behind if it is lose enough). The goal is to not have the speaker wobble back and forth when you nudge the top of it with your hand.
post #126 of 3491
Quote:
Originally Posted by s.bradford View Post

It is simple physics really. Anything projected from a shaky platform is going to be less sharp. Video or audio. But you can test for yourself to see if you'll hear the difference.

As I posted previously, I have tested it and heard no sonic difference between the stock stands and the Mye stands on 1.6Rs and 3.6Rs. Nonetheless, I still like the stands for the reasons I've already mentioned.
The conflation of light and sound makes for a very poor analogy and isn't demonstrative of much. Light and sound behave, and are perceived, in entirely different ways. What may appear to be a reasonable assumption is not always reflected by reality. The OP asked for objective evidence of the stands benefits and as far as I'm aware, there isn't any.
post #127 of 3491
Quote:
Originally Posted by Summa View Post

That's where I'm at with a lot of this stuff too, in all honesty. I know beyond a shadow of a doubt that I love tubes, but I'm not sure how I feel about stuff like interconnects and speaker wires. I know a lot of people also feel that amplifiers are sonically indistinguishable, and I don't know how I feel about that either...but I know that HYBRID amps are more to my liking that solid state. I also know that I like a tubed DAC better than a SS DAC. But I'm with you...I'd really like to see more objective data and DBX testing in this hobby.

The interconnect and speaker wire fairies seem to be rather resilient. In spite of being beaten to pulp by innumerable experts in the field, they keep being resurrected by the credulous.
From where I sit, there's nothing wrong with preferring tubes. I like them sometimes when I'm feeling nostalgic. I remember when tubes were the norm and SS was being eyed with some skepticism by the general public.
post #128 of 3491
How are the badges/insignias attached to the speakers? I was just wondering if they put a whole in the sock?


Anybody every try these rear wave attenuators?

http://cgi.ebay.com/MAGNEPAN-Quasi-R...QQcmdZViewItem
post #129 of 3491
Quote:
Originally Posted by dgmerrill View Post

I have tested it and heard no sonic difference between the stock stands and the Mye stands

Not to belabor the point, but were your tests done full range, with the same source, level, position, etc. and in a manner that would rule out the worthlessness of audible memory?

I have no doubt you did not perceive a difference in two listening sessions separated by the time it took to take the speakers down, mount them in the stands, and set them back up, but that is hardly test criteria I would consider fool proof.

FWIW, I have clearly measured movement of the frame from front to back on larger Magnepans with the stock feet running full range at even moderate listening levels.
post #130 of 3491
Quote:
Originally Posted by datranz View Post

yesterday i head a magnepan for the first time at inland home theatre sound, and oh my gosh, it has the most realistic, pleasing sound i have ever heard. I have never been this impress in a speaker before, the sound was amazingly airy and transparent as if i was there in the concert live.

And it only gets better the more you listen...
Maggies can be addictive

ss9001
post #131 of 3491
Quote:
Originally Posted by rynopr View Post

How are the badges/insignias attached to the speakers? I was just wondering if they put a whole in the sock?

No... they just have an adhesive backing.
post #132 of 3491
Quote:
Originally Posted by rynopr View Post

How are the badges/insignias attached to the speakers? I was just wondering if they put a whole in the sock?

They are sticky backed, so easily adhere without damage.

Quote:


Anybody every try these rear wave attenuators?

http://cgi.ebay.com/MAGNEPAN-Quasi-R...QQcmdZViewItem

I guess in a very bright room they may make a difference. But diffusion on the front wall or something to do the same thing as this:

http://www.soundlab-speakers.com/accessories.htm

..might be better alternatives since they are affecting how the room interacts rather than actually working to defeat the speaker design itself.

Some use fake ficus trees or other wall treatment absorption/diffusion to help break up the HF sound. It's possible blocking or breaking it up it at the plane of the speaker could improve imaging in some rooms, but impact perceived depth of the soundstage in others. Maybe worth a try....

ss9001
post #133 of 3491
Quote:
Originally Posted by Summa View Post

Hi Imu...

Don't take this the wrong way, but having that Insignia as a center with the MMGs should be a CRIME lol. Have you ever tried setting the center speaker to "off" on your Yamaha receiver and running movies in phantom mode? Thats what I did when I had MMGs and I was quite happy with it. Having a far lesser speaker as a center, particularly a non-Maggie, ought to be sticking out like a sore thumb! I have a CC3 on the way soon from a fellow AVS'er, cause I want to see how it does with my 3.6s, but if it doesn't work out then I'll just go back to phantom. The size of the Maggie sound stage makes phantom mode a very attractive option unless you have others sitting off-axis. Give it a shot...you might like it!

As for the Maggie centers, I've heard neither, but the CC3 is widely considered a far superior speaker. That being said, they have an in-home trial on the MMG-C just as they do the MMGs, so you may just want to try it out for yourself

Ha,ha...I deserved that! Yes, phantom center works good, but dialogue placement when watching a movie suffers a bit. I will keep the center off for a while and may get "used" to not having it.

If not getting the MMG-C, any other center that people have tried that is full range and integrated ok?

Any recommendations for surrounds---dipoles??

Thanks,
Imu
post #134 of 3491
Quote:
Originally Posted by s.bradford View Post

Not to belabor the point, but were your tests done full range, with the same source, level, position, etc. and in a manner that would rule out the worthlessness of audible memory?

I'm not about to go through that amount of trouble to disprove what I'm reasonably sure is nothing more than audio woo.
The late Carl Sagan once said, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence". I've seen no evidence, extraordinary or otherwise, to support the claim that the Mye stands create an audible difference over the stock configuration. I doubt there'll be any forthcoming, but should that ever occur, I'll be more than happy to revisit the issue.
post #135 of 3491
Quote:
Originally Posted by s.bradford View Post

I have no doubt you did not perceive a difference in two listening sessions separated by the time it took to take the speakers down, mount them in the stands, and set them back up, but that is hardly test criteria I would consider fool proof.

Following that logic to its ultimate conclusion - If that were true, then it wouldn't make the purchase of the stands for their sonic enhancements worth the money and effort for most purchasers. They simply wouldn't notice the difference in regard to the alleged improvements.
post #136 of 3491
Quote:
Originally Posted by dgmerrill View Post

Following that logic to its ultimate conclusion - If that were true, then it wouldn't make the purchase of the stands for their sonic enhancements worth the money and effort for most purchasers. They simply wouldn't notice the difference in regard to the alleged improvements.

You assume that the difference they make would not be discernible by others if they were not discernible by you. I wouldn't make that assumption... rather I would have commented that although I had not gone to the trouble of performing any real AB comparisons or measurements, I did not perceive a noticeable difference after installing them.
post #137 of 3491
Quote:
Originally Posted by s.bradford View Post

You assume that the difference they make would not be discernible by others if they were not discernible by you. I wouldn't make that assumption... rather I would have commented that although I had not gone to the trouble of performing any real AB comparisons or measurements, I did not perceive a noticeable difference after installing them.

I've assumed no such thing. I know for a fact that my hearing is quite good - well above average for my age group, in fact.

If the alleged improvements require such rigid and strictly controlled conditions to be perceived and the memory of them so fleeting, or so subtle that only the most discerning listener can hear them, then they're hardly worth the investment in my view.

Now, I really have had enough of this silly audio woo nonsense.
post #138 of 3491
I wish Magnepan offered a HT setup with a decent center that can keep up with the dynamic demands of the HT sound. I know they are more geared towards music, but man, if I could have a taste of that for HT...

I once had MMG's and the CC1 for that setup. It just did not cut it for main HT mode. BUT, for music, they were phenomenal ! I still remember how impressed I was with the MMG's. The center was the weak link.
post #139 of 3491
I don't remember ever reading a post on any of the forums where you were this anti-Mye. I'm going to have to really give these stands some evaluation time to see if I come to the same conclusion as you or not.

I guess to me, since sound waves are a physical thing, it makes sense that they would be more effectively propogated when originating from a more stable platform. Whether that translates into a sonic improvement or not, I dunno...guess I'll find out.
post #140 of 3491
Quote:
Originally Posted by neekos View Post

I wish Magnepan offered a HT setup with a decent center that can keep up with the dynamic demands of the HT sound. I know they are more geared towards music, but man, if I could have a taste of that for HT...

I once had MMG's and the CC1 for that setup. It just did not cut it for mein HT mode. BUT, for music, they were phenomenal ! I still remember how impressed I was with the MMG's. The center was the weak link.

It all depends on what your HT goals are. I actually went back to Maggies MAINLY for HT. As it turns out, the 2-channel performance is ever better than I expected, but Maggies can make movies a pretty amazing experience.

Have you tried the CC3? Or phantom mode? Do you have enough juice in your amp for the application?
post #141 of 3491
Quote:
Originally Posted by imuesmail View Post

Ha,ha...I deserved that! Yes, phantom center works good, but dialogue placement when watching a movie suffers a bit. I will keep the center off for a while and may get "used" to not having it.

If not getting the MMG-C, any other center that people have tried that is full range and integrated ok?

Any recommendations for surrounds---dipoles??

Thanks,
Imu

Hi Imu:

I would go with the MMG-Ws for surrounds if you can swing it. That would be the best match for the MMG mains. They are relatively easy to install and also quite reasonable in terms of a price tag. Those have a 60-day return policy, too
post #142 of 3491
Quote:
Originally Posted by Summa View Post

It all depends on what your HT goals are. I actually went back to Maggies MAINLY for HT. As it turns out, the 2-channel performance is ever better than I expected, but Maggies can make movies a pretty amazing experience.

Have you tried the CC3? Or phantom mode? Do you have enough juice in your amp for the application?

Hey Summa:

I never tried the CC3 or phantom mode. I had an Emotiva amp powering them at the time. It wasn't a lack of power, it was the combination of the CC1 with the MMG's. Maybe the CC1 was the weak link.

What speakers did you have prior to the Maggies, and what is your current speaker setup ?

Thanks
post #143 of 3491
Quote:
Originally Posted by neekos View Post

I wish Magnepan offered a HT setup with a decent center that can keep up with the dynamic demands of the HT sound. I know they are more geared towards music, but man, if I could have a taste of that for HT...

You were using one of their smallest models. Depending on room size, 1.6's or 3.6's will give you plenty of dynamics.
post #144 of 3491
Quote:
Originally Posted by Summa View Post

I don't remember ever reading a post on any of the forums where you were this anti-Mye. I'm going to have to really give these stands some evaluation time to see if I come to the same conclusion as you or not.

I guess to me, since sound waves are a physical thing, it makes sense that they would be more effectively propogated when originating from a more stable platform. Whether that translates into a sonic improvement or not, I dunno...guess I'll find out.

I'm not anti-Mye, I like my stands and I would buy them again in a second. I just find some of the claims rather silly and with no real basis in science to support them. I'm a (semi) retired biology prof, as you may remember. And as such, I'm anti-woo and I always have been.

Given the mass of the speakers themselves, I doubt the stands will have much influence on sound wave propagation, and it's unlikely that any influence would rise to the audibility threshold. As always, YMMV.
post #145 of 3491
Quote:
Originally Posted by neekos View Post

Hey Summa:

I never tried the CC3 or phantom mode. I had an Emotiva amp powering them at the time. It wasn't a lack of power, it was the combination of the CC1 with the MMG's. Maybe the CC1 was the weak link.

What speakers did you have prior to the Maggies, and what is your current speaker setup ?

Thanks

neekos, you might want to try the CC3 or wait for the still-yet-to-be-released center speaker Magnepan has been working on for several yrs - true ribbons & larger - designed to mate more smoothly with 3.6's & 20.1's than the CC3. I have no idea when or even if this new center will be out. You might want to check with your local dealer or call Magnepan.

In the meantime, the CC3 does a respectable job and you can set the cross-over at 80Hz unlike the CC1 which needed 160 Hz I believe.

I use the CC3 and it does the job for my tastes. Some however, prefer a phantom center. See if you can get a demo or trial from your dealer

ss9001
post #146 of 3491
Quote:
Originally Posted by dgmerrill View Post

I've assumed no such thing.

Now, I really have had enough of this silly audio woo nonsense.

I don't think it is nonsense. I have a good friend and business associate that just installed them on his 3's and he hears a difference, and I have no reason to doubt him. I have also heard from countless others, but whose opinions I can't vouch for.

I just don't agree with your assessment that if you can't hear it, it doesn't exist.
post #147 of 3491
Quote:
Originally Posted by dgmerrill View Post

no real basis in science to support them

Given the mass of the speakers themselves, I doubt the stands will have much influence on sound wave propagation.

There is a very real basis in science to support them. For instance, I can prove that the excursion of the ribbon driver is insignificant to the back and forth movement of the frame with full range material at moderate levels. It is like throwing a baseball while standing on a surfboard in a swimming pool. Yes the ball will still be propelled forward, but not at the same velocity as on firm ground.
post #148 of 3491
Quote:
Originally Posted by s.bradford View Post

I don't think it is nonsense. I have a good friend and business associate that just installed them on his 3's and he hears a difference, and I have no reason to doubt him. I have also heard from countless others, but whose opinions I can't vouch for.

I just don't agree with your assessment that if you can't hear it, it doesn't exist.

That isn't my assessment. My assessment is that you have no basis in known science for your outlandish claims. Anecdotal evidence is next to worthless, to put it as politely as I am able.
post #149 of 3491
Quote:
Originally Posted by s.bradford View Post

There is a very real basis in science to support them. For instance, I can prove that the excursion of the ribbon driver is insignificant to the back and forth movement of the frame with full range material at moderate levels.

It is like throwing a baseball while standing on a surfboard in a swimming pool. Yes the ball will still be propelled forward, but not at the same velocity as on firm ground.

Of course you can and of course it's just like throwing a baseball.

We're done.
post #150 of 3491
Quote:
Originally Posted by dgmerrill View Post

That isn't my assessment. My assessment is that you have no basis in known science for your outlandish claims. Anecdotal evidence is next to worthless, to put it as politely as I am able.

As an audio engineer I can tell you that you are simply incorrect. Transducers 101 will tell you that resonant vibration within the structure of a motor and its supporting structure can and will induce measurable intermodulation components. These types of distortions are among the easiest for our ears to distinguish (over harmonic components and simple noise).

You don't hear it, fine. But let's not start talking about it having no basis in science when you clearly have little understanding of the science involved.

Why do you think every loudspeaker driver (and enclosure for that matter) known to man has had a good part of its architecture devoted to structural rigidity?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Speakers
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Speakers › The Official Magnepan Owners Thread