The Official Magnepan Owners Thread - Page 79

Originally Posted by ss9001

how about a martin logan's center with the maggies?

Originally Posted by ss9001

Have some questions for the gang

Anyone compare the CC3 with the CCR & can comment on sound differences? Big jump in price - is it worth it? I have 3.6's as fronts & currently use the CC3.

Also, what about the bass stand vs the DWM woofer panel?

Besides cost, my other concern is the complex bass mgmt. Good or bad, I use 80 hz and let the chips fall where they may. The Magnepan method may work just fine but does not appeal to me since it seems to require another set of interconnects from the front preamp outs to the sub, in my room setup that's about 45 ft run - yuck. Not interested and not an elegant solution, IMO.

The ideal would be a processor that had independent Xovers, but as fellow Pioneer owners know, we don't have that option.

How about leaving the sub as yes in the proc, set Xover to 80 and just run the CCR center output to the woofer panel first - it strips off the bass & sends the rest to the CCR....has anyone done it this way?

All thoughts are welcome. I am probably going to audition the CCR in a few weeks.

Originally Posted by ss9001

Have some questions for the gang

Anyone compare the CC3 with the CCR & can comment on sound differences? Big jump in price - is it worth it? I have 3.6's as fronts & currently use the CC3.

Also, what about the bass stand vs the DWM woofer panel?

Besides cost, my other concern is the complex bass mgmt. Good or bad, I use 80 hz and let the chips fall where they may. The Magnepan method may work just fine but does not appeal to me since it seems to require another set of interconnects from the front preamp outs to the sub, in my room setup that's about 45 ft run - yuck. Not interested and not an elegant solution, IMO.

The ideal would be a processor that had independent Xovers, but as fellow Pioneer owners know, we don't have that option.

How about leaving the sub as yes in the proc, set Xover to 80 and just run the CCR center output to the woofer panel first - it strips off the bass & sends the rest to the CCR....has anyone done it this way?

All thoughts are welcome. I am probably going to audition the CCR in a few weeks.

Originally Posted by ss9001

Have some questions for the gang
How about leaving the sub as yes in the proc, set Xover to 80 and just run the CCR center output to the woofer panel first - it strips off the bass & sends the rest to the CCR....has anyone done it this way?.

Originally Posted by DonH50

...honestly at my age (50+) I really couldn't tell unless it was loud and I was close. It was nowhere near enough for me to justify the large price differential....I piddled with Magnepan's scheme and just found it wasn't worth the effort for me.

Originally Posted by Beto3645

I have my center channel and my DWM woofer paired in this way.

Originally Posted by echen1024

Most martinlogans use dynamic woofers for the bass. They might not match the speed of the maggie's

Originally Posted by ss9001


that's what I wanted...a dose of objective analysis

the audio world is so full of hyperbole anyway. I'm sure the CCR will be audibly better but not sure it's going to be $5K better including the woofer stand

Even on paper, I don't think their bass mgmt scheme is an ideal solution at all. It's a kludge. The ideal solution is design the speaker differently but the next best is a processor with independent crossovers. Unfortunately, with Pioneer gear that's not an option.

I may consider adding the DWM woofer panel to the CC3 and live with that awhile but I want to hear what the flagship model can do first.

Originally Posted by purdyd

Actually what is really needed is the ability to specify that the small center speaker bass goes to the front speakers

The kludge actually sounds pretty good, you run the sub off the front pre outs and turn sub to off so all bass goes to the fronts

I am still wondering why you can't try that and why you think that requires additional wiring to your sub?

Originally Posted by ss9001

I may consider adding the DWM woofer panel to the CC3 and live with that awhile but I want to hear what the flagship model can do first and talk to my wallet

Originally Posted by ss9001


+1 on your 1st comment

I have no doubt that it sounds good. Maybe I don't understand it completely. For some reason, to me it reads like a sub Plus setup with the sub and fronts getting all the bass at same time. unless you are connecting the mains to the sub's speaker output not the processor amps. is that the answer? what powers the fronts then? I confess, it sounds confusing to me.

and bass from the surrounds get sent to? sub, fronts or both?

if in the end, the bass is handled by sub and fronts, then that is no different than a Plus or Large setup, to use Pioneer-speak, which about everyone on the planet says is not ideal (comb filtering, uneven bass response, ringing, etc)

Originally Posted by purdyd

Yes, it would be like setting sub to both

Well, your sub has a crossover right?

And the fronts have a spot where the frequency rolls off?

You set the sub crossover to be at that spot

Originally Posted by stustan

I will report back soon.

Originally Posted by ss9001


ok, that makes sense. both of mine do.

I'll try to keep an open mind as I evaluate this hi-priced center/woofer combo.

however, let me add 1 more caveat. sub EQ. I have a velodyne DD18 with built-in parametric EQ. I would be sure I'm in the minority that has both that capability & the added capability of using the SVS/audyssey sub EQ. you do it Magnepan's way, leaving subs turned off in the AVR/proc, then you could negate some of the benefits of sub EQ if it's audyssey based and 2) I don't see how you could use a standalone EQ like the SVS, Velodyne's SMS-1, or Anti-mode because they require subwoofer inputs, not full range preamp outputs. I'll concede that maybe audyssey in an AVR could apply a correction to the combined sub & mains response (that's what I did with the velodyne's EQ). Or use a sub with its built-in EQ, like the Velodyne. But an external solution would be difficult if not impossible to use. So, a big limitation is introduced.

Gain the illusion of a full-range maggie center, lose some or all the benefits of subwoofer EQ. Not sure that's a good trade-off, purdy.

Maybe there's a way to make it all work, but look at the convoluted effort it takes to think it all through. Not a solution for HT enthusiasts trying to optimize bass performance.

I think DonH50 said it best when he said he tried it & decided that it wasn't worth the effort for him. You may be one who doesn't need or want sub EQ, certainly with the Pioneer you don't have it

I think the ideal solution is to let the processor do its job, send the bass managed center to the DWM panel, let it handle freq's from the processor's Xover to its internal Xover (200 hz?) and let it send the rest to the CCx center. As long as the woofer panel and center are in proximity to each other, relatively in the same plane, they should be mostly in phase and that allows you to maintain all the benefits of subwoofer EQ, whether in the AVR or an ext unit. If you set the AVR's Xover higher than the DMW's low freq response, then < 40 hz would be sent to the sub anyway. I don't see how anyone could say that is not only easier to do but closer to being ideal.

If you haven't missed sub EQ, it's because you don't have it in your Pioneer Not being contrary, just saying.

IIRC, Magnepan had downplayed the role of room correction with their speakers anyway...one has to wonder if they have done so out of necessity rather than objective analysis

Remember, I've used Maggies for over 30 years and have talked with Wendell Diller (very approachable, nice guy for owners to speak with) so it's not like I'm unfamiliar with how to set them up

I'm not being contrary for the sake of it I'm trying to raise legit issues. If you & others can explain where I'm missing something, I'll listen. I'm trying to learn here.

All this came about from me talking about how to do heights, and ended up with considering a better center speaker.

Originally Posted by DonH50

I am not sure I followed all of this so not sure exactly what technique, purdyd... I tried the Magnepan bass management scheme and did not care for it. It was a brief test as that is not how I planned to set mine up. I have historically had an active crossover to the sub and that's what I have now so I am not using the sub output. My suggestion, and what I would dearly like to do myself, is to put my CC3 on top of the CC speaker-stand woofer, just don't have space in my current setup.

Sorry if I missed the boat; I'll have more time to read through tonight or tomorrow (taking a fast lunch break between meetings at work).

Originally Posted by ss9001

that would be great! looking forward to your observations.

in the meantime, after I've done my own in-store audition, I'd be happy to post my own impressions on the CCR & stand combo. They will only apply to that room, of course.

Originally Posted by DonH50

My suggestion, and what I would dearly like to do myself, is to put my CC3 on top of the CC speaker-stand woofer

Originally Posted by purdyd

I could still use an external sub equalizer

Originally Posted by ss9001

essentially, Don, that's what I'm thinking of as the budgetary compromise. at least to start with.

unfortunately Magnepan designed the CCR stand so that the combined height with the center is too tall for use with flat panels on most stands, since the screen will typically be only 22-24" off the floor. Wall mounted flat panels and projection screens - it's a perfect idea.

the DWM panel or the DWM-1 furniture looking panel, is what I was considering for my Kuro setup, just sit it on the floor in front of the stand, behind the plane of the fronts.

I could use the CC stand by itself but it might be weird looking with nothing sitting on top

Originally Posted by purdyd

Do you have a crossover for the center and if so, where does the bass go?

Originally Posted by DonH50


No, the center is hooked conventionally and is a "small" speaker to the AVR. As I said, that is it's biggest drawback. Fortunately, most of the deep bass is replicated in the L/R and LFE channel (which in my setup also goes to the L/R mains) so I didn't really notice the lack when I switched from a full-range'ish center to the CC3. In fact, I kind of wonder because the sound seems much better with the CC3 despite the lack of bass; perhaps because I don't have the extra center bass to deal with. I dunno'...

.

Set the processor center channel for small center channel speaker. If your processor provides variable crossover points for small center channel speaker, try crossover points between 100-200 Hz. Set the processor for large left/right speakers (if you have Magneplanar on-wall speakers, such as MMG Ws or MC1s, set the processor for small left/right speakers.

Set the processor for no subwoofer. Even if you are using a subwoofer, you will get better performance from your MMG C by using the no subwoofer setting on the processor. If you want an explanation for this unusual set up procedure, please call Magnepan. Connect your subwoofer to the left/right preamp outputs of your receiver or processor.

Set the subwoofer crossover points to the lowest frequency setting. Move the crossover point slowly to a higher frequency as you are listening to music. When the subwoofer overlaps with the Magneplanar, the bass will become muddy. When this happens, lower the crossover point.

Originally Posted by ss9001


maybe...

but we do it all the time with subwoofers so not sure why this would be any different

I'm really looking for someone who actually has used a M-L e-stat center with maggies and can objectively describe how well it worked for them.

not that I don't appreciate your response

Originally Posted by DonH50

Found it. Here is what Magnepan suggests:

The difference between this and my setup (I do not know about yours) is that I am not connecting the sub the L/R outputs, summing them to mono for the sub. My subs are stereo, in parallel with the mains. I prefer to keep the subs stereo, though that goes against today's convention. I'm an old dog, decided upon this scheme ages ago, and simply stuck with it.

I did try Magnepan's scheme and prefer mine. I prefer to take the LF load off my Maggies, and I prefer stereo subs. That said, today's crossovers are typically steeper than the ones I used years ago, meaning less localizable sound from the sub. I did not try summing the crossover's outputs to the sub (no need in my setup, and I am tired of fiddling with the system -- I hardly have time to listen to it now, let alone muck around with it more).

Either scheme gets around the whole bass management issue as the AVR will send the bass and LFE to the large L/R speakers.