The Official Magnepan Owners Thread - Page 10

Under also tends to be at least partially enclosed within a cabinet and over is usually totally open, which causes a different set of issues.

No matter what you do, there's always an issue!

My set-up was almost identical to Elockett's, right down to the furniture with the CC-3 under the bridge with plasma above and the Casablanca. And here I was thinking I was unique

After reading all this talk about the mmgs I'm really thinking about taking the plunge. I'm thinking of doing 4 MMG-Ws and an MMG-C.

So my question is this, I have a Denon 1909 that I was hoping to use for the HT, it's rated for 6 ohms and it looks like the MMG-Ws are 5 ohms. Does anyone know if the Denon can power them?

I also have an older kenwood VR-3090 which I'm pretty sure can power them, but it doesn't have the video processing that the Denon has, so I was hoping to use the Denon. That also means that if I can convince the gf to let me get some other magnepans for music I can use the kenwood for that.

thoughts?

Not at what most here would consider reasonable levels for HT. But you might be able to live with it.

BTW... I would really recommend spending just a tad more and getting MMG's for the front L&R (as opposed to MMG-W's).

I powered the same set up with a Denon 685 a couple of years ago without any problems, and with enough volume for my tastes. (I do love my Rock'n'Roll). I've since replaced my fronts with MC-1's, which were a HUGE improvement. I'm also using an ONKYO 805 now. Audio heaven for me.

This equipment will be in the family room (TV Room) where we watch movies as a family but nothing near reference levels. We have a bose 3.2.1 GS series system now (not my fault ... I swear, it was that way when I got here ), so I'm guesing almost anything would be an upgrade. We have an energy Take 5 system in the bedroom that gets much louder than I think we need. Do you think the MMG-W's with the 1909 will be able to compare with that from a sound level perspective?

I'm glad that you mentioned the MMG's I was planning on trying them out but I was worried about whether it was even worth it to try and push them with the Denon. I was hoping the gf would be so impressed with the MMG-W's that she would let me put a pair of MMGs with a good amp downstairs in the living room.

I'm running MMGs in the front with a newly added MMG-C in the center and 4 MMG-Ws for surround and rears. I'm using a Yamaha HTR-6090 to run everything but the mains. The 2 MMGs are powered by a pair of Outlaw 200 monoblocks. Before I added the Outlaws, the Yamaha alone was adequate, but I'm getting a little more "punch" now. If your room is not overly large, the 1909 will probably be fine.

Actually, I think a CC3 will perform better than average in this regard given the limited vertical dispersion from its quasi-ribbon (which is why the CC3 manual recommends that the speaker be aimed toward the listener's ears). Further, in my case, the room the Maggies are located in is fully carpeted so it would absorb some of the CC3's sound as well.

I think I'm more concerned about potential discontinuity between screen voices and output from the speaker below the screen.

I'll test this on a ad-hoc stand versus phantom mode in a week or so to see which method works best.

Eric

Excellent BB52: Now I don't feel so bad though in all fairness, not only do I like the look and layout of my CC3 placement, I think it will work out when I get my own home built and can design an optimal screen around my Maggies (probably 2.35:1).

Eric

+1 concerning the MMG recommendation. Though the MMG-Ws are a good value for the price, I'm using MMGs as L+R mains now and can state with confidence that they provide awsome value.

Your Denon doesn't have preouts does it? If memory serves Denon AVR preouts start with the 2000 series. I ask because preouts would allow you to add an external power amp better suited for Maggies at a very reasonable price. There are simply a lot of great deals on MC amps at present (new or used).

Eric

If you can swing the cash and spare the time, buy a pair of each (MMGs and MMG-Ws) and try each as mains with your 1909 to determine which one will serve you best. You will have a 60-day return option on both models.

Eric

There are no pre-outs on the 1909, so I'm limited there. I can always use the kenwood VR-3090 to power the speakers and put the 1909 in the bedroom.

As for trying out both, I have the gf to factor in. This weekend I went to the store to pickup a blu-ray player and came back with a blu-ray, the 1909, and a new TV. If a speaker or two shows up I can probably get away with it, but there's a cooling off period for anything more than that.

Ah, GF politics-I'm all too aware.... However, you could use this to your advantage by buying both pair, telling her upfront that one pair will go back, and because you value her opinion would like her to listen with you to determine which pair stays....

One thing you should both keep in mind (I don't know if this will matter or not) with the MMG-W is that you'll need a sub that's linear to at least 100hz on the upper end of its response (120-150hz would be better still). Not all subs meet this standard. The MMG on the other hand has sufficient bass extension to be musically satisfying on most mainstream content without a sub (exceptions are some large scale orchestral or organ work). Obviously, you'll want a sub for HT with either speaker but the MMG will give you some latitude with regard to the sub's performance and placement in your room.

Eric

I love reading about people who decide to make their first Maggie purchase...no speaker is for everyone, but I know that many people who give Maggies a try will utterly fall in love with them. It reminds me of how I felt when I first discovered them, and I really look forward to hearing about what you guys think once you get them fired up!

Do you think the polk audio PSW10 would pair well with the MMG-W's? I happen to have one laying around. The response on polk's site says 40-160 +/- 3db. If I have to pick something else up, what might you recommend?

Thanks

ryu: Depending on your budget, the subs from ACI are typically very highly regarded by Maggie owners.

Website: http://www.audioc.com/speakers1/speakers.htm
Forum: http://www.audiocircle.com/circles/index.php?board=76.0

There are other brands that blend well, but ACI would be an excellent choice.

I've been happy with my HSU STF-2 with my MMG/MMGC/MMGW arrangement in a 30x13x9 room.

I would certainly recommend trying what you own first. If you're satisfied with the sound-you're done. If you decide to buy a new sub, I'd like to know several things:

• Is your bias more toward music, movies, or a 50/50 split?
• How large is the listening room (and does it open to other rooms)?
• Does cosmetics matter and on a related note, does physical size matter?
• Would you have flexability concerning sub placement in the room (or would it have to be placed in a corner for example)?
• What would your absolute budget limit be for the sub? This doesn't mean you'll have to spend up to this limit but it would be nice to know to limit options.
• Would you be open to used product?

Eric

One more thing: If HT is going to be a priority and you know you'll be playing bombastic content, based on the specs you provided I'm not sure the Polk will provide the lower frequency output you'll want. However, this doesn't necessarily mean that you need to buy a massive bass cannon with sub-20hz output either. Most of the boom-boom energy on movie soundtracks occur between 25-40 hz, so if you decide to buy another sub and can buy something with good output down to at least 30hz (though being greedy 25hz would be better), I think you'll achieve a satisfying result.

Having said all this, I still stand by my recommendation to try the Polk first. Though the low-end spec states 40hz, you'll likely get some extra low end output from natural room gain, even more so if you corner load the sub.

Eric

Because my CC3 may not end up working well for center channel duty do to aforementioned placement issues, I just ordered a pair a 1.6s that will be used as L+R main speakers. My logic behind this (which may or may not be sound), is that the height of the 1.6 drivers is much closer to the height of the screen I'll be using (59" viewable) than the MMG. Thus, if I have to use the 1.6s in phantom mode (TBD), I'll vertically align them to the screen with adjustable floor stands to get a more natural center channel effect. That's the theory anyway. I'll compare this to the CC3 placed below the screen and determine which method works best. If nothing else, it's nice to have options. MMGs will become rear surrounds in a 7.2 setup.

Of course, there are the other minor advantages of increased image height, better power handling and greater bass extension.

I'll post another pic when the screen (which has arrived but has yet to be mounted) and 1.6s are in place.

Eric

Point taken Mrlittlejeans: If using a center speaker works better I can certainly do that. It's just that it's going to look slightly funky because the CC3 will have to go on a stand in front of my cabinet (which ironically was custom configured for the CC3).

Nice!

I'm not familiar with that particular Denon. I'm using a Denon AVR 1800 in the basement to run my 1.6's with a Rotel 1080 as the power amp off the Denon's preouts.

The owners manual warns to NOT hook up any speakers below 6 ohm's and that it will cause damage to the receiver.
Because of that I am not using my MMG's as rear surrounds there (no preouts for the rear on the 1080)

I still have the old pair of Maggie MGI's that I bought way back in 1979. Back then I couldn't afford a good amp, much less a powerful amp. I used to run them with a Yamaha integrated that put out 35 watts/per and they sounded great! I did go through three amps though. Yes it was cheaper/easier to buy a new Yamaha every 2 years than to buy one good amp back then.
All I'm saying is the lower resistance speakers may shorten the life of your Denon.

If your Denon has preouts, as others have suggested buy a used 100 watt power amp and put it in line.

I also echo the idea of getting MMG's for front. In fact, if you are being budget minded, (and you're not into surround sound music)get a cheaper pair of box speakers for the rear surrounds until you can swing the upgrade. There really isn't that much quality rear sound in the content until you get to the SACD, DTS, DVD Audio, 5.1 & up music anyway.

I'm not saying it's not worth doing a whole system with Maggies, No, No, No. What I'm saying is that you'll probably get more out your money with MMG's (or better yet 1.6's) up front and a lesser conventional rear set, than you will by surrounding yourself with the MMG-W's.

I tried 1.6's as my rear surrounds with my 3.6's as fronts, Yes, the quality was fantastic. However, the improvement was most noticed in the music as I mentioned above, and there is precious too little content of that to justify the space sacrifice in the living room. In HT mode, I'm very satisfied with my Klipsch RS42's as rears.

That said, I'm trying to figure out how I can hang my MMG's from the ceiling to replace the Klipschs behind me. Like I said, Maggies ARE better.

I've found just the opposite, I'm hearing better placement WITHOUT a center. True, I was using a mismatched Klipsch RC 52 (designed as a center) with my 3.6's. I think a lot has to do with the room and the Receiver as well.

The only think I've found that "suffers" without the center (but I actually think it is an improvement) is that the voices of the announcers at sporting events usually gets minimized, with the exception of the Daytona 500 where I REALLY wish I could have ELIMINATED the announcers! I don't usually watch Nascar, not that there's anything wrong with that. But I, like the start and the BIG sound when they hit "Crank it Up".

High praise comming from a 3.6 owner

Hopefully I'll join you once I get my permanent residence worked out.

Eric.

HOnestly, bro, I could be very happy living with MMGs in front...Sure, the 3.6s are (much) "more of a good thing", and I'm glad I decided to pull the trigger on them, but the smaller Maggies still give you that Maggie Magic, and when you factor in the price, it's just amazing what you get.

Moving up to the 1.6s with MMGs in back in a 7.2? That would rock!

Last Summer I pulled my 3A's apart to re-lam some wires and make some XOver/wiring upgrades. While they were down, my MMG's had to do "front" duty. These are in custom stands that get them vertical and up (the top of the speaker is about the same height of a 1.6); and I have to say there were some qualities of the MR that bested my 3A's. True they did not have the "slam" of the 3A's... nor the buttery detailed top end of the ribbons, but for 5 or 6 hundred bucks they can be amazing. Much more so than any speaker close to its price (IMHO).

You're preaching to the chior concerning the value the MMG offers. The law of diminisioning returns has been an old axiom in our hobby. As I've stated previously, IMHO, I believe the MMG offers one of the best values in loudspeakers today.

To this end, will the 1.6s "sound" better than the MMGs? Probably not, but they should provide some of the incremental improvements I mentioned previously. The transition from 1.6 to 3.6? I suspect, even less of an improvement given the price difference between the two.

The trick in this hobby is to find the proper balance (which varies with the individual) between performance and price. For me, I think that imaginary line lies somewhere between the 1.6 and the 3.6.

Eric