Just a note: The 2.7's were a "QR" (quasi-ribbon) designated speaker, like the 1.6's. The 2.6R however did have the true ribbon tweeter. From what I unerstand, the biggest fundamental difference between the 3.6 and earlier 3-series iterations is that it features mid and pass panels driven from both the front and back instead of just one side. There is no reason I can think of why the quasi-ribbon tweeter would be any easier (or harder) to integrate with the other panels than the true ribbon tweeter, but it will not offer the same extension, dispersion, and speed. None of which means the 1.6's won't sound good.
Comparison of Magnepan 1.6QR to the 3.3R
I'm looking for observations from anyone who's had the chance to audition these two speakers. I've listened to the 1.6 and 3.6 and liked the clarity, bass response and overall sound of the 3.6. I'm wondering if the 3.3 performs anywhere near as well. The 1.6 was very satisfying though and I could be happy with its sound.
The room I'll be using them in is 15' x 30' with 7'3" ceiling, a finished basement, and I plan to match the source components to the speakers.
If price was not an issue, which would you buy? I'm planning to listen to the 3.3s but it requires a long drive which I'd like to avoid. Thanks.
The room I'll be using them in is 15' x 30' with 7'3" ceiling, a finished basement, and I plan to match the source components to the speakers.
If price was not an issue, which would you buy? I'm planning to listen to the 3.3s but it requires a long drive which I'd like to avoid. Thanks.
- ...
- 15 posts total
- 15 posts total