Yes, Q5 is quite demanding but Q3? OK, Lamm M2.2 in low impedance mode with 220 watts into 4 ohms have absolutely no problem driving it (ok it is a hybrid). My local dealer tried Rogue monoblocks (120w, 150w? I can't remember exactly, into 8 ohms)and it also drives Q3 beautifully. My friend also tried Air Tight 90 watts monoblock with Q3 and it works like a charm. Personally I doubt the 10-20 watts SET would be able to handle Q3 well but good 100 watts tube amps are not out of the question for sure. Q7 is definitely easier to drive than Q3/Q5. I have not heard them with tube amps yet but with Soulution monoblocks, the volume was set quite a bit lower than Q3 ( abotu 40 vs almost 60 on volume dial). Plinius SA Reference in class A mode (100 watts) also work extremely well with Q3. I was the first person in my group to get Magico and now, I have 2 other friends with Q3 and one with Q5 so I definitely get to hear them with several different amps. Q5 is definitely harder to drive but with Q3 and now Q7, Magico does not automatically require super amps anymore. In fact my Lamm M2.2 have more difficult time driving Usher Be-20 than Q3 in my room. |
It appears that Elberoth2 is using a Dartzeel amplifier to drive his Wilson speakers. Neither of these speakers would be considered an 'easy' load. |
Elberoth2- Yes, the Sasha, with a minimum value of 2 ohms at 86Hz, and 43° phase angle at 61Hz (Practically a short) is a breeze...
Keep spinning the myth, but the truth is that none of these Qs are any more difficult to drive then the Wilsons. On the contrary... |
Usermanual - the Q3, and especialy the Q5, are very difficoult to drive. Their very comlex crossovers may be part of it. I'm not sure if any tube amp will drive them properly, not to mention 27W SET Ongaku or Nagra 845.
I have heard them many times, always with powerful SS amps. YMMV. |
Lets get with it Dudes man up!!!!!! |
A Stereo system better than Carnegie Hall,not in this lifetime dude. |
My apologies for double posting. I thought AG has missed the first one as it was not posted after 12 hours.
BTW, for what I consider is a balance view on the differences between these two companies, you can read JF Amati Futura review on:
http://www.ultraaudio.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=225:embracing-old-and-new-sonus-faber-amati-futura-loudspeakers&catid=44:feature-articles&Itemid=37 |
Hmmmm....live music, as far as Jazz is concerned, I guess not. Let see, I went to an opera last night, will attend a piano recital this coming Thursday and a chamber concert next weekend. Does that count as live music? Oh, I also practice on my grand piano pretty much daily. Surely it can't be live music. How else could I also enjoy listening to my Q3 so much?
Anyhow, there will never be a single speaker brand that is universally love. At least I don't patronize people who enjoy speakers that I don't like. |
I want to hear weasels in carnegie hall.
"rzzzzz" |
Au contraire, mon frère. Maestro David Robertson has asked to use my system for the May 20th performance at Carnegie Hall because he feels it sounds much more lifelike than the MET orchestra. I will be playing the following pieces....
MOZART Adagio in E Major, K. 261
MENDELSSOHN Violin Concerto
SCHOENBERG Violin Concerto, Op. 36
and as a special treat, I will play the entire Mothers Of Invention LP "Weasels Ripped My Flesh". It should be a very special evening. |
Wow Jwm, you are so lucky. I (and I am sure all Magico fans) have never heard live music before.
Elberoth2,
I bet you never heard the Q3/5 with a Nagra 845 or, even better (Looks like) an Ongaku?? Try putting a big SS amp on your speakers, see how much you like them. You are showing a "quite nice" room response with a FR 30db down at 10K?!! With these kind of preferences, you should refer making any judgments on anything you have not heard in your own room. |
I go to Carnegie call 15 or more times a year no stereo can do this i agree. |
Audiofreak32 I am just used to live music. I go to jazz venues at least once a month and the symphony and Magico's aren't even close. |
Assuming I could afford them (bad assumption currently with two kids still to go to college) before I would make a final judgement on their value/performance, I would have to hear them on some different systems.
I think even my modest Minimus 7s would have sounded fantastic (limited bass extension assumed of course) on the rigs I have heard the Magicos on. |
Elberoth2,
I bet you never heard the Q3/5 with a Nagra 845 or, even better (Looks like) an Ongaku?? Is that what it took making your Wilson's musical? You are showing a "quite nice" room response were your FR is 30db down at 10K?!! With these kind of preferences, you should refer making any judgments on anything you have not heard in your own room. |
I don't know if Magicos are better of SF. I don't
know if they are more or less musical than other
speakers. All I know is that my Q5 are playing right
now and they are fantastic.
Greetings from Switzerland. Sergio |
If you cant afford MAGICO thats ok Dude. |
|
Apples to apples (spending a given amount of $$$ and the same electronics), I do not understand how anyone could choose any Magico over SF. Maybe you guys need some Q-Tips?
You could put a very nice sounding system together for what just the Magico monitors cost. Makes no sense |
Happened that my speaker right after Strads was the Mini2..
In general, if one prefers to hear more of speakers--Strads (beautiful, musical).
If one wants to hear more of electronics/recordings--Mini2 (honest, transparent).
Guess I eventually grew tired of that cloaking sameness after two plus years living with Strads. The Minis as I recalled, managed to bring more surprises to the table. Imo, both could be just as musically rewarding when dialed-in right--'balancing' is key. |
Whow lighten up boys.MAGICO MINI 2 is still a wonderful speaker more musical than Q1 but thats my take.There are many wonderful speakers out there Yg does not do it for me. |
IMO the best sounding Magicos were the little V2s. The M5s were also good, but very expensive. Somehow the new Q3/Q5 sound too analytical and too sterile for my taste. |
I heard larger Magico also once at a show for comparison in a YG demo. I heard nothing that would warrant describing them as not musical. This was on a different system with SS amp I believe. The sound was much different than the Minis with the good tube gear. Both were very good but different. I suspect in general what is upstream will make a huge difference. Hard to categorize what good speakers sound like accurately without hearing them in multiple different scenarios. Speakers make no sound by themselves. |
Audiofreak and Jwm, I know what you are saying, and I've heard Magicos sound analytical and fatiguing and not like music. If you consider that "audiophile", that's fine. However, I've also heard them sound just as Mapman describes. Very "Musical" with a capital M, as in sounds like music that I could listen to all day long. I've also heard SF speakers sound wonderful.
I think it has a lot to do with matching the equipment and the room and proper set up. No speaker is perfect and most sound different depending on how they are set up. |
Magico Mini 2 was reference standard musical when I heard them play an orchestral string recording off VAC amp, VTL pre-amp, DCS source and high end Nordost wires. Very detailed smooth and musical all at once.
Performance with other kinds of music with large macrodynamic swings was still very good a speaker that size but not reference standard.
Of course the Magico's did not do this all by themselves. The stuff feeding them upstream were undoubtedly a big part of the "magic". OTher very good speakers might have done similarly well and perhaps even better in some regards like macrodynamics. Microdynamics/transients were benchmark standard though so I know they can do it. |
Jwm,
Many would agree with your impression. Two very different approaches.I`ll always prefer musical realism rather than 'audiophile' genre accuracy(artificial). |
He we go again. We have the audiophiles who like Magico and the music lovers who listen to live music and like the Fabers. I have heard Magico's many times and yes they are an audiophile speaker. Do they sound like live music which is warm and natural hell no. |
Good analogy Peterayer. Love them both and could live with either!
Slicing in-between, sport cruisers the likes of Bentley or Aston could be great options too--or even Bugatti if money no object. But until such time, a Hyundai will suffice getting me to places.. ;p |
For around $45k, the Sonus Faber Strads simply TRASH the $88k Magico speakers that I heard IN EVERY WAY POSSIBLE. If you are comparing a sub $50k speaker, there is no comparison between SF and Magico. Magico are dry sounding, non-involving and way over priced. |
Magico: Ferrari. Sonus Faber: Rolls Royce. Do you want to feel the road or travel in comfort? Both can be excellent. Both can be expensive. |
"Wow $165k should be WOW!!"
You would think! |
People who like Sonus Faber sound is unlikely to like Magico as they have very different sound and there is nothing wrong with that. Personally, I would take Q7 over Aida any day (if I have the money and yes, I heard both and also the limited edition the Sonus Faber and I would take Q7 over that as well). For what it's worth, another friend had extended audition of Q3 and Sonus Faber Amati Futura (I think, in the US it is a bit cheaper than Q3 but over here they are pretty much the same price) in his home and went with Q3. |
Magico sleakers are wonderful its personnel taste Sonus Faber are good as well. |
Everybody must jump on Q7 NOW to keep Wolf in business. |
Very OVER RATED and OVER PRICED... I heard so many Sonus Faber speakers trash the Magico at less cost. |
+1. Heard them in Munich at Life-Like. I stayed for 3 hours. It was hard to leave, so magical the experience was... After 2 days at the main show, it was a real treat. |
I just heard Q7 at my local dealer. Mind you the speakers were just unpacked 2 days ago, still on rollers and have not yet been set up properly so I am sure they can do much more than what I heard. My first impression on vocal music was that the tonal balance, as expected were along the same line as Q5, Q3 but bigger, more detail. I thought big deal, at more than three times the price of my Q3, no thanks. However, I ran Q7 through big symphonic pieces, vocal music, pop etc and Q7 became rather addictive in its effortlessness. There was nothing forced, no strain, music was just produced naturally, nothing mechanical at all. The room I heard was about 5x8m. Q7 was driven by Soulution big monoblocks/pre, TW Acoustic/Reed/Miyajima and Rega top CD player. I'll wait a week or so then I will give it another listen. Luckily, it is way out of my budget so I don't have to think much about it. For what it's worth, Q7 impressed me a lot more than the big YG that I heard on 2 separate occasions. While it is not quite as exciting and attention grabbing as when I heard the big Scaena (the one with 2 double subwoofer, around $120,000 pricetag, I think), Q7 really grows on me very quickly and it would be the speakers I would own if bank account and the floor in my apartment would accommodate! |
Heard the wooden horns in NYC in the HighWater Sound room. Great room, fun
people, super music. Very vintage and flavored sound. YG and Magico attempt
to be more neutral and transparent, which to me sounds more like acoustic
music. Others find it too analytical and sterile. Impressions indeed. |
Heard YG at NYC show not impessed!! |
04-17-12: Soundcomponents
If you want to spend that kind of money on speakers, it would be crazy not to really look at it and learn about the Rockport Arrakis. ...
...and the other usual suspects, the WIlson Alexandria X-2 or XLF, the YG Anat III Signature, Focal Grand Utopia, EM, etc. $180,000 expenditure could easily justify a few plane rides and road trips for auditions. |
If you want to spend that kind of money on speakers, it would be crazy not to really look at it and learn about the Rockport Arrakis. It is an incredibly well engineered, complete loudspeaker. No black magic - just really solid engineering and design leads to perhaps the greatest dynamic speaker being built today. |
Wow $165k should be WOW!! |
Wolf, that's hilarious!
You can have a sign "will work for front end and amps!" |
"there has to be somebody out there who plans to drive Q7s with a hyper expensive "custom made by a little man in the rural mountains of Japan who smelts the metal for the wire for his handwound transformers" tiny triode amps that put out 2 "glorious single ended class A tube" watts. "
That sounds cool! Gotta have that! |
If I sell everything and get Q7s, it would be just me in a cardboard box under the freeway with my Q7s. Also, regarding the speaker sensitivity issue, there has to be somebody out there who plans to drive Q7s with a hyper expensive "custom made by a little man in the rural mountains of Japan who smelts the metal for the wire for his handwound transformers" tiny triode amps that put out 2 "glorious single ended class A tube" watts. Who is that Q7 owner? I know you're out there.... |
I never meant to say there is any issue ;-) |
Stereotaipei,
I don't need to be arguing with anyone in order to express an opinion do I?
I think all you just did was say what I've said in a different way.
Why is this an issue? |
Prdprez,
Nobody argued that there is not strong family sound between Q5 and Q7. I listened to both (to the Q7 only in poor CES conditions) and came up with the conclusions that Q7 sounds even more dynamic, with a broader imaging. Of course, also more extended in the bass,but this was not really an advantage in an hotel room with significant room resonances. |
Sell everything jump on Q7. |
Usermanual,
The vertical symmetrical array is not what gives the boost, per se. It's the doubling up of drivers. Depending on where the microphone is set-up when measuring, the location of those drivers is irrelevant.
Even then, it's only 3dB, not 6dB.
VSAs do achieve their optimal performance at the point where all the drivers integrate. For the Dunlavy, this was 10ft. Even so, you're only talking about -1dB differences when measuring significantly closer than this.
With regards to Magico, changing to stronger magnets (This is precisely what higher grades of neodymium does.) does not change eddy currents so much. It's the shape of the magnet and it's structure that effect this. Stronger magnets are useful in 1)overcoming heavier diaphragms, 2)Overcoming stiffer compliance of driver suspension. Thats it.
Even so, comparing the Q5 and the Q7, the only obvious difference is a slightly larger Midbass unit as well as a pair of larger woofers. Ie. the Q7 is moving more air than the Q5. This by itself does not equate to the significantly increased sensitivity. For a given driver, heavier (Ie. larger) diaphragm = lower sensitivity. Thus the need for stronger magnets.
Regardless, none of this has to do with my point. The point of my last entry was the relative ignorance of the press which seemed was assigning cause/effect relationships regarding the Q7 that were more or less not relevant.
I have not doubts that the Q7 is better than the Q5, in an overall sense. But, as I originally stated, I believe these differences are probably more relative to the associated room and it's bass coupling, not breakthroughs in driver technology and what not. The two speakers are still going to sound more similar in sound than not. |
