2. speakers
  3. 1355912322

Magico V3 with tubed amplification, will it work ?

Hello There,
I'm planning to upgrade my old Thiel 3.6 speakers.

I was considering Von Schweikert VR5 Anniversary, really liked then, divine soundstage, great transparency. But I have heard Magico Mini on some audio show, I have never heard anything like this, they sounded different then anything else, so involving, truthful, I was captivated literally... For me they bettered all speaker I have heard so far. (I know that they do not have slam of Wilson speakers). But price $20.000 for mini monitors, that is insane.
But, now I have noticed that V3 can be bought for $12.000, which is about as much I could afford. And V3 will have better dynamics and more bass which is all I would need.
I have talked with former Magico dealer and he told me that Magico will not work with 100W tube amplifier (Supratek Burgundy) or Clayton M100 (class A 100W) which I own.
He basically told me that I need strong 300W of solid state power from Spectral, ML, Krell, Ayre to make them sing. With 100W he claimed they will sound dull uninvolving.
I do not want to change amps so I’m in quandary. He was trying to convince me that Wilson Sasha is better choice and they are easy to drive and 100W will do just fine.
I’m not sure if this is genuine advice or just dealer talk, he is selling Wilson Audio now.
How can Sasha be easy load if it drops to 1.8ohm ? I’m not convinced, so I'm looking for second opinion. I heard on numerous occasions WATT/Puppy in shortcut huge soundstage big bass, but was never captivated by music the way I was with Magico. Hence my question:
Have anybody been using V3 with tube amplification ? Can Magico be successfully driven by 100W tube amp ?
sorlowski
ebm
9,311 posts
 
Razmika,Whow your so smart Dude!!
peterayer
1,382 posts
 
Don't know what Ebm means, but Razmika's post makes a lot of sense. The Magico V3 is pretty inefficient and I would certainly listen to them with tube amps before I committed to buying them.
madfloyd
411 posts
 
My opinion based on owning the V2s and having heard the V3s a few times is that a very powerful SS is the way to go.

My V2s sounded uninspired with not just tube amps, but even a tube pre in the mix. The midrange on these speakers are very lush and do not need tubes (again, imo).
atmasphere's avatar
atmasphere
11,743 posts
 
Not really, physics is still physics, even in audio. Size/efficiency/extension are entwine.

Razmika, you might want to read this:
http://www.atma-sphere.com/Resources/Paradigms_in_Amplifier_Design.php

Physics is indeed physics! It is a simple fact for example, that no speaker needs more than 20:1 for a damping factor in the amp. But there are some speakers that 1:10 is preferred and you read that correctly.

It depends on the speaker- some have very high Q factor (that physics thing again) and thus cannot be properly driven by an amp that is 'high current'.

Your example of the port is not entirely accurate! If one is using the Power Paradigm the port might be tuned a good half octave lower to take advantage of the amplifier's power response. I can point to numerous other examples.
sciencecop
180 posts
 
Mr. Karsten, are you disputing Anthony Hoffman’s (the H in KLH) Iron Law? You know; the one that says that with high efficiency speakers you can either have low bass or small size but not both. If you do, I would like to read more about it.
Neutrally your arguments are placed out of your agendas and therefore should be taken in the right context. For example; in order to create a bass reflex or acoustic suspension loudspeakers that falls under your “Power Paradigm rule” you will have to flatten their impedance curve, right? To do so you will need to create electrical “impedance traps” in the speakers XO network. That will create all sorts of other issues and will make the end results sound like crap even though they are operating under the "Power Paradigm rules" (Phase anomalies, group delay etc.). Not here to argue with anyone so that will be my only comment on the subject.
More to discover