hi cwlondon:
i think the stacked quad esls stomps on all magnepans, as far as creating a more realistic timbre and the quads , within their range, are less inaccurate. |
Dsper
Is the "front wall" the long or short wall? This will make a significant difference if you are able to experiment.... |
This is an interesting discussion to which I would like to ask a question.
When is a room big enough for 3.7's?
I upgraded to 1.7's from 1.2's and heard a world of improvement. Due to room size and physical set up, I do not think that I am getting all the sound stage and depth of field out of the 1.7's.
This indicates to me that the 3.7's would work even less well.
Does my reasoning make sense or does it expose my ignorance?
Please help me to understand room size better.
My room is 15 feet wide and 35 feet long with 8 foot ceilings. The speakers are four feet from the front wall and, due to WAF, the listeing seat is about thirteen feet from the same wall. I cannot move the listening spot further back.
Thanks. |
You have to evaluate the line up as Magnepan views their customers and what they believe are the customer's respective budgets. The 3 series is a compromised design based on what Magnepan believes most customers will bring to the table in terms of equipment quality and room size at the $5K price point. The one series a couple of notches below that. IMHO Magnepan has much less interest in the 20.1 than in the other models because it's too expensive and too demanding of both space and equipment for the average Magnepan buyer, nor does it have the cache to capture the blank check gotta have the latest and most expensive TAS approved gear, Magico comes to mind. The 20.1 exists because Magnepan needs a flagship product and a means of retaining the generally few customers who want to move up the line. Used sales don't count as far as Magnepan is concerned. However, I do believe that the 20.1 will likely get the all QR treatment if for no other reason than to standardize production techniques and materials. Whether or not they revise the crossover is another matter. |
See my earlier post. Seems logical but I've heard it's not imminent... |
We have a 1.7 and 3.7 so is a 20.2 in the works/soon? |
I believe the 3.7 is Magnepan's current sweet spot and 20.1 is their statement speaker.
Big enough room, wallet and amp then the "no regrets move" is the 20.1. Either would bring lots of musical enjoyment. Good luck and please update as you choose. |
Thanks Macdad, that's what I'm thinking but without the ability to compare, it's hard to be sure. |
"What I am trying to figure out is if the 3.7s are truly so good as to be very close to the 20.1s or whether that's maybe a little bit of overstatement generated by the excitment over a very good new speaker ... "
it's good, but you hit the nail on the head with this assesment |
No, not at all. I'm interested in a comparative assessment. I need to make a decision & I am not in a position to compare them personally. What I am trying to figure out is if the 3.7s are truly so good as to be very close to the 20.1s or whether that's maybe a little bit of overstatement generated by the excitment over a very good new speaker ... |
Interesting.
Again, hoping my post doesn't take anything away from the 20.1s. They are superb with stellar amplification and a large room where they can breathe and listening chair is far enough back to enjoy the enormous sound/stage they offer. Best most articulate dynamics and bass I have heard. |
Thanks Podeschi. FWIW, & contrary to expectations, I've heard there isn't likely to be a 20.1 update in the near future - in that significant improvements (Magnepan's criteria for producing a new model) would be difficult to achieve. Of course, that's just what I was told ... |
My room and listening distance isn't big enough to accommodate the 20.1s. Budget isn't a determining factor either. In addition, I preferred the way the treble coordinated and integrated with rest of the range in the 3.7s the most. If I could have the dynamics and low end of the 20.1s with the integrated non-forward "to image scale" sound of the 3.7s in a 3.7 footprint, that would be perfect for me. I'm not saying the 3.7 is a better speaker than the 20.1. I'm saying for my ears and my room and my preferences, I preferred the sound of the 3.7 over any Maggie I have heard. And before anyone says I didn't hear the 20.1s set up correctly. They were set up by a Maggie dealer who spent about 4 hours moving them 1/4" at a time to dial them in. They sounded amazing. A great speaker. I can't wait to see what the next version does. That will be one I likely trade up to. |
I have owned Magneplanars on and off since I was in high school in 1979.
They are wonderful, but need power and are extremely sensitive to room placement.
So a well set up 1.7 might also outperform the 20's. Indeed, a well set up MMG might outperform the 20's in certain situations, neither of which says anything about the value of 3.7s. |
Thanks for your input folks. I have sufficent amplification & a suitable sized room - & was leaning towards purchasing a pair of 20.1s. I just haven't had the chance to compare them to the 3.7s & wondered whether the 3.7s were as close in performance as some people seem to be suggesting. |
Both require a lot of power, 300wpc to start, of quality power unless dynamics do not matter or your room is small, a hardwood floor etc. The 3.7 is a big slice of the 20.1, but not the whole pie. Close enough though that a well set up 3.6 ,3.7 will outperform a poorly set up 20.1. |
Before we digress, I suggest
Magnepan 3.7's versus 20.1's versus Tympani IVa's
please.
I would think the 3.7s will be a distant third to both. |
|
That made no sense. Are you saying you think the 3.7 is better, or you can't afford the 20.1 so you bought the 3.7?
There is no comparison. The 20.1 is a much, much better speaker. A used 20.1 in perfect shape, is a much better deal than a new 3.7. |
My brother owns the 20.1 driven by top of the line Audio Research amps, preamps, etc. It sounds amazing. SOTA in dynamics, accurate powerful bass, speed, transparency, etc. However, for my room, preferred budget and my listening preferences, I actually prefer the 3.7, and just bought a pair. The 3.7s are the only Magnepans I've heard that keep all the Maggie traits I love (speed, transparency, dynamics, scale, immediacy, etc.) but also solve some of the traits that kept me from buying any of the Maggies for my system. The 3.7s strike me as being the most balanced from top to bottom (e.g., when I heard 1.7s and even my brother's 20.1s it seemed the center of gravity was in the treble region, whereas 3.7s don't sound tipped up or aggressive in the upper regions....TO MY EARS). The 3.7s also keep a large sound stage but put the performers and instruments to a more reasonable scale (no more 20 foot tall singers or 12 foot saxaphones). In addition, the 3.7s are the first Maggies I've heard where low level listening didn't come across as less than stellar. The 20.1s are amazing, and I can't imagine what the next version of those will sound like, but for my ears, I voted with my wallet for the 3.7s...and I could have splurged and bought the 20.1s. I think to get the most of the 20.1s one needs massive amplification and a very good sized room. |
yes, the 20.1 is deeper, more coherent, and throws off a much larger soundstage.
that said, the 3.7 is stellar, but the 20.1 is one of the finest speakers ever produced by any measure.
I've read a few threads where people said they would buy the 3.7 over the 20.1, and that's just talking your book. No way, no how. |
