Soundlabs and magnepan mix on front stage?????

Dave,

The three 3.6 Maggies on the link I put in my above response had the center 3.6 laying down sideways which would give a great soundstage that is 2 ft. tall and six feet wide. MYE makes the stands for the center 3.6 to lay down sideways. I thought it would make a great center channel, was hoping someone out there had the setup and could remark on it.

My real concern wasn't the viability of going 100% planar for the listening/theater room as much as using the soundlabs for the right and left and using the Maggies (different manufacture and technology) as a blend.

My first concern was that the titan wasn't strong enough to push the soundlabs with 200W at 8 ohms.

Second concern was that the blend of soundlab and maggie wouldn't work well.

Third concern was that the maggies are 4 ohms and the soundlabs are 8. I thought the "gain" of the speaker through it's volume range would be different enough to throw off the balance of the left and right vs. center channel. Also, being different manufactures, the efficiency will be different potentially further throwing off the balance but I may be wrong on how the amp/speaker relationship works.

Oh, BTW, I will be running an IB setup for the sub so that is taken care of.

If I decided to can the 3.6 for the center channel, Magnepan does make a nice center channel. That is always a fall-back!

Thanks again,

Lance

Lance,

Your proposed system makes more sense if you are running the Maggie 3.6 center sideways.

But your concern about amplification is valid. Yes, of course 200 watts will drive the Soundlabs but if their efficiency is in the mid 80's you might run out of gas on the power peaks, especially if they present an odd resistive/capacitive load like some ESL's do.

I don't know how large your room is or how loud you like to listen, but I would think you'd be limited to moderate volume levels if your room is large. If you have the opportunity to audition the Sim amp with the Sound Labs that should tell you quite a bit. Sometimes it's difficult to guess which amps will work well with a particular speaker.

It seems like an uphill battle to me and that is the reason for my earlier off-the-cuff comments. But good luck; I hope it works out for you.

Lance,

Interesting idea. Let me correct a misconception. The nominal impedance of the SLs may be 8 ohms, but it's VERY far from a flat impedance curve. You're looking at 40-50 ohms in the mids, dropping to about 2 ohms at 20 kHz. It is not a nice load, but I would expect the Sim to be able to handle it. 200 solid state watts is marginal. Also, unless these particular A-3s have the PX panels, they will not be as efficient and you'll be asking a comparatively small panel to do the midbass(?) and up in a home theater. Honestly, I'm not trying p!ss on your parade, and I LOVE my A-1PXs, but I'm not at all sure I'd want them in a theater setup.

As for the differences in efficiency and impedance between the SLs and a Maggie, I'm not real sure that I follow. Your processor is capable of setting relative volume for each individual channel, isn't it? Properly balanced that way, even the nasty impedance slope of the A-3s shouldn't be a problem unless you're getting frequency effects from amp/speaker interaction.

One question, since the center channel is largely for voice, could you get away with something much smaller - like an MMG maybe? I'm far from an HT expert, so maybe I'm just speaking from ignorance.

Hey guys, thanks for the response.

Plato,

No worries, I should have done a better job at explaining that the center 3.6 would be on it's side. My reasoning was that their center channel, the CC3 was selling used for close to a grand. I can buy a pair of 3.6's for around 2,500.00 so the individual speaker wouldn't cost significantly more than a dedicated center channel from maggie. Though i haven't listened to them individually, I am assuming the 3.6 will blow the center channel away in terms of quality and soundstage. I would have to offload the second 3.6 or try and find a "single" out there somewhere, but I am convinced I can find one.

The Sim is rated at "only" 200W but it doubles down as you drop so it will run 400W at 4 and so on. It's strong and has been used with the maggies by more than a few AVS members who claim it's praises.....but your right...listening to the package would be ideal. The nearest maggie dealer from me here in Michigan is 3 hours away and doesn't carry sim. The nearest soundlab dealer is also 3 hours away (in the other direction) and doesn't carry sim either (or maggie). Listening to this proposed system may be tough so I was going off the knowledge of a few fellow members that had experienced the system.

Thank you for the load explanation on the SL's. I understand it now so the matching of the components shouldn't be an issue. The amp should push the SL's pretty well. Maybe not Wolcott, CAT or parasound halo well, but well. I don't need it to break the sound barrier.

For the processor I am planning on purchasing an Proceed AVP2 + 6 with the blueray player that has analog outs. This would allow me to run separate analog outs for all the channels to the AVP then balance to the amp.

Curriemt11,

You might be right on the center channel. I am not a theater expert either. The only reason I was leaning towards the larger 3.6's was because the maggies tend to be more directional specific with a relatively small sweet spot. For theater listening, I wanted a large soundstage and sweet spot so that everyone in their respective listening positions could be in the zone instead of being biased to the left or right. That is also the reason that I was leaning toward the SL's. With the curved framework, their dispersion is significantly wider than the maggies.

When I was in Tampa on vacation a few weeks ago, I stopped into Audio Visions South and had an opportunity to listen to their maggies 3.6 setup in a theater. They were using the small dedicated center channel the CC3 and the MGM surrounds and it was amazing. I also had an opportunity to listen to the new Wilsons at a weakening $150,000.00 a pair.....unbelievable, just a bit out of my price range :-) but alot of fun to demo. I believe the maggies or SL's can handle the midbass, at least it seemed to in their setup but I am not sure what power they were running. My sub system, two 18's in an infinite baffle, can run up to 80 htz if I need them to which will help the low end.

The soundlabs are actually more than I wanted to spend originally as is the sim. My next option is to build the system with a pair of SL's and a solid 2-channel amp (parasound JC-1's for example) and just enjoy it with the theater setup in 2 channel mode for a while. That will give me time to get the bugs worked out and get the setup and room treatments right. After that, I can save up and trial a second amp and surround speakers to go with the SL's. If i didn't like the components, I could return them and keep trying till I find the right combination. (sigh). Since I currently don't own any equipment that is worth putting into a system I am starting from scratch. There are so many options out there it isn't easy to start to make a decision. I know I want to go planar (soundlab or maggie).....so far, that is the only confirmed decision I have made. And I will be 60% theater and 40% listening (approx)

Thanks again for all the input.

Just want to add - although expensive this idea isn't so crazy. I'm actually a bit down on surround sound as I haven't seen it do much. I know recently there are more setups and 3/4 digit acronyms that try to separate voice and other noise and send other noise through primary 2 channels, but still. In some systems 98% of the noise comes out of center channel only!

With good electrostatics you get a sort of free (and better in some people's opinions) surround sound already. And to get a surround processor that has the quality of what the speakers we are talking about means more megabucks, not 2,000.

I want to recommend something crazy. And I wouldn't recommend this for lesser systems, but for what you are saying, I want to recommend it.

Get the Soundlabs or 3.6s for your front 2 channels and do that for a while by itself.

Do that for 3 months, and hook up your DVD player (Blu-Ray I hope? Get DMP-BD50 - obsoletes basically every Blu-Ray player available today, comes out in 1/2 months - ironic note that everyone in format war, BR and HD-DVD loose, because BR2.0 is so different and previous BR versions) and put that through super-high quality 2-channel system.

Get used to it. Then add 7.1 or 5.1 or 5.0 or whatever and that ocean of 3 and 4 digit acronyms I can't keep up with, and see if it improves things. I think we are still several years away from it really matching if you spend less than 5k on the pre-processor. One big step forward is the 'lossless' digital transmission system that the BD50 will be one of the first BR 2.0 players to have.

Unless you are getting Lexicon, McIntosh, Krell, etc. you will ruin the sound with El Cheapo preamp. Those high-end AV pre-amps, not sure if they have incorporated the 'lossless' sound transmission the newest BR players will have. You will want to wait until they do in order to integrate all that.

So, this would be my plan for you:

Get 2 channel speakers right now.

In 3 months get DMP-BD50, and use via 2-channel.

In 6 months get, for example, Krell Showcase Processor (or equivalent from similar company) *when* they upgrade it to support, lets see, here are the codecs I was referring to above: Dolby TrueHD or DTS-MA. You absolutely want to wait for that. The super high-end pre-processors take longer to incorporate new technologies - there are 1k and 2k pre-processors that can handle it now, but won't do nearly what Krell Showcase can do.

Then - you will be in a position to see if the surround sound at that level helps as you've been acclimated to the best that 2-channel by itself has to offer with already-enveloping natural surround sound :).

You've also have gone to surround sound with true lossless digital with all D/A happening only once rather than twice or more at very very high DA quality rather than crappy, and you're using a pre-amp that can handle the kind of speakers you are talking about.

If its better, great! If not, and 99% of the info comes from main 2 channels, or if 99% comes from center, or whatever the case, if you don't like it, then there it is and maybe you can take the pre back as you only just bought it.

Do *not* do anyting without Dolby TrueHD or DTS-MA at this time for the level of equipment you are talking about. It seems we are on the verge of a technology plateau where for goodness sakes, after these technologies really come out, we can sit there and let things be. I'm talking about 1080i at 42" and/or 50", 1080p at 50" (at 50" debateable) or 65" and above definitely, HDMI 1.3, BR 2.0, sound via Dolby TrueHD or DTS-MA and please please please let that be the standards for at least 12 months, 3 - 5 years would be even better.

And that said - to your actual question - I think the 3.6 would do great with the Soundlabs and there should be no problem. You might even get away with 1.6, not sure ribbon will help as if you have a 'real' pre-processor then mostly 'dialogue only' will come out of center and the ribbon starts relatively high. Of course, depending on your settings and all that, in many systems I've heard that were supposed to be incredible, 98% of all the noise came from center, but I think those are set up wrong. The more you can verify that more stuff is coming from center, go with 3.6, but if its dialogue only, 1.6 should be fine, ribbon barely comes into play.

People get so excited about surround, about the 3 planes that fly overhead for 2 min of the 2 hr movie, they ignore the fact that the rest of the movie didn't sound that great compared to all that extra money for pre-processor and add'l speakers put into 'real' 2-channel system.