Magnepan 3.7

Kapton is much stronger than Mylar and being that it is stronger you can make the panels much thinner making them lighter, you made some good points, i wonder why magnepan didn't make the whole panels quasi back then, maybe they felt that the cost would be to high, you have to remember that back in 69 they didn't have the equipment to easily make the panels like they do today and it probably would have cost a fortune to make the speaker full quasi.

I was looking for the source that said that Mylar was less resonant than Kapton, but couldn't find it. I did find an old post from Mart at Planar Asylum to the effect that Magnepan uses Mylar because it's less expensive.

By the way, I just saw the price of the Genesis 1.2 -- $235,000! Guess I won't be using them for surround. :-)

I finally got to hear the 3.7s and have to say, after hearing Wilson's and Avalons In the last month, when it comes to low level resolution at least, the Maggie Ribbon kills both. Of course just one man's opinion.

Listening to Diana Kralls "look of love" cd, track 5 "cry me a river" you hear the pressure of the drummer's brushes change as it swirls around snare and call follow the circular motion.

For 5500 I think they are an audio steal and always sound musical. So much so I am finally going to upgrade my bi-amped, MGIIIAs. Will likely add at least one JL Audio sub to replace my current old velodynes because let's be honest the Maggie's will only go so low and if you want true low bass a sub is needed. Since I can not bi-amp the 3.7s i may used the Marchand I have to set up 3 different bass crossover points and slopes.

I haven't heard the 20.7 yet but 3.7s with twin subs is going to be hard to beat by the 20.7 which will cost more by itself than the 3.7/subs combo

Also, perhaps I am lucky but I have never experienced delamination on the IIIAs and I am the original owner and have had them over 20 years.
With my original MGIIBs they has warnings about not having them in direct sunlight but again never experience it with the MGIIIAs

Mike

Mike, I couldn't agree more. I auditioned a lot of speakers and I thought the 3.7's easily played in the Wilson's league. Let's see, $5500 or $17000? Gee, that's a tough decision.

I'm also intrigued by how the 3.7's with subs would stack up against the 20.7's. At the time I bought the 3.7's, the 20.7's were only a rumor, and I ruled them out based on fears about my room being to small. But, based on how much better the 3.7's integrate with my room that my 1.6's did, I wonder if I should rethink that assessment.

Magnepan has just hit it out of the park with the 3.7's in my opinion.

I also listened to to 20.1 but am buying the 3.7 although I may wait to hear the 20.7 or insist on full trade in.

The 20.1 will go deeper but using subs with 3.7 takes away any advantage in that area acknowledging that sub choice ans set up are critical.
Sound stage is slightly larger but seems to me at least some of that is little bigger physical size.

To my ear even the 20.1 has that "I can hear the crossover point and mild grain" between ribbon and midrange. I can and have lived with it since I had owned Maggies for over 25 years, but this is virtually absent in the 3.7 so while the 20.7 might beat the 3.7 I will take the 3.7s with a pair of JL Audio F 112s over the 20.1 and that set up is almost 11k and I can have the dealers demo 20.1 for that

I appreciate opinions will differ but n this guys opinion, the ".7 series" eliminates a flaw I have always heard in Maggie ribbon/mid coherency and for that alone I am buying 3.7 and passing and passed on 20.1

Mike