How do the Magnepan 3.6r compare to the new 1.7

>but room size of 13'x28' is too small.<

Hmmm, seems plenty big enough for me. I had 3.5s in a 15 X 26 room and had no problems. I have seen bigger speakers shoehorned in much smaller spaces than yours.

Shakey

I like both the 1.7 and the 3.6s. I believe that the 1.7s have this smoothness and coherence that I do not hear with the 3.6s. I got to audition the new 3.7s and I found that same smoothness and cohehrence that I heard with the 1.7s but much better. The 3.7 have much clear midrange than all the previous magnepans along with better frequency extremes than the 1.7 and the 3.6s. For difference in money buy the 3.7s They are a giant killer.

Macdadtexas, Some people are more sensitive to a speaker's coherency than others.

FWIW, coherency is a high priority for me. IMHO, in the right room, the 3 series is the sweet spot in the Maggie line up.

Well insofar as the reviewers are concerned, the comments on the 3.6s lack of coherency surfaced primarily in the reviews of the 3.7. Since it's introduction in 1999 the 3.6 was heralded by these same reviewers as among the best speakers produced, and certainly among the very best speaker values. With the very best front end equipment the crossover of the 3.6 reveals itself to be a weak link in the speaker design; however, what most people describe as incoherence or discontinuity in the speaker is the inability of their equipment to drive the 3.6 w/sufficient high current wattage. The ribbon will then scream, squeal, and buzz while the other panels will try to avoid bottoming out against the magnets.