2. speakers
  3. 161384-106199

Planar speaker characteristics

I’m thinkIng of the possible advantages of going planar.  Here’s my situation:
I currently have Triangle Stratos Volante 260 speakers, and I love their sound. The issue with these are that they have poly switches in the crossovers that limit the volume they can achieve.  Rectification of this issue is a long story, I’ll spare everyone the details. Before I acquired these speakers, I briefly owned a pair of Magnepan MMG’s, and was quite impressed with them. Unfortunately, also at the time I didn’t have the amplifier power to drive them to potential, and after all, they are the smallest end of the Magnepan line.  After acquiring the Triangles, I also got a pair of Parasound JC 1’s.  As of right now, I really do love the sound of my system. But the memory of those Magnepan’s kind of haunts me, now that I have the power to drive a pair of the larger models. I’m thinking in the 3 something range. Can someone with Magnepan experience tell me what characteristics they love about their Maggie’s, and also what they don’t. What I love about the Triangles:  midrange detail and musicality, not clinical, but not too warm. The “jump factor” as a reviewer put it in a review of the Signature Deltas.  What I don’t like are the aforementioned volume issues, and that they are fairly lean in bass extension. High quality bass, but not as deep as I’d like. However, and this is an important however, the addition of a subwoofer has effectively solved that issue. What makes The Magnepan sound appealing, and also not?  Not interested in electrostats. Also, please try to stick to the question.  Not really looking for commentary on the Parasound’s. I love them, even as my greener sensibilities and my electric bill don’t. 
Much thanks in advance,

Dave
dprincipato
mijostyn's avatar
mijostyn
8,570 posts
 
dpincipato, The 3.7i has a oneness or wholeness to it's sound that hides the fact that it has a crossover. It is close to sounding like a one way loudspeaker. The transient response is right up there with electrostatics the sound is crisp. Snare drums snap like they should. Then there is the imaging. Because they are dipoles and line sources down to about 300 Hz they do not radiate sound to the sides, up or down limiting room interaction. Thus, you get more of a holographic image which is very endearing. Add a subwoofer system like the one I have on my system page and you will be very close to SOTA. IMHO linear array dipoles produce the most realistic sound. Magnepan has evolved it's products beautifully. I had Tympanies 35 years ago and they had the magic but unfortunately colored bass. They have solved that problem with their current lineup. The 3.7i is handily the best value in a panel speaker. Next in line would be the Sound Labs 545 which I believe is twice the cost. 
jaytor's avatar
jaytor
765 posts
 
I've owned four pair of Magnepans over the years - MG1s, MG2s, Tympani IVs, MG3.6r. Needless to say, there is a lot I liked about them.

For most of my years as an audiophile, I switched back and forth between Magnepans and more conventional box speakers. When I owned the Magnepans, I missed the deep bass and dynamics of box speakers. After owning the box speakers for a few years, I missed the open, airy sound stage and went back to Magnepans. And I had some pretty nice box speakers including Revel Studios and Duntech Sovereigns. 

I've finally found a speaker that delivers the strengths I liked about both types of speakers. I've built a set of GR-Research NX-Oticas with stereo triple-stack GR-Research subwoofers. These are DIY speakers, so not for everyone, but they have the open, spacious soundstage that I love so much about the Magnepans, along with excellent detail and dynamics and incredible bass. 

Obviously not everyone wants to build their own speakers, but I'd recommend looking at some of the commercial open-baffle speakers, such as from Spatial Audio, if you are looking for that kind of sound.
jaferd
44 posts
 
I don't think my 1.6qr is tonally accurate and little on the bright side unless you put in the resistors. It also requires a sub. 
mijostyn's avatar
mijostyn
8,570 posts
 
Jaytor, wonderful that you built your own speakers. It is certainly the way to get much more for the money. Frequently you can do things better than a commercial entity because the labor is free.  
phcollie's avatar
phcollie
342 posts
 
Dave, 
     I currently listen to 1.7 driven by 4b3 and am in the process of placing an order for a pair of 3.7i.  There is so much I like about them that given the small negatives, I would never go back to boxes.  First is the cohesion during playback. I can not locate any crossover point while listening and the top to bottom design strengthens this effect from ceiling to floor.  Secondly, the accuracy of the midrange and upper end.  Since my planars do not suffer the inertia limitations of cones, the pace is quick and when a passage is staccato, it is truly on time. I also think this adds to the sustain and release giving me that extension on vocals that ethereal.  Altogether the realism from the combination of cohesion and reset quickness of the panel can be spooky. When listening to woodwinds the vibrato and natural tone is so good I honestly want to look around the room to see the musician play. I am past the phase of wanting gut punching bass and more prefer accurate bass. When we played music, the tympani and drum sets were always well in the rear because we did not want a forward or "loud" bass presentation which is popular amongst younger folks today. Often forward bass is mixed in with the phrase dynamic imho. The dipole design in my space adds to the immersive presentation and overall room interaction is wonderful. At the end of the day there is a reason the 3.7i won "best sound cost no object" at 2015 Axpona and so many box designers want to match that sound or use Mag as a benchmark. They are that good.  My experience with the 1.7 has been similar and am looking forward to the upgrade.  Cheers. 
More to discover