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
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. 
audioman58's avatar
audioman58
4,137 posts
 
If you are going with a planer you need clean power that dips below 3 ohms at least 200 wpc and if going with a maggis,stock Xover are very low grade That  applies to most , but 3.7 model on up the true ribbon is a very good ribbon Xover stil suck but lots of potential if keeping then plan on rebuilding the Xover, wiring , and buy a mye stand the stock frames flex which = distortion 
I owned several of them , I have  rebuilt mine and installed a xternal Xover . To behonest the New Spatial audio M5 or M3 
with the excellent Beyma AMT tweeter- mid driver open baffle is excellent, nota pig for power and very dynamic and open ,and you can ask, pay for a upgraded Xover , and a 45 day money back audition ,nobody else is offering that a exceptional value.
More to discover