Good question. The 3.6's and Ushers are definitely different sounding speakers, each has a different set of good and not so good points. As you know, the 3.6's are difficult to drive properly and you need a really good amp to get the best from them, especially if your room is medium to large sized. However, the Ushers are not exactly an 'easy' load being that they are a 4 ohm just like the Maggies. To my ears, the Maggies paint a more realistic soundstage, all the players and instruments are true-sized, you can easily tell for example if a performer is standing and singing or seated. The width and depth of the soundstage is also better with the 3.6's. Finally, I like the way that the Maggies produce the top end; to my ears it is very difficult to do better than the ribbon tweeter. The Maggies sound 'sweeter' and a bit more extended on top to me.
Having said all that, the Ushers are definitely better at producing dynamics and projecting some power and 'thump' into the room. They produce more impact and a greater visceral feeling in the mids and upper bass than the Maggies and are a 'richer' sounding speaker overall. The Maggies can sound a little lean on certain types of music (i think that is less true with the new 20.7's that I have now)... The Ushers will play louder too with less strain...
I have 20.7's now and an old pair of 1987 KHorns, definitley differrent ends of the spectrum! Before the 20.7's I had the 3.6's. I'd like a pair of the Ushers or the Wilsons too because I have yet to find a perfect speaker that I can afford. My room is medium-large at 26 ft long and 17.5 wide and it is fairly easy for me to move speakers around (it's a dedicated listening room). So, when I want to 'rock-n-roll' I simply slide the 20.7's over to the side walls and fire-up the KHorns...(which are designed to sit square in the room corners).
Overall, for me, I'd probably give the nod to the 3.6's, and most definitely the 20.7's. The 20.7's are a much better speaker, in every way, than the 3.6's! However, if your tastes lean towards a steady diet of rock, then the Ushers or Wilson might be a better choice....
Curious, how big is your listening room? What amps are you using to drive the 3.6's? There is a nice review of the Usher Mini Dancers in the latest Absolute Sound; worth reading.
Having said all that, the Ushers are definitely better at producing dynamics and projecting some power and 'thump' into the room. They produce more impact and a greater visceral feeling in the mids and upper bass than the Maggies and are a 'richer' sounding speaker overall. The Maggies can sound a little lean on certain types of music (i think that is less true with the new 20.7's that I have now)... The Ushers will play louder too with less strain...
I have 20.7's now and an old pair of 1987 KHorns, definitley differrent ends of the spectrum! Before the 20.7's I had the 3.6's. I'd like a pair of the Ushers or the Wilsons too because I have yet to find a perfect speaker that I can afford. My room is medium-large at 26 ft long and 17.5 wide and it is fairly easy for me to move speakers around (it's a dedicated listening room). So, when I want to 'rock-n-roll' I simply slide the 20.7's over to the side walls and fire-up the KHorns...(which are designed to sit square in the room corners).
Overall, for me, I'd probably give the nod to the 3.6's, and most definitely the 20.7's. The 20.7's are a much better speaker, in every way, than the 3.6's! However, if your tastes lean towards a steady diet of rock, then the Ushers or Wilson might be a better choice....
Curious, how big is your listening room? What amps are you using to drive the 3.6's? There is a nice review of the Usher Mini Dancers in the latest Absolute Sound; worth reading.