Magico - Wide vs. Narrow

I have the magico q7 the only weight 750 lbs each after thier ozempic diet.i dont think in this economy they can afford to make 750 lbs speakers out of metal.they have many internal bracing.read they review it has pictures. When loud you can put your hand and the cabinet and zero vibration.i would love to hear thier 750k speakers.made in America like Squires products. I would have to win the powerball for that magico.enjoy the music.

No insult was intended, really.  Just being realistic that audiophile level imaging is not what most consumers buy for.  Engaging, rhythm, and a wide sweet spot however are on most buyer's short list.

This thread has some incredibly horrible misinformation in it. It is full of speculation and simply wrong assertions. 
I happened to have a pair of M5’s loaned to me directly by Alon for an event we did for him relations to his personal art endeavors. 
For starters they are NOT simply boxes or “Lossy” boxes as someone speculated. They are all aluminum with the aluminum machined cross bracing seen in all of the Magico designs. The drivers are sandwich cones and yes the ring radiator is the Scan Speak 9900.  The baffle is machined from a solid aluminum slab and is wood veneered over aluminium.

Regarding baffle width there is so much misinformation here. The rectangular baffle mostly affects 2 things, 1 the frequency where edge diffraction begins and 2 the corner frequency where radiation goes for 1pi to 2pi.(  unidirectional forward facing radiation to Omni directional radiation.) Technically the 2 factors work against each other as you want the edge diffraction out of the critical upper frequencies that interfere with localization which means big baffles and yet the opposite is true in that we want wide dispersion that a narrow baffle gives.

It is always a compromise where 1 approach is supplemented with techniques to overcome the the shortcomings of either approach. Narrow baffles need a lot of baffle step compensation and a loss of efficiency is a result as well as diffraction effects in the critical upper mid band.  Wilson, Vandersteen and several other narrow baffle advocates add heavy wool felt to absorb the HF front radiation that would impact imaging and diffraction.

Wide baffles move diffraction down in frequency to ranges that have far less impact on imaging and have less loss of sensitivity from baffle step compensation which typically gives a more dynamically responsive speaker. They unfortunately need rear firing drivers to help rear / side radiation in the typical living room although for near field listening they have great precision since there is less room interactions. 

The 2 design approaches  yield designs that have radically different room interactions and wife acceptance factors.  The wife acceptance factor and typical living room treatments are what hurts type wide baffle speakers today. 

I don’t believe anyone suggested the Magico cabinet is lossy.

it like many competitors is largely inert and typically exceeds the s/n of the room it resides in.

A rear firing tweeter hopefully with both an on/off switch is 100% distortion and can be found on some minimal baffle designs ( the Vandersteen 7 for example ) principally to compensate for “ overdamped rooms “… which i think, if i understand the OP point about music lovers vs audiophile are mostly the domain of the latter.

Enjoy the music

@tomic601 said, "A rear firing tweeter... is 100% distortion..."

I disagree.

Implemented correctly, one beneficial thing a rear-firing tweeter does is this: It corrects the spectral balance of the reflection field.

Duke

rear-firing tweeter advocate