2. speakers
  3. 1066152146

Maggie 3.6R performance dilemma..

Maggie 3.6R performance dilemma..

Hi,

I hope I'm not abusing this forum with too many Magnepan posts; this is my third post in as many weeks!

I have used the forum as a research tool, reading through older threads to see what others are doing with their Maggie's. I've implemented some of what I've read, wherever possible, but so far I haven't been successful in extracting what I believe these speakers have to offer.

So I'm hoping for some new insights into the 3.6R's and also wanting to share some observations that may (or may not) be useful to potential Maggie owners.

First, I've rearranged things in my room a little to decrease the cubic feet of the listening space. Some previous feedback suggested that my room may be too big. The speakers now operate in a space as follows:

48'X28'X10' The 10' ceiling height is directly above the speakers, however this is a gallery and approximately 4 feet forward from the speakers the room opens into a cathedral ceiling which peaks at 28'.

I have the speakers on the long wall, but cannot place them centrally on the wall. They are 12' apart (centre to centre) with approximately 9' to the side wall from the right speaker and 27' to the left side wall.
They are 6.2 feet from the front wall (based on the Cardas rule of ceiling height times 0.618) 18 feet from the listening chair with 3 feet behind the chair to a very reflective rear wall. (I will try to dampen this with drapes in the near future).
Toe-in angle is low at about 5-7 degrees. I have the tweeters on the outside so prefer to keep a small toe-in angle to have the tweeters further from my ear than the mid/bass, as suggested in the Magnepan manual.
Naturally I have experimented with positioning. I have tried variations in all directions but have not attained what I consider to be acceptable sound for reasons to follow.

The basic plan on buying these speakers (used) was to play them at low volumes with my existing Conrad Johnson CAV 50 and spend a week or two trying more powerful SS amps from local dealers, then to buy a new pre/power or integrated, with a $4500 budget.

I tend to play jazz, acoustic, some classical (nothing too brutal) at louder than normal levels. I haven't used an SPL meter, so I don't have an actual level recorded, but opinions of the occasional guest tend to suggest that I listen on the loud side.

I first tried a Belles 250i integrated. My local dealer, who is very experienced in high-end and seemed to be familiar with the 3.6's suggested the modestly rated (125 watts into 8 ohms) Belles based on it's higher than normal current delivery (about 25 amps if I remember correctly) and it's 'musicality'. He advised against the Rotel RB1090 which has higher output, but is far less 'musical' (his words).

The Belles was clearly an accomplished integrated, but for my tastes way too bright and forward. I tried to tame the brightness by moving the speakers....but with little effect.

Next I tried a McIntosh MC 6500 integrated. This had some appeal, sounding more tube like and warmer. However, it quickly ran out of steam, with the powerguard warning indicators flashing on and off even at modest volume levels. It also lacked transparency, didn't image very well and just sounded compressed - obviously lacking power.

Feeling somewhat inclined toward persue the Mac sound for it's warmer presentation, I thought the new MC 252 power amp with autoformers might deliver, given it's 200 watts into 2,4,8 ohms and its better load handling capability with the autoformers.

Well, it sounded better, more dynamic, more transparent....however, it cut-out completely several times on louder passages, the PowerGuard indicators locked in the 'on' position until the signal was removed and the amps allowed to 'cool'.

I then considered trying the MC602 with 600 watts per channel, but now I'm up at $8k without a pre-amp!!

So, to take a breather I rigged up my old CJ CAV50, and to be blunt, despite its inability to play loud, it just sounds so much more musical than any of the other amps I've tried. It also does play quite loud. Almost as loud as the MC6500, without the significant fall-off in performance when overstretched. It also demonstrates to me that tube watts are really bigger than SS watts!! (LOL, yes I know a watt is a Joule/sec and can't be stretched or made any bigger with a tube - but I'll be darned if they don't 'sound' louder!)

So, I'm now hell bent on staying with tubes.

I'm looking at maybe some Cary V12 monoblocks or a VT100 MkII.....advice here would be greatly appreciated....do they have enough power for 3.6R's in a larger than average space?

Lastly, and perhaps most important, with the 4 amps that I've used so far, I'm missing some aspects of the sound presentation that I particularly enjoyed from my old monitors and from other speakers that I've used in the past, including Quad ESL57's. I don't know if this is due to the amp/power deficiencies, the room, or is inherent in the speaker presentation.

All 4 amps that I've used have been unable to open the soundstage width beyond the limits of the speakers. When I read about 'wall to wall' soundstage, well it just isn't happening, and I find that surprising and disappointing. I don't expect a 45' wide stage, but perhaps 4 or5 feet beyond the speakers ought to be attainable on some recordings? My QLN monitors opened a wider stage than I've heard from the Maggie’s. Also, using closely miked acoustic music, small jazz ensembles etc (The Steve Green Trio disc and Diana Krall live in Paris spring to mind), the musicians are gathered tightly within the space between the speakers, at times sounding like they are sitting in each others laps! It just isn't recreating the dimension of a live recording as I expected, given the parameters and dimensions of my room. Incidentally, I haven't moved the speakers since I tried the MC252, and on the Steve Green Trio recording, both guitars sounded overlapped, like the players were standing one behind the other. Now with my CJ CAV 50, there is a little separation between the two, not enough for it to sound realistic, but better than with the Mac.

So how can this just be a function of underpowered amplification? Is it something much more fundamental?....The stage width sounded no different on the MC252 than it does on my CAV 50....200watts versus 45watts, but the 45 watter improves separation and imaging within the confines of the stage. The 125w Belles probably opened the stage a little wider than the MC252, but barely noticeable.

To add to my dilemma, there is virtually no discernable lower octaves on most recordings, I mean no bass. Listening to Clapton's Unplugged, the bass impact on the track 'Old Love' is completely missing, as are other bass lines that I'm familiar with on this recording.

Do I have the speakers positioned incorrectly?. I read about Maggie’s needing room to breath, well this is a fairly large room and they ought to be working much better than they are. My main fault so far is that I haven't been very systematic about moving the speakers in small increments until I find the optimum position. I've tried them at 4' from the front wall where bass seemed no better, so I brought them out to the Cardas recommended position at 6.18 feet. I've slid them back and forth a little from that position but without any positive effect.
Are they too far apart?....when I reduce the 12 feet centre to centre to 10' it reduces the stage width, which goes against what I'm trying to achieve. It warms the tonal balance slightly, given the added centre fill energy, but it doesn't improve bass response or stage width.

Does anyone have a setup procedure that works well with planars? Is it worthwhile even bothering with fine adjustment until I have a more powerful amp in place?

The bottom line is: I'm concerned about spending big money on high powered tube amps, if what I'm hearing is basically the sonic signature of these particular speakers, and other deficiencies that cannot be overcome with my room parameters.
After all, I could ditch the 3.6 and go with a higher efficiency box speaker and keep my CJ amp, and only have to spend another $2,000, perhaps less?

I'm sure that I cannot be the first person having a largely negative experience with the 3.6, though I suspect many people try to use these in rooms that are way too small.
Does anyone have any thoughts as to a way forward that would provide me with a sound that:-

Is non-fatiguing at higher SPL's
Is realistic in its presentation of stage width and depth.
Is realistic in its imaging ability and it's placement of performers on the stage, with realistic separation between performers.
Is realistic in reproducing mid bass and lower bass frequencies, not 'earth shattering' bass, just tuneful bass that underpins the music and adds to the realism of the reproduced event.
Is perhaps slightly warmer than most SS fans would like, with a little over-emphasis of the mids (tube-like bloom that I'm used to hearing with my little CJ integrated).

My other equipment is as follows:
Audio Alchemy DDS Pro Transport
Audio Alchemy Dti Pro 32 signal enhancer/jitter remover.
Musical Fidelity Upsampling DAC set at 192khz
Also tried a Monarchy Audio 18B DAC with volume pot to drive the Mac 252 directly from the DAC.
Various cables of reasonable grade, Acoustic Zen, Flatwire Twin etc (I'm a John Dulavy supporter and believe that wire is wire is wire is....)

I apologize for this long post. However, I’m certain that many people use these posts as a reference when sourcing new equipment, improving the sound of their existing rigs, or just reading for general amusement. So the more information the better, in my opinion.
It seems I'm one of the few that (so far) isn't getting what they expected from the Magnepan speakers, but I'm open and receptive to any ideas and input that others may have.
Many thanks in advance.

Regards

Rooze
128x128rooze
lance328
24 posts
 
I have Maggie 3.5s and two Nad amps where not enough power. I believe now that power is very important but even more important is HIGH CURRENT that most amps don't produce even many very expensive amps. I purchased an Innersound amp demo model and the improvement is outstanding! Just buy one you'll see. It will be the best money spent/saved in your quest to drive these maggies. I will get another and biamp them someday soon but until then I promise the Innersound will blow away your tubes on your maggies and I can't believe I said that. Unless you have an unlimited budget for tubes that would be better spent upgrading the Maggie parts/stands etc. Have you tried this site full of Maggie fanatics http://www.integracoustics.com/MUG/MUG/ .

Good Luck
rkeman
66 posts
 
Magnepans can be driven very well by some affordable amplifiers. My home theater uses the MG-1.6, MG-CC3, and MG-MC1 all driven quite well by an Outlaw 750. I have also used Bryston, Aragon and Anthem amplifiers with good results. Magnepans are fairly resistive loads not as difficult to drive as many purport, although they do require a substantial amount of power. Definitely get a set of Mye Sound stands because they offer a real increase in performance at a reasonable cost.
sean
6,231 posts
 
A) You've got the wrong speakers. Maggies WILL NOT play "loud" if we are speaking the same language. By the way, SPL's should be measured at the seated listening position on an average basis.

B) You don't have a suitable amp(s) for your situation, nor do i think it is possible to obtain one. If you do, you will blow your speakers to smithereens.

You need high rail voltages and high current capacity. Solid state Mac amps are big SS boat anchors that try to emulate tube sound. That is great if you are more concerned with a specific sound than with obtaining high levels of accuracy and the best in electrical performance. Mac's do this by throwing away the technical superiority of their SS heritage and high current potential by introducing the non-linear distortions of an output transformer into the system. An output transformer is equivalent to raising the output impedance of an ss design ( soggy, less controlled bass ) and running a VERY long run of small gauge speaker wire ( higher series resistance, placing a veil on the entire audible spectrum ). In my opinion, such a design is not suitable for use when trying to obtain either accuracy or musicality in a system. Running an output transformer with tubes is another story ( although it sounds better without them ) due to being a bird of a different feather.

C) You are sitting WAY too far back from these speakers. For most speakers to produce "wide" soundstages, you need to sit appr 2' - 3' in from how far you have them spread apart. That is, if you have them spaced 12' apart, you'll probably have to sit somewhere between 11' - 9' from their center. Obviously, this will vary with the amount of toe in used.

D) Your speaker placement and listening positions are all wrong. Look at all of the commonly divisible numbers in the equation here. I will pretty much guarantee that you are creating a lot of your own problems here. Here's what you posted:

"I have the speakers on the long wall, but cannot place them centrally on the wall. They are 12' apart (centre to centre) with approximately 9' to the side wall from the right speaker and 27' to the left side wall. They are 6.2 feet from the front wall (based on the Cardas rule of ceiling height times 0.618) 18 feet from the listening chair with 3 feet behind the chair to a very reflective rear wall."

3' from the rear wall
6' from the front wall
9' to one side wall
12' apart
18' from the listening chair
27' to the other side wall

E) The first thing that you need to do is to get the tonal balance right. Music without bass will always sound "weak & anemic". This is true even if the mid-band spl's are the same or slightly higher than if you actually had some bottom end "grunt". Once you obtain a more balanced frequency response, THEN worry about the volume requirements. The reason that i say this is that once you get some bass into the picture, your perspective on volume will change a little bit.

F) These speakers will never deliver "slam" or great bass impact. Their bass will be tight and well controlled, but you'll never get "thump" out of them. Due to the surface area, they will produce quite reasonable bass when properly set up.

G) John Dunlavy is a very smart man and i have oodles of respect for him. Having said that, many people misinterpret what he said. What he did say is that various wires will measure differently and that they could affect performance but that most people can't detect the differences that they could contribute under controlled conditions.

All i will add to that is:

1) their "controlled conditions" may not have been ideally optimized for the tests being performed

2) the candidates selected for such tests did not have the proper listening skills. As i've stated before, most people here but don't know how to listen.

3) the cables being used were all of similar electrical characteristics and / or not different enough to warrant audible differences under the specific test installation conditions

H) I can provide a means to obtain better, "more optimum" speaker placement for any given room, but it seems as if all of the previous comments have gone unheeded. Most speaker placement formulas fail in rooms that are not relativey square or rectangular in shape. Even then, they don't work all that great due to the various surfaces, points of reflection and room furnishings involved. If you are truly interested in working to minimize your problems, please let us know.

I) Given that most of us have contributed very similar answers and you've gotten the same results with everything that you've tried by ignoring those comments, the general consensus is that the system is trying to tell you something, we are trying to tell you something, but you aren't listening. I don't think that any of us have a problem with multiple posts about the same problem so long as we aren't talking to a brick wall.

Good sound reproduction is a science. You can stumble across good sound by trying a million different things or you can apply logic to the situation and speed the process up drastically. Sean
>



pbb
1,140 posts
 
Get a normal size house, with a normal size listening room or else get some giant, efficient (since you don't seem to like big amps) cone speakers.
jwc37
38 posts
 
The best sound I was able to get from my 3.6/Rs was with an electronic crossover (Marchand XM 26 - tubes) set at the points recommended by Magnepan and two McCormack DNA-1 deluxe amps; one for each speaker. My room is 18+ X 28+ with 10 ft walls and a cathedral ceiling with top being 14 ft from the floor. This set up gave me all the loudness I needed and better inner detail from large orchestral music. Small Jazz groups also sounded very good with this arrangement. I found that using the crossovers provided with the speakers and a single amplifier seemed to close-down the soundstage, depth and most other musical aspects of music. This is not a costly set up and the sound is wonderful with sound pressure levels approaching pain if you want it. Higher wattage amps would probably help even more in a larger room.
More to discover