Magnepan announces the 20.7

Well, this is just great. I just took delivery of my new 3.7's 2 weeks ago, now I have the upgrade bug before my 3.7's are even close to being broken in. My only piece of mind is knowing if I went with the new 20.7, I'd have to upgrade my house. The 20.7's aren't going to fit in any room I have. It is really nice seeing some American companies excelling in value.

Teajay,
You are not the first person to feel the 3.7's were not "significantly" better than the 3.6's. My take is different. I had the opportunity to buy 3.6 demos at half the price of the 3.7's and said "no thanks." For me the 3.7's were clearly substantially better than the 3.6's, very clearly worth an additional 3K, and yes, head and shoulders above the 3.6's.
I can't comment on the 3.6's biamped with an external crossover having never heard them set up this way. Urging caution about accepting exuberant "hype" from reviewers serves a purpose, if it gives people second thoughts about buying speakers unheard. The same caution is in order with respect to your judgement, which is stated as fact, not opinion. I accept and respect your opinion on what you heard, but I and others have clearly formed a very different opinion. I bought based on what I heard over almost a year of careful auditioning. Not because of hype.

Exactly Nottop.
I really value the opinions expressed in the forum. They are an extremely important contributor to my decision about what to audition and occasionally what to buy if an audition is not possible. I have found much better guidance here than in TAS or stereophile. Ideas expressed here have prompted me to do some things and try some things that seemed implausible at first, but proved to be true in practice. But the final judge on everything is my own ears.

What concerns me a little is when our own strongly held opinions are presented as absolutes, and differing opinions are discredited.

All of this is exactly why I would never buy speakers without hearing them. Clearly, people are coming to very different conclusions on the 3.7's. I've already articulated my thoughts on the 3.7's vs 3.6's etc, so I won't repeat what I've already written. As for the Mye Stands, I had a pair for my 1.6's and I have a pair for my 3.7's going through customs as I write this. The ability to tilt the speakers to achieve a perpendicular between the top to bottom middle of the tweeter with ear level makes an enormous improvement in my opinion. Others may hear things differently, and I'm not going to suggest they should hear what I hear or their conclusions are invalid. Those who are considering the 3.7's should let their ears be their guide. Too bad that is not possible with the stands. As Mrschret points out, those who prefer the Magnepan stock feet are fairly rare, but again, people hear what they hear.

Exron,
I'm guessing Mrschret will be able to find at least 11 people who swear by the Mye Stands. What is the point? I have no problem with you not liking them. I have no problem with someone insisting they are the greatest things ever. There is a reason that we have an abundance of high end manufacturers of equipment making everything from flea watt SET's to kilowatt SS monsters. It is because we value different things. Its not because I'm right and you are wrong. What can be very right for me can be very wrong for you. It happens all the time. Some people like BMW's, some people like Audi's. So what? Chill everybody, this is supposed to be fun. I don't need anyone else validating my decisions about buying equipment. My own ears tell me yes or no, but they can't tell you what you are going to like or dislike.

Clavil,
For me the significant improvement came when I angled my 1.6's forward to achieve a perpendicular between the top to bottom middle of the speaker with my ear. This produced a really significant increase in clarity and focus. The sound was just less smeared, if that makes sense. The idea I guess is that this angle provides the best time alignment. I got the stands for my 1.6's used for $200, and it was a no brainer that it was well worth the cost. I liked what they did enough that I didn't think twice about ordering a new pair at $605 for my 3.7R's. Now, I suppose one could tilt the speakers without the Mye stands, but they would not be stable at the angle required for me, and I am a tall person.

Doug, I'm trying to understand why people are having such different reactions to their auditions of the .7 series. I wonder how much of this comes down to semantics. I'm asking myself "At what point does an incremental improvement cross the threshold and become something more?" Can you provide more specifics about your audition of these speakers?
I auditioned 3.6's with some pretty decent Electrocompaniet equipment. Yes, they sounded very good. I was struck by how similar they sounded to my 1.6's. The 3.6's had more at the frequency extremes, and the presence of the ribbon tweeter certainly added much over the 1.6's. These were demo's that were well broken in, driven by a decent front end, and in my judgment were worth considering as an upgrade given the modest cost of swapping my used 1.6's for demo 3.6's. I would have called the 3.6's an incremental improvement over my 1.6's.
My audition of the 3.7's came 4 weeks later, in a different store, and my reaction was very different. I won't recite all the improvements, it would just be a repeat of what you have read in the reviews. I placed an order the next day and have had them in my home for 3 weeks now. The 3.7's in my home perform consistent with my expectations based on my audition, and I remain extremely pleased. I had no problem justifying a 5K investment on the 3.7's vs a 2K investment on the 3.6's. For me that does not constitute an incremental improvement but something much more. For me, the 3.7's were more than an incremental improvement over the 3.6's and my 1.6's.