they are in production. My dealer has not gotten even one pair yet! I have heard that a few dealers have gotten a pair in.
83 responses Add your response
If you think of them as MG1.6 'improved' I don't think you can go too far wrong.
As for amps / placement / setup, they are still Magnepan which means lots of space in back of 'em and sufficient quality power. Details count here.....
They will NOT be a wacky load, though I haven't seen any measurements, but if they follow Magnepan history, and MG1.6 practice, they will NOT have any dips in impedance and will also not have any phase angle issues. Any amp of good quality into 4ohms will work. Now, that being said, more power is indicated into large rooms and higher desired loudness. My MG1.6s with a 4 amp mid/tweet fuse make good use of ICE power 500ASP modules though I have not redlined it....ever. Those days are gone!
A couple of friends and I auditioned the 1.7s in Austin last weekend. We all had the same conclusion; a rather cold and sterile sounding speaker. Probably more detailed than the 1.6s they replaced (we've all owned the MMS, MG 12s, 1.6s and the 3 series before so have a lot of experience with Maggies) but not musically involving. Hard to put a finger on it. Could have been the room or associated electronics but definitely advise auditioning before buying.
to Darkkeys: I think Cwlondon was asking the question of texas42, and not of Darkkeys. (Because of the tone of the texas42 response.) I would just say if it was a 1.7 they auditioned, it had to be nearly brand new. I OWN nearly new (on month old) Magnepan 3.6s.. so i am a bit biased. But any Maggie I have heard at first fired up will sound harsh.. takes an hour or so to mellow out. Once used and broken in, this HF harshness really goes away.
(I 'almost' waited for the new 1.7s myself.. but i wanted the 3.6s and they will not get an update for at least a year, maybe years..)
I heard a short demo of them on Naim gear, speakers were 3-4 feet from the back wall, about 7.5 feet apart and toed in a good bit. I just heard a few Norah Jones songs (20 minutes worth) I know pretty well. I have demoed the 3.6 and 20.1 at length but have never heard the 1.6.
All in all I though they sounded pretty good. They had a lot more bass power than I thought they would. They were also pretty detailed and the detail in the bass seemed exceptional. I heard the 3.6 on a Mcintosh 252 the week before (also played some Norah Jones) and I do not recall it being as detailed in the bass. These were different systems for take that comment with a glass of salt.
The highs are going to be a little forward for a lot of peoples' tastes. I like the tonal balance but I like my gear really neutral. I liked the highs and they had good detail but they were not as integrated as I expected. I read Jonathan Valin's (from the absolute sound) short review on Avguide where he describes them as if they are as seamless as a pair of Sennheiser headphones... I would have to disagree (could have been room/gear). I could clearly tell where the highs were coming from and where they separated from the midrange. But the rest of his comments seem pretty accurate to the way they sound
The mids seem a lot like the 3.6s to me. They still had the larger than life vocal staging. It is nice but a unrealistic at the same time.
They looked much better than the older 1.6 with the metal trim and all in all I would buy a pair. I don't know that they would be my mainstay but it would be fun to swap them out with my boxes (Thiel CS2.4) from time to time.
We recently did an installation with our M-60s are our local dealer who has the 1.7 in stock- so I heard it with our amps. IMO this is an excellent speaker and a nice upgrade from the prior 1.6; no doubt why this speaker has been big news as Magnaplanar does not offer new models very often. It is very fast and detailed, yet relaxed, images easily and is not hard to drive at all (after all we did it with a 60-watt OTL).
Sorry, I have not been on the board for a few days. No, neither myself or my two friends are dealers and have never been a dealer of Magnepan or any other speaker brand. Only an enthusiast. In fact two of us personally own Magnepan MG-IIIA's and think they are great speakers. I'm not disparaging the 1.7s and think I clearly stated it 'could' have been the electronics or room. I'm just stating what each of us heard. All I suggest is, listen to them yourself before buying and make up your own mind. Each of us hear differently.
We are driving the Magnepan MG 1.7s at AC in NJ with an ARC power amp and I can assure you they sound amazing.
using a .75 ohm resistor on the Tweet panel and speakers are about only a couple feet plus out from the front wall.
Some folks forget to install the resistor at all and
there ya go
Do we need to read the manual as they say in Minnesota You Betcha.
Hi Texas42, I agree with your assessment of the 1.7s. I have been looking into buying a pair of Maggies for quite some time and was looking forward to hearing the 1.7s. I was able to audition and directly compare the 1.6 with the 1.7 in the local dealer's showroom last February. Therefore, same music, electronics, cables and room set up. The 1.7s had been broken in for over 200 hours. To me the 1.7 sounded somewhat more forward and bright, perhaps slightly more detailed than the 1.6, but more "sterile" as well. Overall I preferred the sound and musical presentation of the 1.6. So would you believe it, I ended up buying a pair of the 1.6s !! Some may think I am nuts for buying the "old" model, but I liked it better so there you go...
I feel compelled to chime in as, I too, have to agree with Texas42 and Demosis. For the record, I have been a Magnepan user for over 20-years, having owned models from MMG to MG-IIIA, to include a pair of 1.6's which I based my comparison of the 1.7's on.
The 1.7's I listened to were being driven by a NAD integrated amp and CD player, with Nordost cabling. The speakers were completely broken in.
I'll be very brief; I did not like this loudspeaker. For that matter, I did not like the 1.6's either, finding the voicing of both speakers to err too much in the direction of the upper registers, thus imparting a cool, rather than neutral or warm, tone.
Granted, both speakers do all the things that Maggies do very well, so I am not quibbling about their performance; I just did not care for their tone. Anyone who has ever owned a pair of MG-IIIA's knows exactly what I am talking about.
Are they a worthy successor to the 1.6's? Only time will tell. As with all Magnepan's they will have their following. Whether or not you like them will have to be determined by a thorough audition.
Personally, I feel that Magnepan should have re-released the MG-2.7QR, as for about the same price as the 1.7's, it was simply in another league. JMHO.
My approach to getting a sub to play well with my 1.6s is to cross over the sub nearly as low as possible.
When I first did the setup, I let it go for a day or so. Then I slowly, over a period of weeks turned the crossover frequency down and adjusted the level slightly.
At first with the crossover set at about 55 to 60hz, the overlap caused bloat. The bass was fat and indistinct. As I turned it down to where it is now, <40, it is much much better. The only time it lights up is when there is content that low. It fills out the lower end of string bass and timpani very well.
My room of 8 sides and very asymmetrical helps loads. The sub is on the longest wall, about 3 feet from the nearest corner. It sits next to the LH panel.
The sub? Don't laugh! It is a HSU set for max extension.
I'd be WAY surprised if this wouldn't work for the 1.7s as well, which in any successful setup now running the 1.6s, should be a drop in replacement.
Ya really oughta hear em don't ya think? I have had so many instances that someone or a magazine said that this or that was the best thing since sliced bread only to finally hear them and think...huh? ANY speaker has it's own set of
plus's and minus's, only you can decide which ones you prefer. I'm betting that they are pretty darn good and will
reflect both source and amplification to a large degree, maybe more than a $2,000 speaker has any right to. John from AC in NJ is probably your best source of info on these as he is hearing them as God intended...with ARC!
The high power being used to demo the 1.7's in many cases is not representative of what the average audiophile will experience/hear from these speakers at home.
When one pushes past 500 toward 1,000wpc the results with virtually any full range larger floor standing speaker move toward the scintillating end of the experience spectrum. I have experienced this with all manner of speakers, from concentric high efficiency speakers like the Tannoy Glenair to planar hybrids like the Eminent Technology LFT-8B, to the dynamic/planar hybrid Legacy Focus SE (all reviewed). Speakers simply do not sound as "frisky" or vibrant when powered by 200wpc, say, versus 500-1,000wpc.
Some dealers may be showing them with more realistic amplification for most people, which might explain some of the disparity in reports on their sound.
Could differences in amps make that much of a difference? Absolutely. :)
Just heard the 1.7s at a local dealer. He was using NAD electronics. The amp had 150 watts and didn't seem to bring out the best in the speakers. Sounded good but there seemed like more could be pulled from the speakers.
Maggies are one of those speakers that sound better as you move up the amp food chain, both in quality and power.
Always seems counter intuitive to spend so much on amplification on a relitively inexpensive speakwer.
I have had a pair of 1.6QR's for 11 yrs. In that time I've gone from an Adcom 5500 to a McCormack DNA 0.5 deluxe to McCormack DNA 1.0 deluxe monoblocks to Cary 500 MB's. Each step in the progression was a step forward, but I had a pretty nice system with the DNA 0.5 (for which I paid $750.00) driving the Maggies. If you listen to music that requires 25 Hz, then maybe these aren't the speakers for you. Personally, once I got the room placement figured out, I lost all interest in augmenting with a sub. Most of us build systems over time. I chose to build a system around the Maggies, because their strengths play to my preferences. If their strengths appeal to you, you might consider a good used high current amp as a stop-gap until later.
I agree 100% with Brownsfan.
While lots of good power helps it is not needed. A good cheap amp will get you 90% there. The 90% of the 1.7 is much better than 100% of other speakers in its price range IMO.
I you need a cheap amp try Wyred 4 Sound ST500. It is $1500 and 250 watts @8ohms and 550 watt at 4ohms. Maggies are a pretty solid 4ohm load and one of the reason why they need lots of power.
Just picked up my new Magnepan 1.7s two weeks ago and have been playing them for several days. The first two things that stand out are their clarity and seamless sound from top to bottom.
While most of my music playing is classical, I really enjoy Rodrigo y Gabriela's incredible guitar playing (check out the video on http://www.rodgab.com/home.html). In the past on my Magnepan 1.6s, I really felt that the music was just a little too fast and felt the Maggies had a hard time keeping up. It was good, but not great. Now, with the 1.7s the same CD was amazingly clear from start to finish. Every instrument in its proper place and all the details came forth. The best way I can describe it is effortless detail.
Last Friday I sponsored an event in Frederick, Maryland at the Downtown Piano Works. At the conclusion of the evening, the owner, Theresa Shykind, played a piece on what I believe is a $135,000 grand piano in this fantastic small concert room at their store. It was breathtaking. Then on Saturday, I set up the Magnepan 1.7s and played a couple of piano recordings (Haydn and Mozart) that for a few brief moments in each piece, it sounded like the piano was in the room. It was as if I could hear, for the first time on a recording through speakers, the natural vibrations of the piano itself as the notes trailed off just like I heard the Friday before. Very impressive.
The 1.7s are a little better with rock than the 1.6s but still not comparable to most good box speakers, in my opinion. I have lived with several different Magnepans for many years and if you are into rock music (or todays equivalent) I would recommend other speakers. Acoustic rock, and Jazz and classical music are its strengths.
Finally, to me one of the best features is that I no longer hear the treble as separate from the rest of the speaker. With my 1.6s, I could, with eyes closed, point directly at the tweeter. Now, you can now listen to the 1.7s in the near field and hear a seamless wall of sound from bass to treble!
One last update: Just received the Wyred 4 Sound Dac 1 and have been paying it non stop for about 48 hours. Wyred 4 Sound says that the DAC need 200 hours of break in before it sounds its best. Let me tell you that with every, and I mean every change in the chain of electronics feeding the Magnepans (First with MGII 35 years old, then MG 1.6s and now MG 1.7s) the Magnepans step up to another level of quality.
I get that people don't like the Magnepan sound. There are times I want to play rock music and look for another stereo in my home to do so. But when it comes to acoustic music, the Magenepans are absolutely outstanding - with the 1.7s being a significant upgrade to the 1.6s.
I just pulled the speakers out of the box on Saturday and they sounded great from the beginning (a little bright, but not objectionable). If they need break-in as suggested by Magnepan, I can't wait to hear the improvements over time. If you are a Maggie fan, this is an improvement in all areas of the 1.6. More natural sounding, clearer from top to bottom, seamless bass through treble and, to me, a little better bass (but still needs a subwoofer).
Thanks for the post and please keep us updated as the 1.7's break in. Your comments about the improved coherence are intriguing. To me, that would be the one most annoying "flaws" in the 1.6's, although they are good in this area compared to most other speakers I have heard. I'm also interested in your comments on how well the 1.7's do piano. There is no confusing the 1.6's doing piano, good though it may be, with my daughter playing our Walter upright. I listen to a lot of piano, so this would be big for me. Thanks again.
Darkkeys, I came upon this thread from your system page, and with any speaker you need to be sure it will fill your room, at 24 feet long and 16 feet wide you have a lot of space to pressurize, and you may need something bigger than the 1.7's to get you satisfactory volume and mid bass. I have a pair of Legacy Focus speakers and they are big speakers, they will fill a large room, and I know they don't sound like electrostats but they do sound good. Electrostats that will fill your room will need to be big, Maggy 3.6's maybe? That is just my personal experience, if a dealer will let you test drive the 1.7's then you can find out if they will fill the space, but I also know that is hard to find also. I'm just saying don't completely discount box speakers just yet, they can give you more satisfying bass and still throw a good soundfield. I know the allure of electrostats too, I have been wanting a pair of Martin Logans for years now, but the ones that will fill my room are very expensive.
Alpha, thanks for the insight. You are right about "the allure". I find the technology fascinating although I have no experience with Maggies.
Auditioning in my case is impossible without travel. I haven't given up on box speakers. I have travelled to four cities but what I heard so far was not impressive at all compared to what I already have, with one super expensive exception. All the driving gets old.
Without auditioning first, it comes down to chance especially in light of the fact that what I presently have works well in my room.
I notice from reading threads on this site that some use subs with the Maggies to fill out the bass with good results.
My search for a speaker upgrade has not been an easy process, especially living in a locale without any brands to audition or compare. I prefer to purchase new audio equipment. I'm sure this narrows my options.
Thanks again for the insight.
I just listened to the new 1.7s at the local dealer, who forewarned me that they sounded terrible due to not being broken in. Indeed, they sounded very thin, tizzy and totally lacking any dynamics in the mid-bass or bass frequencies. The dealer told me that this was to be expected and that he fully expects that they will sound great once properly broken in.
When the 1.7s arrived, the dealer compared them to his 1.6s that were fully broken in and which he said totally blew away the new 1.7s (I did not get to hear this comparison since he recently sold his 1.6 demo pair). Through the 1.7s I felt that various well-recorded acoustic music did sound very promising, with respect to the resolution in the upper frequencies already sounding detailed and resolved, but when more dynamic material was played (rock, electronic, large orchestral passages, bass & drum) they sounded unacceptably thin and lacking bass of any substance whatsoever.
I have no real experience with Magies. Is this long (and necessary) break in time to be expected, and if so, how much do new Magies improve with break in? I have to wonder about all the glowing reviews for their reviews, do the reviewers receive pre-conditioned (fully broken in) speakers?
I plan to revisit the dealer in about four weeks to reevaluate the new 1.7s.
I would appreciate other opinions (regarding the 1.7s)
Wanted to follow up with almost two months with the Magnepan 1.7s. The break-in process has been a real education. The speakers keep improving with age with the expectation that I have or will have shortly, reached the "fully broken" stage.
One problem (a great problem) is that I replaced my DAC with the Wyred 4 DAC within a couple of weeks of getting the Magnepan 1.7s so I know that the clarity improvements are in part, due to the Wyred 4 Sound DAC.
Finished loading 315 CDs onto a Netgear 9150 500 gig harddrive which I use for all of my listening. The combination is at my highest expectations. For 35 years I have been involved with the lower end of high end audio gear and never have I been so satisfied listening to music.
What amazes me is that the Magnepan 1.7s sound incredible on all types of music. I do have them augmented with a Polk Audio DSW MicroPRO 2000, probably the weakest link in my audio gear, but amazing good for what I paid for it.
I have been running through all types of music, classical, rock, jazz, even Gregorian chant, and everything is sounding amazing. You can hear through the recording at a level I didn't think possible. Even less than steller recordings come through well.
I worked for the Baltimore Symphony Orchestra for a couple of years and had an opportunity to hear concerts at both their locations (Baltimore and N. Bethesda, MD). I also had a number of the BSO musicians perform at fund raising events. I am very familiar with the instuments of the orchestra and the Magnepan 1.7s do an amazing job of making each instrument sound natural. The Maggies do not bring the instrument in the room as much as they take you to the hall. Sometimes this is a slightly distant perspective, but very natural sounding.
On June 19th I will be visiting a gentleman with MBL loudspeakers and MBL amp and preamp. I can't wait to hear with $50K++++ can sound like.
Did you pick up your Magnepans at The Listening Room in Pikesville? Just curious. I have owned Maggies in the past and bought various pieces there, always with excellent results.
One of my favorite thing to do is attend a BSO Concert at the Meyerhoff, which is a wonderful facility, for a reference check. I know what you are talking about. I used to come back from the Meyerhoff and marvel at what a good job my old Magnepan mg1c's did in producing a similarly enjoyable sound! I am confident the new 1.7s break some new ground sound wise to boot from what I read.
I think high-current amps work nicely with the Maggies, too. My speakers are the 1.6, currently being driven by an Odyssey Audio Khartago Extreme SE - it's just 110 watts, right down to 2 Ohms, but is a high-current amp. I've used the Maggies with 300/400-watt Krell, McIntosh and Bryston amps, but the panels really sing with the Khartago. More sensible price too, in the context of the Maggies' pricing!
I did purchase my Magnepan 1.7s along with my previous 1.6s at The Listening Room in Pikesville. They assisted me in selling my 1.6s which helped the process along.
I was at the Strathmore Hall last week to listen to Marin Alsop and the BSO. They were playing Brahms Requiem - not my favorite or even close. However, I did come away with the same impression - the Maggies 1.7 nail the sound of the orchestra and the hall. It is not a forward sound, but more recessed as if you are listening through the microphones in the hall and the orchestra is some distance from you.
I had to laugh. I have been trying to get "depth" out of my Magnepans by inching them closer then, farther from the back wall, never getting close to the huge hall sound I read about in Stereophile and Absolute Sound magazines.
Yet, when I closed my eyes in the hall during the concert, I really didn't get a feeling of a significant amount of depth like I read about in Stereophile. I knew the orchestra was in front of me - I was in great seats in the orchestra section - but it didn't sound cavernous. Again, the Maggies seem to catch what I heard, not too laser focused, not with exaggerated depth, just natural width and depth.
Can't wait until this coming weekend. I am visiting a great guy I recently met at a BSO function in Frederick. He invited my wife and I to join him and his wife for dinner and to listen to his MBL 111E speakers and MBL electronics. I am taking my Wyred 4 Sound DAC 1 with me (he has no digital) to test it out on his system. Looking forward to hearing what a cost-is-no object systems sounds like!
He is considering the Magnepan 1.7s for his "second-system" in his California home - I guess it would be his "slumming it" system. I may bring my Maggies over to his place and see how they sound with $$$ electronics sometime over the summer.
"I heard them today and thought they had NO BASS at all. WONDERFUL VOICES IN THE CENTER John and Paul sounded live, but they were sterile and nothing below 60 hz."
Tough to know what to make of this post without any details about the electronics and room setup. All we are left with is you heard some 1.7's and heard "NO BASS".
You may be correct but it is hard to know what to think with so little info....
It has been a week since adding the Magnepans to my main system.
My initial impressions are as follows: It takes a day to get used to their size. Even though I was aware of their height/width, they look far smaller in the dealer's showroom.
I had to move them over four feet from the rear wall mainly to deal with extreme boominess in the mid-bass. I have pretty much run out of real estate to deal with positioning them out any further. Adding a subwoofer helped cancel out most of the mid-bass problem.
The speakers present a huge sound stage. More details in recordings are heard. These speakers in this system and room, etc make my secondary audio system in my family room sound small in comparison. Part of this may be due to the fact that my family room is far more damped/deadened than my living room. My living room is more lively/reverberant.
I listen to mainly jazz in all forms, contemporary gospel choirs, some rock and classical. I was listening to a choir recorded live and I ended up with the same feeling you get as if actually present at the event. Very moving.
My only real gripe with these speakers are with the attention to detail during the manufacturing process. The craftsmanship/workmanship on these are not done with precision and exactness.
One other issue concerning powering these speakers: After reading the post here on Agon I wondered if my amp would be sufficient. It is more than sufficient and the sound is spectacular. Of course there are always better products but I see no need to purchase another amp. The only reason for me to purchase another amp for these speakers would be for the sake of curiosity only.
This past weekend, I just tried some 96 kHz / 24 bit downloads from HD Tracks.com and I was blown away. The detail, depth and lack of harshness is unbelievable. You can easily hear the limitations of CDs when you switch back from the high res files. You also get a sense of unlimited dynamic range with an almost analog sound. WOW!
This is what I have always enjoyed about owning Magnepan loudspeakers. Everytime you improve the front end, whether it be the amp, preamp, DAC or, in this case, digital quality, you can easily hear the improvements through the Magnepans. The 1.7s just keep sounding better and better.
I use a Netgear 9150 linked to the Wyred 4 Sound DAC1 via Xindak cable. The clarity of the high res files will spoil you for anything else. I am going broke downloading new albums!
Just listened to the Magnepan 1.7 with $20,000 of Macintosh tubes in a high end sound room and I was very disappointed. I listen mostly to folk and piano and they did not grab me. I definitely would not buy them if I listened to hard rock. I previously owned Apoggee Stages and ET 111 and can say those speakers brought me into the music. I did ask if they had been broken in and the salesman said they were.People saying you would need to spend many more thousand for a box speaker to compete, seem to be lying. My epos m12 with ASL 300b's were a lot more involving(better midrange and soundstage). It also seemed to me that they were eating up the Mcintosh mc275 amps.
>It also seemed to me that they were eating up the Mcintosh mc275 amps.
The speakers were woefully underpowered. Maggies will play loud, but they're only 83 dB efficient. They also rarely sound their best in a dealer showroom, since as I'm sure you know having owned the Apogees and Eminents, they require careful placement and have different acoustical requirements than dynamic speakers. That's not to say that they're the speaker for you -- I haven't heard them yet myself -- but to point out that the people who have praised their bang for the buck probably aren't lying! Though I have heard some complaints from people who say they don't like them as much as the 1.6's.
One big reason you may like older Maggies is that sometime in the '90s they began shipping with the Mylar toward the listener.
A couple years ago I sold my factory rebuilt MG-1s and bought some 1.6s which long term were irritating...until I simply rotated them in place.
I now listen to the Pole Piece side, just like the old ones.
I'm starting down a path of further adjustments, too. I just make new jumpers out of #6 copper wire to replace the Chrome Plated Steel the panels ship with. Eventually more mods are on tap and even the jumpers and fuse will go away when I go into the crossover mods.
I've had my 1.7s for nearly 3 months and have several hundred hours on them. I've hooked them up to various amplifiers, including a Parasound JC-1/JC-2 setup and an Audio Research VSi60 and find them extremely musical, particularly with the VSi60, which drives them perfectly to very loud levels without difficulty. I've experimented with tweeter in/tweeter out, reversing the speakers (so the back of the speaker faces the listening area) and with 1 and 2 ohm resistors and find that in my room they sound best with 1 ohm resistors and tweeters in. I much prefer them to the B&W 802Ds, Usher 718s, KEF 201/2s and Apogee Duetta IIs I've used in the same listening area over the past several years and would not hesitate to recommend them to anyone looking at speakers selling for less than $10k. I was concerned the Audio Research integrated amp would not have enough power, but it matches up beautifully and has more than enough power. I'm listening to the SACD of Bigg's performance of Bach's Toccata and Fugue in D minor at a very loud setting as I write this and cannot imagine how it could sound much better.The bass is stunning and I've tried, and turned off, several high-end sub-woofers because they add very little bass and some dissonance. The speakers and the integrated amp are both highly recommended and make great combination.
The reason, at least a POSSIBLE reason for your preference is that sometime back in the '90s, and for no apparent reason, they began shipping with the mylar side facing the listener. This is a 180' flip from prior practice.
I flipped my panels around and now listen the 'old way' and won't go back.
Just a thought...........
and a possible experiment for all you new 1.7 owners.
CHarles : I have the same reaction after three months. They do thrilling things. I play a lot of organ music (Chapuis Bach set and although they tilted to the upper mid range thge force of the bass is compelling. I have found the german Harmonia Mundi recordings of Bach works overwhelming in the way the clarity and sweetness chorus is revealed. I owned a 150 lb. a piece hybrid electrostatric and thought I could nev er replace them as they failed. These are infinitly better even with a vintage solid state amp.
I currently own MG 12's and like them a lot as they are very musical. However, they lack that bit of detail that helps with the sound decay and placement of the individual instruments in the soundstage.
I have auditioned the 1.7's twice.
The first time was in a oddly shaped open room, roughly 18 by 18 foot, that led to an open hallway. This was with a BAT VK300x 150 wpc amp. Did not like then at all. Sounded thin to me, but it was a bad listening space.
Then I listened to the same pair of speakers in a smaller room, 10 by 16 foot. The front wall was the long wall. They were about eight feet apart and I was sitting about six feet a way. Marantz reference amp at 115wpc. Sounded much better, more musical, and articulate bass was there.
By the way, I should be picking up my new pair of 1.7's after Thanksgiving.
It would have been neat, Dsper, If you tried a mod or 2 on your MGs. Magnepan is a DIY dream speaker which responds extremely well. You can do anything from a total reframe in real wood to simple crossover or stand additions.
The real wood frames are not only beautiful (choose your wood....Oak? Maple?) but the real wood helps the sound. MDF is 'dead'.
I had thought about the 1.7s but will opt, instead for a total reframe and eventually a crossover rebuild using optimized 'stock' values. To that end, I'm taking wood shop classes and should be able to begin next year sometime. It's neat since I can use First Class equipment and just pay my nominal shop fees and get premium instruction. 3xwin for me.
Understand your comments and may yet have second thoughts. Time will tell.
I am receiving full trade in value on the 1.2's, so for $1000, the better resolution and better soundstage seemed hard to beat.
The bass was an interesting decision. I am not wood working capable so to buy good frames is $500 plus. Compared to the $1000 cost to me for the 1.7's, their deeper bass along with the other quality improvements, seemed like the way to go.
Now the other interesting part. I talked to my McIntosh dealer about upgrading the MA63000 because I knew I was missing something on the edges and the decay. It has only 160 wpc into 4 ohms. Plus it just does not seem loud enough.
The dealer was not certain that the top Mac integrated, MA7000, with 250 wpc into 4 ohms. would help me.
He suggested that I try the Krell S300i. It has 300 wpc into 4 ohms. His reasoning was that I needed another view of what I could do and maybe Mac was not the answer.
At first I thought that it sounded tinny but once my tubed CD player and the amp "warmed up", I realized I was hearing more detail. For example, there is a Donna Krell album, I think that it is called "Look of Love", that has heavy brushes on track 2. It sounded real without hash at the point of decay.
The trade off is that the Krell sounds less "warm" than the MA6300.
So...to get the power I need and the Mac "warmth" I would need to move to Mac separates at about $10,000, which is not something I can afford.
Obviousily, I am thinking about a lot all at once here. I will get the 1.7's and go from there.
By the way, tell me again what amp you are using with the 1.2's?