The official info is up on Magnepan's site now and it seems the woofer is quasi ribbon, as on the 1.7. |
Sthomas, they don't normally delaminate for many years, if ever (they don't like moist and damp). Most of the stories of delamination are from people who are buying and refurbishing very old ones. Old dynamic speakers require repair work too, generally it's the woofer surround that goes. And if they do need work, the repair is fairly easy, you can do it yourself or send them off to Magnepan. Most other speakers of the same vintage can't even be easily repaired, because the manufacturer is out of business or no longer supports them. |
Unsound, a quasi ribbon is a ribbon that is attached to a mylar backing. A true ribbon is just the foil, without a backing. A planar dynamic is wire attached to a mylar backing. Early Maggies were all planar dynamic. Then they went to a true ribbon tweeter on the most expensive models -- that's indicated with a /R. Then a quasi ribbon tweeter on the less expensive models, that's a /QR, and also quasi ribbon midranges on the more expensive /R models. But they were all still planar dynamic (wire) in the bass. Now they're going to quasi ribbon in the bass, too. So either you have all quasi ribbon models like the 1.7, which is a three-way with a quasi ribbon woofer, tweeter, and supertweeter, or on the higher end models a true ribbon on the tweeter and a quasi ribbon on the midrange and woofer, like the 3.7 (at least, that's what everyone assumes, I haven't seen specs yet). |
James,
I think the screws have to go through the mylar, their purpose is to compartmentalize the membrane so that the resonant frequencies are dispersed. Also, the Miloxane or NDF-30 coating shouldn't be tacky, if it is, it's deteriorating and the speakers will eventually delaminate.
Anyway, no argument that they're put together with glue and string. I just haven't noticed any real problems as a result, the only thing that happens to them is that they sometimes delaminate after many years and have to be refurbed, and the true ribbon tweeters will eventually sag and need to be restrung. From my perspective, the question is whether I'd rather have a speaker that looks beautiful inside or one that's equally functional but $1000 cheaper, but of course others may differ. I don't think it affects longevity, though, since the Miloxane goo is needed to damp diaphragm resonances. AFAIK, there's no material, however expensive, that would stand up longer, given the stresses to which its subjected.
Some people do upgrade their Maggies to higher standards, with exotic crossover components, better binding posts, and wood or metal frames. |
Another capsule review:
http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showthread.php?2471-CES-2011-The-Good-the-Bad-and-the-Ugly
And also at TAS:
http://www.avguide.com/blog/maggie-spectacular
(Is that clarity to which he refers the Brystons, or the Maggies?)
And finally, more from Audiobeat:
http://www.theaudiobeat.com/ces2011/ces2011_bos_magnepan.htm |
Gmorris,
That's interesting and a bit surprising! I think everyone was expecting the 3.7's to use foil in the woofer. |
James,
Yeah, I'm leery too of initial reports since in the case of the 1.7 there was a fair amount of misinformation at first.
BTW, I see from the Planar Asylum that the first review is in:
http://www.computeraudiophile.com/content/CES-Day-Two-Notes |
I know the feeling, but at times like this, it's important to remember that despite the raves that accompany any new model, improvements in speakers are incremental! After all, there are still a lot of people enjoying IIIA's. Which is why they hold their value so well, there were a lot of 1.6's for sale after the 1.7 came out but the used price dropped hardly at all. Hell, my 1D's now go for more than I paid for them in the early 80's! |
Weseixas,
The Maggie tweeter ribbon is actually 3 ohms, owing I think to its length and thinness. Here's a schematic of the 3.6:
http://www.integracoustics.com/MUG/MUG/tweaks/mag3.6xover.jpg
I think Apogee's ribbon mids had such a low impedance because they were 3" wide. |
>Josh358, Yankee ribbon has a true "ribbon woofer" ....
That's interesting. How did they do that?
>The magnetic assembly is what determines if it is a true ribbon or not , not the type of diaphram,
You have a point, though I'm thinking that technically it's based on whether the diaphragm is shaped like a ribbon or not (attached at two ends rather than at all four sides). So the Apogees mids mylar backing would still be considered true ribbons, even the ones with three traces.
Of course, since true ribbons are narrow, the magnet assembly changes too, since a side-by-side arrangement has a field that's more linear with displacement. As I understand it, 3" is the maximum you can do that with practical magnets.
Also, as I understand it, at least some ribbons have low tension to put the vertical resonance below the driver's frequency range. |
Just what I've read here. Always lots of misinformation floating around at this stage, it takes a few weeks to figure out what's true. I've seen several references to better bass on the CES 3.7's, though. |
Onemug,
If you can get ahold of the reviews of the 20.1, either the TAS or Stereophile review compares the sound of the single-ended midrange 20 and the push-pull midrange 20.1, don't remember which one it was at this point (maybe both?). |
The VMPS line sources? I'd expect the imaging to be quite similar, since they have essentially the same driver geoemtry. |
I was looking for the source that said that Mylar was less resonant than Kapton, but couldn't find it. I did find an old post from Mart at Planar Asylum to the effect that Magnepan uses Mylar because it's less expensive.
By the way, I just saw the price of the Genesis 1.2 -- $235,000! Guess I won't be using them for surround. :-) |
Bimmer, if you can swing it, the 3.7 or 20.7 should do better in the dynamics department. If you want more than that and have the space, you can do what I did and get a used pair of Tympanis. |
There's a lot of slop in the use of these terms. Some manufacturers refer to quasi ribbons as "ribbons," which really is misleading. Sometimes they just say "planar," which could mean anything. Also, quasi ribbon drivers cover the gamut. You have quasi ribbons that are basically true ribbons backed by plastic -- some of the Apogee mids, for example, which consist of three ribbons with side-by-side magnets (like a true ribbon), joined together with plastic. Then you have quasi ribbons in which the foil covers most of the surface area, like Magnepan's quasi-ribbon tweeters. Finally, you have Magnepan's new quasi-ribbon woofers, or at least the ones in the 1.7, in which the foil traces aren't much wider than the wires they replaced.
Still, however they're made, quasi ribbons seem to be effective at bringing the sound closer to the true ribbon sound, by controlling more of the diaphragm area and reducing diaphragm resonances. Since it isn't possible to make a true ribbon woofer and true ribbon midranges are marginal (Apogee used them and at their best they were wonderful but they had amplifier-destroying impedances and tended to twist at levels above 100 dB SPL), they're the best that can currently be done with planar magnetic/ribbon technology. |
Epsilonman,
As you point out, the IRS V -- surely one of the greatest speakers ever made -- cost $60,000, and that was when it was new. The priciest Maggie goes for 1/3 of that, 1/6 when you factor in inflation. So you're comparing apples and oranges.
I can't agree with you on comparisons with the smaller Infinity models. They had their virtues, and their problems. So did the IRS V, like any speaker, but it's virtues were so overwhelming that it's hard to argue with it.
I think the big Genesis 1.1's, the speakers most comparable to the IRS, are over $100,000. For that, you could get five pairs of 20.1's and 20 pairs of 3.7's! For which reason they are of practical interest to more of us.
Magenpan had the quasi ribbon before Infinity and Jim Winey apparently wanted to use it in his original production model but didn't, for reasons I'm not clear on. In any case, it's being used now. And it's worth noting that nothing, including the IRS V, has ever equaled Tympani midbass. Sure, the Infinites went lower and louder (although the only time my 1-D's ever bottomed was on cannon shots on the Telarc I812), but the servo woofers couldn't keep up with the planar mids and tweeters, and to my ears, the Tympani woofers are the best ever made, combining as they do planar clarity with dynamic slam. If I did want to go lower and deeper, I'd just add a sub -- one contributor here actually has Bruce Pick's rotary woofer mated with his Tympani IV panels! That goes down to 0 Hz.
By the way, I understand that the 1.7 and 3.7 no longer suffer from the "Mylar sound" that bedevils large planars. That at least is what the reviewers say, I haven't heard them. The foil conductor/Mylar sandwich seems to do a better job of damping traveling waves than the wires. It's never bothered me; I can hear it if I listen, but normally I just tune it out. Unfortunately, all speakers have self-noise of one kind or another. This of course is a matter of taste, it's a sonic flaw and if it bothers you, it does.
Also, as I understand it, Mylar is actually a better sounding material than Kapton for planar drivers. The reason Infinity and other manufacturers used/use Kapton in smaller drivers is that they have to dissipate more heat, and Mylar has a lower melting point.
The reason the smaller Maggies aren't push-pull is, again, one of cost. The 20.1 is push-pull. I don't think you can get away with single-ended in a small driver like the EMIM's and EMIT's, the distortion would be too high. |
