Quad or Magnepan?

Dear friends,

Thinking about taking the plunge and follow the other route to audio nirvana. So instead of cones and domes, electrostatics and planars maybe.

I am using a Ref3a Grand Veena but am considering a Maggie 3.6 or a Quad 2905.

Need your sincere advice, am I downgrading or making the wiser move. If it is the right way, which would you prefer? Maggies or Quad?

Thanks as always.
you must supply room size and amp used. Can you put the speakers 5 feet out into the room? That is the minimum for Maggies in my experience and Quads like a bit of breathing room as well.

I can not help you compare them to the Grand Veena as I have not heard them...
I would say IF your choice is between those two: If you like to listen at louder levels.. get the Maggies. If you enjoy a lot of quiet (but intense) listening, get the Quads.
The Maggies have a reputation of being their best when played a bit louder, with high-powered amps. The Quads excel at lower volume levels.
So, If I were deciding.. I AM BUYING the Maggies.. even though I listen at lower volumes only because the dealer is local. (If I had a Quad dealer locally, it might be a different story.)
I can confirm Elizabeth's comments, Magnepans do flourish when the volume is turned up. Many users have commented that Magenpans don't "rock" but I have found that to be untrue. They can play chamber music and rock music with equal aplomb.
These are both good speakers. I would also consider the Kingsound King, which I reviewed.
I think it depends on the type of music you listen to. I love Maggies and have owned them for years, the do need a big, good, amp and placement is important, but not as much as related on these forums.

That said, I love the Quads, great speakers. For a smaller room, and jazz, vocal or smaller orchestral arrangements, the Quads are sublime.
From my experience selling maggies years ago and listening to a few Quads at Overture Audio in Delaware about two years ago, the 2905's specifically, I would go for the Maggies by far regardless of all other concerns if you have a good amp and room space as Quads need that too. The Quads seemed to have a homogenized sound that kept saying "SHHHHHH" as if they were telling me to stop talking. They sound like that ... cymbals especially. Shimmering is one thing, but they sounded that way much of the time overall. The dipole effect was severely noticeable as I got within about eight feet in front of them and is not as noticeable with the Maggies; be it with or without toe-in. Yes, I do thoroughly understand the physics of sound cancellation to the sides. Plus, the Maggies let you position the tweeters to the insides or outsides as you prefer or your room needs for tighter and better imaging or a wider soundstage. That option can also help them function better in your room due to size, wall and ceiling arrangements, etc. There is also good and valid reasons why Audio Research uses Maggies to test and voice their gear on for decades now. The Maggie is taller too, so it will naturally throw a higher soundstage, and does. I hope this helps you.
i find it interesting when a reference loudspeaker is kicked to the curb. i suspect you're bored.
These are such different speakers that I wonder how you narrowed it down to them?
At least as important as the speaker choice is your choice of amp to accompany the speakers. Maggies really do like a lot more watts, which gets expensive if you like tubed amps. Quads will flourish on moderate power tube amps. As said above, Maggies will sound realistic when cranked a bit, but below that threshold, they sound closed-in and dynamically constrained. I've had my Maggies for 10 years now, and love them to death. Occasionally, I've spent some serious time with Quads as well. They really are exceptional at retreiving low-level detail, and are great for late-night listening sessions where you don't wake up the neighbors.

Horses for courses.

If it were me, I'd also take a really hard look at Roger Sanders's electrostats (his new 10B's). They can really kick butt dynamically, and with the line-drive woofer will give you the gut-punch of solid bass that neither Maggies, nor Quads can deliver. At the same time, they are spectacular at detail and have the "breath of life." Roger wrote the book (literally!) on electrostats. Highly recommended!
Least we forget, the Mags also make excellent room dividers.
What don't you like about the Grand Veena. My understanding is that is a reference level, very special speaker?
Thanks to all who contributed.

Jaybo: You sound like your personal choice would be GV's right? If so what do you think its competitive edge is to Maggie and Quads?

Unsound: I wanted to try something different, something with a more you are there feeling and huge soundstage. That does not mean that GV is not competent at these, however I had a brief encounter with 3.6 one week ago and was thrilled with what it is capable of.

Mr.Bill: I love GV, it is one of the best I have heard so far, maybe sparing Hansen aside. So no real complaints.

Philojolet: My room is like 45 square meters.

Unfortunately Sanders and Kingsound is not available here.

I would also hear from people who could have listened all and compare GV to the other two? Any first hand experiences?

I own Maggies (20.1) and have heard the GV a lot. Different systems, but of equal quality. The GV are more dynamic and have better bass (WEIN) If you do get and keep them both you will be switching them out every week or so. The GV's are my choice for floorstanding cone speakers. The Maggies fill my living room better. Tough choice you have unless you can keep both.