2. speakers
  3. 129773-1644

What are some of the downsides of owning a Magneplanar .7 or 1.7i ?

Thinking of moving up speaker wise, and so am considering  the fabled Magneplanar speakers, that is, either the  the .7, or supposedly new 1.7i.   (BTW, I am not sure the Maggie .7 is necessarily an upgrade, and has less bass than my current box speakers...see below)

Besides "Maggies" having outdated speaker terminals that might be a struggle with banana plugs,, and they are generally power hungry, I am curious if anyone can honestly tell me of any other downsides of this design.  For the last 30 years, I have owned several traditional box design speakers. 

I currently have a pair of Golden Ear Technology model 7's....which I like and generally sound good However, I  would like to confirm what a planar design brings to the table in sound quality. I have read many times about the box-less sound  provided by this design, and its wide sound staging and low distortion. 

I think I have enough power with BAT VK-200 amp (100RMS) to drive the .7, but not sure that is enough to drive the MG1.7i. to higher volumes The pre-amp is a Conrad Johnson PV-14SE. 

The listening room area 12 X15ft, but opens into kitchen/dining area divided by a medium size couch. The rest of the space is approximately 12X18ft behind the sofa with a stupid counter island ( so I cannot move the sofa back any further.. The ceiling is 8 to 9 ft feet high ( not a cathedral ceiling, praise the Lord) . It is a bit of haul to the dealer I bought the Golden Ear T's from who also carries Magneplanar line.  All advice welcomed.    Thanks, SJ   

sunnyjim
kalali's avatar
kalali
1,977 posts
 

"If speaker is suited great for certain kind of music and not good for other kind of music, than this speaker by the general rule of thumb junk."

This might be true in theory but if this were a "general rule of thumb", we wouldn't have so many different designs, brands, or even sizes of speakers out there to choose from. Same content played through a very high sensitivity single driver speaker will sound very different when heard through a multi-driver, or ESL, or magnetic planar design speakers. And in many cases, particularly for large orchestral/multi instrument content, the experience will be much closer to "live" performance depending on the speaker size, etc.

corelli
941 posts
 
I owned the 1.7's for almost 5 yrs and really liked them.  They float a (too?) big soundstage and have that open sound I love.
I was shocked when I ordered the Tekton Double Impacts.  I now realized how I was missing the dynamics of real music.  The sound stage was perhaps even better.  The DI's produced the most realistic piano I've ever heard.  And then this corker--the DI's clearly were superior in grouped voices.  I could never pick out the detail of individual voices on my optimally set up 1.7's like I can with the DI's.  Wow!
Don't get me wrong, I'll always love the Maggies and what they do well.  But overall the DI's for me were so clearly superior I would never go back.
Not trying to push you to the DI's but just point out limitations of the 1.7 that I was not aware of. 
douglas_schroeder
3,281 posts
 
corelli, the secret sauce to the Tekton speakers is the quasi line source array. There are some characteristics of sound reproduction which line sources and panels share. I'm not saying they are identical or that the one can reproduce the other, but they do overlap in some respects. Just as with panels one has to accept certain compromises in performance when approaching a line source. What they do, some can do exceptionally well. 

If you were to work with a fine traditional 3-way you would be confronted with the lack of coherence of the quasi-line source array. I know, I know, you think it couldn't get more clear, delineated. That's wrong, and you would hear it immediately with a great 3-way. But, you would lose some of the characteristics of the line source in the process. It's all trade-offs in speaker design. 

Now, corelli, if you want a very interesting experience, switch back and forth over time between the two, panel and line array. You will be shocked at how "wrong" in comparison the other sounds as you adjust to the one playing. It takes time to adjust to a new speaker technology when you have been using the other. But, once adjusted it sounds "right" to the ear. Then, when you switch back again you have to readjust. But, sure enough, over the next few days it sounds more and more "right" to the ear. It teaches one to pay attention to the more nuanced variables of sound production and how one technology cannot capture the essence of perfect sound reproduction. 


ps
740 posts
 
To the OP, there are NO disadvantages to Magepans. Only you can decide if they are for you.

Setting aside the tired notion of "how may angels might fit on the head of a pin" it seems to me that the aim of home audio, high end or otherwise, is to eventually stop farting around and simply enjoy the music. Case in point, today I hung a pair of the modest Audioengine A2+ speakers in my garage and spent hours listening to all kinds of music while working on various projects. Loved it! Absolutely no concern with any audiophile yada, yada, just the music. From Dvorak to Ornette Coleman, to Tom Petty and more.

Full disclosure: I don’t pretend to know nor have heard what "The Absolute Sound" is, even after decades of listening to many genres of music, live or reproduced.
YMMV.

cisgo
30 posts
 
I will second the vote for Spatial, especially if you have room or power concerns. I currently power a pair of M3 Turbo S with a first watt J2 (13 watt at 4ohm) and am quite pleased with the combo.
More to discover