Can Magnepan survive Wendell Diller?


I bought my first set of Magnepans in 1976, and I currently have a pair of 1.7i's.

It is difficult for me to upgrade to the 3.7i's because their are so many things that the company can do to improve their product that they simply won't offer; upgraded crossover components, a solid wood/rigid frames and better stands are examples.

Other companies are now doing this, but Magnepan always says Wendell doesn't think that is a good idea.

Can a man who suggests using lamp cord for his speaker line really have that much control over an otherwise unique technological approach to speaker design? I must be missing something obvious when a product is hand assembled in MN and any of these upgrades would, in my mind, warrant factory upgrades. Who wouldn't spend an extra $1k for a 1.7i with a hardwood frame and an upgraded x-over? Adding a ribbon tweeter to the 1.7i would warrant an additional $1k, still bringing them in $2k under the 3.7i.

Is it common for one person to hold an entire company back in high end audio? 
128x128william53b
Dsper,

"Why mess with that?"
Because that is what speaker design is all about? 
Continually refining and upgrading components to create the best sound you can make with your product.

It is as if they have the head of Ford automotive design running Porsche. And Ford has all but given up making cars, lest the Mustang, because they can't compete. 
They can't compete because they are making the wrong choices, they can't blame who they hire on someone else; they don't see it as their failure to make their car lines profitable as a process that they would have to change to compete at something they practically invented.

Why doesn’t Magnepan incrementally improve their product by adding a rigid laminate to the MDF frame to tighten up the middle of the frame instead of wasting money on the 30.7?
don_c55,

I get what you are saying, I bought the 1.7i's based on a brick and mortar demo session. They beat everything on the showrooms floor for anything near that price range. 
But I have to say that once home and listening the upper mids and treble sound seemed muddy, sort of like they have a slight head cold. No other speaker in a line of products suffers from that the way the Maggie’s do. My KEF R 300’s have the same midrange tweeter combo as their big brother the R 900's had. So the only thing that suffered in the line significantly as you got smaller was the bass response; just like practically every other speaker line on the market.

Again, K-mart design parameters in an high end market. 
To my point on the 1.7i's I messed with some complimentary drivers to incorporate with my speakers, something that has mega definition.

I bought some Fostex FE168EZ 6.5" drivers and Fostex pots from Madisound and made some thrown together boxes that I placed behind the Maggie's with just enough volume to add definition to the mids and highs. What an amazing difference!

I would add them as dipoles but I can't figure out how to do so without making them incredibly ugly, as mounting them to the top of the frame looked horrible. 
Because of this I have decided to go all in on their rebuild with all new X-over components, binding posts and pulling the fuse from the design. (I removed the fuses and replaced them with solids but the gain was not significant compared to what the Fostex drivers do for the speakers performance.)

Once I get my "Maggie’s little helpers" final boxes built and mounted  I'll post a picture of them.

But this is an awfully long way to go in time and expense to do something that I should be able to buy from the manufacturer, don't you think?


It's something I'm thinking about now that I'm retired. But do I want the headaches of running a company again? No, I don't think so. And I don't view myself as an audiophile as much as someone who loves music and wants the best reproduction I can afford, and you need the personality of a sales person to successfully run a consumer product company. ps audio and Zu have that in their owners. 

Since I already have accepted the size tax on buying the current ones I have, it just makes me wonder why they don't go the extra mile by letting the customers decide how much better their sound should be for the package they buy, and by extension, how much they would pay for for the deluxe model.

I used to do product design and development, you would always logically extend something to the nth degree when you have a unique product. I just read something about the Maggie 30.7 for condos, and that isn’t a bad idea. But why reinvent the wheel when you could improve the sound of the existing product by 15-20%? Marketing should never wag the dog, but it often does; Klipsh is an excellent example of not installing great components so that you can upgrade the line in 2-3 years, based on marketing considerations thinking. Why not just put in the best components and let the market chase you while you look at advances in technologies and materials to refine your design based on research? 
If Maggie’s came in a box, I wouldn't even have bothered posting this, cause it's just another manufacturer implementing their design philosophy on that medium, but Maggie’s are different, and that is something that should be capitalized on, IMHO.
But you know it would be a whole lot easier if they would just finish what they started. No spending my retirement savings on my part, and a lot of happier Maggie owners on their part. 
I wish  Musk would take on audio, he is not afraid of upsetting the market by innovation.

And If I get a windfall of money maybe then I'll ask Mark if he want's to sell. 😉