Compare Maggie 1.6QR to IIIA

Thanks for the suggestions and comments. I have heard the IIIAs but not the 1.6QRs. What do you mean when you say that the the technology of the 1.6 tweeter matches that of the woofer? Are you referring to the difference in age of the new ribbon in the refurbished IIIAs? Thanks

Dewhi...The "Tweeter" in the MG1.6 is just more Mylar diaphram with lighter conductors on it. Same as the Woofer except that the conductors are metal foil rather than wires and (I think) the Mylar is thinner.

In the "R" models, the tweeter is a completely different device, a ribbon transducer. Ribbons are very good, but some think that their sonic characteristics differ too much from the Maggie woofer panels.

If you don't hear a big improvement from the ribbons, save your money and stay with the MG1.6QR. The ribbons also have some reliability weaknesses that don't exist with the QR tweeters.

If you do prefer the ribbons, by all means get them. Just be sure it is because of what you hear, and not that people told you that the ribbons are better.

I've owned MG-IIIa's and now use 1.6QR's. I like the
1.6's better. They are more coherent and seamless in
their presentation. Maybe the last little bit of
airiness is lacking, but there is no shrillness or
harshness to the 1.6's which affect many other speakers
(occasionally the ribbon tweeter Magnepans). YMMV