Maggies 3.6 vs 20.1

Remember this is just my personnal opinion,even though I think its an educated one, based on audtioning all the speakers your interested in.First,the ML Prodigy has been dicontinued for good reasons,they were lousy sounding speakers. ML has not made good sounding speaker since the Monoliths many years ago. I own MG-20's and think their great speakers with many virtues that compete with some of the great speakers of the world at a very reasonable price for what they offer.[I know its kinda sick to call 10,000.00 speakers reasonable!] Your final question about are they twice as good for twice the cost, compared to the 3.6s the answer is yes. They just take it to another level on all parameters, if you admire 3.6s,and have the room and right electronics you will be in sonic bliss with the 20.1s.Hope this helps.

What are your room dimensions?...that's really the first thing to consider, do you have the space to realize the potential of the larger 20's?
Regarding Nealhood's comments about having 7' behind the speaker to make them really shine. There's some truth in that but it comes down to personal preferrence. I had my 3.6's at around 7.5', when I brought them out to 9' I found the stage depth increased considerably but the bass became a little softer and the midrange just a tad leaner. I enjoyed the extra stage depth so accepted the downsides as being a reasonable trade-off. The point is, depending on your preferrence you may prefer the 20's a little closer to the front wall than 7'.

I've heard the Prodigy's and some of what they did was spectacular. The midrange, the 3-dimensional stage were excellent attributes, but the bass was all over the place. I'm sure people have had good success getting the dynamic woofer to integrate with the stats, but I've never heard a successful Logan installation in that regard.

One other consideration. The performance of the 3.6's can be elevated via basic modifications. I've heard people claim that the 20.1 performance can be surpassed by a tricked-out 3.6, but I have no direct experience of any comparison between the two, so I can't comment. I do have a heavily modified set of 3.6's and can attest to their performance being noticably improved over the stock units.
In the next few weeks I hope to be testing a DEQX unit as a replacement for the passive XO's. I anticipate another slight lift in performance, but that remains to be seen.

In summary, I know many Logan owners are happy with their hybrids, I just think it's difficult to get the woofer integration seamless, and maybe a little hit and miss depending on room/equipment.
A modified 3.6R might give you all of the performance of a stock 20, in a smaller footprint, if space is an issue.

Good luck,

Rooze

You might want to consider the Eminent Technology LFT-VIIIA.
One AudiogoNer said he had the Maggie1.6's and then auditioned
the ET's --he switched almost immediately and hasn't looked back.
I believe someone else on AudiogoN favorably compared the ET's
to the much more expensive 3.6r's.
Just a thought.

I have 3.6's, and have had the 1.6qr's as well. The 3.6 is a much better speaker in all aspects, as long as the electronics behind it match the speakers. A lot of clean power is needed.

That said, I believe the 20.1 is the finest speaker made, period, regardless of price. You need to run it with ridiculous power, such as the Innersound ESL monoblocks (800's, or the over the top KW blocks), Krell or Bryston Monoblocks, Plinius as well.

They are a much more cohernt speaker than any hybrid, they are seemless. Like any equipment, definitely take a good test run before purchasing. But you will find many people, not just me, who find the 20.1 to be the finest speaker made, regardless of price.

Good luck

Greetings,
I'm the Agoner that Sedona spoke of, the one who switched to Eminent Technology speakers from the Maggie 1.6's.
Right now I'm running twin pairs of LFT-8's with 8 channels of amplification. You can see this in my virtual system. I have recently posted commments on this setup.

It seems you have deep enough pockets if you're inquring about the 20's. Honestly, I can't say that the Eminents would challenge the 20's and 3.6's since I haven't heard them side by side. The 20's are probably in another class altogether. But we're talking a $1,500.00 speaker vs. one that's multiples more.

I did side by side at home comparison of the 1.6's and LFT-8's. I put the 1.6's up for sale two days later. The Eminents walked all over them.

I would suggest the in home trial period for the Eminents; return shipping is a small price to pay for a serious comparison, especially when you're talking some of the speakers you've mentioned. It would be interesting to see if you also feel the Eminents are a step up from the 1.6's.

One of the things which motivated me to try them was the universally high praise they garnered on audioreview.com
I have never seen a speaker get ALL 5 of 5 rating in something like 17 reviews, but the Eminents did. I concur, a solid 5 out of 5.

My impressions of the comparison were:
1.6's won in width of soundstage (but not by much), but that's about it. They are physically wider than the LFT-8's.

But as far as detail without harshness, bass presence, depth of soundstage, imaging and chanel separation, and less listening fatigue, the LFT's were superior. The are somewhat inelegant looking, but the sound is luxurious.

They are a truly unbelievable steal at under $1k used.