Welcome! Need support, you got it. Or share your ideas and experiences.
Return to Planar Speaker Asylum
[ Asylum Support ] [ Rules ] |
Model: | Magneplanar MG2.6R |
Category: | Speakers |
Suggested Retail Price: | $1,900 |
Description: | 2-way 609in² planar-magnetic speaker with a 45 |
Manufacturer URL: | Magnepan |
Model Picture: | View |
Review by Robert C on April 22, 2007 at 18:09:45 IP Address: 199.126.248.127 | Add Your Review for the Magneplanar MG2.6R |
I have been browsing the planer asylum for some time now. One of the issue that have kept me from owning and listening to a maggie is the perceived power requirement.Last year I bought a McIntosh MC2105 to see what it can do to my bookshelf speaker. I found it has overwhelming power, surely much more than the 105w that it's listed. Since then I have been looking for a pair of maggie. I was directed to look at mainly 1.6 due to its price and quality. After a year of searching, I found a pair of 2.6 in my local dealer's showroom. After coming back from the showroom, I researched on this site. There are not that many people with experience of it. I decided to give it a listen. After calling my dealer, he mentioned that he also just got a pair of 1.6 from trade in. He would gladly let me listen to both.
I was excited as hell going into this session. While I have no golden ears and in my experience didn't have much chance to listen to too many good gears so I am not sure if I know how to tell a good speakers from a bad one. Upon arriving, I found the following equipment setup. A Arcam CD player, AR SP16 pre with remote, a Plinius 8200 150 watt amp. Room size is around 12x 19 ft. A really good size room. Upon listening, I found I really enjoy the speaker. I was also amazed by the ability of the amp. I enjoyed listening to it and I tried to turn down the volume a bit to see what happened. One of my objective is to find a speaker/amp pair that will allow good low level listening. From my reading here, maggie is not supposed to do well. Contrary to belief, I find I enjoy listening to it in both normal and low level. I am able to listen to the details and music. I don't know how to describe the high or mid range. It just feels right. It feels natural and especially the vocal. Its as close to the sound I have always been looking for. In my previous listening sessions with various speakers, I always lean towards favoring smaller speakers. Whenever I listen to tower speakers, I always feel overwhelmed and annoyed. With the maggie 2.6, I feel that i can listen to it very long time. Whatever the high or low you use to describe the sound, I find it very well presented. Gone is any one single section of the sound. Its not as "dynamic" as my small speakers(JMLab Cobalt 806). Nothing shouts for attention. It just presents the hugh sound wall in a good palette of colour.
Next I listen to the 1.6. Now I was told the 1.6 would be more efficient and that I would be able to listen to it at a lower level as a result. What I find instead is I did actually turn the volume up because its not giving me the bass or the bottom end as much as the 2.6. As a comparison, I find myself turning the volume up more and more. One possibility is because of the details it presented and I find myself trying to hear more and more of it.
Which one is better ? My dealer said he likes the 1.6 better and he has one pair himself. I trust his opinion and I always respect his prefessional service. I have an amp with a lower power rating so I have to pay attention to the speaker's efficiency. At the end of the day, I enjoyed listening to the 2.6 quite a bit more. When I listen to it, I felt natural and relaxed.
I bought the 2.6 at a price lower than my new JMLab.
When I got it home, I quitely find that I can't duplicate what I hear at the dealer because I am using different equipment. The main difference is the room I have is close to 2 times bigger and the amp I have is quite a bit slower. End result is the sound is not as relaxed as at the dealer as the size of the room means that I have to turn the volume up a bit. For the amp, while its not as capable as the Plinius, it may be better in presenting vocals.
What I learned from this experience is while we may rely on opinion of others, its very very important to try it on your own situation. At this price, its difficult to find a new pair of speakers that can do what it does. The ribbon is excellent in presenting vocals. While 105watts is very little as a comparison to the 300 + amp most people use for their maggie, the little McIntosh is making good music with the 2.6. The sound while not the fastest, its detailed, smooth, natural, lack of any boxiness, 3d sound stage. I also learned that room condition contributes close to 50% of the sound. In the future, I will find ways to improve that in my listening room.
This review is not intended to be a professional review of the speaker sound. I just know that i enjoyed the music. Please don't be afraid to try your hands on Maggie because you only have 50 watts of amp power. It may not be able to bring out the best of it, it will not be able to hold back many of its attributes. Once you have heard of the ribbon, you may find it dfficult to go back.
One note to those who's lucky enough to live in Edmonton, AB Canada. Bob in Audio Ark is the person you want to speak with if you are interested in maggie. Personal service is much more important than low price on the net.
Product Weakness: | More like weakness of the amp. One thing I do agree with the general public opinion is maggie most likely are not built for rock music. (but then its only until someone else come out to disprove it, isn't it ??) |
Product Strengths: | Ribbon's ability to present vocal or accoustic music. |
Associated Equipment for this Review: | |
Amplifier: | McIntosh MC2105 |
Preamplifier (or None if Integrated): | Quad QC24 |
Sources (CDP/Turntable): | REga planer 3 and Rotel 961 |
Speakers: | Maggie 2.6, JMlab cobalt 806 |
Cables/Interconnects: | stock |
Music Used (Genre/Selections): | jazz and various vocal |
Room Size (LxWxH): | 15 x 33 x 8 |
Type of Audition/Review: | Product Owner |
Follow Ups:
I'm using the MC202 200w x 2,4 and 8 Ohm driving the MG10/QR when playing music with heavy bass at about 90-95 db and the amp power gaurd flashing wildly, look likes it needs about 300-400w of power for them to sing or may be the distortions are from my tube preamp. This's a terifict amp to drive these speakers at moderate level soudstage's deep, wide and so natural :-)) It has the similar sound quality of the 2.6 with less bass.
I also would try Zero Impedance autoXformers, which seems to help amplifiers deliver more amperes
♪ moderate Mart £ ♫ ☺ Planar Asylum
Hey Mart,I'm no expert, but how would adding an external autoformer effect the Mac's, which already use and internal autoformer?
from what I understand, many tubies seem to desire an output tap between 2ohms & 4ohms when propelling Maggies optimally (maximum clean current). That usually means employing an 8ohm tap & 3:1 autoXformer step-down, for an effeective 2.67ohm tap (usually accompanied with an increased effeective amplifier damping factor from seeing an effeective 12ohm nominaative load).
♪ moderate Mart £ ♫ ☺ Planar Asylum
Please tell me what I'm (apparently) not understanding, Mart. I thought you wanted the tube amp to see a higher impedance, thus the addition of an autoformer. Most tube amps won't do squat at under 4 ohms. Or, maybe they WILL squat. Seems like 8 ohms and higher is what tube amps need to see. Isn't this correct?
Be-Bop and Mahler
as a 14 year 2.6 owner, that's listened to them with several amps, from 100wpc to 800wpc, I can tell you that power is what makes them sing. The more power and current you feed them, the more they seem to open up. I am just finishing re-equiptmenting my maggie home theater, and went with 800 x5 for power, with 2 very strong subs. I mostly listen to concert dvd's, either in multichannel or stereo. What I now have does justice to Sarah Brighton or Allison Krause, but can also duplicate the energy of Carlos Santana and Rob Thomas, Clapton, or Steven Tyler and Joe Perry. My 2.6's are destined to be the rear surrounds in my next theater, with 20.1's in the front. But for nowthey do a fine job. great review on the 2.6 and 1.6.
Hi Robert, I enjoyed your review. I've had a Mac/Maggie combo for years myself. What tap are you using on your 2105?The 2105 is rated at 100 wpc. The 5 at the end of the model # just indicates it has a glass front with meters. It doesn't have 5 more watts than the 2100 which is the same amp but no glass or meters. BUT everyone of them really put out close to 150, and that's rms with brief peaks around 300. Mac used to under rate the power, nobody ever complains about getting more than they paid for. The amp is close to 40 years old, tough for a fair fight with a new Plinius but it looks like it did okay.
Hi Onemug, I am using the 4ohm tap. I can understand the benefit of more power easily.For this review, the purpose is not to say previous comments of more power the better, but just to encourange people who had shared the same concern to not be afraid to try this good speakers.
Another one issue I tried to comment on is if you feel your maggie is not giving you enough base, try to look at your speaker placement or the room first before looking at your hardware.
Listening and enjoying low level with the maggie is also possible with the right amp and room combo as well.
My next upgrade is actually not the amp, but to find ways to improve the room first then a myre stand before the amp. Instead of a powerful ss amp, I may look for a good 50+ tube.
♪ moderate Mart £ ♫ ☺ Planar Asylum
Transistor amp.
Be-Bop and Mahler
Is this wrong?
♪ moderate Mart £ ♫ ☺ Planar Asylum
It's so wrong, it's scary wrong. The photo is of a 2105, which is SS from late 60's early 70's. The description is of a 2102, a current tube product.
No, it's not wrong, it's just the wrong vintage of 2105. I believe we're talking about the original SS from back in the early '70's. Is that correct?
Be-Bop and Mahler
Only one vintage of a 2105. They are describing a 2102. Their picture is of the early 2105.
I always thought that the MC2105 was a SS amp. I too believe they are describing a MC2102, with the picture of 2105. The MC2105 is the same as the MC2100, but with the power dials.http://mcintoshlaboratory.tripod.com/aa/mc2105.htm
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: