Planar Speaker Asylum

Welcome! Need support, you got it. Or share your ideas and experiences.

Return to Planar Speaker Asylum

Message Sort: Post Order or Asylum Reverse Threaded

Tympani IV vs IV-A?

91.152.15.204
Posted on November 9, 2014 at 05:23:54
AkuAnkka
Audiophile

Posts: 167
Joined: February 3, 2013
 From some discussion on this page I understood that the main difference between IV and IV-A's is a better mid range in a former one. But, if I look at this info page, it says that while IV-A's can go down to 30hz, while IV's would go only to 43hz: http://www.integracoustics.com/MUG/MUG/articles/speakers.html

So, how does this actually go? Are original IV's really so bad with the ower basses? I wonder if 2.x's and 3.x's really would go lower than IV's, even when they have only about the half of the bass area??

 

Hide full thread outline!
    ...
RE: Tympani IV vs IV-A?, posted on November 9, 2014 at 05:58:18
john65b
Audiophile

Posts: 326
Location: Chicago
Joined: July 19, 2005
 I have heard three Tympanis - T-Id, T-IV and T-IVa

The T-IV and T-IVa were much better sounding (both deeper and higher with ribbon tweet and bigger bass panels) than the T-Id, while I could not really sense a noticeable sonic differ between the T-IVa and T-IV.

The only real difference was cosmetics - the T-IVa had the nice oak rails, while the T-IV looked plain like the T-Id...

Still have a pair of T-Id I have to re-sock....
I VOID WARRANTIES

 

RE: Tympani IV vs IV-A?, posted on November 9, 2014 at 08:13:49
Norman M
 Perhaps a lot has to do with the listening room and its size. I have a IV-A and a 3.6R and in the same room, and relative positions, the 3.6 has a very long way to go to match the IV-A in any and all regards, (unless one has a vivid imagination).

 

RE: Tympani IV vs IV-A?, posted on November 9, 2014 at 09:04:58
Roger Gustavsson
Audiophile

Posts: 2058
Location: Huskvarna
Joined: February 12, 2010
 The technical data on that page is not allways correct. 43 Hz is one of the lower tuning frequencies of the IV, use to be different for the two speakers. The IVa has 40 Hz. This is what is measured at the fsctory, use to get lower with time. I think IIIA, I-D, IV and IVa all reach about 30 Hz in most rooms.

IV vs IVa, IVa is warmer sounding.

 

RE: Tympani IV vs IV-A?, posted on November 9, 2014 at 09:05:30
AkuAnkka
Audiophile

Posts: 167
Joined: February 3, 2013
 So basically is there some faulty information on that page regarding the lowest frequency range (3.6: 34hz, IV: 43hz)?

 

RE: Tympani IV vs IV-A?, posted on November 9, 2014 at 09:23:15
Satie
Audiophile

Posts: 5426
Joined: July 6, 2002
 The main difference is the longer midrange with the thinner mylar.

cosmetic differences were in the wood side panels.

I don't see a significant difference in the bass panels but they may have used different spacing.

T IV with Neo8 midrange, in the Limage setup, in my 17X19.5 room the bottom octave bass is elevated 4 db over the midbass. I EQ the bass DOWN when playing from PC and have definite and impactful organ foot pedal notes - most recently the 16hz note from the Gloucester Cathedral Organ was reproduced to scare the b'jezuz out of me. I can also hear cutting lathe noises from LP and buses and subway noises on some in city studio recordings. I have all the parts for my subwoofers waiting to be assembled but found no motivation to bother finishing them.

If you are willing to make the effort in unconventional and inconvenient Limage placement and spend for the power to drive them (2kw into 4 ohms is not outlandish) you can get a -3 db point below 20 hz.

 

RE: Tympani IV vs IV-A?, posted on November 9, 2014 at 09:37:05
AkuAnkka
Audiophile

Posts: 167
Joined: February 3, 2013
 Thanks Satie! But what is that "Limage setup"?? I couldn't find it with Google...

 

RE: Tympani IV vs IV-A?, posted on November 9, 2014 at 09:56:44
Satie
Audiophile

Posts: 5426
Joined: July 6, 2002
 We discussed it over the past couple of years. It is a placement method for room coupling to make the most of your room's walls - reflections and bass loading to bring about strong bass, warmer balance and outrageously expansive soundstagess while retaining image precision.

Mark Man Swamis cat and Wazoo all fell under the spell and so have a few others. Search in the MUG section with "limage" and you should have quite a few threads.

unique to a tympani, I placed the deep bass panel perpendicular to the wall with minimal spacing and the attached midbass panel is further out in the room. Both face stricktly forwards. I am trying a wide veriety of positionings with the mid tweeter and adjusting the crossover to match the different standoffs or arranging in partial or complete time alignment - within the limits of matching timiing with a 4X6 panel.

This allows you to capture the deepest bass room mode while avoiding the sidewall mode.

 

RE: Tympani IV vs IV-A?, posted on November 9, 2014 at 11:10:29
Roger Gustavsson
Audiophile

Posts: 2058
Location: Huskvarna
Joined: February 12, 2010
 Yes, the difference between the Tympanis and the 3-series is, at least to me, significant. The 3.6 is tuned to about 49 Hz (drop with 18 dB/octave below) and it compress rather early.

 

RE: Tympani IV vs IV-A?, posted on November 9, 2014 at 12:00:25
Satie
Audiophile

Posts: 5426
Joined: July 6, 2002
 Magnepan said in the manual that 30 hz is the initial frequency extension at -3db, expands over breakin and in room response by another 5 hz to 25 hz.

See pages 15-16

I don't know where the numbers in the table came from.


Edit: THIS IS for the TYMPANI IV and IVA

 

HK/Limage pic..., posted on November 9, 2014 at 12:10:09
Mark Man
Audiophile

Posts: 1079
Location: MN
Joined: January 31, 2010



Aku...

Sadie is spot on with how well this set up works, with the right room...scary good...when you get it right, things really open up and virtually snap into focus...

My room is 12'W X 19'-8"L...edge of speakers, (bass panel section), is 11-1/2" from the side walls...6' between the inside edges of the speakers...

Now this is what Sadie was referring to...the speakers are 8'-8" off the front wall...this equates to 43% into the room...from what was posted on this site, (lots of good stuff if you do a search on the HK/Limage set-up on this forum)...for this set up to work well the speakers need to be Minimum of 40% and a Maximum of 60% into the room off the front wall...

This virtually cuts my living room in half as far as usable space...since I am a single dude with no WAF issues it does not bother me in the least...my family thinks I am nuts, duh...and one of neighbors suggested I should buy some Bose speakers, because they are much smaller than my current speakers...well..we just won't go there...

If your room is a rectangle, you have a far-field set-up and don't mind sacrificing 40%+ into your room...this is the way to go...

Hope this helps...
thanks
Mark

 

RE: Tympani IV vs IV-A?, posted on November 9, 2014 at 13:01:10
JLindborg
Audiophile

Posts: 1037
Location: Uppsala
Joined: April 26, 2010
 I think I have been over this before regarding the MG3.6 and its lowest frequency ability.
The one I used (I hope they have some IPC "In Process Controll" that should pick up any deviation) had a resonance frequency around 43Hz and dropped rapidly below that.
Below 40Hz there was NOTHING of useful output.
So 30Hz is totally impossible for a MG3.6.
You may be able to hear it if You play loud and with a 30Hz note but it will be just that, being able to just hear it slightly.
So, not usable.

I have no clue to where they got 30Hz from.
This is part of my honest measuring result from that speaker model.

Cheers!

The one who succeeded was the one who didn't know it was impossible.

 

RE: Tympani IV vs IV-A?, posted on November 9, 2014 at 13:13:53
JLindborg
Audiophile

Posts: 1037
Location: Uppsala
Joined: April 26, 2010
 But then again, You may have been talking about the Tympani?

Hard to tell with this forum layout without quotes...



The one who succeeded was the one who didn't know it was impossible.

 

RE: Tympani IV vs IV-A?, posted on November 9, 2014 at 13:51:08
Satie
Audiophile

Posts: 5426
Joined: July 6, 2002
 JL

The manual and 30 hz figure is for the Tympani IVA (and IV - hardly anything is different) not for the 3.6; I never heard a 3.6 do satisfying Liszt on piano.

 

RE: Tympani IV vs IV-A?, posted on November 9, 2014 at 17:52:38
Norman M
 If it isn't doing "satisfying Liszt on piano" how can it be expected to 'deliver the goods' on a Mahler symphony?

 

RE: Tympani IV vs IV-A?, posted on November 9, 2014 at 21:15:57
Satie
Audiophile

Posts: 5426
Joined: July 6, 2002
 Not without subwoofers and you don't get quite enough output in the mids. The 3.6 are great speakers, just not really full range.

 

RE: Tympani IV vs IV-A?, posted on November 10, 2014 at 03:09:19
Roger Gustavsson
Audiophile

Posts: 2058
Location: Huskvarna
Joined: February 12, 2010
 Well, I think the 30 Hz for the T-IVa is after breaking in as the lowest resonant frequency is at 40 Hz during the manufactoring. Below the fundamental resonance, there will be cut-off at 18 dB/octave. A dipole does not get much help of the room.

 

RE: Tympani IV vs IV-A?, posted on November 10, 2014 at 04:39:16
Satie
Audiophile

Posts: 5426
Joined: July 6, 2002
 My deep bass panel was marked "32" on one side and "35" on the other channel in red crayon. I am not sure that 40 hz was always the defacto resonance peak. In y measurements the resonance peak appears in the low 30s, not really 40hz.

I think the spec (like they measure) is 30 hz initial and 25 hz final.

 

RE: Tympani IV vs IV-A?, posted on November 10, 2014 at 05:38:37
Roger Gustavsson
Audiophile

Posts: 2058
Location: Huskvarna
Joined: February 12, 2010
 My T-IIIA low bass drivers have 46 Hz and 55 Hz written on the frame. If I measure them today (after 25 years in storage) it is 34-35 Hz. Have not measured my T-IVa yet. Stereoplay measured 40 Hz.

 

RE: Tympani IV vs IV-A?, posted on November 10, 2014 at 05:54:11
Satie
Audiophile

Posts: 5426
Joined: July 6, 2002
 My bass panels were restored at magnepan, one a couple of years back and one 15 years ago. They measure about the same and not off from the numbers on the frame. The 40 hz must have been measured before the speakers broke in to any extent.
I must say 46 and 55 is not a close match. Are they both the same type panel?

 

RE: Tympani IV vs IV-A?, posted on November 10, 2014 at 06:20:38
Roger Gustavsson
Audiophile

Posts: 2058
Location: Huskvarna
Joined: February 12, 2010
 The T-IIIA low bass panels are without buttons. The lower section of the driver is tuned to 55 Hz, the upp to 46 Hz. These have heavy copper wiring. Mine are now 39 years old...

The mid bass panels are tuned to 55, 70 and 80 Hz, two buttons on each panel.

The midrange panels are tuned to 71, 71, 97, 110 and 155 Hz, four buttons each.

All these numbers mentioned here are written on the frames of the drivers. With usage these numbers lowers, especially the lowest ones.

 

RE: Tympani IV vs IV-A?, posted on November 10, 2014 at 06:28:22
Satie
Audiophile

Posts: 5426
Joined: July 6, 2002
 I don't remember all the numbers any longer and don't remember where I wrote them down. I am tempted to take the socks off again but I am not sure it is worth the trouble.

I expect the resonance numbers would fall during break in and then slowly drift down. But not from 46/55 to mid 30s. That is a lot of change.

 

RE: Tympani IV vs IV-A?, posted on November 10, 2014 at 08:54:20
Norman M
 'Satie' wrote:

"The manual and 30 hz figure is for the Tympani IVA (and IV - hardly anything is different) not for the 3.6; I never heard a 3.6 do satisfying Liszt on piano."

Liszt wrote a lot of soft, non-bass heavy (and relatively quiet) piano music, so IMO nothing extraordinary in the way of a speaker would be required to reproduce that - so your blanket statement (?) regarding Liszt compositions seems silly. I'm confident in that inmates here can improve upon the listening experience in and around using Maggies, however the OP inquired about the bass output of stock Maggies; Tymps IV, IV-A 2.X and 3.X. Similar to the majority of Maggie users (and not those in the asylum, excepting cases in which warranties remain in effect), I've only listened to stock Maggies.

In my listening room, 3.6s fail to 'turn me on' (using any program material), so I don't regard them as being good speakers. Even my dealer who installed them told me that there is much I'd have to get used to in order to enjoy the 3.6, as compared to my IV-A, at least in my listening room.

(I have a recording of Mahler's piano quartet, 1876 (DGG 447112), which I don't think requires a sub-woofer to satisfactorily reproduce. Coincidentally, many years ago when I told my dealer [who naturally is in business to sell equipment] that I was interested in buying sub for use along with my IV-A he jokingly replied 'what for?, your IV-A is a sub!)

 

RE: HK/Limage pic..., posted on November 10, 2014 at 10:41:12
Norman M
 The bass drivers appear (in the photo, anyway) very close to their side walls (T/in B/out?). Do you think you're getting any of that typical Maggie side-wall bass reinforcement from positioning them that way?

Come to think of it, all the glowing 3.7i reviews and it appears that no one has done a fuse by-pass (as of yet). Just imagine how much better they will sound after the fuses and their circuity have been removed. :-))

 

RE: HK/Limage pic..., posted on November 10, 2014 at 11:30:00
Mark Man
Audiophile

Posts: 1079
Location: MN
Joined: January 31, 2010
 Hey Norm...

"The bass drivers appear (in the photo, anyway) very close to their side walls (T/in B/out?). Do you think you're getting any of that typical Maggie side-wall bass reinforcement from positioning them that way?"

YES...that is one of big benefits of HK/Limage set-up...As I have said before, without this board and Sadie I would have NEVER tried this set-up...it really takes a great speaker to the next level...

The fuse bypass is coming in the not too distant future...a friend of mine is going to do it for me, I am not the guy you want with a soldering iron in his hands...

Thanks
Mark


 

RE: HK/Limage pic..., posted on November 10, 2014 at 12:05:53
Norman M
 Well perhaps the side-wall base reinforcement is one of the big benefits of HK/Limage set-up, as you say. I've never had reason to explore it, however IIRC Magnepan recommended that bass panel side-wall juxtaposition ~20 years ago in one of their Tympani manuals.

 

RE: HK/Limage pic..., posted on November 10, 2014 at 12:13:21
Norman M
 I neglected to add a 'good-luck' for the fuse by-pass. I don't think I'd be so very good using a soldering iron either, even though I studied up on it watching Youtube tutorials. (IAE, after a soldering job done by one of my dealer's crew members failed, I didn't think it advisable for me to attempt ever trying it.)

 

RE: Tympani IV vs IV-A?, posted on November 10, 2014 at 12:42:01
Satie
Audiophile

Posts: 5426
Joined: July 6, 2002
 There is plenty of mellow melancholy Liszt but that is not what we think of when we hear the name, we think of a Faustian Liszt battling his demons in the piano concertos Mefisto Waltz and the Paganini etudes, not the Abbe contemplating existence here and beyond in the anees de pelerinage.

Since I listen to chamber music at in the room volumes I can easily see the 3.6 not being able to fill that bill either. I think of the Tympani IV and IVa as a great speaker and the 3.6 as a good or very good one when biamped. I don't expect it to be a near tympani in performance. I am sure that the maggie novice asking about the relative merits is not quite aware that the Tympani is predecessor to the MG20, not a deconstructed 3.6.

 

Page processed in 0.024 seconds.

[ Top Top of Page ] [ Contact Us ] [ Support/Wish List ] [ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]