|
Posts: 12332
Joined: February 9, 2010
|
Well, it has to be remembered that Magnepan has limited resources. Wendell wears several hats and they don't even have the budget for a real web site design. So nice as it would be, I think there's a limit to the amount of informational writing they can do. They do discuss some of the more practical issues on their website and in the manuals, but it's generally very practical stuff -- what size amp do I use, where do I put the speakers in the room, etc. I think there are more specialized resources for those of us who want to delve more deeply into the tradeoffs in speaker and dipole placement, though not all are available online.
I think Magnepan did discuss the stands some -- they showed two alternative version at CES and asked for feedback on which ones they should put into production. But as far as I know, they didn't have sonics in mind when they redesigned them, rather, they were trying to improve the aesthetics.
Wendell says he mentions his philosophy on blind testing and often has sent it on to us. In general, he's very reluctant to describe the sonic characteristics of their speakers, because he doesn't like that kind of marketing -- he feels that if products are good listeners and reviewers will hear the differences. And he told me not long ago that the reviewers have heard and accurately described almost every sonic change they've made, and have never thought they heard one that hadn't been made. I think this speaks highly of the skill of the reviewers but also points to the fact that Magnepan does require that listening panel to approve any change, meaning that when the change is made you can bet people are going to hear it. Anyway, that's his philosophy and reasoning, but I don't think it always translates well when a customer calls and says "Should I get this? What does it do to the sound?" and gets frustrated when he says "We prefer the product to speak for itself."
Regarding distance, I think there's a fundamental problem here and one that applies to two-channel stereo, not just Maggies or dipoles per se. Specifically, two-channel stereo is highly dependent on the acoustics of the listening room, but listening rooms are seldom the same size as the studio or concert hall -- and those vary in size. So -- if you just play a pair of speakers, any kind of speaker, outside, they won't give you a sense of envelopment. If you play them in an anechoic chamber, it's even worse, stereo has been described as a narrow slit between the speakers.
I've spent a lot of time listening in the studio, where acoustics are, while not entirely "dry" or dead, deader than they are in a listening room, and, really, it isn't satisfying. The sound is very clean and you can hear a pin drop, which is why they're designed that way -- so you can hear minor flaws -- but you don't get a sense of realism with music recorded in larger acoustical spaces. So we use the listening room for a bit of reverb. Only it can't be optimized to suit every recording, from a small dead studio to a vast undamped cathedral.
Some studios have actually been designed with variable damping to allow you to tune the room to the recording but that's only a partial solution and it isn't practical at home.
As I said earlier, in the case of dipoles, the further from the rear wall you put them, the greater the potential sense of depth, because the room reflection doesn't mask the reflection (or artificial pre-delay) on the recording. But you do need some reflections, you don't want to have no rear wall at all. Every room is going to be different and what works for one kind of music may not be optimal for another. Forex, someone, I forget who, told me that he likes to use absorption behind is Maggies because he listens to a lot of chamber music. He isn't after a concert hall acoustic. Whereas someone who wants a concert hall acoustic would likely want to get his speakers as far away from the wall as possible and/or use diffusion to more closely emulate a hall acoustically.
And, of course, the bass issues are separate, although my own tendency is to optimize for imaging and let the bass take care of itself -- they just never seem to gel in the same place!
|
