Welcome! Need support, you got it. Or share your ideas and experiences.
Return to Planar Speaker Asylum
109.153.127.104
Hi Guys,
Got a quick question. Would appreciate some advice if anyone had any ideas on this.The Maggie MGIIIa used two types of ribbon tweeter throughout it's manufacture. Both wide types. The earlier type was thinner than the latter type and was rated at 3 ohms. The later wide tweeter was thicker than the older type and rated at about 2 ohms. It is usually used with a extra 1 ohm resistor in the crossover to compensate for the lower 2 ohm resistance. Magnepan only manufacture the later type of 2 ohm tweeter for use in the MGIIIa, MGIII and Tympani IVa. I guess they discontinued the thinner wide tweeter as it was very prone to breaking. The later model Maggies (3.3, 3.5, 3.6 and 3.7) use the current narrower 3 ohm ribbon instead (which is also the thicker type of material), which is also obviously still available.
I have a pair of MGIIIas with the thicker 2 ohm tweeters fitted with 1 ohm resistors and want to know if its possible/safe to use them without the extra resistor if your amplifier is capable enough to drive low impedance loads? This is using passive single amp drive. I am not too personally too keen on active/ part PLLXO biamping or triamping, as although this undoubtedly improves the sound in many regards (eg detail and transparency) I personally don't think it sounds quite as coherent as one amp drive, and that's my priority.
I want to use my MGIIIas without the resistor as I believe this is more accurate to the original design. I had a pair of Tympani IVa a few years ago with the original 3 ohm thin wide tweeter and one of them broke. Magnepan could only supply me with the 2 ohm wide/thick tweeter as a replacement and the output of the tweeter was quite a lot lower than the other channel (that still had the original 3 ohm tweeter) and not acceptable. I briefly tried with the 1 ohm resistor removed in the repaired speaker, and although the sound was not quite and same as the other speaker (the original 3 ohm tweeter sounding better in my opinion, - more refined), the output level was much similar and much better sounding.
So that's my rationale. My MGIIIas sound a bit down in the treble compared to other Maggies I've heard and I'm sure the reason for this is because the 1 ohm resistor reduces the sound level of the tweeter too much. I wanted to know thoughts on whether its ok or not to run a set of MGIIIa with the 2ohm tweeter with the extra resistor?
Direct Triamping each of the three sections of the speaker (not biamping) is one way around this problem as you can still use the 1 ohm resistor with the tweeter but you have independent control over the volume levels of the three sections of the speaker so can adjust the respective balance any way you want, but I'd rather avoid having to do this if possible for the reasons I've outlined above and because its a lot of work/time ripping out the crossover, making new ones that work well and getting out all the amps to drive the speakers.
The other solution would be to get a pair of current narrower cage/narrower 3 ohm tweeters and install them in the MGIIIas (if the cage would fit OK, which I think it would). This would ideally be my most preferred solution as this is the type of tweeter than sounds best (to my ears, - compared before) but I am in the UK and it's too cost prohibitive to implement (I can't take advantage of tweeter cage trade ins and I don't think Magnepan will ship fully built ribbons in their cages abroad any more :( )
Would really appreciate any thoughts on this.
Edits: 08/06/14 08/06/14Follow Ups:
My T IV ribbons are the "3" ohm - i.e. 2.75 ohm tweeter. They are capable of taking more punishment than you would expect and the test tones will do them no harm well into the 90s db range. More recently I put the XO at the symmetrical point at 5,8khz, but had to add a filter at about the 250hz area (a copy of the mid HP) to protect the ribbon from its new lower freq operating range. So now it is a higher Q filter. But it is entirely coherent with the mids. It was very noticeable in the Limage/HK placement.
The NAD 208 should do ok with the 2ohms as it is there only at high freq - just to be sure I would start by operating at 5-6 db lower than normal listening levels to see if the amp heats up. If it does not heat up more than before then go ahead and raise the level to normal playback. Just check the amp for unusually high temperature.
There is no issue scavenging the tweeter from the 3.3 and you can hand file the IIIa tweeter's slot to size. A little time consuming but simple and easy to control.
Hi Satie,Thanks a lot for the advice. It's a relief to know the ribbons are quite robust in terms of higher SPL levels. I'll give the Anthem receiver with the ARC software a try. It transforms my AV setup with Proac speakers. Really invaluable if you are in a smaller or inadequate room. It works v well right down to 20 Hz unlike other auto eq systems (like the Yamaha one for example). I guess it might even be possible try to do an active biamp setup and run the bass section through both an active LP 3rd order crossover and the Anthem in order to get the benefit of the correction the Anthem does in the bass (and use a one cap PLLXO on the mid/treble.) though I am guessing you might get some phase trouble doing that as running the bass LP through both a crossover and extra receiver is bound to introduce some delay on that signal. I'll try the Anthem in single amp passive operation first though anyway and see how it sounds compared to my other preamp (an old NAD transistor 1155, Yaqin tube preamp and a moth passive)
The cleaner at work did an accidental blunder a few years ago and threw out the TVC preamp I had that used those big expensive S&B TX102 transformers. Must get another one of those sometime it was great. No good for a multi amp setup though (especially tramping) as it had limited gain and no eq but boy it sounded good, - had the dynamics, fullness and extension of an active pre but also had the purity of a passive pre.
Yes I remember you equipped your TIVs with the better narrower newer 3 ohm ribbon. I guess you lengthened the speakers trough as well. If I remember right your tweeter was crossed over higher before at about 8 KHz with a 6 dB HP PLLXO? and your Neo 8 midrange worked up higher than magnepan midranges do. I can understand why you had to put in an extra crossover cap at a low freq to give extra protection. My passively single amp driven 3.3Rs have that setup as well. The speaker level 10uf cap in the internal xo crosses over at 5.3 KHz but there is also 35uf worth of speaker level caps before this in the external crossover for the mid/tweet HP at about 800 Hz, giving extra protection on the tweeter. My mid LP is at about 3 Khz so my crossover is spaced. Wouldn't really want to risk taking the tweeter any lower. So although you had to put in that extra protective HP filter does the symmetrical crossover sound superior to the previous spaced one or just different?
Thanks for advice on the 208. Yes of course 2 ohms is less of a problem at high freq than low freqs (where you need more power) . The Mosfet based 208 does run quite warm anyway probably as it's got quite high Class A bias. The bipolar based NAD 218 I used to have ran near to stone cold.
The 208 is rated into 2 ohms on this spec sheet giving 1 KW in a short dynamic burst (I guess when the class G rail switches in powering an extra 6 transistors per channel on top of the usual 8), but I'm not sure about continuous 2 ohm operation. Like you say though 2 ohms should be ok in the treble. It has a good protection circuitry so will probably just cut out if it gets too hot.
http://nadelectronics.com/download.php?100603160536-NAD_208THX.pdf|Data%20Sheet%20-%20208THX%20Stereo%20Power%20Amplifier
Got to read about about the HK positioning. Got to ask though, are you using the chopsticks yet?!....
Edits: 08/08/14 08/08/14
I do like the symmetrical XO better, but that is because of dispersion falling off rapidly above 8khz or so more than about phase alignment. The very narrow sweet spot with the spaced XO was not easy to live with and made experimenting with the HK/Limage setup that much more difficult.
I am very sorry to hear of your loss of the TVC, such good parts... Since when do cleaners decide what equipment to throw out?
You can't get time coherence with the delay of the ARC processing on the bass so if you do this (and it seems you need it in your difficult space) then you should aim for phase coherence instead.
Re tweeter protection, yes I remember that is how your XO is done, so don't worry about protecting the tweeter, the mid HP is common to both and is sufficient to keep the ribbon out of trouble.
I remembered the 2 ohm rating on the 208 but suggested you watch it for excessive heating, which I don't really expect but must make sure it is not a problem in continuous operation.
The loss of the TVC was partly my fault as I had packed it up with some stuff to take to my flat and put it in a black bin bag. The cleaner thought it was rubbish. Pretty heavy rubbish though and a shame he didn't look in the bag at what he was throwing out. Could not believe it when it happened. Only realised it had gone a day later when the bin guys had already taken it to the tip! Nothing I could do. Back luck there!
It's good the symmetrical crossover gives you a bigger sweet spot. Was the narrow sweet spot also partly caused by the BG Neo midrange drivers working up quite high which are a but prone to beaming?
Thanks for the info on using the Anthem amp in biamping. I might still give that a go at some point but I think it's likely I'll prefer single amp drive anyway. To do biamping ideally I think I'd need a v good digital crossover that could do some good EQ and also give me the possibility to accurately reproduce Magnepans unusual hybrid 2nd/3rd order Bessel/Butterworth Bass LP crossover. My standard straight 3rd order Butterworth active crossover does not totally match my mid/tweeter HP section in terms of phase giving thinness in the lower mid when biamping.
Not sure how the Anthem will hold up as a preamp for single amp passive operation. Its supposed to be quite good in stereo but let's face it, it's not going to sound as good as a TVC with S&B trannys in it.
So now we know what happens when you leave stuff in bin bags...
The Neo 8 start beaming at 4khz but they don't narrow dispersion to critical levels till 8 khz so you want them mostly out of the way by that freq, so at about 6khz is a good enough fc value to avoid the serious beaming. Now that I have the second filter on I can take it down to 4khz and have an easier time with dispersion. I just don't have the proper value cap at the moment.
You can copy the magnepan bass slopes precisely with just a buffer stage or a preamp in between the filters, a SS pre with good bass is probably the best idea, but you can use another pre in front of the Anthem integrated's processing/pre and place the filter before and after it. You would just have to figure out how to prevent the processor from trying to correct the XO. But you still have the latency issue.
Not thinking straight yes you are right there would still be a problem if you had a xo filter after the Anthem even though the measurements are done from a PC. Not sure of how to get around that.
Your experiments with the tweeter crossover are v interesting. Let me know what happens when you reduce to 4 KHz on the tweeter. Seems taking the xo downwards is a good idea if the Neos start to beam at higher freqs. In my 3.3R setup I could also reduce my tweeter from 5.3 KHz (as I also have the extra protective HP at lower freq before it) might try it soon.
Thanks for the suggestion about the buffer in biamping. Excuse my ignorance but how does using a buffer enable you to reproduce the Magnepan Bass slopes precisely? My active Bass LP XO is 3rd order Butterworth.
The Anthem room correction is run from a PC using the ARC Software (calibrated USB mic connected to the computer) which is partly why it's good (and unlike other AV receivers) as it uses the PCs processing power for the measurements and EQ (it does the test tones/measurements with the computer then you upload your desired setup from PC to the receiver afterwards.). It also uses better filters than most other EQ Systems (super infinite impulse response) and it works much better than ordinary parametric eq (which is what the Yamaha amps use for example)
So therefore no worries if the crossover is after the Anthem. Like you say there will still be a The latency problem if using a PLLXO on the external HP and this could be an issue, but I might still try this out.
When you use a PLLXO you have a substantial insertion loss due to the use of resistors in series (for LP) and their need to be an order of magnitude bigger in each progressive filter stage so that you retain Q. So a buffer allows you to have a lower insertion loss by using a lower value resistor in series after the buffer regardless of the values used before the buffer.
A gain stage (preamp) would allow both compensation for insertion loss and buffering and level control. Latency is very small in preamps - a bit longer if they use transformers either at input, interstage or output.
In some tube pre models you can apply part of the filer in the interstage coupling (a smaller cap in the interstage can be used as a HP, a transformer with limited turns can serve as a low pass).
Thanks Satie. I understand what you mean now, replicating the Magnepan stock bass LP XO (MGIII/MGIIIA in my case) at line level in a PLLXO, and use the preamp and buffer to counteract insertion loss. That's a really great idea, I'm sure we mentioned that before and I'm not certain why I didn't try it when I have the necessary buffers and preamps knocking around. That certainly should match up with the Mid/Tweeter HP better than a standard 3rd order Butterworth LP XO. Perhaps I didn't do it before as I was more settled on single amp drive. Need to get another power amp before I can try this though.
Can you get away with just using a preamp with gain or do you really need the buffer as well?
I want to try the Anthem Receiver (with NAD 208) with my Maggies first anyway (in single amp drive) to see what sort of difference ARC makes. I'll post the FR graphs from ARC on here when I try that.
Unfortunately I've remembered that in both of my pairs of Maggies the adhesive stabilising beads that hold the ribbon to the cage at various points has failed at many points (completely gone in the MGIIIA) I will have to put new beads in to stabilise the tweeter first before running the test tones as otherwise I am sure the tweeter will shake/buzz/twist like crazy (actually does that more on bass notes!)
Re splitting the XO - you use a gain stage (preamp) or simplify to a buffer. You don't need both for a third order.
IIRC you were going to repair the dots some time ago. Did you not have a chance to do so? Did you get the material shipped from Magnepan?
Many thanks for the info on the 3rd order LP PLLXO. Sounds great must try that sometime. Would be great if I could get very close to the stock MGIII Bass LP alignment. Will have to brush up on crossover component calculations!No I never did the dots in either the 3.3r tweeter (which is only slight) or the IIIA tweeter (which has failed throughout). I got the chemicals for that repair when I ordered the ribbon repair kit for the Tympanis and I still have the stuff somewhere. Need to get around to it soon and certainly before running test tones through the speakers. I think it's more of a issue (in terms of the tweeter failing) on the 3.3rs as the small area where the dots have come away moves/vibrates a lot and could break quite easily. The whole tweeter of the IIIa has lost it's dots so the movement is shared over the whole area.
Edits: 08/10/14 08/10/14
I am rebuilding my Tympani IVa. Wanted to have the 3 ohm ribbon in them. Ordered a kit from Magnepan. What troubles me is that I am not sure I got a 3 ohm ribbon. I have not dared to unpack and measure it.
Sheila at Magnepan wrote:
“The ribbon you received is for the 60" tweeters which are in the MG3, MG3a, T4, T4a, and T3d. The other sizes are the 40" for the MG2.5 and MG2.6 or the 60.6" and that's for the MG3.3, MG3.5, MG3.6, MG3.7, MG20 and MG20.1
The 40" and 60" is wider and the 60.6" is narrow. They fit in their specific tweeter core channels ( they are also different sizes ) and are designed for specific models.
Confusing as some of you mention there exist a wide 3 ohm ribbon too.
Davy wrote:
“The best mod to do with the MGIIIas in my opinion is to cut the tweeter trough a little longer and install the newer 3 ohm narrow tweeter. This is my plan in the longer term. The output from the new tweeter is higher (than 2 ohm wide tweeter with 1 ohm resistor) with more sparkle. It also sounds significantly more refined and simply nicer than the older two tweeters (though the original fragile thin 3 ohm wide tweeter is not too far behind). The 2 ohm wide tweeter sounds a bit rough/course to my ears is is certainly the worse sounding of the 3 ribbon types in my opinion. The invention of the narrower tweeter was clever as it still uses the thicker material (so its still strong) but as it's narrower it twists less, produces less distortion and hence sounds better than the wider tweeters types.”
Satie wrote:
“My T IV ribbons are the "3" ohm - i.e. 2.75 ohm tweeter. They are capable of taking more punishment than you would expect and the test tones will do them no harm well into the 90s db range. More recently I put the XO at the symmetrical point at 5,8khz, but had to add a filter at about the 250hz area (a copy of the mid HP) to protect the ribbon from its new lower freq operating range. So now it is a higher Q filter. But it is entirely coherent with the mids.”
The best option is the narrow 3 ohm ribbon but can I shorten it to fit the T-IVa? Well, I can also take the tweeter from my MG 3.6…
Hi Roger,I assume you have been sent a ribbon repair kit. Magnepan would have definitely sent you the 2 Ohm wide ribbon foils for the TIVa. There are two types of wide ribbon that are 60" long. The first 3 ohm type was discontinued in the 1980s (not sure which year exactly but probably around 1988). It was used in the original MGIII, some MGIIIas and some TIVas. The original wide type was made from a v thin material and measured 3 ohms. It was replaced with the 2 ohm ribbon (made from thicker material) and 1 ohm resistors were installed in speakers to compensate for the lower impedance. This actually messes up the treble output (by lowering it) as compared to the original design (though some people find Maggies too bright so might have welcomed this). There is mention of this tweeter change in the MGIIIa manual and also they quote the MGIIIa serial no when the change was applied. I also suspect the TIVa used both types of tweeter throughout it's manufacture as AndyR bought a set of used IIVa mid/tweeter enclosures equipped with the 2 ohm tweeter and 1 ohm resistors, but I owned some IVas with the original 3 ohm type and no resistors. (I measured the tweeter, and that tweeter was obviously thinner and looked different to the 2 ohm tweeter)
Magnepan have not said why this change was made, but I suspect it was because the original wide 3 ohm 60 inch ribbon was too prone to breaking as it was so thin.
Fast forward to 1990 and the introduction of the 3.3R. This used a new design tweeter that was narrower than the old two types and slightly longer at 60.6", but the foil used was the same thicker material the 2 ohm tweeter, just narrower. This was clever as it increased the impedance back to 3 ohms but retained strength. It also improved sound quality (in my view). This same tweeter was/is used in the 3.5R, 3.6R and the current 3.7R.
I've heard all three tweeters in various Maggies and swapped some of them around for testing. In my opinion the newer narrow 3 ohm 60.6" tweeter sounds significantly better than the older two wide types, - it's more refined, delicate and has less distortion. The worst sounding one is the 2 ohm wide 60" type and the original 3 ohm wide 60" type is somewhere in the middle.
Roger, if your Tympani IVas don't have a 1 ohm resistor installed under the input plate on then its v likely they used the 3 ohm wide 60" tweeter. I had this exact situation and broke a tweeter in one channel . Magnepan could only supply me with the 2 ohm wide foil as a replacement and I did this repair in one speaker (and installed a 1 ohm resistor too), and found the treble quality was not as good but also the output of the treble was significantly less. To try to get the treble output back up to scratch I removed the resistor, and this was better, but alas the sound quality was still not as good. Removing the resistor is a reasonable fix for this lower output issue in my opinion though, if you amp can handle it. For triamping (but not biamping) you can still run the 2 ohm tweeter with the resistor as you have independent control of the output of each three sections.
It is possible to install the newer, better sounding narrow 60.6" tweeters into the older speakers designed for 60" tweeters (such as the MGIII, MGIIIa and TIVa) if you manually slightly lengthen the ribbon trough in the speaker. I really want to do this for my MGIIIas (which have the 2 ohm ribbon at present), but the problem is, if you are abroad Magnepan won't ship fully built new tweeters to you, and if they did the cost would be very high (likely well over $1000). Its a much cheaper option for people in the USA who can take advantage of the tweeter part exchange program (send back their older cages to get some money back). Roger you have this same problem as Magnepan won't ship a new 3 ohm narrow tweeter to you, but you could potentially (as you suggest) take the narrower 60.6" 3 ohm tweeters out of your 3.6Rs and install them in the TIVas, but you would have to manually lengthen the tweeter trough in the TIVas by 0.6" to achieve this. It would however leave you with another issue, - a set of 3.6Rs without any tweeters. You could not even easily put in the wide tweeters from the TIVas even if you wanted to as the older wide tweeter also has a wider cage too, and I don't think that will physically fit into post 3.3R tweeter troughs. Widening the cage throughout its length is obviously a much bigger and harder job than very slightly lengthening it.
Satie is running the newer, better sounding narrower 60.6" ribbon in has TIVs. I assumed he lengthened the tweeter troughs in his speakers to achieve this. Neolith also did the same modification to his MGIIIas and reckons the output of the 3 ohm tweeter is some 3.5dB higher than the 2 ohm tweeter (with 1 ohm resistor installed).Hope this rather long winded explanation helps. Have both your original TIVa blown?
Edits: 08/12/14 08/12/14 08/12/14 08/12/14 08/12/14 08/12/14 08/12/14
Hi Davy,
Thanks!
My T-IVa are still alive, at least when I last tried them last year. I am not sure whether they are 2 ohm or 3 ohm. There were no series resistors installed. Maybe they are 3 ohm? I have not measured the resistance. At least they looked like wide ones.
So, the dimenions of the ribbon cage has changed too? I made a quick measurement last year and as far as I can recall T-IVa and 3.6 had the same outer dimensions of the ribbon cage. Is that not so? Having all in storage right now.
My T-IVa will not use their original baffles. They will be used with the low bass panels against the side walls and the mid/tweeter sections will be on a decoupled baffles. Mids will use quasi ribbon technology (same foil as 20-series). Biamping via an active crossover, low pass 18 dB/octave at 250 Hz. The high pass will take place within the power amplifiers, 6 dB/octave at 370 Hz (not final). Passive crossover for mid/tweeter.
You didn't mention the slopes you intend to use on your internal mid/tweeter crossover but like I say, I would recommend 6dB slopes (inductor in midrange and cap on the tweeter), giving a 18 6 (6 6) crossover overall and linear phase in mid and treble. I would also recommended the external high pass being a PLLXO. That usually sounds great. The only slight trouble is that the active XO on the bass LP might have a very slight delay compared to an external HP PLLXO and the phase might not quite match up. It will however depend on the particular active XO you are using. This would not be a problem if you used the same active XO on the HP. I would try both active and PLLXO on the external HP and see how they sound.It is also possible to make a 18dB Low Pass PLLXO for the bass (like myself and Satie have recently been discussing) but there is a lot of insertion loss so you need to use a buffer stage or active preamp with gain within the crossover components to boost the gain. I intend to try this at some point, not had time yet.
Edits: 08/12/14 08/12/14
Well, I measured the ribbon cages at the back of the 3.6. From what I recall they had the same dimensions as the cages of the T-IVa. I have a drawing of the IVa ribbon cages somewhere at work. From your writing I take it the distance between the magnets is different for the narrow ribbons.
All the drivers of the IVa are out of the original baffles. Mids have new 6µm Mylar and soon the foil conductors. At first, I got the wrong foil from Magnepan. Thought I needed the foil of the 3.7 mids, 0.001"x0.075", but the correct one was as used in the 20-series, 0.0005"x0.1". All drivers are 60" tall. Low bass is 13" wide, mid bass is 12" and mids 6". Mylar is 11"x58", 10"x58" and 3"x57". The ribbon cage is 2.25" wide.
Maybe I was not clear about the crossover. Only low pass for the basses will be active. The mid high pass will be done inside the input stage of the power amplifiers (for mid/tweeter), just a switch to a smaller value series capacitor. Of course, the type of capacitor will be better too.
The passive high level crossover mids to tweeters will be a second order filter, more like in the MG 20. Will measure responses with the drivers in its new baffle. The drivers will also sit closer to each other, center-to-center will decrease. The mids of the IVa are allowed to operate with less roll-off towards higher frequencies, lower mass diaphragms helps. The 3-series is rolled-off early, the ribbon need to go low.
Well the channel in the newer tweeter is clearly narrower so I assume the magnets are probably closer too , - not checked for sure. I am pretty sure the width of the whole cage is narrower on the newer tweeter.I had previously toyed with the idea of trying to install the newer narrow 3 ohm ribbon foil in an older type wide cage (previously used for a wide foil) but the problem with that is that the tweeter is usually glued to the side of the cage in various places to damp it and stop twisting and distortion, and you would not be able to do this. Also the magnet gap might be different too.
Wow that's a big rebuild job you are doing and sounds great. So your mids were originally shot? Sounds quite hard to use new mylar how do you know when the tension is correct? Using thinner mylar might indeed improve the mids, the only thing I might worry about is that there is then a even bigger speed difference between the mid and bass (the bass is already quite slow in relative comparison to the mid and tweeter)
Sorry I see what you mean now about the crossover, - you are actually intending to use a HP PLLXO on the external mid/highs crossover (i.e. a capacitor), not active.
Yes the post 3.3R 3 series speakers are rolled off a bit early in the mids and the tweeter has to go low. In the older MGIII and MGIIIa it's not as much for some reason. Its possible Magnepan wanted to take the midrange lower in the post 3.3R speakers to improve the lower midrange suckout that can occur in many rooms.
So it's a 18 6 12 12 crossover you intend to implement that is like a MG20 or MG20.1 crossover configuration. That can work quite well, - tried it before, but the 18 6 6 6 crossover sounds much better in my opinion due to the linear phase of the mid and tweeter and the whole things sound much more coherent and seamless. I strongly recommend to try it out. Once I heard it there was no going back. It's also cheaper as you are using less components. You can used a spaced 6dB crossover between the mid and tweeter if necessary to protect the tweeter and it still sounds v good as there is a good overlap between mid and tweeter due to the mild 6 dB slopes (I am using -3dB points of 3 Khz on the mid and 5.3 Khz on tweeter).
Edits: 08/12/14
Magnepan have not changed much over the years. My first set is from 1975 and they are very similar to the set from 2003. They still seem to use the same basic ingredients like magnets and wiring. I am really not sure they changed that much of their ribbon drivers. It can still be same magnets and ribbon cage....
My mids were damaged in shipping. There is a german company that has suitable streching jigs and they can give the new Mylar the tension of the original.
http://www.forumbilder.se/DDN65/img-0349.JPG
The mids of the T-IVa are the only Magnepan with 6µm Mylar diaphragms. Compared to the 3-series, the diaphragm is divided into smaller sections, giving each a very small moving mass. Bass will not pollute these mids as in models that share bass and mid on the same sheet of Mylar. Tympani basses have less moving mass than the 3-series. Up to 250 Hz is really not much of a problem.
You are right in that Magnepan speakers have not changed that much, - particularly in terms of the main drivers, just making subtle changes to foil instead of wire etc (and some crossover changes).
As for the tweeters, the wide and narrow ribbon cages are v similar in dimensions (and the magnets are likely the same) but there are other obvious differences between them. The channel the ribbon foil goes into is obviously a different size between the two. Take a look at yours. The wide foil will not fit in a narrow tweeter cage channel and although the narrow foil will theoretically fit in the wider cage channel it will not work optimally as it's not possible to put in the adhesive securing dots needs.
Yes sorry I forgot the Tympani IVa midrange is different to the 3 series. Sounds nice. Having the midrange on a separate sheet of mylar should give less IMD and the two sections should not pollute each other like you say. I hope they sound great when fixed up. I bought a set of dead IVas a few years ago and repaired them, but they were way too big for my room so I sold them on. Am quite interested in used MG20s or 20.1s but they are risky buy as its a huge problem if they need repair (due to the sealed push pull design of the drivers) and shipping to Magnepan to get them fixed from abroad is not viable. At least the single ended Tympanis and 3 series are DIY repairable.
Thanks for the info on the German company that can repair the drivers with new Myalr,- great to know. Was it expensive to get them to put in new Tympani Mylar?
Dave,
You can look at www.shackman.deReiner Römer does the new Mylar. The re-wiring is done by a friend of mine.
Prices are higher than at Magnepan but no problem with customs as it is within EU. In the end cost is similar to sending them to Magnepan. I visit Germany regulary (my wife is german) and that make shipping easier.
Tympani I - IV, Bass, new film and wire panel 300.0 €
Tympani I - IV, MT/MHT, new film and wire panel 200.00 €
MG I/II. Bass/MHT, new film and wire pair 790.00 €
MMG/SMG, non quasi ribbon, new film and wire pair 650.00 €
MG 0.5 - 12 pair 286.00 €
MG3.x Series, Bass, MHT, new film and wire pair 1250.00 €
Sheila at Magnepan wrote:"The 40" and 60" are 2 ohm and the 60.6" is 3 ohm
I don't know about a 3 ohm for the T4a, they use a 60" tweeter."I think even a 3 ohm ribbon would work in the older ribbon cage. Could not be all that important if the gap between the magnets is a bit wide, it is a matter of about 1 mm each side of the ribbon.
Edits: 08/13/14 08/13/14 08/13/14
Thanks for the info. Well its great to know someone can replace the mylar with the same spec and tension for a cost. I can rewire myself but it's a bit of a slow process so rewiring as well is welcome. Seen many different Tympanis before for sale with broken mylar. If this had been available then....
I think you are right it's actually well worth trying an narrow 3 ohm ribbon foil in an older wide cage. The gap is wider but not vastly. I thought about it before but was put off as it's is very important to get those adhesive dots down to secure the ribbon and I didn't think it would be possible (discussed it with Satie). If it however viable to put those dots in (might be a bit tricky because of the extra space) then it might work just fine. I might try it soon in my MGIIIa tweeters cages, as like I say, that narrow ribbon sounds a lot better than the 2 ohm wide type.
I'd still bet on your Tympanis having the older discontinued 3 ohm wide ribbons in them though, as there are no resistors in the crossover. It's still a good tweeter, just not exactly replaceable if it breaks. Its a very thin material so I'd be careful moving them around.
Its a bit weird that Shelia is not aware of the older 3 ohm wide tweeter that is 60" long. It's likely a common issue that comes up with people break their MGIIIa ribbon as both the wide 3 ohm and 2 ohm ribbon was used in that tweeter, and if supplying a new 2 ohm ribbon to someone that had an early MGIIIa (with the 3 ohm ribbon) they need to be told to install 1 ohm resistor in the crossover. Info about that is written in the MGIIIa manual. The Tympani IVa obviously also used both types of ribbon too throughout its manufacture.
Magnepan is clear on when to install a resistor in series with the ribbon. They just do not mention why. My T-IVa are early ones, serial no. is 020838. They can have 3 ohm ribbons as there are no resistors.
http://www.forumbilder.se/DDN94/60-inch-ribon.jpgNext step will be to investigate the ribbons on the 3.6 to see if they really have different ribbon cages.
Edits: 08/13/14
Thanks for the link. That confirms the TIVa (like the MGIIIa) also used both types of wide ribbon during it's manufacture. Those instructions are for installing the current 2 ohm wide ribbon, - which is why they are saying you need to install a 1 ohm resistor in the earlier models (as it was not present already because the theearlier speaker used the 3 ohm wide ribbon).
Yes from your serial no (and lack of resistors) I'd almost bet my life on your TIVa ribbons being the discontinued wide, very thin 3 ohm versions. Why did you buy more ribbon foils?, just for backup/spares?
Let me know what you see when you have a look at the 3.6 ribbon vs the IVa ribbon. The channel the ribbon goes in is definitely a different size between the two (newer version is narrower). If you take them out I would also be interested two know whether the cage is the same width (the part that hides in the speaker) or different (I think the newer cage is likely a less wide, but I could be wrong). I could look in my two pairs but no time at the moment.
At some stage I might buy some of the new thinner 3 ohm ribbon foils and try installing in the older wide cage. It might be a bit tricky but still possible to glue the foil down with the necessary adhesive dots. If the magnet gap is also different between the two cages it might not quite work as intended though, - perhaps it might affect the output a bit?.
Sorry I misread you post. You actually measured the tweeter cages. Perhaps you missed the newer tweeter being 0.6" longer as that's only slight, but as to the width did you measure the relevant width (which is width of the part of the cage that goes into the speaker hole?). The width of the outside part (that is visible on the back of the speaker) is the same for the different types of tweeter.
Yes, if there is no resistor installed I think its highly likely the wide version 60" long tweeters in your TVIas are the original 3 ohm version. Those tweeters still sound quite good IMO. Not quite as good as the new 60.6" long narrow 3 ohm tweeter but certainly useable and significantly better than the other wide 60" long 2 ohm tweeter. I would treat those wide 3 ohm tweeters with kids gloves, as if a foil breaks then your only choice is to replace both with the 2 ohm foil (must replace both with the same type to get consistent sound between channels of course). Its a shame Magnepan don't make and provide the older, thinner 3 ohm wide ribbon but I guess it was just too prone to snapping. If those are 3 ohm wide ribbons in the Tympanis I would hope they never break and probably not bother replacing them with the narrow 3 ohm ribbon from the 3.6R (unless you are curious/ a tweeker!). If you want ultimate sound though those the new narrow tweeter does sound a bit better no two ways about that.As for for the dimensions of the different cages, did you actually measure the width and length of the cages when you took them out?, or are you just saying they seemed/felt the same?. With the move to the narrower 3 ohm ribbon the length was definitely increased (as we know) by a slight 0.6", but I was also pretty sure the newer cage is narrower as well( this would mean (like I said before) it would not be at all straightforward to equip a post 3.3R Maggie with an older wide tweeter as the trough in the speaker would be too narrow (not sure why anyone would fit a wider tweeter in a newer speaker anyway (unless you were outside the USA and had no choice) as the wide ones sounds worse)).
Interesting what you say about your Tympani set up. - did not quite understand what you mean by "My T-IVa will not use their original baffles. They will be used with the low bass panels against the side walls and the mid/tweeter sections will be on a decoupled baffles"
Wiring the midrange panels with the QR foil is supposed to be a good idea. I have some and intended to do it in the Tympanis I had (and also my IIIas and 3.3Rs), but didn't get around to it. Am curious as to the improvement.
The 18 6 (6 6) crossover you are planning config sounds great in my opinion. It's what I have set up on my 3.3Rs and it sounds way better than stock IMO. I love the linear phase mid and treble compared to the mess I heard before. I also tried 6 6 6 6 but could not get it to work, - too much IMD and just sounded poor compared to 18 dB on the low pass bass, - not sure how magnepan sorted that problem for the 3.7s. Maybe using the foil on the mid and bass instead of wire really helps with that?
I would advise you to use an 6dB high pass PLLXO instead of an active HP on the external mid/tweeter high pass section. It will sound better (in terms of purity/transparency than any active XO and is very easy, - just a simple capacitor (whose value is determined by the power amps input impedance and the XO point you want). You can use a very high quality film cap in this position and it should sound great if you match it up to the Bass Low pass well.
Edits: 08/12/14
Just throwing this out there...
Have you tried reversing the panels and playing the speakers backwards? My IIIa's sounded substantially smoother (and yet slightly brighter) when played backwards. After reversing them and playing them with the Mylar forward for a year or so, I was unable to enjoy them when played traditionally.
Again, I am just spitballing here as everything has pros and cons, including reversing the panels. Might be worth a try if you haven't already experimented with this.
Hi There,Thanks for the advice re reversing the panels. Given this a try before but the trade off is the sound is not as punchy and dynamic when listening to the mylar side compared to the magnet side, though like you say, the mylar side is certainly clearer sounding in both mid and treble. I miss the punch/dynamics too much though so this is not an ideal solution for me.
The best mod to do with the MGIIIas in my opinion is to cut the tweeter trough a little longer and install the newer 3 ohm narrow tweeter. This is my plan in the longer term. The output from the new tweeter is higher (than 2 ohm wide tweeter with 1 ohm resistor) with more sparkle. It also sounds significantly more refined and simply nicer than the older two tweeters (though the original fragile thin 3 ohm wide tweeter is not too far behind). The 2 ohm wide tweeter sounds a bit rough/course to my ears is is certainly the worse sounding of the 3 ribbon types in my opinion. The invention of the narrower tweeter was clever as it still uses the thicker material (so its still strong) but as it's narrower it twists less, produces less distortion and hence sounds better than the wider tweeters types.
Edits: 08/07/14 08/07/14 08/07/14 08/07/14
Hi Davy, I owe you a reply to the PM. Sorry it is taking so long to get to it.
Yes you can take the 1 ohm resistor off - or just bypass it with a favorite wire. You will have higher output from the tweeter but the XO will rise by 1/3 of an octave so that the play level at the lower frequencies that may harm the tweeter would still be approximately at the same level as with the 1 ohm resistor on the tweeter.
That leaves you with the issue of phase and a broader mid-high dip. I don't know how that change would add up but it is really worth trying if you want the extra sparkle of the newer 3.x models.
But be sure your amp can handle the low imp..
Hey Satie and Neo,
Nice to hear from you guys, been a while. Didn't play my Maggies for a few years due to various reasons (had them stored away) but I'm getting back into it again so hopefully I can share some of my experiences on this forum. No worries about the PM Satie. Would be great to hear back from you when you have some spare time to catch up
I am definitely after more sparkle from my MGIIIas so I will certainly try the wide 2 ohm tweeter without the resistor. My amp might not be quite up to it though. It’s a NAD 208, which can drive 4 ohm speakers no problem, but probably is not too happy with lower impedance load like 2 ohms and certainly not 1 ohm. I guess I am risking the amp overheating having a 2 ohm tweeter in the speakers. The amp does have a protection circuit so maybe it will just cut off if there is a problem, but it’s still risky. I suppose I should be ideally be looking for a high current amp with lower impedance drive capability, - Krell, Aragon or Classe etc maybe. I really want something with at least 8 output transistors a channel as (in my experience) that’s the minimum amount you need to get Maggies singing well in passive single amp operation. I am not that clued up on modern amps are there any other ones I should be considering that would do the job OK?
Satie, I guess the potential problems you are explaining with crossover phase etc when not using a resistor is because the 2nd type of wide tweeter is 2 ohms, not the original design’s 3 ohms? Like you say though it’s certainly still worth trying and see how its sounds if my amp can handle it. I suppose I could compromise and put a smaller resistor in there (maybe 0.47, 0.56 or 0.68 ohms) which would attenuate the treble less than a 1 ohm resistor and make life easier for the amp than using no resistors, though sound quality wise no resistor is better of course.
I remember Karen at Magnepan once explaining to me about the tweeter cage being very slightly shorter in the MGIII, MGIIIa and TIVa than the later models. Lengthening it to accept the newer narrow (and superior sounding) 3 ohm tweeter is another possibility. I don't have a router but I guess you could carefully chisel or shave away with something to lengthen the tweeter trough by 0.6 inches. Although I can't buy a new set of narrow tweeters in the cages from Magnepan (as I'm overseas and they won't ship) I do have a pair of 3.3Rs with the narrow tweeter in them which I could donate into the MGIIIa. The MGIIIa has a more solid and punchier bass than the 3.3Rs and sounds more dynamic for some reason (not sure why - perhaps different mylar construction/tension and/or different MDF frame material), so I would probably prefer to "do up" the MGIIIas if possible rather than stick to the 3.3Rs, which (whilst quite good) I’ve never been totally satisfied with.
Neo, I missed your rebuild will look on the forum for it.
I scrapped the stock 18 12 18 12 crossover in my 3.3Rs a few years back (the stock XO has the low tweeter mid crossover point at 1.7 KHz). I scraped it largely as that design had a big suckout in the midrange, - the “audiophile dip” , which I didn’t like and the sound was also a bit phasey and foggy IMO. On Satie’s advice I replaced it with a 18 6 6 6 type crossover very similar to the MGIII crossover (virtually the same values, but no tweeter inductor and a 10uF cap on the tweeter) . The linear phase in mid and treble sounded much better me compared to before. This setup has a higher crossover point at about 3.5 KHz. I thought the original 1.7Khz crossover gave poorer quality treble from the ribbon, but its hard to tell is it exactly why as the new crossover I put in had no audiophile dip and a flatter response, so perhaps that’s why I thought the sound was better, - not completely sure on that one. Certainly the 6dB high pass on the tweeter taxes it quite lot, but perhaps having less components in the tweeter XO cleared up the treble a bit.
I had to sell my Tympani IVas a couple of years ago as I didn't have the right sort of room for them, sadly. The 3 series Maggies are much less room picky. If I had kept the IVas would have definitely put in the better sounding new narrower 3 ohm tweeter after lengthening the tweeter trough, and likely would have also tried the 18 6 6 6 crossover in them which I like a lot. (stock TIVa is 18 12 12 12 if I remember right).
Thanks a lot for your help guys, speak soon.
The answer as to whether it is safe to use the 2 ohm ribbon without the resistor is that it will depend on your amplifier. Assuming you listen to only music (I have no idea about HT use) at reasonable levels, the answer is probably yes but it could be no.
Using the tweeter without a resistor will increase the output of the tweeter by about 3.5db and you may not like the result.
The reason Magnepan does not sell the "newer" ribbon to IIIa owners is because it is about 0.6" longer and will not fit in the speaker. However you can easily lengthen the slot with a router. If you explain to Magnepan what you are doing, they will sell you the tweeters. I did this for my IIIa's when I built a wood frame.
Again the newer ribbon will have a higher output, but it works for me. However I also changed the mid-tweeter crossover so it is now at ~2100hz rather than 3000 and the Q of the tweeter HP filter is higher than the OEM. You should note that the 3.3, 3.5 and 3.6 cross at ~1200 Hz. I did not try to lower the xo to that point but maybe I should give it a try.
Edits: 08/06/14
Hi Neo,
I had a look at your MGIIIa rebuild on your profile. Looks lie kyou did it a few years ago but I somehow missed it. That's a superb job (I am pretty jealous!). I really like the fact you put in the better thinner 3 ohm ribbon and I love the wood enclosure. Turning the mylar to the front is also a good idea too as it gives a clearer sound. When I do this with the stock speaker (just turning it around) it loses bass impact/punch and dynamics compared to listening to the normal magnet side, but I guess putting the panel in a wood frame really helps the bass impact so listening to the mylar side is fine in that regard.
So although you tweaked your internal crossover for active biamping I guess you are still using similar MGIIIa type slopes of 18 12 12 12? Did you ever try the simpler 18 6 6 6 I use on my 3.3Rs and Satie uses on his Tympani IVs? (it has a spaced crossover on the mid/tweeter.). Works real magic in my view as the coherence/blending between mid and tweeter is far better than with any other crossover I have tried. I am still using the stock 18 12 12 12 crossover in my MGIIIa, but I will try 18 6 6 6 in them too when I've sorted my tweeter issues. I guess the only issues with the latter setup is it might now have the same max vol potential and you could get some IMD at higher volumes, but I've never had a problem with it with the 3.3Rs.
Anyway, like I mention in the post above I'm going to try running the MGIIIa wide 2 ohm ribbon without the resistor. In fact when I repaired the delam on the speakers I measured those tweeters at about 2.2 ohms each. The 3.3R narrow "3 ohm" tweeter measured at about 2.75 ohms so the wide thick tweeter is not actually that far off resistance wise, and therefore might be ok without the 1 ohm resistor.
One other quick question no worries if you have no ideas on this. I have an Anthem MRX500 AV amp that has the renowned ARC room correction system software included with it (you run ARC on a PC and upload to the receiver). ARC is much better than the auto eq systems in other brand receivers. It has a calibrated microphone and give excellent results particularly in auto equing the bass region.
There are some graphs here. It's very capable in giving a flatter in room bass response :-
ARC graphs
It is adjustable as you can specify the max eq freq and there is a adjustable "room gain" feature if you find the EQ makes the sound too thin/light. There are also lots of options for subwoofer crossovers to the main speakers. It's mega convenient as you can run it using it with 5-9 different postilions in about 10-20 minutes and get very good room correction very quickly. I've only tried it with conventional speakers so far but I was also thinking of trying this with a set of my Maggies. It's not exactly high end hifi but I am very intrigued. I would never use the internal receiver's amps of course, - would power the Maggies from my hefty NAD 208 power amp using the MRX500s pre outs.
The only thing that worries me is that the test tones the Anthem uses (which are quick pulses from the lowest freq to highest) are pretty high volume, and might smoke my ribbons! Would you or anyone else have any thoughts on whether its worth risking or not?! (suppose I could try it with the 2 ohm tweeters, as I already have some replacement foils handy if they break!).
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: