Welcome! Need support, you got it. Or share your ideas and experiences.
Return to Planar Speaker Asylum
71.46.92.55
...because they still sound horrible after about 30 hours.Cupped hands midrange, tenor sax sounds like soprano sax, piano sounds like a toy, no life at all with cymbals.
And I have dialed in the angle to the wall to maximize warmth.
I'm using a MartinLogan Dynamo sub at the upper limit of its crossover of 80hz, but I probably need a sub to play up to 120hz with the MMGW's.I cannot say how disappointed I am in the MMGW's. I got them to replace MMG's and they are simply not in the same ballpark sonically in any area.
Are the MC-1's any better than the MMGW's (and maybe closer to the MMG's) in the area of midrange warmth? I assume the MC-1 treble detail will similar to the MMG.
I was temporarily using a pair of EPOS ELS3 ($300 msrp) while waiting for the MMGW's to arrive, and I thought they sounded like decent mid-fi; but the MMGW's are not competitive in any way with them.
Edits: 05/24/15 05/24/15Follow Ups:
And the wires coming out of their speaker will attach to the spring clips on your Pioneer receiver.
Why on earth can't they put decent connectors on these?
"A lie is half-way around the world before the truth can get its boots on."
-Mark Twain
I use them as 4 rear surrounds, and there IMO they are barely sufficient. Thankfully I rarely watch/listen to movies, and never to surround music, otherwise I'd be tearing them off the walls.
I am sure these speakers have their place, somewhere in some application. But the big killer to me is not the lack of a QR. Recall the SMGs and MG1s also had no QR but are still considered by many to be the most musical Maggies around. The thing to remember about the MMGW and MMGC is that they are ONE-WAY, whereas the other mentioned models were two-way with wire all around. How much of a frequency response can one expect using a radiating surface of less than 2 square feet as a full range driver?
I almost bought four MMGWs to use as side and rear surrounds years ago, but I could not wrap my head around the idea of losing that much lows and highs. Then I considered the MGMC1s, but they only dip to 100hz, and this is only accomplished by using walls for boundary gain. I ended up getting four MMGs for even cheaper than the MC1s, and with a little ingenuity rigged them to the ceiling using a hinge system I fabricated to mimic the MC1 mounting system. Absolutely stunning sound quality and extension, and by far the best surround speakers I have ever heard.
They can sound good
They have to be high enough. the highest frequencies (above 8KHZ come from the center of the panel, the lower treble 2kHz-8kHz come from the top of the speaker, and then while the panel works good to 125Hz - there is panel breakup from 400Hz down. The very narrow baffle helps a bit.
Note they are inefficient! 82dB@ one meter for 1 watt input. And they start distorting at 105dB RMS or so.
125Hz crossover is a good place to start. If you think of these as a 4 inch full range driver - You get and idea of how they sound. They do extend out pretty flat on axis to 16kHz. At their price they are competitive with other full range drivers. - since you don't need a cabinet.
"The hardest thing of all is to find a black cat in a dark room, especially if there is no cat" - Confucius
...because you can hope in one hand and clap in the other to see which one gets filled first.
The MMG-C and MMG-W are mislabeled. They sound nothing at all like MMGs thanks to the lack of QR. The MMG-Ws need to go back to being called SS-1s and the MMG-C should be called SC-1 for "one squawking center." The difference is so much so that a system that uses all three MMG branded speaker types is going to so mismatched as to bring the listener's attention to each of the speaker positions. That is exactly the opposite of the goal of 5 channel seamless sound.
Return the MMG-Ws. The MC1s are a lot better and sound a lot like the MMGs (at least in my system, I own/have owned MMG-C, MMG-W, MMG, and MC1).
the loss of real estate in the MMGW results in the loss of lows and highs compared to it's rival brother the MMGs (tweaks article list them at 100hz-16k) ....all in the name of WAF.
Personally I wouldn't totally discount them if I were limited in space, but I'd definitely have a sub hidden somewhere in the room.
'Which' sub? hell I like my REL Strata II ($400 used), but it's only used when I have songs with lack of bass (duh). Plus they're a millisecond or two slower than the panels. The better RELs from what I've read tend to fair far better but I'm not at that point yet. Usually it's turned off.
In any event- thankfully the MMGW has a trial period.
Seems like a bad substitution. The MMGW are not full range speakers and are not intended to be. I would say you should consider rearranging the room around the fireplace or on the other side of it where there is no fireplace in the corner.
Arrangement around the fireplace has the TV mounted above it, and the MMGs on either side of the fireplace pulled into the room as much as WAF allows. If the fireplace is not in use it can serve as a nice base for the equipment rack.
And I also think that part of the issue is my amp or lack of one.
I'm using a Marantz receiver that worked great with the MMG's, but the MMGW's are a lot less efficient.
I am going to be picking up an Odyssey Khartago amp some time in the next few weeks and we will see if that helps. I will certainly need it if I get the MC-1's since they are even less efficient than the MMGW's according to Magnepan's specs.
Sorry - I should have stated in my initial post that the floor plan of my new home does not allow me to use MMG's. The short of it is that there is a fireplace in the corner along the wall the speakers are on and placing a speaker next to it looks really bad. (Have to agree with my wife on this.)
So I decided to try the MMGW's on the 60-day return plan thinking if they were not good enough, I'd just go up to the MC-1's.
However, the MMGW's are so bad I am now hesitant to go with the MC-1's since I am concerned that they may not be enough of an improvement over the MMGW's.
BTW, the professional reviews on the MMGW provided on the Magnepan site are very positive so I am a bit shocked at how bad they sound.
Why in the world would you think those would replace MMG's??
Dave.
I am not surprised that you are disappointed with the MMGW. It is really a rebadged and modified Magnepan SS1 that was sold by Magnepan in the 90's as a surround ambient speaker. Certainly nothing I would use as my main listening speakers.
As to your question about the MC1's being better the answer is absolutely. They have a QR tweeter inside and sound fantastic when paired with a sub. I would definitely try out the MC1 and subwoofer combination. I think you will be quite pleased with it, especially when compared to the MMGW.
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: