Welcome! Need support, you got it. Or share your ideas and experiences.
Return to Planar Speaker Asylum
70.164.244.228
Room is 12'x16.5'. Ceiling height is 7'.
There's a nice pair of Magnepan 3.6R available locally, but I'm afraid they would be too much for this room. I'm thinking something smaller would work better in this space? I have a good subwoofer, so the lack of lower end would not be a problem.
-------
Addicted to content-free jazz music.
Follow Ups:
There are both 3.6R and 3.7 fs locally.
3.6r is about $2,200, vs. 3.7 for $4,000. I haven't heard either yet. What are the significant differences that would sway towards the newer model?Also, what to look for when auditioning used Magnepans? Anything will tell me that there's something wrong with the speakers?
-------
Addicted to content-free jazz music.
Edits: 11/03/16
I own the 3.6 and have heard the 3.7.I feel the 3.7 does not go as low in bass.
The de-lamination is not an issue with the 3.6 IMO.
I prefer the 3.6 overall. YMMV
Our stereos do not add any distortion to your music, and they do not take any away! Old Sony Ad.
Edits: 11/03/16
De-lamination can be a problem with early 3.6, like mine made in the end of 2003. I think Magnepan introduced the new adhesive in summer 2004 or 2005. I have an old E-Mail somewhere with the exact date.
I have a similar listening experience of the 3.6 and the 3.7. The 3.7 was a bit thinner but had a better imaging. The transistion from midrange to tweeter is better solved in the 3.7. Still have not heard the 3.7i.
I was recently told that Magnepan switched to the new UV-resistant adhesive in September 2005.
That should provide some peace of mind for those who have some of the later model MG 3.6s.
I apologize for misrembering, getting my facts mixed up. There is a (green) slip of paper (00535-L Rev. C 10/85) included in my Tympani IV-A manuual but its titled "CAUTION--PHYSICAL DAMAGE TO RIBBON" warning about their fragility. On Page 4 of the IV-A manual there is a section dealing with ultraviolet damage reading "The diaphragm side of the planar-magnetic drives should not be exposed to ultraviolet light for long periods of time. Sunlight is the worst, but skylight is almost as bad. Long exposure to strong flourescent lights can also be a problem. In my manual and in large bold cap. letters has been stamped 'DOES NOT APPLY".
That said I had Tympani 1Cs since about 1975 to 1990 which were damaged by indirect skylight coming through windows. (IIRC there was no cautionary remarks about UV damage in its manual.) I sent this Tympani 1-C to Magnepan for repair. They came back looking exactly like new after which I never allowed for them to be exposed to any light coming through windows. Trying to stay on the safe-side, I also protected my Tympani IV-As from such light, even though the manual indicated it would be safe to do so. IAE it's much easier (as well as being less expensive) to keep them covered and/or in a darkened room, than it is to pack them up and ship them to White Bear Lake.
Norman, do you know the serial number of your IVA's? I just checked and mine are 21123, made in Nov 88 -- I'm curious which adhesive I have (and it would be useful to know).
Josh,
Mine are 21185. (My receipt shows that I bought them on 10/04/1990.)
Thanks. So made not long after mine. Still don't know which adhesive I have, though, I didn't think to ask when I called the parts department yesterday.
Checked the age of my T-IVa with Magnepan.
Hi Roger:
1) July 1985
2) More IVa's than IV were made
3) IV: January 1982-July 1984; IVa: April 1985-February 1991
4) current adhesive July 2005
5) Your Tympani IIIA, made February 1976. Number made: 300 (TM-panels), 200 (woofers)
Thank You,
Kari Hoffman
Parts & Service Dep.
Magnepan Inc.
651-262-1934
Interesting, thanks.
Kari must be wondering why she's getting so many questions about when Tympanis were made. :-)
The Tympani IV-A which I still have and use was bought in October 1990 and obviously was manufactured at an earlier date. The user manual that came along with it contained a slip of paper saying to disregard its instruction to avoid exposure to UV light as it was no longer UV sensitive. (That's at least 15 years earlier than the date you give.)
There were two adhesive changes. The first change was to an adhesive that was resistant to UV light but turned out to be subject to water damage. After that, Mark Winey ran an R&D project to find a new adhesive that wasn't affected by either. The new adhesive was subject to stress testing and didn't deteriorate, and since they switched to it, delamination hasn't been a problem,
Wonder which adhesive mine have? I don't have the original manual so don't know if it came with that slip of paper . . .
Josh, thanks for that information (regarding the different adhesives). I must be extremely lucky that I can feel no banana peel nor lift of wiring in my 26 year old Tympani IV-As. At the current rate they're likely to outlive me, which is perfectly fine because I have no intention to take them down, pack them up and shipping them to Magnepan and then reversing the process when they come back.
Additionally, I would first have to buy new cartons as recently my (2nd) water heater sprung a leak and flooded the basement destroying both my IV-A and 3.6R cartons and much else.
Don't blame you for not wanting to ship them, after my experience with Federal Express. Hopefully they'll keep going. As I said, mine have some delam, but they're still quite playable.
My Tympani IIIA from 1975 still have most of its wires in place... It seems the adhesive "eats" the wire over the years resulting in discontinuity.
Interesting. I knew the wires corroded, but I hadn't connected it with the adhesive. The wires in my IVA's are still fine, with some delamination at the ends of the woofer runs and at the taped parts in the midrange. Also, the Mylar no longer sticks reliably to the tape.
It was the European distributor who told me about the adhesive being agressive to the copper wiring on old Magnepan.
Edits: 11/06/16
Interesting. Did he say which version(s) of the adhesive?
My Tympani IVa (Serial # 021008) were manufactured in January, 1987. The manual included the insert regarding the midrange/tweeter panel being shipped detached from the bass panels but there was no notice to disregard the UV precautions.The previous owner must have kept them from sunlight - as have I for the past 3 years - since I don't see signs of delam. and they sound great.
The switch to UV-resistant glue must have been done between 1987 and 1990 then with the change to water-resistant glue occurring in Sept. 2005.
Edits: 11/05/16
Just checked and my serial number is 21123 . . .
My T-IVa have serial no. 20838. Must be early ones as the ribbons are/were 3 Ohm without series resistor.
Figured it was earlier since it has more felt and they'd only make things cheaper. :-)
I just asked the service department and it turns out mine were made in November '88.
Makes sense. I have to check my Sn to see when they were made. They're a bit different than Roger's, have felt only on the tweeters, his has some felt on the baffle.
The date markings scribbled on my TIV indicate the speaker was being built in Oct 82. So no UV protection and I had the mids blow 24 years later, they were very corroded and the wires crumbled easily. They were from the SF bay area so likely had salt moisture exposure.
Interesting, the wires in my mids don't seem to have corroded significantly. As I said there's some delam near the tape and I can press them back into place in the still-tacky adhesive without them falling apart. Haven't given them much thought because I have the Neo 8's but if I were to replace them I imagine I'd use foil. Who knows, they may become surrounds one day.
In addition to the possible delam to watch for in the older 3.6 speakers, there are positive advantages in the older speaker in that you can readily biamp them whereas the 3.7 needs to be altered internally and the crossover replicated in a different alignment in a line level crossover should be doable but we don't have a tried out proven and publicly detailed mod recipe..
You should listen to the speakers looking for buzzes and rattles that would indicate delam. Then use a flash light to backlight the wires so you can spot detached wires, particularly at the top and bottom of the panels. Repairing the tweeters is not expensive at under $200 incl shipping for most US locations - IIRC. If they are damaged then have the price reduced accordingly.
Thank you!
-------
Addicted to content-free jazz music.
For the 3.6's, get the serial numbers, and call the factory to see if they were made with the newer glue. Older glue has long-term delamination problems depending on climate.
3.7's are all QR, never ever heard of anybody having problems with that.
Thanks, good point. I did just that, called Magnepan. the 3.6 were made in 2002, and the person I spoke to at Magnepan said repair would not be difficult, were it to occur.
-------
Addicted to content-free jazz music.
Thank you for all your input!!!
An important question I have for you is whether anyone had implemented MEN220 or Lyngdorf with their magneplanar /dipole speakers? I find that it made a remarkably-favorable difference in my current set-up.
-------
Addicted to content-free jazz music.
I use Anthem ARC with great positive effect with my 3.6's. Cleans up the bass superbly and, with a subwoofer, and increases the 'snap' that typical cone-type dynamic speakers usually do better at than planars.
I limit the upper correction frequency to 1500Hz, which helps as well.
Over on www.avsforum.com, there are people with much more experience with various room correction.
The various algorithms are NOT all the same, and some work substantially better than others.
As far as what I've generally read, Anthem and Dirac are almost universally liked. There is far more mixed results with Audessey and the others which are typical for mass-market receivers (Yamaha has its own).
I don't see any reports of results with McIntosh or Lyngdorf, they're much rarer. (McIntosh must license one of the existing ones)
I haven't heard of anyone doing that (which doesn't mean anything), but other room or speaker correction systems such as Audyssey and DEQX work just fine (with up to 5 channels in the case of Audyssey). Any measurements should be made at the listening distance rather than the near field, since planars have a bass boost up close.
I had that concern with the tiny measurement condenser mic aperatures contributing to the mismeasurement relative to ear perception and opted to get a recording mic with a 1" condenser capsule to get a wider sample. The Rat Shack meter also has a broader capsule than the measurement mics.
Why would a broader capsule be better? It would have more of an effect on the high frequencies, being closer to their wavelength in size.
I would assume that if measurement microphones tend to have a similar design and shape, there's a good reason for that.
yes, there is a good reason to limit the mic's off axis response and limit the size of the aperture and diaphragm because you want to have a precise aim at what you are measuring since most measurements are done near field. When you are measuring far field you want to capture something closer to what your ear captures at the outer ear - before it is directed into the inner ear. To compensate for the limited field sampled some room correction devices are equipped with omnidirectional mics and use multiple locations for sampling. My mic is cardioid aimed straight at the source. .
I've heard both 20.1s and 3.7s sound superb in an 18 x 12 room with bay windows as with your media room.
Just need to move them out from the wall.
I'd try them first against the bay windows, rather than where he has them. It will either sound great or horrible, depending on the geometry.
I've had only one listening room with bay windows, and it was the worst sounding room of them all. Hopefully the op will be more fortunate!
Yeah, that's the thing -- bay windows can be a horror, or they can be great -- E-Stat was referring to a room of HP's that had bay windows and according to everybody was wonderful for Maggies. It all seems to depend on geometry -- if you luck out, you could end up with a refection-free zone and lots of delayed ambiance from the sides -- or you could end up with something dreadful.
Room 2 at Sea Cliff was actually a "pass through" leading from one room to another. There were open doorways at both back corners with one leading straight back while the other was to the side which may have helped to "vent" it.
I heard the 3.7s there with Michael Hobson driven by McIntosh 2301 amps. They sounded a bit more coherent than the 20.1s in that space if not a touch comparatively bass shy.
I had my ORIGINAL MG-1s in a similar situation.
They were in a GIGANTIC room of 8000 cubic feet or so. 2 stories CLEAR inside and a lot of square footage. BUT, the panels were in front of a pair of openings (1 panel / 1 opening!) leading to a dining room of more - normal - dimensions.
Apparently the backwave simply got LOST. But OH! what a sound. And this was with a Carver Cube for amp and I might have STILL been using my Kenwood KA-7100 preamp section to make it all work. The CD player would have been my Magnevox / Philips FD1000.
What a Super Space for stereo.
Too much is never enough
That would likely improve the bass. I have a six foot opening opposite my speaker wall and it improves the bass smoothness and makes the room acoustically larger. The downside is that since it's asymmetrical, I sometimes have to tweak the balance a bit, depending on where I have the speakers.
My room had a 10' ceiling, and was 13' wide by 17' deep, with the bay window floor-to-ceiling, 2' deep and 8' wide. If I had stayed in the house longer I would have turned it into a Helmholtz resonator, putting up sheetrock across the opening (with a hole cut in it) and filling the space with fiberglass, like Paul McGowan has done in the front corners of the new PS Audio listening room.
Edits: 10/27/16 10/27/16
I've though about putting a Helmholtz resonator to the right of my speakers, in the space between the fireplace mantle and the wall. That space sometimes causes an annoying cavity resonance -- it depends on where I put the bass panels.
But I think Roger is right that this stuff is often unpredictable.I'd never have guessed that the Tympanis would work better firing sideways across the room, forex, because the MMG's were better against the other wall. But the IVA's have deeper bass, dipole bass modes are mostly in the z axis, and my room is asymmetrical when they're facing the way they are now, so I get much smoother bass. I'm not even sure I'll need bass trapping at all.
Really looking forward to trying the Neos but have to decide on the amp. I was thinking of putting the little Pass on them but can't spend the money now. So maybe another A-21 for the time being, or an A-51, which would let me triamp but from what I gather really isn't as good as an A-21. (Another possibility would be an earlier Parasound with John Curl's mods . . . )
Paul McGowan was not very sucessful with the Helmholtz absorbers. The key was to place the IRS in another posistion. I find that too many rules of thumb may not work in your room. It is a lot of trial-and-error involved in setting up just about any speakers in a room. Sometimes, we need to compromise. Maybe most of the time if your partner is not happy about some large panel speakers dominating your living room...
It will either sound great or horrible, depending on the geometry.
The advantage being asymmetric walls behind the speakers. The glass was covered with drapes. Wendell blessed the arrangement.
HP even put the IRS in Room 2 back in the eighties. :)
How did he get teh IRS in a 12' wide room? :-)
Though IIRC the room I heard it in at Lyric wasn't particularly big . . .
Talk about speakers overwhelming a listening room,
HP Listening Room #2?
http://www.audioasylum.com/cgi/vt.mpl?f=speakers&m=349123
E-Stat, do you now have some type of morbid fascination with HP?
What I have is many happy memories of a dear friend and mentor across a span of nearly forty years - from whom I learned immeasurably about music, audio and some of his other passions.
That pic is from 1980. It wasn't terribly long until the house was rebuilt after the fire and the far larger Room 3 became the main environment.
I also have *morbid fascinations* from others who were greatly influential in my life like my father and oldest brother who I have also outlived.
BTW, the first pic in your link of the Scaenas is in Room #3 circa 2013 or so. The second pic is photo-shopped fiction.
It appears to me that you are almost attempting to make some type of shrine(s) out of HP's listening rooms. I'm just not sure they should qualify for that.
by far.YMMV.
edit: Don't know about you, but I always delighted in hearing my old favorite recordings essentially for the first time - revealing information I never knew was there. Rhythms in the background rendered so clearly now.
Edits: 11/05/16
"YMMV", I can conjure up the sound I heard of different systems in other listening rooms, including my own Tympani 1Cs (which I lived with for fifteen years), but I highly doubt that this is fact rather than fiction.
...but I highly doubt that this is fact rather than fiction.
That your experience and exposure to various systems is different from mine would be considered fiction?
BTW, I'm quite familiar with the sound of many Magnepans, including the 20.1, 3.7, 1.6, T-III, T-1D and MG-IIs that I owned for a couple of years.
I think I wrote MY opinion would be fiction!
Edits: 11/06/16
Whenever I auditioned loudspeakers/equipment at Lyric Hi Fi, I never required counseling from any persons (now deceased or alive) to tell me what sounded most favorably (IOW most like Carnegie or Halls within Lincoln Center). IMO all that chatter is commercially motivated (manufacturers and critics alike) and is to be ignored.
Whenever I auditioned loudspeakers/equipment at Lyric Hi Fi, I never required counseling from any persons (now deceased or alive) to tell me what sounded most favorablyNor I. I have, however, benefited from exposure to hearing a range of incredibly musical systems and a wide range of content beyond what most audiophiles starting out at twenty experienced. :)
IMO all that chatter is commercially motivated (manufacturers and critics alike) and is to be ignored.
Maybe I'll share your paranoia when I'm an octogenarian. :)
edit: BTW, there are a couple of things I did learn over the years from which you could benefit:
1. Square rooms suffer horrible room modes
2. Sound treatments make a worthwhile improvement even when overt mistakes like observation #1 aren't made.
Edits: 10/29/16
Hey, now I don't have to feel bad about clutter in my room. :-)
What clutter, you can count the items in your room on your fingers....
Not today . . .
The moldy LPs are still strewn around the room drying out ever so slowly.... I will take other photos in the eve when the sunlight is not coming in.
Seat
Right
Left
I like it, it's kind of moody. The LP's remind me of when I had a flood in my apartment years ago and had to rinse and dry out the CD's. The booklets were all moldy so I made photocopies of them and put them in new CD covers.
I''ll go down to my hoarder's nest and show you what a cluttered listening room actually looks like...
I'truth, my listening room is neat because I just moved back in there and all of the clutter is elsewhere! Like down here, or stuffed into the closets, etc. Though really, that room doesn't provide much of an opportunity for clutter, since obstacles around the speakers interfere with the image and there isn't much clear wall space for shelves.
If you can tell, there is a pile deliberately in the center of the room to block backwave reflections off the rack.
The MT panels are firing with an 8" slot from line of sight to edge of woofer panel behind the woofers. I intend to take it further to the sides to just short of aligning the line of sight and the edge of the woofer. Every time I expand further the center image seems to move forward and become more detailed and images more solid. The soundstage widens too - which is to be expected. I am trying to find where the ideal level of reflection and direct radiation masking occurs,
That's an interesting arrangement. I haven't tried woofer son the inside, never mind woofers on the inside and in front. Something else to do, once I get the crap off the floor (vinyl I'm cutting to put on the floor of my office and the closets).
Here is the broad pic to clarify the setup. Sorry about the lack of focus but that is as much as the camera allows with the sun coming right at it.
I don't have the woofers on the inside, I found that really f''d up the imaging on the short wall. It was ok on the long wall.
OK, that makes more sense!
A 3.x model would fit perfectly in your space as the room is actually large just that it is long rather than reaonably proportioned . That implies larger speakers to fill in the bass. You have plenty of space to set them up on the short wall as you marked up your drawing.
You would likely benefit from a Limage type setup near the sidewalls and far away from the front wall where you are sitting just in front of the entrance - fireplace line.
If relevant for you I stumbled on a MG3A for sale at $500 in Columbus OH near me..
I'm thinking they'll work nicely. As others have said, you want space behind them. Does the fireplace really stick out as far as it seems to in the plan? That could be an issue. Sidw walls aren't much of a problem. You might find you have too much bass because they'll come fairly close to the walls, but you can always EQ the bass down a bit. Better to have too much and EQ it down for lower distortion/more slam than to have too little.
I have used the IIIa and 3.6 in rooms that size.
You need about 4 to 5 feet behind the speakers to the rear wall.
I disagree with DrChaos about the 3.6 being bright.
I feel any brightness is mainly due to poor choice of power amp.
I have never needed resistor attenuation on the tweeter.
Sit close to the speakers (10 feet max), as close as 6 feet.
Sitting close give a more intimate feel, and less need for amplifier power.
Our stereos do not add any distortion to your music, and they do not take any away! Old Sony Ad.
I have 3.6's in a 15x12 room. I use the limage setup. Best sounding setup I have ever heard. Not brite at all. I have never needed to use the tweeter resistors
Alan
Edits: 10/26/16
Give me a website "how to" reference.
Our stereos do not add any distortion to your music, and they do not take any away! Old Sony Ad.
Look through the asylum for posts on HK Limage with me ahendler and or markman and or wazoo and for 1pekingroad as search terms in various combinations and you will get most of our discussions on the matter including various presentations of the setup procedure.
I think you should try it. It's not enclosed on all 4 sides so that should help quite a bit.It's more important to get enough distance behind the speakers for good bass integration & imaging. The ribbon tweeter on the 3.x and 20.x models is really something special and it's worth it to try to get it to work!
I have a 3.6, and especially if the room is reflective/bright, I urge you to use the tweeter attenuator resistors. The 1.6 and 3.6 era Maggies are on the bright side and I prefer running with attenuation (used to have 1.6 now 3.6). I use 1.5 ohms which may be a little much but try it, and try 1 ohm.
Because they are line sources, you can get closer to them than you might think. The real issue is visual, and if you can deal with that.
Regarding the room size---there is a significant panel resonance at about 40 Hz and the integration issue is if you stimulate that mode in the room too much. If you are high-passing the mains then that helps a whole bunch. I am using Anthem ARC which is automatic room correction & crossover and it works great!
Edits: 10/26/16 10/26/16 10/26/16
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: