Home Planar Speaker Asylum

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

review MG1.7 vs MG1.6

A friend and I were able to audition the new MG1.7 as well as stock MG1.6qr's together at a local dealership. A big thank you to Audio Perfection of Mpls, MN who allowed us to spend time and play in one of their fine auditioning rooms.

Both models MG1.6qr and MG1.7 (both in original stock condition) were heard in the same room with identical positioning on the same gear.

Amplification and source: Wadia CD player w internal DAC, Audio Research LS26 preamp, AR SD135 amplifier, some fancy cables, IC's and AC conditioning. We were told that the MG1.7's had more than 150 hours of break in time on them.

Listening room was rectanglular - approx 18 ft w x 25ft D x 10 ft H. Ceiling had suspended rockwool along edges. Speakers were approx 5 ft from back wall, 7 to 8ft apart (ctr to ctr). Listening chair approx 8 feet from speakers. Tweeters on inside with slightly less than full toe-in.

Speaker setup was near ideal using the Q sound effects from the Roger Waters "Amused to Death" as a gauge. Images to be heard directly to the right were heard correctly. Images (TV sounds) meant to be direct left were a bit forward of direct left - not quite right, but better than most setups I've heard. Magneplanars need to be fully toed in, in a symmetrical room with side walls at equal distance to both speakers to get these effects correctly.

The framing construction of the 1.7's appears nearly identical to that of the 1.6's. There may be a slight change to the side bracing MDF shaping to smoothly conform to the new side trim. The new side trim appears to be rigid enough to possibly add some stiffening effect along the edge. The crossover appears to be all first order. Solens are no longer used. The caps appear to be polypropelene. One white one looked just like an Infinicap. The other was light blue in color. The inductor looked similar to others used by Magnepan (sledgehammer style). The factory connection plate looks familiar. A single fuse protects both the tweeter and super tweeter. There was the typical "bypass bar" placed in the tweeter attenuation posts.

Biases: I own MG1.6's with outboard crossovers as my main speakers in a near ideal room for them. They are driven with a high quality tube linestage and Gen III Class D amplification. I am very familiar with Magnestand version MMG's and MG1.6's as well as stock 3.6's and 3.6's driven with active crossovers. I am also familiar with the SMGa, SMGc, MG12, MG1.5, MG1b and MG2.5 models. I find that the one lacking aspect of my modded MG1.6's is a bit of haze in the upper mids and lack of resolution at low volumes. The xover modifications improved both of these aspects, but not to the level of let's say of Quad ESL's or MG3.6's. There are some aspects of the MG1.6qr's that I find superior to 3.6's and other far spendier speakers. My friend is an MG1.6 Magnestand owner and is familiar with the MG1.6's in my room.

Listening to the MG1.7:

I was immediately struck by the liveliness of the upper midrange to low treble region. After listening to several different recordings, this also equated to a slightly annoying forwardness. The speaker may have benefitted with a 1 ohm attenuation resistor in place which we did not employ. The MG1.7 is definitely a change in tonal balance and texture when compared to the MMG/MG12/MG1.6 line.

There was no obvious sound of an additional super tweeter (a good thing). Treble dispersion is wider than with 1.6's. The listening sweetspot was about 3 feet wide instead of 3 inches.

Female vocals sounded very nice in tonal balance and texture. Male vocals tended to sound a bit thin.

Resolution was excellent. At low levels, maybe a tad better than 1.6's, but we may have gotten a false sense of it with the tonal bend toward forwardness.

Deep bass was taught and well pitched as was the upper bass to low mid. There was a comparitive suckout in midbass response, I'd guess in the 70 to 90 hz region.

Soundstage was huge left to right and top to bottom, but lacking a bit in depth.

Images were nicely highlighted without false spotlighting.

I desired for some support from a subwoofer.

Listening to the MG1.6:

The slight murkiness in the upper mid to low treble of stock 1.6's was obvious.

Female vocals sounded a little warmer. Male vocals were definitely warmer, if not a tad thick.

Resolution at low levels was lacking.

Bass response, while not any deeper in capability, was more full fleshed and even with added dynamic impact.

Soundstage was huge left to right and top to bottom, and deeper, especially into rear corners.

The sweetspot was tiny, but very rewarding.

Images were nicely highlighted with a bit of spotlighting.

The want of an additional subwoofer with the 1.6's was slight to non-existant.

Both my friend (Magnestand owner) and I were left with similar conclusions. The new MG1.7 has some superior aspects, but the ability of our own MG1.6's to draw us in and emotionally connect us to the music wins out.

Of course, some minor changes like bypassing the fuse, adding a small value attenuation resistor and allowing more break in time would tilt the balance of the comparison. I suspect that many will immediately declare the MG1.7 a far superior speaker upon initial listening. Not all people have the same tastes in tonal balance and texture. I also suspect that those owning MG1.6's with Magnestand mods, Mye stands or crossover upgrades or some other combinations of improvements will be very happy to keep what they have. Keep in mind that the comparison was stock to stock.

Everyone should audition these speakers when they have a chance. This is not a refinement to an existing design. These are wholesale changes in sonics that warrant your consideration.


This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
  Amplified Parts  


Topic - review MG1.7 vs MG1.6 - drkielbasa 14:05:51 01/26/10 (13)

FAQ

Post a Message!

Forgot Password?
Moniker (Username):
Password (Optional):
  Remember my Moniker & Password  (What's this?)    Eat Me
E-Mail (Optional):
Subject:
Message:   (Posts are subject to Content Rules)
Optional Link URL:
Optional Link Title:
Optional Image URL:
Upload Image:
E-mail Replies:  Automagically notify you when someone responds.