Welcome! Need support, you got it. Or share your ideas and experiences.
Return to Planar Speaker Asylum
108.35.109.181
I'm Don, and I have a problem.It's a room and a love of the sound of Magnepans..
As an old (and old time) audiophile - I've always loved the sound of planar speakers. I've owned things like the Jantzen Z-400 speakers, and lusted after speakers like KLH-9's (probably the most amazing sound I ever heard was a pair in a perfect room, driven by a Marantz 8B with a McIntosh C22 preamp and some very good vinyl.)
I have an office I spend a lot of my time in now - it's where the computers live. It's an oddball room in our house - with an oddball shape, more or less a shoebox shape.
Size is roughly 9'W x 14' (or 17' depending on where you measure to) deep. Ceiling height is 7'6" and is a semi-accoustic ceiling.
I managed to sell my old McIntosh ML-2C's which never sounded good in this room (WAY WAY too big, and located on the long wall) and would like to move to planars.
I'd love to keep the original layout of the room since I'm looking out a window when at the computer, but I realize that may not be possible to get acceptable sound.
I've been to two Magnepan dealers - and got to audition the MGG-W's (not in anything like an optimal room/layout) and MGGs, and the Mini-Maggies.
Out of them all - the standard floor standing MGGs were the most impressive. Good clean sound, good instrument location, and adequate bass for most of what I listen to (and for organ music I could always add a subwoofer..)
The Mini-Maggie I found a bit disconcerting since the crossover between the woofer and the upper panels is rather high, about in the middle of the music being listened to, and I could very clearly hear the transition, and apparent instrument movement from the uppers to the lowers. I also have a problem wrapping my head around the price of the Mini-Maggie despite knowing it's a more complex speaker set then the MMG.
The MMG-C - didn't impress me. The low end was missing, and while instrument location was OK, it just didn't sound as clean as the MMG. I suspect the lack of a seperate tweeter has a good deal to do with that.
So - what to do?
I'm posting an image of the current layout (minus the McIntosh speakers) of the room... and then I'll post another image of one idea I had.
I'm open to all sorts of ideas. The room is being redone, so this is the time to make changes. I saw in the mods section where someone had wall mounted MMG's using piano hinges. I'm curious if this would work, and what the sonic impact might be. Or - whatever else your ideas might be. The bookshelves can be removed or moved (they start abut 5' up on the wall and more or less go to the ceiling.)
Thanks much!
Don Eilenberger
SLH, NJ, USA
Edits: 03/02/12 03/02/12Follow Ups:
I see no reason you cannot just get the mmg's and a tight little sub for <45hz (do NOT use the sub above that in this room!), and just flat out do nearfield listening. it works, though some despise it. Some even use small maggies almost as if they were huge headphones!
maggies being so light, you can always slide them in and about. The most fruitful and ez situation seems to be a smallish listening triangle, roughly 6 feet a side apparently.
See, the thing is, you *will* find a certain triangle that will lock in the room, especially if you get a sub to then also lock in at the sub frequencies.
It can be done. It is not hard. Naysayers shall be naysayers.
/ optimally proportioned triangles are our friends
I don't want to poop in the punch bowl but the only way that room would work is to put the speakers midway into the room and your chair in the back of the room. And you would still have to clear the room of most of the furniture and the bookshelves. The bass is really going to suffer.
I hate to steer you away from Maggies, because I really like them but they are only good if you can get everything out of them. I have a 10X10 room and when I had Maggies in there they took over the whole room.
Have you considered a Martin-Logan or a stand mounted cone speaker?
Another one: http://www.justrealmusic.com/content/home1.htm - any experience?
FWIW - I went to BestBuy (booo..) today intending to buy the ML ElectroMotion ELS's that I saw at a BestBuy about a week ago - when a pair came to around $1600. That's no longer the case - now a pair came in at $2200, but comes with a "free" ML subwoofer. I think "free" actually costs around $600 now.
After listening to them in BestBuy's Magnolia (they should serve drinks I think..) listening room - I felt there would be no need for a sub with them. They worked on Saint-Saens Organ Symphony (#3) just fine. They actually startled the young sales chap who had never realized classical music could sound like that (I explained it was a duel between the orchestra and the pipe organ - and the organ wins..)
Anyway - apparently ML keeps very tight rein on the selling prices and limits discounting to 5% or something. So.. I left speakerless. Just waffled around the web and came across a set of Martin-Logan SL3's almost local, so I'm going to try to get a listen of them.
Still thinking on what to do.
The one thing that's sorta turning me away from Maggies (as good as they sounded) is the sheer number of "mods" people are doing to them to correct what sounds like some basic flaws in design and construction.
Hope that doesn't offend - but: Adding framework to the speakers? Should that REALLY be necessary? Rebuilding brand new cross-overs? Really? In looking at the design and construction, it appears the Maggies are slightly over what I could do out in my garage if I was inspired enough to try (I'm fairly handy with both wood and electronics.) It's a nice idea, but a lot of the engineering in it seems to be a tad retro. I can't understand why they're not using an evaporated conductive coating on the mylar instead of gluing wires to it. A big evaporator is expensive, but it would certainly cut the labor cost of manufacturing down by an order of magnitude.
Anyway - I'm still puzzling over what I'll do. I have some money now, and as with most members of the male population, my pocket is afire..
Best,
Don Eilenberger
SLH, NJ, USA
Don, you don't offend at all. As far as I am concerned, the important thing is that you have an idea of what you want. We can't help those who don't know what they want.
I've known and loved planars for a long time, though I left serious hi-fi audio early in the 90s; long story. Then, aa few years ago, at the time I decided to return to audio, I wanted planars. Just then, my wife got very ill; we are still paying medical bills.
As I looked at my options, I remembered the Maggies. These were speakers that had always sounded natural enough to me. See, I am a victim of having lived in a music environment for long enough that not just any speaker can be enjoyable for extended listening.
A pair of old MMGs were offered at a good price and I snatched them. From day one, I knew what I was getting into; a speaker that would be enjoyable the minute it got home and would become much more so as I modded it. I had explored this forum already.
So, I bought Maggies; not just for how great they sound stock but also for what they can get to be, if one wants.
That is what you see all around here, people exploiting that big potential and people helping others get there. Which is why I can go listen to great audio systems costing far more and still go home to my MMGs happy. I mean, really happy. In fact, eager to return to them.
Even before the optional mods, which can cost very little, these suckers only need good placement to sound delightful. Now, they do need that proper placement.
BTW, your room is not inadequate at all. Sure, it may not give you the best that Maggies can offer. Yet, even well short of it, you may get far better sound than most mortals know...unless deep bass is your thing...which a subwoofer can do.
I should add that if your hearing is significantly unbalanced, planars will not provide enough of their best goods because imaging is then hard to perceive. I steered a close friend away from planars because of this. We found a nice set of $16k boxes that both he and I enjoy tremendously.
The bottom line is this. If you liked the MLs better after you heard them, you are making a great choice. You will still need good placement for them, though it may be less critical. These are a good final product.
OTOH, if you liked the MMGs better but have reservations, there's that money-back guarantee. If I had the chance, I'd first be testing every single good speaker I could get to try at home. It does not get any better than that...well, in the case of Maggies it can but you don't know it just yet.
People do the mods because Maggies are amenable to them, not because they don't sound good out of the box. I think you'll find that the general consensus, both among audiophiles and reviewers, is that Maggies punch way beyond their selling price. And this has been achieved by making the changes that have the most bang for the buck, as vouched for by blind listening panels. It's as much about what they choose not to do as it is about what they do.
Take my own favorite mod -- lifting up the MMG so it's vertical, and off the floor. It makes the speaker much better, yes, but basic physics also means that if you do that, bass output is reduced, meaning that you need a sub. So while this mod is useful and many of us have done it, it isn't something that Magnepan is likely to incorporatein a retail version. If they make a model that's vertical, it has to be taller to maintain bass response, and that means it has to sell for more.
Or take the fuse bypass mod. Sure, bypassing fuses can improve the sound in any speaker -- fuses are by their nature extremely non-linear when current is high. But then, the speaker is running without protection. Not something you can do in a commercial speaker.
Heavier or exotic wood frames? They makie a difference, but again, it's a question of price/performance: for the cost of these frames, Magenpan has concluded that they can do more sonically by doing other things instead -- more woofer area, true ribbon tweeter, three-way crossover, etc.
You can rebuild the crossovers if you like with better caps, but the .7's already have improved caps. Davey has measured PG's series crossover and found that when combined with the acoustic response of the drivers it introduced a significant midrange boost. So keep in mind that not all improvements are uncontroversial. (And that Magnepan knows how to design crossovers.)
As far as I know, all manufacturers of large planars have chosen to glue the foil rather than use an evaporative or etched coating. It's just more economical that way. Small planar drivers are generally sputtered or etched. There are good reasons for that: they need fine traces, the necessary process equipment is economical, and they require higher currents, which generate more heat and make it difficult to find a suitable adhesive. There's a white paper on the Bohlender-Graebner site that goes into the economics of planar manufacturing. If it were more economical to use a different process, I've no doubt that Magnepan would.
My feeling on this is that you should use your ears rather than analyzing it. If a speaker sounds better than the other speakers in its price range, and it fits your needs, that's the one you should go for. And that, in my view and that of many others, is the department in which Magnepan excels.
Anyone can use silver wire and 750 pound cabinets made out of machined aluminum and rosewood. Some very fine speakers are made that way. But unless you're in the quarter-million dollar range, compromises have to be made, and choosing the right tradeoffs is, arguably, more difficult than saying "Hey, diamond looks like a good cone material, let's use it" -- and more ethical than doing what some manufacturers admit they do, and putting in fancy components that do nothing for the sound because audiophiles expect them.
Actually - this sorta started with hearing some Martin-Logan's at BestBuy.. somehow they'd accidently set them up correctly. I'm still not sure what model I heard, but it was quite impressive.
As I mentioned at the beginning of the thread, I've had an interest in electrostatics for a LONG long time.. Problem is - most ML's are too much $$.
I may just wait and watch AudioGon and FleaBay for some reasonably priced used ones. My holdback on MLs aside from the price is (1) the proliferation of models - seems to be mostly marketing - but it disturbs me when a company can't make a model for more then a few years without feeling they can "improve" it (which from when I worked in audio was used to get new reviews in the magazines and honk some more of these turkeys out the door..) (2) they've gone to box speakers besides the electrostatics - sort of lets mine the $$ from the name while we can sort of marketing.
Anyone have opinions on smaller ML electrostatics vs the MMG? Is the room less critical with the ML's due to the built in woofer?
And haven't we wandered off-topic now.. :)
BTW - stand speakers don't excite me a bunch. But I'll admit to not having listened to a bunch of them. Seems more marketing over technology again, but I'm always willing to be proven wrong on that..
Don Eilenberger
SLH, NJ, USA
I have had a number of speakers in my little room. MMGs, Martin Logan Electromotion ESLs, Maggie 1.6s and Triangle Celius. The problem with the MMGs and Maggies in general is that they need more space and more power than most other speakers. While normally the M-L can be used 3 or 4 feet from the front wall the Maggies need 5 or 6 feet (or more) to get the rear wave matched to the front wave for good bass performance.
At 600 bucks the MMG is hard to beat but you have to bend to their demands or they will not be satisfactory. Don sounds like he would still like to have some control over his living space so maybe some conventional speakers would be a better bet. Upscale is discounting some Triangle Heliades, which are very nice speakers and would work with all electronics in this small room. Just a thought.
Edits: 03/04/12
Russ, I suppose I was lucky. I received good advice here when the time came to put my system together.
Here's a little diagram of my rectangular room, in which none of what you mention applies.
I can even run the original Denon receiver I began with in 2008. At 100 w/ch it can sustain most of the soundstage I illustrate, albeit a little smaller and with less solid elements than the current setup. I bring it back from storage at times to demonstrate to my friends. While it can't achieve the same amount of bass that the current Denon or the power amp shown can, it still isn't wimpy.
In fact, also in storage, I have a 25 year old NAD power amp whose 100 w/ch are backed by a beefy power supply. It is a pity that it lacks enough refinement in sound at the top. Except for this age imposed limitation, this NAD can deliver very dynamic sound, including bass that you have yet to hear from MMGs. Similar power amp capabilities are available for prices that could have fit Don's budget.
I bi-amp using a very cheap implementation at line level that delivers clarity rivaling unmodded 1.6 and even 1.7s. However, it is not required for most people.
The soundstage, depending on the recording, can be huge and detailed, and often is. The TV, the MMGs and the walls vanish before your eyes as you get involved in the music. Everything within the solid blue outline you can "look" at. It is solid enough that turning your head does not damage the positioning of each elementt in it.
The black dotted outline can be the source of quite solid sound in several recordings. In these, it is surround sound, except it is just these 2 MMGs doing it alone. The main difference between the frontal (solid blue or black outlines) and this area is that if you turn your head around to look, it often changes or vanishes. Not so with the fronta area.
Not shown is the amazing positioning of elements within that soundstage. I have heard $50K+ speakers that could not replicate this kind of soundstage even in their type of ideal room. In fact, the only speakers that have heard exceeded it are the Maggies 3.7 in a demo room.
The subwoofer depicted is hardly ever used for music. It is not needed for most of it. We use it for movies.
The room does not need much treatment to sound great. A small amount of burlap is what I used for absorption.
Don would not have been able to achieve all of this with MMGs in that room. Most likely, with a little care, he could have still achieved a significant portion.
So Russ, I am sorry if you had improper guidance here. The reason that I am spending all this time trying to help is that I am extremly grateful to those who helped me in the past. Pay it forward, is it? I've got a lot to pay for.
The high frequency dispersion of the Logans is limited to IIRC 30 degrees -- the angle subtended by the arc of the speaker (this holds truer as the wavelength gets small compared to the radius of the arc). The crossover frequency varies between models. In general, an omnidirectional woofer can only be made to mate with a line source tweeter at one listening distance, because the woofer has a 1/R^2 radiation pattern and the tweeter a 1/R one.
Dipoles are generally less sensitive to room acoustics than omni/cardioids, but they are more sensitive to placement and absent rear wave absorption need to be at least 3' out into the room. That's true of both the Maggies and ML's.
Really, for your room, I'd either go with boxes -- which can be used against the wall, although they actually like to be out in the room if possible -- or with the on-wall Maggies, a high quality solution that we audiophiles tend to overlook because people associate them with home theater. Or I'd set up a near-field system with the Mini Maggies, if that suits your listening pattern.
LOL, my only issue with ML is that I can't afford their top of the line model, nor the home size required.
The main topic is what works for you and related stuff with a bias to planars & dipoles in general. As long as we don't start praising Bose we are generally safe.
I am off to an affair with some pricey boxes at a friend's place. Have fun!
Ah, Bose - the "Sweet16" in pretty clothes.. :) Which probably dates me a tad - I can remember helping a friend built Sweet16's - we bought the speakers on Canal Street, and then burned up several electric drills making the 32 holes..
FWIW - Bose - if you turn all the signal processing off - isn't bad in my Cayenne. It's actually probably the best factory car audio I've heard. With their magic signal processing on - voices and instruments seem to wander around the car like ghosts looking for a home.
Keep the ideas comin'..
Don Eilenberger
SLH, NJ, USA
Russ, MLs are lovable speakers and your input may valid after all. Yet, if it is based on your 10x10 square room vs Don's rectangular and somewhat larger one, I suspect that you had a tougher nut to crack. Maggies and rectangles seem to love each other, even with furniture (judiciously arranged). Squares...not as easy; I can see your point.
Anyway, would it harm him much if he tried a $600 MMG pair that he can return? That way he can find a good deal on the proper Martin-Logans while he checks out the Maggies. LOL!
[Quote] The Mini-Maggie I found a bit disconcerting since the crossover between the woofer and the upper panels is rather high, about in the middle of the music being listened to, and I could very clearly hear the transition, and apparent instrument movement from the uppers to the lowers. [End Quote]
I have never heard any such issues with my Mini Maggie setup nor have I ever read any reviewers suggesting what you heard at your dealer demo. Since I have my Mini Maggies on ear level speaker stands and I also use subs perhaps my satellite/woofer whole room arrangement is very different to the configuration you heard.
Of course I am most interested in any negative comments that reviewers or trial owners have about the Mini Maggies, since I have found them to be one of the most remarkable Maggies produced if the Tympanis or 20.1 speakers don’t suit your needs.
I would therefore strongly recommend the Mini Maggies with a sub in the second room configuration posted. My alternate to that would be the MMGs wih the Magnestand Mods. Both options may be more than you want to spend but you only live once and compared to anything else Maggie are a bargain.
Thus I agree with josh358 and JBen. I also second JBen’s recommendation for the powerful low cost hybrid Vincent Audio amp.
Update:
[Quote] The mini's I audtioned weren't optimally placed for sure. The woofer was off to the left of my knee. [End Quote]
That explains everything. The single DWM woofer must be centered between the two midrange/tweeter panels. If this configuration is not possible then you need to use two DWM woofers that will be off-centered as you need.
Don,
another option in place of the RPG thing, which will cost money to buy or make (unless you are good with tools, which i am not, hence my MMGs are made of pre-cut lengths of soft pine wood from IKEA!!). The carpenter i hired to make the RPGs refuses to make any more due to the work involved. sigh.
The other option, as i was beginning to say, are plants behind the speakers. What's that species that works quite well according to other members who have done this? I forget. Satie or JBen will remember. Fucia tree? Fuckus tree (God thats starting to sound obscene). Something like that.
This option will save you money.
Warmfires.
This rovers crossed over
to the >>>SUNNY<<< side of the street
Dear Don,
first of thanks Jben, for getting me involved. I have a room that is 9ft by 12ft, so actually smaller than yours Don. But it now sounds great with my modded MMGs. I won't go into the mods here, as there are plenty of other threads for that if/when you are ready.
What i did was to put the speakers on one end of the long of the room, roughly where your speakers are now. Experiment with toe in and tweeter in or out. Mine sounded best mylar front (like the picture you just posted from Brian bennett's tweak page) tweeters in, about 2 feet from the side walls, and 3 feet forwards from the back wall.
I then put up a thick curtain behind the speakers. Double layer of curtains behind the speakers really help in a small room like ours. The maggies were essentially unlistenable without the curtains. (see my recent post about being away for a bit...it's got pictures).
I then placed an RPG abfussor... locally made replica behind each speaker. Along with a carpet and cd racks on both side walls at about the first sound reflection points, really helped the sound.
If you were able to move your desk with the computer to the area of the closet/ longer bit leading to the garage, with the desk placed so that you are sitting facing the speakers, with the bookcases on either side of the speakers on the first reflection points, i feel it would help.
Consider putting up thick curtains behind the speakers. Satie's got a good point about putting the book cases behind the speakers to act like RPG's but if you ever need to take a book out, i know it will be difficult as the space there is very constrained. I have tried to move things around behind my speakers, and it is a real pain going behind them. I'm 5ft 9 and 80kg and not that big, and it's already a tight squeeze, so if you are bigger and not so nimble, i would not place anything that require regular getting to, behind the speakers.
I bought a used PSB subwoofer and a DSPeaker device to control the subwoofer... after a day of playing around with it i realized i did not need a subwoofer, it just got in the way of things as i am already getting very nice clean bass, sufficient quantity that i don't enjoy the presence of the subwoofer.
I really wish you well and hope you get good results from your Maggies. For me there is no other, and right now i am done purchasing anymore hifi as the sound i am getting from my set up in my room, for me, is spactacular.
Deep bass, near 3-D centre image, nice depth and not too shabby width in the sound stage, altho not the widest considering the speakers are only a few feet appart.
Take care.
Warmfires.
This rovers crossed over
to the >>>SUNNY<<< side of the street
Thanks Warmfires!
Like you, I stay away from using the subwoofer and usually get away with it. The textures at the bottom can be every bit as alluring as anywhere further up. I'd hate to mess them up. That's not to say that a proper subwoofer can't do the trick; it is worth pursuing it. Which I do at my leisure, no hurries...
BTW, the new wood for your frames should further improve bass, clarity and dynamics. Last weekend I mentioned that it was worth the expense. That's because I had found it to be among the better choices if I wanted to upgrade the Stixbees frame reinforcement. So, I am glad you figured it out at your end, as well. I, too, will be paying a pretty buck for a good option closer to home, though I don't need as much wood.
Anyway, if Don starts by getting the new system working half as good as yours is at this stage, we will ask him to send you a bottle of the good stuff. [Don, that is a bottle of any of our imaginary fine rums of the world.] LOL!
Thanks much for the replies. They are quite encouraging.
The idea of absorption/diffusion on the rear wall behind the panels is interesting, and I can see how it should work... one advantage I have - both walls that have windows in them (upper and right side in the drawings) have a step out in them due to foundation coming part way up the wall. There is a ledge at about 36" from the floor. The area below the ledge would be pretty much a natural spot to add absorptive panels. And I see there are lots of options for what to put there.
Interesting thread on AVSForum:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=255432
Also as noted - probably not that hard to make custom home-made RPG abfussor (had to Google'm - interesting devices) sort of designs, if the dimensions are available.
I would guess the question of how much absorption I want and how much diffusion is going to have to be empirically answered.. try and listen sort of thing. IF necessary I could also likely use different materials above and below the shelf level.. perhaps with curtains on a traverse rod on the rear (upper) wall above the ledge, that could be closed when serious listening was taking place. Or simply line the entire wall above the ledge around the window with some sort of absorption paneling.
Thanks again, and keep those ideas coming! I think I'm ordering the MMG's tomorrow (the McIntosh speakers are leaving around noon..)
Don Eilenberger
SLH, NJ, USA
I had essentially the same situation you do, long thin home office with a window with a view I wanted to face. And I looked at most of the same options you did, MMG-W's and MMG's, and the same picture of the piano-hinged MMG's, and made the same decision you did and got MMG's. However, when I experimented with the MMG's, they sounded so much better in a bigger room that they became my main speakers for a couple of years.
Now? For me, it would be a no-brainer -- I'd do the Mini Maggie home trial. This is precisely the kind of situation they were designed to address. Dealer setups of the Minis have in many cases been disappointing because dealer showrooms aren't set up to demonstrate desktop speakers. The Minis were designed for nearfield desktop listening, the MMG's weren't, and if my experience is any guide the MMG's just won't be at your best if you try to use them that way.
LOL! Josh, since yesterday I've been reserving this one for you to add. More so because I suspected, but did not know, the dealer variability on displaying the Minis. You now confirm what I suspected.
The dealer here did it right, and the Minis obliged. The dealer also allowed me to fool around with positiong. It was in some of these variations that I heard the kind of discontinuity that Don mentions.
He does have reservations on spending so much at this point which, in light of his own experience, could make sense.
There may be 2 good choices:
1. Home trial of the Minis. Try desktop positioning leaving desk in his favorite position. If not pleased, try the satellite variants mentioned elsewhere. This would mean the desk moves and the Minis go where his 2nd drawing shows. If none of this works, return them and order MMGs. That gives us maniacs a few weeks to drive Don nuts with suggestions!
2. Order the MMGs first, under trial. Allow us demented folks to make him dizzy and probably hurt his back moving things around in the process. If not happy with the sound, once he returns from the clinic, he can pack them and try the Minis. : - ))
"It was in some of these variations that I heard the kind of discontinuity that Don mentions."
I'm glad you mentioned that. It reinforces my own hunch, which is based on my experience with the sub on my computer speakers, and also what I've read about subwoofer localization in the literature.
Like the Mini, my sub crosses over at about 300 Hz to planar satellites. In some setups, I hear its position, but in others I don't, and they aren't always what you'd expect, e.g., I have the sub to my left and a bit behind me right now and I don't hear its location.
The way I justified the cost when I ordered the MMG's for my computer was that I spend more time listening to music at the computer than I do to my main system. Seen in that perspective, it makes a lot of sense.
So if it were me, I'd try the Minis first, based on my experience with the MMG's in a similar setup, the difficulties with the dealer demos, and what you said about not being able to localize the Mini woofer in certain positions.
Yes, if I were looking for a desktop-based system, the Minis would be it.
In addition, a small room Minis implementation as satellites could possibly be a sweet option, by virtue of the ribbon tweeters. [I do wonder if the extra woofer would be needed]. Which reminds me, on the tweeters Don made no remarks as to perceived difference vs the MMG...
I am listening to my MMG as I write 10ft away from them (flat TV/monitor is between them). As I hear this room expand to impossible dimensions outside wall boundaries, I so wish the Minis could do the same in a similar position without a major extra investment. That's why the 3.7s will be it for me...eventually.
Maybe you could make a point source version -- get a couple of DWM's, two Neo-8's, and two conventional ribbon tweeters . . .
Yes, something of the sort crossed my mind at one point. Then I figured that I did not crave yet another long cycle of fine-tuning when the current mods are working so well.
As it is, I am having a headache trying to test some minor tweaks. The minute the system warms up and plays, I don't want to do anything but listen to the music during my scarce free time. On SACDs they are almost always sweet. On upsampled red book material they do quite decently, to understate it. On all these, imaging is superb and dynamics are rather above average for the Maggies I've heard, even some boxes. And then, the stupid bass keeps fooling me into believing that the subwoofer is on when it is not. So, sure, I'd love ribbon tweeters. But I can live without them for the while longer it will take for 3.7s to jump into the shopping cart. Besides, I need a new home for them, minor expense that it is. LOL.
The next couple of tweak rounds may or may not be worth it. In the next few weeks I'll switch woods on the Stixbees and measure the changes ("none" vs "red oak" vs "new wood") like I did at first (none/P-Frames/red oak). Only, this time it will not be just for my own purposes. Now I know that some people could benefit. So, I'll hope to demonstrate that it is cheap, practical, very effective and, to some extent, measurable.
Then, later this year I'll try to take care of the subwoofer/low pass aspect while reducing mechanical intermodulation. The challenge here is not to damage the goods that have been already achieved. Fortunately, this "opportunity for improvement" is not critical for enjoyment.
Even the new wood for the Stixbees is not a "need" except that dismounting the current red oak wood Stixbees set offers a chance to illustrate & measure. The darn things work well. All I have to do to hear their loss of effectiveness is loosen the bolts a little.
I wonder how you could measure their effect? A measurable difference in frequency response, of course, if there is one. But resonances are more difficult, at least without an accelerometer or interferometer. You could try comparing waterfalls with the measurement mic, but it could be difficult to separate the frame resonances from all the other resonances and reflections . . .
Josh asked: "I wonder how you could measure their effect?"
In short, a Radio Shack digital meter can begin to tell the change. Other finer means can be used to further confirm.
Don't cock that gun just yet: You can try the RS meter test rather easily. All you need is 4 pieces of wood/MMG and a few small clamps to try my Pseudo-Frames.
Keep in mind that my Stixbees, as well as my original experimental Pseudo-Frames that led to them, are easily removable. In doing so, one does not need to move the speakers. Repeated test cycles can be done without introducing undesirable variables.
This kind of swapping can't be done with wood frames in order to compare, which is why no one thought of it before, I think.
The peaks tell the story, primarily during impulsive passages. Play impulsive music passage, write down SPL max peaks (in digital meter). Add/remove PFs, repeat test with same passage. Do it several times. Later, try a few different passages.
We all know that frame reinforcemnt works, and so does frame replacement.
However, it seemed that nothing at hand, short of a full-fledged physics lab, could measure it. I remember our group discussions and the arguments as to what actually happens (stiffness, resonance, etc.) as well as our plans to try cheap accelerometer or interferometer DIY approaches. We never did. We were all too busy.
Then, as I planned the test of Dawnrazor's Razoring tweak in 2010, I was desperate. In my mind, good as Razoring could turn out to be, I expected it to be a more subtle effect than frame reinforcement. If it worked, I would feel better recommending it if I found a way to measure it, at least to my own satisfaction.
During preparations for the Razoring tests, I accidentally discovered that a simple Radio Shack digital meter could differentiate "P-Frames vs none" in some situations. However, it was not sensitive enough for the Razoring test.
Yet, it led me to a more sensitive (and elaborate) approach which was good enough for Razoring. It showed that Razoring has an objective impact. In addition, this other test always confirmed what the RS meter reported regarding the P-Frames and (later) the Stixbees .
In both types of tests, the difference shows up in impulsive passages. The peaks are higher. On the less impulsive passages the contrast is lower. Up to the point were compression starts to happen, the louder one plays, the better contrast can be observed.
Now that I know that the Stixbees work (long-term), I hope to enable any soul who needs a cheap & easy approach to do it. And if they need to measure something, they can...though our ears tell things apart just fine.
You know, being old and senile, I'd forgotten that, but when you mentioned it, it came back -- I do remember when you did those impulse tests.
Who was it who mentioned aluminum angles? I think I'd try steel angles, they're more massive. I think they'd complement the MDF well in that they have very different resonant characteristics and would damp one another more effectively than MDF and wood. And there's less of a risk of diffraction. One of the problems with measuring impulses in a circumstance like this is that you never quite know what you're measuring -- reflections, resonance, diffraction.
Really, there are a lot of beautiful frame projects, but I haven't seen any experimentation with Apogee-style truncated pyramids, rounded edges, or rounded profiles. Someone did some measurements of various baffles using the RD-75 and the one that worked best was an airfoil design. The big Infinities/Genesis for example use curved baffles to minimize diffraction. Also, no one seems to have tried an all-aluminum or Corian frame. (The great thing about Corian is that you can prepare breakfast while you're listening.)
Haha, I did not mess with the edges. In fact, these old MMGs (made in 1999) still have the original edges. The Stixbees -- just 1x2x42 red oak sticks -- are hidden under the cloth, right next to these edges, on the back.
My wife absolutely did not want wood frames. A good friend also insisted they were ugly. Later, the same friend would joke: Desperate Husbands, episode 1, Man escapes to Home Depot, invents cheap stealth solution, recovers love of his life for $21 bucks. [She was happy about the solution and named them Stixbees. Her mood, when I was experimenting with the really ugly P-Frames, had been deteriorating...my dinners just didn't taste as good as they used to.]
Corian I would have loved to be able to try. Getting it in custom-made shapes is not cheap. I must say, my wife would have been delighted to serve dinner on the speakers!
I wondered where that name came from. :-)
How about sand-filled metal reinforcements? For both mass and stiffness.
"How about sand-filled metal reinforcements? For both mass and stiffness."
I would expect it to work if stiff enough metal tubes are used in a proper fashion. What these would be, I have no idea. Perhaps Grant knows more.
JBen's "Rinky Dinky Sounds Lab" has just one more related test remaining. I just ordered some Brazilian Teak (Cumaru) for the final version of the Stixbees. Red Oak does a great job as it is. So, I may get little or no additional benefit from the new wood. Yet, if my theory is right, there should be enough improvement that can be measured relative to the previous versions. It is over 60% stiffer than Red Oak.
I'm thinking of some square-profile aluminum that I see at Home Depot. Might be the right size. It isn't particularly heavy, but I imagine that the sand would damp out any resonances, and the profile should confer very good stiffness. Easy to drill, cut, and join. Then all you'd need is a beach. (Of course, Mye stands would be better, but I'm thinking of something that's inexpensive and easy to DIY.)
I wonder which ones you saw at Home Depot. The ones I looked into at both HD and Lowe's seemed too flexible. This turned me off at the time I was choosing something for the experimental P-Frames. When I compared them -- by not quite scientific means --, 4' of 2x2 Douglas Fir "rang" and vibrated less than the same lengths of aluminum tubing that they had at the time, years ago.Except that I did not know it was Douglas Fir then. It was just a cheap wood that they had on the shelves, with no identity. I bought it on impulse. After they cut it for me, I walked to the hardware section and compared to the 4' aluminum tubes.
There's a story behind me not knowing that it was Douglas Fir for a long time. It turned into one hell of a blind test down the road and led me to the conviction the stiffness has more influence than mass, even as both help.
Edits: 03/06/12 03/06/12
I'd expect the aluminum tubes to ring like a bell, but that's when they aren't damped by sand and the speaker frame. That's the advantage of using disparate materials constrained in a sandwich -- if the resonances occur at different frequencies, they'll tend to damp one another.
The state of the art Apogee uses a heavy steel frame covered with Corian. Probably, one of
the finest ribbon speakers around.
Which one is that? The Diva?
The Apogee Definitive ( another design I would love to hear; unfortunately
there are none in the United States, and with a cost that is prohibitive for most
audiophiles.
Apogee DEFINITIVE full planar reference system. DEFINITIVE is a 3-way ribbon/planar system that is constructed from the finest materials to the highest specifications. Efficiency levels that rival some horn designs, detail resolution of the highest order. Engineering tolerances tighter and more accurate than any other planar ribbon currently available, past or present. XLM bass ribbons, metal alloy ribbons designed to meet electrical and mechanical requirments for lifelike reproduction. And able to be driven as a real 4 ohm load by as little as 20w tube amps.
Definitive includes a DEQX PDC2.6 Preamp/active crossover and room correction unit, and also have their own speaker cables attached. To use you will require 6 channels of extremely high quality signal leads, the finest source, and 6 channels of high quality tube, solid state or the best of digital amplifiers. At this time no passive crossover is planned. Definitive is made from a solid steel cnc laser machined frame, faced in Corian. At present DEFINITIVE is only available in Australia.
Josh, the efficacy is very high, are extremely powerful magnets part of the reason this speaker can be driven with 20 watt amplifiers.
What are your thoughts?
OK, it's one of Graz's. He uses neodynium magnets to get that efficiency. Unfortunately, neodynium is extremely expensive right now, because the Chinese drove all the other rare earth mines out of business and once they had a monopoly, put export limitations on it to force rare-earth-dependent businesses to move their production to China. New mines are about to come online, but for the next few years anyway it will stay pricey -- I've seen figures like $3000 for a high-eff 2" Apogee-style woofer. So most manufacturers are using it only on smaller drives, e.g., small quasi-ribbon driers like the BG's. There, you need high efficiency, because there isn't much heat radiating surface so you want to limit current, and it's also desirable to keep magnets out of the path of the high frequency audio to minimize diffraction and cavity resonances.
MM, are these your Apogees? Wicked!
You know, that room looks almost like mine, except for the corner truncation I have. If you ever feel like these Apos could use a vacation break here in FL, I would not mind loaning you my MMGs : - ))
Those are Graz' new Apogee Definitives, $100 grand, from Australia. The photo is from his epiphany inducing experiment playing them with tiny tube amps, SETs if I recall....
Synergy review
http://www.stereo.net.au/forums/showthread.php/41156-Apogee-Acoustics-Synergy-2
The Definitive pic there are the only finished pair made as of this Jan.
Bummer! A time-share swapping arragement for these Apogees and my MMGs would have been nice. Them Apos being in Australia won't work. I can't wait that long for the MMGs to return to me : - ))
JBen says: "... including bass that you have yet to hear from MMGs."
JBen, you are selling me a little short. My 10X10 room is just one room in my house. My MMGs are now in the great room in my vacation condo, 20X30 with a 12 foot ceiling. I'm using a Parasound A21 and an Audio Research pre. It sounds pretty good, probably better than most MMG set-ups. I use a sub but the bass is good without it.
Anyway, your room looks good to me and it's way better than the OPs. The same set-up in his room would have the speakers in the same place and listening chair just like yours but his chair would be at the back of the room. It just sounded like he wanted more control of his environment than that.
That's great news! Such a large room must be a challenge for the MMGs to fill. Your experience with Maggies in a high ceiling may come in handy for some here, also. Mine is barely 8'.
LOL, when I bring a friend's Parasound A21 every now and then, my MMGs do cheer up a little more. That A21/MMG pairing is great. I think it was Andy who heard it driving 3.6s in Australia and loved it also.
Back to Dan's options, the thing I keep remembering is a series of emails where an inmate I approached in late 2007 told me that I would be very unhappy with MMGs. He had good intentions and it was based on what he knew of my tastes in music, mostly SACD-based classical music.
At that point I had not yet read any archived postings. During one of my wife's long stays, I took the laptop to the hospital. I had so much time to read! Patterns began to emerge. I would not be able to enjoy the 1812 Overture cannons with them, that was clear, but I saw a lot of potential.
Oooops, we should have asked Dan about his music tastes, or perhaps I missed it! If he is a closet Punk rocker, MMGs are off the list. (I am really having a blast imagining Dan as such. LOL)
The mini's I audtioned weren't optimally placed for sure. The woofer was off to the left of my knee.. the two main panels were correctly spaced, but had a lot more room behind them then I would in my room/setup.
The movement of one instrument as it dropped in frequency from a center position to the left of my knee was quite audible to me and rather disconcerting. I question how well a system can work with that high a crossover point. You're well above the range where the ear supposedly (I believe there is a lot of debate on the subject) becomes non-directional.
Having instruments move from the desktop to down around my feet might be just as troubling.
I Googled "low frequency directionality" - and found this in a Wikipedia article:
Evaluation for low frequencies
"For frequencies below 800 Hz, the dimensions of the head (ear distance 21.5 cm, corresponding to an interaural time delay of 625 µs), are smaller than the half wavelength of the sound waves. So the auditory system can determine phase delays between both ears without confusion. Interaural level differences are very low in this frequency range, especially below about 200 Hz, so a precise evaluation of the input direction is nearly impossible on the basis of level differences alone. As the frequency drops below 80 Hz it becomes difficult or impossible to use either time difference or level difference to determine a sound's lateral source, because the phase difference between the ears becomes too small for a directional evaluation. "
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sound_localization
Another interesting discussion on low frequency localization:
http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?fcabl&1007236733
I've given thought to getting the MMGs with the return option and seeing if they can be made to work correctly - if not send them back, and think more about the MiniMagi, or?
Don Eilenberger
SLH, NJ, USA
Good point, Don. For the longest time, I have regarded solid research into audio as a good general guideline. To be sure, the variables in, and range of, human perception easily throw a monkey wrench into things. And that is not even considering other non-human variables, which research can't fully cover for each of us.
In addition, that which sometimes is evaluated in the domain of a given parameter, say frequency, in real life comes with other attributes. These, together, feed our individual perceptual engines.
So, for example, when the lowest notes of the tuba in Billy May's "Solving the Riddle" hark from a decidedly left, outside the room location, I understand that several things make it happen, despite its frequency. I don't fully know what they are but I am hearing it as I write now via a pair of modded MMGs, no subwoofer.
{Pause: damn it, this Billy May album is from the early 60s and still sounds so great! Its brass textures are addictive to me...probably a thing from my musical past....in the Jurassic period. LOL]
Back to subject...I think you have some good choices. I am very happy that Audiozorro pitched in. In doing so, he also presents the other good (non-desktop) alternative with the Minis.
Any way you choose to go I am confident that we'll be able to help you get great sound.
The Minis are now developing a more solid portfolio of user experiences. I for one, love them, even if they don't fit my current needs.
The MMGs, if they start showing their potential in your room and you keep them, are still a superb choice. That is because they start sounding great and then, with a few bucks and a little sweat, you can make them little audio monsters on their own, tailored to your tastes.
{Now fully back to listening mode]
Here is the first idea I came up with. I do lose the view out the window, but I'd have the option of looking out another window. I also lose the bookshelves on one side of the room, but I can live with this.
The MMG's would be on the floor more or less (or could be elevated with some home made stands if necessary)..
I also would consider wall mounting of the MMGs - if anyone has ideas or has done this, please let us know how and how it worked..
Don Eilenberger
SLH, NJ, USA
Welcome
I think you have the right idea already and I would just take it to a further extreme, taking the desk further towards the garage end and removing the printer stand to the other wall if it turns out to be a problem for traffic to the garage.
You may get a benefit in sound by moving the bookcases to the front wall, arranging them behind the speakers to provide some diffusion, which they like.
Long rooms are really good for these speakers if you can get them sufficiently off the front wall and listen to them from further back in the room.
Thanks for the welcome..
I should note - the back of the desk is open when it faces the speakers in the second drawing.. which I imagine could make a difference.
Don Eilenberger
SLH, NJ, USA
A link to the wall mounted MMGs..
http://www.integracoustics.com/MUG/MUG/tweaks/BrianBennett/
Don Eilenberger
SLH, NJ, USA
Don, at this point I am in total agreement with Satie. Of course, the devil is in the details but overall, if you could arrange that way, it would be one good starting point for the very reasons Satie mentions. In addition to great sound, you may be able to tune things for great imaging also. When one gets these together, it is heaven on earth.
In any event, I am not assuming that this will be acceptable to you. The head keeps cranking (well, the single brain cell in it, anyway). Plus a couple more actions may add options and/or perspective.
One is that I asked an inmate (on the other side of the world) to take a look. If he gets my email he may be able to shed some light on this. Before he moved to a larger place, I believe he had a challenge similar to yours in a narrow-ish room. Also, there may be others that have had the same challenge.
Furthermore, we have yet to hear from inmates who may have tried non-standard approaches in similar situations.
Believe me, we can drive people nuts with options!
Welcome Don!
I am at work right now and I still have to post some follow-ups her. However, I'll be taking a look at what you posted and perhaps ask a few Qs.
Also, you are bound to start getting some good advice from the gang here shortly.
Here are some pictures.... as usually i have loaded them ass first, sigh, must get the hang of posting first pictures last here. Anywayz..You can see the cheap IKEA wood, painted half-assed. Yes, since moving back in to my new home i have become a lazy, happy pig squealing in delight. The contractor we hired did an admirable job, so far better than my wife and i had hoped for. We have repaid his dedication and excellent work with giving him business... good honest contractors are very very hard to come by here in my country. Most just rip you off and disappear. All i do these past few weeks is go to work, come home, turn the set on, go have a shower, and listen and listen and listen. Oh, and do a happy jig when i play some really nice gooves. sigh... i never thought my system would sound this good, ever, considering how little i've spent on it. I mean, i have the MMGs, a Vincent power amp, bought used, made in china, cheap. And a Esound cd player, made in china, bought used. Doing transport duties, feeding a Buffalo II dac, and a home made pre amp. (not made by me.. a local hifi Guru made it for me, and it sounds marvelous! My whole set costs less than HALF the price of my close friend's speakers alone. I used to sit infront of his system and enjoy the music so much, never expecting to have such nice tunes in my own home, but now it's there. I'm not saying the sound is better than his, what i am saying is that i now truly appreciate my system enough to leave it alone and just sit back and bask. Which i do every day now!! :-)
But i was hoping to show the curtains, nice and thick with pleats, the abfussor behind the speaker,
and the thick curtains. Also the cd racks on either side of the room, about where the first reflection points are.
There are bay windows on one wall near the right speaker letting music into the dining and kitchen area. I feel this helps with lessening bass boom, since i seem to have none, with the set up like this.Hope this helps you Don.
Take care and good luck with your room my new friend.
Warmfires.
This rovers crossed over
to the >>>SUNNY<<< side of the street
Edits: 03/03/12
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: