Welcome! Need support, you got it. Or share your ideas and experiences.
Return to Planar Speaker Asylum
216.158.98.226
In Reply to: RE: 1.7 vs. 1.7i How to tell the difference? posted by Taki888 on May 28, 2020 at 19:37:01
Are the crossovers different at all? There are no ribbon drivers in the 1.7 or 1.7i, it is all "quasi ribbons" (flat wire on Mylar).
Follow Ups:
I don't have any reference for 1.7 or 1.7i. You are right, no ribbons. I just wonder how
you can visually see the differences and what to look for.
If both i and non i are 3 way, the foil layout is the same on both?
No one seems to know what the "i" stands for and Magnepan will not tell you either. Same goes for the 3.7 vs. 3.7i.
I think it's a change in the mylar tensioning and maybe the tuning dots. Probably mostly on bass panel as the sound is said to have more bass.These are part of Magnepans' long held trade secrets. In the manufacturing, the mylar needs to be tensioned, and tensioned in a quantitatively repeatable way.
Moreover the tensioning is not uniform, it changes throughout the vertical axis--most likely higher tension higher up and lower tension lower.
This will reduce any resonance peaks and spread out the frequency response. For the same reason the Apogee bass panels were trapezoidal, narrower at top, and hence higher characteristic frequency. Magnepan figured out how to have the same effect but in a square, and much cheaper to manufacture, frame. (Frames & cabinets are always the most expensive parts of speakers).
It turns out there's lots of wizardry needed to make a panel that wants to vibrate like a tympani drum (which has a distinct pitch) into something that doesn't have a pitch of its own. (and this is why I believe they haven't been cloned in Asia at a cheaper price).
Anyway, my total supposition (without any inside evidence/knowledge) is that in the change from the wire bass panel on the 1.6/3.6 (which was used for decades) to the QR needed more of a re-think of the tensioning and resonance control than originally anticipated. The wire bass panel can be/and is doubled in the center runs, giving more efficiency/output and more mass (lower resonance frequencies).
Probably the non-'i' 1.7 and 3.7 were too lean in the bass area and continued work improved on the original design's resonance control. 20.7 incorporates those learnings as do 0.7 and LRS.
Edits: 05/29/20
Whats the big mystery with this i improvement? Josh knows what it is, why doesn't he just post it here?
The 1.7 was a lot of things, but definitely not "too lean in the bass area", the bass was muddy and uncontrolled, a far cry from the 1.6. When we did a A/B with the 1.6 +1.7 it was a big disappointment, we all expected the 1.7 to be a further development of the 1.6, but it turned out the 1.7 had gone off in a different direction and had left the audiophiles out in the cold.
We could only conclude that the 1.7 had been designed for the US market, surround system's, home theatre's e.t.c., which makes sense, audiophiles are on their last legs and the 2 channel market is drying up quickly...... whatever this i improvement was, it wasn't going to fix this 1.7
If you knew what it is, you'd understand why I don't post it. :-)
I can verify though that Wendell had a good reason for keeping mum, though I do think he should have said a bit more -- he could have described what they've done without disclosing the actual secret.
I figured it out on my own, BTW, after someone here on the group noticed and wrote about part of the difference. Wendell never confirmed.
Also, AFAIK, the 1.7 was designed for the audiophile market. They do have a line of home theater speakers, but they're designed to mount on the wall (and will work with music, though -- an underutilized solution I think for those who don't have sufficient space).
Thanks Josh, for explaining why you won't explain it..... does that make sense? I guess the mystery shall linger on.......
I still can't figure out those 1.7s, the room, set-up + system were top notch, we moved them around and tried everything, it just never happened. at the end of the day we hooked up the 1.6s and there it was! all the magic came back! I think GL nailed it when he said the 1.6 has a "living soul", couldn't agree more!
Driving home, I thought maybe the 1.7s were broke, damaged or a Monday morning production? but spoke to a European distributor a few weeks later and he just confirmed what I experienced, so I'm not alone on this.
Has any experienced listener with a serious set-up gone from a 1.6 to a 1.7(i) and considered it a improvement? I know a lot of people have purchased 1.7s but I've never heard of anyone going from a 6 to a 7?
My memory may be failing me, but weren't there some reviews here early on from some who had moved up?
I'm wondering if the difference people here doesn't have something to do with the overall balance -- as I recall, the 1.7 was leaner in the bass.
Otherwise, in general, the main thing I hear in the quasi ribbon speakers is greater clarity. Also less Mylar noise and some have said that there's less of the "you have to turn them up before they sound good" issue.
the 1.6 was an amazing speaker. Haven't heard the 1.7 (although I owned a crippled pair once).The LRS is also an amazing speaker and it does everything right, but when the 1.6 is hitting all cylinders (to me at least) it had a "living soul" in it's presentation.
Edits: 06/03/20 06/03/20 06/03/20
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: