Welcome! Need support, you got it. Or share your ideas and experiences.
Return to Planar Speaker Asylum
Just got my new stands for my Maggies 1.6's from Grant Mye. Thought I'd post a report on the experience. Grant is very helpful and well organized. Purchase was no problem except for the need to get an international money order. The stands were finished and shipped in a timely manner. When they arrived my wife called and asked if I'd bought a bazooka (the struts). They were very well packed. Have a phillips head screwdriver handy. All parts are very well constructed. Fit and finish was outstanding. It's really annoying when things don't go together as advertised. All these parts fit. Assembly went fairly smooth. Total time for stand assembly was one hour. Fifty minutes for the first and ten for the second. It's a two person job unless you're much more coordinated than I am and have an extra set of arms. This included time to shim the speakers as the stands were a bit too high. Note that Grant mentions this possibility in the instructions. Also included in the hour was time spent disassembling on of the supports after I dropped a bolt down it. This really went smoothly. I didn't even have to disconnect the speaker cable. One suggestion: Note that the bottom of the support goes on the **outside of the stand** with the flange inside.After finishing the stands it was nearly dinner time, wife was muttering and strongly hinting that my next action better be opening a bottle of wine. We decided to spike the stands later. I assured her I wouldn't dally, but I did turn on the system to make sure things were ok. Whoa!!!! Not what I expected. Not at all. But had to run after 30 seconds or so.
It's confession time now. I got the stands as stands. I've always thought that the supplied stands were pretty pitiful. I wanted something that would be more stable. OK, yes I'd read the endorsements about changes in the sound. But lets face it, theres a lot of hype in audio. People endorse Mpingo blocks. Now I do know that stands can help. But in my experience it was a fairly modest difference. I had hopes that I might get a bit of improvement in imaging, and maybe in bass. And actually that did happen. But what struck me on my first quick listen and subsequent longer sessions was completely different.
The major impression was that pixies had somehow magically swapped out my Proceed 150 watt amp for some 500 watt muscle amp. There was a sense of "strain" that was present before and now had disappeared. Note that I was very happy with the sound of my system prior to the new stands. With the stands the sound was now **effortless.** Grain has disappeared. The midrange is soooooooo sweet and smooth (not smeared smooth). It's as if a distortion has vanished. Or perhaps there's a .5 to 1 db increase? Additionally, microdynamics are now much more apparent. That's always been a peeve for me. No more. For example, in Resphigi's "Ancient Airs and Dances" I could hear, vividly, the flutist strain to maintain a vibrato at the end of long phrase. You could literally hear the flutish run out of breath (and the gasp for air). The sound space with in which the instruments were place is now much more defined and there is no blurring at the edges. This is tough to describe, but it's readily audible. For example, in one section of Airs I previously thought the oboe was very fuzzy. Nope, not fuzzy, it's an oboe with a clarinet very softly playing harmony. The space between the notes is now dead quiet.
The help in the imaging and bass was also present. Interesting the most striking improvement in imagining was in the increased depth in the sound space. The hall goes waaaaayyyy back now. Note also that it's not a two dimensional depth with rows of "flat" instruments. The sense of ambience was enhanced. Bass attacks were now much more pronounced. Also, especially in string bass, there was much more detail and a nice sense of airiness. Not just "thud" but sting, and wood in space.
Note that this was before spiking. After applying the spikes (I almost didn't worrying that it would mess things up) there was a small but noticeable increase in focus and and air.
I did not expect anything of this magnitude. I can't understand why my amp suddenly sounds more powerful. I don't care. What I can say is this. Until you've got your Maggies better supported you haven't begun to hear what they're capable of. I don't know if other stands could give this kind of results. What I can say is that he Mye stands transformed my Maggies.
Follow Ups:
Kelowna is having a very serious fire to the order of 30% of our city being evacuated from their homes. If anyone is trying to contact Mye Sound and does not get a response within 3 days please email me at grant@monasheemfg.com instead of my usual address.
I am a semi-comfortable distance from the Evacuation Alert border, but the front has been moving fast. Delivery's should not be affected as the fabrication is done quite a distance from here. It just started raining for the second time in two months... let's hope it continues.
I apologize for any possible delays. I'll try to post again should I be forced to leave my home.
you must've been on vacation the day they shot this pic.
;^>PS: God bless & good luck
♪ moderate Mart £ ♫ ☺ Planar Asylum
This is one of a few bad areas. Thanks for everything.
sorry, had to go there
;^>
♪ moderate Mart £ ♫ ☺ Planar Asylum
Mye stands arrived last week, set up was a breeze and when done I gave the maggs a rap - ROCK SOLID! I had a huge smile on my face.One unexpected feature, the front legs are shorter than the stock which looks better. Sonically a big improvement - base is nmore controlled and has slam. the stands allowed me to use silver ICs which had previously been overly tizzy -- I'll post a review soon.
The best dollar amount spent to musical improvement value with my system has been the Mye stands without a doubt. Thanks Grant!
actually, DIY works just as well - even less dollar spent.
-
I submit that you have yet to "hear" your Magnepans until they have rigidity in the order of that which Mye Stands provide. I venture to say that all who have tried them including myself do, in fact, consider them a must.
From my fiddling with them over all these years, they have done an exquisite job of bringing the performance into my living room. FOr some reason, probably intuitively, I think you can over rigidize them and lose what makes them so magical. As a matter of fact, there was a guy on here in the past that had MG20s and went to these great lengths to rigidize the frame, who stated that there was a point where thesound was like the performance was in chains. The freedom was gone. I feel that some of the non-rigidity is why the design is so successful. Even those that like what the stands do (and the MYe stands may actually be quite good) may later find some imperfection to the sound brought on by the stands. Usually, it takes time to tell the whole story. I always wonder why those who go to extreme lengths to modify the speaker and fall all over themselves about how much over an improvement the modification made, so often end up trying to sell them. I'm happy for you all that are very happy with your stands. But I wouldn't trade my experiences over these 23 years using three different models (1Bs, 3As, and 3.6s) with those who have made the modifications because I have learned to make exquisite musical performances, including tonal neutrality, so present in my living room without any drastic changes in the design.
"I always wonder why those who go to extreme lengths to modify the speaker and fall all over themselves about how much over an improvement the modification made, so often end up trying to sell them."You can divide Maggie owners broadly into two camps: tweekers and non-tweekers. Those who are inclined to continually upgrade components (and therefore sell old components) are probably more likely to also be tweekers, as they share the common objective of continual system improvement. Maggies are also easily tweeked, relative to other speakers on the market.
That said, you make a good point that not all tweeks may be improvements in the long run. It's all a matter of taste. There are many (myself included) who find the Mye stands make real improvements in the sound of the already excellent Maggies. But I agree with you that tweeking is not a "must", simply an option for those who are interested.
I have experienced the same results with the Mye stands on my 2.6's.I believe the results are so dramatic because the stands'struts are designed to attach to the speaker 3/4 of the way up the panel from the bottom which significantly increases the rigidity of the panel.The diaphram
of the Maggies has little excursion and with stock legs alot of the energy actually moves the panel back and forth along with the diaphram.
With the Mye stands alot more energy goes into actually moving the diaphram rather than the speaker.I believe this is why my amplifier sounds more powerful and the sound is more dynamic with more bass slam
and also more detail .I have also found the images within the soundstage are more focused because the panels are not swaying back and forth and smearing the details.Best upgrade I have done for my system.
Now we need someone to upgrade XO's that one could purchase and plop into their Maggies!!
Scott
I do agree that placement can affect sound quality. I think that Maggies are extremely sensitive to placement. As I note below, mine were set up using the Cardas method for dipoles. I had previously tried other methods (e.g. thirds, fifths) and had done quite a bit of experimenting before ending up with Cardas. Why doesn't Magneplanar recommend it? Beats me. I've heard other folk say it doesnt' work well for them. But the point that folks seem to be missing is that the placement didn't change. About the only difference is that the speakers are now about an inch higher. Everything else is the same. So either I'm having a wonderful placebo effect or the stands made a major difference.
I think Magnepan doesn't recommend it because people would shy away from buying speakers that sit near the middle of their living rooms ;-)I use the same method (0.618 ceiling height in back, 0.278 room width from wall to woofer center) and my 3.5Rs on big custom wood stands look like I just pulled them off the wall to clean behind them.
Sound in that location is so dramatically superior than just 10 inches back and a few inches closer to the side wall, that I will not move them an inch!
Well said Peter.Winney is wise to avoid discussion of placement. Most of Winney's customers will be more satisfied with the boomy bass when set closer to the rear wall, at least until they know different.
The majority of maggie owners have no clue how to get their speakers to sound best, and unfortunately one-third or more into the room (off the back wall) is where they probably sound best.
The Cardas site opens the mind to DIFFERENT placement techniques and away from the nonsense put in the user manual. The site has numerous set-up techniques for many types and shapes of rooms. The equilateral triangle placement used in a few of the set-up's is a good starting point.
This is one tweak that is really worthwhile. I was an early adopter, and I consider it one of the best investments I have made in audio. Not every maneuver gets that rating!
Handicapper
..(nt)
Do you know if he makes stands for 2.7qr's? Thanks.
I do not yet have the design for 2.7's, but please contact me. The design is probably very similar to the 2.6's, and even if not I could get the design done in no time.
-
Placement should not be done in lieu of using good stands. Both will yield positive benefits that combine to improve the overall listening experience.
Yes, placement is critical. Room acoustics can't be emphasized enough and are likely the weakest part of most everyone's setup!But Grant Mye's stands take the MG1.6's up another notch in dynamics and resolution. Add Symposium Rollerblocks to further find out what the stands and isolation can do!
True. My set up used the Cardas method. It seemed optimal.
Cardas method is fine for a front firing box speaker in a rectangular room. The formula does not apply for dipole planars which have a radically different dispersion pattern.
Dipole radiation also involves the back-wave emanating from behind the speaker. Correct me if I am wrong but I don't believe the Cardas formula takes this into account. The canned formula should however help avoid the dominant axial mode in any rectangular room resulting in improved bass performance. That's about the limit of the formula's utility.For Maggies, a placement solution derived from an accurate 3-D acoustic simulation is likely to yield much superior results. A pink noise analyzer with calibrated microphone can also yield meaningful results but still, that method takes a lot of trial and error by sampling measurements and, one would still need to physically move the speakers around. I can't imagine doing this with a pair of Tympani with it's infinite possible panel configurations. For me, an accurate computer model works best.
If optimizing position for Maggies is as simple as the using the canned Cardas formula, don't you think Jim Winey would have provided a similar formula to his dealers or customers at least to help move his product faster?
Theories and speculation are valuable, but empirical observation always holds the higher ground in any scientific process. If a theory says that a process should not produce certain results, and yet it does, repeatedly, then the theory is at fault, not the observations. Chalking reproducible observations up to wishful thinking is the epitome of wishful thinking.Furthermore, the Cardas method is not as simple as following a formula and plunking down your speakers-- I don't think anyone uses it without tweaking, dipole or other. Not everyone has access to computer modeling software and know-how, and we have to start somewhere.
You made some valid points.The aim of using such a formula in the first place is to minimize the dancing-the-Maggie-routine that you're trying to avoid. There is an implied precision (with the 3-decimal multipliers) in the Cardas formula that can give a false sense of accuracy. The reality is, for planars, I had found the formula only gives a very crude estimate, contrary to what the implied precision of the formula might suggest. Another caveat is the formula is valid only for a rectangular shaped room. If you have an L-shaped room, like I have, you're out of luck.
Having said that, I had done some comparisons between results derived from a computer analysis and the numbers generated using the Cardas formula for my own setup. I found the results can differ as much as 12 inches for the rear wall to speaker distance. Now that may not seem like much for a 24' long room but, when when you consider most Maggie owners would probably notice a change of sound quality for positional changes as little as one inch in any given direction, it is easy to see how approximate these results really are. I did not compare the side wall distance calculations due to the L-shaped room.
The Cardas formula would give you ball park figures if you have a perfect rectangular room with a flat ceiling. It is probably as good as any other rule of thumb I've encountered (i.e. 4 ft - 5 ft from the rear wall) for positioning planars. The implied precision may suggest higher accuracy than the formula actually merits, but I suppose it's better than having no formula at all.
Bottom line: if you use the Cardas formula for positioning planars, you still may have a lot of dancing to do.
monk
So what's a viable alternative to computer simulations? In the dance, I'm sure there are positions I haven't tried.In my case, my room is shaped like a McDonalds Chicken McNugget (the boot). The speakers are on the more narrow wall. If I remember the dimensions correctly, then it is 9 feet wide at the narrow end, 14 feet from the front to back wall, and 10.5 feet wide in the toe of the boot.
I'd try interal tweeter positioning of your repaired MG2.5/R's at the narrow end with wall-baffle bass reinforcement. This should minimize the room's "boot", IME.
♪ moderate Mart £ ♫ ☺ Planar Asylum
it's when the side wall is close enough to the bass panel to prevent significant bass soudwave leakage. The wall then acts like a baffle extension.
♪ moderate Mart £ ♫ ☺ Planar Asylum
It's where the bass side rest near the side wall & is a couple feet away from the back wall. The narrow room coniguration. ... Some actually anchor the Maggie with some rigging to make the wall double as a stand. I had one guy email me about attaching some hinge to the side rails & pulls the hing pin whenever he moves them for cleaning, but wants to remain anonymous.
♪ moderate Mart £ ♫ ☺ Planar Asylum
My speaker cables are really short. They're Goertz MI-3 with silver spades, and they're only 4' long apiece, and I can't quite get the speakers up against the wall. I've got about 6" to go on either side. Perhaps someday when I have monoblocs, or longer speaker cables.Thanks for the advice, though.
Hey, could I use MDF or the like to bridge the gap? I guess I'd have to figure out some way to stabilize it, but why not?
If you have stands then a mere extension will do. If you don't have an after market stand, I would recommend making a hinged wing & swivel it out to bridge the gap.
♪ moderate Mart £ ♫ ☺ Planar Asylum
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: