Planar Speaker Asylum

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

Planar Speaker Asylum

RE: My experience is different ...

58.169.244.54

In Reply to: RE: Current Maggies run full range compared to high pass and subs. posted by ColinB on December 31, 2020 at 05:37:47

I have active 3-way Maggies - which are basically IIIas with the mid on a separate sheet of mylar to the bass panels. Or you could call them T-IVas with only 1 bass panel.

I pass over to sealed subs with a 24dB L-R XO @ 80Hz; my miniDSP unit enables me to swap between 4 different stored configs 'on the fly' - so I can easily compare running my Maggie bass panels full range vs. chopping them off and bringing in the subs.

I much prefer the latter.

Andy

Follow Ups:

RE: My experience is different ... - ColinB 13:47:09 01/01/21 (10)
Hi Andy,

Did you tune the tension button on the 2.6R bass/mid panel to a lower frequency when you reframed them?

I had some 2.6Rs, MGIIIas and 3.3Rs at the same time in the past and directly compared them all. The 2.6R was far lighter and less extended in the bass than the 3 series models. Probably due to the combo of it being a 2 way rather than a 3 way, a less area. I found the 3 series models vastly better and sold on the 2.6Rs very quickly. The panel area on the 3 series is about 800 sq in (with the midrange part) compared to 609 for the 2.6R panel.

So when run full range it might not be such a fair comparison to a 3 series model as you are using the 2.6R panel on the bass, compared to the 3 series bass panel, which is tuned lower and is also larger, although I appreciate the XO setup you have on the speakers is three way, not two way, so that must make some difference.

Yours mids and bass are on separate sheets of Mylar, which helps with congestion etc compared to a stock 3 series.

Assume that your subs are sealed?. Where do you place them in the room? Are their amps standard or servo type?
- RE: "Did you tune the tension button on the 2.6R bass/mid panel" ... - andyr 15:45:14 01/01/21 (9)
  No I didn't (as I didn't know how to do this!).
  
  Now, you said: The panel area on the 3 series is about 800 sq in (with the midrange part) compared to 609 for the 2.6R panel .
  
  Leaving out the mid panel area on the IIIa - you get bass panel areas of:
  * 620 sq in for the IIIa, and
  * 609 sq in for the 2.6R.
  
  So not so very different, I suggest. :-))
  
  I never listened to 2.6Rs - I had had IIIas for about 15 years and when I reached the end of my upgrade path, I decided to try and create a IIIa which had a separate mid panel (to get rid of IMD - and vibrations from the bass panel getting to the ribbon cage).
  
  After a couple of years looking, I was able to find the bass panels from a pair of 2.6Rs (which were shipped from Rome) ... and the mid/tweeter panels from a pair of T-IVas (which were shipped from Detroit).
  
  The cross over uses stock IIIa slopes - although I tweaked the filter roll-off points slightly, to get a smoother overall FR. I use a 3-way active XO, using a miniDSP.
  
  Yes, my subs are sealed (outside dimensions are about 3' high x 18" wide x 2' deep) with a 800w Hypex plate amp. So no servo-control.
  
  Subs are in the front corners of the room - see here:
  
  Andy
  - RE: "Did you tune the tension button on the 2.6R bass/mid panel" ... - ColinB 05:59:22 01/02/21 (0)
    Thanks for the pic. Yes I remember your photos of the Frabkepans from several years ago too. Really lovely job you did on those frame etc. Wish I had those kind of DIY and woodwork skills!
    
    I see what you mean about the size of the 2.6R and 3 series bass panels but the whole panel size on the 3 series is 800 sq m, - I know a part of it is for mids but I wonder if that greater size also has influence on bass extension. I'm also pretty sure the 2.6R panel is tuned at a higher freq than the 3 series bass section and therefore doesn't have as much extension. Although my comparisons aren't exactly the same as what you are using (as your 2.6R panel is only covering bass in a 3 way system and the stock 2.6R is 2 way) but I can say for sure the difference between the 2.6Rs I had and the two 3 series models was absolutely huge. The 3 series models sounded so much better to me. So much more range, scale, bass volume and especially bass extension. I was pretty disappointed with the 2.6R, after hearing a bit of hype about it.
    
    I once restored a full set of Tympanis IVas in 2012. I had the full set with all the original bass panels with Mylar in tact (the seller delivered them to me. IIRC you had some that got damaged and that was very back luck, (was that you?)). My set came with the mid and bass panels delaminated and having lost continuity. The tweeters worked fine and were original 3 ohm thin wide types. It took me two months to rewire the mid and bass panels, but the speakers didn't work so well in the room I was using at the time compared to the 3 series models. The room was 15 by 24 and wasn't big enough. I was only able to set up the speakers widthways over the 15 ft wall due to various reasons, and it didn't work so well. The bass was very overwhelming and muddy. So I sold them and went back to just using the 3 series models. In hindsight I wish I had tried the IVa mid and tweeter section with a 3 series bass panel only,
    which I could have easily done. It might have integrated well and worked much better in that room than the IVa bass panels. Much less width and not so spread out. Separate Mylar for mids and bass, like your setup.
    
    I also didn't know about a trick Satie used on his Tympani IV bass panels on another room of less than ideal size which was to cross over the bass panels lower than stock (stock is 350 Hz Maggie 3rd order LP IIRC) - he changed to a 200 Hz LR 4th order low pass which kept the lower mids out of the bass panels and from spreading out too far. Mind you he used the Neo 8 mids which could play lower than the Maggie mids so he could cross over lower.
    
    I like the sound of the slightly modified MGIIIa XO slopes you use. Less peaky than stock in the mids than the MGIIia XO would generally be a v good thing for most people. (Although some people like those hard mids). Using the passive speaker level XOs I preferred
    the MGIIIa with first order mids rather than 2nd order (like the MGIII XO). That was also a bit less peaky. Did you try that too?
    
    Those subs you have look very nice. Bet the system sounds great with those. I was told before by someone (can't remember who) that with Maggies when using a sealed box sub it's important to place subs in the corners
    of the room, as if you don't, some of the bass travels to the back wall first and then to the listener (which is a longer overall distance) and it can sound slower than having them in the corners.
  - RE: "Did you tune the tension button on the 2.6R bass/mid panel" ... - ColinB 18:23:19 01/01/21 (7)
    Thanks for the pic. Yes I remember your photos of the Frabkepans from several years ago too. Really lovely job you did on those frame etc. Wish I had those kind of DIY and woodwork skills!
    
    I see what you mean about the size of the 2.6R and 3 series bass panels but the whole panel size on the 3 series is 800 sq m, - I know a part of it is for mids but I wonder if that greater size also has influence on bass extension. I'm also pretty sure the 2.6R panel is tuned at a higher freq than the 3 series bass section and therefore doesn't have as much extension. Although my comparisons aren't exactly the same as what you are using (as your 2.6R panel is only covering bass in a 3 way system and the stock 2.6R is 2 way) but I can say for sure the difference between the 2.6Rs I had and the two 3 series models was absolutely huge. The 3 series models sounded so much better to me. So much more range, scale, bass volume and especially bass extension. I was pretty disappointed with the 2.6R, after hearing a bit of hype about it.
    
    I once restored a full set of Tympanis IVas in 2012. I had the full set with all the original bass panels with Mylar in tact (the seller delivered them to me. IIRC you had some that got damaged and that was very back luck, (was that you?)). My set came with the mid and bass panels delaminated and having lost continuity. The tweeters worked fine and were original 3 ohm thin wide types. It took me two months to rewire the mid and bass panels, but the speakers didn't work so well in the room I was using at the time compared to the 3 series models. The room was 15 by 24 and wasn't big enough. I was only able to set up the speakers widthways over the 15 ft wall due to various reasons, and it didn't work so well. The bass was very overwhelming and muddy. So I sold them and went back to just using the 3 series models. In hindsight I wish I had tried the IVa mid and tweeter section with a 3 series bass panel only,
    which I could have easily done. It might have integrated well and worked much better in that room than the IVa bass panels. Much less width and not so spread out. Separate Mylar for mids and bass, like your setup.
    
    I also didn't know about a trick Satie used on his Tympani IV bass panels on another room of less than ideal size which was to cross over the bass panels lower than stock (stock is 350 Hz Maggie 3rd order LP IIRC) - he changed to a 200 Hz LR 4th order low pass which kept the lower mids out of the bass panels and from spreading out too far. Mind you he used the Neo 8 mids which could play lower than the Maggie mids so he could cross over lower.
    
    I like the sound of the slightly modified MGIIIa XO slopes you use. Less peaky than stock in the mids than the MGIIia XO would generally be a v good thing for most people. (Although some people like those hard mids). Using the passive speaker level XOs I preferred
    the MGIIIa with first order mids rather than 2nd order (like the MGIII XO). That was also a bit less peaky. Did you try that too?
    
    Those subs you have look very nice. Bet the system sounds great with those. I was told before by someone (can't remember who) that with Maggies when using a sealed box sub it's important to place subs in the corners
    of the room, as if you don't, some of the bass travels to the back wall first and then to the listener (which is a longer overall distance) and it can sound slower than having them in the corners.
    - RE: "having them (the subs) in the front corners" ... - andyr 21:07:19 01/01/21 (6)
      That's very interesting, Colin. Maybe that's why so many people have reported that adding subs spoilt their Maggie sound?
      
      I certainly don't hear any mismatch between the subs and the bass panels You can't really see the sub cones move (when the covers are taken off) - all that seems to happen, when the subs are running, is that the sound stage widens and the Maggies seem to have grown some cojones! :-))
      
      Andy
      - RE: "having them (the subs) in the front corners" ... - ColinB 06:29:15 01/02/21 (4)
        
        In Reply to: RE: "having them (the subs) in the front corners" ... posted by andyr on January 01, 2021 at 21:07:19
        
        The way the Finish designer described placing the subs in the corners and the reflection issue when not doing so made a lot of sense. I had always previously thought it was better to place the subs closer to the listener, away from the corners or wall and in line with the speakers, but I hadn't considered how part of the bass wave would travel to the front wall and back.
        
        Sounds like corner placement works really well in your system. So do you just use a symmetrical 80 Hz 4th order XO? Someone else (I think it was Satie) suggested to me to use a 4th order 80 Hz HP on the Maggies and try varying the sub 4th order LP, maybe trying it a bit lower, say 50 or 60Hz, - to try to stop the dipole bass and sub bass radiation patterns interfering too much.
        
        RE: "That's an interesting experiment" ... - andyr 14:03:32 01/02/21 (3)
        
        In Reply to: RE: "having them (the subs) in the front corners" ... posted by ColinB on January 02, 2021 at 06:29:15
        
        ... leave the Maggie HP @ 80Hz but make the sub LP lower.
        
        I will try that soon. :-))
        
        Andy
        
        RE: "That's an interesting experiment" ... - ColinB 14:31:24 01/02/21 (2)
        
        In Reply to: RE: "That's an interesting experiment" ... posted by andyr on January 02, 2021 at 14:03:32
        
        Good luck! Will be interested to hear how you get on :-)
        
        RE: "That's an interesting experiment" ... - Gson1976 05:10:56 03/11/21 (1)
        
        In Reply to: RE: "That's an interesting experiment" ... posted by ColinB on January 02, 2021 at 14:31:24
        
        I have played around a lot with different setups between 1.6 and subs last 5 years... I share same experience - sealed is a good general route to go and at least 2 subs, one per side behind mains near corners. Room modes will help bottom end of subs, but you need to run PEQ to tame and make them sing correctly so it not becomes a boomy/one note bass sound... Phase is also a key to make them integrate. It is important to have some knowledge to make a sub integrate well. Actual room and setup are what it comes down to.
        However, I have experienced that Maggies do clean/tight bass quite well in untreated rooms due to its dipole design. If you add a dynamic sub you will hear a lot more of that boomy, one note, sound. Dipole seems to be more forgiving generally with room acoustics.
        I have tried both extra Maggie bass panels and 3-4 different ordinary dynamic subs. Bass reflex was not able to match due to lack of speed (I guess) and adding Maggie bass panel was not pleasing enough in the punch area so I ended up with multiple subs in closed cabinets. I believe dynamic drivers in dipole config can be even better and Rythmiks with servo systems the end of the road???
        However, if you know what you are doing and relief Maggies around 80hz with 12-24 dB HP and work with phase/distance and have a parametrical EQ at hand you will end up with a great sounding system. This will bring clarity to the panels when going little louder. The only down side to Maggie design is bass slam and attack (IMHO) and some music needs well integrated subs to please me, some music not. You pick speakers upon music taste. But I can be wrong about attack as it can be my large room that is playing tricks on me. But I seldom here people talk about Magnepan speakers when it comes to moving air. Rock and EDM sounds thin and bright on lonely Magnepans, but heavenly on less processed genres.
        I run my setup through a HT receiver to get it right with filters and distance through mic setup, EQ and a Velodyne SMS-1, but that�s me.
        
        Edits: 03/11/21 03/11/21 03/11/21 03/11/21 03/12/21
        
        RE: "That's an interesting experiment" ... - Roger Gustavsson 07:06:57 03/13/21 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: "That's an interesting experiment" ... posted by Gson1976 on March 11, 2021 at 05:10:56
        
        ColinB wrote: "I once restored a full set of Tympanis IVas in 2012. I had the full set with all the original bass panels with Mylar in tact (the seller delivered them to me. IIRC you had some that got damaged and that was very back luck, (was that you?))."
        
        That was probably me. I repaired the midrange drivers, used foil conductors. Looked great but unfortunately the Mylar came lose on the double sided tape that splits the diaphragm into smaller sections. Basses were re-wired by the guy I bought them from. Ripped a ribbon, the original one from 1985. Have a spare set of the narrow ribbons.
      - RE: "having them (the subs) in the front corners" ... - ColinB 06:17:12 01/02/21 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: "having them (the subs) in the front corners" ... posted by andyr on January 01, 2021 at 21:07:19
        
        I remember now who advised me to put subs in the corners of the room. It was the designer of DSPeaker antimode products in Finland. Can't remember his name.
        
        When placed in the corners, I would think it would be a lot better to use two subs rather than one as the bass would be more even around the room.
        
        I think that the cones on sealed subs usually don't move like they can do on ported subs as the sealed box has a natural 2nd order HP due to and determine but the size of the sealed box. With a ported sub it's a good idea to add a subsonic filter to stop those crazy subsonic movements below port resonance. On the antimode device there is a 10 Hz subsonic filter for this that works well (although I still don't recommend using a ported sub for Maggie as they are too slow - leave them for Home Theatre use).

Post a Followup:

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.

To view your new posting or follow-up, click on the RELOAD or REFRESH button on your browser.

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

Schiit Audio