In Reply to: RE: Maggie madness posted by josh358 on March 22, 2012 at 13:59:36:
That relentless focus on value means that they work towards solutions that real people can afford, and avoid "everything but the kitchen sink" improvements that would drive the price up without offering much by way of audible improvement. For example, he points out that using neodynium magnets to improve the efficiency would end up costing the customer more than a bigger amp would.
@josh
This is not a good example.. if I think it over it is quite a stupid one.
Why not using something which we already now and gives good results? Neodynium doesn't cost as NASA materials, if for 3.6 the cost would raise for about 200$ at most(price for on the market, not for a large consumer!!), I still think this is way better than buying a large amp.
To maintaing the overal balance in sound Magnepan would need only average to small sized magnets(low price), because using to strong magnets on highs and mids would ruin the coherent sound.The low end would not catch up, because it would reach it limits(mylar, resonances, drum effect..).
If all were thinking like that we would be still drive around with steam engines, or car diagonal car tires instead of radials..
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- RE: Maggie madness - berni 01:22:05 03/27/12 (8)
- RE: Maggie madness - josh358 06:15:27 03/27/12 (7)
- RE: Maggie madness - berni 06:42:08 03/27/12 (6)
- RE: Maggie madness - josh358 08:17:39 03/27/12 (5)
- RE: Maggie madness - berni 09:07:15 03/27/12 (0)
- RE: Maggie madness - berni 08:48:25 03/27/12 (3)
- RE: Maggie madness - josh358 09:41:02 03/27/12 (2)
- RE: Maggie madness - berni 10:01:23 03/27/12 (1)
- RE: Maggie madness - josh358 18:57:08 03/27/12 (0)