Home Planar Speaker Asylum

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

[ Follow Ups ] Thread: [ Display  All  Email ] [ Planar Speaker Asylum ]
[ Alert Moderator ] [ Edit ] [ Delete ]

Re: Perception of Maggie Bass response part II

209.156.144.60

Kevin,

In answer to your comment about distortion, I essentially agree with you. tecnically speaking anytime you are listening to a reporduction of a sound you only have two things: 1. The original signal and 2. Something other than the origianl signal. By definition, anything which is not part of the original is distortion. My contention is that that difference I'm am ascribing to the Maggie bass is indeed distortion--a distortion unqiue to Maggies. I din't mean to imply you weren't free to enjoy it more than the distortion you hear in Cone drivers.

In regard to your rhetorical question about doing my testing in an anechoic room--not so fast; the answer is "Yes", I did do the tesing in an anechoic room. I made my basement into an anechoic room; it scored extremely low on the Wife Acceptability Factor but its the only reliable way I know to do such A/B testing.

By the way before I create too much conflict and develope a reputation as a Maggie Basher, I have been hooked on Maggie sound for more than 20 tears. I have owned MMGs, 3.5s and the newer 1.6 QR's. Incidentally, I think the 1.6 QR's are much better balanced than the 3.6's, and I for me they do a better overall job of creating the illusion of "being there".

question about distortion i

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

Follow Ups Full Thread
Follow Ups
You can not post to an archived thread.

[ Top Top of Page ] [ Contact Us ] [ Support/Wish List ] [ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]