Welcome! Need support, you got it. Or share your ideas and experiences.
Return to Planar Speaker Asylum
67.8.201.7
I just picked up a pre-owned pair of MG12. I plan on doing some modifications to the x-o and the "frame", but don't really know what they look like w/o their sock and existing frame.I've modified several dynamic speakers to stiffen the baffle and control resonances, etc. with good effect. I have an idea of what I want to do. I'm not sure a stand like the Myestand is optimal since it doesn't really stabilize/dampen the entirety of the sides of the Maggies.
Assuming the entirety of the lateral edges of the driver and frame are vibrating to a degree while music is playing, then stabilizing the Maggie with a single contact like the Myestand. All that is really accomplished is some degree of overall stabilization, but a change of the resonant frequency of the speaker, ie, visualizing the lateral edge as a guitar string- applying a single point of contact will change the pitch of the string.
A full circumferential frame would accomplish this stabilization similar to what Peter Gunn is working on. And using 4-5" wide material on all sides should increase the lower frequencies as would be the case in typical dynamic speakers.
Being fairly new to this page (and planars), I'm surprised that this hasn't been done already. Dynamic and horn speaker designers/users often tweak/modify their speakers. One of the most common is to brace the front and rear baffles and dampen the internal walls to reduce loss of energy via vibration of the baffles/cabinet.
Follow Ups:
Sorry, I haven't any photos of naked maggies. I have, however, been thinking about this very issue for a while now. After reading the numerous tweaks, such as Andy's, I couldn't escape the conclusion that they were ultimately patches and that the only true solution would be to remove the bloody transducers from the MDF and secure them in a thick section of hardwood. This is not an action to be taken lightly, so I want to be sure I know exactly how I want things before proceeding.I have been experimenting with height and tilt. My objective is to place each MMG directly above an REL Q200e subwoofer. There are definite tradeoffs to such a positioning - on the one hand certain little details of imaging are improved by absolute verticality; on the other hand they do tend to beam a bit more. The problem is that the height required to position them above dynamic woofers precludes tilting (unless I want to stand up to listen to them). They need the supplementation of a quality sub - period.
Replacing the crossover, wiring, and connectors makes a substantial improvement in so many areas that it's impossible to highlight them all. I've decided to stick with my initial plan - been listening to them in their current orientation for a couple months since the break-in of the new crossover and I'm happy with what I'm hearing. If I had a dedicated listening room, I'd be all over Peter Gunn's beautiful speakers and I'd bet the Swarm is awesome as well. As it is, I have space constraints that dictate stacking, so stacking it is for me.
I may be insane (actually, I think that could be readily proven), but I'm planning to cut each part (new panels and triangularly braced sides) out of single boards of hardwood rather than build them up. The problem is finding such wood (16” wide), and paying for it is going to hurt like hell! I have a friend who buys from an old mill in North Carolina (he’s going up there in two weeks) who is getting me pricing next week – we’ll see. Is there any true advantage to this approach (I am NOT a woodworker)?
Here’s a picture of my trial run as it looks currently. The stands were a project for another pair of speakers (AR91s) that got hijacked temporarily. The MMGs attach to the stand via ¾” plywood and the heaviest steel angle (that all had be hammered to 90 degrees) brackets I could find at Lowe’s. The frames are cut out of cheap ½” birch plywood. Like I said, it’s only temporary – intended as a test. Sorry for the ramble, but I’m truly keen to see photos of your project. Keep us posted! I’ll post pictures when I get going with rev2.
A sawn board is not like a slice of cheese.One of the things people forget is wood is under a lot of stress holding it's tree up. This comes from not just supporting the weight (which might be growing at an angle) but fighting wind resistance all it's life. Because of this it can have built in "spring" that doesn't becomes noticeable until it is cut or sawn or a major part is taken away. It might seem flat, but the minute you remove the central section it could warp very badly.
I would also expect it to crack at the corners within 5 years or so as well from expansion/contraction problems.
In any case to have any chance at success you would have to get a quartersawn piece which would cost a fortune at that width for 2 of them, then you'd be throwing 70% of it away, and the odds are it will still warp and break. Colonial wrights had access to woods of all kinds of width, and nobody used boards this way because it simply doesn't work. That's why the trade of joiner was invented.
If you are interested in doing this you'll have to copy what I did. I very much doubt you'll have success any other way. I realize the solid mitred corners I did are hard, but you could do a traditional mortise and tennon. Then you only need straight boards and no very large widths. If instead you use steel all over it to join it I might wonder if you'll get the full sonic vibrational benefits of the wood in the end. Even a glued half lap joint would be better.
Good luck with it.
I've owned speakers constructed of this material. It is rigid, dense, viod free and has a nice finish.
The problem is I genuinely think the gain I got was not from rigidity, but from the natural absorption properties of the wood used. It ate up the vibrations going into it.Baltic Birch is still plywood, which is veneer and glue, where mdf is sawdust and glue. I can't say what kind of sonic properties it holds but I cannot imagine it compares to real wood. In this case it would be a cosmetic mod mostly I believe.
which, by the way, is beautiful. I'd love to see those things stained and finished!Actually, I posted the question because I have been reading about these issues and was beginning to doubt the judiciousness of my planned approach. Thank you for your advice. I'm going to try my hand at making some frames out of inexpensive materials - not to use, but simply to learn by doing it.
I'm not a woodworker, but I like to do things. I made my entertainment cabinet which isn't fancy, but it sure is solid and looked nice stained. I don't like it as much in the glossy black finish, but I wanted to try that finish before building the next cabinet - to go with a 46" LCD TV (later this year, I hope).
Oh no, the pics don't do them justice. They would not look as good stained, which was why I left them this way.My advice then is to go buy some poplar. It is easy to work, glues, stains and paints well, it's as cheap as any wood, and unlike pine it comes knot free (and sap free, as it's a hardwood) If you can't make frames from it, you ain't makin them out of anything :^ )
A mortise and tennon joint is your best bet for permanency, but will require more tools and skill. A half lap would be far easier but while you'd be gluing side grain the wood won't be oriented the same so there is a genuine likelihood at some point expansion and contraction will break the joint, or cause cracking some place.
Again, good luck with it.
I have done half lap before, but I also inserted dowel pins. It made for a rather strong joint (and I kind of liked the look) - still solid after about 10 years. Of course, that project had nothing to do with a speaker (which will be issuing constant stresses). I really like the look of dovetailing, and with the proper jig I see no reason why I shouldn't be able to execute such a joint. I did a mortise and tenon joint before too, but not with mitered cuts - that seems a bit more complicated.
That's the thing about wood, it has a mind of it's own and when it has a mind to do something even God can't stop it. A joint can work 57 times and then on try 58 go all to pieces. Like Tolkien believed, some wood just harbours evil thoughts... :^ )Dovetailing is for making boxes, so I am not quite sure how you would apply that to this problem. You could make a half lapped dovetail (one large single tail going from the bottom and top rails into the side stiles) that was half the thickness of the sides, and then pin it with 2 dowels. Hmmm... that might be worth a try some time just from the aesthetic standpoint, although I would worry that the grain orientation would lead to gap-osis as the tail shrank in winter. This would work well with plywood however.
Mortise and tennon on a mitered cut? This isn't really done. Traditionally if you wanted to strengthen a joint of this type you'd groove both pieces and use a spline in between them which is what modern biscuit joining is. However, you could use a half mortise and half a tennon but it would be complicated work and nobody would see it or know it, and it wouldn't work any better than the spline.
Let me know how it goes, I'll be curious about your results.
Remember my qualification: I am NOT a woodworker!As a non-woodworker, I've probably done some things that would make those who know what they're doing scratch their heads. On the other hand, I've had a reasonable amount of success in my endeavors so far. I was thinking about using dovetails to join the braces to the stiles and base (large XO box) and using the half-lap with dowel reinforcements on the mitered corners of the new panel frames. The dowels would be inserted through both halves of the overlaps (at 90 degrees to their faces) to prevent them from moving. This will leave little circles showing, but what the heck? I know this sounds tricky and I'm not sure it will work, but I have an idea about how to do it.
Then again, I may change my mind once I start playing with things. I'm not in a real hurry, my Frankenstein project is functioning okay. I'd just like something more aesthetically appealing and I'd like to get the REL directly under the MMG. My test creation just sort of evolved as I was toying with things - there was NO plan. Like I said, I'm just a hack with some tools, but I do have fun at it!
Thanks again for all of your input; I sincerely appreciate it. I can't say enough about the look of your Magnestands or the framed pair of SMGs - absolutely gorgeous work! As I mentioned elsewhere, if I only had a dedicated listening room, I could buy your products and save myself a ton of work (but then again, I *like* doing the work - I just don't have the skills you obviously possess). I wish you well with your enterprise and I wouldn't be surprised to hear about your getting swamped with orders. Your website is also excellent, but I have some comments about grammar here and there if you are interested - I can send such comments via email if you wish.Thanks again and best of luck with your cottage industry.
BTW - For my test project I used plywood. Do the issues raised about cookie cutter construction also apply to plywood?
No, you can do whatever you like to plywood. Just be aware that a lot of plywood has holes and hollow spots on the inside which may either be a problem or just look bad. Only the most expensive cabinet grade stuff is free from this. (and even then not always)Thanks for your comments on my work, and grammar. All I can say is I was raised around PA Dutchmen, and my off is all. I have a habit of saying things yet not in the best english way once. Ach, I did it again yet.
Yes, please email me directly about my faux pas and I'll happily clean them up. Thanks.
My maternal grandparents are/were PA Dutch chicken and dairy farmers from Bloomsburg. Fried scrapple for breakfast and shoofly pie for desert at dinner. They drank whole milk straight from the cow and ate 2 dozen eggs a week, grandma lived to 93 and grandpa to 95 ... cholesterol smolesterol!
They probably regularly ate foods fried in lard as well. Cholesterol isn't even a component of plaque (it's lipoprotein-A bound by lysine) and it is deposited in response to micro-fissures in the arterial walls (it's a life saving measure that overshoots the mark). That's why it tends to be limited to the proximal arteries - the ones subjected to the greatest amount of expansion and contraction. I would imagine they never consumed or used (in cooking) partially hydrogenated vegetable fats - just butter and lard (thus reducing the likelihood of alimentary carcinomas). There's definitely something to be said for such a lifestyle.My grandfather was Irish and died fairly young (thanks to drinking heavily and the things he did while inebriated), but my grandmother also lived to a ripe old age of 92 (and was self-sufficient until her final few months).
Hey Doctor Wazoo,doesn't exercise factor into things too? I bet they were getting a ton more exercise than most of us do, and we get the partially hydrogenated to boot.
In keeping with the audio theme, is it important to brace things better vertically or horizontally? Both?
If I were a doctor, I'd be basquing in the glory of a pair of 20.1s!Your comment about exercise is spot-on, however. There are many, many factors that lead to longevity (with good health) - attitude certainly being one.
You've directed your query about bracing to the wrong person - I'm *learning* from this forum. I will say one thing though. I don't believe one should strive to completely deaden one's speakers - a little sympathetic vibration is probably beneficial. I don't think anyone would argue that the stock architecture is ideal though.
You are dead on about the stock architecture.Although, it is ideal for pumping out affordable if not ideal speakers.
I figured someone expert would chime in on my question. We'll see.
I am planning a stand of my own, but it will not be like any other I have seen. That it is not to say it is better or anything like that, just very different in that it will be a wallmount, and not a floor stand.
I was thinking that I should add some metal braces that were vertical, and then I thought maybe I should do some horizontal too. BUt it might not be necessary. But, I could do them with out and add to see if it was worth it.
By wall mount you mean on a wing from the side? Or do you plan to have them on the rear wall and just held out away from it somehow? Is it room constraints which are causing you to consider this path?My only advice there is don't trust the MDF to hold it up with screws. Be very careful it is supported well.
If by vertical bracing you mean struts like people with floor stands use, I can't see how you can use them without a base. You need a triangle for strength. In that scenario you can only go to the wall, and then you can only come back on the bottom, which is essentially a base. I really don't think you can get the benefits of a floor standers struts by hanging them, and in fact I really fear hanging will worsen the over all vibrational problems because there is no way to truly "hold" anything that's essentially in the air.
Mass, like anything, is helpful in the right measure and detrimental when you add too much. Generally if it looks wrong it is wrong and it will sound wrong.
I would only go this route if there really was no means at all of having them on the floor, and then with the understanding you will not reach the same level of performance speakers on the floor will achieve.
Good luck.
Hey Peter,I apologize for not being too clear.
I will be mounting them on the SIDE walls (if that is not too far apart, I have to check)about 6ft into the room.
The speakers will be facing each other, and I'll sit about 3ft back from that plane. Kind of like big headphones. It does sound crazy, and if I had never tried this setup, i would easily dismiss such a post as the work of a nut. But witht he tweeters closest to the listener, this is the best setup I have ever had. It is weird, but the sound stage is really huge, and between the speakers and the normal front wall, so it stages like a normal setup. Except that I am telling everyone where the speakers are, I could easily win money of a blindfolded listener by asking where the speakers are. Not sure if the stock ones work in this config.
I was planning on making something like a picture frame around the driver itself...no mdf, and attaching the new frame at the top and bottom using those triangle shelving brackets that some people use for floor stands.
So the top and bottom will be braced with the brackets. I could run a flat steel beam down the whole length, but I wasn't too sure that was necessary. I was thining that I just needed the "frame" to be ont he left and right vertical sides of the driver, but am wondering if I should do the horizontal as well. Any thoughts.
The other thing is that I live in earthquake country, so having them on the walls wouldn't be a bad idea.
Just don't use metal fence posts, OK? :^ )I really wish I could beam you into my room for an afternoon. That might just solve your whole problem :^ )
Anyway, for whatever reason, your room, your gear, your dimensia or a combination of all 3 you like maggie headphones.
My new frame is essentially a complex picture frame, although the pieces are permanently attached (at least it is to be hoped) and picture frames are not. If you can make yourself something like that, yes, it should work.
My only problem is don't they need to be out at least 2 feet to sound right? Supporting them that far from the wall.... I'm drawing a blank right now. Obviously you'll have to attach to studs, but how you minimize the structure while maintaining strength I don't know. In your case you may almost have to make something out of steel.
Is being on the wall really safer in a quake? I suppose, as long as the wall doesn't come down. I don't know how you people deal with that.
Good luck with it, and if you get stuck feel free to email me.
Hey PG,QUit building those really nice stands, and start working on the beaming technology!!
Yeah it does seem like dementia, but I am telling you it sounds better than a normal setup. THe trick is to be very nearfield say 3ft from the plane of the speakers, and of course they need to be vertical.
ANyhow, it will be a while before I get around to this, but I think I have it figured out.
The only issue I can forsee is that the studs need to line up on both walls, or I am sunk. However, the way I plan to do it, I can easily make them floor standing.
ALso, they can be a ft off the side walls, but the sound is affected more from the distance to the front wall...just like normal. So, as long as they are say 4-5ft or more from the front wall, it will meet the "hey don't they have to be 2ft from the wall" requirement.
It really is the coolest effect, and from looking at it, you would never guess it would work, but it really does.
See, I had a 1.6 owner come and listen and he said tha the modded MMgs sounded better than his 1.6s and he was jealous. If there was an issue with teh setup, he woudl have said things like "how do they sound in a normal setup?" or "have you thought about setting them normally?", etc. But he didn't.
"I carn't doo it Captian. You know I don't like beaming maggies..."I'm not going to second guess you. If you're happy it works for me.
My advice is to get 2 large sheets of finished plywood (your choice on species), finish the edges with trim molding if you like and attach it to your wall studs. Make it large enough that you can attach the maggie bracket to it. With it secured to the studs it won't come loose, and you can then screw the stand in anywhere on it without worrying about lining up a stud.
I have a similar incident to this that is quite peculiar. When I was originally building my attic room I was of course very interested (re-concerned as all hell) what the acoustics would be like, given the A frame ceiling. I had removed the insulation and flying squirrels from between the risers and laid the floor, and as it almost looked like a space I had my friend bring his maggies over and we set them up.
Sitting on a folding chair across the room, we were both treated to the most bizarre sound we ever heard. When you listen to speakers, even if they are imaging right and the sound is between them and not localized on the speaker itself, it still sounds like it's over there. This sounded nothing like that. It was as if we were wearing what we both called a "speaker helmet". The sound seemed to be coming from just a few inches from our head from every direction including behind us EXCEPT for in front. It wrapped around the tops and back of our heads, but nothing from the front. It was just like wearing a football helmet with hundreds of tiny speakers all over the sides, top and back playing at you.
He said it was the weirdest and coolest thing he ever heard, but he wouldn't want to live with it. I was mortified that the room would sound awful. Apparently it was just the bare wood roof and reflective surfaces everywhere, the A frame and lack of any walls that did it, because once finished finished it was fine.
Good luck with your project. If you can fit a triangle into your design it will make it a lot more rigid.
Hey PG,YOu really are a bright one. I never would have thought of that ply-wood trick....thank you so much!!!
It doesn't quite sound like what you are describing. It images like a normal nearfield setup- in terms of where the center image is. The difference is that it is not as precise as a normal setup. Which may seem like a bad thing, but to my ear it is a lot more like live music, which is never really as precise as stereos make it. It was like I added a tube amp, and got all the benefits, and none of the down-sides.
Also, the front wall (where you have your equipment and treatment) had windows that took up the maot of the wall. When those windows were opened, the system sounded the best. I don't know if it was because of the breeze that would occasionally blow or the fact that the reflected sound would dissapear through there, but man was it really realistic.
Trust me, I have had a normal setup for more than I have ahd the abnormal one, but I find it very hard to go back. I also think that this only works in nearfield...at least on the quasi-ribbons.
THere are some ribbon owners that swear by this set-up and do not do it nearfield either.
I will be setting up in the new house soon, and who knows, maybe this will not work as well and I'll end up with a more conventional setup.
Thanks again for the tip.
I tried to resist the temptation to respond, but look where that got me. Oh well, hopefully my subject line will help you get more answers to your post than mine.I understand about the economics of speaker building and Magnepan does have what appears to be a design tuned to efficiency of production - being so thin makes them easier to store and ship too. As many have noted, however, that provides an opportunity for brave folks like are found in this forum to modify - and modify we do!
In a sense your stands WILL be better than anyone else's because they will be designed for your specific requirements. I am a little curious about the wall mount part of the equation though. How can they be wall mounted yet kept far enough away from the wall to sound good? I found that they opened up as I moved them out into the room - too bad I don't have the room to place them further than 3 feet from the rear wall! That's why I don't have a larger pair (well, that and my constraints in the other dimension).
Bracing is definitely an issue in the vertical plane due to the length of the panel and the thinness of the MDF - it can't help but flex. That movement is bad in several ways - from wasted energy to phase incoherence. At merely a foot wide I wouldn't imagine this to be a problem in the horizontal plane, but what do I know?
I think the benefit of mass comes from coupling (don't want to start a semantics war here) them to the floor which won't apply in your case (I think - haven't seen what you're doing). In my case, I have heavy (1/4" thick) steel stands with spike feet that bite into the subfloor beneath my carpet. The additional mass of my frames and XO box just helps drive them into the subfloor all the better. I think this improves, among other things, their bass response. It doesn't perform a feat of magic - I still need to use a subwoofer with them.
It actually is a sideways set up, and even though they will be close to the sidewalls, the speaker preforms as if it is the same distance fromthe FRONT wall on a normal setup. SOo, if I hang them on the wall 6ft out into the room, even though they may be a ft off the sidewall, they sound like they are 6ft out in the room in a normal setup.
Actually, I remember reading another post about that configuration a month or so ago. You've piqued my curiosity. I just have to try that this weekend, but I'm going to have to make some longer speaker cables to do so. My Litz cables are only 8' long (probably made them too short now that I think about it - you know what they say about hindsight). I think my son's Monster Cable wires are about 12' - might be long enough if I drag my amp out of the cabinet...Oh, what a sick crowd we are!
Just remember that the tweeters should be closest to you, and you have to listen nearfield. Say about 2-4 ft away.I don't think it works on the non ribbon models unless it is nearfield.
ALso, if you turn the speakers so the backs are facing each other, you are effectively changing the absolute phase of your system. So you need to compensate with the speaker leads, or with a pre amp or source that can change the phase.
And, when I did it, I just turned the speakers so the backs were facing each other...because I had short cables too.
But when I moved, I re did the speakers with some binding posts so the posts were on the front of the speaker. THis room never sounded as good. I don't know yet if it was the room or listening to the front of the speakers. In some cases, magnepan makes you listen through the perforations, and if I ever get things set up in the new place, I'll be able to figure out if that is better than the front of the speaker.
THe link below shows the posts, but it also shows the distance from the side wall, which is about 1ft. In the old room, I had some bookcases between the speaker and the wall...maybe that helped the sound too...probably did.
Short answer-no, and in fact there are many disadvantages, starting with cost and waste, and moving along to grain orientation of each piece for strength. An open triangle, such as the sides of the speakers in your photo, with proper joinery, will be much stronger made out of three narrow pieces of wood rather than one wide piece. Not to mention the difficulty of finding any hardwood in this width, much less a particular species.What you might try to do is find the correct width and length to be able to make each side of your frames from a single board, thus matching grain and color on each side.
is a simple biscuit. I don't own or have the space to store serious woodworking equipment, but I do have a friend who has opened an invitation to use his shop. Unfortunately, he inherited it from his Father in law and is not, himself, an expert woodworker. I have much to learn and I'm glad I posted the question - thank you for the advice. I wasn't concerned with the cost/waste as long as the method produced a better frame (I was making an assumption about something I don't know very well).If you don't mind my pressing further, what joining method would you recommend? I'm assuming dovetails should be used, but what do I know? Perhaps I should aim for rev3 being the final edition and try my hand at learning some new skills with lesser materials. That wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing - it's been a fun experiment so far!
I build some furniture, but wouldn't classify myself as an expert woodworker. However, single boards tend to "move" quite a bit as they gain/lose moisture with the seasons. Before you build you should be sure the wood is absolutely dry (test with a moisture meter if you can borrow one). Even kiln-dried wood from a mill usually requires a fair amount of seasoning in a dry indoor environment. Your joints should be designed so that they remain tight with the normal expansion/contraction of the wood. Look at some of the colonial woodworking joints for ideas, especially for your corners.Alternatively, you could look at some of the more advanced composite woods, which have outer faces of exotic woods, but are multi-ply, and much more dimensionally stable. Some of these are better in compression and some are better in bending. You need to use the right type based on the types of load stresses your Maggies will exert on them.
It's not all that simple, but I'll bet you'll end up with really terrific looking speakers -- can we still even call them Maggies when you're done?
Keep us posted on how you make out... Sounds like a fun project!
that such questions as I posed never fail to attain answers! Thank you for your valuable advice. I definitely have much to learn. My intention was to use hard maple even though I know it's a pain to stain (tendency to blotch) for its dimensional stability. Building up the frames with narrow pieces of hardwood would certainly save money!Do you think dovetails would be the best joinery method for this project?
No matter what I do to them, they are still maggies! I can only hope to make them better maggies. They sound better now than when I started playing with them and they look quite a bit different too - they're also substantially heavier. I don't like all the screws, but I wanted to make something easy to disassemble. The finish is awful; the paint is plenty smooth, but it doesn't look good over the long straight grain (the oak parts look fantastic though). Do and learn!
Yes, it's been a fun project so far and I'll be sure to post when I get going again.
Sorry, I haven't any photos of naked maggies. I have, however, been thinking about this very issue for a while now. After reading the numerous tweaks, such as Andy's, I couldn't escape the conclusion that they were ultimately patches and that the only true solution would be to remove the bloody transducers from the MDF and secure them in a thick section of hardwood. This is not an action to be taken lightly, so I want to be sure I know exactly how I want things before proceeding. HTML tag not allowed
nt
There are lots of photos of unsocked maggies in the tweaks section under wire repair.However if you plan all this work (good luck!) my advice is to get a staple puller and look for yourself. There's no place to begin like the beginning.
Here is a link to a naked version of the mmgs which are very similiar to the 12s.HOw imprtatn is it to brace things top to bottom if making a stand around the raw driver.
I am planning a stand replacement, and think I have it all figured out except wether or not I need to use a vertical metal plate.
Yes, thinking along the same lines as you lead me to:
a) glue aluminium U-channel down the sides of the MDF frame (under the sock ... and I later added the same U-channel at top and bottom), and
b) get some metal stands made up, which bolt to the side of the aluminium U-channel at 3 places, at the back on each side (as well as the bottom).Have a look at the photos here:
http://www.audiocircle.com/gallery/thumbnails.php?album=626... to get the general idea.
On picture #1, you can see the U-channel at the sides (painted black). Pictures #4 & 5 show you my stands.
I can send you a picture of my naked Maggies in their stands, soon (just as soon as I borrow my daughter's digital camera to take a few shots! :-)) ). PM me your email address if you'd like to have it.
Regards,
Click here for some ideas on stiffening the frame. Andy has IIIa's but the principle will work with any Maggie.
I may be an egoist but at least I don't talk about other people.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: