20.7's are here!

[blackraven]

Here's a nice brief review of the new Magnepan 20.7's-

First Listen: Magnepan (http://www.avguide.com/blog/first-listen-magnepan-s-new-flagship-207-loudspeaker)

Any one want to give me $13K?

[GMichael]

Here's a nice brief review of the new Magnepan 20.7's-

First Listen: Magnepan (http://www.avguide.com/blog/first-listen-magnepan-s-new-flagship-207-loudspeaker)

Any one want to give me $13K?

The check is in the mail.

[Feanor]

Here's a nice brief review of the new Magnepan 20.7's-

First Listen: Magnepan (http://www.avguide.com/blog/first-listen-magnepan-s-new-flagship-207-loudspeaker)

Any one want to give me $13K?
A bargain at the asking price too, doubtless. Like the whole Magnepan line.

To wit, a couple of days ago, just for fun, I listened to a pair of Monitor Gold GX200's at our local dealer; MSRP $5000 and they sounded like rubbish compared to my MG 1.6QR's at $2000.

http://www.monitoraudio.co.uk/assets/images/products/gold-gx/gx200/gx200.large.jpg

[JoeE SP9]

GM, if you're handing out checks I'll be happy to receive one.

A couple of years ago one of my friends bought a pair of 3.6R's from a guy who had just bought a pair of 20.1's. We listened to both that night. As good as the 3.6R's were and still are the 20.1's were much better in every way. The 20.7's must be something else.

Now might be a good time to look on Audiogon for a used pair of 20.1's.

[GMichael]

GM, if you're handing out checks I'll be happy to receive one.

A couple of years ago one of my friends bought a pair of 3.6R's from a guy who had just bought a pair of 20.1's. We listened to both that night. As good as the 3.6R's were and still are the 20.1's were much better in every way. The 20.7's must be something else.

Now might be a good time to look on Audiogon for a used pair of 20.1's.

I could send you one, but it wouldn't be worth the paper it would be written on.

I heard a set of 3.6's once. They where set up outside a store on the sidewalk. I had to walk between them to get into the store.
The 20.1's and 20.7's must sound incredible.

[LeRoy]

Here's a nice brief review of the new Magnepan 20.7's-

First Listen: Magnepan (http://www.avguide.com/blog/first-listen-magnepan-s-new-flagship-207-loudspeaker)

Any one want to give me $13K?

Did you add the 20.7's to your audio collection?

[Poultrygeist]

Gezze, compared to these my OB's look like bookshelf speakers.

[Big Dog RJ]

Yeah, I have listened to them being driven with the new 300 watt Audio research amps. the sound is ok, typical maggie sound, very detailed, open and fills the room indeed. Good depth, good sonics, imaging extra...

But then I walked out with the Wilson Alexandri's series 2 and that was only driven with a 150 watt tube amp from Audio Reseach, everyting described above, the Alexandria's deliver twice more! Out standading speaker system by Dave Wilson.

I prefer my Quads 2905's to the new 20.7's. I must say though have you listened to the new MG3.7's pre-auditon one, now that's more like it. Also the tweeter doesn't seem to be in its own world compared to many previous models. Now the whole speaker seems to launch one sonci wave into the room, similar to the Quads. I personally think that the new MG1.7 & 3.7 are well made designs by Magnepan and probably one of their best models so far.

The 20.7 for over 10 grand, you can find far better speaker systems our there. trust me, I've heard them.
I have also owned the 20.1 for a few months, before going for the Quad 2905's. Far better sonics.

Cheers, RJ

[E-Stat]

But then I walked out with the Wilson Alexandri's series 2 and that was only driven with a 150 watt tube amp from Audio Reseach, everyting described above, the Alexandria's deliver twice more!
At only ten+ times the cost! Why would you compare a $14k (?) speaker with a $150k speaker?

[Big Dog RJ]

Yes, it would seem a bit unfair to compare anything to Wilson's.
Anyway, what I was trying to compare the MG20.7 with were the Quad 2905's. According to my listening tastes I prefer the Quads; that electrostatic magic and pure reproduction you just don't get on maggies.
I have used & owned many magneplanar models previously for many years since 1984, but always had the reference sound off Quad ESL63's. There are power limitationsof course on the ESL 63's that maggies have no problem with. however, Quad's newer models especially the 2905 power is not a problem unless you are looney and want to bring the roof down.

In the real world if it is live natural music you're after, the Quads are the closest to the original sound, and by that I mean the absolute sound. (non-exaggerated, non over driven, very relaxing and engages you into the music).

The MG20.7 is great! Don't get me wrong, they are very fine ribbons. but for that money more competitive brands such, Martin Logan, Sanders Sound, King Sound, Sound Labs, Inner Sound etc; and for dynamic drivers - Sonus Faber, Focal, Magico, Genesis, Revel are equally good if not better.

I have never paid brand new or retail prices for any of my audio systems - including the Alexandria's. I have my trusted contacts and they take care of pricing for me. I also give them business by introducing new audiophiles to them and make sure business prospers with a win-win situation for all.

The maggie speakers that I do like though are the new MG3.7 and 1.7; these are true value for money and sound excellent! MG20.7 does require some heafty wattage to make them move. I audiotioned them with 300 watt plus monoblocks from Audio Research, these things are massive, bigger than my older Manley 350's. The solid state amps I audiotioned with the MG20.7 were the 600 watt Pass Labs monoblocks. This type of amplification is necessary to get the best quality out of the MG20.7. You could use a Bryston, but I wouldn't recommend anything lower to a Bryston.

Now both these amplifier systems cost nearly 100 grand, so when you spend close to that much for Wilson's and far less on amplification, then you do have a comparison afterall based on actual price and not retail- you see my point?
Therefore the MG20.7 system plus Audio Research amps = $80grand in Australia- sound nice
my Alexandria's + Lamm monoblocks or C-J 60w amp = $89grand AUD- sound awesome!

I think I have mentioned this before in my earlier posts that highend audio in Australia is dam way expensive, far more compared to the US and a hell of a lot more compared to the UK. The only place cheaper is Singapore, but you still have to pay 50% duty since you are bringing in new items in to the country, caution! Australian customs do not like this!

There is a Mark Levinson amp sitting right in front of me, it costs around 20 grand in Melbuorne. In the US the very same model is just $9.5k! welcome to Australia mate.
Cheers and have a good one.
RJ

[Big Dog RJ]

Just a quick note ref to the new 20.7's ; I brought them home for a weekend listen over the long weekend since I had nearly 5 days off.
I must say that I discovered something very interesting that has changed my mind about these maggies. The following is described below:
1. speaker placement - 6 ft away from the wall behind the panels. listening position 12ft.
sidewall placement , panels 1ft away from sidewalls, enough space to walk around the speaker.
2. room has carpeting right along, and ends in two L shapes at the rear, hence minimum standwaves. I have not used or ever attempted to use bass traps, or room treatment gismos, since I believe the natural sound should be delivered as natural as possible in a simple room setting.
3. preamp used - conrad johnson ACT2
4. Source components - Walker audio turn table(black diamond series I), & Cary CD 500 with c-j DAC. also tried the wadia and meridian transport, preferred the Cary.
5. Power amps - c-j MV60se ; Audio research 150 ; Lamm ML 1.1

Listen results:(a) I found the c-j to be least impressive, since it didn't have much guts to drive the 20.7's to their full potential, hence the c-j's do a better job driving the Quads.
(b) the new AR 150 stereo amp was very nice, fitted with the new KT120's deliver a great sound with the 20.7's.
(c) ah! the Lamm's , outstanding with the 20.7's SE ended 90watt class A designed monoblocks, they really bring out the best in the 20.7's. Again with no harshness or distortion whatsoever, and plenty of headroom, never ran out of steam. runs a bit hot though...

Conclusion - give the new 20.7's some top-end quality amplification and you will be amazed at what this can do for the price. Very expansive soundstage, very detailed, all nuances come to life. excellent bass, far better than any previous maggie speaker I have owned. Good all round frequency dispersion, even the ribbon tweeter is better controlled.

However, they cost around $20 +grand in Melbourne, hence for a little more there are others available such as martin Logan, and King Sound + Magico, Genesis, Focal & Sonus Faber around $25 to $35 grand. If you're lucky like me you may also find a carefully used pair of Wilson's for way less than retail.
But of you really like the maggie sound, then I would highly recommend the new 20.7, but please give them adequate power to drive them along with very critical room placement. they need a lot of room!

I realized they require more room than the Alexandria's!

cheers, RJ

[Feanor]

Just a quick note ref to the new 20.7's ; I brought them home for a weekend listen over the long weekend since I had nearly 5 days off.
I must say that I discovered something very interesting that has changed my mind about these maggies. The following is described below:
1. speaker placement - 6 ft away from the wall behind the panels. listening position 12ft.
sidewall placement , panels 1ft away from sidewalls, enough space to walk around the speaker.
2. room has carpeting right along, and ends in two L shapes at the rear, hence minimum standwaves. I have not used or ever attempted to use bass traps, or room treatment gismos, since I believe the natural sound should be delivered as natural as possible in a simple room setting.
3. preamp used - conrad johnson ACT2
4. Source components - Walker audio turn table(black diamond series I), & Cary CD 500 with c-j DAC. also tried the wadia and meridian transport, preferred the Cary.
5. Power amps - c-j MV60se ; Audio research 150 ; Lamm ML 1.1

Listen results:(a) I found the c-j to be least impressive, since it didn't have much guts to drive the 20.7's to their full potential, hence the c-j's do a better job driving the Quads.
(b) the new AR 150 stereo amp was very nice, fitted with the new KT120's deliver a great sound with the 20.7's.
(c) ah! the Lamm's , outstanding with the 20.7's SE ended 90watt class A designed monoblocks, they really bring out the best in the 20.7's. Again with no harshness or distortion whatsoever, and plenty of headroom, never ran out of steam. runs a bit hot though...

Conclusion - give the new 20.7's some top-end quality amplification and you will be amazed at what this can do for the price. Very expansive soundstage, very detailed, all nuances come to life. excellent bass, far better than any previous maggie speaker I have owned. Good all round frequency dispersion, even the ribbon tweeter is better controlled.

However, they cost around $20 +grand in Melbourne, hence for a little more there are others available such as martin Logan, and King Sound + Magico, Genesis, Focal & Sonus Faber around $25 to $35 grand. If you're lucky like me you may also find a carefully used pair of Wilson's for way less than retail.
But of you really like the maggie sound, then I would highly recommend the new 20.7, but please give them adequate power to drive them along with very critical room placement. they need a lot of room!

I realized they require more room than the Alexandria's!

cheers, RJ
Thanks for the report, Raj. It's all tad beyond my circumstances, still, very interesting to hear.

[Big Dog RJ]

Good day Feanor,

I understand you have the MG1.6QR; they are fine speakers by magnepan. Absolute true value and beat almost any dynamic speaker out there for well over its price category. I did own a 1.6 for a brief time, just before embarking on the larger MG 3.3 series. I must say "if and only if" you get the positioning right with maggies, they will sound wonderful and this is very difficult in almost 90% of installations I have heard. Only a handful have ever gotten it right!

I can very clearly remember listening to my first maggie 1.6 and 3.3 series it was outstanding!
The chap's room had this special kind of german wooden flooring that gave a very warm feeling. Towards the end of the room there was a large space that branched out into a "T" sort of shape, hence if you look at the "T" the system was at the front down the middle of the T and his listening seat was towards the intersection of the T. This gave him about 15 to 17ft listening distance, with the panels nearly 10ft away from the wall behind. he had the MG3.3/R set 7ft apart, with the ceiling sloped a bit towards the rear. Also towards the top of the ceiling behind his listening position was a rectangular gap in the wall covered with a mesh, this allowed any excessive bass to filter out, plus allowed natural light to pass through. He also had the mg1.6 in the background, not hooked up at the time, but had easy access to hook them up which we later did on both systems. ending up listening to the 3.3 the rest of the night. I did notice he had the mg1.6 further out towards the listening room but closer together about 6ft apart, and they were far more easier to move around compared to the larger 3.3.

The audio gear was located dead center of the panels on the ground, no audio rack or anything of the sort other than for the turntable, which was a VPI. He also had not one, but two REL subs working in syn with the MG3.3& 1.6 connected through a special crossover made from Infinity & Lexicon.
the power amps were big Manley 350 tube monoblocks (which I later bought off him) and the preamp was an Audio Research, digital playback was off Audio research & Burmester DAC; he must have had over a million CD's plus 2 million LP's...

That sound coming off the MG3.3/R & 1.6qr was probably the best I ever heard from a maggie system back then. and this was way before the 20.1 series was released. The soundstage was awesome, the depth was full 3-D, and the tonality plus timbre was spot on. The maggies absolutely disappeared, and the stage was in full swing. We would eventaully listen up till 3am the next morninig, since every hour the system would sound bloody terrific! He had balanced the REL subs so well that they never overpowered the maggies natural bass. I don't know how he did it, but both subs were so well tuned. he later told me that the Lexicon was the main player in this balancing game and infinity cross over just supplied the necessary conenctions. He also mentioned that the advantage of having two subs is that they can be fine tuned to perfection for each channel, allowing them to work with just one speaker rather than sharing two. This also allows for greater efficiency and bass control according to him.

I eventually purchased the entire system from him including his cardas cables & interconnects. But when I set it up at home with only half the distance for placement - yep guess what? I never achieved that sound the way it reproduced at his place.

And this I later realized that all maggies need a lot of space around them to sound their best.The more space you give them the better they perform, and wattage does really matter, especially between 50 watts to 350 watts in the mid to bass regions. The maggies can perform very well, but you have to drive them with real current to get them going, and once this is done they certainly beat nearly all dynamic/cone systems out there - other than of course the Wilson Alexandria!

have a good one mate,
cheers, RJ

[RGA]

The 1.7 was a massive upgrade IME to the 1.6 (provided the same amps are used in my next audition) so it will be interesting to hear the others in the line.

Fortunately, Soundhounds carries the complete line of Magnepan along side Quad. I prefer the sound of the 2905 over the 20.6 by a very wide margin. Though the Maggie can play louder with more bass I think the main reason to get either is for the midrange and the Quads have it all over the 20.6. Now that the 20.6 is no longer being made perhaps we'll read reviews that state the "problems" with them - since after all - if they had no "problems" they would not be "replaced." To me the 20.6 was pretty terrible - the 1.7 sounds much much better than the 20.6. For the price difference you could add two top flight subwoofers to the 1.7 and it would probably still take up less space.

And I love the fact that a SET can drive the 1.7 - it makes them far far more appealing to me because I get more choices as to what to drive them with. The 1.7 is in my top 3 or 4 speakers under $2k bettering a lot of speakers above that. For example I would take a 1.7 over a B&W 805 or Dynaudio Contour at more than double the price.

[Fred70433]

The 1.7 was a massive upgrade IME to the 1.6 (provided the same amps are used in my next audition) so it will be interesting to hear the others in the line.

Fortunately, Soundhounds carries the complete line of Magnepan along side Quad. I prefer the sound of the 2905 over the 20.6 by a very wide margin. Though the Maggie can play louder with more bass I think the main reason to get either is for the midrange and the Quads have it all over the 20.6. Now that the 20.6 is no longer being made perhaps we'll read reviews that state the "problems" with them - since after all - if they had no "problems" they would not be "replaced." To me the 20.6 was pretty terrible - the 1.7 sounds much much better than the 20.6. For the price difference you could add two top flight subwoofers to the 1.7 and it would probably still take up less space.

And I love the fact that a SET can drive the 1.7 - it makes them far far more appealing to me because I get more choices as to what to drive them with. The 1.7 is in my top 3 or 4 speakers under $2k bettering a lot of speakers above that. For example I would take a 1.7 over a B&W 805 or Dynaudio Contour at more than double the price.

Would you please let us know what SET you've experienced the 1.7's with?

BTW, the former speaker was the 20.1's.

[Feanor]

The 1.7 was a massive upgrade IME to the 1.6 (provided the same amps are used in my next audition) so it will be interesting to hear the others in the line.
....
And yet not everybody agrees, for example, the famous Magneplanar modifier, Peter Gunn. He recommends the 1.7's only with his modifications; (gosh, that's amazing).

See Peter Gunn of the 1.7 HERE (http://www.indiespinzone.com/mag/mag1.7.html).

I'm far from and expert but I agree with Gunn that the crossover is odd. Assuming his diagram is correct, the mid/low-tweeter has the 1.4 mH inductor both in parallel and in series with itself -- odd, and my electronics isn't good enough to understand what this means.

Gunn also declares that the bass is "weak" which he attributes to the lower mass of the new QR bass panel. Quote: "Bass reproduction takes mass [emphasis added] (they don't make subs using QR foil) and decibels is also a measurement of "force" and since the QR foil is so light and "mass-less" it cannot sustain a bass wave properly or generate increased volume." I'm not sure I buy this.

[RGA]

Would you please let us know what SET you've experienced the 1.7's with?

BTW, the former speaker was the 20.1's.

Yes the 20.6 didn't seem right when I typed it ;) I meant the 20.1. Just never been able to hear that speaker sound good.

The 1.7 I've heard twice - at CES with Bryston and that sounded pretty poor. Soundhounds carries Bryston and they hate the combination - I concur.

Man I wasn't paying attention either - the SET is not a SET - it's an SE tube amp presumably a SEP - Audio Note Soro SE 18 watts. Audio Note (http://www.audionote.co.uk/products/amps_integrated/soro_se_01.shtml#)

[RGA]

And yet not everybody agrees, for example, the famous Magneplanar modifier, Peter Gunn. He recommends the 1.7's only with his modifications; (gosh, that's amazing).

See Peter Gunn of the 1.7 HERE (http://www.indiespinzone.com/mag/mag1.7.html).

Wow I am shocked - a guy making money on modifications of a loudspeaker comes out and hates the new STOCK model and ONLY likes it after you PAY him - what a surprise that is. :yikes:

The 1.7 stock sounds better than the 1.6 stock.

I am in 100% agreement with him

"Stock I find the 1.6 very bright and fatiguing after 15-20 minutes. I did not find the 1.7 bright in this regard and in fact I thought it had an "exciting" quality at first and that it was rather dynamic. That lasted for 15 minutes until my brain caught up to the trick. This intrusion of highs into the lower bands is what gives the speaker its' sense of dynamics and the "exciting" quality, however if you have a discerning ear you'll not only grow tired of it, you may begin to resent it as I did. It makes music simply sound wrong. Not fatiguing, but my desire to listen to it is just as absent. IMHO it is a wiring trick designed to remove the 1.6's overt brightness on top but to keep the speaker artificially bright anyway by smearing that brightness all the way down to the upper bass regions. Spread like that it is not in your face and it gives the speaker a false sense of dynamics."

Now at CES Magnepan was very careful to ONLY let you listen to two tracks played at low volume with very easy midrangy music. No one was allowed to play their own music or ask to change the volume setting. Perhaps that supports this fellow's notion that after 15 minutes the ear will adjust and figure out the gross problems which he calls "wrong."

At Soundhounds I could play as loud as I liked for as long as i liked - But I didn't play all that long either. The 1.6 bothered a number of people auditioning them for being excessively sterile and shrill - but I had the same misgivings of the ribbon tweeter in Apogee a decade earlier when I listen to big monsters (I forget the model) in Vancouver. The Duetta Sig II sounded better than their bigger models. They never could sell them.

But the 1.7 doesn't sound shrill - as this fellow noted.

Personally Feanor that link is kind of scary - if one read that without being a diehard Maggie fan and JUST looking at it objectively you could only draw the conclusion that they're an incompetent speaker maker. And all the people buying them NEED to get them FIXED. WTF? I go out and buy a car but I need someone to fix the engine, transmission, replace the brakes, steering assembly, and oh the body(speaker frame) needs to be replaced as well? Seriously. The stock model is so utterly broken?

This is what I am reading:

"That being the case there is no way around this and it must be considered an inherent flaw."

"However, maybe this XO gimmick only works when the entire thing is QR foil, so who knows. If it stays like this and all other models follow, it's going to be a black future ahead for us."

"The crossover on this model comes right out of a horror flick. My XO guy said his computer really didn't like it. I know from a customer (who's comments appear below) and from my own stock listening that it has 2 very bad humps in it."

"if you bought one, have no worries, it can be made right."

Eesh. funny that Valin doesn't hear any of these problems. I wonder if he gets money to cut them into bits and sell them to people ;)

Well at least this guy makes me feel I wasn't wrong on my views of the stock models - funny how this is never presented - perhaps I need to hear his speakers. Seems we hear the stock models similarly!

[Dawnrazor]

Wow I am shocked - a guy making money on modifications of a loudspeaker comes out and hates the new STOCK model and ONLY likes it after you PAY him - what a surprise that is. :yikes:

Personally Feanor that link is kind of scary - if one read that without being a diehard Maggie fan and JUST looking at it objectively you could only draw the conclusion that they're an incompetent speaker maker. And all the people buying them NEED to get them FIXED. WTF? I go out and buy a car but I need someone to fix the engine, transmission, replace the brakes, steering assembly, and oh the body(speaker frame) needs to be replaced as well? Seriously. The stock model is so utterly broken?



+1!!

Here is an interesting review of some 3.6s that were gunned:

Review: Varkdriver's Magnestand 3.6R (long) - varkdriver - Planar Speaker Asylum (http://db.audioasylum.com/mhtml/m.html?forum=mug&n=157077&highlight=varkdriver&search_url=%2Fcgi%2Fsearch.mpl%3FForumSelect%3DSel ected%26amp%3Bauthor%3Dlake%2540%7Bwebsite%7D%26am p%3Buser_id%3D52179%26amp%3BsortOrder%3DDESC%26amp %3B)

Also alot of the brightness that get attributed to mags is not really the mags. It is rf getting back to the amps and the choke tweek gets rid of that sterility.

[RGA]

The issue I have is the price - you pay one price but then you immediately need to ship them someplace to get someone to make them sound good - or you need to be an experience DIYer. No one factors in their own time but my time is $50 an hour so factor that into the price.

It is nice to read the link where the guy does a mod and actually admits that it made the sound worse. But not everyone feels that way as he does have a business going!

The best way to upgrade a Magnepan is to buy an electrostatic speaker from King Sound or Quad. King Sound has speakers the same price as the 3.6 and sounds IMO considerably better than the 3.6. The 2905 is about the same price as the 20.1 and it also sounds better - especially at lower volume levels. One of the reasons I liked the Soro combination is that it sounded clear and had bass at low volume levels and I didn't need to do the usual - crank it to get them sound decent routine.

That's why the only speakers from Magnepan I would support are the 1.7 down because there is no alternative (if you simply must have a panel). for the same prices.

Although I am not sure why these guys don't give some of the Sonist Ribbon hybrids a try - at least you get some "meat on the bones" to the sound and a full bodied presentation on acoustic instruments like Cello and Piano that is not attained on the planars I've heard.

Still it's odd that when I have gotten on these speakers in the past people have jumped all over me - but meanwhile they own "modified" versions of them - obviously couldn't stomach the stock models either.

So why do they get on my case - after all the Maggie fans who have modified them come out and say "they're unlistenable after 15-20 minutes like this fellow. Also doesn't help when the biggest Magnepan dealer in British Columbia has a sales guy who thinks they're "terrible loudspeakers" but has to sell them because it wasn't his decision to carry the line. Maybe they need to the modified versions?

As a reviewer or audiophile I can only listen to the manufacturer's product - I can't "guess" at the possible sound that various tweaks will play in improving the sound. Forumers seem to support mods for the most part - the guy slagging them? Who knows maybe he has an axe to grind against the company owner.

I would suggest that Magnepan take a page from Audio Note or Teresonic or DIY makers and simply come out with 3-4 versions of the same speaker. Come out with a stock version - then come out with the "modded" version or upgrade variants of the same speaker. That way you give the customer the options they want without them going through the hassle of shipping it to some modder which will invariably cost far more money than simply having the manufacturer put out the model.

It also gives objective ousiders like myself to listen to all three models side by side to determine if said mods actually improve the sound or not rather than taking the word of a guy who makes money on the modifications.

I wonder if Magnepan has addressed the issue - maybe they believe they're as good as they can be made and that all mods make them worse?

The comment section in that thread you linked is also odd - changing the crossover? I can see using better materials but changing the crossover to some other design topology is really puzzling to me as it would completely change the sound (and matching) of the loudspeakers.

For me they're far too finicky to bother with. I know too many people who own and or sell them (or both) that never seem to be happy with them - they're always screwing around with them - either nightmarish to position, want to fix the treble, have to spend to buy more powerful amplifiers (4 ohm stable speakers are dead easy to drive) so if they're doing that they're on the wrong path. They have to play at just "so" volume levels and they only play certain music well.

To me the sound quality doesn't justify the hassles.

[Feanor]

...

I would suggest that Magnepan take a page from Audio Note or Teresonic or DIY makers and simply come out with 3-4 versions of the same speaker. Come out with a stock version - then come out with the "modded" version or upgrade variants of the same speaker. That way you give the customer the options they want without them going through the hassle of shipping it to some modder which will invariably cost far more money than simply having the manufacturer put out the model.

...
I think Magnepan is, in a real sense, more honest than other makers. They know that expensive upgrades, e.g. to crossovers, make an exceedingly minor, if indeed not entirely imaginary, improvement. The whole "SE" thing is generally an attempt to extort money from suckers; responsible makers will sell their base products with adequate components.

In the case of Magneplanar, to insist that they must be upgraded to sound any good at all, is BS coming from self-interested entrepreneurs or wacko hobbiests.

[RGA]

I think Magnepan is, in a real sense, more honest than other makers. They know that expensive upgrades, e.g. to crossovers, make an exceedingly minor, if indeed not entirely imaginary, improvement. The whole "SE" thing is generally an attempt to extort money from suckers; responsible makers will sell their base products with adequate components.

In the case of Magneplanar, to insist that they must be upgraded to sound any good at all, is BS coming from self-interested entrepreneurs or wacko hobbiests.

You may be correct - have you directly compared the stock to the modded version?

These are sweeping statements and unless people have compared them directly - same room same system same time then who knows?

I certainly put more faith in the manufacturer's abilities than some guy in a basement some place but that particular modder has had a successful business for a long time with a LOT of Magnepan owners who think his mods make big improvements - so I am willing to give the guy a little more leeway that a guy who started a company a month ago making these wild claims. Still I have no idea since I have not heard them.

But I can't say I disagree with his take on the sound of the stock models. A lot of people not on forums also agree with my and his take on said stock models. Although one wonders why someone would HATE a stock speaker so much but STILL buy them and then spend a lot of time trying to fix it. To me that's pretty suspicious. I don't know anyone who buys something that they think is terrible but "gee let's buy it anyway" so that I can rebuild the entire thing from the ground up.

I also don't buy the premise that improved parts make no difference.

You need some real experience before you say that and no offense but you don't have any. The ONLY way to tell if PARTS quality makes an improvement is to have several amplifiers, or CD players or Speakers - they must all use the exact same design - but each one uses better parts.

And guess which company you can test this "theory" on. Audio Note. You can do the following. Get an M3 Preamp, Jinro as power amp, CDT 2/Two, DAC 3 and AN E/LX HE speakers.

Listen to said system. Then listen to system 2 - M6 preamp, Ongaku as power amp, same transport, Dac 5, AN E Spe HE speakers.

The preamp is exactly the same except parts quality - black gates, and the core materials of the transformers. Cables all sound the same right so it doesn't matter if it is silver or copper - just need to adjust the volume knob right. The power amp is the same design - speakers are the same design - same cabinet materials same exact drivers.

The issue isn't really that this modder can't completely change the sound by changing the XO or making other mods - clearly according to the AA thread he changed the sound - made it worse. That said more people think he makes changes for the better - either way they sound different than the stock models so apparently changing the XO is a big deal.