Magnepan 1d

[IBSTORMIN]

On the Magnepan 1.6's, I believe they recommend the woofers on the inside and tweeters on the out side. Also try some toe in and place them only 6-8 feet apart.

Listen to some well recorded acoustic, piano and vocal music and you will be blown away by just how good they can sound.

I always thought the Maggies would be very sharp. The only experience I have had with ribbons is in Infinity models and I always thought they were too harsh. These Maggies are smooth. I had been listening to a Dianna Krall DVD-A and was loving her mellow sexy voice on the Maggies. I switched back to the Preludes yesterday and my first thought was they were too bright! I let my ear adjust and found they were more detailed and had more stage placement just as I had heard before. What I lost was the warmness in her voice. She just didn't sound as sexy. The more I compare, the more I like the Maggies. When listening to rock, the Preludes win! I just need two systems now! ! ! !

How have you configured panel placement?

I think JoeE sent this already and I followed it placing the tweeters on the outside for better seperation. I have also built a sidewall where it was open before which helped a great deal. The manual is actually for the 1C with a note on the last page stating the differences in the 1D. The guy I bought them from didn't have the manual when I picked the speakers up but promised to mail it. I'm curious to see if it's different.

[Feanor]

I always thought the Maggies would be very sharp. The only experience I have had with ribbons is in Infinity models and I always thought they were too harsh. These Maggies are smooth.
...

Pardon my ignorance: do the 1D Maggies have ribbons? I had the impression that Maggies of that vintage did not.

[E-Stat]

I think JoeE sent this already and I followed it placing the tweeters on the outside for better seperation. I have also built a sidewall where it was open before which helped a great deal. The manual is actually for the 1C with a note on the last page stating the differences in the 1D. The guy I bought them from didn't have the manual when I picked the speakers up but promised to mail it. I'm curious to see if it's different.

Do you "vee" the bass panels? How much toe in do you use for the tweeter section? How much toe in do you use for the bass section? You'll note the pictorial diagrams involve multiple placement variables beyond just "tweeters-in" or "tweeters-out".

rw

[IBSTORMIN]

Do you "vee" the bass panels? How much toe in do you use for the tweeter section? How much toe in do you use for the bass section? You'll note the pictorial diagrams involve multiple placement variables beyond just "tweeters-in" or "tweeters-out".

rw

I set them up like the manual shows - Mid panel almost flat but slightly toed in, bass panel and tweeter panel toed in about 30 degrees.
Sort of like this:
tweeter panel .. \
......mid panel .. I
.....bass panel .. \

When you say vee the bass panels and you referring to the bass & mid? I know it was a pain for me but.....Can you draw it?

[IBSTORMIN]

Pardon my ignorance: do the 1D Maggies have ribbons? I had the impression that Maggies of that vintage did not.

No Bill, pardon MY ignorance! They do not have ribbons. I used the wrong term because I am still learning. What type are these Maggies?

Hey Bill, I see you have a Subsonic 5! I had a Subsonic 7 and sold it to a friend that wanted it. I've missed it ever since. BIG mistake to let it go!

[IBSTORMIN]

After listening to these speakers for several months I have learned alot. My amp is plenty to drive them to deafening volumes and there is no distortion I can hear from delamination, although some day I plan to uncover them and look. I received the 1D manual and realize I must have sounded like a fool, the guy I bought them from told me the three panels were bass/mid/tweet. As you guys said after I re-read, two panels are bass/mid and the third is the tweeter. Placement of speakers is critical. I have them set up as the 1D manual suggests, outer bass/mid perpendicular to and up against the wall, center bass/mid toed in slightly and the tweeter panel on the inside pointed to cross in the middle by aiming at the opposite ear. Stage placement is better this way but I found it is not as important as the realism these speakers present. The bass is probably going below 40Hz and on most music a sub is not necessary. They sound REAL!!!! My Infinities are in another room. Of course, now I want to try bi-amping. Suggestions on an active crossover, preferably used?

[E-Stat]

Placement of speakers is critical. I have them set up as the 1D manual suggests, outer bass/mid perpendicular to and up against the wall, center bass/mid toed in slightly and the tweeter panel on the inside pointed to cross in the middle by aiming at the opposite ear.

That's what I meant by "veeing" or angling the panels. Such is critical for best image.

The bass is probably going below 40Hz and on most music a sub is not necessary. They sound REAL!!!! My Infinities are in another room.

Their bass quality and timbre have always been strong points.

Suggestions on an active crossover, preferably used?

The classic answer was the Audio Research EC-2 seen here. They do come up from time to time on Audiogon and Ebay. A popular current model is made by Marchand here. Bi-amping can be advantageous, but it also expensive. I would opt for a better amp first.

rw

[JoeE SP9]

After listening to these speakers for several months I have learned alot. My amp is plenty to drive them to deafening volumes and there is no distortion I can hear from delamination, although some day I plan to uncover them and look. I received the 1D manual and realize I must have sounded like a fool, the guy I bought them from told me the three panels were bass/mid/tweet. As you guys said after I re-read, two panels are bass/mid and the third is the tweeter. Placement of speakers is critical. I have them set up as the 1D manual suggests, outer bass/mid perpendicular to and up against the wall, center bass/mid toed in slightly and the tweeter panel on the inside pointed to cross in the middle by aiming at the opposite ear. Stage placement is better this way but I found it is not as important as the realism these speakers present. The bass is probably going below 40Hz and on most music a sub is not necessary. They sound REAL!!!! My Infinities are in another room. Of course, now I want to try bi-amping. Suggestions on an active crossover, preferably used?

A good electronic crossover is not inexpensive. The tube unit that Marchand makes is a nice piece. Those Tympani's may make you go for tubes. You will hear how good they can sound on the 1D's. E-Stat may also be right about a better amp.

[IBSTORMIN]

Bi-amping can be advantageous, but it also expensive. I would opt for a better amp first.

rw

It now makes sense, it probably would be cheaper to try another amp first, although I already have another 200WPC amp. Maybe I am being stubborn, but I really am amazed by how my balanced Integra amp sounds and wish I could comare it to what you call better amps to see if they really are, before I spend the money.
On the crossover, does it have to be active? I almost bought a used pair of crossovers from a pair of MG III's for sale on E-bay. Went for around $170. Would that have worked? How do the MG III's compare to the 1D? I understand they have a true ribbon tweeter instead of a Quasi and they were replaced by the 3.3. Ever heard them?

[E-Stat]

It now makes sense, it probably would be cheaper to try another amp first, although I already have another 200WPC amp. Maybe I am being stubborn, but I really am amazed by how my balanced Integra amp sounds and wish I could comare it to what you call better amps to see if they really are, before I spend the money.

That is always the best case to hear components in your own system first. The Onkyo is a decent amp, but lacks the openness and poise of better ones. Even the double Advents in my vintage system benefit from using a Threshold Stasis amp. A Stasis 2 would be magnificent on the Tympanis.

I almost bought a used pair of crossovers from a pair of MG III's for sale on E-bay. Went for around $170. Would that have worked?

No, as the the MGIII is a three way design with different crossover point(s).

How do the MG III's compare to the 1D? I understand they have a true ribbon tweeter instead of a Quasi and they were replaced by the 3.3. Ever heard them?

Oh, yes I am familiar with the IIIs. It would be a mixed bag. The top end of the III would be arguably better. The overall frequency balance and overall imaging ability, however, would not be. I find the Tympanis to have unmatched response from mid bass upwards to the lower highs. If you recall, one of Harry Pearson's reference systems way back when was the QRS/ID system using the QRS ribbon tweeters. The 1D handled most of the range.

rw

[IBSTORMIN]

That is always the best case to hear components in your own system first. The Onkyo is a decent amp, but lacks the openness and poise of better ones. Even the double Advents in my vintage system benefit from using a Threshold Stasis amp. A Stasis 2 would be magnificent on the Tympanis.rw

Is the Stasis2 balanced? What is the difference between it and the Stasis1? Audiogon shows them both released 1978 with the 1 selling for more.

You seem familiar with alot of equipment, are you familiar with the 1993 Onkyo Integra M-588F dual mono amp I have? I know this amp sounds cleaner hooked up balanced.

[E-Stat]

Is the Stasis2 balanced? My pre is fully balanced. What is the difference between it and the Stasis1? Audiogon shows them both released 1978 with the 1 selling for more.

No, you would need to advance in time a bit to the S/500 for balanced operation. The Stasis One was a bit of overkill as a monoblock with seventy-two 150 watt output devices for 200 watts output. The Stasis Two only had forty-eight 150 watt devices for 200 watts for two channels. According to Harry Pearson, the Stasis Two sounded better.

You seem familiar with alot of equipment, are you familiar with the 1993 Onkyo Integra M-588F dual mono amp I have? I know this amp sounds cleaner hooked up balanced.

While Onkyo has always focused primarily on mid-fi receivers, they have made some decent separates in the past. Never at the level of the best American gear IMHO. Use of carbon resistors instead of metal film? Power consumption of 550W for 400 watt output and tiny heat sinks means that it is not biased very heavily into class A. Speaker switching on a high end power amp?

588

rw

[IBSTORMIN]

While Onkyo has always focused primarily on mid-fi receivers, they have made some decent separates in the past. Never at the level of the best American gear IMHO. Use of carbon resistors instead of metal film? Power consumption of 550W for 400 watt output and tiny heat sinks means that it is not biased very heavily into class A. Speaker switching on a high end power amp?

588

rw

I thank you for your honesty. What do you think of BAT & Krell?

[IBSTORMIN]

one of Harry Pearson's reference systems way back when was the QRS/ID system using the QRS ribbon tweeters. The 1D handled most of the range.

rw

How was the QRS integrated with the 1D? Is there a tweeter in production today that could be added in a similar way? Is this worth doing or should I just look at a newer pair of maggies like the 3.x series that already has a ribbon tweeter?

[E-Stat]

I thank you for your honesty. What do you think of BAT & Krell?

Balanced Audio makes some truly great tube stuff. Victor Khomenko was the first to use both the 6H30 "supertube" and the big 6C33 triodes (used in MiG-25 Foxbat radars). His family worked at the Svetlana tube factory in St. Petersburg so he literally grew up knowing about tubes. They use first rate components including oil filled caps and are zero feedback designs.

Krell is also very well made. I met Dan D'Agostino back in '75 when he was the rep for Dayton-Wright electrostats and Dunlap Clarke amps. That experience taught him the value of designing high current amps that can drive any kind of load. The big Krells are among few amps that can drive a 1 ohm load and not shut down or blow up. While I have only heard a couple, they strike me as being a bit dark and sterile for my tastes. On the other hand, some might say that of my VTL amps as well.

rw

[E-Stat]

How was the QRS integrated with the 1D?

He simply used the 1D as the bass section mated with the QRS ribbons for the top with an active crossover.

Is there a tweeter in production today that could be added in a similar way? Is this worth doing or should I just look at a newer pair of maggies like the 3.x series that already has a ribbon tweeter?

It is probably not worth doing for the cost required. I would wait and hear the 3.6r or the 20.1. I very seriously considered buying the 20.1s after hearing them at Seacliff. The Sound Lab electrostats are more coherent and do better at low levels.

rw

[IBSTORMIN]

E-stat, What do you think of Martin Logan?

[E-Stat]

E-stat, What do you think of Martin Logan?

Clearly, M-L is the widest producer of electrostatic speakers, but I confess that I've always preferred full range models. Ironically, the very first ML, the CLS was arguably full range although a tad lacking in the bottom. The current CLZ definitely requires a separate sub. For me, the beauty of electrostatics is not just having a nice clear upper range, but providing seamless top to bottom coherency. I've yet to hear a hybrid stat sound truly coherent. Virtually all of them use monopole woofers. You have The Bass and The Rest.

BTW, that was the secret to the QRS/1D system. The 1D panels were far closer in response and radiation pattern to the Infinity ribbons than the cone woofers found in the original. That was my beef about the mighty Infinity IRS system. Big, clear and powerful with woofers that belonged to a different system.

rw