Talk me into 3.6's

[Mike Anderson]

The Kw series is more dead-neutral than the A3 series, so my guess is that your going to get a high quality but dead flat response from the union.

That's exactly what I'm looking for. I want it accurate, not colored.

BTW, I saw somewhere that the kW series are the only amps MF still makes in the UK, is that your understanding?

I had the A3.2 integrated, and I don't know where it was made, but the build quality was impeccable.

[Geoffcin]

That's exactly what I'm looking for. I want it accurate, not colored.

BTW, I saw somewhere that the kW series are the only amps MF still makes in the UK, is that your understanding?

I had the A3.2 integrated, and I don't know where it was made, but the build quality was impeccable.

I really don't think your going to get more/better bass because of the high power. You WILL be able to play louder and longer without your amp frying, but remember that the 3.6r is a fused speaker. I've got a fistful of burned tweeter fuses to prove it! And all done with either the PS Audio (hard to do), or MF amp (not so hard to do). Amp RMS watt ratings are one thing, but the 3.6r tweeter fuse is rated for about ~275 watts (that's JUST for the tweeter), and the A3cr had NO problem producing that much current into a transient.

Don't know about MF moving the production out of country, but I do know that Antony Michaelson is a stickler for quality. EVERY piece of MF gear I've seen is built to last. Even if he now makes them overseas (not China please!) I would expect them to be top quality.

[Mike Anderson]

I really don't think your going to get more/better bass because of the high power.

Well I should still have the Logos when the speakers arrive, so I'll find out. If it turns out there's no significant difference, I'll keep the Logos and send the MF back.

But about 80% of the opinions I've seen on this point say large amounts of power from a good, clean amp will give you a tighter, more controlled bass.

[Geoffcin]

Well I should still have the Logos when the speakers arrive, so I'll find out. If it turns out there's no significant difference, I'll keep the Logos and send the MF back.

But about 80% of the opinions I've seen on this point say large amounts of power from a good, clean amp will give you a tighter, more controlled bass.

That sounds about right.

Fact is that about ~20 watts or so into the 3.6's get my room about as loud as I like it.

Watch as the Logos gives you a warmer bass signature than the MF.

[Mike Anderson]

^^ OK, but two points, once again:

1) Your loudness preference is likely different from mine, as is your taste in music and your room;

2) I'm not really talking about volume per se, I'm really talking about control (i.e. dynamics).

I've noticed that when people compare the low-power versus high-power amps with Magnepans, the people who tout the low-power amps consistently talk about a smoother (sometimes described as warmer or "more musical") sound.

I suspect this is really a lack of dynamics. I've played both low and comparatively high-power amps on my 1.6QRs, and I noticed the same thing -- what we're really talking about is how the amp renders extreme changes in volume, e.g. rapid attack and decay.

This is just a matter of preference I suppose, but I really like those dramatic displays of dynamics, particularly at high volumes and bass levels. To me, they tend to grab your attention and make the sound more realistic and "there". Listen to a really fast solo on a stand-up acoustic bass, a bass-drum heavy drum solo, or a heavy synth line played at high speed. I find it very pleasing to hear all the ins-and-outs, if you know what I mean.

It's certainly a more aggressive, up-front sound, but for my tastes and my music, that's very appropriate.

[GMichael]

Did you get your 3.6's yet?
Are those 1.6's on their way to me yet?

[Mike Anderson]

Did you get your 3.6's yet?
Are those 1.6's on their way to me yet?

Haven't gotten them yet, but I promise, on the day they get sent out, I'm putting up an ad for my 1.6QRs -- they'll be a very good deal, because they're in pristine condition (only nine months old).

[Geoffcin]

^^ OK, but two points, once again:

1) Your loudness preference is likely different from mine, as is your taste in music and your room;.

My musical preferences run the gamut from Ravel to Korn. On any given day I'm libel to blow a fuse or two. Basically there's nothing that CAN be done to my speakers that I haven't already done. (save modifying them)

^^
2) I'm not really talking about volume per se, I'm really talking about control (i.e. dynamics)..

Control is more a function of damping factor. It's TRUE that high powered amps (SS that is) tend to have higher damping factors. The MF Kw has a huge damping factor, much more than the Pathos does. That being said, the 3.6's don't respond to damping factor nearly as much as some cone speakers. Hook the MF Kw series to a speaker like the B&W 802 and you'll think that someone turned on the subwoofer! That's not true with the maggies. Each speaker/amp system is going to respond differently, so there's no hard-and-fast rules.

In any case your going to have a chance to hear for youself. The best thing is to have an open mind about it.

[Mike Anderson]

In any case your going to have a chance to hear for youself. The best thing is to have an open mind about it.

Oh I definitely will -- there'd be no point in spending a few thousand extra on an amp if it doesn't offer any improvement, and I made sure returning the MF would be an option.

[Mike Anderson]

Control is more a function of damping factor. It's TRUE that high powered amps (SS that is) tend to have higher damping factors. The MF Kw has a huge damping factor, much more than the Pathos does.

Right, the specs say the damping factor is > 200 (I assume that's against an 8 ohm load - so it's something like > 100 for the 3.6Rs.) I don't know what it is for the Pathos.

That being said, the 3.6's don't respond to damping factor nearly as much as some cone speakers.

Do you mean to say they result in a lower damping factor because they're 4 ohm speakers? (My understanding is that damping factor is the speaker load divided by the output impedance, in which case you get half the damping factor compared to 8 ohm speakers).

If you mean something else, I'd be interested to hear why -- It's not obvious to me why the damping factor would make less of a difference on something like ribbons as compared with cones.

[Feanor]

...
This is just a matter of preference I suppose, but I really like those dramatic displays of dynamics, particularly at high volumes and bass levels. To me, they tend to grab your attention and make the sound more realistic and "there". Listen to a really fast solo on a stand-up acoustic bass, a bass-drum heavy drum solo, or a heavy synth line played at high speed. I find it very pleasing to hear all the ins-and-outs, if you know what I mean.

It's certainly a more aggressive, up-front sound, but for my tastes and my music, that's very appropriate.

... the speakers for you after all. They are seldom recommended for people who like punchy bass at high levels. Maybe Cerwin Vegas ...

[Mike Anderson]

^^ I suppose you're joking, but yeah I know the Magnepans don't have that punch-you-in-the-chest type bass, and I'm fine with that. What I want is quality, not quantity, and not punchy.

There was a time when I listened to a lot of punk rock, and harder/noisier rock stuff (think Iggy and the Stooges), and I still have it in my collection but it isn't what grabs me anymore. These days I want resolution and refinement.

I got past the testosterone peak a looonnng time ago.