Talk me into 3.6's

Printable View

  • 09-19-2006, 10:41 PM
    Mike Anderson
    Talk me into 3.6's
    Currently using Magnepan 1.6qr's, and I love 'em. They're still in great shape (so I could get a decent price selling them used, also with the Mye stands).

    But I have some cash to burn. So... anyone want to talk me into upgrading to the 3.6's?

    My amp is the Pathos Logos. I don't know offhand if that's enough to take full advantage of 3.6's. Also, my room is not ideal. It's a little on the small side, it's asymmetrical, and there's all kinds of furniture and crap that makes it complicated to deal with.

    So, is it worth the extra bucks? Any of you 3.6 owners out there want to testify, even under less-than-perfect conditions?
  • 09-20-2006, 09:30 AM
    Florian
    Well, the 3.6 walks all over the 1.6 Then the smallest Apogee Stage and up walk all over the 3.6 and starting with the Duetta/Scintilla they will walk over the 20.1 also. Look for an Apogee Duetta etc.... thats my recommendation.
  • 09-20-2006, 10:00 AM
    GMichael
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Florian
    Well, the 3.6 walks all over the 1.6 Then the smallest Apogee Stage and up walk all over the 3.6 and starting with the Duetta/Scintilla they will walk over the 20.1 also. Look for an Apogee Duetta etc.... thats my recommendation.

    Do you know if any of the new Apogees will be available for less than $4k?
  • 09-20-2006, 02:26 PM
    Rick Vansloneker
    I bet not...
  • 09-20-2006, 08:57 PM
    Mike Anderson
    Yeah, I definitely can't go any higher than $4k on this.

    But is my amp going to provide enough juice, or am I going to have to spend extra to replace it?
  • 09-21-2006, 12:05 PM
    Bingo
    Sympathy
    [B]Mike - I do not want to give you advice, just sympathy and share with you a very similar predicament. I had the 1.6 QRs for about two years and enjoyed them very much, but I knew all along that my 12 x 15 room wasn't really big enough to do full justice to them. But all the while I had the 1.6s I drooled over the 3.6 ... and wrestled with the idea a long long time....but.....(here comes the but) .... I really knew that if my room was too small for the 1.6s then it would definitely be too small for the 3.6.s ... and so I dropped the idea. Later, I sold the 1.6's for a pretty good sum, and then discovered that the JAS audio Orsa speaker used a true ribbon tweeter thant went all the way up to 60k ...(did I say that right?) ...and so I thought that the true ribbon tweeters would be fine since they were housed in a monitor, a small (bookshelf sized) speaker...the Orsa has a response down to 45 hz, but I have on order a SVS SB12 Plus which will go all the way down to 25 hz..maybe less. I don't have the sub in yet, but I do find that the Orsas give a very good presentation....and they FIT my room a heck of a lot better than the tall 1.6's...
    NO! I am not at all suggesting you go for Orsas..everyman has ears and every ear has subjective responses...yours ain't like mine and mine ain't like yours.... But if you can audition some monitors and check them out with a right to return if you don't like them, it might be worth a try.... Actually it was fun wrting this even if you completely ignore it.

    Bingo
  • 09-21-2006, 05:41 PM
    JoeE SP9
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Mike Anderson
    Currently using Magnepan 1.6qr's, and I love 'em. They're still in great shape (so I could get a decent price selling them used, also with the Mye stands).

    But I have some cash to burn. So... anyone want to talk me into upgrading to the 3.6's?

    My amp is the Pathos Logos. I don't know offhand if that's enough to take full advantage of 3.6's. Also, my room is not ideal. It's a little on the small side, it's asymmetrical, and there's all kinds of furniture and crap that makes it complicated to deal with.

    So, is it worth the extra bucks? Any of you 3.6 owners out there want to testify, even under less-than-perfect conditions?

    What size is your room?
  • 09-24-2006, 01:21 PM
    Mike Anderson
    ^^^ About 15x20.
  • 09-24-2006, 02:52 PM
    JoeE SP9
    What else is in the room? Is it your standard living room with furniture? Depending on how much else is in the room they may fit quite nicely. Buy them!!! You know you want them. If the room turns out to be too small get a new house. You are an audiophile aren't you?:ihih:
  • 09-24-2006, 05:40 PM
    Grandpaw
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Mike Anderson
    ^^^ About 15x20.

    I'm no expert here but that seems like it will be an awful tight fit in a room that size for those speakers plus furniture and get the room around your speakers that you need. There needs to be room around them so they will do their best not just make sound, Jeff
  • 09-24-2006, 05:50 PM
    Mike Anderson
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by JoeE SP9
    What else is in the room? Is it your standard living room with furniture?

    Pretty much, yeah. No couch, but it opens up into our dining room, so there's a table there. A couple chairs, some bookcases, etc.

    Some people said my room was too small for the 1.6's, but I love 'em. I put casters on the Mye stands so I (or my wife) can easily move them out or back as needed. For listening I can typically get them a good 4' out from the back wall.

    They sound great to me -- and wouldn't mind more of the same.

    I'm a little more worried about having enough power to drive them to their full potential.
  • 09-24-2006, 09:33 PM
    bobsticks
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by JoeE SP9
    What else is in the room? Is it your standard living room with furniture? Depending on how much else is in the room they may fit quite nicely. Buy them!!! You know you want them. If the room turns out to be too small get a new house. You are an audiophile aren't you?:ihih:

    C'mon Mike, you know you want 'em. More surface area equals better, we're all aware of that. Everything will be just fine :devil:
  • 09-25-2006, 05:54 AM
    Feanor
    More true of the 3.6 than the 1.6???
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Grandpaw
    I'm no expert here but that seems like it will be an awful tight fit in a room that size for those speakers plus furniture and get the room around your speakers that you need. There needs to be room around them so they will do their best not just make sound, Jeff

    The 3.6's have ribbon tweeters, I believe. These will have much wider dispersion at higher frequencies than the quasi-ribbons of the 1.6's. I'd suspect this make placement more critical, especially with respect to the side walls. Would you say this is true?
  • 09-25-2006, 07:38 AM
    Mike Anderson
    I can get my 1.6's a couple feet from the side walls. But a problem is that the positioning is necessarily asymmetrical with respect to the side walls (i.e. one will always be closer to the wall than the other).

    This is unavoidable, given the way the room is laid out. Is it a big problem?
  • 09-25-2006, 09:04 AM
    E-Stat
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Mike Anderson
    Currently using Magnepan 1.6qr's, and I love 'em. They're still in great shape (so I could get a decent price selling them used, also with the Mye stands).

    But I have some cash to burn. So... anyone want to talk me into upgrading to the 3.6's?

    In short, the 3.6s extend the bandwidth of the otherwise excellent 1.6s a bit at both endst. The greater panel area helps the bottom and the ribbons at the top add some extension and "sweetness".

    They do, however, require some power to make them really sing.

    rw
  • 10-27-2006, 07:51 AM
    Mike Anderson
    Well I'm leaning towards getting them, but I still haven't figured out if my present amp has enough juice to drive them well.

    It's the Pathos Acoustics Logos:

    http://www.pathosacoustics.com/indexeng.htm (click on Logos in menu on the left)

    Main specifications:
    Output power: 110W RMS @ 8 Ohm, 220W RMS @ 4 Ohm
    Frequency response: 2Hz-200KHz 0,5dB
    THD: <0.05%
    S/N ratio: >90dB
    Input impedance: 100 KOhm

    Any advice on this score?

    People on Audio Asylum are saying you need around 500 wpc to drive the 3.6s well. I find that hard to believe though; the Logos drives my 1.6s just fine, as nearly as I can tell. Are the 3.6s really that much harder to drive?
  • 10-28-2006, 06:39 PM
    Mike Anderson
    ^^^ Alright, well never mind - it's a moot point now, because I just ordered them. And since most of the advice I got (elsewhere) suggested that more power was definitely in order, I got one of these:

    http://www.musicalfidelity.com/products/kw/kw500.html

    Almost 800 wpc! That oughta do the trick.

    A dealer gave me a very good price on a display model w/few hours on it, so I went ahead and bit. I've paired MF and Magnepan before, so I'm pretty confident this is going to be a great combination. It's quality gear, built like a tank and extremely clean.

    Can't wait 'til everything gets here!
  • 10-28-2006, 07:27 PM
    Geoffcin
    You got the right speakers!
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Mike Anderson
    ^^^ About 15x20.

    Don't worry, youve made the right choice.

    The 1.6r are fantastic speakers. In some ways they are BETTER than the 3.6's. But you are going to forget that once the 3.6's are broken in. (better planar bass) The fact is that the 1.6qr's are slightly more coherent through the midrange-treble crossover due to the excellent quasi-ribbon tweeter. BUT, that being said, there's NOTHING that can match the speed & purity of the pure ribbon tweeter that the 3.6r uses. And NOTHING I've heard can match the quality of sound of the dipole line source pure ribbon tweeter (many cost-no-object speakers use the same type of tweeter).

    The Magnepan 20.1r uses a quasi-ribbon midrange, and a push-pull Planar Magnetic bass driver (that goes down to an astonishing 25hz). That speaker comes closer to matching the ribbon tweeter in speed and shoud be considered, but when all the chads are counted there NO speaker that can touch the Magnepan 3.6r for bang-for-the-buck in the under 5k range.

    As I've said before, you've made the right choice, congrats!
  • 10-28-2006, 08:51 PM
    Mike Anderson
    ^^^ Thanks -- I've not heard a great deal of music from true ribbons, so I'm anxious to hear how they'll sound in my new setup.

    But what I'm *really* looking forward to is the beefier bass, which is a good part of the reason why I went ahead and splurged for the MF kw500. I love the tight, rich bass of the 1.6QRs, but I every time I hear them, I just want MORE!
  • 10-29-2006, 04:38 AM
    Geoffcin
    I hate to dissapoint you
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Mike Anderson
    ^^^ Thanks -- I've not heard a great deal of music from true ribbons, so I'm anxious to hear how they'll sound in my new setup.

    But what I'm *really* looking forward to is the beefier bass, which is a good part of the reason why I went ahead and splurged for the MF kw500. I love the tight, rich bass of the 1.6QRs, but I every time I hear them, I just want MORE!

    But I wouldn't discribe 3.6r bass as "beefy". More like lean-and-mean (and totally accurate). It goes a bit deeper than the 1.6qr, but there's really only slightly more in quantity. Also your going to have a long breakin time to get that deeper bass from them. If you play a lot of bass-heavy material through them it might be as little as a month, if you easy on them figure a YEAR before the bass panel really performs up to spec.

    I really like MF gear, but don't let the massive power rating of the Kw500 fool you into thinking it's going to be bass-heavy. I've always found MF gear to be neutral to slightly bright (at least through the 3.6r). So, even with all that power your going to get a neutral presentation from that amp. That's a GOOD thing, as long as that's what your expecting!
  • 10-29-2006, 07:46 AM
    Mike Anderson
    ^^^ I'm aware of the bass situation -- maybe my use of the word "beefy" wasn't quite accurate.

    I'm partly thinking of the fact that it goes down to 35hz, but I'm really talking about the quality of the bass, not quite so much the quantity. I really enjoy the controlled, tight, fast sound of the bass my 1.6qr puts out, and I'm thinking the kw500+3.6qr will be more of the same (only more!)

    I've owned a MF integrated amp before, and it was the same -- very neutral and clear -- but there seemed to be a specal synergy with the magnepans. The super-clean presentation was exactly what was needed to bring the best out of the high-resolution maggies. Some people probably would have described the sound as "clinical", but I thought it was beautiful accurate and uncannily realistic.

    I probably should have kept the amp (passed it along to my brother, who loves it) but I somehow convinced myself I needed something fancier. It wouldn't have provided enough power for the 3.6s anyway, but I have a pretty good idea what I'm getting into with the kw500.
  • 10-29-2006, 08:45 AM
    Feanor
    HaHa! only 220 watt/ch
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Mike Anderson
    ...
    I've owned a MF integrated amp before, and it was the same -- very neutral and clear -- but there seemed to be a specal synergy with the magnepans. The super-clean presentation was exactly what was needed to bring the best out of the high-resolution maggies. Some people probably would have described the sound as "clinical", but I thought it was beautiful accurate and uncannily realistic.

    I probably should have kept the amp (passed it along to my brother, who loves it) but I somehow convinced myself I needed something fancier. It wouldn't have provided enough power for the 3.6s anyway, but I have a pretty good idea what I'm getting into with the kw500.

    Are you referring to your Pathos Logos which I believe you use? Why not try them with the 3.6's before worrying about?? Claims that 3.6's demand 500 w/c sound apocryphal to me; the Logos will be OK reasonable listening levels, I'd bet.

    If I had the "problem" of the 3.6's and didn't have an amp I'd certainly look above 200 w/ch, but much beyond that I'd look for quality rather than quantity.
  • 10-29-2006, 08:57 AM
    Geoffcin
    You will get more bass
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Mike Anderson
    ^^^ I'm aware of the bass situation -- maybe my use of the word "beefy" wasn't quite accurate.

    I'm partly thinking of the fact that it goes down to 35hz, but I'm really talking about the quality of the bass, not quite so much the quantity. I really enjoy the controlled, tight, fast sound of the bass my 1.6qr puts out, and I'm thinking the kw500+3.6qr will be more of the same (only more!)

    I've owned a MF integrated amp before, and it was the same -- very neutral and clear -- but there seemed to be a specal synergy with the magnepans. The super-clean presentation was exactly what was needed to bring the best out of the high-resolution maggies. Some people probably would have described the sound as "clinical", but I thought it was beautiful accurate and uncannily realistic.

    I probably should have kept the amp (passed it along to my brother, who loves it) but I somehow convinced myself I needed something fancier. It wouldn't have provided enough power for the 3.6s anyway, but I have a pretty good idea what I'm getting into with the kw500.

    But that's going to be very dependent on how much room you can put behind the speakers. The 3.6 likes 3 to 4 feet of free space behind them to develop the best bass.

    I wouldn't jump to conclusions about the power requirments of the 3.6r either. I'm doing a review of a modest ( but high quality) 50wpc intergrated amp, and it drove my 3.6's with NO PROBLEM. If anything it was MORE bass heavy than my PS Audio amp!

    I kept my MF A3cr amp when I got my PS Audio and it's a good thing I did, as it's doing duty now driving my Maggie CC3 center. The MF amps responce is perfect for a speaker with a Quasi-ribbon tweeter as it give it just a subtle amount more "air". On the 3.6r this is not needed, and can be just a little over the top on treble loaded recordings. 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.
  • 10-29-2006, 09:07 AM
    Mike Anderson
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Feanor
    Are you referring to your Pathos Logos which I believe you use? Why not try them with the 3.6's before worrying about?? Claims that 3.6's demand 500 w/c sound apocryphal to me; the Logos will be OK reasonable listening levels, I'd bet.

    If I had the "problem" of the 3.6's and didn't have an amp I'd certainly look above 200 w/ch, but much beyond that I'd look for quality rather than quantity.

    Yes, selling the Logos. I like to listen at high levels, and I play a lot of bass-heavy music. And the MF kw500 is definitely quality, not just quantity.
  • 10-29-2006, 09:09 AM
    Mike Anderson
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Geoffcin
    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.