Magnepan 3.7?

[tube fan]

My previous criticism of earlier Magnepan's (except for the IV) was in the low end and in the grain (lack of liquidity). Plus, no salesman would play the speakers at realistic levels. We shall see.

[RGA]

"My previous criticism of earlier Magnepan's (except for the IV) was in the low end and in the grain (lack of liquidity). Plus, no salesman would play the speakers at realistic levels. We shall see."

That criticism will still be valid with the new ones. But I think you'll find they don't get shrill like the .6 models. Again though I was running a robust tube amplifier - or I should say the dealer was running a robust tube amplifier.

So long as you don't listen to amplified music and or loud levels and expect deepish bass they will be fine. The 20.1 doesn't have much bass IME - I actually prefer the sound of the 1.7 to the 20.1. You get more transient than decay and a somewhat washed out presentation that pervades every recording I play. A homogeneous sameness to a diverse recordings. But again at under $2k for the 1.7 that's hardly a problem as I get that from other speakers but not the 1.7's clarity and nimbleness of nuance in those transients and a more coherent presentation than typical boxed designs. But no they are not perfect as some seem to indicate - and relying on TAS would be a huge mistake on multiple levels especially the two critics you mention. I can't think of two audio critics I would trust less than those two.

[bobsticks]

- and relying on TAS would be a huge mistake on multiple levels especially the two critics you mention. I can't think of two audio critics I would trust less than those two.

LMAO, Richard, you are the Echo Boomers answer to the crusty, curmudgeony sound mavens of old...a new breed of audiophile...and, it's an honor and a privilege to give you the King Melvin Audiophilic L'enfant Terrible medallion in recognition of moving the conflict forward into future generations...

(...actually, I love reading your stuff, I just wish Flo could be here to read you extoll the virtue of a planar speaker in such a full-throated yet tepid way)

[Feanor]

LMAO, Richard, you are the Echo Boomers answer to the crusty, curmudgeony sound mavens of old...a new breed of audiophile...and, it's an honor and a privilege to give you the King Melvin Audiophilic L'enfant Terrible medallion in recognition of moving the conflict forward into future generations...

(...actually, I love reading your stuff, I just wish Flo could be here to read you extoll the virue of a planar speaker in such a full-throated yet tepid way)

Did you mean verbose equivocality?

[Florian]

I do lurk around here sometimes

[bobsticks]

I do lurk around here sometimes

Aha! Good day to ya, sir...good to see the lurkers come out of hiding if only for a moment.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Bryston sounded utterly dreadful. So that's actually a VERY GOOD thing because the speaker SHOULD tell us how truly pitiful SS amplifiers are.

I don't know which Bryston amps you are talking about, but you should be more specific. To say that SS amps sound pitiful is ridiculous. That is like saying all people are stupid, without recognizing that their are smart and stupid people. There are good SS amps, and bad ones, There are good tube amps(love the VTL MB-450 series III amp), and there are really bad ones as well.

It is always entertaining to see a person paint a picture with a street sweeper....