-
Magnepan 3.7?
Anyone heard these? They are getting rave reviews, and I admit to being interested.
-
They seem interesting, i had the chance to demo a pair on a hifi store and i was impressed by the clarity, detail and punch. I wish i can buy a pair of them.
-
Well for what it's worth the 1.7 is better than any previous magnepan I have auditioned. With several notes - one it needs a competent tube amplifier. The Audio Note Soro with its 18 watts and matching single disc CD 2.1 sounded very good with it. Bryston sounded utterly dreadful. So that's actually a VERY GOOD thing because the speaker SHOULD tell us how truly pitiful SS amplifiers are. And the Maggie 1.7 bloody well does that in spades. Since the 3.7 is the .7 upgrade it should do the same thing but with more bass.
The 1.7 still struggles with amplified music and proper dynamic bass response. I don't buy it for a second on drums for example. But then for under $2k I don't buy most speakers (I can't think of any off hand). I liked it on Loreena McKennitt, Diana Krall, anything with strings. Presumably the 3.7 would raise the bar. I will try and audition it over the Easter break. If I can I will bring Guns and Roses, the Evil Nine, AC/DC and several harder hitting but excellent dance recording albums such as Madonna's Ray of Light. The problem is finding the quality amplifier that "also" has the power to play at levels that are acceptable for a $5000ish speaker and retain proper levels of decay and "weight" to the music being played.
And you know better than some not to put too much stock into reviews. Everything gets raves and not everyone will like it. If you liked the 1.6 and 3.6 then you will like the new ones. If you didn't care for the old Maggies or you don't love Quad - you won't like the new ones - they still have many of the same traits - just better refinement. To me it is the treble that is a LOT better in the 1.7 and that provided you use a very good tube amp like the Soro or Wyatech amps. If you've never heard them - then no talk will matter - it's something you need to experience first hand. The price of them are fairly reasonable.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by tube fan
Anyone heard these? They are getting rave reviews, and I admit to being interested.
The MG 3.7's are what I aspire to, (though I'm unlikely to get them for financial reasons). I currently own MG 1.6QR's and love them; 1.7's might be nice but the upgrade might be more than I'm willing/able to pay.
RGA has recently come around to recommending the 1.7's in the <$2k category. More credit to him for that because he has long recommended Audio Note speakers -- a totally different sound born of totally different musical sensibility. He makes some good points about the Magneplanar's, principally that they aren't rockers.
However to suggest or imply that an 18 wpc amp is good with any Magneplanar is ridiculous, because they thrive on power. Personally I don't agree that one must drive them with tube amps, but Richard is likely right that you, Tube Fan, ought to do so. In that case I'd recommend 60+ wpc -- personally I'd welcome the opportunity to hear my 1.6's driven by a pair of AES Six Packs or updated Dynaco Mark III's.
Currently I drive my 1.6's with a Class-D-Audio SDS-258 and love it. But then I prefer maximum transparency and accuracy of timbre at the expense of occassional stridency, over the chocolatey-caramel sound of tubes.
-
My AR D70 tube amps can drive my Fulton J speakers to 100+db levels. Believe it, we have NO Magnapan dealer in SF region!
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by tube fan
My AR D70 tube amps can drive my Fulton J speakers to 100+db levels. Believe it, we have NO Magnapan dealer in SF region!
From what I hear, a lot of people are very happy driving Magneplanars with 60 wpc tube amps like the ARC D-70. That is, assuming moderate volumes -- not 100 dB -- and depending on musical choice.
I'd certainly like to hear a D-70 driving my Magneplanars MG 1.6's.
I had to do 5 hour round trip to Toronto to pick up my 1.6's; I bought them unauditioned though I had owned MMG's.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by tube fan
Anyone heard these? They are getting rave reviews, and I admit to being interested.
Yes, under excellent circumstances. I responded to a request here. Short answer is that they are among the best Magneplanars I've heard since I value coherency very highly.
rw
-
I am going to make an effort to hear the 3.7s driven by tubes (I may have to supply the tubes!). RGA's contention about the low end (of the 1.7) is a major concern. What I am looking for is something that has the detail and clarity of a double set of KLH 9s, that can play down to 35 hz, and can play at realistic volumes (for me, this means a similar volume to the one you would hear live). I don't listen to club music, so I'm "only" looking at about 100 db. So far, I have not heard anything that significantly beats my pair of Fulton Js.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by tube fan
What I am looking for is something that has the detail and clarity of a double set of KLH 9s, that can play down to 35 hz, and can play at realistic volumes (for me, this means a similar volume to the one you would hear live).
They do very well with your criteria except for 35 hz response. More panel area is required as you would find with the 20.1. They're good to about 40 hz and you can always add subs. They are nearly as coherent as full range electrostats.
rw
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by E-Stat
They do very well with your criteria except for 35 hz response. More panel area is required as you would find with the 20.1. They're good to about 40 hz and you can always add subs. They are nearly as coherent as full range electrostats.
rw
Good info! They are on my must-hear list.
-
HP continues his review of the 3.7 in the new Absolute Sound (May/June). Among other praise, he contends that, at $5500, Magnepan is almost giving them away. JV also loves the 3.7, and compares them to the Magico Q5s.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by tube fan
HP continues his review of the 3.7 in the new Absolute Sound (May/June). Among other praise, he contends that, at $5500, Magnepan is almost giving them away.
He had finished all the copy by the time I heard them. He has since swapped out the interconnects - perhaps they contributed to why I found the system just a touch bright.
rw
-
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.
-
"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.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by RGA
- 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) :biggrin5:
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobsticks
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) :biggrin5:
Did you mean verbose equivocality? :confused5:
-
I do lurk around here sometimes :devil:
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Florian
I do lurk around here sometimes :devil:
Aha! Good day to ya, sir...good to see the lurkers come out of hiding if only for a moment.
-
Quote:
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....
-
At the CAS I heard several ss amps that produced acceptable sound. Yes, they were horribly expensive. BTW, my two favorite rooms at the CAS were using SET amps (Audio Note's 20 watts and Teresonic's 2 1/2 watts). I doubt I could drive either my Fulton J or Dunlavy with 20 watts.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
To say that SS amps sound pitiful is ridiculous.
Especially when you consider that many speakers don't tango well with tubes. Although I didn't get a chance to hear the 28B-SST amps a reviewer friend on hand, he says they are exceptional sounding amps. And he's a tube fan. It is fair, however, to say that some earlier models were not exactly in the same sonic class. :)
rw
-
I admit that the best ss amp don't sound bright or hard. They have the tone correct, but the ones I have heard don't get the three dimension correct. The best do not bleach out sound as they used to. I still object to the bass of the ss amps I have heard (too much damping factor?).
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by E-Stat
Especially when you consider that many speakers don't tango well with tubes. Although I didn't get a chance to hear the 28B-SST amps a reviewer friend on hand, he says they are exceptional sounding amps. And he's a tube fan. It is fair, however, to say that some earlier models were not exactly in the same sonic class. :)
rw
I agree with you Ralph. Some of the earlier models sounded like cold steel.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by tube fan
I admit that the best ss amp don't sound bright or hard. They have the tone correct, but the ones I have heard don't get the three dimension correct. The best do not bleach out sound as they used to. I still object to the bass of the ss amps I have heard (too much damping factor?).
Go listen to the 28B-SST, it will change your mind on the three dimensionality aspect. This is one of its strong suits.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
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....
The problem is that most people have a budget - you are quite wealthy and have stated several times that "budget" is not a consideration. For most people it is. The Audio Note Kit one is an "excellent" amplifier regardless of budget. You can argue that there are good high power solid state amps and there are - Technical Brain, top of the line Pass Labs but the costs are astronomical compared to a $2k amp.
Even if I were to say that the 28B is a good amp (and I've heard it a few times and was not the least bit impressed - the Maggie 1.7 sounded FAR better on a Soro at around $6k than the 28B which I am pretty sure is more than $6k and Bryston's flagship preamp.
SS at high power can be good but the cost is far too high for it versus even entry level and comparatively inexpensive tube amplifiers (for $1600 the Shengya PM 150 monoblocks (you get both for this price) are 150 watt tube hybrid power amps with plenty of power for most speakers. There isn''t a bryston that I have heard that sound better but ploenty of them cost a lot more - and the Shengya's even seem to me to be better built.
I do agree there are poor sounding tube amps but I have not experienced them nearly as often perhaps because I am in my 30s and wasn't around in the 50s, 60s and 70s and heard the truly abysmal that no doubt cluttered the department stores of the day. The tube makers that last today in a SS world generally all sound pretty good to very good. Even companies selling $1500 to $5000 amps like Rogue Audio and Mystere driving speakers like Wilson Sophia and Martin Logan Summits made those speakers sound better than I have ever heard them sound and made me partially rethink what I thought of those speaker makers. Martin Logan I usually always heard with Bryston - bad sound. Wilson Sophia I heard with top of the line Krell - OK sound but bad when money factored in. Even Magnepan has sounded "bad" almost every time I heard them. For years I have been extremely diplomatic on just how terrible sounding I felt Magnepan has been with the exception of the 1.6 and 12. Which sounded ok. Finally hearing them with a good tube amp and a great CD player does help me see more in them.
The dealer here carries Magnepan 1.7 and the 3.7. He carries and has carried Bryston for many years. They carry top of the line Bryston - they don't like the combination and neither do I. Some people do like the combination - that's fine.
What counts as good or bad will be somewhat subjective but my hearing of it is my hearing of it. And Bryston is generally tiring and grating. And if it takes one to spend $30,000 on amplifier so that it gets to a point where even the "fans" say that they don't sound metallic - that is hardly high praise for the competencies of their design team.
Even reading what you are saying here about bryston is that "All some or most of their previous amps suck and have always sucked but they finally got it right with their top of the line most expensive amps" Huh? while other companies got to that no metallic irritating mess with their entry level gear at 1/10 the price. I know which design team I'd rather support. Not the one building amps for 30 years and only now have got one amplifier line to sound anything remotely correct. Yikes.
I don't pretend to make new arguments - I clearly and do prefer speakers that can be run with relatively low powered amps - these kinds of speakers almost always sound better top to bottom, tonally and especially dynamically. I certainly understand the crowd that argues "you need more power" but that is usually because they need to turn the volume WAY the hell up to make things out clearly because the system lacks resolution. And that is why it confounds them when I say - "I like the 1.7 with a Soro at 18 watts" because they can't understand that this amp had very good bass - wonderful resolution and I never even need to get the volume dial past the 11 o'clock position and it played pretty loud. I was roundly impressed with the 1.7 so much so that it would be my number 1 choice under $2k. And I genuinely mean it. But ONLY if it is connected to this kind of amp. With bryston it's a complete pile of dog poo.
As an edit - this is not to say that Bryston is bad in itself either because I did enjoy it with PMC and even my own Wharfedales - in fact it was Bryston with my Wharfedales that started my entire interest in higher end audio because the Bryston kicked the snot out of my Pioneer Elite receiver way back in the day to the point where rather than selling the speakers I got rid of the amplifier. The Bryston was SO SO much better than the Pioneer Elite. But as eye opening as that experience was when I first heard a very good SET amp that amp sounded SO SO much better than amplifiers like Bryston.
The interesting thing is that Soundhounds is also selling the Cerwin Vega CLS 215 and I am betting that the Soro has more trouble with that speaker than it has with the Magnepan. At $1k they looked very nice in terms of value for the money. Next time I am there and if they have not sold out of them I will be very interested in comparing them with a MF, Ayre, Audio Note, McIntosh, Classe, Bryston, the new NAD series, and maybe even my Rotel pre/pro. People always laugh at Cerwin Vega - but for the music most people listen to - if they don't butcher classical and jazz too much they'll be excellent in this price range and with reasonably high efficiency and assuming the load is not stupid they may be a great deal.
-
Do you get a special price on gear from Grant Fidelity? Their web site says $2,000 in US dollars. $500 is not chicken feed for those of us who have to work within a budget.
-
I don't understand the criticism of HP and JV. HP sounded the praise for tubes when almost everyone else (including JGH) was praising early ss (pure CRAP). JV continually supports both tubes and analogue, and I agree.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by tube fan
HP sounded the praise for tubes when almost everyone else (including JGH) was praising early ss (pure CRAP).
It is he to whom I referred as really liking the Bryston 28B. Read his review.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tube fan
JV continually supports both tubes and analogue, and I agree.
Along with solid state designs from Soulution, BAlabo, and Technical Brain.
rw
-
Oh kids, let's stop this petty bickering...clearly the answer is just to buy the CTH-8550 and be done with it.
OTOH, has anyone tried the 3.7 with any of the Van Alstine hybrid gears? That would seem to be a reasonably priced option...
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobsticks
OTOH, has anyone tried the 3.7 with any of the Van Alstine hybrid gears? That would seem to be a reasonably priced option...
I run the 1.6's with a Van Alstine hybrid preamp, hybrid DAC, and a SS amp. I really like the combo. My system has a very tube like sound but the punchy bass of SS.
I did get to do an in home audition with his hybrid 500wpc FET Valve amp and enjoyed the sound. I would have bought the amp but I got such a good deal the Parasound.
Check out the Van Alstine forum on audiocircles, there are plenty of Maggie owners using his hybrid and tube gear.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by E-Stat
It is he to whom I referred as really liking the Bryston 28B. Read his review.
Along with solid state designs from Soulution, BAlabo, and Technical Brain.
rw
Yes, JV ALSO likes some horribly expensive ss gear. JV vastly prefers analogue to digital, and I agree. HP was one of the few critics who defended tubes when 90% of other "critics" thought early ss was superior to tubes.
BTW, RGA, I think it would be more interesting if you mentioned several instances where HP or JV got it wrong in your opinion. No one is perfect, and HP and JV are two of the best IMO.
Also, Stereophile seems to be extremely tardy in reviewing some highly regarded gear, e.g., Magnepans and VPI Classic tt.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobsticks
Oh kids, let's stop this petty bickering...clearly the answer is just to buy the CTH-8550 and be done with it.
...
Yeah, right. But it's not tubes, 'Stick, so Tube Fan won't like regardless.
Or try a ClassDAudio SDS-258, ($600 completed). Same power as the DarTZeel; not tubes either but does sounds great with my tube preamp.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by tube fan
Yes, JV ALSO likes some horribly expensive ss gear. JV vastly prefers analogue to digital, and I agree. HP was one of the few critics who defended tubes when 90% of other "critics" thought early ss was superior to tubes.
BTW, RGA, I think it would be more interesting if you mentioned several instances where HP or JV got it wrong in your opinion. No one is perfect, and HP and JV are two of the best IMO.
Also, Stereophile seems to be extremely tardy in reviewing some highly regarded gear, e.g., Magnepans and VPI Classic tt.
Well John Valin has some issues for me with honesty and integrity and as such I don't trust what he has to say. The fact that he may like tubes over SS and that stance is agreeable doesn't mean much since most of the high end chooses tubes over SS including almost all of the high end speaker manufacturers that partner their speakers with tube gear. Wilson, Sonus Faber, all the panel makers except Magnepan, Dynaudio - in other words all of the best sounding rooms at CES all ran tube amps so it's hard not for anyone including Valin to get this right. And even then he still got it kind of wrong in that he went with Magico and Technical Brain as his best sound of show. I liked the room too but TB has horrendous failure rates and the Magico is grossly overpriced for the sound it puts out. And Soulution sounds really rather lousy and edgy and costs a bomb. Even the biggest SoundLab dealer in the U.S. doesn't like Soulution so I don't know what Valin is saying.
HP I mixed up with REG so sorry to HP.
PS - Ayre - which is pretty good SS and very good digital TAS doesn't like - finally there is some decent SS and TAS doesn't like it. They can't seem to get it right. There is a certain lack of professionalism at TAS that I don't want to get into on a public forum but the info I have - well Stereophile to me is about a million times the magazine that TAS is and I'll leave it at that.
-
Okay, okay...tubes then, how's about the Vincent TubeLine SV-236MK integrated amplifier...both TAS and Sterophile seem to approve (never heard it myself). Lota rave reviews for $2k.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobsticks
Okay, okay...tubes then, how's about the Vincent TubeLine SV-236MK integrated amplifier...both TAS and Sterophile seem to approve (never heard it myself). Lota rave reviews for $2k.
Vincent amps are made by the same company that makes some of Grant Fidelity's amps - the difference is Grant Fidelity admits it while Vincent seems shy to. Not a big deal but the Vincent monoblocks are very likely made by Shengya which I reviewed. So if this is the case and I believe it is then Vincent will be very very good value. The PM 150 monoblocks sound a lot better than the GF Rita which is already one of the best deals out there for a very powerful tube integrated.
Tube Fan - I think my problem with Valin is kind of alluded to by audiofederation in that he doesn't seem to have a clear idea of what he likes and therefore likes too much stuff IMO. The problem with being a reviewer is that we usually have to choose stuff we like and the more we like the more we get to review and the more we review the more polific we are and the bigger name we get for ourselves. When you hate most stuff and like very little then you can't be prolific and therefore you don't get a "big name" or seen all over the web. And I'm sorry but there just isn't that much stuff that is very good that is out there.
Audiofederation kind of reviews John Valin here http://audiofederation.com/blog/archives/778 and like them I do agree with Valin some of the time but for me anyway on the really important sounding rooms IMO he's off base from my take on it.
PS Tube fan - they may have finally made a CD player that will trump "most" turntables - Mike has a good ear - I met him at CES and mostly we agreed across the board. AN digital was already the best out there IME by a significant margin and if this raises the bar exponentially over their other cd players then I hope to hear it once it is broken in and set-up properly - it wasn't at last CES but should be for next show - although a CD player for $185,000.00 is not exactly cheap. http://audiofederation.com/blog/cate...io/audio-note/
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by RGA
Vincent amps are made by the same company that makes some of Grant Fidelity's amps - the difference is Grant Fidelity admits it while Vincent seems shy to. Not a big deal but the Vincent monoblocks are very likely made by Shengya which I reviewed. So if this is the case and I believe it is then Vincent will be very very good value. The PM 150 monoblocks sound a lot better than the GF Rita which is already one of the best deals out there for a very powerful tube integrated.
Tube Fan - I think my problem with Valin is kind of alluded to by audiofederation in that he doesn't seem to have a clear idea of what he likes and therefore likes too much stuff IMO. The problem with being a reviewer is that we usually have to choose stuff we like and the more we like the more we get to review and the more we review the more polific we are and the bigger name we get for ourselves. When you hate most stuff and like very little then you can't be prolific and therefore you don't get a "big name" or seen all over the web. And I'm sorry but there just isn't that much stuff that is very good that is out there.
Audiofederation kind of reviews John Valin here http://audiofederation.com/blog/archives/778 and like them I do agree with Valin some of the time but for me anyway on the really important sounding rooms IMO he's off base from my take on it.
PS Tube fan - they may have finally made a CD player that will trump "most" turntables - Mike has a good ear - I met him at CES and mostly we agreed across the board. AN digital was already the best out there IME by a significant margin and if this raises the bar exponentially over their other cd players then I hope to hear it once it is broken in and set-up properly - it wasn't at last CES but should be for next show - although a CD player for $185,000.00 is not exactly cheap. http://audiofederation.com/blog/cate...io/audio-note/
I agree that most of REG's reviews are questionable. He loves digital, ss, and even prefers mm to mc cartridges. HP is solid IMO, AND he takes a stand! I haven't heard much of the ss gear that JV likes, so I cannot comment on those opinions. I have heard the Magico V2 and V3, and would not trade my Fultons for either. The Q5s are a stretch for me as far as cost goes (have not heard them).
As far as digital goes, I loved the sound in the Audio Note room at the CAS. That was digital unlike any other I have heard: smooth, detailed, got timbre correct, and had great micro and macro dynamics. I may have even underrated the sound, as I have a strong preference for analogue (no blind listening here). They played a big band jazz cd at realistic volume, and the sound was very close to what I heard at Pearls jazz club on many Mon nites.
BTW I just played Miles' "Someday my prince will come" with John Coltrane on Sax over my Fulton Js at full realistic volume. Both Miles and Coltrane sounded like they were in my living/listening room!!!
-
My local HiFi store carries several models of the Magnapan line ( small panels to very large ) and I spent a couple of hours listening to all of them recently. As much as I tried to like them they just don't float my boat like the Zu's.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Poultrygeist
My local HiFi store carries several models of the Magnapan line ( small panels to very large ) and I spent a couple of hours listening to all of them recently. As much as I tried to like them they just don't float my boat like the Zu's.
Was your dealer running a tube amp? Just wondering because several people listening to the Magneapn Bryston set-up looked at each other and basically said it was "shi%" and sound thin brittle and bright and 2 dimensional. This happened to me way back with the 1.6 where even the dealer noted that with Magnepan he has to control both the kind of music and the volume. Needless to say none of the people selling them like them a whole lot.
With the 1.7 however and with a tube amp things changed - not bright or edgy and not the usual ribbon colouration with emphasis on the leading edge and zilch on the decay (SS amps are terrible at capturing the entire note) so it seems so fantastically clear but without decay you don't get the whole note. So you get a washed out hard presentation albeit with a low noise floor. Without bass and without decay - it seems fast and clean - but to me it throws out 1/2 or more of what is on the recording for a fake sense of clarity. My dealer at Soundhounds actually explained what it is about the combination that doesn't work better than I am explaining it.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by tube fan
I agree that most of REG's reviews are questionable. He loves digital, ss, and even prefers mm to mc cartridges. HP is solid IMO, AND he takes a stand! I haven't heard much of the ss gear that JV likes, so I cannot comment on those opinions. I have heard the Magico V2 and V3, and would not trade my Fultons for either. The Q5s are a stretch for me as far as cost goes (have not heard them).
The problem with all shows is that at any given point the sound may not be as good as it could be so sometimes it's not completely fair to judge. I auditioned a lot of rooms (in retrospect I covered too many). Still at some point money has to factor in. The Magico Technical Brain sounded good on Cello when I went in but here's the thing - it sounded no better than Audio Note's cheap room which still wasn't cheap but it comprised of Art Dudley's AN E/SPE HE speakers ($7600), the Jinro which Art Dudley just reviewed ($20,000+) integrated amp and a one box CD player 3.1 or 4.1 can't remember). So maybe ~$30k room. The Magico speakers were something like $60,000 and the TB gear over $70,000 and the source was a computer high digitial bit rate (top bit rate available if memory serves).
So many things are going on here - can you pare one room down and still retain most of the quality in sound. The Magico room didn't allow me to play my music. So was it playing only to its strengths. Lots of systems can be made to do "some" thing very well. Terry at Soundhounds says it all the time - this one is good for this music so they play a set of music on it and rotate but throw on something else and it sounds rather dreadful.
Some of the expensive SS amps make little sense to me - they still come across as brute force sound and not very subtle (the audiofederation did an interesting series comparing most of the top high power amplifiers). Oddly relatively low powered inexpensive ones seem to get the subtlety better - the Sugden A21a and even the Creek Audio integrateds and Heed amps all under $3,000 do some things better than big powerful and expensive amps. Less feedback maybe.
-
I listened to the big white Maggies driven by a SS and tube preamp ( Rogue? ) and they sounded like they were almost out of phase. But I checked and they weren't.
|