Thanks very much!

Good for you!

Hi Melvin!

With subwoofers?

@@FilipinaVegana yeah an svs sub for the party and off when I do critical listening as the bass lags behind.

How do you measure the distance between them?

Hi David! Glad you are enjoying your system!

Me too, I recently got back to my MG 1.4s. I do have an analogue system with tube preamplification and a Stellar S300 power amp. The Maggies are amazing for my taste. Apart from imaging not pin point they blow away any box speaker I have heard, regardless of price. I sewed new socks for them in french royal blue. They look beautiful and the WAF is quite high. From a certain distance off the back wall they really come to life. Love them. Btw. great discussion.

@@carlosoliveira-rc2xt I used to think that also. But what you have to realize is that most other speakers, because they are not as close to flat resistance across the spectrum, have impedance swings all over the place. The Maggie would sit at 4 ohms like a dummy load demanding current across the spectrum. While convention speakers might have some low spot, rated load impedance, the impedance is often as high as 30ohms at some frequencies! And because of "True Power", reduced actual power consumption due to phase shifts between E and I which Maggies don't have as much of, ... So the amp is not forced to drive a 4 ohm load across the spectrum. Just at a few short spots across the band.

Excellent feedback Bruce thanks!

I have 1.7s having owned others in the past. What power amplification have you had success with? Thx.

@@stephengordon1752 I’ve only ever used them with a Primaluna Prologue 5 with KT88’s, about 45 WPC. KT120’s sound a bit bolder, bigger but maybe not as sweet. Of course tube amp power numbers are not the same as SS. A lot of reviews recommend a high power SS amp and particularly fed from tube preamps. I prefer the sound of a tube amp. It’s personal choice and the type of music one listens to. I was curious whether my amp power was too low for these current hungry speakers. But when the sales rep played the Maggies the sound was stunningly more open, great on vocals compared to speakers in a box in this price range. You already familiar with their sound. Used Maggies are rarely for sale, often by owners who are upgrading, and they don’t stay on the market for long. What amp are you using?

@@TuffyAndBetty A NAD 275BEE was purchased at the same time as the Maggies to get me up and going. It is surprisingly good. I'm a bit stuck because I really can't be sure that an investment in a different (more expensive) amp is necessarily going to yield a noticeable difference. I listen at low'ish levels - and so a tube power amp may well be more practical in my case than for most. Thx for replying.

I have the 1.7s and for the longest time paired them with a Denon X series receiver and was happy to a point. Upgraded the 2 channel amp for the Maggie’s to a Moon 340i from Simaudio based on a recommendation from my dealer. Never thought an amp could have such a profound impact on the quality of audio but it’s like I purchased a brand new set of speakers and am hearing them for the first time. The Moon 340i is stunning with these speakers. FWIW I asked about, but didn’t listen to, pairing the Maggie’s with a Hegal 120 or 3x .. was told the Moon would pair better. I haven’t tried the Hegal to compare but the Moon certainly does wonders for them. Best of all, wife loves the Maggie’s too and everyone always comments about how cool and different they look.

I have the 1.7i's and they're driving me crazy, terribly muffled in the upper mid bass region for some reason. I keep trying and failing to make them sound good and I'm not sure where I'm going wrong. I have decided it must be my room, but I've not heard of that placement method so I'll give that a go. Thanks.

I had them for 3 years ,I sold them because size was just to much for my new interior. So now I have a lrs ...I have to say the lrs tweeters are a step up from the Tympani. The actual size of the soundfield. Not much out there that matches a Tympani .

The big head thing is especially noticeable with panels like Martin Logans.

@@vilipmak3973 Thanks Vilip, so cool that you took a moment to respond - - course this could easily turn into a "beating a dead horse thing" - - generally, I'm on point with you to put that on the table first - so, I don't doubt you're hearing what you describe - - I have a background in playing music, still have my union card and such, and having said that, quite a bit of recording experience, both armature and studio - we both know engineers will work on the spotlighted vocal - without going into details of what I mean, could that be what you're hearing? And yes, certainly part of this messing around does indeed make for a "larger" than life center image, singers want that - - so - - speaking about maggies in particular (I have no personal experience with the M.Logans) - - If I listen to an old early stereo recording, you know, recorded in two channels, but making the third or middle channel by combining the two outside channels, yes, that center image can come across as more pronounced - it's basically 2 channels combined - but, I can listen carefully to a ride cymbal coming from just one of those outer channels, and if one listens very closely to the actual image size of that cymbal, I find that cymbal size (I'm a drummer) isn't much different than the actual image size in the center although of course it's usually up in db level - - so I can't help but wonder if what you're talking about isn't, in reality, the speaker giving you what's actually there - - anyway, don't get me wrong - I never intended or care about going off the deep end about this issue, except that it made enough of an impression on me that, as you can tell, I explored it further - my system is reference in the sense of the gear itself, who the hell knows what reference really is - I'd hate to see a real world frequency graph of my room, so ya get me, I'm into music first, but I'm well over the 100k mark mostly because I'm into vinyl - so, having mentioned that - decades with the MGIIIa's (crazy modified by the end) and now probably heading into 4 years or so with the 3.7i's which yeah, I've begun messing with them too. And yes, along the way I've had considerable experience with dynamic coned point source too, I doubt in my lifetime we'll get to where one can have the outstanding features of both (maybe the maggie condos?) - but I just can't get by the box thing - over long periods, I've got to have panels and so I'll give up that wonderful visceral thing that a nice set of Focals or Wilsons will give ya. Thanks man, love what you guys do on your channel - Later, Skip

Over the years, I have heard that rel subs are one of the few and best at pairing with Maggie's. I'm assuming your using the high pass to match the amps bass with the subs bass?

@@brandonburr4900 Yes, I am using the high level input as recommended by REL and the deal where I purchased the speakers and subwoofer.

The JL can do it. That's for sure.

Did you have to rebuild them at any point?

With subwoofers?

I went and heard the large Acoustats once. They were truly amazing. I don't think speakers that utilize a woofer for the low end, like the Martin Logans can come close to matching them. But you need a VERY large panel to any any bass out of them at all. I expect doubling them up, side by side, killing the highs in one pair, would have made them. And nothing is an electrostatic speaker except an eletrostatic speaker. The best sound I've ever heard was my Signet TK33 headphones, which were electrets (same thing but the stators are not externally powered). They sounded basically like you 'were there', and you could listen to them basically all day long, even at high levels, and still they were totally non fatiguing. The 2Bs are a LONG way from the Maggies of today. Now they have ribbon conductors, rather than wires, and a true ribbon line source for the tweeter. The panels are also larger, what was the tweeter before and plays midrange now is about twice the area. The tweeters were really puny in the high end before, not so these, still pretty much full up at 40 khz, which doesn't matter so much, but the older tweeters were basically gone at 14 khz, which very much does. If you haven't heard any of the modern mid to high end Maggies, go take a listen. They are light years beyond the 2Bs, which I've also owned, and the SMGs, and originally, an MG1 system. I don't mean a little difference in sound, but a MAJOR difference in sound. It is not something you have to have any kind of 'golden ears' to hear the difference.

@@MrJdsenior I certainly would hope that the improvement in sound over the MG 2B's would be major. I was comparing from that era and comparing it to what I considered the speaker system that I missed the most. The 2B's at the time were driven by all Bryston system. It was replaced by the Acoustat's, which he later went with the Martin Logan CLS of that day and Audio Research gear. I stayed with the Acoustat's and all Counterpoint gear. I liked the sound with the VPI HW19, Koestsu Black Goldline cart. I am retired now, moved from NYC to Poland, and had to downsize. So while I know there is better gear than I have now, I am content with the sound and enjoy what I am listening to. But still miss the Acoustat's.

And again as we explained - not really imaging although of sorts, kinda - but generally there can be a deep and layered soundstage. Soundstage is not imaging. Imaging exists within a soundstage.

​@@vilipmak3973 lol trying so hard to be a expert , audio engineers call it sound field and ends there. stop attacking the dude on semantics dude

@@MichelLinschoten Its not semantics. There is a difference between what is soundstaging and what is imaging. And it is easily discerned in a system that truly does both - and this is just what audiophiles desire. Audio Engineers are fine and they have their own criteria, just not the criteria of an Audiophile.

Try placing your speakers to the height you desire for the sound stage.

@@rb032682 thanks for the suggestion but currently the tweeter position is at ear level when sitting on the sofa. Do you recommend raising above ear level? I have a center channel speaker not in use. I have though of pointing upward behind flat screen TV to perhaps give a more higher sound stage. Any reasons not to do this?

@@f430ferrari5 - I would say "try it". Unless it is too difficult to place the center speaker behind the screen, it's worth a try. Experiment as desired. The worst that can happen is the accumulation of knowledge and experience. If you can raise your speakers above ear level without causing any risk to you or the speakers, try it. I have a pair of my speakers about 12 inches above ear level with the speakers tilted enough to align the tweeters with my ears. I don't think much about the height of the soundstage. Do you have any acoustical treatment? I have treatment of various types on all 6 room surfaces. Mostly absorption with a variety of diffusion devices.

I have some 28 year old Paradigm Titans. Best value speaker I have ever come across.

@@rb032682 thanks for the advice. I decided to put the center channel behind the flat screen and point upward. This raised the sound stage 👍

Thanks Dan

Thanks Sammy!

they put the money where it matters most, in the speaker. from there you can do any upgrades you want, as you see fit. it's crazy that they are losing money on the LRS; it has exceeded my expectations after an uncertain break in period. when i have the space i will definitely upgrade to the 1.7 or better

@@cabasse_music right. But you can’t get factory upgrades. Missed opportunity for them I think. And they lose money on LRS not because people aren’t buying them - they cost too much to make! I think they really underestimated how popular they would be.

REL and Sonus faber subs which are connected to the amplifier output are two of the few subs that can integrate ok with Maggies. IMHO, subs are optional. And tight seamless integration will always be a challenge. With Maggies, I always hear the crossover to the sub.

That's not a line source tweeter. It has a large central tweeter panel that occupies the entire middle of the speaker. The 63 in fact introduces a delay circuit spiraling into the center of the speaker to mimic a point source. The Quad 63 as a result images.

@@vilipmak3973 Agreed, I've used them for over 30 years. What I'm saying is that it's not even remotely close to a point source. yet it still provides state of the art imaging. A true line source like a Magneplanar's long ribbon can also deliver excellent imaging. Imaging is determined primarily by the amplitude and phase relationship between the left and right speakers. Comb filtering caused the difference in arrival time between the center of the ribbon, and the extreme top and bottom of the driver, causes a long line source to behave increasingly like a point source at higher frequencies.

I agree. I Love my LS-50s for what they do, but the lack of a reasonably sized soundstage seems to rob music of much of its context. So then I hook up my MMGs with raised & properly angled stands. Ultimately I think I favor staging over image specificity, or rather I miss staging more than I miss pinpont imaging. But I'm keeping both.

I've only had experience with Mye, and clients like them

I have the 326BEE and I recently upgraded to crown xls 1502 (used from guitar center haha). I use the NAD as a preamp now and damn, let me tell you - the speed, resolution and dynamics completely opened up. I was underpowering my SMG-B's with the NAD alone. It was like night and day. what you'll notice is this - you can get as loud as you like with the NAD, but without giving it the power it really needs, that sound will be flat and without dynamics. it takes doubling of power to add 3db and so youll need 8 and 16x the power to get those noticeable dynamics

It will they are very linear impedance wise, they are just low sensetivity.. which requires somewhat more power (clean power) as you up the volume knob more than you think. Tubes I bet sound stellar

The highest quality low wattage tube amp you can afford.

With Maggies, the specification does not tell the entire story. Your 20.1 may be rated to 25 Hz and yet the panel will still only move so much and are still SPL limited. For real bass, the visceral and slam cannot be missing.

@@vilipmak3973 I don't know what the SPL limit is because I have never found it, and played louder than I am comfortable with. As for bass slam, what you said is true, but the bass extension is there, and the bass is good.

Start at least with 1.7i. 3.7i if you can swing it. The entire sitting/ standing/ tilt angle goes away. The 3.7i moves to a true rather than "quasi" ribbon tweeter.

@@glenncurry3041 thanks for the tip, I've had other people also recommending 1.7 as a good starting point. I'll keep an eye on what becomes available here in Australia. Cheers

@@glenncurry3041 Do you think my space (26 x 22 x 15 ft high) is too big for the 1.7i? I don't care about (or even like) thumping bass, but I do love soundstage height. I want an immersive experience with classical orchestral music. I'm hoping the 1.7i will work, as 3.7i are a huge $$ jump, but . . .

@@issadad The 1.7i should work great in that space as long as you have good amps. My space is 34'x'40'17' with a 8' wall breaking it into to 20'x34' spaces (Kit/Din ... living room) So mine is similar in some aspects for the actually listening room. Positioning is critical. A couple inches this way, that... a few degrees of rotations,... But once locked in, the sound stage height/ depth/ performers locations/ ... should blow you away!

@@glenncurry3041 Can't begin to tell you how grateful I am for this reply, especially since there's nobody in Maine. So 1st: in my chair with head tilted back, my eyes (even closed) look up at abt 30˚ angle, as if looking up toward a stage, and that's where I expect to see/hear the music, in my "line of sight" -- not 3 ft off the floor, where the singer is standing in an orchestra pit. 2nd: I don't seem to care about or even like chest-thumping low bass slam, which typically sounds like an artificial machine effect as opposed to a real musical instrument, say kettle drums at a symphony concert. So the whole sub-woofer conversation is one I'd prefer to avoid. And so: if big band Beethoven and small combo Diana Krall, both played pretty loud, can sound goosebump immersive and detailed, that's all I ask. Now you know me, nice to meet you. I'm trying to decide btwn: 1) 1.7i (perfect size + price), 2) 3.7i (big $ jump but better ribbon tweeter and maybe better for my space?) and 3) one of the open baffle jobs from Spatial Audio Labs (M3 Sapphire or X series, great open sound and more dynamic than Maggies but only 45" tall). Klipsch Cornwall IVs were also on the short list briefly, and I definitely love the GR Research DIY NX-tremes (NX-Oticas too) but I can't even build an IKEA spice rack. That said, I'd be inclined with either Maggie model to pick up the GR Research upgrade kit and find somebody to install it. So one cocksure expert warned that Maggies wd sound like transistor radios in my 10,000 cu ft room, but another expert (in this thread) says that the 3.7i eliminates all the beaminess & downside issues of the 1.7i. Then you replied, more encouraging. Re: amplification, my short list for now includes: Hegel H190, McIntosh 2300, Parasound A21+ w somebody's tube preamp, Line Magnetic LM-508 IA, used Audio Research DSi200, McIntosh MAC 6700 Receiver, Vincent Audio SV-237 Mk II. Or...? Thomas Tan (Thomas & Stereo channel) says Maggies do fine w solid state bcse they're already airy enough w/out tubes. My space is not overly live, I have a big shag rug for the rig, but I'm not wild abt sound treatments unless absolutely essential. Any thoughts? Am in Portland, ME. And thanks!

Same with owning electrostatics. Every cone speaker sounds distorted by comparison.

Actually Mono is not a good litmus test for imaging in the stereo sense. Any time differential that arises from being off-centered is not encoded in mono tracks. However, mono can and does place the performer or the performance in the middle of your room even if you have only one speaker. A stereo recording should primarily encode the "space" where the recording took place like certain classical recordings where you can hear the underground train passing by beneath the concert hall. That you get "imaging" within the "space" is really an added extra!

@@vilipmak3973 Good point. To be more clear it just seems that when switching a DAC's rendering or preamp to present a recording as mono, the width of that center image never seems wide or tall with Magnepan. Until the speakers are very well positioned the image as mono tends to be massively smeared with them. Thanks for a great commentary. I really appreciate your dialog in these videos.

Yes I have found position to be critical. A few inches, twist a few degrees, .... can move or destroy system frequency response and imaging. But once the spots are found! e.g. I find if the sound field seems too close to the ground, one panel is not toed in the same as the other and a couple of degrees of twist will raise or lower the image. Because they block doors when in the right spots, I have to move mine out to play them. Since the wife won't let me put marks on the new carpeting.... it takes a few songs to get them set up when I am going to listen. But I am learning what to do when it sounds like this or that.

​@@glenncurry3041 Thanks for sharing! Listening to panels as close as I do has been both amazing and a major source of frustration. Do you find that even as things settle, such as speakers sinking into the carpet in their new locations, the vertical positioning or center image will slowly shift?

@@AdrianJFabre Mine literally do not stay in their listening positions for more than 3-4 hours. Then get moved back so we can get into the bedroom or garage! And they get moved a good bit for at least one to two record sides. Not enough time for much settling. I had even found different positions for different records at times. Moving closer of further from the wall affect low end and some records are tight and some loser. So I can tighten or loosen the low end by moving them forward and back. e.g. YES Concert Rock likes the extra boom when further out. While some nice jazz likes the tightness of being closer. But that does get way too OCD!

Vive le difference!

I've always found the Vandersteen Subs to be wanting - it doesn't have real slam.

@@vilipmak3973 They make subs for home theater and for music. HT do more dinosaur car crunches and music subs seem to blend with stereo presentation. They also improve other areas like extending the ease of the upper frequencies and smooth out the whole presentation. Because of the high pass filter implementation they mimic the sound of your main amplifier. I’m technically impaired but it seems to work. The 3 down firing woofers in a sealed box enable them to keep up with the speed of the panels. They’ve since introduced new models replacing the 2wq. They’re made to tailor the sound you prefer with Q control. I rarely see video reviews if at all . On another note what’s the opinion of Tetra Speakers in Canada? A friend has a pair and again not much information nor do I see any videos about them Thanks again for your work. I enjoy the videos!!!

@@BillyDrummondDrums And you need to know the impedance of the amp and so forth. Maybe the new ones are better. I prefer the maggie to be driven by an amp with adequate damping factor. No sub.

@@vilipmak3973 yes 100k , 75k etc. Seems to work but again I’m not technically inclined. Think the Vandersteen implementation is somewhat unique. Thanks for responding.

I like Maggies (unlike electrostatics), but what I like about them I can find in dynamic speakers e.g. Omnis, open baffles and wide dispersion box speakers i.e. non-box sound with wide soundstage.

Unless you like to listen to music at a high volume, I think you will be fine. I have LRS+ in a 16'x 22' room and am more than happy; just make sure you give them space from the front wall. I have the Freya+ and run 2 Vidar2.s as monoblocks (Schiit only publishes 8 ohm spec.s on their website when used as monoblocks. I went to visit them at the Schiitr and they said it will be OK as they used this setup with their 1.7i.s; you can confirm this with a phone call to them), and i have 2 sub.s. My recommendation to you would be to get two Vidar2.s (vs the Tyrs) and use the extra money to get 2 "fast" subs; Magnepan recommends REL T5/X. If I had the budget, I would get the Tyrs. Best of fun on your journey!

@@pfunk34 right on, I own a couple subs but I doubt they will be up to the task. Rels are sweet, I was already considering them. Subs are definitely in the budget but, may be down the road a couple months. I can only spend so much at a time, I got a wife, lol. Thanks for the feedback.

I love that they sell the product but still provide their honest perspectives on the downsides.