• The move to the new server is done. There are some software and database maintenance updates in process. This has us passing the hat around to help out. We appreciate any donations. Seriously, even a dollar helps. The payment page may be found here - https://www.audiokarma.org/support.html

No love for Magnepan MG II ?

I wish I could comment on the performance of the MG II. I've never heard it. I have the MGI - Imp in daily use and I also have MMG's and 1.7's. (Along with OLA's and Paradigms in other systems). Love them all but particularly the Maggies. The 1.7's are in use in my main man cave system. MGI Imp in the TV room (My wife loves them, as do I). In my office system Paradigms or MMG's, OLA's in the bedroom system.
 
This will take the discussion on a bit of a tangent....

Many people have an opinion on Carvers Hologram circuit....I'm currently listening to these MG II's using a Carver TFM-45 Amp, Carver SD/A-490t Tube CD Player and Carver C-9 Sonic Hologram. Sitting in the sweet spot it sounds great!

The bass is good but just needs a little bit more punch. I'm going to add in the subs and an active crossover and see if I can get them to integrate.

My big Acoustats still sound better but we are currently living in an apartment and they are just too big to use. The MG II's will be fine until we find a new house.
 
JoeESP9 said:
What model Acoustats do you have?
Click to expand...

Many years ago I bought an old set of 2+2's. The frames and covers were in very poor condition and the transformers had been fried.

I had new transformers wound and replaced all of the components in the interfaces. Then I built new frames and placed the panels side-by-side instead of stacked on top of each other.

I also built a woofer cabinet for each speaker and integrated it into the design.

The sound qualities are excellent. I use an active crossover and two amps the drive them. They are very powerful but also very detailed.

as3.jpg


as1.jpg
 
Last edited:
JoeESP9 said:
Most of the complaints about poor bass on Maggies can be directly traced to the amplifier. Most receivers need not apply.
Click to expand...

I have to agree.
I have run H/K amps for years-never found a speaker they could not drive well, particularly bass wise.
I'm not sure I agree the bigger Magnepan,s are "better".
In a large room for sure-but the smaller models-such as the SMG have no problem filling fairly large rooms with sound-and bass.
As mentioned the important key is the amp.
If you have room have at it with the Xl panels IMHO-but I would not shy away from the smaller ones.
Spend the extra $$ and get a good amp-with plenty of low end drive.
Maggie's aren't a hard drive for a amp-even one not rated @ 4 ohms.
They just don't sound the best.
 
Last edited:
I just rebuilt a set of MG-1 improved maggies and am driving them with a yamaha A3090 amp. It pushes 160W a side at 4 ohms and seems to do the job. My listening space is about 17 x 13' and their setup along the length of the room, 2' off the wall with 4' on the sides. They sound great but I am running a sub, LFE out. I had a set of MG-1's and drove them with a Kenwood M2A and I feel the yammie pushes them well. So the just is more power = cleaner transient response to the speaker? I had to set the front mains to small as once I got up on the volume dial the bass would cause the bottom of the panel to slap. I have thought of buying a dedicated amp and using the yamaha as a pre.
 
Vintagegeek said:
I just rebuilt a set of MG-1 improved maggies and am driving them with a yamaha A3090 amp. It pushes 160W a side at 4 ohms and seems to do the job. My listening space is about 17 x 13' and their setup along the length of the room, 2' off the wall with 4' on the sides. They sound great but I am running a sub, LFE out. I had a set of MG-1's and drove them with a Kenwood M2A and I feel the yammie pushes them well. So the just is more power = cleaner transient response to the speaker? I had to set the front mains to small as once I got up on the volume dial the bass would cause the bottom of the panel to slap. I have thought of buying a dedicated amp and using the yamaha as a pre.
Click to expand...

I'm not directly familiar with the Yamaha A3090 amp so I had to look up the specs. Note that the 160W at 4 ohms is a "Dynamic Headroom" type of measurement i.e. advertising copy. I also note that there is no 4 ohm RMS power rating. This leads me to believe that the panel slap you are hearing is simply the power supply in that amp reaching its limit rather than the Maggie. However, if you are happy with the sound using the subwoofer assist that's all that matters.
 
Well I traded some gear and got a Denon POA 2200 and PRA 1100, power and preamp. Now I can hear the difference having the extra power. There is definitely more control of the bass and panel in general. Fortunate as the pre has 2 sets of outs, makes feeding the sub easy:)
 
Vintagegeek said:
Well I traded some gear and got a Denon POA 2200 and PRA 1100, power and preamp. Now I can hear the difference having the extra power. There is definitely more control of the bass and panel in general. Fortunate as the pre has 2 sets of outs, makes feeding the sub easy:)
Click to expand...

I'm not surprised. Looking at the specs for the Denon it looks like there is a lot more beef with that sizzle.
 
Actually they sound good on their own where I have placed them now. The sub is crossed at around 65Hz and just barely cracked open to provide a little more extension.
 
JoeESP9 said:
Your post only reinforces my assertion. I've had and used MG-I's, MG-II's and MG-IIIa's. I currently use Acoustats. Both Maggies and Acoustats IME need some real power to work properly. I reiterate, most receivers need not apply.



BTW: With Acoustats IME the more panels the less power needed.
Click to expand...


I don't get this. The factory drives 3+ with old Luxman receivers. I ran a pair of MGiii's in a huge room for 6? Months with a 17w per channel Harman Kardon 330B. Forget wattage specs. If your amplifier actually dumps amps when needed ..it will run Magnepan's ...even big ones. I also do not agree with those that say "add a subwoofer" or "subwoofer needed". One ...a sub is very hard to position and integrate. I got close if not dead on but always ended up shutting it off...and just listened through the MG's. I agree with Anthony Cordesman that bi amping an MG is rarely productive. They likely do need spacing from the back wall. But I never needed more than two feet....but that sound-living room. ..16x16 ..had only three walls. The house was multi level with that living room looking over the dining room. I vehemently disagree that Alpine-Luxmans cannot perform like the 70's units. I hooked up a few Harmon Kardons and Luxman r1050, 106,114,361, H-k model1? Tube amp to the MGIII and all gave beautiful sound. .... but I did not like the old tube amp. You don't need an Audio Research or a Levinson or Conrad-Johnson to enjoy Magnepan. And in rooms too small for an MG .... I recommend a good Pinnacle PN5+ if you can find a pair. There is only one guy that pans them if you do a Google and his bench tests contradict the old Hirsch labs data?!?! I'll sum up by saying I never rattle windows but....the wife says "do you have to play them that loud"...so there you go. My music? Jackie Gleason, Mozart , Beck, Phil Collins, knopfler, doc Severinsen, Pink, Johnny Cash, Deborah Henson-Conant, Evanescense-Amy Lee, Lang Lang, Los Lobos, Jamal etc...any Deutsch-Grammophone recording...you get it. I work my hardware. MG's limitation? I think only the room and location. ...and teenagers and meth heads .
 
minnesotagtt said:
I don't get this. The factory drives 3+ with old Luxman receivers. I ran a pair of MGiii's in a huge room for 6? Months with a 17w per channel Harman Kardon 330B. Forget wattage specs. If your amplifier actually dumps amps when needed ..it will run Magnepan's ...even big ones. .
Click to expand...

I run my MGIIs with Threshold power and they sound great. I've owned this pair since the mid 70's. Placement is critical and they aren't particularly good off axis. I use a Hsu Sub woofer with mine to get the last octave.
I originally used a pair of AR-3a in series woofer only with a B&K passive crossover which worked ok.
MGIIs are different and need a fair amount work with placement. Mine are relatively used nearfield. Not rock and roll but with enough power and high current, they can come close. The impedance is around 5 ohms on mine and the load is purely resistive and linear regardless of frequency, another factor in their great performance.
 
minnesotagtt said:
I don't get this. The factory drives 3+ with old Luxman receivers. I ran a pair of MGiii's in a huge room for 6? Months with a 17w per channel Harman Kardon 330B. Forget wattage specs. If your amplifier actually dumps amps when needed ..it will run Magnepan's ...even big ones. I also do not agree with those that say "add a subwoofer" or "subwoofer needed". One ...a sub is very hard to position and integrate. I got close if not dead on but always ended up shutting it off...and just listened through the MG's. I agree with Anthony Cordesman that bi amping an MG is rarely productive. They likely do need spacing from the back wall. But I never needed more than two feet....but that sound-living room. ..16x16 ..had only three walls. The house was multi level with that living room looking over the dining room. I vehemently disagree that Alpine-Luxmans cannot perform like the 70's units. I hooked up a few Harmon Kardons and Luxman r1050, 106,114,361, H-k model1? Tube amp to the MGIII and all gave beautiful sound. .... but I did not like the old tube amp. You don't need an Audio Research or a Levinson or Conrad-Johnson to enjoy Magnepan. And in rooms too small for an MG .... I recommend a good Pinnacle PN5+ if you can find a pair. There is only one guy that pans them if you do a Google and his bench tests contradict the old Hirsch labs data?!?! I'll sum up by saying I never rattle windows but....the wife says "do you have to play them that loud"...so there you go. My music? Jackie Gleason, Mozart , Beck, Phil Collins, knopfler, doc Severinsen, Pink, Johnny Cash, Deborah Henson-Conant, Evanescense-Amy Lee, Lang Lang, Los Lobos, Jamal etc...any Deutsch-Grammophone recording...you get it. I work my hardware. MG's limitation? I think only the room and location. ...and teenagers and meth heads .
Click to expand...

Your results don't reflect what the majority of Maggie owners have observed.

No one has said you need Krell, Levinson or ARC for an amplifier. What people say is that you need some power.

Without a figure expressed in dBA your "loud" means nothing to anyone else. For some 75dBA is loud for others 105dBA is loud.

When I owned Maggies (MG-I, MG-II, MG-IIIa) I tried using various receivers. The results were not satisfactory. I was unable to get the volume levels I wanted.

With Acoustats (4 different models) anything less than ~60WPC was/is simply inadequate.
 
I agree

geiman said:
I run my MGIIs with Threshold power and they sound great. I've owned this pair since the mid 70's. Placement is critical and they aren't particularly good off axis. I use a Hsu Sub woofer with mine to get the last octave.
I originally used a pair of AR-3a in series woofer only with a B&K passive crossover which worked ok.
MGIIs are different and need a fair amount work with placement. Mine are relatively used nearfield. Not rock and roll but with enough power and high current, they can come close. The impedance is around 5 ohms on mine and the load is purely resistive and linear regardless of frequency, another factor in their great performance.
Click to expand...

Maggies beam! At 14 feet ..with the MGIII....if you are dead center....if you move head 3-4 inches side to side... the highs CHANGE!
So...set them up where you sit a bit off axis..
 
JoeESP9 said:
Your results don't reflect what the majority of Maggie owners have observed.

No one has said you need Krell, Levinson or ARC for an amplifier. What people say is that you need some power.

Without a figure expressed in dBA your "loud" means nothing to anyone else. For some 75dBA is loud for others 105dBA is loud.

When I owned Maggies (MG-I, MG-II, MG-IIIa) I tried using various receivers. The results were not satisfactory. I was unable to get the volume levels I wanted.

With Acoustats (4 different models) anything less than ~60WPC was/is simply inadequate.
Click to expand...

Maggies and their power requirements are really one of those mystifying things that have no easy answer. I had been listening to my 1.7's with my Conrad Johnson MF 2300A which is rated at 240 Watts 8 ohms and has been tested at 480 watts RMS (45 Amp current delivery as tested) into the 4 ohm of the maggies. Results are outstanding. It really sounds very good.

I have been curious for a while on matching tube power amps with Maggies and finally, after reading about some folks that have done just that I decided to buy a (relatively) inexpensive tube amp to hear what I could I could hear and make up my own mind in the tubes vs big watt SS @ Maggies. Well, at the levels i listen (usually max of 85-90 db) and the type of music I prefer (Jazz, folk, classical, light rock) I find that my CJ is largely unused and my 60W/ch tube amp with wimpy current delivery is on most of the time. Go figure!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom