Anyone hear the 30.7? Impressions? Make sense to spend THAT Money on a Magnepan?
- Thread starter caesar
- Start date
Are you serious? I can't get a sense of speed, transparency and dynamics from Youtube. What I actually hear from the video sounds emphatically mediocre to me -- I am sure in real life the sound is much more impressive.
FWIWFM Magnepans are not full-range ribbon speakers. They are not full-range with a single panel like the CLXs and big SoundLab ESLs. The new "quasi-ribbon" design is similar to the previous wires-on-mylar design but now the traces are printed. Only the ribbon tweeter in the 3.x, 20,x, and 30.x models is a true ribbon speaker. Skipping the technical details true ribbons are faster, more delicate, and more expensive. Magnepan's approach of ribbon tweeter with planar-dynamic panels and low-order crossovers has always sounded good to me if not quite as good in the midrange as ESLs. At frequency extremes, who wins in the planar dynamic vs. ESL battle has always been very amplifier- and speaker-dependent to me.
I owned the 20.1's and have heard the 30.7. The best value in the Maggies is the 1.7 and 3.7 (if those are still made) The big ones are just to much for most any room and driving them with tube electronics (which would get the best out of them) isnt a viable reality. As I understand they have removed the ability of biamping as well. Ill stick with my horn system.
I saw your pics. Can you describe here or in that thread the details of your horn system, amps, and analog?
Terrible sounding speakers. I heard them at a local stop on the tour that is going on around the country. I have a friend that has heard them in 2 other states and they sounded terrible at those stops too. IMO, the 20.X series was lacking in the bass and the 30.7's tried to make up for that. The bass was over bearing and wobbly, not tight. A friend of mine that has the 3.7's was going to ask Wendell if he could adjust the speakers to get them to sound better. Another friend who owns a pair of 20.7's and wanted to hear these for an upgrade, he is keeping the 20.7's. I couldn't tell you where the problem was coming from (speakers, amp mismatch, setup, etc..) but since Wendell was showing these off, I would think he would provide the best equipment available to him to get the best sound out of them. We left after 20 minutes. I talked to Wendell months ago and he told me that it was a slam dunk that people would run out and buy these that already owned a pair of Maggies. I don't think so, I wouldn't convert!
Nice horns hsbry, I’m much enjoying my Pap horns with open baffle foray as well, still more to experience as well.
On the Maggies I’d suggest that the 20.7s are no more of a challenge for either the room or for valves than are the 3.7s... they require the same rear wall distance to come into their own and width is always less an issue with dipoles. The 1.7s don’t do it for me as the treble and bass are both not in the same league as even the 3.7s... and the 20.7s are appreciably better than their smaller sibling being way more authoritative (the double magnets) and sufficiently full range. On valves... push pull over 150 watts a side for either 3.7s or 20.7s is reasonably doable and there are quite a few choices here though I’d consider Allnic monos if I was to go this route.
I loved the 3.7s but as a person who values balance I regrettably couldn’t live with the 3.7s forever. After much consideration I feel I also have no interest either in going 30.7s (famous last words lol) and have other plans for my next move in ribbons. Onwards and upwards... or down, down into the rabbit hole, who truly ever knows which ways it goes.
On the Maggies I’d suggest that the 20.7s are no more of a challenge for either the room or for valves than are the 3.7s... they require the same rear wall distance to come into their own and width is always less an issue with dipoles. The 1.7s don’t do it for me as the treble and bass are both not in the same league as even the 3.7s... and the 20.7s are appreciably better than their smaller sibling being way more authoritative (the double magnets) and sufficiently full range. On valves... push pull over 150 watts a side for either 3.7s or 20.7s is reasonably doable and there are quite a few choices here though I’d consider Allnic monos if I was to go this route.
I loved the 3.7s but as a person who values balance I regrettably couldn’t live with the 3.7s forever. After much consideration I feel I also have no interest either in going 30.7s (famous last words lol) and have other plans for my next move in ribbons. Onwards and upwards... or down, down into the rabbit hole, who truly ever knows which ways it goes.
Odd. I thought the demo of the 30.7 when Wendell came to town was amazing. The speakers were the best sounding Maggie’s I have ever heard, and by a wide margin! Set up and ancillary gear/ room size definitely would impact these speakers. I heard them with big Mcintosh amps...not my fave by any means, but able to well control the large panels.
Just goes to show how speakers, and planars in particular, can be very chameleon. One of the reasons I still shy away from this kind of speaker ( planar)
I attended the 30.7 demo in Tampa, FL with high expectations. It was an ackward demo in that Wendell would not allow attendees to sit and listen; senseless approach! He specifically asked people to walk around in order to appreciate the speaker dispersion capabilities. Most of us sit down at home when listening to music, maybe we’ve been doing this incorrectly all these years ;-).
Unfortunately, the demo was subpar and many of us that attended questioned the quality of the speaker (sound AND construction).
By the way, I have personally owned Magnepans and have been a Maggie fan. Like the 3.7s and 20.7s.
Unfortunately, the demo was subpar and many of us that attended questioned the quality of the speaker (sound AND construction).
By the way, I have personally owned Magnepans and have been a Maggie fan. Like the 3.7s and 20.7s.
That is why it's so hard to come to clear judgements in this hobby. Too many variables, even in well worked out home set-ups. For the longest time I thought a certain amp couldn't do cymbals very well (too whitish), while otherwise sounding terrific, but then it turned out it had been power chords and interconnects used.
Especially when it comes to shows, I always say: when the sound is great, wow, that's a really great system, and all the components must pull their weight. If the sound is bad, I shrug it off -- too many things that can go wrong. So it's a worthless data point which means nothing. And then there are those who confidently blame it on one single component, which usually makes me laugh.
Especially when it comes to shows, I always say: when the sound is great, wow, that's a really great system, and all the components must pull their weight. If the sound is bad, I shrug it off -- too many things that can go wrong. So it's a worthless data point which means nothing. And then there are those who confidently blame it on one single component, which usually makes me laugh.
At the demo that I attended, Wendell did no such thing. There was a centrally placed chair ( which did limit the number of folks who could listen seated!) and that was used in turns.I spoke at length to Wendell about the state of the business and how he was hoping to bring this product to market. Meanwhile, other folks were busy enjoying the speakers with various music that they supplied ( not supplied by Wendell or the dealer!)
As a group, we also suggested moving the speakers into a more favorable position than what Wendell and the dealer had initially set up. At first, Wendell wasn't that excited about this idea, but after some minimal prodding, he relented. Once we re-positioned the speakers, all thought the SQ increased...including Wendell.
I thought Wendell was very approachable and open minded....after all- how many other folks in the speaker business allow the 'less experienced' listener/consumer to move their demo speakers to a more synergistic positioning and thereby get better SQ? Wendell did, kudos to him!
DaveyF -
Glad you had a better experience than we did in Tampa. I took pictures (now deleted) of people getting on their knees to try to listen to the speakers as if they were in a chair - nuts! Ultimately, some of us moved a couple of chairs to the center of the room for better listening.
Lastly, during the demo, the local dealer went out his way to play all sorts of music for everyone to enjoy. But the setup or the room or the equipment did not play well together.
Again, glad your audition went well.
Glad you had a better experience than we did in Tampa. I took pictures (now deleted) of people getting on their knees to try to listen to the speakers as if they were in a chair - nuts! Ultimately, some of us moved a couple of chairs to the center of the room for better listening.
Lastly, during the demo, the local dealer went out his way to play all sorts of music for everyone to enjoy. But the setup or the room or the equipment did not play well together.
Again, glad your audition went well.
Last edited:
Size of the room does matter but you don’t need a castle for any speaker to work in. The room they had these in was probably 45-50’ long and 30’ wide. I know the Maggie lovers will come back and say well that’s too big. Again, the bass was loose and overbearing even for a big room. JV of tas indicates the 30.7’s are great for acoustic music. If that’s the case get a pair of 1.7’s or the 3.7’s. What is he going to do when playing rock, jazz, or blues, hook up another speaker? This reminds me of the Quad speakers. For an intimate low volume system, they sounded fantastic. Turn it up with zed zeppelin or brian Bromberg cuts, and the thing clipped.
Maggies don’t have loose bass. Think you just got a bad demo. The larger Maggies are equally good at most music types unlike a lot of speakers that have clear preferences for certain music.
Valin certainly wouldn’t have kept a pair of 30.7s if they weren’t great.
Valin certainly wouldn’t have kept a pair of 30.7s if they weren’t great.
I agree with The sound of Tao, the Maggie’s that I have heard, particularly the 30.7’s most certainly don’t have loose bass, they may have insufficient bass, but what they do have is never what i would consider as loose, or sloppy.
While they can sound very different in regards to their imaging characteristics, based on set up, they have never failed to produce Tight bass in the rooms I have heard them in...albeit with the issues associated with the size of the particular panel. OTOH, the 30.7’s had the best bass I have heard from any panel.
DaveyF, I think we agree on the relative value of the 30.7 speakers. I too heard them at that event and was impressed by them but found they didn't have the detail of my Martin Logan CLX based system. But that's my taste. Most people who would consider them have already taken over a space and I think their size would be fine in a room the size of that at the event. I'd guess it was about 15x25x10 (false acoustic ceiling), common in American homes of folks who can afford a 30K speaker. Now, Europe, that's another story. When I lived in England, it was common to have a home with that footprint, much less a room.
We could open a whole topic on why high-end audio costs what it costs. It is a complex problem, driven by low production levels, requisite high-margins needed to justify the shop investment, etc, not to mention the desire of the principals and employees to make a living. Car production is measured in tens or hundreds of thousands, with high levels of standardized parts and on-sight production of the largest pieces. Nearly everyone buys a car, probably less than .1% buys a good audio system. I know you're a Linn fan, and it is also an example of excessive price/costs. The old LP12 was a piece of stamped metal, wrapped in wood, that worked well enough but yet was very expensive to most people. Today, it's more sophisticated, but can push 20K as options are added. I'd say the Maggies are an excellent value compared to that.
An example I thought about recently was the Swedish Audio Technology arm at 30K or so. You'd think the guy making those would be rich. But if you consider the margins, and number sold, and production/promotion costs, he'd be lucky to make what an successful CPA or consultant makes but for a lot more trouble. I know there are folks in the industry, for which lightning has struck, that are driving Ferraris and sporting 80K watches, but they're few and far between.
The demo of that drum recording sounded awesome over my computer with B&W MM-1s. I've never heard such fast, well integrated bass before.
Dude! You and your friends are a tough crowd. Peace brother!
Steve, I would be very surprised if most folks here in the US can accommodate these speakers. The room we heard them in was apparently 19 x 25 x10. Wendell did tell me that the 30.7 could work in a room as small as 15' wide, but I suspect that would be pushing it.
As to value, well I agree, that is a personal decision. I think the 30.7's deliver a huge amount of SQ for the $$. That is where the value lies. I do not think, like I said, that they are particularly well built...quality wise. I don't quite agree with you on the Linn table of yore, it always had a very costly to manufacture platter and bearing system. The two-piece platter ( inner and outer) was machined to a very close tolerance ( not that cheap to do), plus the plinth was a real wood plinth that I know cost the company in excess of 100 pounds each! ( Yes, even back in the day!) Nothing in the new Maggie strikes me as that expensive to manufacture. If we look at some of the competing products, from the likes of Wilson and Magico ( their low end models, LOL) or even YG ( their lower end models) I don't see their cost to manufacture the boxes and drivers as being anywhere near as low as these Maggies. ( I could be proven wrong here, but that's just my overall impression)
Your point about the SAT tonearm is well taken. OTOH, it brings up the question of whether that product makes any sense to bring to market, IMO. If you have such a restricted market for your product due to complexity and cost, and as such you have to bring your product to market with an enormous price ( one that will rule out 99% of possible consumers!) and to add to that you cannot make enough profit to make it that effective from a profit stand point, is it worthwhile to do the endeavor regardless? That's a question that Marc Gomez has apparently asked himself and answered. I'm not so sure that many others would have come to the same conclusion. Instead, they may have tried to bring to market a more widely appealing product that could be marketed at a far lower price, thereby insuring far more sales and a more lucrative end result. OTOH, I do see that Marc is trying to bring to market a lower priced arm that has much of the tech distilled into it ( and possibly sounds even better!)-- that makes a lot of sense IMHO.
Last edited:
That's true, though if you listen through a pair of good, efficient headphones via something like an Audioquest Dragonfly Red, you can get more of a sense of clarity, dynamics and overall fidelity (depending on the quality of the video camera, and settings used to upload the video).
Last edited:
Similar threads
