Do we still need panel speakers in 2012

[FrantzM]

I must say that I am a panel person. I have no problem with so called box speakers, I love the Q3 a lot for example. I can however see that with what I would spend for a Q3 I could lget the Magneplanar MG 20.7, a JL Audio Gotham and two F 112 for a Geddes configuration or a Pardigm Sub2, two Sub1 or too many Rythmik or or Seaton Submersive or ... to care about changing speakers for a long time .. I would even have money left for some tube traps or Real Traps or other acoustic treatments... and get a good Pro-type parametric EQ or even a Tact or quiv... That is the case to me for panels in particular Maggies .. By themselves they are already great add some serious subwoofing and you have uber system performance at more than sane expenditure .. What not to like in 2012 or 2025?

 

[Steve williams]

Audioguy

I thought Maggies were tough to drive with tubes

 

[microstrip]

I must say that I am a panel person. I have no problem with so called box speakers, I love the Q3 a lot for example. I can however see that with what I would spend for a Q3 I could lget the Magneplanar MG 20.7, a JL Audio Gotham and two F 112 for a Geddes configuration or a Pardigm Sub2, two Sub1 or too many Rythmik or or Seaton Submersive or ... to care about changing speakers for a long time .. I would even have money left for some tube traps or Real Traps or other acoustic treatments... and get a good Pro-type parametric EQ or even a Tact or quiv... That is the case to me for panels in particular Maggies .. By themselves they are already great add some serious subwoofing and you have uber system performance at more than sane expenditure .. What not to like in 2012 or 2025?

Frantz,

I am finding that most of the time panel lovers disguise their preference with value for money considerations. Do you thing that there is something different with the sound of panels, that is unique and can not be matched by box speakers?

 

[FrantzM]

Audioguy

I thought Maggies were tough to drive with tubes

I am not Audioguy (although we were separated at birth ) ... Not really ... They are resistive load but are very inefficient .. They do very well with high power tubes amps .. I woul say at least 200 watts/ch. Room dependent of course...

 

[A.wayne]

Maggies need current , lots of it , regardless there is no measurement for ones satisfaction , some like them with tubes others will not ....

If you look at the 3.6 impedance magnitude and phase , you will see it requires alot of current in the critical midrange area ....

 

[A.wayne]

Frantz,

I am finding that most of the time panel lovers disguise their preference with value for money considerations. Do you thing that there is something different with the sound of panels, that is unique and can not be matched by box speakers?

Not Franz..


Unique ....yes , cannot be matched ......No ...!!!!

 

[MylesBAstor]

Frantz,

I am finding that most of the time panel lovers disguise their preference with value for money considerations. Do you thing that there is something different with the sound of panels, that is unique and can not be matched by box speakers?

Yes And vice versa.

 

[MylesBAstor]

Maggies need current , lots of it , regardless there is no measurement for ones satisfaction , some like them with tubes others will not ....

If you look at the 3.6 impedance magnitude and phase , you will see it requires alot of current in the critical midrange area ....

I've never had any issues with tube amplifiers and Maggies. In fact, the 100 wpc cj amplifiers worked wonderfully with Maggies. In fact, the only tube amplifier that I ever heard that didn't work with Maggies was the Berning EA-2100.

While ss might seem a better option, that amp better have a good upper mid to treble response. Otherwise, the Maggie ribbon will take your ears off.

 

[audioguy]

I am not Audioguy (although we were separated at birth ) ... Not really ... They are resistive load but are very inefficient .. They do very well with high power tubes amps .. I would say at least 200 watts/ch. Room dependent of course...

Which is how I heard them. The amps were Audio Research 300 watt mono-blocks. I would also consider the newest Bryston mono amps as well. Huge amounts of power - drive anything.

 

[MylesBAstor]

Maggies need current , lots of it , regardless there is no measurement for ones satisfaction , some like them with tubes others will not ....

If you look at the 3.6 impedance magnitude and phase , you will see it requires alot of current in the critical midrange area ....

That measurement is at odds at what is quoted in the Maggie owners manual.

IMPEDANCE: Bass- 4.7 Ohms; Midrange/Ribbon Tweeter- 4.2 Ohms; Ribbon Tweeter- 3.3 Ohms

 

[FrantzM]

Not Franz..


Unique ....yes , cannot be matched ......No ...!!!!

There you go ...

I actually think that much that is attributed to panels is a function of their line source-type patterns in their passband... In the bass panels or not you have basically omni pattern... I think in term of "speed" there are nowadays some non-panel that canmatch .. The midrange and purity of the Q3 is spooky for example .. there is not smearing or perceived lack of speed .. Also I have heard some speakers that while not strictly panels but are line source do a good job of impersonating panels Dali Megalline, Pipedreams and recently Scaena .. a line of speakers that is under the radar and has been for a while but the real , superlative deal.. Will impress more than one in all that matters and the price seem to be decent whatever that means these days ... They sound like panels to my ears ..
Concerning box speakers there are many I could live with and be happy ... I still find there is an "authority"a sense of scale that few box speakers match as for the impact ... I must say that with proper subwoofing , that doesn't seem to be a problem with panels ... The better panels do not have the limitation in dynamics almost endemic to the genre a few years back ...
If one can let me know of a $15K speaker that can match several (most?) $100 K out here I would be pleased ... To repeat myself .. Matching a MG 20.7with a pair of Paradigm Sub 2 is about $30 K speaker system, a concession for those who like things in pair and in stereo although we can;t hear stereo below 70 Hz but ...I digress .. Do you know many speakers capable of matching this system at any price ?

 

[kach22i]

Frantz,

I am finding that most of the time panel lovers disguise their preference with value for money considerations. Do you thing that there is something different with the sound of panels, that is unique and can not be matched by box speakers?

I find myself liking open baffle speakers in addition to any sort of panel speaker.

I've heard electrostatics where the rear wave was captured, and they seemed to bridge the divide between stat's and boxes.

http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showthread.php?454-JansZen-electrostatic

I also favor box speakers which have rear firing drivers.

From this, I must conclude that I like to hear the room and reflections in a way which traditional box speaker lovers either do not care for, or simply can live without.

I admire the "drive" and solidity which good box speakers deliver on, but I'm willing to forgo a little of it in favor of the "space" flat panel speakers allow me to experience.

The cost comment on my part comes in particular from listening to some very nice stuff from Sonus Faber, the Elipsa matched with some Audio Research equipment to be exact. I could live with at set up, but the speakers alone list for $20,000. I'm sure I could find satisfaction at a lesser price from something in the Martin Logan line up.

 

[A.wayne]

That measurement is at odds at what is quoted in the Maggie owners manual.

IMPEDANCE: Bass- 4.7 Ohms; Midrange/Ribbon Tweeter- 4.2 Ohms; Ribbon Tweeter- 3.3 Ohms

This is why we measure, I have measured the 3.6 myself and can vouch for the impedance mag/phase and when playing music it usually use 3-4 volts rms for 84db avg din, you would consume that 100 watts easy , if you lift the level or when playing very dynamic music (12 db dynamic peaks for eg.)

So one can enjoy it on tubes , subjective taste, room size and demand changes your choice of amplifier ...

 

[hvbias]

Panel guy for life here as well

Evolution Acoustics or maybe Coincidents would be the only box speakers I could go back to.

 

[A.wayne]

There you go ...

I actually think that much that is attributed to panels is a function of their line source-type patterns in their passband... In the bass panels or not you have basically omni pattern... I think in term of "speed" there are nowadays some non-panel that canmatch .. The midrange and purity of the Q3 is spooky for example .. there is not smearing or perceived lack of speed .. Also I have heard some speakers that while not strictly panels but are line source do a good job of impersonating panels Dali Megalline, Pipedreams and recently Scaena .. a line of speakers that is under the radar and has been for a while but the real , superlative deal.. Will impress more than one in all that matters and the price seem to be decent whatever that means these days ... They sound like panels to my ears ..
Concerning box speakers there are many I could live with and be happy ... I still find there is an "authority"a sense of scale that few box speakers match as for the impact ... I must say that with proper subwoofing , that doesn't seem to be a problem with panels ... The better panels do not have the limitation in dynamics almost endemic to the genre a few years back ...
If one can let me know of a $15K speaker that can match several (most?) $100 K out here I would be pleased ... To repeat myself .. Matching a MG 20.7with a pair of Paradigm Sub 2 is about $30 K speaker system, a concession for those who like things in pair and in stereo although we can;t hear stereo below 70 Hz but ...I digress .. Do you know many speakers capable of matching this system at any price ?

I really dont know Franz i have never heard 20.7 with subs, i have heard many other maggies and have to admit not a fan of the 20/20.1 , prefering the 3.6/3.7. With subs , much better value , i must say.

I have heard dynamic speakers that will better them , agree they cost more , but you have to admit by the time one upgrade their magnapan , improving xover, frames or modifying panels which vibrate , etc , you have increased the price , stock out of the box they are not competitive against the better dynamic speakers of course they are a lot cheaper...

Just saying. ...

 

[FrantzM]

I really dont know Franz i have never heard 20.7 with subs, i have heard many other maggies and have to admit not a fan of the 20/20.1 , prefering the 3.6/3.7. With subs , much better value , i must say.

I have heard dynamic speakers that will better them , agree they cost more , but you have to admit by the time one upgrade their magnapan , improving xover, frames or modifying panels which vibrate , etc , you have increased the price , stock out of the box they are not competitive ...

Just saying. ...

First time I have that then again if you live long enough .. ... I am not sure we can discuss much more different stroke and all that ...

 

[A.wayne]

Not sure i'm following you , first time .....?

 

[garylkoh]

Magnapan are a competitor, but I'll say this for them. The 20.7 and 3.7 are a great leap of improvement over just one model back. I still own a pair of 3.5's and 3.6's.

The major difference is that we are talking about line-source vs point-source. Not panel vs dynamic (although that is usually how they are implemented). A line-source radiates like a cylinder, a point-source radiates like a cone. As a result, you get a 6dB reduction in relative intensity per doubling of distance for point sources and a 3dB reduction for line-sources. What it actually means in real-world, small changes in distance make about half the difference in sound pressure with line-sources when you compare to point-sources (far wider sweet spot). Another effect is that if the line-source and point-source have the same sensitivity (note I didn't say efficiency), say 90dB/W at 1m, then at 4m the line source delivers 84dB/W and the point source 78dB/W. At the same amplifier power, you have 4 times the dynamics/loudness from the line-source.

 

[microstrip]

That measurement is at odds at what is quoted in the Maggie owners manual.

IMPEDANCE: Bass- 4.7 Ohms; Midrange/Ribbon Tweeter- 4.2 Ohms; Ribbon Tweeter- 3.3 Ohms

Most probably these are resistive values of the wires and ribbons of each section - not of the whole speaker including the crossover.

 

[A.wayne]

I have not heard the 20.7, IMO the 20.1 was not worth the extra cash over the 3.6/3.7 , better to have the smaller with subs than the 20.1 .....