Does Magico have a "house sound", and if so, how would you describe it?

[Ron Resnick]

Next time I am at a live classical concert I will be sure to tell them when their sound is too lean and lacks texture...oh wait I don’t hear that live...

Haha. I'm talking about playback systems.

 

[Carlos269]

Haha. I'm talking about playback systems.

There either is or there is not an “absolute sound”, which one is it? Just curious to see if the idiology aligns with the response.

 

[Ron Resnick]

There either is or is not an “absolute sound”, which one is it?

I think this is more appropriate for one of the "absolute sound" threads. I would be happy to respond to your question over there. Or please feel free to start a brand new thread.

(I was not intending to derail the discussion about Magico; I sought only to applaud one poster's introspective approach.)

 

[Frenchrooster]

Ron,

IMHO we all know that the high-end is a matter of preference and he share a subjective hobby. But is nice to learn that if we write it we can than refer to high-end components using extremely pejorative words such as "Great on Hifi criterias" and be considered as an introspective audiophile ...

Sorry, I am ready to accept all other clear subjective attributes, but I think that this is the type of comment that poisons a thread ...

I feel all comments critisizing Magico speakers would be considered by you as poisoning the thread. I don’t agree that using « great on hifi criterias « is pejorative.
all I said is my personal and subjective comments and listening impressions. I just wanted to say that I recognise that Magico are great speakers but not my kind of signature of sound. What’s wrong with that ?
all comments on Magico thread have to be entirely positive ? It’s a forum.

 

[Ron Resnick]

Ron,

IMHO we all know that the high-end is a matter of preference and he share a subjective hobby. But is nice to learn that if we write it we can than refer to high-end components using extremely pejorative words such as "Great on Hifi criterias" and be considered as an introspective audiophile ...

Sorry, I am ready to accept all other clear subjective attributes, but I think that this is the type of comment that poisons a thread ...

Please know that I never consciously or deliberately or intentionally post anything to "poison a thread."

I sought only to applaud one poster's introspective approach.

I think "great on hifi criterias" is more benign than the declaration as an objective fact that a speaker is thin-sounding and soulless. Alternatively, I can agree that these statements are substantially the same in concept, but that the latter simply is stated more forcefully.

 

[Frenchrooster]

I think Frenchrooster and Ron just nailed it .
Magico and wilson or Avalon and Kharma to name a few well known brands , all deliver a version of the truth that they see fit as the norm .
Its just the consumers task to pick the flavour they like.
Some consumers are good at it , some keep on swapping untill the wallet is empty and they still haven t found what they re looking for .
The choice is enormous regarding loudspeakers which is only better for consumers .

Exactly. Magico, Wilson and Sonus Faber for example are all great speakers , but very different in their type of presentation. Who can say that one of them is nearer the reality of a concert ?

 

[andromedaaudio]

I like the equipment just as much as everyone else, God knows that I have a ton of it

lol

Who can say that one of them is nearer the reality of a concert ?

The buyer hopefully after a couple of month at home

 

[morricab]

Haha. I'm talking about playback systems.

So am I

 

[Skanda]

Exactly. Magico, Wilson and Sonus Faber for example are all great speakers , but very different in their type of presentation. Who can say that one of them is nearer the reality of a concert ?

i'm the odd one out here: i don't care about replicating a concert. i've enjoyed listening to my system over pretty much any concert i've been to. concerts are fun for other reasons though even pre corona i wasn't going often - i'm a home body.

i agree with your point though. they are all playing music and that music is as _real_ from one speaker to another just really what you're benchmarking it against. so the question that i'm trying to figure out now is one better for some music than others?

i've heard zellaton is excellent for classical. i listened to pretty much everything other than classical on the zells when i demo'd and enjoyed the sound. it was fleet footed for sure something i love at first and really grabs me but i don't think it's something i'd want long term. i've heard sf's are great for opera. i have limited experience with sf and what i did hear i did not enjoy so didnt explore more of the line

 

[Alpinist]

genuine question as i was looking at some yg's: if you could have a yg sonja or magico m series (lets say m3) with one at a substantial discount to the other would you just buy the cheaper one?

would anyone say magicos are better (just compared to themselves and not other speakers) at unamplified bass vs amplified/synthesized bass? i listen to alot of synthesized/amplified bass and less so unamplified and am wondering if the magico sound is just tuned to prefer one to the other. don't get me wrong, i love whatever this house sound is.

most magicos i've heard are good all rounders but my recent experience with alexx v's and xvx have me wondering if wilson or some other brand have an edge for the type of music i like or if i was just taken by a new sound that i'm not used to

I would take the YG Sonja 2.2i over the Magico M3 but I would take the Magico M6 over the Sonja XVi Jr. This is straight up with equal discounting.

Ken

 

[dbeau]

this game is like Scientology and once you make it to the top of the hill and look back you realize just how silly most of it is. Sorry to burst some bubbles, but hey pride-in-ownership still means a lot to most of us.

Don't worry, your, or anyone else's, opinion will not 'burst bubbles' on this forum

 

[Skanda]

Don't worry, your, or anyone else's, opinion will not 'burst bubbles' on this forum

yeaaaah i am neither buying equipment for or on anyone else's opinion. to the extent that impacts my buying decisions is the loose concept of resale value where i prefer to avoid esoteric brands where possible

i'm lucky that magico sounds great to me and happens to hold value reasonably well all things considered

 

[Gregadd]

Of course they do. It has changed over time. I have only heard Magico with the heavy weight ss electronics contenders.
The most misunderstood and misused term is neutral. Marico trends to the dark side of neutral.

 

[HenryD]

genuine question as i was looking at some yg's: if you could have a yg sonja or magico m series (lets say m3) with one at a substantial discount to the other would you just buy the cheaper one?

would anyone say magicos are better (just compared to themselves and not other speakers) at unamplified bass vs amplified/synthesized bass? i listen to alot of synthesized/amplified bass and less so unamplified and am wondering if the magico sound is just tuned to prefer one to the other. don't get me wrong, i love whatever this house sound is.

most magicos i've heard are good all rounders but my recent experience with alexx v's and xvx have me wondering if wilson or some other brand have an edge for the type of music i like or if i was just taken by a new sound that i'm not used to

Audio Drom gave the Magico M3’s their highest rating at 95%

MAGICO M3 | Audiodrom

Recenze - Test MAGICO M3

www.audiodrom.net

 

[tima]

IMHO we all know that the high-end is a matter of preference and he share a subjective hobby. But is nice to learn that if we write it we can than refer to high-end components using extremely pejorative words such as "Great on Hifi criterias" and be considered as an introspective audiophile ...

Sorry, I am ready to accept all other clear subjective attributes, but I think that this is the type of comment that poisons a thread ...

Francisco, I don't take "great on HiFi criterias" as inherently pejorative. Imo there is a fairly clear distinction between the qualities of live acoustic music (tonality, dynamics, timing, venue context) and HiFi qualities that some stereo systems offer or add in reproduction (focused imaging, frequency emphasis, image size, black-backgrounds, etc.). Many of the latter are part of an audiophile lexicon that concert goers simply don't use. Some audiophiles value them, some do not. But the pointing out or attributing these to components - as one person's opinion (le coq français) - strikes me not as pejorative but descriptive and evidence of introspection sufficient to know the difference.

 

[Frenchrooster]

Francisco, I don't take "great on HiFi criterias" as inherently pejorative. Imo there is a fairly clear distinction between the qualities of live acoustic music (tonality, dynamics, timing, venue context) and HiFi qualities that some stereo systems offer or add in reproduction (focused imaging, frequency emphasis, image size, black-backgrounds, etc.). Many of the latter are part of an audiophile lexicon that concert goers simply don't use. Some audiophiles value them, some do not. But the pointing out or attributing these to components - as one person's opinion (le coq français) - strikes me not as pejorative but descriptive and evidence of introspection sufficient to know the difference.

Thanks for clarifying. I want to point also that english is not my first language, so I may easily be misunderstood.
i could have said instead of « great on hifi criterias « something as « I am aware that Magico are great speakers and sound very accurate, but I don’t like their kind of presentation or sound signature * .
i prefer for instance Kharma or Sonus Faber. Can we say that Magico are more neutral to Kharma ?
i read too often, on many forums, that Magico, Soulution, CH precision are the most neutral and accurate gear in the market. I don’t agree with that.

 

[andromedaaudio]

Soulution

I ve heard Soulless on 2 occasions , based on that i wouldn't even qualify it as high end audio , more like regular audio .

Can we say that Magico are more neutral to Kharma ?

Any idea how anybody is gonna determine that other then their own ears and what the manufacturer and reviewers tell them?
There are an enourmous amount of variables regarding audio reproduction / brain / human perception , most likely a lot we don't even know about.

 

[andromedaaudio]

Francisco, I don't take "great on HiFi criterias" as inherently pejorative. Imo there is a fairly clear distinction between the qualities of live acoustic music (tonality, dynamics, timing, venue context) and HiFi qualities that some stereo systems offer or add in reproduction (focused imaging, frequency emphasis, image size, black-backgrounds, etc.). Many of the latter are part of an audiophile lexicon that concert goers simply don't use. Some audiophiles value them, some do not. But the pointing out or attributing these to components - as one person's opinion (le coq français) - strikes me not as pejorative but descriptive and evidence of introspection sufficient to know the difference.

Tima are you really reviewing ching cheng ?

As taken from your signature : Wires: Shunyata ? PC/SC/IC, ChingCheng PC;

 

[PeterA]

Tima are you really reviewing ching cheng ?

As taken from your signature : Wires: Shunyata ? PC/SC/IC, ChingCheng PC;

We can only hope. People’s signatures are usually an indication of what they like.

 

[tima]

Tima are you really reviewing ching cheng ?

As taken from your signature : Wires: Shunyata ? PC/SC/IC, ChingCheng PC;

My system signature shows the gear I have and use.
Below that is a list of equipment currently in-house for review. Other components are in-the-works for review, but I wait until they are in-house to list them.

We can only hope.