Has Magico lost its Touch?

microstrip

VIP/Donor
May 30, 2010
20,806
4,698
2,790
Portugal
What advances and what finished products? Can you give specific examples and not be so vague?
Peter,

You were a Magico owner and this is a Magico thread - I will just refer to the carbon nanotube technology used in Magico cones. Or modern electrostatics - many do not use the old coatings - they use sputtering techniques to make the Mylar partially conductive.

The studies concerning resonance and delayed resonamces of modern synthetic materials used in speaker enclosures were only possible using digital measuring equipemnt - they could not be carried using just tube osciloscopes and generators. Creating such enclosures is a technological event. It is just becoming more common due to the wide use of accessible virtual instruments.
 

Ron Resnick

Site Co-Owner, Administrator
Jan 24, 2015
16,017
13,347
2,665
Beverly Hills, CA
Ron,
Not quite.

The F35 will go down as one of the greatest failures in US aviation history. Originally designed as a replacement for the F16 (an inexpensive multi role fighter) and the F15E (1980’s multi role version that caught in the Gulf War.) Lockheed successfully convinced all branches of the military that it could replace their planes. So a variant with foldable wings was created for the Navy to replace the F18 and a STOL version was created to replace the Harrier for the Marines.

What was delivered is the most expensive fighter plane ever purchased by the US government that cannot out perform any of the jets it’s replacing in speed, maneuvering or rate of climb. The F16 is 300 mikes per hour faster and beat the F35 in a dog fight during testing.

And to make matters even worse for the F35 program, the latest variant of the F15, the F15EX, is becoming a more financially prudent option for the US military:


With all of its technology, new materials, and new machining techniques; the F35 is no better at fulfilling its mission. What did we get with all of this expensive technology? A more expensive, but not a better fighter plane.

My analogy stands, you could of just bought more F15E’s. Or a bigger speaker made out of MDF.

Buying more F-15s versus fewer F-35s is an answer to a different question than the one your first analogy sought to illuminate.

Many of your statements here are totally correct. You are correct overall that the F-35 has been a disappointment in many ways -- there is no doubt about that. F-35 pilots rave about flying the F-35 -- but only when it works properly.

But the characterization of the origination of and the sequence of the Joint Strike Fighter ("JSF") idea is not correct. The suggestion that "Lockheed successfully convinced all branches of the military that it could replace their planes" is at least a little bit misleading.

It was the Pentagon who sought to combine the aircraft acquisition requests of three military services into the single JSF program, and ask for a single aircraft that could hover like a Harrier, fly supersonic like an F-15, be stealthy like an F-117 and land on aircraft carriers like an F-18. It was not Lockheed's unsolicited, original brainchild to which the Pentagon responded "What a great idea, why didn't we think of that?"

After the Pentagon issued its program request Lockheed then made the mistake of just saying "yes" -- and assuming arrogantly that the SkunkWorks would be able to just figure out how to package so many advanced technologies and role requirements into a single platform.
 
Last edited:

bonzo75

Member Sponsor
Feb 26, 2014
22,448
13,475
2,710
London
Isn't this off-topic
 

Ron Resnick

Site Co-Owner, Administrator
Jan 24, 2015
16,017
13,347
2,665
Beverly Hills, CA
Isn't this off-topic

It sure is! But this is not a member's main system thread.

But it certainly should not be in the Magico Speaker Forum -- or any WBF audio sub-forum.

A good friend of mine was the CEO of Lockheed SkunkWorks -- only the third CEO in the division's history. He was a senior aerospace engineer and executive at SkunkWorks for many years. He was the Project Manager for both the F-117 and the F-22, so I have from him some background understanding about certain SkunkWorks program histories.

I apologize.
 
Last edited:

bonzo75

Member Sponsor
Feb 26, 2014
22,448
13,475
2,710
London
Ok, in the sequel to catch 22, Milo minderbinder sells the Pentagon stealth bombers that you can't hear and you can't see.

He would have done well in the audio trade
 

PeterA

Well-Known Member
Dec 6, 2011
12,522
10,688
3,515
USA
Peter,

You were a Magico owner and this is a Magico thread - I will just refer to the carbon nanotube technology used in Magico cones. Or modern electrostatics - many do not use the old coatings - they use sputtering techniques to make the Mylar partially conductive.

The studies concerning resonance and delayed resonamces of modern synthetic materials used in speaker enclosures were only possible using digital measuring equipemnt - they could not be carried using just tube osciloscopes and generators. Creating such enclosures is a technological event. It is just becoming more common due to the wide use of accessible virtual instruments.

yes it is a Magico thread. Thank you for two specific examples. They are new and different and advanced but I’m not convinced it makes for improvement in sound quality. Sometimes a dead cabinet sounds dead. I enjoyed that sound for a long time and many others do as well however there are many people who do not like the sound of Magico speakers despite the claims of advancement.

In the end I am still not convinced the technological advancement has improved the sound of audio equipment at the top end. Even a vintage JBL or Klipsch May sound better for half the price of any Magico entry speaker.

Sure there are new measuring techniques but do these get us to a better sounding speaker then from the days when designers simply used their ears to design wooden cabinets?
 
Last edited:

Al M.

VIP/Donor
Sep 10, 2013
8,686
4,474
963
Greater Boston
Sometimes a dead cabinet sounds dead. I enjoyed that sound for a long time and many others do as well however there are many people who do not like the sound of Magico speakers despite the claims of advancement.

Depends. Ian's Magico M Project now produce an extremely lively sound with the CH Precision amplification.

My Reference 3A Reflector monitors have a dead cabinet, and sound extremely lively as well. They have a much more dead cabinet than my previous Reference 3A MM DeCapo BE monitors (with very similar drivers), and sound even more lively than those.

In fact, the Reference 3A Reflector monitors sound more lively because of the dead cabinet. Resonances of the cabinet do not partially cancel driver energy anymore, as they apparently did in my previous lower-level Reference 3A monitors.
 

GSOphile

Well-Known Member
Sep 3, 2017
569
353
173
Magico may not have been the first to use graphene coated carbon fiber cones in their midrange and bass drivers, but they were probably the most prominent. Their use of Aluminum honeycomb cores in their M9 and A5 mid and bass drivers is claimed to be a first and a major factor in these products' performance excellence.
IMO the previously mentioned use of computer software modeling tools by many speaker and driver manufacturers has definitely been a revolutionary development and has lead to significant performance improvements at contained costs (compared to cost/performance would have been without these tools).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Audire

KeithR

VIP/Donor
May 7, 2010
5,144
2,812
1,898
Encino, CA
Bell labs funded WE. It was a big thing to make talkies in those days so this was the forefront of of R&D. Govt also threw money at it. Lansing heritage borrowed off them. That's Altec Jbl and tad. Tad additionally had massive investment from Pioneer.

All these, and RCA and Siemens were much much larger companies that makes Wilson and Magico seem like garage operations. These were not catering to OCD audiophiles but to cinema and other industries. The market, money, and investments were larger as part of the pie. Tannoy was used in studios and has been around for 70 years or more. It sure went downhill as managements changed and sold off.
you have to look at productivity, not just $. when you don't have computers, your costs are an order of magnitude higher. for example, finite element modeling for enclosures/drivers is available to all as a computer program.

it's probably easier for smaller speaker companies to come up than before but generally the hifi market has moved from a middle-class hobby in the 60s to an upper echelon one. so we have smaller companies with higher cost product. KEF, Dynaudio, and some others though have come up with pretty SOTA design/measurement facilities more recently. the NRC has been used for years by others (PSB).

that all said, TAD under Andrew Jones still had a big Pioneer investment. Same now with Revel and its ties to Harman/spinorama etc. Sony had a great line of speakers 5-10 years ago too that I would take over many today but the name isn't as cool as Wilson/Magico. (its SCD-1 was also one of the most impressive pieces ever released at $5k back in the day). Yamaha and Technics are back making great gear at "reasonable" prices. i think this is very positive for the hobby going forward.

I think this forum vastly underestimates other companies in this industry and is way too focused on Robb Report brands like Wilson and Magico. there is a lot of cool stuff going on.

ps. go tour YG or Magico (I have) and see the millions of $ they have put into manufacturing - it is beyond impressive to see a chunk of aluminum morph into a cabinet. these aren't inexpensive vented boxes from the 60s. you can argue about the sound, but it is quite easy to see why it costs what it does
 

sbnx

Well-Known Member
Mar 28, 2017
1,182
1,331
290
Sorry I brought up the fighter plane analogy. However, if you go back I never compared the F35 to the F15. I compared it to the A4 which was a 1950's era jet. Anyone think an A4 is technologically superior or more capable than an F35?? By comparing the F35 to the F15 a two to three decade jump in technology was made.

If you like the vintage sound then go for it. But it is not technologically superior. Does it sound better? That is up to the listener/buyer to decide.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jeff1225 and PeterA

Kingrex

Well-Known Member
Feb 3, 2019
2,807
2,315
350
I don't think Magico has lost its touch. Myles moves from brand to brand albeit fairly slowly. How could he not change over time. Every day of his life is listening to something new. So to speak.
 

sbnx

Well-Known Member
Mar 28, 2017
1,182
1,331
290
Thanks for bringing us back on topic.
 

KeithR

VIP/Donor
May 7, 2010
5,144
2,812
1,898
Encino, CA
I often make this point, the absence of scale and serious R&D investment in modern day audiophile production. The golden age of audio in the US, Germany and Japan (later) had large corporations making products primarily for the commercial market (movie theatres and outdoor applications).
you can't have it both ways and say there is no R&D but that speakers are just rigid boxes and no improvement needs to be made.

i actually think Wilson has pioneered loudspeaker enclosure design since the 90s with its phenolic-resin based approach. it also was created iirc with BYU help

also, your own speaker uses the D2 horn which was a pretty big project for JBL (likely costing big $):

 

bonzo75

Member Sponsor
Feb 26, 2014
22,448
13,475
2,710
London
Sorry I brought up the fighter plane analogy. However, if you go back I never compared the F35 to the F15. I compared it to the A4 which was a 1950's era jet. Anyone think an A4 is technologically superior or more capable than an F35?? By comparing the F35 to the F15 a two to three decade jump in technology was made.

If you like the vintage sound then go for it. But it is not technologically superior. Does it sound better? That is up to the listener/buyer to decide.

There isn't a vintage sound. And acoustic research is not an example of the vintage brands discussed
 

DaveC

Industry Expert
Nov 16, 2014
3,899
2,141
495
Imagine if Magico made a cone speaker with 95+ dB efficiency, and with fewer drivers and simpler crossovers. Then we would see if the advances in driver materials and cabinet construction are meaningfully better than what has been done before.

This is absolutely NOT possible. The drivers they use require more complex crossovers with steeper slopes. If you use different drivers, different number of drivers and a different crossover all you have left is a cabinet that probably isn't suitable for different drivers anyways.

If you want to hear a simpler modern speaker check out Vandersteen or something similar, maybe Dunlavy although they are not around anymore.
 

bonzo75

Member Sponsor
Feb 26, 2014
22,448
13,475
2,710
London
Also incentives for defense and audio are different, as they are for computers.
 

bonzo75

Member Sponsor
Feb 26, 2014
22,448
13,475
2,710
London
ps. go tour YG or Magico (I have) and see the millions of $ they have put into manufacturing - it is beyond impressive to see a chunk of aluminum morph into a cabinet. these aren't inexpensive vented boxes from the 60s. you can argue about the sound, but it is quite easy to see why it costs what it does

Expensive cabinets are not evidence of R&D. Probably Magico sound dead because they have spent with inefficient R&D
 

sbnx

Well-Known Member
Mar 28, 2017
1,182
1,331
290
From WIkipedia:
The Douglas A-4 Skyhawk is a single-seat subsonic carrier-capable light attack aircraft developed for the United States Navy and United States Marine Corps in the early 1950s. The delta-winged, single turbojet engined Skyhawk was designed and produced by Douglas Aircraft Company, and later by McDonnell Douglas. It was originally designated A4D under the U.S. Navy's pre-1962 designation system.

The Skyhawk is a relatively lightweight aircraft, with a maximum takeoff weight of 24,500 pounds (11,100 kg), and has a top speed of 670 miles per hour (1,080 km/h). The aircraft's five hardpoints support a variety of missiles, bombs, and other munitions. It is capable of carrying a bomb load equivalent to that of a World War II–era Boeing B-17 bomber, and can deliver nuclear weapons using a low-altitude bombing system and a "loft" delivery technique. The A-4 was originally powered by the Wright J65 turbojet engine; from the A-4E onwards, the Pratt & Whitney J52 engine was used.

Skyhawks played key roles in the Vietnam War, the Yom Kippur War, and the Falklands War. Sixty years after the aircraft's first flight in 1954, some of the 2,960 produced (through February 1979)[1] remain in service with the Argentine Air Force and the Brazilian Naval Aviation.
 

Kingrex

Well-Known Member
Feb 3, 2019
2,807
2,315
350
I thought armchair audiophile were bad. Now its instant expert, military jet design, just add internet.
 

About us

  • What’s Best Forum is THE forum for high end audio, product reviews, advice and sharing experiences on the best of everything else. This is THE place where audiophiles and audio companies discuss vintage, contemporary and new audio products, music servers, music streamers, computer audio, digital-to-analog converters, turntables, phono stages, cartridges, reel-to-reel tape machines, speakers, headphones and tube and solid-state amplification. Founded in 2010 What’s Best Forum invites intelligent and courteous people of all interests and backgrounds to describe and discuss the best of everything. From beginners to life-long hobbyists to industry professionals, we enjoy learning about new things and meeting new people, and participating in spirited debates.

Quick Navigation

User Menu

Steve Williams
Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator
Ron Resnick
Site Co-Owner | Administrator
Julian (The Fixer)
Website Build | Marketing Managersing