Magico A5?

[mxk116]

Great thanks for that. Does the A5 fill the room with bass adequately? Do you get that 'pressurised room' feeling?

By themselves the A5's possess articulate and fast bass with excellent tonal variety. With the Westminster Lab amps and cables the bass is wonderfully satisfying. Unfortunately, even with 3 x 9" bass drivers per speaker they don't move enough air to pressurize the room in a manner in which I think you are referring. I'm coming from a multi-amp active x-over system that resided in a purpose built listening room with two 2 x 18" sealed cabinet subwoofers. Those could definitely pressurize the room.

Regardless, I never expected the A5 to accomplish that in this particular room. I'm not convinced any speaker in, or near, its price point could. If I feel the need to achieve that I would have to deploy at least a pair subwoofers. At the moment I am more eager to enjoy the Westminster Lab gear with the system as is and leave that option for future consideration.

 

[avian]

The rear of the speakers are ~45" from the rear wallView attachment 110767

Looks like you had to sacrifice a few baby goats on the rug to get those Rei's, but the end result was totally worth it.

 

[ecwl]

Looks really beautiful ! I bet it sounds amazing. Remind me please, which company makes this diffusor? Also if you don't mind letting me know, what are the dimensions of your room? I was told by my dealer after inquiring about the Magico A5 that maybe a Focal Scala or Wilson speaker will fill the room better with bass. My room is just under 50m2.

Because Wilson and Focal are ported and A5 are not, I would say the bass is just different and the bass with room interactions would be very different. But A5 bass quality is also much higher than the ported bass from Wilson and Focal IMHO. To me, it all comes down to your actual room acoustics, how much flexibility you have to place your speakers and your listening seat as those things tend to change the bass volume and resonance more than which speaker you choose. My take is that A5 may have slightly less low bass (<30Hz) than Wilson or Focal in the same price range but I would take higher bass quality any time.

 

[GSOphile]

Right on regarding Magico bass quality. I think you will also find that speaker placement with Magico's is less critical/more accommodating than with ported designs.

 

[rau]

As far as bass goes you need current , I pulled out my Luxman M10x and replaced with my constellation centaur 500 and change was huge . These speakers love current . If your amp is not rated 2 ohm your not hearing these speakers

 

[GSOphile]

The M-10X is stable with 1 ohm loads (1200W peak per stereo channel).

 

[MarkusBarkus]

...I have two M900s bridged for lots of grip. That said, I do agree with @rau 's underlying premise, re: power on the A5s. Perhaps appropriate to quote Tower of Power here: "You can't cut loose, without that juice!" Party on...

 

[GSOphile]

The M-10X is not as bass centric as its predecessor in my system, a Gryphon Diablo 300. IMO the Lux has a more neutral presentation with wonderful clarity in the mids and top. I have tried three preamps with the Lux so far (ARC Ref6SE, Pass XP32, and Constellation Pictor with Filter) with the latter's SQ my preference, but still looking.

 

[rau]

The M-10X is stable with 1 ohm loads (1200W peak per stereo channel).

The M-10X is stable with 1 ohm loads (1200W peak per stereo channel).

The M10x as soon as you bridge is 8 ohm
and does not have the current to get the most out of the A5

 

[rau]

This is why the Westminster Lab Rei sounds so good it has the current

 

[rau]

Or Centaur II 500 I'm using

 

[GSOphile]

I have no plans to pursue bridged operation with my M-10X. (I do note, however, that the M-10X bridged peak power specification into 2 ohms is 2400 watts, so I doubt that current will be a problem for most bridged M-10X users, specifications aside.) I'm not questioning that your Constellation Centaur 500 is a much more powerful amplifier (almost 3X) and likely with significantly greater current capacity than the Lux - at an MSRP of approx 3X. I'm happy. I think you're happy. Peace, brother.

 

[rau]

I have no plans to pursue bridged operation with my M-10X. (I do note, however, that the M-10X bridged peak power specification into 2 ohms is 2400 watts, so I doubt that current will be a problem for most bridged M-10X users, specifications aside.) I'm not questioning that your Constellation Centaur 500 is a much more powerful amplifier (almost 3X) and likely with significantly greater current capacity than the Lux - at an MSRP of approx 3X. I'm happy. I think you're happy. Peace, brother.

(I do note, however, that the M-10X bridged peak power specification into 2 ohms is 2400 watts, so I doubt that current will be a problem for most bridged M-10X users,

I have no plans to pursue bridged operation with my M-10X. (I do note, however, that the M-10X bridged peak power specification into 2 ohms is 2400 watts, so I doubt that current will be a problem for most bridged M-10X users, specifications aside.) I'm not questioning that your Constellation Centaur 500 is a much more powerful amplifier (almost 3X) and likely with significantly greater current capacity than the Lux - at an MSRP of approx 3X. I'm happy. I think you're happy. Peace, brother.

I'm just saying those advertised specs are not true if you look at the test results . I'm glad your happy no harm meant .

 

[GSOphile]

(I do note, however, that the M-10X bridged peak power specification into 2 ohms is 2400 watts, so I doubt that current will be a problem for most bridged M-10X users,

I'm just saying those advertised specs are not true if you look at the test results . I'm glad your happy no harm meant .

Whose test results?

 

[rau]

Whose test results?

Luxman M-10X power amplifier

As I started to write this review, the news broke that Sound United, the owner of Boston Acoustics, Bowers & Wilkins, Classé, Definitive Technology, Denon, Marantz, and Polk, was going to be purchased by a corporation that makes medical instruments. Such consolidation is not new. China- and...

www.stereophile.com

 

[rau]

 

[DasguteOhr]

When you need a hard beast , this old mcintosh sounds pretty good
you can weld with it, they never give up.

 

[GSOphile]

(I do note, however, that the M-10X bridged peak power specification into 2 ohms is 2400 watts, so I doubt that current will be a problem for most bridged M-10X users,

I'm just saying those advertised specs are not true if you look at the test results . I'm glad your happy no harm meant .

I looked at Atkinson's results. The advertised RMS power specs were 150 watts/channel 8 ohms; 300 watts/channel 4 ohms. His test results exceeded specs measuring 202 and 350 watts/channel respectively. He did not measure dynamic power maximums, bridged operation, or 2 ohms power, so don't see where you get your comment that "advertised specs are not true."

The M-10X is a Japanese amp. Regarding Luxman's published specs, the following quote from Stereophile's review of the Esoteric M1X might shed some light on why Esoteric (and by inference
Luxman) doesn't include 2 ohms RMS power specs:

As excited as I was, though, I grew concerned when I noticed that the M1X's specified compatible loudspeaker impedance is 4–16 ohms, and that specified maximum output power is rated only down to 4 ohms. Could the M1X handle my Alexia V's impedance dip, to approximately 2.5 ohms at 85Hz? (footnote 1) In a Zoom session with Haas; Esoteric's marketing and international-sales managers, Hiroyuki Machida and Tsuyoshi Sugiura; and the company's digital marketing, website design, and social media guru, Shota Terai, Terai told me that it could. "Our manual has to conform to Japanese safety standards," Terai explained. "This is why we limit our recommendation to 4–8 ohms. But the amplifier's performance [extends farther] than what's on the spec sheet; its linearity extends to 2.4kW into 1 ohm."

 

[rau]

I looked at Atkinson's results. The advertised RMS power specs were 150 watts/channel 8 ohms; 300 watts/channel 4 ohms. His test results exceeded specs measuring 202 and 350 watts/channel respectively. He did not measure dynamic power maximums, bridged operation, or 2 ohms power, so don't see where you get your comment that "advertised specs are not true."

The M-10X is a Japanese amp. Regarding Luxman's published specs, the following quote from Stereophile's review of the Esoteric M1X might shed some light on why Esoteric (and by inference
Luxman) doesn't include 2 ohms RMS power specs:

As excited as I was, though, I grew concerned when I noticed that the M1X's specified compatible loudspeaker impedance is 4–16 ohms, and that specified maximum output power is rated only down to 4 ohms. Could the M1X handle my Alexia V's impedance dip, to approximately 2.5 ohms at 85Hz? (footnote 1) In a Zoom session with Haas; Esoteric's marketing and international-sales managers, Hiroyuki Machida and Tsuyoshi Sugiura; and the company's digital marketing, website design, and social media guru, Shota Terai, Terai told me that it could. "Our manual has to conform to Japanese safety standards," Terai explained. "This is why we limit our recommendation to 4–8 ohms. But the amplifier's performance [extends farther] than what's on the spec sheet; its linearity extends to 2.4kW into 1 ohm."

There is no 2 or 1 ohm ratings its peak ms burst so unless you istening to ms burst pops

Its 600 watt bridged 8 ohm thats it

The amp didnt exceed the bench test prove amp is current limiting into 4 ohm as it couldn’t double power

 

[rau]

The M10x is a nice amp no doubt , and it's not about the wattage it's the current . I'm just saying a amp that can run 2 ohm stable with good current makes the A5 sing .

I had the A5 speaker packed up and was ready to sell them with my M10x , I decided to try my constellation which was at my other home but I loaded it up and hauled it to this home to try it . I was floored when I heard what these speakers can do with proper current .