Stereo, I appreciate your contributions to all of the Magico threads. You have experience as an engineer and own the speakers so I value you opinion. As an owner of the Mini2, I well understand the goals and efforts to which Magico goes to build their speakers. Though this older design is not as transparent and free of distortion as the Q series, it sure is good looking and it sounds fantastic. You may at times feel as though your posts fall on deaf ears, there are those of us who are learning something. Keep it up and please share your experience with the Ultimate 3 when you've had a chance to live with them for a while.
Magico introduced the Q series subwoofers
- Thread starter Roysen
- Start date
Stereo, I appreciate your contributions to all of the Magico threads. You have experience as an engineer and own the speakers so I value you opinion. As an owner of the Mini2, I well understand the goals and efforts to which Magico goes to build their speakers. Though this older design is not as transparent and free of distortion as the Q series, it sure is good looking and it sounds fantastic. You may at times feel as though your posts fall on deaf ears, there are those of us who are learning something. Keep it up and please share your experience with the Ultimate 3 when you've had a chance to live with them for a while.
Alexandre
Yes one can. One can debate the worth of a product which goal is to reproduce music with no experience on the product. If you are addressing me , I do have experience with similar products but no I don't own Magico, planning to own products in their performance range. The notion of "Price" range is an artificial construct. So if the speakers I am auditioning fall below the performance os Magico Q3 and Q5 and that IME, I will go Magico , else, it could be speakers costing 5 times less ...
Of course I came in this thread and though they, the subs were expensive. I do find their speakers Q3 and Q5 at the top of the performance envelope, regardless of price. IOW I would go for a Q5 rather than many speakers I have heard costing 100K or more ... I would also grab a Magnepan before many other speakers too but that is just me. Furthermore it were for experience with said products this thread would remain blank. No one here has heard them. I don't even think they are being distributed yet. And to go further a subwoofer by its lone self makes only grumbling noise .. "hearing" or auditioning a sub is always in the context of a system and then there are myriad parameters that come into play to make the subs work with and within the system. All that we all know or should know by now.
The numbers advanced by Stereo are the cost of parts, it doesn't necessarily equate with quality of reproduction, nor of finish products. Using "cheap" drivers doesn't mean a finished "cheap" products. It is all in what the parts are the testing of said parts and any customization that goes in said parts and how they put together. That is the whole notion of added value. And from what I heard said Raidho with their "cheap" drivers seem to be making great music. There is a cost associated with the testing customization , well in engineering... Moreover no one, except for the most simplistic mind will tell me that cost of material has a lot to do with Price of High End Audio products. The relationship is far from linear and to be frank tenuous at best ... So in what way can I claim Aluminum superior to all these other approaches? Where these measured by an independent lab? You may prefer the sound of Magico and so do I but can say it is so because its parts are more expensive than those of Raidho? or Wilson or that its BOM is more expensive than its competitor? No that's is not the metrics for quality. That can not be the metrics.
nobody ever said you need to own a product to discuss it! of course not.Hi
A discussion forum is not an echo-chamber for fan of a given brand or owner of a given product. Not owning a product or a brand doesn't preclude a person from having an opinion on it. Far from it. One learns from diverging , dissenting opinion or facts. I don't own a Magico speaker but came to take them very seriously in my quest for speakers. I, speaking for myself respect what they do and will criticize them if I find substance for such.
This argument of having to own a product in order to discuss about it is old and hint at barely concealed snobbery. The subwoofers from Magico exist and no doubt some will buy them. Will these persons get the best? Not in my view. Thus I,would not buy these subs. Again I, (I think you get the emphasis by now) actually wouldn't buy any subs at these prices as I know for a fact that better performance can be achieved with less lofty expenditures. DIY is one way but several smaller and less dear subwoofers are another alternative. This is not an opinion but something based on Science, a notion on which Magico products more so than many seem to be based on.
@microstrip
I am more and more in need to listen to the Aida. I must say I have (had?) that view of Sonus Faber products as being overly colored. I wasn't too pleased by what I heard from their outpurt say around 2008. They were too sweet making everything sound too nice and sweet.... IMHO. I have heard reports that this has changed dramtically with the Aida and others being serious, tranparent and truthful transducers. Will try to audition carefully and will report my opinion as non-owner.
Back to the Q subs .
But at the minimum, people should have listen to it in good conditions or should have real knowledge on audio design if they want to express an opinion before listening to a product. Otherwise I don't see which value can be brought to the conversation, it just becomes a pissing contest. I personally would never criticize a product I have not listened to. That's why I have nothing to say on the Qsub- and I am not in the market for a sub anyway right now.
Happy to hear your observation on the latest Aida. My personal experience with the brand is also that it sounds too sweet and colored, but I have listened to the Aida only at shows (i.e., not in good enough conditions to express a fair judgement), so I cannot comment on their latest designs.
Frantz,
My point was not that product A is better than product B because its parts are more expensive: it is rather "better design unfortunately requires more expensive parts to address fundamental physics issues, which leads to better sound". I tried to explain where the money is going and how more expensive parts address design problems. But apparently it is the wrong place to try to be fact based. I could also explain you why aluminum or carbon sandwich is a much better material for cabinet design than MDF: you don't need to take measurements for that, just take the properties of different material and run a 3D simulation and you will see how much distortion different cabinet designs introduce. But who cares? Let's keep audio as a voodoo science ;-)
And yes, cheap components assembled with a smart design lead to a good product (like the Magnepan for example). But expensive components with a smart design lead to a great product: this is what I am looking for.
Which doesn't mean that you don't have a lot of example of expensive components with poor design, which lead to poor sound. Recently, I had a dealer visiting my home with a set of 10k+ loudspeaker cables from a well known brand, and he was himself shocked to admit that the free cables I got from APL are sounding better....
Yes, I can imagine auditioning a sub by itself
. Of course nobody has listened to the Qsub. But what would be interesting would be people answering the last post of LL21, then we could learn something out of this thread. I am not a sub guy, so I am the wrong guy to answer him.
Frantz,
I was addressing the thread in general, and the folks who have never been within 500km of a Magico and suddenly feel the urge to poo-poo all over them.
You, of course, have been doing your homework and auditioning, Magico among others. So no, I wasn't addressing you specifically, just you assertion that we, somehow, would only consider an owner's opinion, which is not true.
And I didn't say Raidho uses cheap drivers, on the contrary. They use proprietary, custom-made drivers, and supposedly that's their charm, as the cabinets are generic, China-made wood enclosures. I just mentioned this as an example on how the end price has little relation to a) price of parts, or their quality and b) actual performance. Didn't Stereophile just find out a miraculous $3500 Marantz that almost beat the $40k MSB stack? So there
alexandre
Hi Lloyd,
I have played a lot with subwoofers over the years (mostly from Audio Physic). My experience is the the distortion in real world sized rooms at those levels at those low frequencies, the room will be the limiting factor. Unless the room is designed to handle this or the subwoofer has a compensation filter which can be dialed in to decrease level at the standing waves, you will hear the room compress, create room gain and distort those low frequencies.
Frantz,
Can you really support your statement that Magico products are based on Science? I find them technologically very advanced, but no where I could find evidence that they are based in science. Serious measurements on most of the range are scarce or non existing, and they do not publish technical papers.
BTW, I can not believe that one of the reasons I, as you and many in WBF, like their sound and could easily live with them is because they use the same brand of ultra-expensive capacitors that is used in the Aida's.
I agree with you - more money, if properly used, can lead to a better audio product, that sometimes, mostly due to number of units being considered for the possible market dimensions, becomes very expensive.
We have excellent expensive audio products and some that are not so good. If an expensive product is not high quality it should be nominated and debated. But general denigrating statements about high-end prices from people who never listened to the products being debated in top systems are not adding nothing to threads. Thanks for adequately defending your lady!
They do use COMSOL that is multiphysics software with modelling/simulation based upon measurements, but that is blurring the boundaries of definition for "based in science" or engineering where there is significant overlap in both fields.Frantz,
Can you really support your statement that Magico products are based on Science? I find them technologically very advanced, but no where I could find evidence that they are based in science. Serious measurements on most of the range are scarce or non existing, and they do not publish technical papers.
BTW, I can not believe that one of the reasons I, as you and many in WBF, like their sound and could easily live with them is because they use the same brand of ultra-expensive capacitors that is used in the Aida's.
Just one example of what is involved with Magico speakers, I think only Crystal Cable are the other ones with expertise in COMSOL and its application to speaker design.
Cheers
Orb
Last edited:
interesting...thank you. If I may interpret what you are saying (as a non-techie)...are you saying that even though the Magico may have super-low distortion...once we get past a certain level of low-bass volume...the room may become the limiting factor an introduce a form of distortion by virtue of the fact that It cannot handle the high-decibel bass?
If this is the case...does having a low-distortion sub still end up performing better in the exact same room...or does the distortion due to the room limitations effectively make the differences in distortion between the 2 subs practically irrelevant?
Sorry...non-techie...thanks for helping me to understand a bit better.
No problem Lloyd.
The length of a soundwave is determined by its frequency. The lower the frequency the longer the soundwave. The sub 100Hz soundwaves are very long. If the room is not long enough for the soundwave to completely spread out, it will pressurize the room and cause a sonice "pileup" which results in increased level below the frequency of the smallest standing wave in the room. The gain rises in amplituede as the frequency falls. The smallest standing wave can be calculated and the gain can also be calculated based on the size of the room.
So the room will cause a higher level at certain frequencies as long as the room is not big enough to let the soundwave of your low bass to completely spread out. This can be compensated by filters in the crossover of the subwoofer to decrease the level at the frequencies where this will happen based on an input on roomsize. Basstraps will very likely not be as effective because they normally can only be set to a fequency range and not to specific frequencies.
Take a look at Michael Freamers review of the Audio Physic Rhea subwoofers from quite a few years back. This explains this phenomenon in detail and the testet product has a filter built into its crossover to handle tihis:
http://www.stereophile.com/subwoofers/957/index.html
The length of a soundwave is determined by its frequency. The lower the frequency the longer the soundwave. The sub 100Hz soundwaves are very long. If the room is not long enough for the soundwave to completely spread out, it will pressurize the room and cause a sonice "pileup" which results in increased level below the frequency of the smallest standing wave in the room. The gain rises in amplituede as the frequency falls. The smallest standing wave can be calculated and the gain can also be calculated based on the size of the room.
So the room will cause a higher level at certain frequencies as long as the room is not big enough to let the soundwave of your low bass to completely spread out. This can be compensated by filters in the crossover of the subwoofer to decrease the level at the frequencies where this will happen based on an input on roomsize. Basstraps will very likely not be as effective because they normally can only be set to a fequency range and not to specific frequencies.
Take a look at Michael Freamers review of the Audio Physic Rhea subwoofers from quite a few years back. This explains this phenomenon in detail and the testet product has a filter built into its crossover to handle tihis:
http://www.stereophile.com/subwoofers/957/index.html
If you want to know the length of a sound wave, divide 1130 which is the speed of sound in air by the frequency. For example, a 20Hz bass wave is 56.5' long (1130/20). Anybody have a listening room that is 56.5' long? If you were building a 1/4 wavelength transmission line sub that would be tuned to 20Hz, that means your line length would be 14.125'. That's why true 1/4 wavelength transmission line subs are huge.
It is very true, mep, that this is an issue which needs to be addressed by everyone in real world sized listening rooms with fullrange speakers or subwoofers. But discussing subwoofers with less than 1% distortion at 20Hz is quite meaningless until this issue is handled in the room where the subwoofer is going to be used. Please keep in mind that the roomgain we are talking about is created by the room and not the speaker so it will be heavily distorted. The pressure will also put the room in motion which will cause not damped objects and materials in motion which in turn will rattle and cause a distortion. However clever placement of several subwoofers can pressurize the room from locations in the room which cancel out each others roomgain effects - at least to some degree. That is why I never use just one subwoofer.
Last edited:
Hi
The distribution and level of room modes is not only a function of the room size but also of the position of the LF (Low Frequencies) transducers in the room. EQ involves reducing (preferred) or increasing (path to danger ) certain frequencies in the bass, I don't believe much in doing that over what is called the Schroeder frequencies. For most room above 300 Hz...
Also it is not entirely meaningless to discuss the rather spectacular spec of 1% THD at 20 Hz. One is thus sure that such subs will not be the source of distortions. For the most part even the most exalted subwoofers extolled in the High End routinely produce distortion of the order of 10% or more at those levels and frequencies. Often around 40%! No wonder you rarely specs from these too. They ell tell you how well it integrates with their speakers but few are capable to match these. On that alone the Magico subs are unique and head and shoulders over most if not all Subs from any manufacturer in the High-End arena. If you leave the High End there are other subs capable of spectacular output some made by our own (he hasn't posted for a while BTW) Tom Danley. I still would rather use several less expensive subs, thus working them where they would by sheer numbers match the specs of the Q subs and also distributing them in the room as to even the response of the room in the bass. The better solution IMO and that of people who know a lot more about bass than any: Sean Olive, Devantier, Earl Geddes, etc.
There is also another problem. A room can begin to display some non-linear behavior at a certain SPL level, ringing for one , This is not a function of the room volume but rather of its construction. Material may exhibit some non-linear behavior under physical stress. We could discuss that but I think I'll leave it to the the true pro: Mark Seaton, Nyal Melior, Amirm, Tom Danley, Sean Olive, et al who can write volumes and educate us all about such interesting phenomenon.
At the end and despite the futile and resistance and intonation to the contrary, the room is the greatest determinant i the quality of music reproduction. Proper bass requires subs, several and EQ. There is not other way around ultimate bass: Room treatments, Several subs, Supreme and clean output and EQ. The Magico Subs seem to take care of the Supreme and clean part and they likely surpass any other High End manufacturers on this part. Such can be matched by multiple smaller and less exalted subs, if I didn't make myself clear
The distribution and level of room modes is not only a function of the room size but also of the position of the LF (Low Frequencies) transducers in the room. EQ involves reducing (preferred) or increasing (path to danger
) certain frequencies in the bass, I don't believe much in doing that over what is called the Schroeder frequencies. For most room above 300 Hz...Also it is not entirely meaningless to discuss the rather spectacular spec of 1% THD at 20 Hz. One is thus sure that such subs will not be the source of distortions. For the most part even the most exalted subwoofers extolled in the High End routinely produce distortion of the order of 10% or more at those levels and frequencies. Often around 40%! No wonder you rarely specs from these too. They ell tell you how well it integrates with their speakers but few are capable to match these. On that alone the Magico subs are unique and head and shoulders over most if not all Subs from any manufacturer in the High-End arena. If you leave the High End there are other subs capable of spectacular output some made by our own (he hasn't posted for a while BTW) Tom Danley. I still would rather use several less expensive subs, thus working them where they would by sheer numbers match the specs of the Q subs and also distributing them in the room as to even the response of the room in the bass. The better solution IMO and that of people who know a lot more about bass than any: Sean Olive, Devantier, Earl Geddes, etc.
There is also another problem. A room can begin to display some non-linear behavior at a certain SPL level, ringing for one , This is not a function of the room volume but rather of its construction. Material may exhibit some non-linear behavior under physical stress. We could discuss that but I think I'll leave it to the the true pro: Mark Seaton, Nyal Melior, Amirm, Tom Danley, Sean Olive, et al who can write volumes and educate us all about such interesting phenomenon.
At the end and despite the futile and resistance and intonation to the contrary, the room is the greatest determinant i the quality of music reproduction. Proper bass requires subs, several and EQ. There is not other way around ultimate bass: Room treatments, Several subs, Supreme and clean output and EQ. The Magico Subs seem to take care of the Supreme and clean part and they likely surpass any other High End manufacturers on this part. Such can be matched by multiple smaller and less exalted subs, if I didn't make myself clear
Does anyone (Stereo?) know how the 15" sub drivers in the new Magico Ultimates may likely match up to these QSubs? No accurate answer for sure, since both haven't been formally listened to, but curious at people's hunches.
At $600k for the Ultimates, it'd be chump change to add $70-$140k for 2-4 extra Q18 subs to REALLY wake up the dead and get them reaquainted with music again.
Re needing multiple subs, my guess is if you can afford $160k+ for a pair of Q7s, and c$35k for a Q18 sub, I'm sure you could go the whole hog and spend $235k-$300k on a pair of Q7s and 2 - 4 Q18s to go around the room
The q is, how would this stack up v MBL OTT main spkr/sub towers, Mikes MM7 4 way towers etc? The Q7/Q18 configuration may STILL fall short re the higher placement of sub drivers present in these SOTA 7'-8' tower spkrs.
At $600k for the Ultimates, it'd be chump change to add $70-$140k for 2-4 extra Q18 subs to REALLY wake up the dead and get them reaquainted with music again.
Re needing multiple subs, my guess is if you can afford $160k+ for a pair of Q7s, and c$35k for a Q18 sub, I'm sure you could go the whole hog and spend $235k-$300k on a pair of Q7s and 2 - 4 Q18s to go around the room
The q is, how would this stack up v MBL OTT main spkr/sub towers, Mikes MM7 4 way towers etc? The Q7/Q18 configuration may STILL fall short re the higher placement of sub drivers present in these SOTA 7'-8' tower spkrs.
Why should the Q subs not match with the Ultimate or any speakers? it is time to relegate the matching subwoofer myth to the dustbin of f High End Audio falsities. Sub/ main match is matter of crossover, placement or Eq .. Everything else being equal if the subs is bad in its designs than Garbage In Garbage Out.
Now if we are trying to go for the price thing... a Magico 7 with 2 of the 18 inches monsters could be a match for the MM7 + towers. We know not much about the measurements of the MM7 subwoofers we know a little more about the capabilities of the 18 inch in the Qs and they are phenomenal. There is no physical reason why a pair of 18 inch would not displace as much air as a quatuor of 15 inch.. it is a matter of linear displacement and on that account the 18" Q-subs seem to be the real deal..
Now if we are trying to go for the price thing... a Magico 7 with 2 of the 18 inches monsters could be a match for the MM7 + towers. We know not much about the measurements of the MM7 subwoofers we know a little more about the capabilities of the 18 inch in the Qs and they are phenomenal. There is no physical reason why a pair of 18 inch would not displace as much air as a quatuor of 15 inch.. it is a matter of linear displacement and on that account the 18" Q-subs seem to be the real deal..
Hi
At the end and despite the futile and resistance and intonation to the contrary, the room is the greatest determinant i the quality of music reproduction. Proper bass requires subs, several and EQ. There is not other way around ultimate bass: Room treatments, Several subs, Supreme and clean output and EQ. The Magico Subs seem to take care of the Supreme and clean part and they likely surpass any other High End manufacturers on this part. Such can be matched by multiple smaller and less exalted subs, if I didn't make myself clear
I completely agree with what you wrote except for the need for EQ. If you see my thread http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showthread.php?9457-new-home-for-my-Magico-Q1, you see that my Fathom measures at listening position+-3dB down to 20Hz without any EQ correction. And more interesting, the same measurement is obtained if I walk around the room (even in corners!). If you treat extensively the room like I did with 31 Helmholtz resonators, you can basically get rid of all major room resonances. Potentially the same can be achieved using membranes. Soft absorption alone like Real traps or Tubetraps will never work at low frequency.
I am trying to audition the Q7...and intend to hear the QSub with the Q7 if they can have them setup together. Most curious about Frantz thoughts on this...and a proper sub setup with Q7s 'potentially' challenging great world class speaker systems like MM7. Do not doubt the potential on bass...but I do wonder about 'full scale' for 12-13 musicians the way I heard on the Genesis 1.1s and Arrakis where the scale was at least 30%-50% greater, fuller, more 'complete' feeling (to me) than XLFs, Grande Utopias, etc.
I often see people referring to the Q7, but forgetting the Q5. Wouldn't the Q5 with a few subs be in the same level as the Q7? Is there any significant difference in the performance of the tweeters and medium units of these speakers?
Although the efficiency is very different, it does not seem to be a main reason - most people also refer to using very powerful amplifiers with the Q7.
Although the efficiency is very different, it does not seem to be a main reason - most people also refer to using very powerful amplifiers with the Q7.
Similar threads
 | Steve Williams Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator |  | Ron Resnick Site Owner | Administrator |  | Julian (The Fixer) Website Build | Marketing Managersing |