Thank you, Elliot.what tube amp are you talking about. I have heard the VACS drive them very well and I heard the big ARC do that as well.
Thank you, Peter.Interesting topic Ron. What is motivating the question?
Madfloyd had big CAT monos and pre but prefers CH on his MPro, predecessor to the M6. When I had Magicos I used Pass SS. I preferred Lamm SS and that combination produced a natural sound. I did try my Lamm tubes and there was a magic but only on certain non demanding music when the amps were not pushed.
Madfloyd had big CAT monos and pre but prefers CH on his MPro, predecessor to the M6.
Thank you, Peter.
I've heard them driven by big CAT monos, but cannot confirm the model. The sound was excellent in dynamic range, FR, and clarity -- at least I couldn't tell anything was missing. Mind you, this is an opinion formed after a few hours of casual listening & wine drinking!Hello!
Does anybody have any experience using tube amplifiers to drive Magico M6 loudspeakers?
I don't see how CAT will be better than CH except possibly on chamber where valve tone would have some advantages on initial listening. But CAT is not that level, unless andro is comparing (then it rises up a few levels)Yes, even though the tone of the CAT was fine, the CH Precision are much more lively and dynamic on the M Project. I wonder if the M6 are at least marginally easier to drive.
I’ve heard M6’s driven by ARC M160’s on two different occasions at the same dealer. Both times I felt that the amps simply couldn’t do the bass justice, that it felt like it “lagged” in the proceedings. The second time it was after the Magico sales manager had spent a day dialing the speakers in. In a sidebar with him, I mentioned my concern about bass lining up, and opined that a solid-state amp would probably suit the speaker better. He just gave me a knowing, but “no comment”, kind of look. I think they are a rather challenging speaker for tubes to drive.
Neither - - it's the speakers that are challenging (to drive). The best I've heard M6's was in a home setting with CH Precision M10 monos driving them. That was two years later than the tube experience, and with that SS power the bass lined up fine with the rest.What was challenging , the Sales Mgr or the amp ..?
I find both can be Challenging , but with the tubes , the best i have heard an M6 is on the big VAC’s mono’s , better than when i heard them on SS, unless you have them in a large room then the SS maybe better as they are power hungry like all Magico Speakers ..
Correction, you tried them with Lamm HYBRIDS...Lamm does not make a pure SS amp.Interesting topic Ron. What is motivating the question?
Madfloyd had big CAT monos and pre but prefers CH on his MPro, predecessor to the M6. When I had Magicos I used Pass SS. I preferred Lamm SS and that combination produced a natural sound. I did try my Lamm tubes and there was a magic but only on certain non demanding music when the amps were not pushed.
Did you ever hear their big Horn speaker? I did twice..but with Pass labs...I got the feeling it was a lot of potential wasted...Ron, what prompts the inquiry?
I always hoped that Magico would develop a more efficient speaker system. Maybe expand their horn speaker line. A two way front loaded horn with dual 15 or 18 inch woofers in the corner so it doesn’t have to be huge. First Watt is down the street.
I would take the CATs every day of the week and twice on Sunday on just about any speaker... IMO the tonality of the CH is simply not natural and without tone you don't really have music...the rest of the hifi traits become irrelevant. Mind you, I am only talking about a direct comparison of these two brands...not an absolute context but a relative one.I don't see how CAT will be better than CH except possibly on chamber where valve tone would have some advantages on initial listening. But CAT is not that level, unless andro is comparing (then it rises up a few levels)