Magico Q7
- Thread starter wizard
- Start date
I owned the ML32 and ML33h monos and then ML33 monos back in 1999-2001. magnificent industrial design and really works of audio art. I also owned the Linn CD-12 at that same time and it was also beautiful.
the big-boy Levinsons were smooth and listenable. however; on current SOTA speakers I think they would really show their age. they would be a restriction to any quality source.
Probably under Joachim gerhard as it was audio physic gerhard called back then and you had deutsch mark 180.000 (those were the times ) screw the euro
http://www.audiophysic.de/download/cerubin/image_hifi_1999_06_cerubin.pdf
http://www.audiophysic.de/download/cerubin/image_hifi_1999_06_cerubin.pdf
How did the 33 compare with the 33H? I have heard the 33H on Sashas and definitely felt the treble grain was where they showed their age. D'Agostino Momentum definitely strikes me as more filigreed and refined in the treble for instance.
To me the only magico designs which were imo perfect in bass as well were the S 5 and V3 , the Q 7 lacked a little and the Q 3 a lot , peter before you get angry i havent had much exposure to your mini 2
Things being room dependable off course but certainly every speakerdesign is tailored to some extent
Interesting, so in some ways the S5s are Magico's best speaker. I wonder how the M Project will be.
I have never heard the Q7, but I have heard the V3, Q1, Q3, Q5, S5, S3...and the S5 is my favourite for its overall balance of qualities...truly a fantastic speaker. I think somehow that balance will find its way into the M series...and beyond.
To me the only magico designs which were imo perfect in bass as well were the S 5 and V3 , the Q 7 lacked a little and the Q 3 a lot , peter before you get angry i havent had much exposure to your mini 2
Things being room dependable off course but certainly every speakerdesign is tailored to some extent
andro, Don't worry. I never get angry about someone else's opinion or preferences. The Q line is certainly voiced differently than the S or V lines. My Mini is I think a bit closer to the Q in that the effort or intent was one of a very neutral tonal balance. I have heard this same balance in the Q7 and Q3, though I preferred the Q3. So far, the Q3 is the only Magico I've heard with which I would consider replacing my Mini 2.
I have spent some time with the S5 in a good friend's system and also the V3 at two dealerships. I never really liked the V3 because of driver coherence or integration. I do like the S5 very much, but it has a warmer sound with a slight tilt toward the bass having both more impact and weight compared to the Q line. I prefer the transparency and neutrality of the Q line, but I fully understand why others prefer the S line. The other thing is that all of these speakers have different power needs, and both your and my preferences are perhaps results of the systems and rooms in which we have heard these particular models.
The thing is that most of these Magico speakers are so revealing of upstream components, that IMO, you are hearing more of the rest of the system and room interaction than you are hearing the contribution of the speaker. Most complaints about the "Magico Sound", again IMO, is really more about what the speaker does not do rather than what it does. These speakers draw very little attention to themselves, unlike what many other speakers do.
If only I could be sure of that I would spend a lot of money.
Oh, take a chance MadFloyd. It's the only way I will ever be able to hear the mighty M Project. Any idea how efficient and easy a load that speaker has?
MadFloyd,
I have listened to the Q7 in two systems and the S5 in another two places. I could not find any way in which the S5 was better than the Q7. To be honest, IMHO they can not be compared. The bass of the Q7 is really good. Sorry, it is just my opinion.
Peter,
Fortunately. It is why the mini II is such a good speaker!
I would also love to listen to the Q5 with Audio Research REF750's, just by curiosity. I was impressed with its musical sound, but they very difficult to drive.
+1
As much as I love the S5, the Q7 is a MUCH better speaker, including on the bass: Much more impact, neutral frequency response (no typical 80Hz bump that Wilson and others use so much to make us believe there is a lot of bass), much more bass definition.
The Cerubin was a project handled by the technical designer that Joachim Gerhard had hired during that period. The Cerubin was the project that lead to Bernd Theiss doctors degree at the University of Essex as I understand.
Joachim actually did not design any speakers after Virgo II. He did all quality control though and had final word on all minor changes. From virgo II to Avanti III all speakers at Audio Physic was designed by Bernd Theiss. He is a genious and behind all the speakers in the AP golden area. He left the company when they started work on the Avanti III. That was when Joachim hired Manfred Diestertisch as Bernd Theiss replacement. Manfred Diestertisch has been the man behind all AP speakers from Avanti III up until now and he was also the person who took over Joachim's head designer role when Joachim was forced to leave AP by their board.
The AP Cerubin certainly is tough competition for the Magico Q7 in terms of overall sound quality. In terms of bass the Cerubin blows the Q7 out into Orbit with its 8x 10" bass drivers pr speaker actively crossed over by a gigantic 1000W analogue amplifier.
Last edited:
One of those strange days where I agree entirely with microstrip.
... I am getting complacent It takes a while to warm up to the Q sound for many listeners/audiophiles. THey are so devoid of a character that many will be taken aback at first then the wealth of information that those speakers provide begin to pour in and there is no going back. The S5 is an entry to that world not the last word.
I have no doubt that a serious high wattage tube amplifiers will be able to drive the Q5 well. The REF750 would do the job very well I think.
Interesting roysen , i ll try to find some more info on the net .
Madfloyd every design is in a sense unique as putting together different units in a different housing will give different sound , you cant see those things in measurements (freq response for example ).
Different height/placement of the units
Different X- over or X- over parts, the list goes on and on ....
Regarding comparing the Q 7 to a S 5 : i am talking about balance , i never said i d rather own a S 5 then a Q 7 , the Q 7 is definetively on my short list if i ever was going to buy something , for the money the S5 is very good i think
Madfloyd every design is in a sense unique as putting together different units in a different housing will give different sound , you cant see those things in measurements (freq response for example ).
Different height/placement of the units
Different X- over or X- over parts, the list goes on and on ....
Regarding comparing the Q 7 to a S 5 : i am talking about balance , i never said i d rather own a S 5 then a Q 7 , the Q 7 is definetively on my short list if i ever was going to buy something , for the money the S5 is very good i think
Last edited:
They are finished from repair and now in new condition both visually and electricly.
Great, so did you hook them up and hear them in your room already? How do they sound, now that they are fixed?
Similar threads
