Magico S5's in the house...
- Thread starter MadFloyd
- Start date
Well, but they are not (1.9 ohm at 86Hz), nor are their impedance plot more balance. We don't need to guess here, both speakers measurement are on-line.
Btw, a kick drum will "jump" at you in live performance, but not a cello. My Wilsons use to startled me on both. It was fun for sometime... My son JBL monitors jump all the time, is that a good thing?
To be honest, I've seen so much Wilson bias over the years its nice to read something different
Caveat- I don't own either brand.
Keith,
I understand you, but it is natural - when people love their systems they want to show it! BTW, I valuate more 200 people posting their opinion 5 times, than 5 people posting their opinions 200 times.
BTW, since this a Magico thread I am posting the Stereophile measured frequency response of the Magico Q5, that IMHO sounds great.
Attachments
Keith,
I understand you, but it is natural - when people love their systems they want to show it! BTW, I valuate more 200 people posting their opinion 5 times, than 5 people posting their opinions 200 times.
BTW, since this a Magico thread I am posting the Stereophile measured frequency response of the Magico Q5, that IMHO sounds great.
I wonder if MC would have summed up the bass like that?
To me, the Q5 always sounded a bit lean.
According to some Magico lovers you have to spend a few months listening to them to really appreciate them ...
According to some Magico lovers you have to spend a few months listening to them to really appreciate them ...
Good one
I must say, I never took the time...
According to some Magico lovers you have to spend a few months listening to them to really appreciate them ...
The Q5 maybe, but my Q3, it was love at first sight
alexandre
I've been following this thread for a few reasons. First, Madfloyd is a friend so it's cool to see him do his audiophile thing and I also respect his ear, kind of borrowing from experiences with gear. I'm also pretty intrigued with Magico speakers and hope to have the opportunity at some point to hear them in my system.
I have to say, at this point in the thread Im left feeling sort of hanging....I mean I just really wish cannata would take a postilion and open up a little about his feelings regarding Wilson bass. Don't be shy, go ahead and let it out
So about Madfloyd's current experiments....the one thing that I keep thinking about are those cables. I wish you hadn't made that change before getting the S5's in house. I know it wasn't a planned thing, opportunity just sorta knocked but it creates a challenge, IMO. From my experience the MA-X, love em or hate em, really change how a system sounds. Top to bottom they have an impact. As mentioned throughout this thread, it does take some time for our brains to adjust to changes in our systems sound, especially significant changes. I know it's a coulda shoulda woulda thing but I sure wish you would have lived with the Alexia's + MA-X for a while THEN bring the S5 in. You made some comments about how certain instruments or frequency sounded different/better/natural etc and I thought to myself I wonder how much of that may have been the cables...? Could be none, could be a lot but likely at least some.
I don't have any care about which speakers Madfloyd prefer's, cables amps etc. Just thinking about the process.
PS: I feel a little dirty posting in the Magico thread. I own Wilsons....and like them.
I have to say, at this point in the thread Im left feeling sort of hanging....I mean I just really wish cannata would take a postilion and open up a little about his feelings regarding Wilson bass. Don't be shy, go ahead and let it out
So about Madfloyd's current experiments....the one thing that I keep thinking about are those cables. I wish you hadn't made that change before getting the S5's in house. I know it wasn't a planned thing, opportunity just sorta knocked but it creates a challenge, IMO. From my experience the MA-X, love em or hate em, really change how a system sounds. Top to bottom they have an impact. As mentioned throughout this thread, it does take some time for our brains to adjust to changes in our systems sound, especially significant changes. I know it's a coulda shoulda woulda thing but I sure wish you would have lived with the Alexia's + MA-X for a while THEN bring the S5 in. You made some comments about how certain instruments or frequency sounded different/better/natural etc and I thought to myself I wonder how much of that may have been the cables...? Could be none, could be a lot but likely at least some.
I don't have any care about which speakers Madfloyd prefer's, cables amps etc. Just thinking about the process.
PS: I feel a little dirty posting in the Magico thread. I own Wilsons....and like them.
Last edited:
I've been following this thread for a few reasons. First, Madfloyd is a friend so it's cool to see him do his audiophile thing and I also respect his ear, kind of borrowing from experiences with gear. I'm also pretty intrigued with Magico speakers and hope to have the opportunity at some point to hear them in my system.
I have to say, at this point in the thread Im left feeling sort of hanging....I mean I just really wish cannata would take a postilion and open up a little about his feelings regarding Wilson bass. Don't be shy, go ahead and let it out
So about Madfloyd's current experiments....the one thing that I keep thinking about is those cables. I wish you hadn't made that change before getting the S5's in house. I know it wasn't a planned thing, opportunity just sorta knocked but it creates a challenge, IMO. From my experience the MA-X, love em or hate em, really change how a system sounds. Top to bottom they have an impact. As mentioned throughout this thread, it does take some time for our brains to adjust to changes in our systems sound, especially significant changes. I know it's a coulda shoulda woulda thing but I sure wish you would have lived with the Alexia's + MA-X for a while THEN bring the S5 in. You made some comments about how certain instruments or frequency sounded different/better/natural etc and I thought to myself I wonder how much of that may have been the cables...? Could be none, could be a lot but likely at least some.
I don't have any care about which speakers Madfloyd prefer's, cables amps etc. Just thinking about the process.
PS: I feel a little dirty posting in the Magico thread. I own Wilsons....and like them.
Richard, welcome to the thread (David, you too!)
Regarding cables: I only have 1 MA-X cable in the system and it's between my DAC and the preamp so when I listen to analog, it's not in the path. The MIT cables did 2 things in my system (to my ears):
1) reduce grain
2) reduce midbass as compared to the Transparent
I will be switching back to an all Transparent path on Saturday (just for the day) so I'll get a feel.
On Sunday I will probably switch back to the Alexias to see how I react. In my mind they have more energy which I miss on symphonic and rock material.
I will keep this thread updated with my observations/perceptions.
Thanks for the formal welcome but I've been lurking for days
Glad to hear the cables are not at all an issue with the audition process. Off topic, surprised they (MA-X) had such small impact. Certainly doesn't match my experiences.
In general, I gotta think both of those magnificent speakers are going to do a lot of things well and a couple of things not so well. Gonna come down to which you enjoy the most, flaws and all. I'm all about getting to a place where time in the listening chair is about music, not gear
Glad to hear the cables are not at all an issue with the audition process. Off topic, surprised they (MA-X) had such small impact. Certainly doesn't match my experiences.
In general, I gotta think both of those magnificent speakers are going to do a lot of things well and a couple of things not so well. Gonna come down to which you enjoy the most, flaws and all. I'm all about getting to a place where time in the listening chair is about music, not gear
Keith,
I understand you, but it is natural - when people love their systems they want to show it! BTW, I valuate more 200 people posting their opinion 5 times, than 5 people posting their opinions 200 times.
Despite the ongoing pissing match, I ultimately think Magico is great for Wilson and vice versa. I don't think Wilson designs were going anywhere post W/P 7 (arguably the 6- in fact, I chose the original Sophia over the 7 as it was more coherent). I auditioned the Maxx3 just when Magico had the V3/M5 out - it seemed bass limited despite size and price premium over the outgoing 2. Wilson's latest product line is much more competitive and that has driven Magicos Q and more recent S lines as well. And then folks who don't like either tend to trend toward Sonus Faber, which has a much different product array (better) than 10 years back.
The only negative about the high end of speakers, is everyone deciding they need to make 50, 100, 200k speakers- the market just isn't big enough imo. A perfect example is Tidal- which was all the buzz two years ago, but you never hear anyone posting about it now. For Alon Wolf to have taken Magico this far and with staying power is to be commended- I told him that in person a few weeks back.
Nice post Keith. I think the W/P 7 was introduced shortly after David Wilson started to show photographs of the Vienna State Opera and reference his visits there in some of his marketing material. The Wilson sound has been evolving ever since.
I've always thought that the S5, first in the S line, was a direct response to the Wilson Sasha. I agree with you that these two brands are good for each other, and for the industry, though I bemoan the escalating prices.
Madfloyd is in an enviable position to be able to evaluate both speakers at his leisure. This comparison was a popular thread on the AudioShark forum also. It is interesting to me that Madfloyd is open to the possibilities of each speaker and is not firmly in one or the other camp as so often is the case with some of these brands, like Transparent, MIT, Wilson, Magico. In fact, he will also have complete suites of each of those cable brands at least on Saturday with which to do some comparisons.
I'm quite interested in how this comparison will develop and what Madfloyd will be thinking in a month from now.
I spent the day yesterday listening to Madfloyd's system. As I have an analog only based system, we spend most of the day listening to familiar LPs. First up was Beethoven's Appassionata played by kayo Kamiya, direct to disk at 45rpm. I know this record well as I have been using it lately while comparing cartridges. The upper keys sounded glorious with beautiful tone, dynamics and detail. Extremely natural, but the midrange and lower frequencies were a bit thin, lacking body, weight and foundation. It seemed odd that my Magico Mini IIs could play this recording with more realism than the much larger, full range S5. This initial impression reflected some of the criticism people have expressed about the thin bass on Magico speakers.
Ian and I set about tying to improve the sound. We moved the Alexias out of the room and started to play with speaker positioning. We added the spikes to the S5s once the speakers were close to their final location. We moved the speakers closer to the listener, moved them in toward each other and set them up fairly precisely with his laser measuring device. Toe-in and tilt were adjusted. With each change, the midrange slowly filled in, the bass began to appear and the sound improved. Tonal balance became much smother and the low frequencies gained a clarity, weight, articulation and texture. I had not heard this level of sound in his system before. It was beginning to be very impressive.
We then switched his MIT speaker cables to the Transparents that I had brought with me and we also inserted some Transparent ICs between his phono and pre. This changed the tonal balance toward the midrange, so we spread the speakers apart and regained the tonal balance and increased the soundstage width while doing so. It was kind of interesting how we got similar results from switching speaker cable brands and moving the speakers narrower or wider. The MITs sounded very extended with great high and low frequencies, but they were a bit thin in the midrange. The Transparents emphasized the midrange over the frequency extremes. We compensated for this simply by moving the speakers closer to each other or further apart. In the end, we both agreed that the bass was slightly better with the MIT, but I preferred the Transparents overall because I found the highs less fatiguing. Ian seemed to like both brands and will work on further toe-in and minor adjustments to address the MIT highs. Both cables sounded very good.
We also made some minor adjustments to VTA, azimuth and anti skating. Now Beethoven's Appassionata had the tonal balance and dynamics that I hear on my Mini IIs in my much smaller, sealed room but it had more resolution, extension and scale. The energy exploding from that Bosendorfer was something to behold. It sounded very natural and realistic, as did most of the other LPs we listened to after all of our adjustments. Near the end of the visit, Ian wanted to quickly run through a selection of digital files so that he could better understand what the Magicos sounded like with contemporary rock and pop recordings and he also wanted to switch the cables back to MIT.
Sure enough, they could bogey. There were some extreme amounts of bass articulation, extension and impact on heavy rock music. The place was shaking. (As it did earlier with the Sheffield Drum LP). Dynamics were incredible, but so where the delicate, nuanced string lines on solo violin. I suppose it sounds trite, but I found these speakers very emotionally involving. I was not really expecting that. I should add that the S5s are extremely transparent. You don't get the sense that they are adding a coloration of their own. I'm sure they must, but it is very difficult to identify exactly what it is. I thought my Mini IIs lack cabinet colorations. The S5 takes that to a new level. And the drivers just don't attract attention to themselves. It is a very coherent speaker design. The speakers seem a bit more forgiving in terms of room placement because of the sealed cabinets, but they can be so precise and revealing, to reach the speakers potential, it is worth making the effort to really play with set up and speaker/listener positions. We found those efforts very rewarding.
I had heard the S5 previously on two occasions at dealerships. I was underwhelmed. I don't know if it was the set ups, the associated equipment or that they were not yet fully broken in. It makes me wonder if some of the criticism of Magico's general sound is due to less than ideal auditioning conditions.
This experience at Ian's house gave me a new appreciation of this speaker. His room is fine but not ideal for acoustics. It is extremely comfortable and a real pleasure to be in. Ian loves music, so the openness of the room allows him to listen less seriously while cooking in his kitchen or walking around the downstairs. I had thought that this open room would not allow the pressurization necessary to get that visceral impact from the lower frequencies that some other speakers can provide. I was wrong. The S5 delivers plenty of impact and startling dynamics and room filling sound, even in Ian's large, open floor plan.
His associated equipment is of a very high caliber. The Pass electronics and Magico are a superb combination. In this setting, the Magico S5s sounded fantastic. I think they will benefit from some more break in. I think they have about 250 hours on them now. And they will sound even better with some more judicious fine tuning to achieve their last bit of potential, but I was very impressed with the presentation yesterday. It is the best that his system has sounded to me, and I have been enjoying his hospitality for several years now.
Many of you know that I am a big Magico/Pass fan. But given my previous experiences with the S5, I was not expecting such a good demonstration. I had always preferred the sound of the Magico Q series, but after yesterday's listening session, I have a new found respect and real appreciation for these speakers. Like Myles discovered during his excellent review period, the S5 is a real achievement.
Many thanks again Ian for a wonderful afternoon listening session. The system is really sounding excellent.
Ian and I set about tying to improve the sound. We moved the Alexias out of the room and started to play with speaker positioning. We added the spikes to the S5s once the speakers were close to their final location. We moved the speakers closer to the listener, moved them in toward each other and set them up fairly precisely with his laser measuring device. Toe-in and tilt were adjusted. With each change, the midrange slowly filled in, the bass began to appear and the sound improved. Tonal balance became much smother and the low frequencies gained a clarity, weight, articulation and texture. I had not heard this level of sound in his system before. It was beginning to be very impressive.
We then switched his MIT speaker cables to the Transparents that I had brought with me and we also inserted some Transparent ICs between his phono and pre. This changed the tonal balance toward the midrange, so we spread the speakers apart and regained the tonal balance and increased the soundstage width while doing so. It was kind of interesting how we got similar results from switching speaker cable brands and moving the speakers narrower or wider. The MITs sounded very extended with great high and low frequencies, but they were a bit thin in the midrange. The Transparents emphasized the midrange over the frequency extremes. We compensated for this simply by moving the speakers closer to each other or further apart. In the end, we both agreed that the bass was slightly better with the MIT, but I preferred the Transparents overall because I found the highs less fatiguing. Ian seemed to like both brands and will work on further toe-in and minor adjustments to address the MIT highs. Both cables sounded very good.
We also made some minor adjustments to VTA, azimuth and anti skating. Now Beethoven's Appassionata had the tonal balance and dynamics that I hear on my Mini IIs in my much smaller, sealed room but it had more resolution, extension and scale. The energy exploding from that Bosendorfer was something to behold. It sounded very natural and realistic, as did most of the other LPs we listened to after all of our adjustments. Near the end of the visit, Ian wanted to quickly run through a selection of digital files so that he could better understand what the Magicos sounded like with contemporary rock and pop recordings and he also wanted to switch the cables back to MIT.
Sure enough, they could bogey. There were some extreme amounts of bass articulation, extension and impact on heavy rock music. The place was shaking. (As it did earlier with the Sheffield Drum LP). Dynamics were incredible, but so where the delicate, nuanced string lines on solo violin. I suppose it sounds trite, but I found these speakers very emotionally involving. I was not really expecting that. I should add that the S5s are extremely transparent. You don't get the sense that they are adding a coloration of their own. I'm sure they must, but it is very difficult to identify exactly what it is. I thought my Mini IIs lack cabinet colorations. The S5 takes that to a new level. And the drivers just don't attract attention to themselves. It is a very coherent speaker design. The speakers seem a bit more forgiving in terms of room placement because of the sealed cabinets, but they can be so precise and revealing, to reach the speakers potential, it is worth making the effort to really play with set up and speaker/listener positions. We found those efforts very rewarding.
I had heard the S5 previously on two occasions at dealerships. I was underwhelmed. I don't know if it was the set ups, the associated equipment or that they were not yet fully broken in. It makes me wonder if some of the criticism of Magico's general sound is due to less than ideal auditioning conditions.
This experience at Ian's house gave me a new appreciation of this speaker. His room is fine but not ideal for acoustics. It is extremely comfortable and a real pleasure to be in. Ian loves music, so the openness of the room allows him to listen less seriously while cooking in his kitchen or walking around the downstairs. I had thought that this open room would not allow the pressurization necessary to get that visceral impact from the lower frequencies that some other speakers can provide. I was wrong. The S5 delivers plenty of impact and startling dynamics and room filling sound, even in Ian's large, open floor plan.
His associated equipment is of a very high caliber. The Pass electronics and Magico are a superb combination. In this setting, the Magico S5s sounded fantastic. I think they will benefit from some more break in. I think they have about 250 hours on them now. And they will sound even better with some more judicious fine tuning to achieve their last bit of potential, but I was very impressed with the presentation yesterday. It is the best that his system has sounded to me, and I have been enjoying his hospitality for several years now.
Many of you know that I am a big Magico/Pass fan. But given my previous experiences with the S5, I was not expecting such a good demonstration. I had always preferred the sound of the Magico Q series, but after yesterday's listening session, I have a new found respect and real appreciation for these speakers. Like Myles discovered during his excellent review period, the S5 is a real achievement.
Many thanks again Ian for a wonderful afternoon listening session. The system is really sounding excellent.
Thanks, Peter. It was great to see you again and the day was certainly very rewarding for me. You have a great ear and your voicing skills are getting better and better.
The speakers are sounding excellent, as is my turntable which you adjusted - thanks for that!
I had some work to do to try and get similar voicing with my MIT speaker cables (once you left with your Transparent) and while I'm not there yet, I'm now in a place where things are sounding very good. I just played Ornette Coleman's The Shape of Jazz to Come LP and Ornette and Don Cherry sounded so natural and present. Charlie Haden's bass was robust and I was groovin'.
Next up is some classical followed by classic rock.
The speakers are sounding excellent, as is my turntable which you adjusted - thanks for that!
I had some work to do to try and get similar voicing with my MIT speaker cables (once you left with your Transparent) and while I'm not there yet, I'm now in a place where things are sounding very good. I just played Ornette Coleman's The Shape of Jazz to Come LP and Ornette and Don Cherry sounded so natural and present. Charlie Haden's bass was robust and I was groovin'.
Next up is some classical followed by classic rock.
See, that's why I don't understand people who say Magico speakers are "clinical" or "souless". How can they be, if they, through sheer transparency, present you MORE of your music, in a less coloured way?
Great report, Peter, and congratulations on your system, Ian!
alexandre
I think folks who like Sonus Fabers, Harbeths, Devores, Audio Notes, etc. will always think a Magico as soul-less.
I also think Magicos can sound that way on Soulution, Spectral, etc. as we discussed in Newport. I'm craving to hear Dart/Magico which apparently is not
I think folks who like Sonus Fabers, Harbeths, Devores, Audio Notes, etc. will always think a Magico as soul-less.
I also think Magicos can sound that way on Soulution, Spectral, etc. as we discussed in Newport. I'm craving to hear Dart/Magico which apparently is not
Pass/Magico is certainly not soul-less either.
Many people prefer Magico/Spectral/MIT/digital. Others like Magico/Pass/Transparent or other/analog. The key is that Magico is so transparent to upstream components, and it has such little cabinet sound, that the equipment that one selects for the rest of the system will heavily influence the overall sound.
Last edited:
Similar threads
