• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Magnepan LRS Speaker Review

Vuki

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2018
Messages
341
Likes
392
Location
Zagreb, Croatia
I've listened to LRS in a quite large (ca. 7x5m) treated listening room and they sounded balanced. I'm sure they don't measure like that spinorama shows.
 

josh358

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2017
Messages
493
Likes
387
Well the Klippel is giving results of an anechoic chamber. Without being in a chamber. So it should measure as if there were no floor.

I'm not sure if this method has issues with large panels or with dipoles or both. It should not matter. Then again large panel listening experience always seems at odds with any of the common measurement methods.

I remember the first time I heard a panel. MG 1 Maggies. My description was deficient bass with zero impact, and no real treble. A light weight ephemeral sound. But from about 100 hz to 8 khz it's was open and clear and magical. I do think the appearance of something so cool impacted that perception too. Plus it only sounded good over a narrow loudness range with you sitting in The Spot.

I later acquired some MG 2i's. I didn't keep them long. It was a love/hate relationship. I found ESLs much more to my liking even though they've plenty of issues of their own.

I'm not convinced the Klippel is telling us the truth about panels and I'm not convinced that it isn't. The results of Harman blind tests on the panels indicate when you can't see the speaker they sound like they measure. Not very well. I could believe the influence of panel visuals is greater than box speakers. So in real life maybe panels sound great even though they don't.
As Dave says, you can't measure a dipole off the ground. You just can't, because the ground is an extension of the baffle.

Remember that the back wave from a dipole is out of phase with the front. At low frequencies, it creeps around the front of the baffle and the front and back waves start to cancel. They lose 6 dB/octave as frequency decreases. The frequency at which this rolloff starts, Fequal, is proportional to baffle size. And with a floor in place, the effective baffle size is at least twice what it is without it. (There can be even more room reinforcement.)

Anyway, the bottom line is that I almost never see dipole woofers measured correctly, and incorrect measurements won't tell you anything about how the speakers actually sound. To measure them correctly, you pretty much have to measure them in a room -- and then you're dealing with the specific room.

I'm not sure which specific Harman studies you're talking about, but if they put panels in their speaker shuffler, they probably would have sounded like crap. Dipoles need careful placement, and even if you positioned them carefully, a blind A/B comparison would be problematic since dynamic speakers requires require a deader acoustic than dipoles, meaning that one or the other is going to sound too dead or too live in an A/B comparison.

Another issue is that AFAIK you can't judge a dipole line source in mono. It will work, but you won't have any sense of the spatial magic that makes them a popular choice for acoustical music.

There are others as well.
 

Robbo99999

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Messages
6,874
Likes
6,672
Location
UK
:facepalm:
Compared to most competent multi-driver speaker designs, the engineering of these are closer to a string of wires stretched over a hollow gourd than to a Stradivarius. The mystery is how they can actually sound good with that kind of engineering. Except to those that can "hear measurements".
Ah, it's true I wasn't aware of the details of the speaker design.....but I knew they were an unusual design that wasn't based on the usual dome type woofers/tweeters and figured it was some kind of flat panel type speaker....but given the fairly high price & unusual design that led me to think "overengineered" when a lot of cheap normal type designed speakers (the type most commonly reviewed on this site) perform better. I'm not sure exactly what your angle/meaning is when you say "hear measurements".....I think it's pretty obvious from the frequency response of this reviewed speaker as to how it would sound, or maybe you're referring to something else.
 

EJ3

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Dec 10, 2019
Messages
2,153
Likes
1,661
Location
James Island, SC
Wow, that's a lot to digest! Awesome review! You'll probably need a really good sub to cross it over 200 Hz.
You will need a true sub and a mid-bass module! Just think of all that money you will save by buying Magnepan. Now you get to spend on mid bass speakers and subs. Of course, with other models within the line, your mileage will vary. We just don't know. Then there is always what you like.
 

Feanor

Senior Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 22, 2019
Messages
382
Likes
496
Location
southwestern Ontario
To be honest it's pretty easy to imagine how they'd sound from the frequency response when it has such large deficiencies within that response. If there wasn't a correlation between frequency response & perceived sound quality then there would be no point in measuring it! :D But yes, I've never listened to them, and wouldn't plan to for these ones.
Well exactly. In other words you have a prejudice that you aren't willing to test.
 

Blumlein 88

Grand Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 23, 2016
Messages
20,521
Likes
37,050
As Dave says, you can't measure a dipole off the ground. You just can't, because the ground is an extension of the baffle.

Remember that the back wave from a dipole is out of phase with the front. At low frequencies, it creeps around the front of the baffle and the front and back waves start to cancel. They lose 6 dB/octave as frequency decreases. The frequency at which this rolloff starts, Fequal, is proportional to baffle size. And with a floor in place, the effective baffle size is at least twice what it is without it. (There can be even more room reinforcement.)

Anyway, the bottom line is that I almost never see dipole woofers measured correctly, and incorrect measurements won't tell you anything about how the speakers actually sound. To measure them correctly, you pretty much have to measure them in a room -- and then you're dealing with the specific room.

I'm not sure which specific Harman studies you're talking about, but if they put panels in their speaker shuffler, they probably would have sounded like crap. Dipoles need careful placement, and even if you positioned them carefully, a blind A/B comparison would be problematic since dynamic speakers requires require a deader acoustic than dipoles, meaning that one or the other is going to sound too dead or too live in an A/B comparison.

Another issue is that AFAIK you can't judge a dipole line source in mono. It will work, but you won't have any sense of the spatial magic that makes them a popular choice for acoustical music.

There are others as well.
I think you are rationalizing their poor performance. The floor will make some difference as will rear wall position. But there are more problems than that. And Harman tested Quads and M-Ls in room vs other speakers.
 

sweetchaos

Major Contributor
The Curator
Joined
Nov 29, 2019
Messages
3,872
Likes
11,549
Location
BC, Canada
As someone who never heard panels, I appreciate the honest review.

Magnepan's marketing department claims:
Full-range planar (electrostatic or ribbon) speakers have a reputation with audiophiles for uncanny bass and midbass accuracy.
- I guess they have their own definition of accuracy.
Once a listener develops an appreciation for dipole sound, few go back to conventional dynamic speakers.
- It sounds like "With time, you'll learn to like our sound".

Deal breakers for me:
- No bass, require sub just to make it sound right
- Not accurate
- Not consistent from song to song
- Smallest sweet spot (unless your head is in a vice)
- Power hungry and inefficient, require expensive amp

Lots of limitations, reminds me of...
giphy.gif
 

Robbo99999

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Messages
6,874
Likes
6,672
Location
UK
Well exactly. In other words you have a prejudice that you aren't willing to test.
Well exactly, that's what reviews are for.....I wouldn't bother hunting out this speaker to listen to..... nor to buy.
 
D

Deleted member 2944

Guest
Wouldn't that be the same with every speaker?
Yeah, that's a fair point. But think about the individual case for each type of "floor-standing" speaker, and the particular dipole configuration here.

That’s not to say that “conventional” floor-standing systems will not exhibit a similar characteristic when measured via the NFS. However, with many conventional floor-standing systems the lower portion of the speaker "box" functions much like a “stand” for the upper portion…….so the inappropriateness of the measuring scheme is less pronounced.

Worst-case scenario is….a speaker designed exclusively for floor standing would exhibit a full 6db inconsistency because the expected half-space listening environment is replaced with a full-space measuring environment.

The mounting platform of the NFS system is well above the floor and thus the bass-shy measurement, in this case.

There are other issues with this speaker that are perfectly valid for discussion, but the exaggerated sloping off of the bass is easily understood.

Dave.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Thomas savage

Grand Contributor
The Watchman
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 24, 2016
Messages
10,260
Likes
16,298
Location
uk, taunton
If you've never listened at any length to dipole speakers, maybe you should shut the eff up ... just as suggestion.
Hey , let's not go full butt hurt when folks don't think much of the things we like ..

Not so much of a suggestion more of a request.

Cheers
 

josh358

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2017
Messages
493
Likes
387
I think you are rationalizing their poor performance. The floor will make some difference as will rear wall position. But there are more problems than that. And Harman tested Quads and M-Ls in room vs other speakers.
Have you ever seen what happens to the response of a dipole when you lift it a few feet off the ground? That's like drilling a hole in the side of a sealed subwoofer. Seriously. The measurement has nothing to do with how they will measure or sound in your living room. It's just wrong.

Here are two response measurements -- compare the bass. Curve 1:
LRS 1.JPG

Oh my god, way too much midbass, that speaker must sound boomy!

Curve 2:
LRS 2.JPG


Oh no, no bass at all, *that* speaker must sound really tinny!

Except that they're the same speaker. They're both the LRS. And both were carefully measured by reputable reviewers, John Atkinson in the first case and Amirm in the second.

In both cases, the measurements were invalid, pretty much in opposite ways. Neither has much to do with what you'll hear in your room, which is pretty flat down to 60 Hz.

Comparing the results and methodologies of the two reviews is I think a very informative exercise and again, a lesson in the limitations of measurements in reviews! Compare for example the measurements of vertical dispersion. Totally different scale -- but which *has more to do with what you hear in the room*? I'm guessing Stereophile's, unless you're a spider or a mouse.

Graphs and numbers can fool us into thinking that something is more reliable than it is. How can numbers lie? But if you look at the two graphs above, you'll see that they can, that these two measurements of the same speaker differ from one another more than methodologically consistent measurements of two entirely different speakers would.

I hope everyone who thinks you can "listen with measurements" sees this. That's a dangerous trap to fall into, almost as dangerous as complete subjectivity.
 

Feanor

Senior Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 22, 2019
Messages
382
Likes
496
Location
southwestern Ontario
Hey , let's not go full butt hurt when folks don't think much of the things we like ..

Not so much of a suggestion more of a request.

Cheers
Yes, I was a bit rude: apology to all concerned.

It's not so much about being "butt hurt" as it is the about so many supposedly "objectivist" people displaying arrogant prejudice with no experience and little knowledge.
 

Robbo99999

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Messages
6,874
Likes
6,672
Location
UK
Have you ever seen what happens to the response of a dipole when you lift it a few feet off the ground? That's like drilling a hole in the side of a sealed subwoofer. Seriously. The measurement has nothing to do with how they will measure or sound in your living room. It's just wrong.

Here are two response measurements -- compare the bass. Curve 1:
View attachment 83799
Oh my god, way too much midbass, that speaker must sound boomy!

Curve 2:
View attachment 83800

Oh no, no bass at all, *that* speaker must sound really tinny!

Except that they're the same speaker. They're both the LRS. And both were carefully measured by reputable reviewers, John Atkinson in the first case and Amirm in the second.

In both cases, the measurements were invalid, pretty much in opposite ways. Neither has much to do with what you'll hear in your room, which is pretty flat down to 60 Hz.

Comparing the results and methodologies of the two reviews is I think a very informative exercise and again, a lesson in the limitations of measurements in reviews! Compare for example the measurements of vertical dispersion. Totally different scale -- but which *has more to do with what you hear in the room*? I'm guessing Stereophile's, unless you're a spider or a mouse.

Graphs and numbers can fool us into thinking that something is more reliable than it is. How can numbers lie? But if you look at the two graphs above, you'll see that they can, that these two measurements of the same speaker differ from one another more than methodologically consistent measurements of two entirely different speakers would.

I hope everyone who thinks you can "listen with measurements" sees this. That's a dangerous trap to fall into, almost as dangerous as complete subjectivity.
Given the massive differences between those two then it does indicate that something somewhere is wrong somewhere....unless it just means that the speaker is widely unpredictable in terms of listening position & placement (& perhaps hence measurement), and therefore that is it's own set of negative attributes for the speaker right there too.
 

josh358

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2017
Messages
493
Likes
387
As someone who never heard panels, I appreciate the honest review.

Magnepan's marketing department claims:

- I guess they have their own definition of accuracy.

- It sounds like "With time, you'll learn to like our sound".

Deal breakers for me:
- No bass, require sub just to make it sound right
- Not accurate
- Not consistent from song to song
- Smallest sweet spot (unless your head is in a vice)
- Power hungry and inefficient, require expensive amp

Lots of limitations, reminds me of...
View attachment 83783
Heh, "hasn't heard panels" says more than you know.
 

josh358

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2017
Messages
493
Likes
387
Given the massive differences between those two then it does indicate that something somewhere is wrong somewhere....unless it just means that the speaker is widely unpredictable in terms of listening position & placement (& perhaps hence measurement), and therefore that is it's own set of negative attributes for the speaker right there too.
There's something wrong with both measurements, just different things. Stereophile's were made with the microphone too close -- you can't do that with a dipole woofer, because you'll think there's too much bass. Amirm's were made off the floor -- and you can't do that with a dipole woofer, because they lose all their bass when you lift them off the floor.

I think the problem in both cases is that they tried to use the measurement techniques that work for conventional dynamic speakers with planars. And that doesn't work. It's like, I don't know, filling your lawn mower with vegetable oil and complaining that the carburetor got gunked up.
 
Top Bottom