• 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

FrantzM

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 12, 2016
Messages
4,337
Likes
7,731
Hi

A simple question. Is the LRS the best effort by Magnepan? What if it were a not so good example of what Magnepan can do ? I am awaiting measurements from other dipoles to form an opinion. This is the first and only dipole so far reviewed by Amir,
 

ctrl

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 24, 2020
Messages
1,616
Likes
6,086
Location
.de, DE, DEU
How Linkwitz did it.
A link to the origin of the images would be helpful.

To the black and white image:
1600689769572.png

This is the way to measure for anyone who does not have an anechoic chamber at hand. By using a gate on the impulse response, which suppresses all reflections, quasi anechoic measurements down to 200-300Hz are possible (with smoothing increasing to lower frequencies).
There are several ways to measure even lower frequencies with good accuracy. One of them is ground plane measurement.

To the first image:
1600689787678.png

I assume that the low frequency range (<300Hz) was determined with a ground-plane measurement.
To ensure a reliable measurement in the far-field, the measuring microphone should be in the triple distance to the largest dimension of the loudspeaker (as a rule of thumb).

In order to measure as few ambient reflections as possible, the distance to the next reflective surface should be as far as possible. If the next reflecting surface is five times the distance of the microphone distance to the loudspeaker, the reflection would already be attenuated by -20dB.

Due to the boundary surface ("mirror sound source") 6dB are added in relation to the free field level (4pi). Therefore, measurements are often made at a distance of 2m, since the result then corresponds to a 1m free field measurement.
 

wje

Senior Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 13, 2020
Messages
425
Likes
560
Location
Virginia
A simple question. Is the LRS the best effort by Magnepan? What if it were a not so good example of what Magnepan can do ? I am awaiting measurements from other dipoles to form an opinion. This is the first and only dipole so far reviewed by Amir,

Magnepan has often stated that the "LRS" was marketed to give people who couldn't afford one of their higher priced models, a "taste" of Magnepan. It's simply a loss-leader speaker that likely has a very low profit margin at $650.

I've owned the LRS, the .7 and finally, the 1.7i over the course of 6 weeks. For my preference, the .7 performed the best in my 16' x 15' living room. I really liked the .7 - but the guy who bought my LRS model, also wanted the .7, too. So, I reluctantly sold them to him. I then sprung for the 1.7i, which in my room, was a huge mistake. The speakers didn't bring me the same joy that the .7 model did. The 1.7i was towering behemoth compared to the .7 and really killed the views in my living room with the windows. I placed the 1.7i up for sale, and ironically, the guy that bought the LRS and the .7 from me, also wanted the 1.7i, too. So, I sold them. Now, I'm Magnepan-less in my home. It was a good experience.

Some impressions: When using the Crown XLS1502 amplifier, the LRS and .7 was capably powered. However, when switching out the Crown for a Parasound A23+, the bass was much better defined on the .7 than the LRS. I could really hear where the .7 benefitted from the better amplifier. I didn't have the Crown amplifier at the time I had the 1.7i, so I couldn't make any conclusions with respect to amplifier comparisons.

With the Magnepans being gone, I can reflect upon it being a great listening experience. The Magnepans did quite well with the jazz I'd listen to, but seemed to be a bit weak when it came to listening to rock and roll.

So, now here I am with the Wharfedale Linton Heritage speakers, on their dedicated stands. The sound is big, full, and does well with many genres of music. Plus, I've brought back my view in my living room with respect to being able to see out the windows again.

Here's a view of the 1.7i in my living room. As you can see, they are quite large - standing at 65" tall, with a few more inches added to that height by using the Mye stands.

Magnepan 1.7i 09032020.JPG
 

whazzup

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Feb 19, 2020
Messages
575
Likes
486
Are people saying the 'magic' (imaging, acoustical audio, etc) of panels comes from the 'panel way' of generating sound waves? Or the dipole design? Or both?

Similarly, are people attributing the 'failure' of klippel measurements to the unconventional panels (relative to box speaker drivers), or again, due to the dipole design (and by extension the room's role)?

Any official documentation that klippel has that says that they HAVE considered panels and/or dipole designs in their R&D?
 

JohnBooty

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Jul 24, 2018
Messages
632
Likes
1,555
Location
Philadelphia area
I really enjoyed the LRS when I heard them last year.

I didn't mind the lack of deep bass. What was there felt natural. For some types of music you'd really miss it, of course.

In my limited experience, flat panel and open baffle speakers seem to have some magic. I did not think they were the most neutral but, if I had to guess, there's something about the dispersion of that kind of speaker that just makes things sound more natural to me. Traditional ported box speakers, even really enjoyable ones, never really "disappear" for me.

If I had the extra space, I'd love to have some Maggies set up in a different room as a second listening system. Kind of like a sports car that doesn't make a great "daily driver" but makes a fantastic second car.

The Magnepan world begins with their 3.6 - 3.7 speakers. Not sure who their lesser models are aimed at, especially when speakers like the Tekton Pendragons and JBL Studio 590s cost less and do everything as good or much better- without the hassle and without subs.

I heard some Tektons (not the Pendragons, though) and felt they were among the worst-sounding speakers at the show. Absolutely piercing highs, and I don't have great high-frequency hearing so that's quite a dubious achievement.

Are people saying the 'magic' (imaging, acoustical audio, etc) of panels comes from the 'panel way' of generating sound waves? Or the dipole design? Or both?
We don't know is I think the real answer.

I agree that "we don't know" is definitely the answer. My uneducated hunch is that it's at least partially because of the dipole design, because well-executed dipole speakers using conventional drivers pull off a somewhat similar trick to my ears.
 
Last edited:

Willem

Major Contributor
Joined
Jan 8, 2019
Messages
3,658
Likes
5,276
Are people saying the 'magic' (imaging, acoustical audio, etc) of panels comes from the 'panel way' of generating sound waves? Or the dipole design? Or both?
We don't know is I think the real answer.
 

Willem

Major Contributor
Joined
Jan 8, 2019
Messages
3,658
Likes
5,276
If I had the extra space, I'd love to have these set up in a different room as a second listening system. Kind of like a sports car that doesn't make a great "daily driver" but makes a fantastic second car.
I have Quad 2805s as my main system in our big listening room and I really do not need anything else. They are driven by a 2x140 watt Quad 606-2 power amp and helped by a B&W PV1d subwoofer (plus Antimode 8033 subwoofer eq). Once equalized the sub integrated very well. I could do with a bit more headroom and as a first step I am planning to add a second sub.
The most important quality of the Quads is indeed that they disappear: the music is in the room, and that is it.
 

Burning Sounds

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Dec 22, 2016
Messages
523
Likes
883
Location
Co. Durham, UK
Lot's of talk of "magic" now, since @josh358 first mentioned it.

You should all know that "magic" is a Linkwitz patent! ;)

"After listening to a great variety of good, bad and so-so stereo recordings I am tempted to call it MAGIC521. The music comes through!"
 

Feanor

Senior Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 22, 2019
Messages
382
Likes
496
Location
southwestern Ontario
We really need to put this relativist and fallacious truism to sleep once and for all:
1) Prove it. We live in a time where speakers like the Genelec Ones or D&D 8C exist, it's hard to find any faults related to reproduction performance with them.
2) Once that's done, prove the underlying joke of an implication that all compromises are more or less equal. Once again, talking about reproduction performance, not preference.

Sorry to get a little vehement, but I see this feelsgood-soundsgood bullshit all the time.
If there is a phenomenon that is perceived by many people and there is a certain consistency of those observations, is it really science to dismiss these widely held perceptions as "bullshit"? Or would if be more scientific to investigate the possible physical bases of the widely perceived but not presently explicable phenomenon?

Incidentally I'm an agnostic; I'm not an atheist because I understand the the existence of God cannot be disproven.
 
Last edited:

welsh

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2020
Messages
363
Likes
364
But I assume that's based on Amirm's rolled-off bass? Correct me if I'm wrong, I didn't go back to check. I certainly didn't notice any lack of midbass impact on the percussion track at AXPONA.

In practice, with the MMG, I found that the practical limitation wasn't in the SPL capability of the woofer but rather intermodulation between the woofer and the tweeter. If the LRS is similar, I think you'd definitely want a sub if you like your music loud -- from what I've seen of SPL measurements people make online, most people don't play their speakers very loud at home. Personally, I found that the MMG was fine with classical, but I didn't like it with rock.
I’m new to this forum, and I am not conversant with the measurement parameters... but weirdly, my LRS speakers deliver in terms of string quartets, acoustic guitar and female voice... Yes, you have to have a Clockwork Orange-style clamp-chair to enjoy them fully.
 

Francis Vaughan

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Dec 6, 2018
Messages
933
Likes
4,697
Location
Adelaide Australia
Wow. The butthurt is real. Don't use an image from Magnepan itself? Know what else is marketing? All this "magic" nonsense.
I would normally be very careful of using any marketing images from any company. They are commissioned by the marketing department, are shot by professional photographers, usually with a graphic designer, and often done in a hurry. They typically have no input from any part of engineering, and are selected purely on looks and how they fit the marketing message. In order to get a good looking photograph typically all manner of indignities will be inflicted on the engineering elements of the device being marketed. You have no assurance that anything in a marketing shot is set up in a manner that the engineers would prefer. My first thought on the picture in question was that it was a typical studio setup, and the void to the left simply the rest of the studio space. However, what appears to be cat scratching post suggests it really is a real living room. However, critically, there is no place for a listening chair. Given the nature of Maggies, there is no way this is a real room setup. No owner would actually set the room up that way.
So again, imagining that the room has not been rearranged to suit the needs of the photographer is simply naive. Every part of the image is setup to sell the dream. Sell the notion that buying the product has you buying into the the entire lifestyle in the picture.
As to the magic. Unless you have tried, you have no idea. Personally I have, I like, but would not own. The big Maggies can be fabulous on the sort of audiophile music that seems to appeal to your traditional audiophile. Small jazz ensembles, acoustic instruments, acoustic blues, and so on. The very limiting listening position is a deal breaker for me, as well as their less than happy behaviour with evil loud and nasty levels of reproduction. I know people that love them. And their setups can sound utterly fabulous, within those constraints.
 

CDMC

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Sep 4, 2019
Messages
1,172
Likes
2,321
If amir had done a better job setting these speakers properly he would have been blown away...but he did not. I have owned many speakers in my life, including the Dunlavy SCVs (please research them). I presently own Maggies 3.6s which are a freaking miracle in terms of reproducing music. Yes, it takes a long time to find the sweep spot and most Maggies will require sub augmentation. But please do not end a review of the LRS with a non-recommendation...it undermines the whole ASR effort. This was a blown review, pure and simple.

Why are you so invested in whether or not Amir recommends the LRS? He didn’t like the way they sound and measures. There are many people who don’t like the way Maggies sound. Maggies can sound wonderful, but it doesn’t mean they objectively measure well. That still doesn’t change how your 3.6s sound. You love them, enjoy them, and get over that not everyone agrees with you.
 

CDMC

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Sep 4, 2019
Messages
1,172
Likes
2,321
Precisely the distance I had it from my back wall: 55 inches or 4.6 feet. The manual says this however: " Locate the speakers 2 feet or more in front of a wall." There is no mention of any symmetry requirement. Here is a sample image from Magnepan's own site for 30.7:

IMG_0539.jpg


Not symmetrical at all.

Nor does it need to be. Maggies output very little sound to the sides and sidewall placement does not affect their sound much.
 

JohnBooty

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Jul 24, 2018
Messages
632
Likes
1,555
Location
Philadelphia area
Lot's of talk of "magic" now, since @josh358 first mentioned it.
You should all know that "magic" is a Linkwitz patent! ;)
"After listening to a great variety of good, bad and so-so stereo recordings I am tempted to call it MAGIC521. The music comes through!"
To be clear, when I write "magic" I'm just talking about things we don't yet have measurements for - not some sort of thing that cannot be measured.

Whenever I see somebody else using the term on ASR, I give them the benefit of the doubt and assume that's what they mean as well.

Aside from the occasional person who shows up to troll here... we on ASR are objectivists.
 

CDMC

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Sep 4, 2019
Messages
1,172
Likes
2,321
I’m new to this forum, and I am not conversant with the measurement parameters... but weirdly, my LRS speakers deliver in terms of string quartets, acoustic guitar and female voice... Yes, you have to have a Clockwork Orange-style clamp-chair to enjoy them fully.

The important part is that you like them. At the end of the day, that is the goal.
 

DonH56

Master Contributor
Technical Expert
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 15, 2016
Messages
7,835
Likes
16,497
Location
Monument, CO
The LRS took the place of the MMG (discontinued, I think) as an inexpensive, entry-level "taste" of the Magneplanar sound. Thus says Magnepan. A lot of people like them, but a lot of people (Maggie owners or no) do not. I usually damp the back wave since I have rarely had a large enough room for them (where they do sound very nice). The measurements are what they are, and Amir stated the methodology and such, nothing surprising to me anyway. Dipoles in general have fairly unique, specific requirements with respect to room and placement and people tend to love them or hate them. I've never heard the LRS but did not really care for the MMG (or my own MG-I, though they were enough to get me to buy MG-IIIa's way back when).

Arguing if they are "best" is pointless IMO. Some like them, some like me much prefer their larger models, some prefer 'stats, many like their conventional speakers (I am happy with mine now), many favor horns, etc. All will argue passionately why their choice is best. All have their pros and cons.

Whatever - Don
 

Sancus

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 30, 2018
Messages
2,923
Likes
7,616
Location
Canada
Are people saying the 'magic' (imaging, acoustical audio, etc) of panels comes from the 'panel way' of generating sound waves? Or the dipole design? Or both?

I've never seen a good explanation of it but if I had to guess it would be the very different pattern of reflections they create compared to a normal speaker. They have much lower levels of floor and ceiling bounce through much of the frequency range, with somewhat higher rear wall and front wall bounce.

I have read some sources say that dampening ceiling reflections with treatment can make a room sound bigger, so maybe it's something like that. Regardless of the exact mechanism, I suspect the answer is in the reflection data.

Magnepan LRS vs Genelec 8030C
MAGNEPAN LRS
index.php


GENELEC 8030C
index.php
 

whazzup

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Feb 19, 2020
Messages
575
Likes
486
We don't know is I think the real answer.

Erin has done the Bose 901: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/bose-901-series-v-speaker-review.14865/

I'm way out of depth here, but maybe @amirm or @hardisj can send off an email to them, it'll be interesting to know where Klippel itself stands with regards to their technology being used for measuring erm..., 'room dependent speakers'? Have they already accounted for such speakers? Just a thought :)
 

KaiserSoze

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Jun 8, 2020
Messages
699
Likes
592
This is so funny...pages of measurements which do not mean squat and just a few sentences on listening impressions probably based on a non-ideal set up. Your non-recommendation is the lonely negative review of such a bargain set of speakers. Many reviewers have praised these speakers. Put down your voltmeter and learn to appreciate music reproduction using listening skills and proper set up. That is the problem with these kind of sites....

This post is asinine.

The question of whether the measuring approach that Amir uses can do justice to a dipole speaker is an appropriate question to ask for this speaker. Several other people have asked this question, but you didn't. What you did is something else entirely.

The fact is that with this particular speaker there are fundamental design flaws. The fact is that the extensive measurements that Amir took did an excellent job of identifying those fundamental design flaws. And he also did a perfectly good job at reporting on his subjective listening experience, particularly in regards to the fact that the tonality changed whenever he moved just a little bit. Any speaker where this occurs is not a good speaker. Why should it take more than a few sentences to say something that only really requires one or two sentences to say?

The biggest single problem with the speaker, in my view, is that in the forward radiation space and not very far off center there is a tall, broad, vertical stripe where there is a major null, broad in frequency and centered at the 1 kHz crossover frequency. This null is due to interference between the tweeter on one side and the woofer on the other side, and it totally wreaks havoc with the sound of this speaker. This isn't something subtle and it isn't something that would be missed by any half-informed designer of loudspeakers.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom