Magico S3 NFS Spinorama and comparison to Revel F228Be

[Jon AA]

Oh, so it is totally artificial and yet more real at the same time... :-D

Not the best stuff IMHO.

I do get reverberation and a room experience from my humble 2.1 setup. Few of us live in an anechoic chamber.

But an orchestra would sound like garbage if you packed them all into your room and asked them to play. That's the point.

Not sure this is selling me on the need for multi-channel.

That you thought all multi-channel put you in the middle of the band indicates you haven't listened to much of it (the stuff you'd like, anyway). Only you can decide if it's for you, but in order to do that from an informed point of view, you need to actually listen to some of it first (in a good setup). A few music Blu Rays where you can switch between the Stereo, 5.1 and Immersive mix in real time is very eye-opening (or ear-opening).

That said, from an objectivist POV: No one that I know measures speakers in a 2.1 or even less multichannel setup.

Who exactly are you talking about here? The manufacturer making the speakers, the installers/integrators, the end users?

 

[Sal1950]

The market that Magico sells to is used to having an exotic huge prestigious amplifier. Give it a few years and that generation will pass.

I wouldn't be so sure about that.
The very life and breath of the "High End" depends on the "everything matters" crowd.
The cables, and electronics, even magic pucks all sound different they believe.
For that crowd, where the really big money plays, to accept actives would be suicide for that industry.
I wouldn't hold my breath for that to happen.

I do get reverberation and a room experience from my humble 2.1 setup. Few of us live in an anechoic chamber. :-D Not sure this is selling me on the need for multi-channel.

But thats artificial reverberation, a distortion, the sound of your room, not the sound of the concert hall

That you thought all multi-channel put you in the middle of the band indicates you haven't listened to much of it (the stuff you'd like, anyway). Only you can decide if it's for you, but in order to do that from an informed point of view, you need to actually listen to some of it first (in a good setup). A few music Blu Rays where you can switch between the Stereo, 5.1 and Immersive mix in real time is very eye-opening (or ear-opening).

Exactly. And maybe it's hard for the hard core classical music crew to accept the added cost, etc.
But I hate to say it but they're not the ones supporting this industry. It's the popular forms of music that are driving the boom in multich/atmos recording. You do have to accept there's a new paradigm in listening and throw out the old head in the concert hall window prospective. The best of the releases being mastered by the engineer guru's such as Steven Wilson put you on stage, in the middle of the band, as if you were one of the musicians. Some are also painting a 3D soundscape like walking into a painting with width, depth, and height.
This new paradigm creates a very exciting music listening experience that takes the listener into a new world that widely surpasses even the change from mono to stereo.

 

[Ken Tajalli]

At the Florida Audio Expo in 2021, the big Magico room was the only setup that activated some lust in my lust neuron.

They weren't playing loudly, but the music was just - hard to explain, of course - floating in the room, not "coming" from anywhere.

Woof.

Magico M9 (I think) Nope, M6.

Not enough lust was activated to do anything more than file the experience away in my stare and compare neuron, though.

Listened to my stuff when I got home, it's good enough.

Multichannel? I don't think I care.

I have heard Magico's a few times at shows. They mostly sound excellent. But on one occasion they didn't . so I reckon system setup plays a big role.
On that note, I have never heard Wilson's sound less than excellent. Any of them on any amp!
Another wonderful one is B&W 601. 801 Always top notch.

 

[Sal1950]

I have heard Magico's a few times at shows. They mostly sound excellent. But on one occasion they didn't . so I reckon system setup plays a big role.
On that note, I have never heard Wilson's sound less than excellent. Any of them on any amp!
Another wonderful one is B&W 601. Always top notch.

Dedicated set-up people ?

 

[pablolie]

...

But thats artificial reverberation, a distortion, the sound of your room, not the sound of the concert hall

...

I am aware of that. But I doubt that even with a high number of surround speakers you can recreate the supposed *exact* same room modes in any typical listening room. I should also note that I do use Dirac (well, did in initial setup).

I also -personal opinion- think that, knowing how hard it is to even semi-optimally set up a 2.1 system, I'd get even more gray hairs trying to set up a 5.1 or 7.1 system. And I'd like to dispel the myth that I haven't heard a professionally calibrated multi-channel system. I have. I didn't get any new insights listening to music on it, if anything I thought I was missing stuff, but that may well have been down to some personal preferences of the owner (typically waaaay too much FX bass for my taste, it's a very common sin in multichannel systems, since they are often set up for "wow" effect).

 

[Ken Tajalli]

Dedicated set-up people ?

Yes. In UK its the importer dealer that do it.
Mogico, even though are fairly efficient , have always been partnered with amps that can double as arc welders!
But Wilsons, I have heard them even with moderate Tube amps, and sounded fantastic .

 

[Blumlein 88]

I am aware of that. But I doubt that even with a high number of surround speakers you can recreate the supposed *exact* same room modes in any typical listening room. I should also note that I do use Dirac (well, did in initial setup).

I also -personal opinion- think that, knowing how hard it is to even semi-optimally set up a 2.1 system, I'd get even more gray hairs trying to set up a 5.1 or 7.1 system. And I'd like to dispel the myth that I haven't heard a professionally calibrated multi-channel system. I have. I didn't get any new insights listening to music on it, if anything I thought I was missing stuff, but that may well have been down to some personal preferences of the owner (typically waaaay too much FX bass for my taste, it's a very common sin in multichannel systems, since they are often set up for "wow" effect).

I agree about the over-sized bass. Most MCH systems I've heard were like that. It was when I helped a friend setup his surround system dialed in appropriately it was much easier to hear the benefits. Not true with all recordings, but on some it did things that stereo simply cannot equal. I've always thought subjectively stereo was about 4 times better than mono. MCH is better, but by a much smaller quantum. Maybe about double at best. Often less. Yet that is not inconsiderable and at some point spending 4 times the money on your 2 channel rig won't get you that much improvement.

 

[Sal1950]

(typically waaaay too much FX bass for my taste, it's a very common sin in multichannel systems, since they are often set up for "wow" effect).

That's a very common sin I hear in 2ch rigs also.
Actually multich guys use the various DRC software and on a whole get more accurate bass reproduction than the boom happy 2ch guy who don't use any correction software and set levels by ear. All those guys driven down the street with their whole car buzzin and rattlin aren't multich.

Yet that is not inconsiderable and at some point spending 4 times the money on your 2 channel rig won't get you that much improvement.

I would strongly disagree with that statement D.
Yea to do it well is expensive, the main reason most have never heard a good rig..
But the rewards are worth much more than you estimate.
All else is gaslight.

 

[richard12511]

All those guys driven down the street with their whole car buzzin and rattlin aren't multich.

These guys?

 

[richard12511]

I'd dismissed the speculation so thanks for the comparative photo.

edit: I did mean comparative, not combative, autocorrect keeps things interesting ...

It doesn't make sense price wise, as the Magico is considerably more expensive than the Revel F228Be, but it really does look like a match to me.

What really matters though is, how much does that Klippel cabinet flexion graph/display really correlate with perceived sound quality? Does the exaggerated "bending" of the "competitor"(whatever it is) show up in the spinorama? We've seen from Amir's and Erin's reviews that increasing the NFS measurement point count tends to add jaggedness to the spin, and reduce the overall score. Magico says they measure their speakers for 16hours with the NFS. If that's true, then their measurements are even higher resolution than Amir's or Erin's, but looking at that graph, it looks surprisingly smooth. Could that super sturdy cabinet be a reason for that?

If those little dips/peaks are inaudible, though, it may not even matter.

 

[Blumlein 88]

It doesn't make sense price wise, as the Magico is considerably more expensive than the Revel F228Be, but it really does look like a match to me.

What really matters though is, how much does that Klippel cabinet flexion graph/display really correlate with perceived sound quality? Does the exaggerated "bending" of the "competitor"(whatever it is) show up in the spinorama? We've seen from Amir's and Erin's reviews that increasing the NFS measurement point count tends to add jaggedness to the spin, and reduce the overall score. Magico says they measure their speakers for 16hours with the NFS. If that's true, then their measurements are even higher resolution than Amir's or Erin's, but looking at that graph, it looks surprisingly smooth. Could that super sturdy cabinet be a reason for that?

If those little dips/peaks are inaudible, though, it may not even matter.

What is needed is a blind Harman style test between the two speakers. If Magico is sure they would win, maybe they'd take part. Would be a win-win. Even if the Revel came in 2nd, look at the price difference. Nobody loses. Maybe throw in the top Genelec and something like the Dutch&Dutch for a good 4 way shootout.

 

[richard12511]

What is needed is a blind Harman style test between the two speakers. If Magico is sure they would win, maybe they'd take part. Would be a win-win. Even if the Revel came in 2nd, look at the price difference. Nobody loses. Maybe throw in the top Genelec and something like the Dutch&Dutch for a good 4 way shootout.

That would be a dream come true. Doubt it will ever happen, at least until someone buys all those speakers.

 

[GXAlan]

This is the speaker in question:
View attachment 289271

Looks very similar to the Revel F228Be to me(white drivers with darker surround, correct number of drivers, port in the right spot, and overall shape looks similar. Definitely could be wrong though.

Agree it sure looks like it, but then Magico isn’t really comparing in the same price point. The A5 is $25k a pair. So if it’s better than the $11k Revel, then it’s like saying our speaker is better than one that is $14,000 less expensive than ours.

 

[MoreWatts]

The obvious amplifiers for the Magicos are the D'Agostino Relentless Epic Monoblocks. 1600 watts @ 8 ohms, 3200 W @ 4 ohms, $350K a pair. There's an ASR thread. This is the combo that needs to have the shootout with the new Genelec monsters.

 

[Axo1989]

Agree it sure looks like it, but then Magico isn’t really comparing in the same price point. The A5 is $25k a pair. So if it’s better than the $11k Revel, then it’s like saying our speaker is better than one that is $14,000 less expensive than ours.

I imagine Magico would run a bunch of comparisons as general research. If they started putting that particular one in advertising I'd scratch my head a bit, but I don't think they do that.

 

[MattHooper]

I agree about the over-sized bass. Most MCH systems I've heard were like that. It was when I helped a friend setup his surround system dialed in appropriately it was much easier to hear the benefits. Not true with all recordings, but on some it did things that stereo simply cannot equal. I've always thought subjectively stereo was about 4 times better than mono. MCH is better, but by a much smaller quantum. Maybe about double at best. Often less. Yet that is not inconsiderable and at some point spending 4 times the money on your 2 channel rig won't get you that much improvement.

Obnoxious bass in MC systems is one of my pet peeves (and, well, in two channel systems too, often subwoofers are dialed too high for my taste). Agreed about your general assessment of mono/stereo/MC. Overall I favor my 2 channel for music, but still love my MC system and it does some things better than my 2 channel. There is just something about throwing more drivers/speakers at the sound that seems to do certain things my floor standers don't quite do.

Also, my system is actually only 7.0. My center channel is very large, my L/R speakers go low enough and both are benefitting from room gain so I feel no need for a sub. Was listening to some new prog rock (bass levels on some of this new stuff is insane!) and it was floor shaking.

BTW, another big pet peeve of mine for home theater systems is sound that isn't matched to picture in terms of scale. It was a bigger problem back when home theater was becoming all the rage in the 90's but display sizes hadn't caught up. So store demos would have some CRT set or maybe a new 42" plasma, with a 5.1 surround system all large speakers. On would go Gladiator (inevitably) and you'd be surrounded by deafening almost life-sized sonic impressions of armies in battle, yet you are watching these relatively tiny little figures running around on screen. It was such a mismatch my brain always had trouble with it. As displays have gotten bigger that issue has got a bit better. But I still see tons of people's photos on AV sites or reddit forums with a modest size flat panel screen as their "home theater" flanked by huge floor standing speakers and MASSIVE subwoofers. Absurd to me....but makes some folks happy.

 

[Blumlein 88]

Obnoxious bass in MC systems is one of my pet peeves (and, well, in two channel systems too, often subwoofers are dialed too high for my taste). Agreed about your general assessment of mono/stereo/MC. Overall I favor my 2 channel for music, but still love my MC system and it does some things better than my 2 channel. There is just something about throwing more drivers/speakers at the sound that seems to do certain things my floor standers don't quite do.

Also, my system is actually only 7.0. My center channel is very large, my L/R speakers go low enough and both are benefitting from room gain so I feel no need for a sub. Was listening to some new prog rock (bass levels on some of this new stuff is insane!) and it was floor shaking.

BTW, another big pet peeve of mine for home theater systems is sound that isn't matched to picture in terms of scale. It was a bigger problem back when home theater was becoming all the rage in the 90's but display sizes hadn't caught up. So store demos would have some CRT set or maybe a new 42" plasma, with a 5.1 surround system all large speakers. On would go Gladiator (inevitably) and you'd be surrounded by deafening almost life-sized sonic impressions of armies in battle, yet you are watching these relatively tiny little figures running around on screen. It was such a mismatch my brain always had trouble with it. As displays have gotten bigger that issue has got a bit better. But I still see tons of people's photos on AV sites or reddit forums with a modest size flat panel screen as their "home theater" flanked by huge floor standing speakers and MASSIVE subwoofers. Absurd to me....but makes some folks happy.

All of that is why I have a projector with a large, large screen. They've improved and my current one is LED based. They do still give up some picture parameters to top quality LCD/LED direct view panels, but the screen size is important.

 

[Pearljam5000]

No one's talking about the fact
That all of Magico's speakers are made out of *Aluminum * and they sound very good
What a coincidence

 

[Axo1989]

No one's talking about the fact
That all of Magico's speakers are made out of *Aluminum * and they sound very good
What a coincidence

I hope they use aluminium for export, I’m not sure I trust that aluminum stuff.

 

[thewas]

No one's talking about the fact
That all of Magico's speakers are made out of *Aluminum * and they sound very good
What a coincidence

A good example of two phenomena:

a) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlation_does_not_imply_causation
The difference of correlation and causality, as rather expensive loudspeakers will have such, see also

New evidence for the theory of the stork - PubMed

Data from Berlin (Germany) show a significant correlation between the increase in the stork population around the city and the increase in deliveries outside city hospitals (out-of-hospital deliveries). However, there is no correlation between deliveries in hospital buildings (clinical...

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

b) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frequency_illusion
People tend to notice something more often after noticing it for the first time, leading to the belief that it has an increased frequency of occurrence.