Magico Ultimate vs Magico M6

[HenryB]

No. But we know that the A1 and M126Be have similar levels of distortion.

Seriously??
Not only the A1 do have, overall, lower THD, they also have much more usable low frq. (+12db@50Hz!!). And they are sealed, i.e., grater punishment on the woofer. The M126Be should have done much better.
Anyway, if that is what's happening with the F228Be vs. the A3, it will explain objectively why subjectively the A3 do sound better, even though I am sure their Spinorama is not as good. Unfortunately, I can't find any distortion measurements on either speakers

 

[andreasmaaan]

Seriously??
Not only the A1 do have, overall, lower THD, they also have much more usable low frq. (+12db@50Hz!!).

M126Be is on the left, Magico A1 is on the right:

I'm not sure I understand what you mean by "+12dB@50Hz"?

But anyway, just to circle back to the original question, your belief is that the difference in sound quality between the A3 and the F228Be comes down to nonlinear distortion - is that correct?

 

[AudioJester]

My local dealer is a Magico dealer.
I have listened to several models, from the stand mount up to S5, I think it was.

They are superb. Expensive but I heard differences on them none of the other speakers showed up as clearly.

Isnt that the big problem. When it is expensive and visually appealing you start hearing "differences"?

 

[HenryB]

I'm not sure I understand what you mean by "+12dB@50Hz"?

Look at the frq. response, the A1 (bottom) has 12db more output at 50Hz (and 20Hz)

 

[HenryB]

But anyway, just to circle back to the original question, your belief is that the difference in sound quality between the A3 and the F228Be comes down to nonlinear distortion - is that correct?

Yes

 

[andreasmaaan]

Look at the frq. response, the A1 (bottom) has 12db more output at 50Hz (and 20Hz)

The anechoic chamber in which these speakers were measured (NRC) is not reliable below 100Hz. Furthermore, the compensation applied to measurements taken in this chamber assume that the DUT is a sealed-box loudspeaker. The result is that vented designs appear to exhibit less output below 100Hz (although sealed-box speakers will not measure accurately, either).

In reality, both these speakers have comparable bass extension.

This spinorama gives a more accurate representation of the Revel's bass extension:

This hifinews lap report puts the A1's extension at -6dB/47Hz, i.e. very similar to the M126Be.

Yes

Implausible IMHO.

 

[HenryB]

The anechoic chamber in which these speakers were measured (NRC) is not reliable below 100Hz.

LOL, what is up with you guys, every time you see something you don't like you just dismiss it as a none factor? The NRC is not reliable, but hifinews is?? Anyway, if the NRC is not reliable, I am sure it is at least consistence and is similarly 'unreliable' on both speakers

Regardless, the A1 is a sealed design, it only make sense it will have more output after the roll-off starts.

 

[andreasmaaan]

LOL, what is up with you guys, every time you see something you don't like you just dismiss it as a none factor? The NRC is not reliable, but hifinews is?? Anyway, if the NRC is not reliable, I am sure it is at least consistence and is similarly 'unreliable' on both speakers

It's a well-known fact, published by the NRC, that the NRC chamber is not reliable below 100Hz. In fact everything I mentioned in the previous post is well-known, publicly stated fact, direct from the NRC.

The NRC's measurements above 100Hz are extremely accurate (yes, even more accurate than hifinews ).

And the differences in nonlinear distortion between the M126 and A1 are negligible, as the graphs show.

 

[HenryB]

BTW, M126 hifinews review will be appreciated, couse I couldn't find it (maybe it is a well-known fact as well, but what do I know)...

 

[andreasmaaan]

BTW, M126 hifinews review will be appreciated, couse I couldn't find it (maybe it is a well-known fact as well, but what do I know)...

Sorry if my use of the phrase "well-known" offended you. That wasn't my intention. What I meant was that the NRC has made it public knowledge that their measurements are of no use below 100Hz. Hifinews has not measured the M126 AFAIK, lol.

I agree with you that, if the M126 and A1 have the same -6dB point, the A1 will roll off slower below it. I don't see the relevance to the question of relative levels of distortion, though.

Anyway, my curiosity remains as to your hearing what you perceive to be an extremely obvious difference in sound quality between two speakers, without any obvious explanation. I'll admit I'm very sceptical of the idea that subtle differences in levels of nonlinear distortion could cause such obvious audible differences. So I'd be interested to know if you have other explanations

My money would be on one/all of the following:

• differences in frequency response
• differences in dispersion
• differences in bass extension/alignment and interaction with the room
• psychological factors

 

[Beave]

From what I've read, the NRC chamber's bass measurements are pretty accurate & reliable for sealed speakers, especially sealed bookshelf speakers, and to a lesser extent for front-ported speakers.

But the measurements aren't accurate for rear-ported speakers. The rear port output throws off the measurements in the range it covers.

 

[Frank Dernie]

Isnt that the big problem. When it is expensive and visually appealing you start hearing "differences"?

Maybe, some people do seem to believe that, but I did not know it was expensive when I heard the differences, it was the small Q1.
Also FWIW my main speakers were more expensive than the big Magicos, so I wasn't listening to even the bigger ones on the basis of reassuringly expensive, just interested.

 

[Zvu]

Listen the whole interview. Laurence states at one point that at Vivid Audio they've held on to a prototype loudspeaker made out of wood materials just to show people how much wooden cabinet contributes to the sound - everything else being equal.

 

[vavan]

What are "HK reports"?

perhaps MAGICO A3 VS. REVEL 228 BE conducted by harman where "All listeners rated Magico as their least favorite choice"

 

[thewas]

Listen the whole interview. Laurence states at one point that at Vivid Audio they've held on to a prototype loudspeaker made out of wood materials just to show people how much wooden cabinet contributes to the sound - everything else being equal.

You can make of course a wood enclosure having huge vibrations as well as a metal one having them at higher frequencies where the are psychoacoustically more audible and disturbing despite the smaller absolute oscillation amplitudes, like for everything its not just about on partial aspect like material but the total engineering like using FEM optimised stiffness (for example ribs) and damping.

 

[Harmonie]

Oh, but they matter.

To make a wooden cabinet as acoustically inert as aluminium cabinet is extremely difficult. There are many speaker driver manufacturers out there but their drivers usually must multitask to adhere to the greater audience. Making your loudspeaker from scratch gives you the opportunity to specialize drivers for intended purpose only. Until someone points to a model of 3000 bucks/pair of factory made loudspeaker that can match in every way to Magico M6 "with a little eq", i think there is not much to say.

There is something that can be done in DIY for that kind of money but only if you know what are you doing.

How much do you think this costs to make ?

https://imgur.com/a/oVPRa9f

Seems very expensive to produce and wonder how many pieces they have to sell for ROI.
What is the Twaron's fiber damping function for ?
If they want to go for the most performant (and expensive), they should go for Zylon ... if they are interested, let me know

 

[andreasmaaan]

perhaps MAGICO A3 VS. REVEL 228 BE conducted by harman where "All listeners rated Magico as their least favorite choice"

It's so ridiculous that this happens to exist lol.

 

[thewas]

perhaps MAGICO A3 VS. REVEL 228 BE conducted by harman where "All listeners rated Magico as their least favorite choice"

Interesting also that the Salon 2 was preferred by most to the 228 BE although it has a smoother spinorama.
One guess from me would be the wider radiation in the mids of the Salon, especially since it seems to have been a mono test.

 

[andreasmaaan]

Interesting also that the Salon 2 was preferred by most to the 228 BE although it has a smoother spinorama.
One guess from me would be the wider radiation in the mids of the Salon, especially since it seems to have been a mono test.

Yeh, I also would have expected the 228 to be more preferred. I don't see much of a difference in DI around the midrange though, maybe just a slight difference around 200-400Hz...? My guess is that it has more to do with bass extension.

 

[Roy_L]

It would be easy to presume that but there is the fact that they build their own drivers so they can optimise them exactly for the purpose, their cabinets are made out of thick aluminium, they use high quality components for crossovers without shying of large number of components.

While i'm not saying their price is justified, i am saying that for 3000€ you can't buy speakers that you can correct a little to get that sound. For that kind of money you could probably build it - if you know what you're doing.

Sorry to disappoint, but at least the woofers are made by Morel. I know this because I've been there, in the very workshop where they're made. Don't know about the tweeters though.