Idk why Magnepan suggested a 50hz crossover because there is no bass in that region with a sub. That's their specs too.
-
Welcome to ASR. 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
- Thread starter amirm
- Start date
50 Hz is their low-frequency corner spec, where the response is already rolling off, not necessarily the crossover point to a sub. I usually cross over an octave above that point (100 Hz) or so, at least half an octave, so 80 Hz is about right. A good trade between localizing the sub, reinforcing the bass, and taking a load off the panels.
This is what I did with my Quad 2805 panels. Their measured response drops down steeply below 37 Hz, but an 80 Hz high pass filter gives them some more very welcome headroom.
Panels have limited excursion so to play louder you usually need larger panels. Theoretically stronger magnets (or stronger electric field for your ESLs) and stiffer diaphragm material with greater drive (power) would work, if you could get enough linear excursion, but in practice you just can't do it today (if ever). As a result, large bass signals cause high distortion (10's of percent at ~100 Hz and below) if those levels can be reached at all. Deep bass can require 10~1000+ times the power to be heard as loudly as midrange signals (equal loudness curves). Larger panels do a little better, but the realistic solution is a sub, which handles the bass and really reduces the distortion ("cleans up") the lower midrange and up (with a crossover to limit bass to the panel).
IME/IMO - Don
Do you like how they sound? Thats all that matters!
This is exactly what I did - in fact thus far three of them, equalized by MSO.
D
Deleted member 58670
Guest
500 Hz is where the LRS should be crossed over in my opinion …….
Sorry it took me a little while to dig up the data for the high pass filter: 80 Hz fourth order ( I think LR, but I am not sure). Mind you, this is using a passive inline filter, so I cannot change the properties. Matching had to be done with the low pass filter on the subs.
Thus far, I have only used MSO to equalize the subs. The next step is to measure and equalize the electrostats as well, and import filter settings for those into my RME ADI-2. The bad news is, of course that those filters will equalize both outputs - the xlr ones used for the main speakers and the rca ones for the subs. I will have to see how that works out in practice.
Hellasärö
Member
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2022
- Messages
- 54
- Likes
- 96
I bought a pair of discontinued Magnepan mgmc1 (surround) speakers for testing. I crossed them over to a sub at 120hz and ran antimode X2 correction. Sounded and measured pretty good in a small well treated room in near field(1,5m). In my bigger room with a 3m listening distance they sounded horrible.
But will definitely experiment with EQ and DSP crossover in the small room. The midrange was the best I've heard in my small room. They measured better in-room than in the sound and vision test (2nd pic purple trace).
But will definitely experiment with EQ and DSP crossover in the small room. The midrange was the best I've heard in my small room. They measured better in-room than in the sound and vision test (2nd pic purple trace).
Attachments
JaCro
New Member
The buttons (or “tie-downs” in Magnepan parlance) that clamp the diaphragm at different locations, are placed there to both damp the fundamental resonance and create a redistributed group of resonances to passively, self-equalize, or enhance the output of the frequencies between the dipole baffle cutoff frequency and the lowest resonant frequency.
Any open baffle, dipole loudspeaker without this approach, and a driver with a “Q” of 0.707 or less, will have a first order (6dB/octave) high pass characteristic from the baffle cutoff frequency down to the fundamental resonant frequency, below which it will fall at 18dB/octave. Alternatively, most dipole film loudspeakers, such as an ESL or planar magnetic, will often have a singular high “Q” peak at the fundamental resonance with a droop in the amplitude response between the fundamental resonance and its baffle cutoff frequency.
While all the current Magneplanars use the distributed mode approach with symmetrical positions and button count on the left and right loudspeaker, the LRS and LRS+ are unique among the Magneplanars in that the system pairs use asymmetrical “tie-down” buttons, with (most examples) having 1-button on one of the loudspeakers, and 3-buttons on the other loudspeaker, creating 2-distributed modes on the first and 4-distributed modes on the second loudspeaker, or a total of six interleaved modes of different frequencies. This is effective at allowing the pair, when working together, to produce smoother and deeper bass than either single unit alone.
This makes achieving an accurate, meaningful measurement, more difficult, particularly if the tester doesn't know they are different or doesn’t understand how and why they are different from each other. Almost everyone that has publically disclosed measurements of the LRS’s appear to be unaware of this design element and have just measured one of the two speakers, providing a misleading result.
I hope this helps clarify the issue.
- James Croft
D
Deleted member 58670
Guest
Afaik, asymmetrical tie-downs are used on 1.6 and possibly other magneplanars as well, but not the larger 3.6 or 3.7.
I've listened to Magnepan / Magneplanar speakers since the early '70s. I've never understood why anyone bought the things.
D
Deleted member 58670
Guest
Because of rave reviews in hifi magazines I guess ….?
I never understood this either. The maggies I’ve heard were cluelessly set up in regular living rooms, and usually with a subwoofer just thrown in. Horrible.
MarnixM
Active Member
James, thanks very much for your elaborated explanation. Had to read it twice to understand it in its details, but indeed my right speaker has one “button” and the left three. I don't know in my situation if this option for "smoother and deeper bass" is very effective because I use a 4-channel amp with seperate woofers with an active 24dB X-over at 160Hz. So both my LRS+ panels act as mid-bass/high sources. . With the use of ARTA I optimised the combination for flat response, but later on, based "on listening with my ears" I gave the woofers +3dB extra output. Recent DSP corrections below 300Hz didn't bring the expected final optimalisation to the sound and is now deactivated again. A DIY soft dome ultra tweeter with reflective omni-directional cone completes the speakersystem. Although I like to experiment with my total music equipment, my main focus is on playing "good music", for me mainly classical and jazz albums.
MarnixM
Active Member
I listened (and build) several types of speakers (horns, bass reflex and closed) systems and never understood why not everybody is using open baffle systems........ Great Linkwitz fan!
D
Deleted member 58670
Guest
I agree with that. But Magnepans out of the box is not the best solution.
Ordin Aryguy
Member
Spend some time with the Amplifier Power Required section of the Crown Audio online System Design Tools. Your answer will be found there.
Crown Audio - Professional Power Amplifiers | English (US)
www.crownaudio.com
The LRS has a relatively flat impedance of roughly 4 Ohms, so whatever amplifier you choose, just make sure it's comfortable driving 4 Ohms.
A little bit of research and some logic will help you quickly dispel the myths that seem to surround Magnepans regarding "lots of power" and "lots of current."
Another data point for LRS. Mic is not calibrated for absolute SPL so disregard that. Measurements left and right from listening position 1/24 smoothing. Positioned for good imaging at LP, tweeters inside with toein (small sweet spot but really good when there). Limited in the placement with this room. A little over 3ft from the front wall and a little over 2 feet from the side walls. Room is symmetric.
Later applied baffle step correction at 600hz and a notch to bring down the 50hz a bit....................After that these sound really good. As good as anything I've had in this room given the extension limits at the top and bottom. Of course they don't go to concert SPL and can use a high pass filter below where it goes south. These are definitely more than reasonable speakers. They present like all OB/Dipoles in this room, nice quality bass presentation and midrange is great. I wish for a bit more extension in the top end but overall very good after baffle step correction. No sense trying to get more extension on the bottom end of these. It could be the room as all the OB in this room tap out at 45 to 50hz.
As with everything, good but with caveats. If you don't have eq then they sound thin due to native FR response.
Later applied baffle step correction at 600hz and a notch to bring down the 50hz a bit....................After that these sound really good. As good as anything I've had in this room given the extension limits at the top and bottom. Of course they don't go to concert SPL and can use a high pass filter below where it goes south. These are definitely more than reasonable speakers. They present like all OB/Dipoles in this room, nice quality bass presentation and midrange is great. I wish for a bit more extension in the top end but overall very good after baffle step correction. No sense trying to get more extension on the bottom end of these. It could be the room as all the OB in this room tap out at 45 to 50hz.
As with everything, good but with caveats. If you don't have eq then they sound thin due to native FR response.
Attachments
Similar threads
- Poll
