Magnepan LRS Speaker Review

[MRC01]

... I believe this is one of the main show stopper in dipole speakers in general: limited space in listening room.

I find it's generally true that in order for Magnepans to sound their best, they need to be further from the front wall than many people realize. The speakers take over the room, which causes decor and lifestyle limitations.

Perhaps the strong beaming can be adjusted also by dampening the back wave without loosing most of the sound characteristics.

Beaming happens when the physical dimensions of the driver equal or exceed the wavelength of frequencies they emit. Other Magnepan models like the 3.6/3.7 have a thin ribbon tweeter that eliminates beaming, at least above 1700 Hz where it crosses over. It's one of the best tweeters ever made, measured distortion at -60 dB or lower, and its revealing, crystal clear sound is a big part of what made Magnepan famous.

 

[Selkirks]

I find it's generally true that in order for Magnepans to sound their best, they need to be further from the front wall than many people realize. The speakers take over the room, which causes decor and lifestyle limitations.

It was a bad idea trying to work 3.7i's in to my small room. Like having Space Odyssey monoliths.

 

[hex168]

Has anyone here compared Maggies to Eminent Technology LFT-8s?

 

[Newman]

Other Magnepan models like the 3.6/3.7 have a thin ribbon tweeter that eliminates beaming, at least above 1700 Hz where it crosses over. It's one of the best tweeters ever made, measured distortion at -60 dB or lower, and its revealing, crystal clear sound is a big part of what made Magnepan famous.

With a separate line tweeter beside the mid-bass panel, and you get pretty ugly off-axis horizontal output through the crossover region (just like Amir has been showing us the measurements from 2-way centre channel speakers that also put the tweeter beside the mid-bass driver, and it is considered a major weakness of those speakers). Thus making the reflected sound significantly different to the direct sound. (One would think the logical mitigation would be to use a high-order crossover to make the crossover region as narrow as possible. But no, Maggies use a first-order crossover.)

Really not good.

 

[EJ3]

With a separate line tweeter beside the mid-bass panel, and you get pretty ugly off-axis horizontal output through the crossover region (just like Amir has been showing us the measurements from 2-way centre channel speakers that also put the tweeter beside the mid-bass driver, and it is considered a major weakness of those speakers). Thus making the reflected sound significantly different to the direct sound. (One would think the logical mitigation would be to use a high-order crossover to make the crossover region as narrow as possible. But no, Maggies use a first-order crossover.)

Really not good.

I haven't heard any Maggie's personally since the mid-1980's. But, from what people tell me that have: not much (if anything) has changed.

 

[Moti]

Really not good.

Actually LRS is really good in the difficult acoustical enviroment (regular asymmetrical hard surface living room). It has capabilities to work well near side wall and it can throw the sound beam from the distance better than regular box speaker. Maggies have won blind speakertests in the 90`s and they have improved the products since. The basic boxspeaker still needs a lot of attention in room acoustics which is not an option in most cases where sepatare listening room is out of the question.

 

[Newman]

Actually LRS is really good in the difficult acoustical enviroment (regular asymmetrical hard surface living room). It has capabilities to work well near side wall and it can throw the sound beam from the distance better than regular box speaker. Maggies have won blind speakertests in the 90`s and they have improved the products since. The basic boxspeaker still needs a lot of attention in room acoustics which is not an option in most cases where sepatare listening room is out of the question.

Hey, welcome to ASR! It's the best place on the internet for learning more about audio.

Your post looks to be reciting some of the common beliefs about panel and dipole speakers. Much of that has been discussed with enthusiasm by fans here (and fact checked, and corrected where necessary) earlier in this thread. It's a long read, but rewarding.

I would like to see these blind test results won by Maggies, because you would be the first to produce any in the five years since I challenged the same claim.

Have you read Amir's review in post #1 of this thread? He concludes, "a hugely flawed speaker ...the designers solved 30% of the physics of building a speaker, and threw you in there to solve the rest!"

Sean Olive has summarised his experience conducting controlled (blind) listening tests of speakers of all configurations including dipoles, bipoles, omnis, etc, and not once has he found a speaker where the sound quality could not be predicted based on the spinorama measurements (unless it had sufficiently audible distortion). It seems that if the direct sound / on-axis sound is not excellent, then having a different interaction with the room will not save it. For this speaker, the direct sound is not excellent.

cheers

 

[Moti]

would like to see these blind test results won by Maggies, because you would be the first to produce any in the five years since I challenged the same claim.

Finnish Hifi-magazine February 1994. Maggie won 2x, 3x or even 4x more expensive speakers in blind listening test (three listeners). The maggie measurements looked not so great.

 

[Moti]

Have you read Amir's review in post #1 of this thread? He concludes, "a hugely flawed speaker ...the designers solved 30% of the physics of building a speaker, and threw you in there to solve the rest!"

Yes. Have you listened these in room with subs?

 

[Newman]

Yes. Have you listened these in room with subs?

Yes. But not in a controlled listening test.

 

[Moti]

Yes. But not in a controlled listening test.

And LRS sounded horrible as written in Amir’s review?

 

[Newman]

And LRS sounded horrible as written in Amir’s review?

Amir actually said it sounded good on typical audiophile show tracks, in the right conditions. I thought you said you did read it?

Unlike Amir, I don't report on my sighted listening impressions. They will be dominated by non-sonic factors, just like everyone else's, and I don't want to give the impression they relate to the innate attributes of the speaker's sound waves.

It is routine for speakers with 'a point of difference' to get artificially elevated sighted listening reviews from audiophiles. Some kind of 'exclusivity factor' biases their/our perceptions. But the science we have to date indicates that speakers with a spinorama like the LRS can be easily beaten in controlled listening tests by speakers with better spinoramas, telling us that their sound waves themselves are not preferred. And there is also evidence that having an unconventional beam pattern doesn't seem to change that, despite all the claims of fans.

None of which changes the fact that doing the typical, sighted listening 'audiophile audition' of these speakers will result in a disproportionate amount of favourable impressions, leading to sales, loyalty, fan talk, etc. Then they get taken home and fallen in love with as the adaptation effect takes hold. A legend is born. The reality, that they probably wouldn't be chosen in controlled comparative conditions, falls to the way side.

But for some of us, that is not good enough.

cheers

 

[Moti]

I thought you said you did read it?

I am really appriciating your policy to remain silent with your subjective findings.

I actually have read Amirs test several times and also these 86 pages (now) comments. Took several days in 2024 or so. After that I bought pair of LRS just to discover myself how good or bad they really are. I placed them in very challenging, spacious and bad (unsymmtric) location where conventional speakers have issues. After two years casual listening with 15” dipole subs I am now relocating them and trying to find if they can shine in good near field acoustics as well.

 

[leonelvq]

The Maggies MG12s calibrated with a MiniDSP 4x2HD with Dirac Live 2.1 and a PSB SubSeries subwoofer sound amazing!!!

 

[EJ3]

The Maggies MG12s calibrated with a MiniDSP 4x2HD with Dirac Live 2.1 and a PSB SubSeries subwoofer sound amazing!!!

If I had all that stuff in my system, I suspect that I could make a lot of speakers sound amazing
(come to think of it, maybe I'll get the MiniDSP 4X2 (or one of their other products). Maybe, in a couple of years, & the Dirac at that time. Subs: got a pair that I built that I like: 20Hz-80Hz & over a KW to power each one.
But that is 100% not the same as hooking up a pair of some speakers & it sounding great with some BASS & Treble tone controls & that's it.

 

[MattHooper]

I don’t have a lot of experience with Maggies myself, but I do remember my first encounter with the big Maggie 3.7 in a dedicated room at an AV store, and what impressed me the most probably was the life-size impression of some instruments. There was a piano recording especially which sounded more like being in the presence of a full-size piano then I was used to for most speakers.
It was fascinating.

My friend had smaller Maggies for a while, which I heard a few times. I quite enjoyed them. Though I wasn’t fond of their beaminess.

Not ultimately for me, but I get the appeal.

 

[Eric Natural]

The Maggies MG12s calibrated with a MiniDSP 4x2HD with Dirac Live 2.1 and a PSB SubSeries subwoofer sound amazing!!!

I'd love to give this a shot - DIRAC is cheat-code

 

[drewdawg999]

Still loving my little Maggies with mandatory sub. Also mandatory are proper stands, taking them off the ground and making them perpendicular. Made a pretty huge difference for me, all around better sound quality.

Pairing with a Dayton Titanic mk3 10" sealed sub, great match, can't tell where bass is coming from. Goes down to 29Hz, great for music.

 

[Newman]

Still loving my little Maggies with mandatory sub. Also mandatory are proper stands, taking them off the ground and making them perpendicular. Made a pretty huge difference for me, all around better sound quality.

Pairing with a Dayton Titanic mk3 10" sealed sub, great match, can't tell where bass is coming from. Goes down to 29Hz, great for music.

It's your annual 'encouragement talk'! link1 link2

cheers

 

[drewdawg999]

It's your annual 'encouragement talk'! link1 link2

cheers

Yeah but this time I took pics!
Anyways, I'm always proud of these things. Oh, and I started a thread about the stands with measurements here. Didn't get too much action on that though.
I actually got a new sub, a Hsu ULS-15 mk2, awesome power and depth. It's currently serving HT duty, but I should hook it up for music too, wonder what that would sound like, much better than this Dayton I suppose, though Titanic was their upper line. I got chastised in the other thread for mentioning subwoofer speed, but I certainly had a little Infinity sub that couldn't keep up with the Maggies, just sluggish and yucky, a one-note fart machine. Also have a cheap Polk sub as well that can't do the job. Those are ported, the Hsu is sealed and Dr. Hsu said it would be great for music.