Magnepan LRS Speaker Review

[MattHooper]

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.

Glad to hear you’ve found a system you’ve been enjoying for quite a while and you’re having fun! Measurements certainly aren’t the only route to finding satisfaction and enjoying this hobby.

 

[EJ3]

Glad to hear you’ve found a system you’ve been enjoying for quite a while and you’re having fun! Measurements certainly aren’t the only route to finding satisfaction and enjoying this hobby.

The measurements (particularly with the electronics/computer hardware) are great to know that you are not introducing flaws to the more difficult already speakers.
And that then may actually help your speakers be more of it's own sound.
Which then allows you to use various forms of EQ to try to get your speaker more neutral in the room.
That is perfectly fine!
But, for some, neutral is the known starting point.
And (like adding their own seasoning to a chef's meal), that is what they want to do for themselves with the sound.
That is perfectly fine, also.
Either way, these people are enjoying the hobby and spreading the joy of the hobby to others.
To me, enjoying what I do, listening to the music and being able to share that musical joy with others is the point.
Others may certainly have other ideas about it but that is what it comes down to for me.
And this site helps me with my neutral point.
Thank you everyone.

 

[Jim Creek]

I owned a pair of Maggy LRS about 12 years ago. I understand why some people are drawn to that sound. They have a quirky sound that reproduces some instruments that seem ‘in the room’. Vocals were particularly appealing but they fall short over all.

I was a regular in a Maggy forum that discussed DIY improvements to these speakers. The most talked about improvement were specially designed stands. Many believed that improving the stands solved all the problems of the LRS. Some guys actually hung them from the ceiling.

After trying many tweaks I gave up on them.

 

[MRC01]

...
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.
...

The blind speaker tests I have read aren't entirely clear about how the speakers are set up. I question whether each speaker is individually set up optimally in the room in which they are all tested (I don't accuse them of doing it wrong, I only question because the test procedure documentation I've read isn't entirely clear on this point).

If the speakers are lined up in various positions against the front wall, at most one of them, and more likely none of them, are optimally positioned. Optimal positioning of each speaker being tested would require speakers to be physically moved during the test, which would make fast switching impossible. Dipoles are more sensitive to positioning than conventional speakers are, so while any suboptimal positioning negatively affects all the speakers, it affects dipoles more than it does the others and would bias the test results.

If the testers did account for this, it would be interesting to hear what kind of creative solution they devised.

 

[NTK]

Dr Toole's loudspeaker blind tests are done with "positional substitution" to eliminate the effects of room mode excitation. He had also commented on the dipoles speakers he tested and were mentioned in his book.

The statement: "This suggests that the perceived influence of directivity is dependent on both position and room type” is not proved. We now know that bass performance accounts for about 30% of the factor weighting in subjective evaluations. Changing locations dramatically changes this aspect of what is heard. This is why we do positional substitution evaluations.

I would add that in my earlier response, I failed to note that one of the two tests was done at the Canadian taxpayers expense (at the NRCC) and the second at Harman's expense. There is no commercial bias, as keeps on being implied.

OOPS, your bias is showing again. You said: "Note that the often quoted Harman research found dipole to be no good. Which begs the question, how robust is Hard?"

You need to read more carefully. There are two dipole speakers recorded in my book as having both subjective and objective evaluations. One failed because it was a dense collection of resonances, easily observable (in the measurements) and audible (in the listening tests). It failed not because it was a dipole, but because it was a poor loudspeaker. A second dipole was criticized because of its extreme directivity at high frequencies (a 3-inch tweeter can do that), but in the total context of loudspeakers it was, overall, a respectable performer. Both deficiencies had nothing to do with their basic dipole radiation pattern and in fact, the second unit, a Quad, is not a pure dipole but by their own description a modified one, with felt pads damping the rear radiation.

What you said is simply not true.

" . . . how robust is Hard?" Very robust. But "Hard" is hard, or difficult, because most interested parties lack the technical facilities and/or knowledge to collect anechoic data and process it for presentation to two eyes and a brain. Unless the subjective input is double-blind, preferably involving positional substitution, and is balanced by competent and comprehensive "hard" data, rational conclusions are not possible. This has been the normal case, in the past, and even now.

 

[mlee]

Erins from Erins Audio Corner seems to like their presentation when setup properly but says they are tough to set up. The best tweak I did to mine was to implement a baffle step type of filter that brought the in room response closer to a mostly downward sloping response. After that the bass and midrange sounded great but the extreme top end rolled off a bit more than I'd like. That said great value if you can tweak em to how you like em but they do require some work. They are better than a lot of the speakers I've had in my room but they are definitely not set and forget type of speakers.

 

[Ruben93]

Now I regret paying $2390 with tax for my 1.7i. The Kef R3 cost less and probably sound better.

Yes the kef r3 is way better. I have it for myself and it's one of the best speaker i owned.

 

[Saturn94]

I owned a pair of Maggy LRS about 12 years ago.

Just for clarity for anyone reading this, the LRS wasn’t available until 2019. It was likely the MMG model you had, a different design.

 

[Jim Creek]

Just for clarity for anyone reading this, the LRS wasn’t available until 2019. It was likely the MMG model you had, a different design.

Yes, sorry, it was the MMG.