• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. 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

617

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 18, 2019
Messages
2,403
Likes
5,296
Location
Somerville, MA
Why do people buy a budget model and then complain that it's a budget model? Magnepan makes speakers with multiple drivers, true ribbon drivers, and with dual magnet assemblies in which the drivers are a good deal more rigid than the single-magnet drivers. They cost more because the components cost more.

Sure, they could use esoteric components, but they'd lose their reputation for high bang-for-the-buck. There are planars out there that are no-holds-barred -- neodynium magnets and what have you -- but you'll be spending in the tens of thousands for them with, frankly, little gain in performance.
Magnepan's tradition is value engineering -- the components they use are chosen because blind listening tests show that they are better for the price. For example, Mark Winey, the company's president, told me that he didn't OK the addition of the supertweeter to the 1.7 -- its predecessor, the 1.6, didn't have one -- until it was preferred in blind listening tests by both expert and non-expert listening panels.

Pretty much everything that goes into the speakers is blind tested and often customers don't grasp this. They do uneconomical things at home (where labor is free and it really doesn't matter) and don't understand why Magnepan doesn't use them. That's why you won't see the likes of esoteric wire -- in blind testing, no one was able to hear it. Ditto (since we're talking crossovers) air core chokes -- they used to use them and then compared them blind with iron core chokes and nobody could hear a difference. (You can bet they would have if the test hadn't been blind, lol.)

Before you redesign the crossover, by the way, be sure you know what they've done -- people frequently mess this up. The crossover from the tweeter to the supertweeter is a 1.5-way crossover, which is to say that the whole tweeter plays up to a certain frequency and then a narrower segment takes over at the very top. This optimizes both power handling and dispersion in a panel of limited size. Also note that the frequency response is designed to decline gradually with frequency rather than being flat -- a standard house curve. So many don't understand the purpose of a house curve and think speakers should be flat, ouch. Also, that in an average room you should use the 1 ohm series resistor -- it is equivalent to the center position on a tweeter pot.

At least one commercial mod gets these things wrong. Just imitate the values with better caps and you'll be fine. Or use a higher order XO between the woofer and tweeter, although you'll probably be losing as much as you gain -- it really depends on how loud you like to listen. Retain the series XO so the impedance drop from the tweeter to the supertweeter doesn't throw off the XO point, and to damp the panels out of band -- that's a lot more important in a planar than it is in a dynamic.

If you increase the strength/mass/damping of the baffle, or improve the mounting of the driver in the baffle -- all good things -- make sure you don't cause diffraction issues. Hell, you might be able to reduce diffraction with half round end pieces and some felt -- I don't know, haven't tried.

Not all of the design considerations at all, but an indication of the thought and experience that have gone into these speakers. Forgive me if you're already familiar with some or all of this -- some DIYers are truly knowledgeable -- but from what I've seen, most people know a lot less about commercial planar design than they think they do.

I assume you kept the original crossovers intact somewhere?
 

William53b

Member
Joined
May 9, 2021
Messages
7
Likes
4
Now I regret paying $2390 with tax for my 1.7i. The Kef R3 cost less and probably sound better.

Oh my word. I have both, and don't play them side by side. The R3 will just humiliate them, of course the R3 isn’t dipole, but that can be somewhat fixed by using a rear firing tweeter that in most cases in my quest for a better sounding speaker, really helps the humble box.
Hi there, as I am really curious and a absolute layman, can you shred some light on what's so wrong? and that any sort of in room measurements you've done after fixing them ?



As a layperson, no, not really. Suffice to say that they are asking a membrane of polymer under tension to do something that it cannot, in this configuration, and there are many thing wrong with the panel itself. That's why Magnepan's have a separate tweeter in their better models.

Almost all rooms are six sided boxes with holes in them, and there are two ways for a music lover or someone who is more interested in the equipment to make them accommodating: You can try and duplicate a sound or mastering studio with things manufactured to modify that box. I don’t want to live and relax in a studio, so instead of just spending money, I invest in collectible rugs and fiber arts, quality bookcases with books of various sizes suitable for display, medium to heavy duty lined drapes on all windows and finally, a heavy fabric cover for my TV for when I'm listening. Also fabric folding frames of tryptics work well behind speakers and as bass killers in corners.

This makes my wife love our living room, regardless of my stereo.

For imaging, start with each speaker 3’ out from the back wall and at least six feet apart and keep listening and repositioning them to taste. Once you have a width figured out, you can experiment with the depth. Both speakers prefer being near an outside wall, so their ability to reproduce sound is fairly dependent on you selecting the right model in their lines for the room size. Also, Maggie’s may well like to be further from the back wall than three feet, depending on your room size. (Corrected.)

I have a 12x14 room for my not in regular use equipment and my living room is 12x24, and we are going to make that both wider and taller.
All rooms properly set up work better on the long axis. Both speaker manufacturers products produce better bass when using an outer wall for bass coupling.
 
Last edited:

William53b

Member
Joined
May 9, 2021
Messages
7
Likes
4
Why do people buy a budget model and then complain that it's a budget model? Magnepan makes speakers with multiple drivers, true ribbon drivers, and with dual magnet assemblies in which the drivers are a good deal more rigid than the single-magnet drivers. They cost more because the components cost more.

Sure, they could use esoteric components, but they'd lose their reputation for high bang-for-the-buck. There are planars out there that are no-holds-barred -- neodynium magnets and what have you -- but you'll be spending in the tens of thousands for them with, frankly, little gain in performance.
Magnepan's tradition is value engineering -- the components they use are chosen because blind listening tests show that they are better for the price. For example, Mark Winey, the company's president, told me that he didn't OK the addition of the supertweeter to the 1.7 -- its predecessor, the 1.6, didn't have one -- until it was preferred in blind listening tests by both expert and non-expert listening panels.

Pretty much everything that goes into the speakers is blind tested and often customers don't grasp this. They do uneconomical things at home (where labor is free and it really doesn't matter) and don't understand why Magnepan doesn't use them. That's why you won't see the likes of esoteric wire -- in blind testing, no one was able to hear it. Ditto (since we're talking crossovers) air core chokes -- they used to use them and then compared them blind with iron core chokes and nobody could hear a difference. (You can bet they would have if the test hadn't been blind, lol.)

Before you redesign the crossover, by the way, be sure you know what they've done -- people frequently mess this up. The crossover from the tweeter to the supertweeter is a 1.5-way crossover, which is to say that the whole tweeter plays up to a certain frequency and then a narrower segment takes over at the very top. This optimizes both power handling and dispersion in a panel of limited size. Also note that the frequency response is designed to decline gradually with frequency rather than being flat -- a standard house curve. So many don't understand the purpose of a house curve and think speakers should be flat, ouch. Also, that in an average room you should use the 1 ohm series resistor -- it is equivalent to the center position on a tweeter pot.

At least one commercial mod gets these things wrong. Just imitate the values with better caps and you'll be fine. Or use a higher order XO between the woofer and tweeter, although you'll probably be losing as much as you gain -- it really depends on how loud you like to listen. Retain the series XO so the impedance drop from the tweeter to the supertweeter doesn't throw off the XO point, and to damp the panels out of band -- that's a lot more important in a planar than it is in a dynamic.

If you increase the strength/mass/damping of the baffle, or improve the mounting of the driver in the baffle -- all good things -- make sure you don't cause diffraction issues. Hell, you might be able to reduce diffraction with half round end pieces and some felt -- I don't know, haven't tried.

Not all of the design considerations at all, but an indication of the thought and experience that have gone into these speakers. Forgive me if you're already familiar with some or all of this -- some DIYers are truly knowledgeable -- but from what I've seen, most people know a lot less about commercial planar design than they think they do.

I'll assume you started this out with a rhetorical question. Thanks for the info, all good to know.
 

wje

Senior Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 13, 2020
Messages
425
Likes
560
Location
Virginia
As an owner of the LRS, I have worked pretty hard to integrate the panel with a fast subwoofer such as the REL T5. I was able to have very good success by adding a simple outboard high-pass filter inline from the amp to the LRS that really improved things. Since anyone who is serioius about getting the most out of your speakers, I wonder why you don't simply add an option for such a high-pass filter directly into all your models? I can't see how this would be a high cost addition. I was able to do it externally for about $15 per speaeker. You already have facilities for adding resistors to tailor the tweeter. Why not give some attention to the low end? High quality musical subwoofers are abundently available. You seem to already be moving in this direction. I know you cannot keep up with demand but an LRS-X model with my suggested high-pass feature would be very well received in the market.

Good points that you've made. I did watch the video on Y.T. where you utilized the $15 Parts Express high-pass crossovers in your setup. I took a slightly different approach. I have a pair of RSL Speedwoofers in my setup with my LRS speakers. I utilize the MiniDSP DDRC-24 in between my pre-amp and amplifier. The MiniDSP allows me to set all of the crossover levels, the slope (e.g. 24dB in my case for a faster response). Also, I've utilize Dirac Live! with the MiniDSP to apply appropriate room corrections. All in all, I'm pretty happy. In the past 10 years, I've owned 20+ pair of speakers, and 10+ in my current room/home over the past 5 years. I've had speakers that have cost 8x the price of the LRS, but there were issues here and there that had me switching to other options. Had the MiniDSP DDRC-24 and Dirac Live! been available 5 years ago, I'm sure I could have cut that number of purchases down greatly. I've tried to listen to 80s rock on the LRS, which I've found to be not so pleasant. However, since I listen to jazz and smooth jazz 90%+ of the time, I don't have issues.

Next step. Building proper supports for the LRS and getting rid of the factory stands. I'll be using very strong "L" shelf brackets, 3/4" Poplar and floor spikes for a total cost of about $80.00.
 

DonH56

Master Contributor
Technical Expert
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 15, 2016
Messages
7,834
Likes
16,496
Location
Monument, CO
My experience with Maggies over the years is that successful subwoofer integration depends greatly upon the room and its treatment, natch. By and large a high-order crossover (18 dB/oct min, 24 dB/oct preferred) makes integration better/easier as the panel's bass interferes less with the subwoofer (and vice-versa). My first design (ca. 1979-1980) used a 12 dB/octave crossover but was almost immediately replaced by an 18 dB/oct version, a fairly high order at that time. It was quickly obvious that 12 dB/oct was not steep enough. I later moved to a conventional Linkwitz-Riley design with 24 dB/oct slopes and was able to integrate a sub pretty cleanly (at least to my measurement mic and ears). I have almost always treated the wall behind to reduce comb filter effects and such but that does not help the deep bass much (wavelengths too long, and the panel transitions to more of a big point source instead of a line source).

Integration is much easier these days with DSP (e.g. I incorporated an analog all-pass filter in my crossover to help time-align sub and panels) but it is not necessarily "easy".

FWIWFM - Don
 

josh358

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2017
Messages
493
Likes
387
As a layperson, no, not really. Suffice to say that they are asking a membrane of polymer under tension to do something that it cannot, in this configuration, and there are many thing wrong with the panel itself. That's why Magnepan's have a separate tweeter in their better models.
The dynamics of a tensioned polymer membrane are well understood and have been used to good effect in electrostatics and planar magnetic speakers for over 50 years now, including speakers which are/were considered among the best of the time. They have their own set of advantages and tradeoffs vis a vis dynamic drivers. I have a friend who is still using KLH-9's that were manufactured in what, 1964? And there are people who use Quads that were made in 1959. Those old stats still have a clarity that even most megabucks dynamics don't.

The woofer panels are actually pretty amazing -- they'll go out to 8kHz or so. Putting a tweeter strip down the side is a compromise, of course, but in practice, it works pretty well and has great bang for the buck. Of course, they won't match the true ribbon driver, which is widely considered one of the best tweeters ever made, but again, it comes down to cost -- an inexpensive speaker is never going to match an expensive one, whatever kind of speaker it is!
 

William53b

Member
Joined
May 9, 2021
Messages
7
Likes
4
The dynamics of a tensioned polymer membrane are well understood and have been used to good effect in electrostatics and planar magnetic speakers for over 50 years now, including speakers which are/were considered among the best of the time. They have their own set of advantages and tradeoffs vis a vis dynamic drivers. I have a friend who is still using KLH-9's that were manufactured in what, 1964? And there are people who use Quads that were made in 1959. Those old stats still have a clarity that even most megabucks dynamics don't.

The woofer panels are actually pretty amazing -- they'll go out to 8kHz or so. Putting a tweeter strip down the side is a compromise, of course, but in practice, it works pretty well and has great bang for the buck. Of course, they won't match the true ribbon driver, which is widely considered one of the best tweeters ever made, but again, it comes down to cost -- an inexpensive speaker is never going to match an expensive one, whatever kind of speaker it is!

An inexpensive speaker does not have to be a cheap speaker. I bought my first Maggie’s in 1978, and they had one advantage over mine, heavier Mylar that was not as elastic as the present models. If you can’t look at a panel, sans sock, and immediately tell me the first thing that is wrong with it, then whatever I say will never be able to to change your mind on that matter.

The three advances in all of that time is actually only two. Lighter diaphragm and foil instead of wire. The buttons are needed to tame resonance in the diaphragm caused by the lighter more elastic material being used.
 

josh358

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2017
Messages
493
Likes
387
Magnepan is an acquired taste. Put a Revel speaker next to a Magnepan of the same price range and it's a world of difference. The Revel is crystal clear and highly defined while the Magnepan offers a fuzzy, reverbish sound that can be enjoyable with Diana Krall vocal music but lacks clarity with lots of other music. My best upgrade for my LRS was to get rid of them and buy the Revels. The difference in sound is Night and Day.
I have the impression you're going for something that sounds good with close-miked studio pop. That was engineered to sound good on studio monitors and cheap speakers/earbuds and I think it will sound best on dynamics. The people who like line source dipoles are people who like and are familiar with live, acoustical music. That's where the typical box falls flat on its fac, and line source dipoles excel because they sound more like the real thing.
 

josh358

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2017
Messages
493
Likes
387
An inexpensive speaker does not have to be a cheap speaker. I bought my first Maggie’s in 1978, and they had one advantage over mine, heavier Mylar that was not as elastic as the present models. If you can’t look at a panel, sans sock, and immediately tell me the first thing that is wrong with it, then whatever I say will never be able to to change your mind on that matter.

The three advances in all of that time is actually only two. Lighter diaphragm and foil instead of wire. The buttons are needed to tame resonance in the diaphragm caused by the lighter more elastic material being used.
That isn't what the buttons are for. They create resonant sections that provide acoustical equalization to compensate for the 6 dB/octave dipole rolloff in the bass. Try tapping the sections with the socks off, moving from smallest to largest. You're in for a surprise.

As to what's wrong with the panels, I'll be glad to forward your complaint along to Magnepan if you like. There are some significant changes in store for the mechanical design of the speakers, so now's the time to be heard.
 

amper42

Major Contributor
Joined
Dec 21, 2020
Messages
1,581
Likes
2,280
I have the impression you're going for something that sounds good with close-miked studio pop. That was engineered to sound good on studio monitors and cheap speakers/earbuds and I think it will sound best on dynamics. The people who like line source dipoles are people who like and are familiar with live, acoustical music. That's where the typical box falls flat on its fac, and line source dipoles excel because they sound more like the real thing.

I spent many years playing acoustically and in mic'd jazz/rock groups. It never sounded like the Magnepan. I also have several VMPS DiPoles. They sound much cleaner than my LRS. The Magnepan sound is not more realistic or even close to a standard dipole - it's a completely different sound that adds much more reverb which reduces clarity.
 

josh358

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2017
Messages
493
Likes
387
I spent many years playing acoustically and in mic'd jazz/rock groups. It never sounded like the Magnepan. I also have several VMPS DiPoles. They sound much cleaner than my LRS. The Magnepan sound is not more realistic or even close to a standard dipole - it's a completely different sound that adds much more reverb which reduces clarity.
The VMPS dipoles are actually bipoles rather than dipoles. Any dipole should add the same amount of reverb as another dipole as long as they're both point or line sources.

Dipoles actually add 4.8 dB less reverb to a room than conventional omni+cardioid boxes. They just dump it to the rear where it increases the sense of depth, rather than to the sides, where it creates lateral spread. You can stick some Owens-Corning 703 on the wall behind a dipole to hear what it sounds like without the rear wave. It's a very sterile, studio or headphone sound. I think most would say that the best approach is to use diffusion behind the dipoles.

Subjectively, I'm not sure how you have your LRS's set up. They should sound freaky realistic compared to dynamic speakers in that price range, at least any that I've heard.
 

Wes

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Dec 5, 2019
Messages
3,843
Likes
3,788
Josh, tell Maggie that some of use really like LIKE LIKE the wood strips on the sides, including choice of oak or cherry.

Even if they are thin...
 

josh358

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2017
Messages
493
Likes
387
Josh, tell Maggie that some of use really like LIKE LIKE the wood strips on the sides, including choice of oak or cherry.

Even if they are thin...
There will definitely be a wood option. It won't look quite like the original strips, though. That ship has sailed -- most or all of the cosmetic design has been done. I think everyone will like the results. Wendell is hoping to take the 30.7C on tour in September, so everyone will get a chance to see it.
 

steve f

Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 7, 2021
Messages
32
Likes
23
These measurements are fascinating, and thanks to the owner of these Magnepans.

A number of us, I'm sure, would love to see measurements of Sanders or Quad electrostatic speakers. They may be more difficult to ship even than the Magnepans.
I have Ouad 989s sitting in my garage, broken due to absolutely crap QC of adhesives and a failed electrolytic cap. The boxes are simply huge. We’re talking pallets here. I was going to repair them, but I got very lucky and purchased the last pair of Sanders 10C speakers. They are shipped in several boxes and containers that are end assembled by the owner. It took me a half hour. Perhaps if ASR asked Roger Sanders nicely, he’d send a loaner pair.
 

klatwork

Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2021
Messages
18
Likes
2
i heard the 1.7 a few years back...i was deciding between these and the chanes.
They felt very invasive, like someone singing next to my ears or even inside my head.
but if you sit a few feet of axis or away from the sweetspot....the sound became muffled and faint, it's almost as if you walked out of the room..
It's an interesting experience, but the quality of the audio is not great..not very clear...
 

richard12511

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Messages
4,335
Likes
6,700
i heard the 1.7 a few years back...i was deciding between these and the chanes.
They felt very invasive, like someone singing next to my ears or even inside my head.
but if you sit a few feet of axis or away from the sweetspot....the sound became muffled and faint, it's almost as if you walked out of the room..
It's an interesting experience, but the quality of the audio is not great..not very clear...

Which Chanes did you end up with?
 

josh358

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2017
Messages
493
Likes
387
i heard the 1.7 a few years back...i was deciding between these and the chanes.
They felt very invasive, like someone singing next to my ears or even inside my head.
but if you sit a few feet of axis or away from the sweetspot....the sound became muffled and faint, it's almost as if you walked out of the room..
It's an interesting experience, but the quality of the audio is not great..not very clear...
They shouldn't sound like they're next to my ears -- must have been something wrong with the setup, because they're very distant sounding speakers -- if the imaging has a flaw, it's that the instruments can be too far away.

The faintness of axis is the dipole radiation characteristic -- dipoles radiate to the front and rear, not so much to the sides. There are advantages and disadvantages to this. It's advantageous in a room without acoustical treatment, and if you don't want to disturb the neighbors. It's a negative if you want to listen seriously off axis.
 

bikall

New Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2021
Messages
2
Likes
0
The LRS lacks mid and highs. After 2 weeks owning i stripped the crossover and replaced them with a set from Gr-reseach. https://www.gr-research.com/store/p99/Magnepan_LRS.html. The difference is night and day. The bottom frequencies are skimmed off a bit so that the mid and highs are more in balance. The tweeter isn't allowed to play too low now, so it doesn't sounds stressed when the LRS is pushed with some power from the hegel H95. I do run 2 REL T5 's to support the bass. But when you swap out that tiny iron core coil with a big air coil also it improves the lows audibly.

When i first played norah jones "don't know why" it sounded she had a bucket over her head. Now it sounds bright.
 

josh358

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2017
Messages
493
Likes
387
The LRS lacks mid and highs. After 2 weeks owning i stripped the crossover and replaced them with a set from Gr-reseach. https://www.gr-research.com/store/p99/Magnepan_LRS.html. The difference is night and day. The bottom frequencies are skimmed off a bit so that the mid and highs are more in balance. The tweeter isn't allowed to play too low now, so it doesn't sounds stressed when the LRS is pushed with some power from the hegel H95. I do run 2 REL T5 's to support the bass. But when you swap out that tiny iron core coil with a big air coil also it improves the lows audibly.

When i first played norah jones "don't know why" it sounded she had a bucket over her head. Now it sounds bright.
It sounds like you have a planar bass-friendly room. Room vary amazingly in what they do with planar bass. Actually, they vary amazingly with all speakers, but they seem to vary more with planars. Anyway, the complaint I usually hear is that the LRS's lack bass and highs, not midrange.

OK, so there are a few reasons for that. One is that these are small room speakers. As Wendell Diller at Magnepan put it, if you put them in a large room, they turn into a midrange. (In general, the *size* of a planar woofer has to match the room, not just the frequency response.) That's because of the way the baffle interacts with the room -- the larger the planars panels, the more they approach an infinite baffle. Re the highs, the speakers have to be aimed at you vertically because the highs beam vertically. So basically you angle them up so that they aim at your ears when you're in the listening seat.

What Danny did with the XO was to increase the slope from 6 dB/octave. It's always a compromise -- the woofer and tweeter blend better with a gentle transition. Also, the time domain response is correct. It's said that this can be heard with test signals -- it's usually said that it isn't audible on music, but who knows. At best, the effect is subtle.

If you move the XO frequency up, the tweeter will indeed be less heavily loaded, so there's a real argument for using a higher order crossover.
Finally, I believe that Danny equalizes these speakers flat. But flat isn't real with two channel stereo -- accurate reproduction requires a "house curve" which has diminishing power response. The LRS is designed to have a house curve rather than to be flat. But if you're listening off the vertical axis, I imagine that a flat response is better!
 
Top Bottom