If this helps? An image, a cross-section in any case. I did not find any technical data, but I just did a quick check.
Edit
Sorry missed it before but,...
Edit
Sorry missed it before but,...
That's a phase plug that extends towards the rear wall (my friend told me this and he knows it from the dealer who sold the speakers so take it for what it's worth) where it's bolted. An allen bolt is visible there. If I recall correctly he told me that they remove the dustcap and fit that contraption there.Cabinet looks good - angled braces should help avoid resonances (or push them up higher). Not sure what that tube is but, I believe in another model they link two woofers with a metal tube, like Kef used to do. I don't think thats a port. It might be a "brace" to connect the woofer the to rear panel. I assume they're time aligned, but that offset looks huge - doesn't seem the two drivers are aligned on acoustic center, so perhaps theres some sort of phase compensation? And it appears that there's some sort of anti-reflection material under the tweeter? But that's hard to guess.
I dunno - assuming the drivers are well matched and the xover is well designed, I don't see why these wouldn't sound OK. The only points my dilletante ass would raise, is the time alignment and the possible difraction issues from that cabinet design and any port issues from that slit at the bottom.
That was my impression also. To me these speakers are about detail to the detriment of all else. They were at my home for 2 weeks and at first I was excited to try something new but they have that in your face sound which made me give up and move them in a corner after a day. I believe these were made for string quartets or something like that, definitely not for full-range music. They hold their own when it comes to detail, I'll give them that. It's hard to explain but there was this song with a bass sax which sounded more real compared to mine. But after a couple of hours of listening I wanted to just stop playing music. Oh and my friend's room is different in all ways imaginable, he has an open space living/kitchen, there's way more (and I do mean way more) space behind the listening position compared to my living room. But still...They did a review. They generally liked the speaker but added that extended listening becomes tiring.![]()
MC Systems M3
Met alle nieuwe producten die er op de CES 2004 te zien waren ligt het voor de hand om juist uit die noviteiten een keus te maken bij het uitzoeken van een te testen component. Wie mij wat beter kent weet echter dat ik slechts zelden voor de meest voor de hand liggende keus ga.hifi.nl
He also remarked how picky they seemed to be with regard to placement.
They did a review. They generally liked the speaker but added that extended listening becomes tiring.![]()
MC Systems M3
Met alle nieuwe producten die er op de CES 2004 te zien waren ligt het voor de hand om juist uit die noviteiten een keus te maken bij het uitzoeken van een te testen component. Wie mij wat beter kent weet echter dat ik slechts zelden voor de meest voor de hand liggende keus ga.hifi.nl
He also remarked how picky they seemed to be with regard to placement.
That was my impression also. To me these speakers are about detail to the detriment of all else. They were at my home for 2 weeks and at first I was excited to try something new but they have that in your face sound which made me give up and move them in a corner after a day. I believe these were made for string quartets or something like that, definitely not for full-range music. They hold their own when it comes to detail, I'll give them that. It's hard to explain but there was this song with a bass sax which sounded more real compared to mine. But after a couple of hours of listening I wanted to just stop playing music. Oh and my friend's room is different in all ways imaginable, he has an open space living/kitchen, there's way more (and I do mean way more) space behind the listening position compared to my living room. But still...
I would count the K&H O300D (which I own) and the Neumann KH310 (its successor) to this group of speakers.A compromise between these two antipodes, obviously, might give best overall results.
I'm biased here as I was affiliated with the company and was involved with the development, but the HEDD Type 30 and Type 20 monitors have killer soundstage (and are excellent speakers overall) for reasons that are not always fully identified (for some speakers things just happen to fall perfectly in place whereas for others it doesn't and as designer you cannot simply say it's because this or that).
I expect response anomalies (uncorrected) are more likely that timing errors w.r.t. localization, especially since it will be symmetric for both speakers, and time based location is based on differential arrival times between the same sound from both speakers.
So if I understand you correctly, in this case equalization should fix the imaging?
What's the distinction between open-baffle & dipole?Open-baffles tend to have less side-wall reflections. Dipoles as well.
In the sweet spot, imaging, true imaging, i.e. recreating what is on the source material, is a factor of on-axis frequency response, equal on-axis frequency response between both channels, equal phase response between channels up to about 1500Hz, lack of significant rapid phase shift from 200-1500Hz (more debatable), keeping distortion under control, speaker width (angle), speaker distance (if driver integration comes into play), and importantly, keeping the level of reflections low especially under 6KHz (but not <200Hz). ....... That won't guarantee you will get what the person making the recording intended, but you will get an accurate representation of the "image" that is in the recording.
Will you like it? No idea. I am not you. Many, probably a majority will give up a bit of imaging accuracy for wider perceived soundstage, i.e. sound outside the speakers, but that is artificial, so you need to accept that it is artificial. The greater the level of direct sound to reflected sound, the better the imaging accuracy, but at the expense of other qualities most people like.
Smooth off-axis response will widen the potential sweet-spot, and allow, if desired, less raking of the angle, again allowing a wider sweet spot. In an untreated or lightly treated room it will also reduce room response peaks and valleys, which will just sound bad, and also in an untreated or lightly treated room, will effect "imaging", or "sound-stage".
Most speakers without major flaws, operating in an area of lower distortion, equalized, in an absorptive room, will image accurately. When you move away from an absorptive room, and reflections come into play, and you need to balanced direct/room response for equalization, then things get much more difficult.
When you look at things like open-baffle, dipoles, and line arrays, they don't inherently image better, they either enhance a quality that people like, or they "fix" an issue in untreated rooms. Open-baffles tend to have less side-wall reflections. Dipoles as well. Then they add in euphonic reflections that people like, that sense of space, whether it was on the recording or not. Line arrays reduce ceiling and floor reflections and provide a closer to 1/R drop in response versus 1/R^2 drop in response from about 500Hz and up (for typical floor to ceiling). That helps with untreated floors and ceilings but also improved sizes of the sweet spot.
No magic, just science, and all relates directly to how we perceive location.
If there was nothing wrong with them, that is, broken, so it goes without saying that you did not like them.. But you probably just did not like the sound with them in that room, placed as they were. As simple as that. Skip those now. Put the gunpowder on something else.I was also amazed by the effort that went into making those speakers. The shape of the box, the finish, that phase plug thing etc. Oh and one thing and I just remembered. That top box where the tweeter is mounted is not attached firmly to the rest of the case, there's some play. Not adjustable in position but not glued or bolted to the rest of the case. In comparison, my speakers are a very basic design in most way. Rectangular bass-reflex boxes, both drivers are not flush mounted, no horizontal offset, no chamfered edges, no slanted baffle. The filters are 1st order and impedance equalized (there are 2 PCBs, one on the rear wall and one on a side wall). Not hard to drive. Would I chose them, price no object? Hell no, I've heard much better and not insanely priced. But until I'm sure (where sure means after listening to them in a similar room with my music, not in a dealership where everything is tuned to perfection or at least supposed to be) I want to upgrade I'm staying with these.
Someone said above that if electrolytics are used in the filters they are subject to aging. My friend told me that they use silver wiring, I can't imagine the type of person to use "audiophile" cables inside a speaker opt for electrolytics. Look at pic no 4 here: https://www.marktplaats.nl/v/audio-tv-en-foto/luidsprekers/m1768910572-mc-systems-m3 There's a Siltech sticker at the back. You can see that we're in mumbo jumbo territory here.
Oh and one more thing. While looking them up I ran across a pic of the M3 where the tweeters are ribbons, not domes. Maybe not a coincidence.
As I said above, to me it sounds like whoever designed the M3s has a very specific taste in music and sound and made them for like people. IMO definitely a niche type of sound which I'm not a fan of.
But IMO we're speculating based on some pics and basic specs. In my native language we like to call this wandering in the fields.
If you run the model on Google images there are so few pics online that it's obvious it's an obscure brand, likely mostly known in The Netherlands. Possibly no distributors outside the country. I'll take a wild guess and say that there aren't any measurements of these speakers. Like I said, way, way too much speculation based on very little info.
Oh and last thing. I believe it's obvious that tweaking them is absolutely out of the question because 1 the resell value in the audiophile market would become zero 2 there's no guarantee it's worth it and my friend doesn't have the inclination and is a busy person.
Certainly this bears further examination, under the standards accepted here at ASR. Your attitude, however is a bit "Dutch" for my taste.But TBH I don't care. It's pointless to speculate based on incomplete data. Pics, generic specs. All I know is how they sound.
But IMO we're speculating based on some pics and basic specs. In my native language we like to call this wandering in the fields.
Or you who seem to like technology and speaker design fix some DIY instead. It will give you so much more. Then you have control yourself and do not have to modify any existing speakers.
(these are not my speakers! ..sure)