18-Mar-2015, 23:35
It’s Maggie time!
I’ve been wanting to hear some Maggies for a long time and somehow never got round to it. Now that I’ve decided to part with my SF Cremonas (with a heavy heart), I’m looking for something to replace them in my study system. The room is about 5m x 4m. The smaller Maggies would fit the room pretty well. The Devialet 200 will be doing amp duty. So today I paid a visit to KJ West One, the London temple of hi-fi porn.
The system was a Unico CDP (don’t know which model) into a D200. The speakers were the Magneplanar MG .7 and MG 1.7. I was really looking forward to hearing these speakers. You know what’s going to happen now, don’t you …
The first thing to say is that the family resemblance between the two speakers is much stronger than any differences between the two models. So most of my comments on the MG .7s apply also to the MG 1.7s.
First up were the new MG .7s. They look pretty elegant. Black cloth with wooden ‘cheeks’.They’re about the same height as my ML Montis and maybe 50% wider.
The first thing to say is that these are proper panel speakers. They do the things panel speakers do and no other speakers (in my experience) can. They project a wide and high picture of the music, a picture so big that you can hear into the music in a way that you just can’t with other speakers. The separation of instruments in orchestral music is wonderful. All the desks of the orchestra are in exactly the right place. Violins to the left and across the middle: check. Cellos and double basses down to the right: check. Woodwind up a bit and centre right. Brass and timpani blaring and thumping towards the back.
They also create a remarkable 3D effect. I’d say they do this just as well as my Martin Logans.
The other key feature of panel speakers is speed. The Maggies may not be quite as ‘fast’ as ESLs, but they certainly beat most electrodynamic speakers. The effect is an exciting and persuasive articulation of attack and decay. Moving from electrodynamic to panel speakers is a bit like moving from listening to the slurred speech of a drunk person to the clipped articulation of John Gielgud in his prime.
The music I was using was mainly classical: solo piano, early female vocal (Hildegard von Bingen), Bach chamber stuff, then some big Mahler (nos 5 and 8). I finished with a bit of Yello. (Why not?)
The Hildegard came across beautifully. Very vivid and pure upper mid-range. Really stunning. Those female voices sounded so sweet and present.
But then the disappointment kicked in. The upper octaves of the female voice (and piano and violin) were too prominent. They dominated the range. The result was a slight sense of a nasal ‘twang’. Added to that, neither the .7s nor the 1.7s can do bass, or at least they can’t integrate the bass into the musical picture. Throughout the demo I felt that I was looking into a beautifully detailed and articulated picture, but looking through the narrow slot of a letterbox.
The 1.7s were better. A bit more roundness and fullness, but still not the full picture.
I’m writing this at home, listening to the same music through my Martin Logans. It’s an unfair comparison: the MG .7s retail for £2K and the MG 1.7s for £2.9K. The MLs are several times pricier. But the MLs make instrumental timbres sound real, and the Maggies make them sound a bit artificial.
It may be that the Devialet 200 isn’t really the right amp for them. A fairer comparison would be driving the Maggies with my Sanders Magtech. (Apparently Magneplanar often use the Magtech for their show demos.)
So I'm sad to say it’s no deal for me. My experience today was that the Maggies do some things brilliantly, but they fall down when it comes to a full and realistic picture of the music. I really wish it had been otherwise.
Matt
I’ve been wanting to hear some Maggies for a long time and somehow never got round to it. Now that I’ve decided to part with my SF Cremonas (with a heavy heart), I’m looking for something to replace them in my study system. The room is about 5m x 4m. The smaller Maggies would fit the room pretty well. The Devialet 200 will be doing amp duty. So today I paid a visit to KJ West One, the London temple of hi-fi porn.
The system was a Unico CDP (don’t know which model) into a D200. The speakers were the Magneplanar MG .7 and MG 1.7. I was really looking forward to hearing these speakers. You know what’s going to happen now, don’t you …
The first thing to say is that the family resemblance between the two speakers is much stronger than any differences between the two models. So most of my comments on the MG .7s apply also to the MG 1.7s.
First up were the new MG .7s. They look pretty elegant. Black cloth with wooden ‘cheeks’.They’re about the same height as my ML Montis and maybe 50% wider.
The first thing to say is that these are proper panel speakers. They do the things panel speakers do and no other speakers (in my experience) can. They project a wide and high picture of the music, a picture so big that you can hear into the music in a way that you just can’t with other speakers. The separation of instruments in orchestral music is wonderful. All the desks of the orchestra are in exactly the right place. Violins to the left and across the middle: check. Cellos and double basses down to the right: check. Woodwind up a bit and centre right. Brass and timpani blaring and thumping towards the back.
They also create a remarkable 3D effect. I’d say they do this just as well as my Martin Logans.
The other key feature of panel speakers is speed. The Maggies may not be quite as ‘fast’ as ESLs, but they certainly beat most electrodynamic speakers. The effect is an exciting and persuasive articulation of attack and decay. Moving from electrodynamic to panel speakers is a bit like moving from listening to the slurred speech of a drunk person to the clipped articulation of John Gielgud in his prime.
The music I was using was mainly classical: solo piano, early female vocal (Hildegard von Bingen), Bach chamber stuff, then some big Mahler (nos 5 and 8). I finished with a bit of Yello. (Why not?)
The Hildegard came across beautifully. Very vivid and pure upper mid-range. Really stunning. Those female voices sounded so sweet and present.
But then the disappointment kicked in. The upper octaves of the female voice (and piano and violin) were too prominent. They dominated the range. The result was a slight sense of a nasal ‘twang’. Added to that, neither the .7s nor the 1.7s can do bass, or at least they can’t integrate the bass into the musical picture. Throughout the demo I felt that I was looking into a beautifully detailed and articulated picture, but looking through the narrow slot of a letterbox.
The 1.7s were better. A bit more roundness and fullness, but still not the full picture.
I’m writing this at home, listening to the same music through my Martin Logans. It’s an unfair comparison: the MG .7s retail for £2K and the MG 1.7s for £2.9K. The MLs are several times pricier. But the MLs make instrumental timbres sound real, and the Maggies make them sound a bit artificial.
It may be that the Devialet 200 isn’t really the right amp for them. A fairer comparison would be driving the Maggies with my Sanders Magtech. (Apparently Magneplanar often use the Magtech for their show demos.)
So I'm sad to say it’s no deal for me. My experience today was that the Maggies do some things brilliantly, but they fall down when it comes to a full and realistic picture of the music. I really wish it had been otherwise.
Matt
Sonos Connect (W4S) > DSpeaker Antimode 2.0 > Sanders Magtech > Martin Logan Montis
Sonos Connect (W4S) > Devialet 200 > Vivid V1.5
Silver Phantoms (just the two)
London
London
