Planar Speaker Asylum Welcome! Need support, you got it. Or share your ideas and experiences.

---

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] Thread: [ Display  All  Email ] [ Planar Speaker Asylum ] [ Return to Search Results ]

---

[ Alert Moderator ]

---

Review: Varkdriver's Magnestand 3.6R (long)

Posted by varkdriver (A) on July 3, 2010 at 11:55:14

OK, so I created a firestorm over the appearance of my Magnestand 3.6R's... Lets move on to the sound, which is what you all care about (and rightfully so). You don't have to look at mine, but if you mod yours; you will have to listen to them. Many of you criticized me for not including sound with the cosmetics, but I strongly feel the two topics should be kept separate, as cosmetics are totally personal.

First, a little context, so you know where I'm coming from. I'm 60 years old and have been an audiophile since 18. In my long "career" as a serious hobbyist, I have owned a butt load of very good equipment including Apogee, Magnepan, Von Schweikert, Vandersteen, Allison, Paradigm, Krell, Rowland, Audio Research, Linn, Oracle, Parasound, McIntosh, Sonic Frontiers, VPI, PS Audio, Martin Logan and Wilson to name only the better stuff. I have a dedicated listening room with dedicated circuits and extensive ASC sound treatment. The room is quiet, articulate but not over damped. My preference is for Planar speakers, as I like the way they present music. Spending 30 of those 42 years in the military and moving often, I had the chance to set up planars in many different rooms and learned a lot about tweaking, placement and sound treatment. I prefer tubes in the front end of my system, but currently am happy with all solid state. My musical taste is jazz, classical and classic rock. My hearing is very good, but my wife's is spectacular. In general, I would consider myself as a very "seasoned" audiophile with a lifetime of experience to draw on.

The speakers PG built for me are currently one-of-a-kind. They are the second pair of 3.6R's he has built, and the only ones right now with these particular crossovers. Please keep this in mind as you read my review below as his experience is much deeper with other Maggie models than 3.6R. (By his own admission). They have been run extensively over the last couple of months and are fully broken in. Amplification is Parasound JC2, JC1. Cables are Nordost.

My initial impression upon listening was cautiously positive. I never form opinions on a "green" product, but it is very hard not to have an initial feeling about the sound. Here is what I emailed to Mr. Gunn:

Begin quote:

"First thing Patte and I noticed is they are somewhat "brighter" sounding than before especially on my phono source where sibilance is more pronounced. Surface noise is more noticeable. SACD seems about right as far as detail goes, but phono kind of went the wrong direction (for now)

Inner detail is very much improved, which I like. Makes listening at lower levels more viable. They "wake up" now at much lower gain settings and draw you in to the music even at very low levels. They needed to pushed before to wake up and be interesting.

Upper bass is a little more recessed making the overall sound a touch cooler. This may also be a result of their current brightness, which changes the tonal balance. One thing I need to do when the crossovers are broken-in, is to re analyze my room and set my Velodyne subwoofer. Smoothing out the transition to Maggies may change the tonal balance as well.

I am hoping the crossovers have some burn-in to go and that will improve things. Tweaking their position and toe in may also help."

End quote.

I set them up where my stock maggies were, but with less toe-in per PG's suggestion. They were tweeter outside, 6' between inside edges, toed in 2.5", 4' from back wall and 4' min from sidewalls. Left them there for the break-in period and initial listening impressions. I have tried many different positions since them but have arrived back at close to this position. After break-in and listening with many types of music and sources, here is what I heard.

High Frequencies: Definitely more treble energy that stock. Result is more perceived "detail", but also more sibilance on certain sources like phono where surface noise is emphasized. My past experience with ribbon tweeters taught me that "aiming" them away from your ears could help with that. Problem was when I reduced toe-in, I started to get gaps in the soundstage and it sounded like a three channel system. I ran my stock maggies with the tweeter fuse bypassed and was always satisfied with the treble performance. After tweaking position a hundred times (including tweeters in-NOT the answer in this case) I have found no answer for this detail vs. gap in soundstage problem. Throwing a resistor on the ribbons may be my only hope in this case, but doesn't excite me. For some people this increased detail may be desirable, but not to my ears.

Mid-Range: There is a LOT more mid-range. Initially, the increase in midrange led me to believe that the speakers came back "more efficient". I don't believe that is true from an electrical point of view, but only my impression with so much more midrange energy. Mid-range is good IMHO as much of music lives there, but in this case, it may be too much of a good thing. My initial, favorable impressions were largely based on this increase in mid-range. If you couple this with the increase in detail, what you get is a speaker that sounds best at low to moderate levels, but can start to "shout" and become aggressive when pushed. Vocals really step out into your face when you crank it and can wear you out quite quickly. Less toe-in does help with the midrange bloom a bit, but then I get the gaps in soundstage. I would say, however, that low level listening at conversational levels is quite nice. Problem is I like to listen to music at realistic levels. That's why I have JC1's.

Upper Bass: Seems to be somewhat recessed which makes the midrange even more pronounced. Put my Velodyne software on and tweaked the subwoofer again which helped a bit, but still have a upper base dip that I can't equalize. Working my ASC Cube Towers in the corners to see if that can be mechanically tuned a bit.

Low Bass: Not much change here. My Velodyne comes in at about 50Hz and really fill out the bottom octaves nicely. My room will go low very cleanly and with good amplitude. No complaints about the bass- it's very musical and integrated with the Maggies.

Soundstage: I mentioned the "gap" vs. detail issue, but the soundstage is changed in other ways. The pronounced midrange tends to put the vocals way out front of the background leading to VERY deep soundstage. This is seductive at lower levels, but become "odd" at higher levels. Almost like having the artist walk towards you as you crank it up. I noticed PG reverses the mid/bass panel like Magnepan used to orient them. Wonder if that contributes to this at all...

There is a lot going on with PG's mod to these speakers, and the result is considerably different than stock. There are many potential elements contributing to these changes, but I believe the crossovers are the biggest contribution. Changing from two to one crossover point and running the mid/bass panel sort of "full-range" must have some effect on the sound and the components/design of PG's crossover is quite different as well. I'm sure the damping the frames provide improved the perception of detail as well, but with a ribbon tweeter, I am not sure that is a good thing. Ribbons can be fabulous, but they can also bite your ears off. My subjective sound evaluation is that there are some definite "peaks and valleys" in the freq response of these speakers and will bet a nice dinner there is broad, mid-range hump in the response curve. I got my RTA software and calibrated mic out, but can locate my line amp right now. As soon as I get set-up, I will post some curves to see if my subjective opinion matches the measurements. I always listen before I measure.

So am I happy? No, I would have to say this was not a forward step for me after listening for the past couple of months and tweaking for the best sound compromise I could achieve in my room. The stock 3.6R's had a more "seamless" sound with cohesive soundstage and balance between the frequencies. They had to be "pushed" more for their best sound, but could be listened to for hours as reasonable high volumes levels. The Magnestand 3.6R's are better at conversational levels, but I believe the stock 3.6R is better everywhere else. I have a lot of $ invested and cannot afford to sell them at a loss, so I will apply my own expertise and see if I can get them a little more balanced to my taste. This is not the first step backward I have taken in 42 years and it won't likely be my last. It's part of the journey.

Please keep in mind that this is only my opinion of my unique Magnestand 3.6R's and does not impugn the sound of anything else PG modifies. For those of you who own and love your Gunned Maggies- more power to you! If I had 3.6R's I would proceed with caution if contemplating this modification. There may be better paths to improving the already good sound of the stock 3.6R without the substantial change in character this mod brings. In the end, I really think the crossover is not right for this particular model of Maggie.

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:

Crux Audio

---

[ Top of Page ] [ Contact Us ] [ Support/Wish List ] [ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]

---

[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]

---