Magnepan’s “Tri-Center” Concept: Does Stereo Sound Better with Three Channels?

Posted by: Chris Martens at 9:09 am, October 7th, 2011

I recently had the opportunity to visit Magnepan’s White Bear Lake, MN headquarters and manufacturing facility, partly for a factory tour, partly to get an introduction to the firm’s new Mini Maggie speaker system, and partly to hear an unorthodox “stereo” system that Magnepan had set up in its "skunkworks"-like listening room. It’s that latter aspect of my visit that is the subject of this blog.

 

Background

About a year ago I reviewed an excellent surround-sound speaker system comprised of a set of Magnepan’s motorized, two-way MMC 2 quasi-ribbon-type, dipolar wall-mount speakers (used for the left/right and surround channels), a CC5 quasi-ribbon-type center-channel speaker, and a set of DWM planar magnetic woofers (these augmented, at the very lowest frequencies, by a superb JL Audio f112 subwoofer). Magnepan’s head of marketing Wendell Diller came out to Austin to help set up the system and we wound up listening late into the evening, working on getting speaker positioning, channel level trims, and other system adjustments just so—all with the goal achieving spectacularly coherent surround sound (both for multichannel music and for movies).

As we worked on the system, it struck me that with Magnepan speakers it is relatively easy to get a system adjusted to the point where sound quality is very good; the hard part is pressing on through toward an even higher level of sonic quality, where imaging and soundstaging gel in a truly great way. The problem is that it’s so easy to get “very good” results that you’re tempted to settle for them, rather than doing the hard work of careful trial and error experimentation (and listening, listening, and more listening) until you get something more. But if you do that work, the fact is that the sonic rewards you’ll enjoy can be extremely satisfying.

In the course of our setup and tuning work—which eventually yielded fantastic results—Diller and I talked at length about exactly what role center-channel speakers can or should play, and discussed ways in which center channel arrays could, in principle, prove useful in high-end music systems (and not just for home theater applications). About then, almost as if by intervention of divine providence, we stumbled upon a few small but significant final tweaks that brought the review system to breakthrough levels of performance. And as a result, I had my answer to the “but will it work for high-end music listening?” question.

The answer is yes, a properly set up surround system can sound fantastic for music listening, maybe even better than a conventional stereo system can—even when listening to stereo source material (and I must admit I didn’t entirely see this one coming) through surround processing algorithms such as Dolby Pro Logic II. Diller just smiled at my reactions and mentioned that he and the Magnepan team had been experimenting with stereo systems that use a center-channel array, which he termed the “Tri-Center” concept.

“If you like what you’re hearing here in this review system, which I think is already quite good, then you really should come up to White Bear Lake to hear a demo of the Tri-Center in action.” What self-respecting audiophile/home theater enthusiast could resist an offer like that?

 

Into the Magnepan Listening Room—In the Dark

The Magnepan listening room is more a rough-and-tumble working lab than a posh listening salon, and for that reason I did not photograph the room. But if you ever have the chance to visit, here’s what you’ll find. The room is set up around perfectly positioned stereo pair of Magnepan 3.7’s planar/ribbon dipole speakers (or, I suppose, any other new speakers Magnepan might have under development). But here’s what’s unusual. The stereo system can be played in the normal way, using just the beautifully dialed-in left and right speakers, or it can be set up so that—in addition to the left/right pair of 3.7’s—a three-piece center-channel array (the Tri-Center array) can also be brought into play.

None of the above, however, is obvious when you first enter the listening room, since Diller is a big believer in conducting blind (as in “listen in pitch darkness”) listening tests, where you can’t see what is playing, nor do you know—in A/B comparisons—which system is which. Diller ushered me into the darkened room, then, somewhat humorously using a headband-mounted flashlight to guide my steps (this “lamp unto my feet” approach was calculated to make sure I would not trip over cables or lab gear). Once situated in the designated listening chair, we began to play music and make comparisons, using both a collection of demo tracks that Diller had assembled, plus a wide range of reference material (pop, jazz, classical, etc.) that I had brought along.

Comments

dlaloum -- Sat, 10/08/2011 - 18:44

 Nothing new there...
 
Stereo (by definition - coming from the greek word for "solid" so it is sound giving the illusion of solidity) - was originally invented in th 20's/30's as a 3 speaker system. - It is NOT contrary to popular belief and useage, related in any way to 2 channel sound. (In fact by extension, properly used multi channel surround systems are true "stereo", as they have a greater potential for achieving the illusion of solidity!)
Later developments worked on 2 chanel recording with 3 channel reproduction.
Macintosh receivers of the 50's and 60's were set up for three channel stereo.
Now that almost every home as 5.1 surround, and the most common media component is the multi-channel AVR - implementing 3 channel stereo reproduction is trivially easy... 
Finally we can start to hear stereo the way it was supposed to be heard.
Now if only we had more properly recorded Blumstein recordings....
 
bye for now

David

GEICKMEI -- Tue, 10/11/2011 - 12:40

Agreed, nothing new here. We should all be listening in surround by now, with at least a Dolby Pro Logic II decoder giving two channel recordings a center channel and the surround channels. What do they think they are doing by giving it a fancy label?

The insight to be had about using a center channel speaker is this: In setting up your two outside speakers, left and right, it is easy to get the center imaging screwed up. If you place the speakers too close to the front or side walls, you can get a clustering of reflections at each side that causes a perception of stretched soloists, a hole in the middle, imprecise center imaging. This is especially true with dipolar or omni speakers, but if you use directional speakers you will get even worse off-center effects. The center channel speaker covers up a lot of those errors and lets you sit off to the side without furrowing your brow. The beauty of it all is that you use the same system for both music and home theater. Set it up for home theater and you are good to go for music as well.

And David, make that Blumlein, not Bumpstead.

Josh Hill -- Wed, 10/12/2011 - 09:50

"What do they think they are doing by giving it a fancy label?"

Well, this is a different implementation of the center channel, which involves using both three speakers with specific dispersion patterns and processing which is apparently critical to the effect. The overall sonic effect is apparently quite different from that of a single speaker.

Matt Harris FB -- Wed, 10/12/2011 - 02:42

Hi David,

I'm always open to hearing new musical performers. Who is "Blumstein" and where can I hear him/her? I Couldn't find anything relevant to music on Google.

Thanks,

Matt
www.Liquiphonics.co.uk

dlaloum -- Wed, 10/12/2011 - 06:41

Heheh thank you guys .... a slip of the keyboard (and the memory)....

Josh Hill -- Sat, 10/08/2011 - 21:36

There's apparently more to the tri-center than just conventional 3 channel stereo, which Magnepan has long offered. Why that is, it seems no one knows, including Magnepan.
Amen to Blumlein! 
 
 

Jyoti Banerjee -- Tue, 10/11/2011 - 06:45

 In what way is Magnepan's Tri-Centre different from Trifield, say as implemented by Meridian?

Josh Hill -- Tue, 10/11/2011 - 07:28

Trifield is a method of deriving a center channel from a two channel source. Tri-center depends on the physical arrangement of three speakers to reproduce a derived center channel. They've been using a Bryston SP-2 pre-pro to derive the center, with very specific settings. Apparently, the effect doesn't work as well with other processors they've tried, for reasons that aren't entirely clear. According to Bryston, it doesn't work as well with conventonal monopole speakers, either. Not sure if anyone's tried it with a Trifield processor rather than a Dolby one.

Norman Varney -- Tue, 10/11/2011 - 13:11

Three front channels is especially nice with the new Living Stereo three channel SACDs!  A word of caution for three channel, unless conditions are just right, 2 channels will prevail over 3. Three channels require very accurate time alignment, matching of amplifiers and cables (not to mention speakers), encode/decode processing, and acoustic room treatments for first order reflections.
As in home theater playback, the CC can help solidifiy the stereo image for those off axis, but the money seat does not require it. Two channel, when produced well, reproduces superior to three, and does so without the added cost and complexity.
If I had my way, home surround sound would consist of R&L front, R&L rear and R&L front sub channels.

Norman Varney
A/V RoomService, Ltd.

Josh Hill -- Wed, 10/12/2011 - 09:45

I agree completely if we're talking about conventional three-channel stereo. But I gather from the reviews I've read, and from discussions with someone who's currently trying it, that the tri center is a real improvement.

Here's part of what he said in an email. Referring to conventional three channel with the Magnepan CCR alone: "The problem was that it was very easy to localize the CCR both from side to side and top to bottom. If there was a single voice (i.e. singer) in the music, the voice would be frozen on where the CCR was, nice but not very realistic." And referring to the tri-center setup, with the flanking dipoles balanced and with some delay: "At that setting, a vocalist floats very clearly in space in front of an orchestra, but the individual instruments in the orchestra are highly localized side to side and with a feeling of significant depth. The feeling is that the soundstage moved back away from the listener but added depth."

So I think we should keep an open mind as to what it can do until more people have had a chance to try it. The question I think being whether it's gotten three-channel stereo right and overcome the limitations which better suited the center channel to a role as an anchor for off-axis listening than to "sweet spot" music listening.

Monaco2000 -- Sat, 10/15/2011 - 10:12

I still love the old-fashioned "Hafler Hookup"---two Maggies in front of me, two Maggies behind me. The sense of realism is greatly enhanced. The rear speakers voice the difference signal off the recording---heard by the mics but never reprduced in conventional stereo. For those unfamilar with the Hafler Hookup, just Google it for lots of great info.

 Larry Forbes
Klee Acoustics

prajaniati -- Sun, 10/16/2011 - 08:55

Nice article, thanks for the information.

wessokolosky@ya... -- Tue, 12/20/2011 - 18:49

If I'm not mistaken, Bell Labs did a lot of research into 3 channel "stereo" music reproduction in the late 30s, perhaps the 40s, concluding that 3 was better than 2. That led Paul Klipsch to advocate 3 channels across the front as early as the 50s. (Dates may be a bit off as this goes back a ways.) Klipsch designed his LaScala/Belle Klipsch to serve as a center channel, way before the idea was widely adopted. The Bell Labs papers on the concept were available through Klipsch at one point.
 
Wes

All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1999 - 2011 NextScreen. All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.