Magico M5 Loudspeakers
Jonathan Valin -- Tue, 02/10/2009 - 15:16
Tomorrow, if all goes according to plan, I get the Magico M5s!
I will begin posting photos of the install process and the speakers sometime after noon. I will also blog about the installation, with photos of the Elam boys carting them up my three flights of stairs to the listening room, where the Soulution 710/720/740, ARC 610T/Ref 3/PH7/CD8, Walker Black Diamond, and Tara Labs Omega Gold and Zero Black await.
I gotta admit I'm excited. This ought to be a great stereo system--anything less will be a disappointment.
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.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
>>Perhaps in your “would-be” world<<
Try "civilized". Or "Service oriented". Even "reasonable." There is never a good enough excuse for rudeness. ESPECIALLY when in business.
Come on, he did not get a reply to his email. How rude can that be… Probably went to spam or something. I assume that if he was seriously interested, he would at least made a phone call. But I guess it is easier to rant here first (Cheaper too). Never worked in an audio store but just hanging around audio forums, I can see how even the most "civilized" or "service oriented" and even "reasonable" people will lose it sometime.
Put it this way. If high end dealers in general are as attentive and courteous to their customers as 5th Avenue jewelers are to theirs there will not be disgruntled audiophiles "ranting" here or anywhere for that matter.
The issue remains whether or not they received his email and was the email followed up by a phone call to the dealer? Even SBS deserves the benefit of the doubt.
I am surprised by the lack of mention of the competitors of the Magico 5 from the Absolute Sound Staff, yes the Magico is a good speaker I have heard it, but Harry is using the Scaena's which are also magnificent speakers, doesn't Harry's voice and selections matter to the magazine anymore?
It seems weird that in the Golden Ear issues the Scaenas got a glowing report by Harry but they weren't mentioned by any other writers, how can there be accoldaes thrown by one writer and not a single mention by any of the others even in passing? Don't you guys go over and visit each others reference systems to see how good their systems actually are?
How can the Magico's be viewed any differently than any of the other major contenders which are also rarely talked about as open competition.
At the last CES I heard the YG Kipods and they sounded fantastic, and I would take them any day over the Magico V3 which I also heard and thought were very good. YG has been mentioned by Stereophile but not TAS. YG makes an all aluminium speaker, uses custom made drivers and even has a self amplified bass section which goes considerably lower than the V3 yet there has never been a comparison or mention. YG makes facsinating claims but in the Stereophile review they actually did measure extremely well. The Magico and YG product lines are more similar yet different wouldn't you guys want to do some kind of shoot out between these two aluminium based titans?
It seems that the magazine is playing favorites, at the expense of real nuturality. The Magico story is very interesting, they came out of nowhere and over night are considered to be leading the field, but what is so extraordinary about Magico? Aluminium baffle very nice but there are many speakers with more exotic cabinets, proprietary drivers yup other people have them too, specially made crossovers, yup others have them too. Magico makes a nice product no doubt but the pricing is way out of line for what you are getting no matter how nicely made they are. Are the 5 worth $22,000.00 more than the MAX 3 which is also a superbly built and engineered product?
Anon-
It seems that you are ignoring, or not willing to accept, what some of these reviewers are telling you. Many of these guys, especially JV, has been telling us for quite some time what is “so special” about Magico products. You are obviously not buying into it. That is fine, but it is not for the lack of information giving to you by the reviewers. Reviewers tend to review what they like. I am not so sure anyone of these reviewers, really like the YG stuff. It took a lot of advertisements on their part to get the coverage they did in SP. I am not so sure they could have gotten it in any other way.
Thanks, Ben. It also seems to me that Anon is ignoring the fact that this thread is about the Magico M5. I've also started threads about other speakers I've "favored" from MBL, Symposium Acoustics, Martin Logan, Quad, etc. Let's face it: One can only write at length about what one's heard in one's home.
As for YG...I, too, thought the Kipod was terrific sounding at last year's RMAF and at CES, and we are going to review it. Robert is expecting a pair very soon. Additionally, I thought the Wilson MAXX 3 was the second-best sound at this year's CES and am on record saying that it would've won Best Sound, had I not been bowled over by the M5. I was also very impressed by Richard Vandersteen's new Model 7, by the unconventional but extraordinarily realistic-sounding Vritu from Da Vinci, by the phenomenal (and phenomenally expensive) ribbon-and-glass The Force from Perfect8 Technologies, by the ultra-transparent, highly neutral, and very lifelike Scaena 3.2 ribbon/cone hybrids, by Hansen's exceptionally gorgeous-sounding Emperor, by the realistic and very affordable Amphion Prio 620, by the superbly neutral (or would that be "nutural"?)and "invisible" Avalon Indras (always great, IMO), by the incredibly authoritative and very beautiful Focal Grande Utopia EM, by the remarkably quick and highly resolving TAD CR-1 and Reference-1, by the uniquely enveloping and uniquely exciting MBL 111F and 101 E MkII, by the always-great-sounding Gershman Black Swans, by the sweet and highly musical McIntosh XR200, etc., etc.
Although I respect all of Magico's speakers, I haven't "loved" them all. I've reviewed exactly two in three-and-a-half years. That the M5 happens to be the best loudspeaker (overall) that I've heard in my home does not mean that there aren't other speakers that I've heard that are "better" in certain ways than the M5s or other speakers that I haven't heard that may be better, period.
JV,
Surely you could manage to include at least one of the VSA speakers in your list.
Simply forgot about the Von Schweikert Unifield, oldguy, which I will be reviewing soon!
The VR9s should be on anyone's top ten list. The VR5 Anniversaries should at least get honorable mention. Pity VSA doesn't spend the ad dollars that many of the other guys do and that seems to make all the difference in the world.
I'm not going to get pissed off by this ugly insinuation, although I should. But I will make it clear that ad dollars have never made any difference in my opinions of loudspeakers, electronics, sources, and cabling. My posts, reviews, and RMAF and CES show reports speak for themselves. I've given honest assessments of gear from long-time advertisers and from folks who've never advertised at all. This happens to be a thread about Magico M5s, which are the speakers I'm currently reviewing. I've started similar threads about many of the products I've reviewed--to share my excitement with readers and give them a peek into what I'm thinking and how my thinking evolves over the review period. When I answered that anonymous poster and pointed out the same thing, I also made a short list--off the top of my head--of other speakers I'd liked (and have said I liked). The inadvertent omission of VSA was just that...inadvertent. I also left out Nola Baby Grand References, Quad 2905s, MartinLogan CLXes, Symposium Acoustics Panoramas, MBL 101 X-tremes, Rockport Hyperions, and a truckload of others.
If you feel that you should get pissed off then by all means, get pissed off. I get pissed off every time I read a review these days primarily because I can never know if what I'm reading is 'conflict of interest'- free. ***UGLY INSINUATION WARNING***proceed at your own risk! If opinions aren't influenced by advertisement then that pesky reviewers' special pricing or extended loaner period rears its ugly head. Anybody who says these points are moot lives in la-la land. Yes JV, go ahead and get pissed off like the rest of us. OK mr. moderator, you can pull my plug now, it's been worth it. :-)
Let me see. I forget to mention your beloved VSAs and we are therefore utterly bought and sold. I could point out that VSA has not been a long-time advertiser in our mag, and yet I am reviewing one of its speakers. Guess why? Oh, don't guess. Let me tell you: I liked it when I heard it at RMAF (so did RH), and I liked it again when I heard it at CES. I could also point out that I have been critical of many of our advertisers' products and highly impressed by many non-advertiser products. Just look at any show report I've ever written.
As for loans...yeah, reviewers often do get long-term loans of gear we particularly like. That has been the case since HP started TAS. None of us who do this for a living could afford to buy most of the gear we review--or we wouldn't be doing this for a living. Does this prejudice us? Speaking for myself, yes and no. It depends on what you mean by "prejudice." If "prejudice" means that reviewers tend to prefer equipment from certain marques that they have long experience with and whose track record of producing excellent products is indisputable (such as ARC--a non-advertiser, BTW--in my case), yeah, I am predisposed to be interested in whatever that company produces. Would this "prejudice" keep me from calling a spade a spade? No, it wouldn't. More importantly, it hasn't. I reviewed a Class T amp from ARC that I didn't like--and said so in print. And no more than 24 hours ago, I wrote this about the selectable EQ (the big new "selling point") of ARC's otherwise superb Reference 2 phonostage preamp:
As for [the Reference 2's] EQ settings...I'm still contemplating this question. My problem with EQ varietals in general is a variation on my problem with any kind of EQ—to wit, changing EQ can end up sounding "better" on some discs even though it is demonstrably inaccurate. I can think of plenty of products (speakers, for instance) that fatten up the upper bass or suck out the upper midrange and round off the treble and, as a result, sound consistently more "beautiful" in a forgiving sense than products that are more accurate and less uniformly forgiving. For fun, I've tried the Decca curve with records I know were mastered to the RIAA curve and, in several cases, the sound is arguably as good if not more attractive in some ways (and in other ways, not) with the "wrong" EQ as it is with the right one.
What worries me is that there is no end to taking this "sounds good to me" road. And this worry is compounded by my genuine uncertainty about the EQ that various recording companies were actually using at any given point in time. On 78s and mono LPs from the very early 50s it appears that Columbia and Decca were using their own EQ curves (which the ARC gives you access to). But there is a good deal of evidence that Columbia never used anything but the RIAA curve on its stereo recordings and on its mono recordings after 1955 or thereabouts. Ditto for stereo-era Deccas. And yet we are being encouraged—by ARC, Zanden, FM Acoustics, AMR, etc., and by certain audio writers, including some on this very mag—to think otherwise. Until I’m absolutely sure about which EQ curve “rightly” goes with which generation of recording and label (and I’m studying the problem), I consider the EQ settings on the Ref 2 (and on all the other preamps which offer label-specific EQ settings) as “fixed” tone controls that may compliment some discs (as noted) but that aren’t necessarily "right" for anything but monos from the early 50s.
Does that sound bought and sold to you?
The bottom line is if I were you, oldguy, I'd simply stop reading our worthless AVguide Web site, TAS, or any other audio magazine. It'll spare you the pain of wondering whether our diamonds (or zircons) are conflict-free. And it'll spare the "rest of us" the pain of reading your bullshit. Since we don't have a moderator to pull the plug, why don't you do me and the "rest of us" a big favor and pull the plug on yourself?
Over and out. : )
Just for the record JV, being a VSA owner has absolutely nothing to do with my rant against equipment reviews and their obvious conflicts of interest. I would feel the same way if I were the owner of a Bose wave radio. Members of this board notwithstanding, there are a hell of a lot of folks out here who, to put it mildly, distrust equipment reviews/reviewers. I suggest you google yourself...make that google your name...and you will find lots of comments regarding JV and his reviews and several that aren't particularly positive. Many of them claim that you are into a "best in the world" speaker of the month, etc....but you must be aware that those opinions are out there otherwise you've been auditioning gear in a cave somewhere. Ok I am officially pulling my plug now (cue the applause track); off AVguide life support and on to attending to more pressing things...waxing the dog, cleaning my nails, etc.
<<Ok I am officially pulling my plug now (cue the applause track); off AVguide life support and on to attending to more pressing things...waxing the dog, cleaning my nails>>
Getting a life...
oldguy -
I see you trying to inject that dreadful VSA in every possible loudspeakers thread you can? Is that your idea of cheap advertisement? Why don’t you start your own VSA thread and give us all a break?
This board is a mind numbing waste of time anyway and I thank you for the reminder. Not to worry my friend, I have no intentions of starting a VSA thread so can't give you that break you ask for, but do me a favor Roy and shove it. OK? Now you have a nice day!
OLDGUY
i think VSA are cool and Vonsch....... is definitely one of those guys we need to celebrate but comon man.......we're past that stage on this board .stop insulting the integrity of TAS,,,,,,,start a thread .see how many of us will bite.......i for one really wants to know about the new VSA product..otherwise man go listen to your system or find some other forum.....cause we're not feeling you......and please don't take that to mean that all of us here are feeling MAGICO.......I for one just get a thrill from reading JV.i like his colorful language and segue's. it doesn't mean i like everything he likes.
just as i like reading WP at stereophile and PERRY at Stereotimes..............you wanna know my favorite SPEAKER BRANd.....ROCKPORT......You wanna know why........It just always sounds like LIVE MUSIC...but that's TOO ME............AND THAT's WHAT MATTERS.
So Lighten up man! make your comments without the added BULL-SHIT
I believe oldguy posts here, http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?board=139.0 as es347. This "circle" is for Von Schweikert enthusiasts. Although, as one can see, it's not very active.
I'll ask you again, oldguy: Why doesn't VSA have very many dealers?
Just want to put in my 2 cents here.
I had the opportunity to listen to the M5 at Sound Chamber, HK's Magico dealer.
I forgot if it was a FM Acoustics or Spectral setup, but I do recall clearly that they were using the Berkeley Alpha DAC.
Anyway, in short, breathtaking!
The first impact on me was resolution resolution resolution. The speakers resolve so much details... not 'unnecessary' details... I mean the inner musical details... thing that make music music... not 'air', not 'page turning'... not 'baton hitting stand' details, but musical details. And doing so in a completely natural manner... totally at ease, nothing seems to be forced.
Then in very little time, it became clear to me that these are the most coherent Magico speakers there are. I actually didn't think about the idea of 'coherency' during the early part of the demo, because the term didn't even enter my mind... But then, I was only 7 to 8 ft away from the speakers... the demo room wasn't that big... and there I was, with so little distance between the M5 and me, the speakers blended perfectly. Being a Mini II owner, I find that difficult to accept... how a 3-way multi-driver design can sound more coherent than a simple 2 way, 2 drivers design? But it's quite obvious... the entire audio spectrum share a common sonic signature.
I have no interest in the 'spec' of the speakers. I think at this level, we are beyond 'specs' examining. They could go to 20Hz or 22Hz or 30Hz, I don't care. All that matters is music sounded real.
So they are 89k. But in some ways, I like them more than the Model 6 which I also listened to that day. Unless I have a really big room, the Model 6 may simply be overkilled. On that day, the M5 beated the Model 6 in terms of coherency ever so slightly. But this is only in relative terms.
One thing I would like to comment on... since I upgraded my Mini to Mini II with the new NanoTec driver... and now that I have listened to the new Model 6 with the NanoTec drivers and the M5, a full array Magico-designed drivers, it has become quite clear to me that the driver really has a distinct 'voice'. The V3, Mini II, M5 and Model 6, (have not listened to the V2) do all share a clear distinct sonic signature, especially in terms of their abilities to 'resolve'....this is most apparent in the midrange.. the 'texture' is unmistakable.
WSlam,
Hey, buddy! Good to see you back on-line.
I'm glad you got a chance to hear the M5s, and I'm glad that you liked them as much as you did.
Jon
Hi Jon,
The M5 left me very 'unsettled'... It's been days since I listened to them, but the impression they left me is stronger than the impression I had when I first heard the Mini in the same demo room.
My first priority now is to get my room to the best acoustic shape as possible. I had major issues when I first moved into the new room with the Mini II. Turned out it's a floor bounce cancellation in the 350Hz region and two rugs solved the problem completely and brought the balance back. But now I suspect my room is a little too 'dead' (dry)... Once I solve the room issues, and that is gonna take me time with no professional help and going via trial and error, I will think about the M5 again.
Having said that, the Mini II continues to impress me. The sound I get now is the most enjoyable sound I have ever had. The Mini II continue to deserve my priase.
Now I wonder if there may be a M3 and M4 coming!? (Assuming Mini II is the M2?)
Have you had chance to listen to the Berkeley Alpha DAC? Any thoughts?
ws
WSlam,
Without taking anything away from the Mini II, the M5 is the most realistic "big" mutliway loudspeaker I've heard, and I'm not surprised you were impressed. I have not heard the Berkeley Alpha DAC but my pal Robert Harley raved about it in TAS. However, just recently he called the Meridian 808.2 Signature CD player, with its unique apodising filter, "the most significant product in the history of the compact disc." If you knew Robert as well as I do, you'd know that this kind of encomium is virtually unparalleled coming from him.
Jon
Hi Jon, do you have any information regarding the M5's crossover? Wht order?
Nope. That's top secret. I know Magico uses sophisticated "elliptical" crossovers made from the highest-quality Mundorf parts, and I know that Wolf and Co. takes crossover design very seriously. But I do not know the slopes or hinge points on the M5 (or any other Magico speaker).
No idea what an elliptical crossover is.
The only mention I could find is from the 'other' maagzine's test report on the V3, that the woofers were crossed using a second order crossover, and the other crsoover point is at 2.7kHz (estimated)
You will find a concise explanation of elliptical crossovers in my interview with Alon Wolf, which accompanies my upcoming review of the M5 in Issue 196.
Looking fwd o reading it. When will 196 be out (exact date?)
ws
It is our October ish, which usually mails (and shows up on newsstands) in mid-September.
excellent. can't wait...
Just read the review. Just fantastic! (both review and speakers). I am sure a lot of people who have not heard the M5 will think you are over the top, but you really are not.
This is a test
H'mm. Like an air-raid drill?
JV - AVGuide (TAS) should let people know that your M5 review is available for GEC members, might drive a few more subscriptions. Really was an excellent and insightful article. well done. i was worried after reading through this whole forum there wouldn't have been much more to say, but you have done a great job with this article.
Thank you, bherlihy!
Good to know what to expect in the next issue!
Now that the review is out, does it mean you have to part with the M5 soon? =)
...from my cold dead fingers.
Be careful! People are gonna say you are getting special treatments again! haha.
Mr. Valin,
I've enjoyed your reviews immensely - thanks. If I missed this, just point me in the right direction - but have you had an opportunity to compare in any meaningful way the M5 and M6 speakers?
Thanks.
First thank you, Forester.
To answer your question, no, I have not. The only time I heard the M6 was when it was introduced at CES two or three years ago. At the time I thought it was simply phenomenal (so did WG and RH) but, for the very little it's worth, when I heard the M5 at CES last year I thought it was the best speaker I'd heard at any show (including the CES in which I heard the M6). If you live anywhere near Goodwin's Audio I believe you may be able to hear (and compare) both speakers under far better conditions than a trade show.
Jon
If I may chime in.
I listened to the Model 6 and M5 on the same day (Is "Model 6" the M6? Why would they use M and Model? a little inconsistent?).
IMHO, from my brief encounter, I actually prefer the M5 over the Model 6. There is seamlessness quality from the M5 that is unheard of, not just within the Magico lineup but among all speakers I have encountered. I still find the AMT on the Model 6 to 'stick out' a little, perhaps no in terms of integration or loudness, but of tone quality. I also find the M5's bass to have more texture than the Model 6.
On the basis of what I heard at CES, I agree point for point. For those of you who don't already know, WSlam is a first-rate listener who has auditioned much of the world's best audio gear.
Thanks Jon. That is very flattering. I am just lucky to be in Hong Kong. We have access to almost all the 'major brands' of HiFi within 2 buildings in HK next to each other. And Magico's entire lineup is now showcased in the dealer's showroom in HK, from Ultimate II (being driven by I don't know how many Lamm monoblocks) to the V2. I have yet listened to the Ultimate II. I saw them setting them up and had no idea they are that physically imposing!
My friend just 'signed me up' for a session with the M5 this Saturday! I have some 'bad friends' =)
For my future reference, where is the second building? I've been to the one where Magico, Sonus Faber/ARC, BL etc.. are located, but wasn't aware of another building in the vicinity.
literally right next door. 1 Duddell Street and CNAC bldg.
1 Duddell is the one I went to, three times.
Thanks for the info - I have yet one more thing to look forward to, for my next trip to HK :)
Hi,
how is the new tweeter?
do you think it will be built in in the V3 ? .... in the review of the TAS the scanspeak was mentioned not so positively
regards
I compared the photos of the M5 and the V2, it seems that both are using the same same new tweeter built by Magico.
That's why I ask if this will also be soon or later integrated in the V3 ...?
thanks
My friend and I went to listen to the M5 again.
In less than a movement of Mahler No.5, we simply exchanged a glance and understood what was going on. The M5s are so good, we just didn't need to listen anymore.
I have now listened to the M5s on two setups, one with 47Lab CDT + Berkeley DAC + FM Acoustics pre/pwr, and today, Spectral CDT, Berkley DAC + BA Labo pre/pwr.
I will agree with JV that the M5s are extremely transparent. Whatever you feed them, they will reveal the differences. e.g., today, with BA Labo behind the M5s, the sound was even more laid back and 'darker' than the FM setup. But even with the FM, which usually is quite neutral, I have noticed that the M5s imho, are slightly on the laid back side of neutral. Whoever did the voicing of the M5s obviously has very 'elegant' taste. Even if they are not absolutely neutral, they are voiced very very tastefully.
From today's longer audition, the one thing that continues to impress me most is the coherency of the drivers. Everything share the same tonal character, same ever so slightly laid back character, and same texture.... they really do sound like one source. Simply stunning.
Hi WSL,
Had a similar experience at SC. I especially liked the FM/M5 combo. Probably the best system I ever heard. Simply stunning, just like you said. BTW, I have to say that at CES with the Soulution gear , the M5 did not sound “laid back” at all. I wonder how much of all this is the nature of the signal going into the M5s that are simply moving out of the way. Perhaps JV can enlighten us on that...?