MAGICO Mini II: First, Second, Third, Etc. Impressions
Jonathan Valin -- Mon, 07/23/2007 - 12:36
For ease of reading, I've gathered my previous comments on this thread and will add to them as time goes by. Those of you who have already read my previous MAGICO II posts can just skip to "Third Impressions" below.
As I did originally, I'll start with the RTA I took from the sweet spot in my listening room, using Room Tools software/hardware and a very high-quality microphone.
I should note that, because of the unusually deep-reaching bass response, I ran the RTA a dozen or two times, using slightly different microphone setups, and double-checked it with a pro SPL meter and Granite Foundations CD (which gives you 15 second bites of every frequency from 10Hz to 90Hz). The bass response is legit, although you should not necessarily expect the same 25Hz response in your room (unless you live, like I do, in a 150-year-old house with extremely thick brick exterior walls, lath-and-plaster interior walls, very tall ceilings, and hard pine floors). As noted below, Alon Wolf measures the speaker flat down to about 37Hz in his space, which is fully 10Hz lower than the Mini I went. Bottom line: These speakers definitely have much deeper and improved bottom end.
As for the roll-off in the top octave in my RTA...I think this is an artifact of my measurement setup, as the microphone in my RTA is not aimed directly on the tweeter's axis but faces forward, as you would if you were sitting in the sweet spot, and is set precisely at ear height (between mid/woof and tweeter) rather than at tweeter height. Wolf's measurements, on axis, show flat response in the top octave (my original MLS measurement of the Mini I showed exactly the same thing, and this is the same tweeter that was in the Mini I). Bottom line: The Mini IIs don't sound "rolled-off" in the treble.
First Impressions
This is a frequency response plot (RTA) of the Mini II taken from the sweet spot of my listening room, with my usual room treatment in place ([4]Shakti Hallographs, [3] ASC Tube traps). FYI, I used Ascendo Room Tools software/hardware and a very high-quality microphone to make these measurements.
The speakers have not yet broken in--I've been playing them continually now for about 100 hours, so I've got another 100 hours to go. Why the lengthy break in? Not only does the new carbon-fiber-sandwich Nano-Tech mid/woofer need to loosen up, so do the parts in the new crossover, which (among other Mundorf items) features a Raimund Mundorf gold/silver capacitor almost as big as a man's fist.
Still, as you can plainly see from the response plot, things have changed with the MAGICO Mini. It still measures phenomenally flat--and sounds that way--from the upper bass through the treble. (And remember, this is not a near-field, quasi-anechoic measurement plot; this is a real-world graph taken at a distance of about 10 feet from the speakers, with the room very much in play!) However, in my bass-friendly digs, it now also measures virtually flat to below 30Hz!
Of course, measurements are one thing, listening quite another. Though in my room (with its very substantial low-end lift) the bass of the Mini IIs actually rises a bit to a peak at 25Hz, before plummeting, I'm not going to claim that they will reach that low in your room (Alon Wolf's measurements in his room show them flat to about 37Hz before falling off at 12dB/octave); nor, am I'm going to claim, in spite of the measurements, that the IIs deliver the bottom octave with the impact of, say, the MBL 101 Es (or of the Mini I with the Wilson-Benesch subs). Let's face it: No small-diameter driver can move air like a big-diameter cone, and measured low bass response doesn't always correlate with musical low bass response. That said, thus far on classical power music and much pop the Mini IIs sure don't sound low-bass-limited! They don't sound very much limited, at all.
Because they have more low end than the Mini Is, the II's' overall tonal balance has changed a bit. On first listen, this is an appreciably fuller, smoother, richer sound than that of the slightly lighter-balanced Mini Is. Aside from this, nothing else has apparently changed much. The speakers still disappear into the soundfield better than anything else (save, perhaps, for the MBL 101 Es). They still sound more of a piece than anything else with cones (save, perhaps, for a one-way like the Omega Hemps). They still have killer midrange and treble transient response, astonishing dynamic range for a two way, and standard-settingly low levels of noise and coloration. They still soundstage at least as well as anything I've heard (including the 101 Es). And they still have what is very likely the highest resolution of low-level colors and dynamics of any cone loudspeaker.
I'm not going to go into greater detail about the Mini IIs' sound at this very early point. I have too much break-in and listening time ahead of me. But I can say this with certainty: When it comes to the very low end, the Mini IIs--to my astonishment--are more than a bit improved over the Mini Is. Whether that means that power-music lovers can now do without a sub remains to be seen.
BTW, lower bass doesn't come for free. Wolf says that the Mini IIs need a bit more amplifier power than the Mini Is, which were scarcely SET material to begin with. I can't confirm this at this point, save to say that, like every loudspeaker on earth, the Mini IIs' bass sounds bigger, deeper, and more powerful at higher volume levels.
Second Impressions
With 48 hours more break-in, nearing 150 hours total, it is becoming increasingly clear to me that—driven by the Audio Research Reference 3 or Audio Space Reference 2 linestage, Audio Research Reference 610 T amplifiers, Audio Research Reference CD7 CD player, Audio Research PH7 phonostage, Walker Proscenium Black Diamond record player with Clearaudio Goldfinger V2 or Air Tight PC-1 cartridge, and hooked up with Tara Labs Zero interconnect, Tara Labs Omega speaker cable, Tara Labs The One power cords, and Tara Labs PM/2 Power Screen line conditioners—the Magico Mini IIs are very likely the best dynamic loudspeakers I’ve ever heard.
The obviously marked improvements in the bass (for which, see the thread “Magico Mini II: First Impressions”) have now extended into the midrange, which has a smoothness, liquidity, lifelike density of tone color, and window-like transparency that make the Mini I sound just the slightest bit rough, bright, “white,” and gritty by comparison. Wolf says the reason for this astonishing change for the better is that “the breakup modes of the [mid/woof] cone are now way higher than before.” Thanks to his new carbon-fiber driver and crossover, the midrange has become less of an excitable boy, without any apparent sacrifice in musical excitement.
Resolution in what was already the highest-resolution dynamic loudspeaker system in my experience is, astonishingly, even higher. I haven’t put on a favorite CD or LP in which I haven’t heard something old made new again. Formerly hard-or-impossible-to-hear song lyrics, details of instrumentation, or layers of a complex studio mix are suddenly crystal clear, without the slightest hint of analyticity. In fact, the Mini IIs are considerably richer and more natural in timbre and texture than the already-superb Mini Is. Best of all, the level of phonographic realism—of seeming to be in the presence of real vocalists and real musicians, of coming closer to the absolute sound—has here reached a new high. Indeed, I rushed down to my study to jot off this note after listening to a series of familiar recordings—most of them what I would’ve considered extremely “lifelike” on the old Minis—sound utterly renewed, as if they’d all come back from three weeks at the world’s finest spa. If someone (even Wolf himself) had told me that the Mini I’s midrange could be improved upon to this extent, I wouldn’t have believed him. But hearing is believing.
All that is left to fall in line is the treble, which, at the moment, seems a little bit “smoothed down” to me, although this might be a psychoacoustic effect of the substantial increase in low bass and midrange density of tone and texture. The Mini I had a bright, lively, effervescent treble—some might have said too bright because it stuck out a bit if the speaker was set up on-axis. It no longer sticks out, on-axis or off-.
Third Impressions
The Mini IIs continue to improve in every area with break-in. The treble still sounds "smoother" and considerably less aggressive than it did with the Mini I. This is the exact same tweeter that was in my Mini I—unlike the mid/woof it wasn't swapped out for a new driver—however, it is being fed by an entirely new crossover, with different-value, higher-quality Raimund Mundorf parts.
Also, it has become clear to me that part of the lively, brightish treble-range sound of the Mini I wasn't the tweeter per se, but the superaddition of the sound of the original titanium-sandwich mid/woof, whose non-linearities (break-up modes) were much lower in frequency than those of the new Nano-Tech carbon-fiber-sandwich mid/woof (which is linear out to 20kHz!) and which, I'm guessing, was adding a bit of its own non-linear, out-of-passband sound (grain, roughness, and aggressiveness) to the top octaves.
In any event, the treble range of the Mini II is quite a bit more "integrated" with the mids and lows than was the treble of the original Mini, without any sacrifice in upper-octave transient speed, low-level resolution, or naturalness.
While the Mini II's mid/woof needs a bit more power than the Mini I—for those extra 10 to 20Hz of bass response—they will play louder with greater ease than the Mini Is. HOWEVER, no two-way all by its lonesome is going to play at rock-concert levels or have the impact of a big multiway cone, horn-loaded, omni, or large planar loudspeaker. This is one of the tradeoffs that you'll need to consider before investing in a Mini II (or any two-way). I'm not saying that the Minis won't play very loud or lack bottom end impact. In fact, at reasonably loud levels (90–96dB peaks), I'm not at all sure I would recommend a subwoofer with the Mini II. It just doesn't need it on any kind of music (including synth or drum-and-bass). If you typically listen to music at 100+dB levels (especially in a largish room), then you probably ought to be considering a different kind of loudspeaker.
I think I should note that MAGICO is offering the upgrade that I am reporting on—completely new mid/woof driver, completely new crossover, and new enclosure bottom plate (the old one has to be removed in order to make these changes)—for $4400, which is precisely the retail price difference between the Mini I and the Mini II. In other words, Wolf isn't making any money on the upgrade. IMO, this is an extremely fair deal, considering the large and largely surprising sonic improvements you'll get for the investment.
I should also note that I will soon be reporting in TAS on another two-way—the Focal/JMLab 1007Be—that costs a lot less dough than the Mini II. I haven’t heard the 1007 yet and am not expecting miracles, but it should be interesting (and educational) to see how much of a Mini-like sound you can buy for better than $20k less than the II.
Thanks for the exciting updates, Jvalin. Based on your description, the Mini II sounds like a significant upgrade that further builds upon the hallmark qualities of the original Mini, addressing residual traces of colouration that still stand in the way of absolute neutrality. I can almost hear what you are describing as I have gotten to know the original Mini's over the last few months.
The reduction in colouration and resonance you describe is exactly why I chose the Mini I (and why I would settle for the superbly neutral Stirling LS3/5a version 2's if the Magico were unavailable. These latest BBC-approved speakers might not produce as much detail or amplitude as fancier speakers, but they add very much less.) Can't waiting to have my Mini 2's!
The truth is I haven't been conveying my full excitement about the Magico Mini IIs because: a) I have to save something for the print review; and b) I seriously doubt if some people would believe the sound I'm hearing from the Mini IIs in my room (particularly in the low end) without actually hearing it for themselves.
This speaker is a far, far, far cry from a Stirling LS3/5a (or any LS3/5a, and I know whereof I speak having lived with the original and various iterations of the original for the better part of twelve years). You would simply have to come over to my house (which, of course, I would love you to do, Professor) and hear, oh, the low-bass and hard-transient-rich sampler discs that Jeremy Bryan made for me (copies of the discs he brought to shows for MBL).
Listening to these incredibly percussive tracks through the Mini IIs, the ARC Ref CD7, and, believe it or not, a superlative integrated amp that I will be reviewing next month in TAS, which sounds so much like megabuck MBL solid-state gear--for tens and tens and tens of thousands of dollars less--that it has left me flabbergasted, you would not believe how close these MAGICO two-ways come in speed and impact on very hard transients (from slamming drum strikes to electric and bass guitar plucked so hard the strings sound like they might break) and on sheer low-bass power and extension to my paragons of transient speed, impact, and bass power and extension--the MBL 101 Es driven by MBL electronics. I'm talking wall-shaking, floor-shuddering, nearly-bottomless bass that is, at the same time, superbly defined. I'm talking transient response like gunshots. Oh, the 101 Es with MBL electronics ultimately have an edge at the very, very bottom and in sheer razor-sharp leading-edge definition on the hardest transients, but, Prof, the differences are astonishingly small. For someone primarily into rock 'n' roll on CD, this particular combination would be very hard to beat in a room like mine.
I am curious about that integrated amplifier you speak of, not that I can buy a new one after investing in the Telos monoblocks. The best guess I can offer is the ASR Emitter II, but its probably something even better.
The bass extension and power of the Mini IIs seem to be nothing short of miraculous, and sounds like something I could use listening to symphonic and Jazz recordings. My Mini IIs were expected to arrive last week but the shipment has been delayed for some valid reason or other. After this, I might decide to bug Alon with even greater insistence and blame it on your posts.
I was listening to the Stirling Broadcast version 2 LS3/5a's the other day. These offer a more refined and less congested presentation than the originals with expanded bandwidth, making it a little more in keeping with modern day standards, while maintaining the strengths of the originals. I agree with you that even this latest version is far from matching the transparency, dynamics, extension (both upwards and downwards) and soundstaging of good mini monitors available today.
However, I could not help feeling that these improvements have come at a price, and that modern speakers exceeding the perceived psycho-acoustical flatness, neutrality and absence of cabinet colouration/signature of the LS3/5a are hard to come by.
In this sense, diehard LS3/5a fans might say they prefer to hear less of the music than more of the speaker. It seems with the Minis, and probably even more so the Mini IIs, the paths towards these seemingly exclusive goals can be traversed simultaneously. One can hear much more of the music and even less of the speaker itself!
Quote:I am curious about that integrated amplifier you speak of...the best guess I can offer is the ASR Emitter II, but its probably something even better.
It is not the ASR Emitter II, and it is not battery-powered. It's a fairly conventional Class AB solid-state amplifier combined with a fairly conventional Class A solid-state preamplifier from a company that has been around for awhile and whose products have been recommended before in TAS.
I'm being coy here because I don't want to spill the beans on-line before I write the review. But this is not an esoteric marque.
Quote:In this sense, diehard LS3/5a fans might say they prefer to hear less of the music than more of the speaker. It seems with the Minis, and probably even more so the Mini IIs, the paths towards these seemingly exclusive goals can be traversed simultaneously. One can hear much more of the music and even less of the speaker itself!
This is extremely well put, as is always the case with you, sacduser. It is also exactly true of the Mini I and Mini II.
Quote:The bass extension and power of the Mini IIs seem to be nothing short of miraculous, and sounds like something I could use listening to symphonic and Jazz recordings.
They actually are rather miraculous. I can honestly say that, in my room with the electronics I've mentioned, the MAGICO Minis are no longer limited by the music. They now play everything superbly.
I'm going to make a 2nd guess about that integrated amp: I'm thinking it might be a Bryston . . .
Oy.
Rather than keep you guessing, I'll just tell you: It's the GamuT DI 150 from Denmark, currently priced in the U.S. at $10.5k (£5700 in the U.K.).
I've had considerable experience with GamuT amplifiers, starting with the Mark I version of the D200, which Ole Lund Christensen (then chief engineer and founder of GamuT) delivered to me personally way back when. Ole’s ingenious idea was to reduce the number of power output transistors to a minimum—a single massive power MOSFet for each leg of each channel.) Like early MBL amplification (although the two amps use very different gain strategies), the first GamuT amp was a speed-burner with extremely low noise, a thin and cool but fundamentally neutral balance, tremendous transient response, and great bass. The Mark II version of the D200 made an improvement in density of tone color, fleshing out timbres considerably and adding a welcome bit of warmth, at what I thought was a slight but justifiable cost in its astonishing transient speed and impact.
This latest GamuT is a somewhat different-sounding animal. As far as I know, Ole is no longer part of the company, so I'm not entirely sure who is responsible for voicing the DI 150. (I believe it may be a young man named Frederik Johansen.) Whoever it is has done a superlative job. The DI 150 combines the circuitry of GamuT’s D3 preamp and its D200 Mk III amplifier in a single chassis in a true dual-mono configuration. Fed by an ARC Ref CD7 CD player through its balanced inputs, it sounds (via the MAGICO Mini IIs) so much like megabuck and megagood MBL electronics it is, as I already said, flabbergasting.
The slight blunting of transient speed and impact in the D200 Mark II has apparently been rectified in the Mark III (which I never auditioned), because this is a sound that seems to combine the best of the D200 Mk I’s virtues with the best of the D200 Mk II’s. In other words, it has gorgeous tone color but, once again, hits like a heavyweight—terrific transient speed and terrific low-end definition, extension, color, weight, and clout. This is also a very-low-noise, very-high-resolution device, as the Mk I also was and all MBL amps/preamps are. (The DI 150 is the single quietest preamp/amp I've ever used in my system--zero hum, noise, and RFI, regadless of source, which bespeaks a superb grounding scheme.)
I will have some nits to pick about back-panel ergonomics and have not yet made up my mind about the DI 150’s sound through its single-ended inputs (i.e., when fed by a phonostage). But I can safely say that it is a wonderment if you listen to CD/SACD through its balanced inputs.
The DI 150 is conservatively rated at 180Wpc into 8 ohms (typically it puts out more like 210Wpc) and 360Wpc into a 4-ohm load (and 720Wpc into 2 ohms), like the Mini II. It is gorgeously made and gorgeous to look at, BTW, and has a remote control that allows you to adjust volume, select input, and mute output.
Now, $10.5k is scarcely chicken feed, although it is a helluva lot less than the $94k that an MBL 6010D preamp and pair of 9011 amps would cost you and $4-5k less than the GamuT D3 and D200MkIII would cost you if purchased in their stand-alone forms. It is also, at this writing (and, once again, with CD through its balanced inputs), the second-best combo I've heard with the Mini IIs--the best being the ARC Ref 3 or Audio Space Ref 2 preamp and ARC Ref 610T amps, a $50k package.
Sorry to try and pin you down, JV, but...
Is it the second best over the MBL because you haven't tried MBL combo yet or you just like it better? Either way, the Gamut/Mini combo sounds like a bargain for the ultra high end.
I know HP liked their older cd player-have you tried the newer Gamut cd?
No, Rupert, I haven't tried the top-of-the-line MBL with the Mini IIs yet because I no longer have the 9011 amps. I will try the $41k MBL 9008s and the $20k MBL 6010D at a later point, but, honestly, they will really have to shine to justify the $50k price difference--and I know, from long previous experience with both units, that (in my room, as currently configured) they won't be as entirely free from hum as the DI 150.
While I don't imagine that the DI 150 will outperform MBL separates on an absolute basis (the MBLs are, after all, the best solid-state units I've ever heard), this GamuT integrated is undoubtedly a great combination with the Mini IIs (if you use a CD/SACD player as your front end), and puts a Mini-based system within reach of a lot more audiophiles.
I shiould note that the superb sound I reported on with the GamuT integrated came with Tara Labs Zero balanced interconnects between the ARC Ref CD7 and the DI 150, and Tara Labs Omega speaker cables between the DI 150 and the Minis--a bit of wiring that costs almost as much as the Minis! However, I would imagine you can do quite well with the DI 150 and less expensive wire. (I can say this with some confidence because, while the DI 150 has not yet been reviewed in the U.S., it has been very favorably reviewed in England and in Europe, and I'm pretty sure that none of those reviewers was using top-of-the-line Tara Labs stuff.)
At some point I will try the DI 150 out with less expensive wire. It would be swell to be able to confidently recommend an entire Mini-based system--including source, wires, and room treatment--that costs less than MBL or ARC separates all by themselves.
I haven't tried GamuT's new CD player. But given how good the DI 150 sounds, I think I will. (OTOH, if you buy the $9k ARC Ref CD7 CD player you get a goodly taste of the ARC Ref 3's gain stage as part of the bargain--and believe me, that is something you want to have if you love the sound of live music!)
Quote:I know, from long previous experience with both units, that (in my room, as currently configured) they won't be as entirely free from hum as the DI 150
I feel obliged to add something to this comment, which may have been a bit unfair to MBL and ARC. Grant Samuelsen of Shunyata Research just yesterday pointed out that the most likely reason why I'm experiencing zero hum with the DI 150 is that, unlike the monoblock MBL 9008/9011s and the monoblock ARC Ref 210/610Ts, the DI 150 has only one power cord. With the monoblocks, I necessarily use two (four with the MBL) power cords, increasing the probability of developing a ground loop.
I don't want to leave the impression that either the MBL or the ARC amps have inherently higher hum. They do not.
None of this takes a jot away from the surprising sonic excellence of the DI 150, BTW.
That's one very impressive frequency response curve!
Yes, AR, it is exceptionally flat. Save for the bass, which actually peaks (in my room) at 25Hz, it is within ±2dB for most frequencies and most of the time within ±1dB! And this is in-room frequency response, not nearfield quasi-anechoic frequency response, which is ruler-flat with the Mini and Mini II.
However, as I’ve often noted, frequency response plots don’t ever tell the whole story. They say a great deal about overall tonal balance. But you wouldn’t know from this plot: a) how well the Mini II soundstages; b) how life-sized its images are; c) how incredibly dynamic it is (including the deep bass) for a two-way (or frankly an any-way); d) how low in driver, enclosure, and crossover coloration it is; e) how superb its low-level resolution is; and f) how completely it disappears into the soundstage. Ultimately, there is simply no substitute for listening.
Nonetheless, the Mini II (like the Mini I) is one speaker that sounds as great as it measures.
Wow, is AR complementing the Mini? I am not sure I can handle this. But seriously, as a very proud owner of a Mini 1, I was/am somewhat skeptic about the Mini 2. Not to mention a bit ticked off about the change. I have learned to expect nothing short of excellence from MAGICO so I am keeping an open mind but how much better can it get?
Why do you think I waited so long to try out the Mini II, Roy?
I felt exactly as you do. I was very afraid that Wolf had traded off the midrange magic of the Mini Is for a few measy hertz in the bass. And who needed that?
Well...it didn't turn out that way. The change in the bass goes far beyond a few measly herz and, to my utter surprise, the improvement in the midband/treble is just as significant. As Mr. Pearson has observed, with products at an unprecedented level of excellence (and the Mini I is a prime exampe), you can't really tell if something is "missing" until you hear something better. Put simply: The Mini II is better.
That said, I'd be pissed off, too, about having to fork out another $4k so soon after buying something that I thought (and many other astute listeners thought) couldn't be improved upon--or at least not with such unseemly speed. But the truth is that Wolf and his associates have been working on this new Nano-Tech mid/woof driver for several years. It just happened to be ready for prime time very soon after the Mini I was launched.
Now, it would've been nice to have been told about this prospect when I was working on the Mini I review--so I could've alerted potential buyers--but I wasn't told. And, to be perfectly honest, that is another reason why I laid back on the Mini II: I felt purchasers of the Mini I (and reviewers or, at least, this reviewer) had been handed a bit of raw deal. On the other hand, I think Wolf is aware of this and is showing a sense of responsiblity by not charging Mini I buyers anything more to upgrade than what they would've spent for the Mini II. I don't think any manufacturer could be fairer than that.
I should also point out that, given my musical taste, I could've gone on living in near-complete happiness with the Mini I. And so, for that matter, can you. If you don't make the upgrade, you've still got the best mini-monitor money can buy. I say this because I'm no longer sure the Mini II qualifies as a mini-monitor, save in a physical sense. It sure doesn't fit the sonic profile of any mini-monitor I've ever heard.
Like I said before, I think that the Mini Version I was way too much money for a speaker with, let's call it "bass issues". Another $4,400 for that kind of frequency response is nothing to complain about. Not that I have a flawless memory for frequency response charts, but the chart in this thread seems to be a first as far as I can recall. The new price seems utterly fair to me.
If you thought that Version I was not lacking anything, then don't upgrade. But for those who thought that it was fundamentally flawed at that price, another $4,400k is nothing to complain about. Compare that to the price many were willing to spend for the tourus subwoofers. I'd be thankful that the speaker is designed in such a way that you actually can upgrade it. If Version 2 was in a different cabinet I might be a bit miffed, but c'mon, you have a wonderful upgrade path here. What is an extra $4,400 when you are talking about $30k speakers? Some of you have probably spent multiples of that on cables.
This is hard to believe (and to confess), but I actually find myself completely in agreement with you, AR. The new Minis (at about $26.5k with stands) are $16 less than the Mini Is with Torus subs and amps (and, in the majority of rooms, will go almost as deep--in my room, deeper). Add another $3.5k to this substantial savings, and that's enough to buy a GamuT DI 150 and ARC Ref CD7!
Well AR, based on your rational, the “mystery speakers” JV was testing will be worth whatever price you will put on them. After all they went down to 15 Hz. So is the "Carver Amazing Loudspeaker". I can tell you, without any hesitations that “bad bass” is a lot more frustrating than limited bass. Had no real “bass issues” with my Mini. I even tried them with the Torus and preferred them without. Would I like them to go lower? Of course, but only if nothing else suffer (other than my wallet...).
Roy Pan wrote:Well AR, based on your rational, the “mystery speakers” JV was testing will be worth whatever price you will put on them. After all they went down to 15 Hz. So is the "Carver Amazing Loudspeaker". I can tell you, without any hesitations that “bad bass” is a lot more frustrating than limited bass. Had no real “bass issues” with my Mini. I even tried them with the Torus and preferred them without. Would I like them to go lower? Of course, but only if nothing else suffer (other than my wallet...).
I haven't really read this site in a while. What do you mean about "mystery speakers"?
http//forums.avguide.com/viewtopic.php?t=2636
I replied too hastily when I said I was "completely in agreement" with AR.
What I meant to say is that I agree entirely that "the new price [of the Mini II] seems utterly fair" and that "you have a wonderful upgrade path here."
I do not agree that the Mini I was "way too much money for a speaker with, let's call it 'bass issues.'" The Mini I was, is, and remains a great loudspeaker that is fairly priced for the superb sound it offers. And, for the music I most often listen to, it did not have "bass problems."
I also agree with Roy that "bad bass" is "more frustating than limited bass."
The only point I am making is that at this price point (for my wallet) any speaker better have high quality, deep bass. Magico's modifications are excellent in my opinion. Those who are satisfied with Version I should have no regrets or feel pissed off about having to fork out another $4k. If you didn't think that the speaker had bass issues, then ignore the upgrade, subwoofers, etc. No one should be complaining about what Magico has done here. JV shouldn't be complaining that it would have been nice to have been alerted that a Mini II was coming so that he could have alerted potential buyers. Version I was purchased for what it was. Version II is available for both existing and new buyers. Everyone should be very happy. No one got a bit of a raw deal here.
AR, I can respect that deep bass is a priority for the kind of music you enjoy. Therefore, for you, the Mini I would be the ultimate squandering.
To enjoy some types of music such as Classical and Jazz, freedom from colouration, clarity, Timbral variety, lifelike dynamics and subtlety of nuance are perhaps more important than the deepest most powerful bass, full orchestral and big band climaxes nothwithstanding.
In that sense, in a pre-Mini II world, someone with such preferences would find the Mini I an excellent deal, not because there was nothing to complain about or that it had ideal deep bass qualities for Jazz and Classical, but because there is no alternative speaker which can perform as well in the parameters which are more essential for that type of music. The Mini I has bass issues, but the issues of clarity/colouration/dynamic/nuance/timbral presented by alternative speakers in the same price range were musically much harder to accept.
Given that the Mini II is all that Jvalin describes (I'm still waiting for Magico to ship my trade-up pair), it changes the entire game. It appears we can have our cake (ultimate clarity/neutrality) and still eat it (deep bass).
To put it all in perspective, we need to celebrate the fact Magico has managed to thrust the Mini's performance up to a whole new level, addressing an important ommission for many listeners (deep powerful bass) . Mini owners will now be captivated by their music in a more intimate, engrossing and complete manner. At the end of the day (or an eight-month waiting period, whichever is later), greater engagement with the music is what it's all about, not just the complacent feeling of assurance that one has a hi-fi that can't be beaten.
I hope to report as enthusiastically as Jvalin about the Mini II's once they arrive and burn in for 200 hours.
AR, you have a point, but so do I.
The Mini I remains a great speaker at its price. At the same time, if Alon and company knew that the model I was reviewing would soon be replaced with a new improved model, I think it would've been better policy to tell me this (and, through me, TAS readers), as this is information that may, for some potential buyers (such as you, AR), have been pertinent to purchase (or at least to the timing of purchase).
That said, the situation (from Magico's POV) was a little more complicated than I at first realized. While only available state-side for less than a year, the Mini I had been available in the Far East for better than 3 years. So the upgrade, which had been in the works for quite awhile, wasn't as "abrupt" as I thought. In any event, as both you and I have pointed out, AR, the deal that Alon is offering couldn't be fairer: Upgrade, if you want, to the Mini II for no more money than it would've cost you to purchase the Mini II in the first place, or keep the Mini I as is, which entails very little sacrifice for those (like me) who love the speaker and love the kind of music it is so terrific at reproducing.
Sacuser's comments are simply right on, as they always are.
Sacsuder, do you know what happened to WSlam? Is he still a Mini fan? Is he still eating $1k steaks?
Quote:AR, I can respect that deep bass is a priority for the kind of music you enjoy. Therefore, foryou, the Mini I would be the ultimate squander.
Well the thing is I listen to just about everything save for country music and harcore rap music. I love to listen to classical and jazz as much as I love to listen to techno and trance. But even from a basic product value perspective, I do not accept that a speaker at that price should have had such a high roll off. For those with a narrower (than me) taste in music where the bass and output limitations are not an issue, then you should not lament your purchase of the Mini V1.
Quote:The Mini I remains a great speaker at its price. At the same time, if Alon and company knew that the model I was reviewing would soon be replaced with a new improved model, I think it would've been better policy to tell me this (and, through me, TAS readers), as this is information that may, for some potential buyers (such as you, AR), have been pertinent to purchase (or at least to the timing of purchase).
I still disagree here. No one should have purchased this speaker if they had reservations about the bass. If you feel the need to buy the upgrade, but resent how soon it was released, then I think you need to re-evaluate your initial enthusiasm. You purchased V1, because you were satisfied with the performance to price ratio. The upgrade should be of no relevance to you. And even if you purchased subwoofers to go with it, it isn't like you didn't know what the Mini lacked before you purchased it. If you later chose to buy subs, then you really can't complain to Magico about it.
I see situations like this being similar to airplane ticket sales. You can't get upset that American Airlines didn't tell you that they were going to have a ticket sale next week. It is simple supply and demand - if you want it as is, then buy it. For me it wasn't even a consideration before now. Again, simple supply and demand. Magico has supplied something that I might now want to purchase. That's good ole capitalism for you. Just like an airline ticket that I once thought wasn't worth the price, now I will consider this speaker given that the value proposition has changed significantly.
Let me put a spin on this. Few speakers have upgrades of this magnitude. And to get it for $4,400, you really have nothing to complain about. Shouldn't you be thanking Magico for coming up with a cheap upgrade so soon? Surely you wouldn't want them to delay releasing the upgrade 12 months to assuage those who might suffer a tinge of buyer's regret? Imagine if next year they released a larger monitor, and you were "forced" to buy a completely new speaker? Would you still be mad?
How many of you remember how B&W doubled the prices of their speakers in one year? Magico deserves a hearty pat on the back - not criticsm IMO.
Once again, your point is well made, AR. Those folks who praised, love, and bought Minis bought them for good reasons. I have no remorse, as a reviewer, about my enthusiasm for the speaker; nor do I take back one word of my praise for its sterling sound. Where the Mini I plays it was, is, and remains a great, standard-setting speaker.
My point, which I still think is valid, is not that anyone who fell in love with and bought the Mini Is would now feel cheated because they secretly had "reservations" about the low bass. The bass "issue" was thoroughly aired out in my review, and fair warning was given that the Mini Is weren't the right speakers for certain kinds of music (without a subwoofer) or for certain-sized rooms. My point is simpler: As a reviewer part of whose job it is to report the facts to the public, I think I should've been informed (and my readers should have been informed) that an upgrade of considerable significance was in the works.
I'm not going to hammer on this point again, because, as noted repeatedly, MAGICO's upgrade is such a fair offer--and the original speaker is scarcely chopped liver. I will point out that, although the bass is significantly extended in the Mini II, bass is not the only difference. I've talked about the midrange and treble in my Second and Third impressions. I have yet to mention another improvement: The Mini IIs play louder than the Mini Is with less strain. Difficult as it is to believe given the Mini I's standard-setting excellence, the II is, overall, a better speaker--and would be even if it didn't go substantially lower in the bass.
But what is the basis upon which you think that you should have been forewarned that a significant upgrade is in the works? Magico, in the good old world of capitalism, felt that it was under no obligation to let no reviewer or purchaser of Mini 1s know that an upgrade is in the works. What is the economic or ethical law that they have broken here? I see none. We always buy products knowing that something will eventually outperform it. That is the hobby. That is the business. The upgrades you describe sound amazing - for $4,400! I fail to see what Magico has done wrong here.
Didn't say Magico "did wrong." Just wish they'd let me know the Mini was about to be ugraded. End of story.
Quote:That said, I'd be pissed off, too, about having to fork out another $4k so soon after buying something that I thought (and many other astute listeners thought) couldn't be improved upon--or at least not with such unseemly speed. But the truth is that Wolf and his associates have been working on this new Nano-Tech mid/woof driver for several years. It just happened to be ready for prime time very soon after the Mini I was launched.
Now, it would've been nice to have been told about this prospect when I was working on the Mini I review--so I could've alerted potential buyers--but I wasn't told. And, to be perfectly honest, that is another reason why I laid back on the Mini II: I felt purchasers of the Mini I (and reviewers or, at least, this reviewer) had been handed a bit of raw deal. On the other hand, I think Wolf is aware of this and is showing a sense of responsiblity by not charging Mini I buyers anything more to upgrade than what they would've spent for the Mini II. I don't think any manufacturer could be fairer than that.
Per the bold, I think you were a bit harsh on Magico. There should be nothing but gushing praise here.
Jaysus in a moving van! What a transformation a few bass Hz can make! Now you're defending MAGICO Minis against...me!
Well, it's noble, very noble, but unnecessary, AR. I love MAGICO Minis--both the Model I and the Model II, and Alon Wolf is a friggin' genius (as well as a good friend).
Just in case nobody here has read about it, and because we're talking about the bass issue-there is a new, lower price Magico model just introduced.
The V3 looks like it gives up very little of the build quality (or obsession!)
but is floor standing and 3 way with 2 woofers. My understanding is that is goes lower and is a few thousand less. It does use the new driver technology. Should play louder too.
Thought I'd add my $.02 as I wouldn't want someone to buy a set of 5 for surround sound and then regret not knowing and blame Wolf or Valin!
Our Mr. Harley will be reviewing the V3 in the not-too-distant future.
Quote:Jaysus in a moving van! What a transformation a few bass Hz can make! Now you're defending MAGICO Minis against...me!
I'm not the one who thinks that V1 purchasers should be pissed off because they got a bit of a raw deal from Magico. No big deal though.
For fun, I'm attaching an RTA of the $4.5k Focal/JM Labs Electra 1007Be—a ported two-way with an inverted-dome Beryllium tweeter and "W"-sandwich mid/woof in an enclosure that is shaped very much like that of the Mini (though certainly not "built" like that of the Mini). The plot was taken from almost exactly the same spot (a bit lower, because the speaker isn't as tall) as the Mini II plot, with precisely the same software/hardware and microphone. (The red plot is the left channel; the blue the right.)
Although RTAs can definitely be "tailored" to reflect the way you hear a speaker simply by adjusting microphone receptivity patterns, location, and height, this plot is actually a fair representation of the way the 1007Be sounds in my room at this early point in its break-in period—a bit “up” where it plays throughout the bass range and lower mids, giving the overall sound a full and slightly darkish character, a little sucked-out in the upper midband/lower treble, making it a bit recessed, with an appealing touch of extra energy in the mid-treble where the Beryllium tweeter (which is quite fast, sweet, and extended, BTW) crosses over, adding sparkle and snap on top.
Like all mini-monitors, the speaker, which is small compared to the largish Mini, disappears into a very broad, deep soundfield, But...it doesn't disappear as a sound source like the Mini does, because you can hear the things I described above—the slight elevation of the mid/woofer in the upper bass/lower mids, the slight suckout of the mid/woofer in the upper midband, the bit of added energy of the superb tweeter (the top treble does not sound rolled-off as is indicated in the plot, BTW). If you've wondered what you're paying all that extra dough for in a Mini, it is, in large part, the absence of these slight audible discontinuities, the absence (or the great reduction) of the electro-mechanical signature of the loudspeaker itself (of its enclosure, drivers, and crossovers).
The Focal is what I would call a musical speaker rather than a true high-fidelity transducer, in that, unlike the Minis, it doesn't seem to take on fully the character of the recordings being played (or reveal fully the characters of the electronics upstream of it). It is not, at least at this point, fully "transparent to the source"; instead, it tends to add its own very appealing character to the sound—which is to say, that regardless of source or electronics, it sounds slightly dark, fast, a bit recessed in the mids (and a bit forward in the upper bass/lower mids and treble), and exceedingly lovely. It sure doesn't sound the way Focal/JM Labs' speakers used to sound, which was fat, rich, staid, and opaque.
For $4.5k the 1007Be is shaping up to be a highly recommendable speaker—at least it is when it's sitting on MAGICO's 120-pound $6k stands. (Its own stands were damaged in shipment, which may have been a blessing in disguise for the Be.) A Mini I or Mini II it definitely isn't, but then it doesn't cost what a Mini I or Mini II costs. Like the Mini, it goes great with the GamuT DI 150 integrated amp.
(I should note that the sound of the 1007Be has changed quite a bit over the course of 10 days of break in. I'll have more to say about this in my review of the Be.)
jvalin wrote:Sacsuder, do you know what happened to WSlam? Is he still a Mini fan? Is he still eating $1k steaks?
When we last corresponded, WSlam was augmenting his Mini's with Torus, which he found to address its "bass issues" (I like this term; it has a nice ring to it. I plan to use it whenever I can. Thanks, AR!)
WS had also acquired a Dartzeel NHB108, which he found to work wonders with the Mini's. From my experience with the Dartzeel, I can imagine its staggering transparency and uncovering of the flow of subtle layers of detail would synergise perfectly with the Minis. According to WS, for his listening preferences, the Dartzeel's 100 watts (180 into 4 ohms) could drive his Minis without breaking a sweat. A Mini user I know tried the Dartzeel and eventually chose a more forceful amp that comes closer to pushing the Mini's to their maximum dynamic capacity. However, I doubt there many amps that could achieve a level of transparency matching that of a Dartzeel/Mini combo.
WS also expressed interest in the new nanotech carbon fibre drivers for the Mini, but I'm not sure if he is planning to upgrade. Would be interesting to hear what the Torus would do for a Mini II. I wonder what sort of "bass issues" such a partnership would give rise to.
I'm not sure about subwoofing the Mini II, but then I wasn't at all sure about subwoofing the Mini Is. I don't want to go over old ground again, but subwoofing a fast, neutral, seamless, low-coloration, high-resolution, high-transparency loudspeaker like either of the Minis is no walk in the park, regardless of what you may have read elsewhere (even in the hallowed pages of TAS). I found a magical (or would that be "magico") combo in the Wilson Benesch Torus, but then the Wilson Benesch Torus is more of a woofer (or a cross between a woofer and a subwoofer) than a true sub-20Hz sub. On power music, the less-deep-reaching Mini Is benefited by adding a woofer of the speed and discernment of the Torus; the Mini IIs, at least in a room my size, probably wouldn't. Indeed, in my room the IIs have almost as much bass of at least as high quality as the Mini I/Torus combo (which went down flat to "only" about 27Hz).
If musical taste and content are no longer the deciding factors they once were when it comes to the question of subwoofing the Minis, room size and ultimate SPLs could be. As noted, the Mini IIs play considerably louder and lower with less strain than the Mini Is (although it takes more amplifier power to do this). But they still have SPL limits—chiefly because of big excursions in the bass.
You know there are reasons that loudspeaker manufacturers make "big" speakers as well as small ones—room size, ultimate sound-pressure levels, and very-deep-bass response being three of them. If you've got a room the size of the Ritz and habitually listen at rock concert levels, then rather than looking for a subwoofer to mate up with the Mini IIs, I’d give a listen to the MAGICO V3s and Model 6s (for starters). As swell as they are, neither the Mini I nor the Mini II, with or without sub, is going to be a headbanging hardcore rocker's idea of Nirvana (or vice versa).
What is the size of your room? Is it sealed off by doors, or open to other rooms?
I've got a weird room. At 17.5-feet by 16.5-feet (with 10 foot ceilings) t's virtually square! In theory, it shouldn't sound good at all. There is a single door that opens on to the landing at the top of an old-fashioned spiral staircase (the room is at the top of our four-story house). I generally leave the door closed, though opening it makes for interesting acoustical differences. The house is 150-years-old, so the walls are plaster-and-lath over very thick layers of brick, the floors hard pine.
For reasons I don't understand, the room is great-sounding with speakers large and small, and particularly terrific in the bass. Juergen Scheuring of Ascendo, who not only makes the wonderful Ascendo M-S speakers but is also the inventor of the RoomTools acoustical-measuring program, measured my room and pronounced it "the best-measuring room" he'd come across in a residence. Jeremy Bryan, then of MBL, told me (and MBL) that I got the best bass out of the 101 Es he'd ever heard, which is a mouthful considering how well he was then setting them up at shows.
I'd like to take credit for this, but I can't. The room just sounds good. Oh, I've treated it a bit with diffusing and absorptive materials, those marvelous Shakti Hallographs, and those weird pillar-like columns that Pearson once recommended...but frankly it isn't treated any differently (and far less elaborately) than other rooms I've used for listening, including much larger spaces. Alon Wolf thinks it's a matter of old-fashioned solid construction, such as is typically found in Europe.
Here's an old snapshot of the room, taken when I still had the ARC Ref 210s and the Krell MRS subwoofer, which I was then experimenting with (unsuccessfully) in combination with the Mini Is. The shot shows the back wall with my Walker equipment stand and the door leading to the staircase landing. You can see a Hallograph in the left corner.
I am BACK! :D
I was just told about the new threads here on the MM II. I just finished the long post JV posted, but I have not caught up on all the replies following the thread.
I have been busy with many things, but yes I did manage to try out the Mini II a few weeks ago at the HK dealer, Sound Chamber.
The difference is not subtle, but does get some getting used to. First of all, I was in slight denial that the Mini I could be 'improved' upon, and I started to listen 'at' the differences and determine whether they are merely different or *improved*.
JV has pretty much summed up the differences. The IIs are fuller, richer, and seem to play with 'more confidence'.
Once I 'admit' of the differences, I 'pull' myself (zoom out) away from micro analyzing the sound and just listen.
With the 'different' woofer (and crossover, from what I was told), the sound is indeed improved. How? I don't know. But it is just as coherent, but fuller, richer, and perhaps even more transparent then before.
The *only* aspect that did not win my heart over is the all-black looks. I like the silver tweeter plate and the silver woofer. they look great! But the all black make them less 'nostalgic' looking and turned them into something a little more modern/contemporary.
It's not a cheap upgrade, and I may just do it... but not now, as I will be moving within the year and will likely finally get a decent sized listening room. I shall determine then...
But it is a upgrade for sure... improvement, not just different.
Guys,
You are talking about uber expensive speakers to start with. $4k for an upgrade is cheap. Be thankful that there is an upgrade path in the first place!
WSlam,
Welcome back, buddy! Eaten any good steaks lately? (I haven't yet been able to talk Alon Wolf into embossing his nose print on the top plate of the Mini stands.)
BTW, I had the exact same reaction that you had about "improving" the Mini. I just didn't think it could be done--and certainly not done to the extent that Wolf & Co. have managed to do it.
Don't worry about all-black drivers. If you send the speaker back to Magico for upgrade (rather than purchasing a new one), you will have two-tone drivers! The tweeter doesn't get swapped out, so it stays silver. Only the woofer turns black. It's actually kind of cool looking. (If you want to add a black tweeter--same tweeter, BTW, just different color--it is a cosmetic option, but is not included in the ugrade price.)
JV
AR, I don't think anyone is complaining about the upgrade path or, really, about the (very fair) cost. I think everyone is still a little in shock--and that's what you're hearing from all of us. The speaker was so exceptionally good in the first place that the very idea of "improving" it is discombobulating. It would be like setting out to improve a favorite child or pet.
I don't think this is something you ever related to (because you saw the Mini strictly as a luxury purchase), but Mini owners don't just buy these speakers; they fall in love with them. Buying a Mini is an emotional commitment, as well as an aesthetic statement. That's why it's hard to accept the possiblity of upgrading them. Love doesn't admit improvement.
jvalin wrote:I've got a weird room. At 17.5-feet by 16.5-feet (with 10 foot ceilings)
Jvalin,
It is interesting to note how the Frequency Response graph corresponds to the modes that are generated by your room dimensions. With a 17.5 to 16.5 foot dimensions, peaks of around 33 to 35 Hz (low D to C) might be expected, as well as an octave higher at 66 to 68 Hz. This is borne out by the boost in the graph between 30 to 40 Hz, which helps extend and flatten the bass response further, I'm sure.
There is no peak at around 70Hz, which indicates that you have discreetly managed to avoid excited the 2nd room mode, probably by positioning your speakers and listening chair clear of the middle of the room and near the one-quarter points of the room.
What is surprising is the peak measured at 25Hz, which corresponds to the lowest Ab, which is even lower than the lowest note of the Steinway grand and Contrabassoon). Acoustically, a frequency this low can only be accentuated by a room dimensions of around 20 feet long. Any clue how this is possible?
I do not have a clue. All I can tell you is that was how it measured--repeatedly. I am now using a newer version of RoomTools software and will measure again when it comes time to review the Mini IIs. As I said, Alon doesn't claim 25Hz extension (or at least not flat). His measurements show the speaker going down flat to about 37Hz and then rolling off at 12dB/octave below that. I would imagine that that is how they'd sound/measure in most rooms.
I should note, if I haven't already, that other speakers (the MBL 101 Es, the Ascendo M-S MkIIs, the Sonus Faber Stradivari, the Kharma CRM3.2s, etc.) have performed phenomenally well in the very low bass in this room. Even the little Focal/JMLabs 1007Be's are playing and measuring lower than they should in this room--the right channel is only down a few dB at 27Hz referenced to 1kHz. I did use the newer version of RoomTools to take this Focal graph, and, as I noted, RTA plots vary widely with mike placement, although the fundamental "contours" of a speaker's in-room response stay more or less the same.
jvalin wrote:WSlam,
Welcome back, buddy! Eaten any good steaks lately? (I haven't yet been able to talk Alon Wolf into embossing his nose print on the top plate of the Mini stands.)
haha, that would be seriously funny!
jvalin wrote:BTW, I had the exact same reaction that you had about "improving" the Mini. I just didn't think it could be done--and certainly not done to the extent that Wolf & Co. have managed to do it.
Without a direct side-by-side comparison, I could not tell the 'amount' of improvement, but it's there for sure. I went to listen to the II with another MM owner, and he agreed they sounded different. But it is incredibly difficult to quantify the difference I suspect, if Sound Chamber had a pair of the original MM there for comparison purpose, it would make the II an 'easy sale' to someone like me.
jvalin wrote:
Don't worry about all-black drivers. If you send the speaker back to Magico for upgrade (rather than purchasing a new one), you will have two-tone drivers! The tweeter doesn't get swapped out, so it stays silver. Only the woofer turns black. It's actually kind of cool looking. (If you want to add a black tweeter--same tweeter, BTW, just different color--it is a cosmetic option, but is not included in the ugrade price.)
JV
Yes I am aware, but wouldn't a silver tweeter and a black woofer look even stranger? They will end up looking like '2 eyes' staring at you. Are yours now silver/black or all black?
I wonder when the nano-carbon woofers will make their way to the model 6! that will be worth a listen!
ws
Quote:Are yours now silver/black or all black?
Silver/black. I'll post a picture one of these days.
Quote:Without a direct side-by-side comparison, I could not tell the 'amount' of improvement, but it's there for sure. I went to listen to the II with another MM owner, and he agreed they sounded different. But it is incredibly difficult to quantify the difference
Yes, it would be nice to compare the speakers side-by-side. However, I don't think the differences are that hard to hear, once you get the Mini IIs in your home. First, the bass goes substantially lower and has more apparent power and presence down there. (This is not hard to discern.) Second, the midrange is smoother, slightly fuller, less whitish (in large part because of the change in the bass and, hence, the overall tonal balance), and very slightly lower in noise and higher in resolution. (This is also not hard to discern.) Third, the midrange-to-treble balance seems smoother, at least to my ear, with the tweeter not sticking out quite as much when you listen on axis (once again, I think this is because of the fuller tonal balance and because of the change in the crossover). Fourth, the speaker plays louder with greater ease.
Quote:I wonder when the nano-carbon woofers will make their way to the model 6
I think that may already be in the works.
Quote:AR, I don't think anyone is complaining about the upgrade path or, really, about the (very fair) cost.
But you did at first, with your comment about being pissed off and getting a raw deal. And now WSlam is talking about how this is not a cheap upgrade. All of this sounds extremely ungrateful to me.
Quote:I think everyone is still a little in shock--and that's what you're hearing from all of us. The speaker was so exceptionally good in the first place that the very idea of "improving" it is discombobulating. It would be like setting out to improve a favorite child or pet.
I don't think this is something you ever related to (because you saw the Mini strictly as a luxury purchase), but Mini owners don't just buy these speakers; they fall in love with them. Buying a Mini is an emotional commitment, as well as an aesthetic statement. That's why it's hard to accept the possiblity of upgrading them. Love doesn't admit improvement.
What I never related to was why someone would pay so much money for a speaker that had bass and SPL issues for large or open rooms. Someone mentioned earlier that there is a reason why manufacturers make larger speakers, and for me that spoke to the heart of the matter. For that kind of money I expect to be able to play whatever kind of music I want, at high SPLs in a large room. Many other manufacturers have achieved this and certainly to my satisfaction in terms of fidelity. Overall, I had dismissed the alleged improvements the Mini would bring due to its inherent size limitations. Others vehemently disagreed, but later in the Mini I discussions I became comfortable with the idea that if there is a market for this speaker, then it should be filled.
In my eyes, the upgrade is a nod that the Mini V1 did in fact have the significant shortcommings that I was moaning about, and that it actually did make musical and business sense for Magico to improve the bass and SPL output. Now I look forward to an opportunity to hear this speaker. Whereas before I would never even consider it, now it is high on the radar. Those who purchased V1 frankly shouldn't care unless they purchased it with the belief/understanding that something needed to be improved. Those who saw the speaker as something that could not be improved upon should see this upgrade as something superfluous.
One last point. I felt that your comments about falling in love with the Mini are somewhat patronizing. I'm sure that we've all built systems over the years and felt a great deal of affection for the sound that has been achieved. But this is the first time I've seen someone adopt the idea that something simply could not be improved upon. "Love doesn't admit improvement"? "Buying a Mini is an emotional commitment, as well as an aesthetic statement"? This lack of objectivity reeks of Emperor's New Clothes. Let me suggest that in this case he's not butt naked. But if you have fallen so much in love with his new crown, coat and slacks, that you can't admit that he's barefooted, then you no one to blame but yourself if you are shocked that he's raised taxes to pay for a new pair of shoes.
Quote:this is the first time I've seen someone adopt the idea that something simply could not be improved upon...This lack of objectivity reeks of Emperor's New Clothes.
This is a misconstrual of my point.
I have nowhere suggested that the Mini IIs aren't a sonic improvement over the Mini Is. In fact, I've repeatedly said they are an improvement--and have detailed the areas in which they outperform the Mini Is.
My point wasn't about the benefits of the upgrade; it was about the psychology of people contemplating the idea of upgrading something they thought, with real justification, couldn't be bettered--or couldn't be bettered so quickly.
Let's face it: When you finally pull the trigger on a $22k investment in a pair of stand-mounted two-way speakers, you had damn well better be convinced that they're the nuts--that they are the best mini-monitors the audio world has yet seen. The Mini Is were precisely that.
To find out a relatively short time later that the manufacturer has found a way to "upgrade" a speaker that you were convinced was "best-of-type" and whose sound you postively love is...disorienting, to say the least. It is, as I said, like being offered an "improvement" to a beloved child or pet.
BTW, this kind of reaction is normal for audiophiles who have a deep emotional commitment to their systems or to specific components in their systems--and has nothing to do with price per se. There are, for example, plenty of folks still out there who fell in love with the sound of the Quad 57s and, despite fifty years of "improvements" to the Quad electrostatic line, have never replaced them. And there are undoubtedly going to be some Mini owners who will never upgrade them, either--who will rest content with the "classic" sound of the I.
Quote:In my eyes, the upgrade is a nod that the Mini V1 did in fact have the significant shortcommings that I was moaning about, and that it actually did make musical and business sense for Magico to improve the bass and SPL output. Now I look forward to an opportunity to hear this speaker. Whereas before I would never even consider it, now it is high on the radar.
AR, I'd be curious to know how you react to the Mini IIs.
Quote:My point wasn't about the benefits of the upgrade; it was about the psychology of people contemplating the idea of upgrading something they thought, with real justification, couldn't be bettered--or couldn't be bettered so quickly.
Let's face it: When you finally pull the trigger on a $22k investment in a pair of stand-mounted two-way speakers, you had damn well better be convinced that they're the nuts--that they are the best mini-monitors the audio world has yet seen. The Mini Is were precisely that.
But JV, the best is one thing. The idea that they could not be improved upon is a whole different level of affection. I remember my first real experience with hi-fi. It was a pair of B&W 801s with a denon and Classe front end. To this day the emotional impact has not been reached, save for perhaps an audition with some Martin Logan electrostats which absolutely blew my socks off about 10yrs ago. Everything and I do mean [b]everything[/] can be improved upon. What you speak of in regards to the mini is heresy in the audiophile experience. One can always fall in love with a product, but objectivity necessitates being open to the idea that another product (or an upgrade) will always come around, at an ever lower price to boot. To me it sounds like you closed your mind off to the idea that this was possible.
Quote:AR, I'd be curious to know how you react to the Mini IIs.
I'm actually kicking myself now, because just last week I was in a city with a dealer who would likely have had the Mini II. I only read your comments after I returned home. I'm thinking that this might now be the holy grail, and I missed the chance to hear it. *&!@$!
Post new comment