Magnepan’s Mini Maggie System Revisited (Playback 53)
It’s Great On Desktops, But What About Whole Room Applications?
February 15th, 2012 -- by Chris MartensSource: Playback
DWM Mid-Bass Module:
• The DWM module is a single panel, one- or two-channel, dipole lower midrange/bass driver. Many users mistakenly think of the DWM as being just a “woofer” (or “subwoofer”), but in fact it is more than that. Specifically, the DWM module not only provides all of the bass output for the system, but also contributes a significant part of the system’s lower midrange output.
• The DWM provides dual (left/right) high-current speaker taps and satellite speaker outputs (see rear panel DWM photo). Along with dual inputs, etc., the DWM provides connectors where optional woofer-output padding resistors (included) can be installed, if desired.
• The versatile DWM module provides built-in crossover network with settings appropriate for use with several different Magnepan products, including:
o Mini Maggie satellites,
o MMC2 or MC 1 on-wall speakers, or
o CCR or CC5 center channel speakers.
• DWM uses a planar magnetic mid/bass panel that, by design, features dual conductors or “voice coils” (one set for the left channel of the Mini-Maggie system, the other for the right channel). Note, however, that while the DWM panel can be used with two-channel inputs, it also works fine with a single-channel input.
SONIC CHARACTER
Mini Maggie System on the Desktop
When used in desktop applications, the Mini Maggie system sounds uncannily similar to Magnepan’s much larger and more costly 3.7 floorstanding loudspeaker—a speaker that has won critical acclaim and awards from The Absolute Sound and other publications. The only major differences involve the fact that the Mini Maggie system offers less powerful and deeply extended bass, a somewhat less expansive dynamic envelope, and conveys images and soundstages with less of a sense of scale (especially in terms of image height) than the 3.7 does. Indeed low bass extension and wallop (from about the mid-40Hz point on down) is not really the Mini Maggie system’s strong suit. But where it plays (mid 40Hz on up beyond the highest audible treble frequencies) the little Mini Maggie system sounds very much like the superb 3.7, which is high praise indeed.
In practice, this means the Mini Maggie rig sounds smooth and evenly balanced from mid-bass frequencies on up, with terrific levels of transparency, openness, resolution, and transient speed. One aptly chosen word many listeners use in describing Magnepan speakers in general, and the Mini Maggie/3.7 in particular, is coherency. That term also applies to the Mini Maggie system in a big way. The sound is remarkably consistent from top-to-bottom, so that the speaker’s various drive units merge seamlessly and speak as if with one common, qualitatively consistent voice.
Unlike many desktop speakers, the Mini Maggie system is capable of presenting soundstages that offer almost shocking degrees of apparent width and depth. Image height is quite good, too, though not on a par with Magnepan’s larger floorstanding models (which are known for their spectacular sense of scale and image height). But as desktop speakers go, the Mini Maggies system’s imaging and soundstaging are—in my experience—about as good as it gets. It’s an eerie thing to listen the system, realizing that the Mini Maggie satellites are in fact being heard at arm’s length, yet at the same time receiving the sonic cues that suggest musical events are unfolding on a big, broad stage located what seems like 20, 30, 40 or more feet away from the listener. Imaging precision is excellent—the best I’ve ever heard from any desktop speaker system. In short, Magnepan’s ads for this system have got it right; it’s a desktop rig that provides a listening experience similar to hearing big dipole speakers in a large, well-proportioned listening room.
But Can it Work for Whole-Room Applications?
Let’s begin by stipulating that the Mini Maggie system will only ever work well in mid-to-small size rooms—typically the smaller the better. I would also add that, for almost all whole-room applications (except for exceedingly small rooms), listeners should probably plan on upgrading the system to include two DWM modules (not just one, as comes with the standard Mini Maggie rig) in order to achieve optimal bass balance.
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.
Comments
I'm always a little bemused by audiophiles thinking that when a speaker manufacturer makes a specific near-field system that, logically, has to sell for a fraction of the cost of a standard speaker, that by buying such a low cost speaker system means a short cut to the high end if it could only be extended to purposes beyond its designed specifications. Put simply a desktop or near field speaker system, is designed specifically for that acoustic environment, and if it should perform as well as in different acoustic environments, then that is more due to luck than anything else.
I live in a mobile home and own a pair on mini Maggies. They are separated by a thin LED computer monitor attached to a mini-mac, and powered by an Accuphase C2110 preamplifier and and Roger Sanders Magtech power amplifier. Music sources are the Bryston BDP-1 digital player via the BAD Alpha Dac series one, a Cambridge Audio azure 650T DAB tuner and the mini-Mac via a MF-Vlink into the Accuphase DAC30. Wiring is Audioquest Columbia between the amplifiers, and similar specified cables between the Magtech and the Mini Maggies.
I've owned Proac Tablettes, etc, powered by Accuphase and Electrocompaniets, but not ever would I contemplate deploying the Mini Maggies to a non near field acoustic space.
Many years ago I constructed a pair of speakers modelled on the Sonab OA-6 speakers, minus the powered woofers, using four Phillips tweeters and Magnavox mid/bass drivers. Sound? Quite good, considering, but while 3-dimensional, the reproduced acoustic space was imprecise. Unreal in other words.
Mini Maggies in assumed deployment? Accurate, but not at the volumes to reproduce a recorded music performance - that isn't possible. On the other hand modern electronically produced may well result in a euphonious experience for those inclined, via the Mini Maggies.
I doubt that the Mini Maggies could perform as well in a larger acoustic space than what they were designed for, speaking from experience.
Louis Hissink
Hi Louis,
Two quick comments.
First, I think you're right; in my experience, the Mini Maggie system is always at its very best when heard in the desktop environment for which it was designed. But, as you can see, this follow up review represented an experiment to see how, or even if, one could get good results from the system in small-room environments. (What drove the experiment was that so many readers wanted to know if the Mini Maggie rig could possibly be used in whole-room applications. Hence, we went in search of answers.).
Second, I'm experiencing severe "gear envy" just from reading your description of your desktop system. I'll bet it sounds terrific ('wish I could hear it...). Enjoy.
Chris Martens
Editor, Avguide.com/Playback/The Perfect Vision
Hi Chris,
Thanks for the kind words - it does sound pretty good and the system is being slightly modified, (Cambridge tuner being replaced by the Accuphase T-1100), but until the remastered Alan Parson's Project "Tales of Mystery and Imagination" CD arrives from Amazon, adding a subwoofer remains the only addition to improve the sound since I am missing that bottom end to the House of Usher tracks with the recording of the thunderclap, but one thing that your readers need to take account of is that the Mini Maggies are very inefficient. I was listening to some modern music at a comfortable level and was intrigued that the Magtech became very hot, so hot that it was untouchable. Given that the MM's are 4 ohm loads, this meant that the Magtech was running at full power on transients, or close to 900 wrms pc, and this is for music at the near field listening position; double or triple the amplifier power requirement for a minimal far field listening position. This requirement may cause domestic disharmony or, more usually, acute poverty.
So I can appreciate Wendell's reluctance to endorsing the MM's for a far-field application - possible but the cost of doing so means a substantial increase in amplifier power and perhaps a pair of mono magtechs might be a solution. This makes the idea of using the MM's as a small room system somewhat problematical and the money invested in the extra amplification might be better spent on more efficient speakers, be they Magnepans or otherwise. Of course domestic bliss is always a factor with speakers, so I can see why the MM's are considered as a possible small room speaker. Having said that, I can't believe that Magnepan would suggest that an amplifier of 25w per channel is workable - probably if it's undynamic elevator musak or it's class A watts? (Roger Sanders informed me that the Magtech does get warm when running normal loudspeakers at 8 ohms but as the MM's are inefficient 4 ohm transducers, even the Magtech gets driven to its limits and that generates lots of heat (which I have not reached, yet.......). The only thing missing is the ultimate bottom end which is basically the start of all music, whatever its type. (Incidentally the designer of the Japanese Technical Brain amplifiers uses 1.7's and those are no slouches in the power and current departments either)).
Incidentally, further to the Parson's thunderclap reproduction, I first heard it via the LP version on an LP12 running a Grace arm and FR cartridge into Naim amplification and Linn Isobariks decades ago. That thunderclap was jaw dropping in realism, and since then I have never really been able to replace it. I've found a remastered CD on Amazon and while I have the iTunes version of the LP, (the thunder clap is totally anemaic and unimpressive) , I'll hold off getting a subwoofer until I get a better source and listen to it. Oh for a hi-res digital copy of the music.
Louis Hissink
Chris, I have a small room (13 x 9) where I have been pondering this sort of configuration. I have some MMGs, but the recent edition of some cabinets at the end of the room has negatively impacted their sound. Because of my concerns about the ability the Mini Maggies to fill the room (to reach my chair about 8 feet away), I have been leaning toward a pair of MMC 2s.
Do you have any thoughts on the Mini Mags vs. the MMC 2s that you'd be willing to share?
Hi Dibblestein,
Good question. Either can work well. When I reviewed the MMC 2 + DWM combo, I found it did a great job of recreating the sense of soundstage scale--much as the larger floorstanding Maggies do. In practice, I found that the MMC 2 + DWM combo offers performance comparable to, and some might say even better than, that of the 1.7.
Bear in mind, though, that the MMC 2 does not have the true ribbon tweeter that the Mini Maggie system provides, which is one of the factors that drives the Mini Maggie system's overall refinement and resolution.
Will the Mini Maggie play loudly enough in your room? The answer depends on how loudly you like to listen, but I would say yes, the levels would be sufficient for most purposes (provided you bring enough amplifier to the party). However, do bear in mind that dynamic envelope of the Mini Maggie system (in whole-room applications) is narrower than that of the MMC 2 + DWMs combo. (At the end of the day, driver surface area really does give the bigger Maggies an advantage in terms of dynamic reach.).
As I see it, you get better overall power response, image scale, and greater dynamic clout with the MMC 2 + DWM combo, but better resolution/detail with the Mini Maggie + dual DWM combo. It's hard to predict which factors will mean more to which listeners. I've had some guest listeners just fall in love with the Mini Maggie system because it does such a good job of revealing inner details and depth and width soundstaging cues, etc., in the music. It's kind of an addictive thing to hear. But at the same time, I recall many other guest listeners being wowed by the expansiveness, three-dimensionality, and sheer scale of the soundstages created by the MMC 2 + DWM combo (I say "recall" because it's been a while since I had the MMC 2 + DWM combo on hand to listen to). To each his own.
Chris Martens
Editor, Avguide.com/Playback/The Perfect Vision
As a former Maggie owner (gave them up due to fully-clawed cats, unfortunately), I have to wonder why anyone would spend $2,285 on the recommended system when they could just get the 1.7s for $2,000 and not deal with the hassles of setting up FOUR speakers (2 sats, 2 subs)? I realize Chris implies that the Minnies can approach the sound of the 3.7s for half the money, but I would have to imagine there are trade-offs in power-handling, dynamics, etc. (not to mention placement) that would still make the 1.7s better for most people... and cheaper. Or heck, if you're on a budget, just get the MMGs and spend the rest on music!
I'd say it's because the 1.7s are inappropriate for most smaller rooms.
Hi pmindemann,
You've beautifully summarized the 1.7 vs. Mini Maggie dilemma. For many applications, the 1.7 would--to my way of thinking--be the better choice for precisely the reasons you've specified. In a lot of settings, this is the way I would probably go (I'm currently using 1.7s at home).
But, in smaller rooms, the equation potentially changes, in that the Mini Maggie system really does offer a step up in resolution (just as does the 3.7). I attribute much of this difference to the Magnepan ribbon tweeter, which is terrifically revealing. Once you've heard it, it's hard to go back.
Re: Four speakers vs. two. You're right again: the Mini-Maggie system (with dual DWM modules) is a bit more work to set up (although the guidelines I provided in the review should help simplify things somewhat). However, note that the Mini Maggie system is much less visually imposing than the larger Maggies are, which will be a significant factor for some. My sense, too, is that the Mini Maggie system will work in rooms that are just too small for the 1.7.
There's much to be said for the MMG + more music approach, too. More music is almost always a good thing, I feel.
Chris Martens
Editor, Avguide.com/Playback/The Perfect Vision
On the subject of small room maggie applications, the MC 1 system has worked exceptionally well or me. The MC 2 would as well. Wall mounted, can fit small rooms quite well. I find the DWMs the true revelation in these woofer-sat Maggie configurations. Would they benefit a conventional minimonitor? Worth exploring.
One Caveat with the MC 1 and MC 2.: The usual wall-mount is not rigid. The speaker takes a quantum leap in resolution and solidity by being firmly held at the chosen angle, I don’t believe the mechanized angle adjuster of the MC 2 is adequately rigid.
Hi QUAD-HO,
'Very interesting comment.
Question: Do you have a recommended method for more rigidly mounting the MMC 2 at the desired angle? I'm curious because I know many users of full-size Maggies also report getting good results from mounting their speakers on more rigid stands. What have you found that works with the swing-out/wall-mount Maggies?
Chris Martens
Editor, Avguide.com/Playback/The Perfect Vision
The pedigree of the Mini-Maggie and the conclusions of this review catch my attention. At the same time, it makes me think of another small speaker that could be used for near field listening and I expect would do better than the Mini-Maggie in filling a room. That is Audience's "The One". This uses a single 3 inch full-range driver and a small passive radiator in a box that is smaller than the Mini-Maggie. I've read that it has been "dropping jaws" at recent shows and that it's big brother impressed even the likes of HP (I consider that a bit of a pedigree for the Audience.)
A shoot-out of this type could include other contenders beyond these two. How about it, Chris?
Mye sound makes several interesting stands for floor Maggies and they seem to make sense, but based on his drawing of his pole/stand for the MC 1, his stand does not provide the rigid hold needed. Maybe he is working on something else now. Not being all that handy, I devised a simple design of a wall mounted standard and brackets (common shelf support). The standards are situated behind the already wall mounted speaker and on the smaller angle side. The brackets, clamped on to the standard, are positioned over the top and under the bottom sides of the MC 1 and via stand-offs hold the speakers quite rigidly. To me there is a world of difference. The very reason the Maggies exist is to provide a level of resolution that a non-rigid environment would impair. My little bachelor set-up is not very obtrusive and it certainly could be made more elegant by the handy amongst us.
Hi Chris,
Thanks for the wonderful review on the mini-maggies along with this revisited one. I have a system where the LR are 3.7 while the center is CC5 with a DWM. Unfortunately the match between the center and LR is not perfect. I can hear the difference between the center and the LR channel amd most it is due to the ribbon tweeter. It is not distracting however. Do you think that one can use the mini-maggies as a center speaker for the 3.7, seeing that it has the true ribbon tweeter. Can the mini-maggies(with the two satelite speakers) match the power of 3.7. Unfortunately I can not afford the CCR. I am keen to know what you think.
Thanks,
Ric
I don't know... it sounds good but it's somewhat of a Pyrrhic setup.
In my office, room about 12x13, I run Acoustic Energy AE-1s, a nuForce HDP and an Acoustic Reality 200W ICE amp and those near field monitors are outstanding (sources are 24/96 recordings off my Linn LP12 that are on the network and played by my laptop). The monitor speakers are on a shelf right about seated head level, four feet apart, and provide an incredible deep sound staging that reaches even across the sofa on the other side of the room. So for this type of use: a combo computer set up and small room use, I think a great set of mini monitors are the better choice. Note too that the cost is a wash, you'll be spending $2K bucks in speakers either way.
But in my living room, I got tubes driving a pair of Maggie 12s (which replaced a much more expensive combination of yet another pair of AE1s and Entec woofers). I always though that the sound quality of the 12s would be just a place holder, of course, until I move to the 1.7s. However, somehow, I am suddenly in no rush. Which is amazing as the speakers are the cheapest part of the system, on a par with the Grado cartridge.
So, IMHO, I think for Magnepan sound in a small room is best done with a pair of MMGs or 12s that can be moved out of the way when not in use.
Just my thoughts.
Regards
Hello,
This is my first post here in The Absolute Sound. I am doing so because I am very interested in the Mini Maggies as a desktop speaker system but I need some help. I was wondering if any of you out there have been using Sonos as your source. If you have, how well do you think the Sonos Connect:Amp would work with these Mini Maggies? Also, I have one of those Steelcase desks with drawers on both sides. Would I put the Maggie Sub module under this confined desk space and how would it effect the sound? The other idea s that I could forgo the Maggie Sub and replace it with the Sonos Sub? Also, I was wondering how the Mini Maggies compare to the usual near field monitors such as Genelecs and Focals? I also just read a glowing review of the new Ancient Audio Studio Oslo. Lot's of questions, I know, but the last time I bought audio equipment it was the Cambridge Soundworks Model 88CD Radio.. some15 years ago. I don't have a lot of money and I need to get this right the first time. Thanks.
The Sonos Connect:Amp is simply not powerful enough. The Sonos Sub won't work either. Sonos could work fine as a streaming source. Best place to start is to try the Maggie free 30 day home trial with the Wadia 151 DAC/amplifier.
http://magnepan.com/model_mini_maggie