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
So How Does It Sound?
When properly dialed-in, the Mini Maggie system as used in whole-room applications exhibits similar sonic benefits to those conferred on listeners by the Mini Maggie desktop system—but with three caveats that are worth noting.
First, the system’s dynamic envelope, if you will, effectively becomes narrower in whole-room applications, because you typically will need to turn up the volume to higher levels to get adequate output for whole-room listening. In other words, you are essentially using up a good bit of the speaker system’s dynamic headroom, simply to get it to play loudly enough for whole-room use (which means you may also need a more powerful amp).
Second, the Mini Maggie system’s overall tonal balance, and in particular its bass performance, tends to become at least somewhat room dependent—a problem that really never arises when using the system in a desktop audio context. Potential users should be aware that it might take considerable experimentation in order to get adequate bass extension and weight (bearing in mind that some rooms seem ill-suited for use with dipole woofers in the first place).
Third, the system’s limitation in terms of conveying image scale, and especially image height, become more noticeable in whole-room applications. Even so, I would say the Mini Maggie system is at least as good an imager as other systems its size and price, but it doesn’t sound as big or expansive out in the middle of a room as it does on a desktop.
But having noted these caveats, let’s also consider the system’s benefits. Once again, you have a modestly priced speaker system that, for all intents and purposes, matches the detail and timbral purity of Magnepan’s exceptional 3.7, which is saying a mouthful. Does this mean, then, that the Mini Maggie rig is capable of higher levels of resolution and freedom from grain than the full-size Magnepan 1.7? Yes, it does. The tradeoff, however, is that the power response characteristics of the 1.7 (and of the 3.7) are much better suited for most whole-room applications, and their bass performance is much easier to tap in more kinds of rooms than that of the Mini Maggie system. For many listeners, just as Wendell Diller had predicted, the full-size Maggies would probably be the better choice overall. Still, there’s real magic in the resolving power of the Mini Maggie system.
One afternoon, I put on “Joe Turner’s Blues” from Wynton Marsalis & Eric Clapton Play the Blues—Live from Jazz at the Lincoln Center [Reprise Records Jazz] as a demonstration for an audiophile colleague. This live recording is noteworthy not only for the masterful playing of the key soloists, but for the uncannily realistic manner in which it captures the sound and feel of a jazz ensemble performing live on stage. My colleague listened to the Mini Maggies almost slack-jawed in disbelief and then blurted out, “Their soundstaging is so believable and their imaging so precise that I can tell exactly—and I mean exactly—how big the stage is and where each ensemble member is seated. Most $2k speakers I’ve heard could never do this.” My colleague’s reaction neatly summarizes the appeal of a $2285 speaker system that sounds much like its more capable big brother, the Magnepan 3.7—itself one of the greatest bargains in high-end audio.
But let me supply just one further anecdote, which in a way parallels the story that my colleague Jonathan Valin at The Absolute Sound likes to share about his first encounter with Magnepan speakers, where he mistook the sound of the speakers for that of a real piano. One day I played a very realistic drum recording, “Drum Solo by Dirk Sengotta”, from the Henrik Freischlader Band Live [XYZ/Pepper]. Suddenly, there was a knock on my listening room door. A relatively shy, quiet member of our office staff poked his head in the door and said, “Forgive me for bursting in on you, but I just had make sure you hadn’t moved a real drum kit into the office, because from just outside the door it certainly sounds like you’ve got the real thing in here. Could I come in and listen for a minute?”
He was right; the drum kit on the recording really did sound almost real through the Mini Maggies, with the kind of tautness, snap, and definition that only very fine speaker systems possess. But what was even more important was that the Mini Maggies had proven their ability to win friends the old-fashioned way: namely, by making music sound so real that people can’t help but stop and listen. Isn’t that something we can all appreciate?
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