Magico Q7 + Spectral monos

ack

VIP/Donor & WBF Founding Member
May 6, 2010
6,774
1,198
580
Boston, MA
When someone says something like "I can't find any flaws with this or what", what they are probably saying is that he/she is not qualified to find flaws, not that what's under observation is flawless. And when someone says "Do you know what a 1982 Chateaux Margaux sounds like", that someone must have just heard a system better described as a fine work of art or a wine that is so good you can't have enough of. My previous encounter with the Q7 + Constellation Performance was lukewarm; the dealer was right, these speakers need an extraordinary amount of time to break in (BTW, the Constellations were nowhere to be seen this time around). But the dealer was not right that the 360II monos cannot drive them. So today's setup (MSB->30SS S2->360 S2->Q7) was nothing like what I heard before. BTW, I was intentionally vague in the thread's title about which monos, because the production DMA-400s will arrive at the dealer in the next couple of months, and based on their claims listening to the pre-production units, they are even more extraordinarily resolving; so I'll post updates here.

Here are some random thoughts:


  1. This system is vastly coherent; I can't tell one driver from another; no "tweeter sound". Imagine an electrostatic that can do it all. Speakers were able to disappear this time. Incredible sense of scale.
  2. The Q7 are faster than the CLX I've heard, in the entire spectrum. Unreal sense of resolution, or rather, quite real. I have no idea where the 400's could take this system to, in that department. I heard every pin drop, so to speak, or shoelace fly around. The point is not really that I heard those things per se, but rather what that means for the instruments (timbre, size, et al) and their location in space, and of course the exceptionally low level of noise that makes this possible.
  3. Excepting the manufacturers, I suspect very few others might know the limits of these electronics or speakers. This, of course, only makes me happier for owning the electronics, so hats off to KOJ and Bernice!
  4. I only played RR large-scale orchestral, and the sense of being there, of total involvement, was truly sensational. You have to experience such a system with your eyes closed to appreciate the illusion the most.
  5. I still don't consider the cabinet totally inert; it's not; place your hands on any surface except the baffle and you feel the vibrations - so much for that water-glass-on-the-top-plate video; put your ears anywhere on the cabinet and there is plenty of sound you can hear. We can debate all we want whether this is something we can actually hear from a distance, but for me, perfection is still elusive.
  6. Bass weight varied by listener location, so I suspect those of you buying a Q7 pair might have a bit of a bear time trying to properly position them. I can see why others would be selling theirs in favor of other speakers with presumably heavier, fuller bass. I prefer this type of accuracy.
  7. I walked away dazed by the emotional impact of the performance.

I have to go back and listen to vinyl and hi-rez digital at some point, perhaps with the 400s. For now, I treated my ears to a Margaux :D
 

LL21

Well-Known Member
Dec 26, 2010
14,411
2,509
1,448
When someone says something like "I can't find any flaws with this or what", what they are probably saying is that he/she is not qualified to find flaws, not that what's under observation is flawless. And when someone says "Do you know what a 1982 Chateaux Margaux sounds like", that someone must have just heard a system better described as a fine work of art or a wine that is so good you can't have enough of. My previous encounter with the Q7 + Constellation Performance was lukewarm; the dealer was right, these speakers need an extraordinary amount of time to break in (BTW, the Constellations were nowhere to be seen this time around). But the dealer was not right that the 360II monos cannot drive them. So today's setup (MSB->30SS S2->360 S2->Q7) was nothing like what I heard before. BTW, I was intentionally vague in the thread's title about which monos, because the production DMA-400s will arrive at the dealer in the next couple of months, and based on their claims listening to the pre-production units, they are even more extraordinarily resolving; so I'll post updates here.

Here are some random thoughts:


  1. This system is vastly coherent; I can't tell one driver from another; no "tweeter sound". Imagine an electrostatic that can do it all. Speakers were able to disappear this time. Incredible sense of scale.
  2. The Q7 are faster than the CLX I've heard, in the entire spectrum. Unreal sense of resolution, or rather, quite real. I have no idea where the 400's could take this system to, in that department. I heard every pin drop, so to speak, or shoelace fly around. The point is not really that I heard those things per se, but rather what that means for the instruments (timbre, size, et al) and their location in space, and of course the exceptionally low level of noise that makes this possible.
  3. Excepting the manufacturers, I suspect very few others might know the limits of these electronics or speakers. This, of course, only makes me happier for owning the electronics, so hats off to KOJ and Bernice!
  4. I only played RR large-scale orchestral, and the sense of being there, of total involvement, was truly sensational. You have to experience such a system with your eyes closed to appreciate the illusion the most.
  5. I still don't consider the cabinet totally inert; it's not; place your hands on any surface except the baffle and you feel the vibrations - so much for that water-glass-on-the-top-plate video; put your ears anywhere on the cabinet and there is plenty of sound you can hear. We can debate all we want whether this is something we can actually hear from a distance, but for me, perfection is still elusive.
  6. Bass weight varied by listener location, so I suspect those of you buying a Q7 pair might have a bit of a bear time trying to properly position them. I can see why others would be selling theirs in favor of other speakers with presumably heavier, fuller bass. I prefer this type of accuracy.
  7. I walked away dazed by the emotional impact of the performance.

I have to go back and listen to vinyl and hi-rez digital at some point, perhaps with the 400s. For now, I treated my ears to a Margaux :D

Thanks for taking the time...have only heard the V3, Q3, Q5 and am not suprised by your 'review'. Let us know when you've taken delivery!
 

cjfrbw

Well-Known Member
Apr 20, 2010
3,323
1,313
1,730
Pleasanton, CA
Q7 and Spectral would be a combo to hear. Judging from the Wilson/Spectral at the CAS 2011, Spectral seems to work very well with large room/large speaker. If the big Magico can attain electrostatic speed with box dynamics, it would be a great pairing.

The Magico Q5 and VAC amp I heard a couple of years ago also sounded excellent.
 

Husk

Member Sponsor
Apr 20, 2010
128
6
1,573
Spokane, Wa.
Magico Q7?

Q7 and Spectral would be a combo to hear. Judging from the Wilson/Spectral at the CAS 2011, Spectral seems to work very well with large room/large speaker. If the big Magico can attain electrostatic speed with box dynamics, it would be a great pairing.

The Magico Q5 and VAC amp I heard a couple of years ago also sounded excellent.

Ack, Do you know which MSB model dac was being used? Platinum, Signature, Diamond?
 

ack

VIP/Donor & WBF Founding Member
May 6, 2010
6,774
1,198
580
Boston, MA
Ack, Do you know which MSB model dac was being used? Platinum, Signature, Diamond?

No not really, but probably top of the line. I do know that cables were the new top of the line MIT Ultra High Sucrose Polyunsaturated F.A.T., Maximum Speculation X Rev 20, followed by all letters of the alphabet; sporting a price tag with as many zeros as I have buttons in all of my shirts.
 

FrantzM

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member
Apr 20, 2010
6,455
29
405
No not really, but probably top of the line. I do know that cables were the new top of the line MIT Ultra High Sucrose Polyunsaturated F.A.T., Maximum Speculation X Rev 20, followed by all letters of the alphabet; sporting a price tag with as many zeros as I have buttons in all of my shirts.

:D
 

cjfrbw

Well-Known Member
Apr 20, 2010
3,323
1,313
1,730
Pleasanton, CA
No not really, but probably top of the line. I do know that cables were the new top of the line MIT Ultra High Sucrose Polyunsaturated F.A.T., Maximum Speculation X Rev 20, followed by all letters of the alphabet; sporting a price tag with as many zeros as I have buttons in all of my shirts.

You mean the cheap ones?
 

microstrip

VIP/Donor
May 30, 2010
20,806
4,698
2,790
Portugal
No not really, but probably top of the line. I do know that cables were the new top of the line MIT Ultra High Sucrose Polyunsaturated F.A.T., Maximum Speculation X Rev 20, followed by all letters of the alphabet; sporting a price tag with as many zeros as I have buttons in all of my shirts.

I am sure that if they have replaced all this strange cabling with good quality large gauge inexpensive zip cord you could have felt the 3D movements of the conductor moving his baton. ;)
 

Roysen

New Member
Aug 6, 2011
728
2
0
Very nice, ack. I have a question though for those of you who have auditioned the Q7. In this setup that ack describes they are using the Spectral amplifiers to drive the Q7. Great results have also been reported by teaming the Q7 up with the big dartZeel NHB-458 monos. These two amplifier choises really sound very different. What do you guys think is the ideal match for the Q7 and why? I mean what about the sound of the Q7 and the amp you suggest would make that a perfect combination?
 

ack

VIP/Donor & WBF Founding Member
May 6, 2010
6,774
1,198
580
Boston, MA
I can't speak for the Zeels, but if there is one word to describe Spectral and the Magico Q line, it is RAW. If you want that, then it's a match. If raw implies exceptionally neutral - which is how I interpret it - then the limiting factor is your recordings (assuming upstream gear is also of equal caliber). If you have very few good recordings, I'd say the return of investment may be low; if you are not bothered by bad-to-average sounding recordings, then the return is much higher. But don't look at this combo to pretty things up.
 

PeterA

Well-Known Member
Dec 6, 2011
12,521
10,687
3,515
USA
Ack, Thanks for that write up. I also heard that system a couple of weeks ago, though I played eight of my LPs on that Basis/Vector/Goldfinger analog front end. I left thinking it was the most transparent and revealing system I've ever heard. However, there was something ethereal about it. Voices floated a bit and some material did not sound well grounded, as though it lacked foundation. There was a slight lack of palpable presence to Johnny Hartman's voice for instance. I don't know if this was due to slightly thin lower frequencies or something else.

I just returned from four days listening to opera in the Vienna State Opera. Four nights, four different operas heard from the front row, just right of center, first balcony and three days of rehearsals seated eight feet from the conductor on the edge of the orchestra pit. These different perspectives were quiet revealing about how sound integrates in a great hall and how it is produced from the extreme energy leaving the instruments. I have a much better appreciation of what real music sounds like now, and no system I've heard really approaches what I just experienced in Vienna. There was a weight/body/richness of tone that the Q7 system just did not have when I heard it. The sense of clarity and dynamics were excellent and much closer to what I heard, but something about the palpability and presence was missing.

I'm wondering if superb systems like this Q7/Spectral are now so transparent to the source, that perhaps were are aware more than ever what recordings are not capable of capturing. Alon Wolf has written that even his best efforts have a way to go before they sound like the real thing and that one of the issues is problems in the recording itself. I think the important question is: can we use our systems as vehicles through which we learn about and enjoy our music. As a Mini 2 owner and admirer of the Q series, I say yes. Magico does get me closer to the music.
 

ack

VIP/Donor & WBF Founding Member
May 6, 2010
6,774
1,198
580
Boston, MA
Mr. Ayer,

thanks for the comments. I think I and others have touched on most of your comments... to repeat, emphasize and extend: 1) bass response varied by listening position, so thinness you could have experienced, depending; 2) recordings are all about what the microphones capture, so not necessarily what you experience in row X, seat Y, even in the same hall, never mind two totally different ones; 3) perhaps only a live feed might stand a chance to make this system's limits more obvious; 4) No one really said this system or any other has reached true live-event reproduction to the scale we are talking about, only that the level and quality of "illusion" is quite high; 5) I wouldn't compare the Vienna Opera with your solo voice - apples and oranges; an easier comparison may be the BSO against BSO recordings of the same material, of which there are plenty, though not necessarily top quality recordings. I use Mahler's 2nd (Philips CD) and Saint Saens Organ 3rd (on vinyl; aka the "sonic spectacular") - have listened to both live a number of times over the years, not the same at home, but still thrilling to listen to and able to convey the same emotions, but with a lot of room to grow. The latter - emotions - is what matters to me the most, rather than to fool myself that Symphony Hall could ever fit into a living room; but to get that emotion, a lot of things have to be done right by the reproducing system, and sheer scale is really not the end-all be-all but certainly a good part of it - I pay more attention, for example, to truth of timbre, dynamic headroom, 3D soundstage with properly positioned instruments, and certainly extreme resolution (as my brain makes little effort to try to hear what it thinks I should hear and instead immerses into the emotion)... This would be a good topic to discuss - what do we actually hear when we critique a system, what are our priorities.
 

PeterA

Well-Known Member
Dec 6, 2011
12,521
10,687
3,515
USA
Ack, Sorry, I must not have communicated my impressions clearly enough. I'll address the points in your post individually: 1) I did not find that the Q7 bass response varied much by listening position, at least in a zone around the seat. I also just assumed that the location the dealer sets up is optimized for the demo. Maybe I just heard it differently from you. 2) agree, and the more transparent a system is, the more I find this to be true. 3) Don't understand what you mean by this. I'm just comparing in a general sense what orchestral music sounds like live to my ears from various seating positions at the BSO and in Vienna relative to my classical LPs on the Q7 that day in that room. To me, there is/was a considerable gap, based on my sonic memory. 4) agreed, and I don't think I suggested anyone really said the system sounded like the real thing. 5) I didn't compare the Vienna Opera to Hartman's solo voice. I was referring to the solo voice on the Q7 versus the way it has sounded to me on other systems. I've never heard him live. Solo voice and piano and massed strings sounded just a tad thin compared to what I've heard in some other good systems and at some live events. I did not really touch on the scale issue regarding the Q7. That seemed pretty good considering one is talking about a stereo system in a room. Even a big system in a big room like this one is nothing like a symphony hall. Yes, emotional connection to the music is important.
 

ack

VIP/Donor & WBF Founding Member
May 6, 2010
6,774
1,198
580
Boston, MA
I did not find that the Q7 bass response varied much by listening position, at least in a zone around the seat.

If you go back, try moving fore and aft a couple of feet, then you will hear the wild variation.

I also just assumed that the location the dealer sets up is optimized for the demo.

No, if that were the case they wouldn't have demoed not-yet-broken-in speakers in the first place (with Constellation, a month ago); they are still trying to figure out the best position of these speakers, which should be moved further back. As we've said before, trust YOUR ears.
 
Last edited:

andromedaaudio

VIP/Donor
Jan 23, 2011
8,350
2,730
1,400
Amsterdam holland
Zanden or BOULDER (at least the poweramp) , because they step away from " high end" into music while remaining utterly neutral , i suspect a great match with the Q7, there might be others , i dont know , personally i never " got " spectral , i found it dry and uninvolving.
I think the above mentioned would couple well to the Q 7 as the one thing they have in common is transparency and neutrality
Roysen;15795 1 said:
Very nice, ack. I have a question though for those of you who have auditioned the Q7. In this setup that ack describes they are using the Spectral amplifiers to drive the Q7. Great results have also been reported by teaming the Q7 up with the big dartZeel NHB-458 monos. These two amplifier choises really sound very different. What do you guys think is the ideal match for the Q7 and why? I mean what about the sound of the Q7 and the amp you suggest would make that a perfect combination?
 
Last edited:

LL21

Well-Known Member
Dec 26, 2010
14,411
2,509
1,448
Zanden or BOULDER (at least the poweramp) , because they step away from " high end" into music while remaining utterly neutral , i suspect a great match with the Q7, there might be others , i dont know , personally i never " got " spectral , i found it dry and uninvolving.
I think the above mentioned would couple well to the Q 7 as the one thing they have in common is transparency and neutrality

My instincts tell me Zanden big monos (9600) would be sensational with Q7s...though you might need to double up the monos to super-drive the Q7s. In any event, i would love to hear that combo above all others, perhaps even above my own fav Gryphon Colosseum.
 

andromedaaudio

VIP/Donor
Jan 23, 2011
8,350
2,730
1,400
Amsterdam holland
lloyd but,... if i was shopping in that price range , i probably still would buy a kharma exquisite classic as its now called :D
 

About us

  • What’s Best Forum is THE forum for high end audio, product reviews, advice and sharing experiences on the best of everything else. This is THE place where audiophiles and audio companies discuss vintage, contemporary and new audio products, music servers, music streamers, computer audio, digital-to-analog converters, turntables, phono stages, cartridges, reel-to-reel tape machines, speakers, headphones and tube and solid-state amplification. Founded in 2010 What’s Best Forum invites intelligent and courteous people of all interests and backgrounds to describe and discuss the best of everything. From beginners to life-long hobbyists to industry professionals, we enjoy learning about new things and meeting new people, and participating in spirited debates.

Quick Navigation

User Menu

Steve Williams
Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator
Ron Resnick
Site Co-Owner | Administrator
Julian (The Fixer)
Website Build | Marketing Managersing