Heard the Magico S5's yesterday

[andromedaaudio]

You also state a so called test about alu versus resin based material , there is no real explanation how the test was performed , was the alu material braced and the resin not ( the S 5 is braced i assume ) , how big in size and thick were the materials ?
If alu was such a non resonant material why is it then nessesary to brace it to the extreme like in the q series , maybe it is bettter to use a material which doesnt ring much to start with .
It is braced with stainless steel or steel which is not a non resonant material , it is strong/non flexible however
Ever rubbed a knockle to aluminium or alu alloy say a 500 mm by 1000 mm by 25 mm thick plate and did the same with for example HPL {paper drenched in resin } i did

 

[Kingsrule]

they show the parts they are using in their videos...

Could you please provide a link to said video.....

 

[PeterA]

Stereo why dont you change your forum name to magico ?
I ll be watching in januari to see your "ultimates "arrive if they arrive? , design wise , dont you think the buildquality/attention and looks of the xlf beats the magico q 7 BOX anytime, its still a BOX afterall

I actually happen to prefer the looks, and the build quality, of the Q7 to the XLF, although I do think the smaller Q-series (Q3/Q5) are better proportioned. I especially like the drivers and front baffle aesthetic. I've heard both the Q7 and XLF is very high quality systems and rooms. The differences and similarities are kind of interesting, but that is a discussion for another thread. It's interesting how Magico threads evolve and evoke all sorts of responses.

 

[andromedaaudio]

Its only when stereo starts to get disrespectfull to other manufacturers i tend to respond , the membrane material of the drivers is very nice indeed , one of the main strongpoints of the brand i think

 

[PeterA]

Its only when stereo starts to get disrespectfull to other manufacturers i tend to respond , the membrane material of the drivers is very nice indeed , one of the main strongpoints of the brand i think

Stereo seems to be dealing in facts about parts costs and material properties and as such, it may be helpful to those interested in the Magico S5 speakers. I don't read his comments as disrespectful to Wilson owners or to the brand. I think he is presenting information and letting the reader decide, or at least that is how I interpret it. Your comments about the looks and build quality of the Q7 relative to the XLF are a bit off topic and seem subjective and a bit personal toward Stereo, as is the suggestion to change his name to "Magico". Perhaps it was made with respect.

 

[BiggusD]

I am just a newbie to hi-end audio. A couple of weeks ago I attend the Hi-Fi News Show in England. I heard the Wilson Alexia driven by D'Agostino monobolock and the pre-amp - all top stuff. I was very disappointed with the bass from the Alexia. Very loose and boomy. Lots of quantity but no quality. Just my humble opinion...

 

[microstrip]

(...) I think he is presenting information and letting the reader decide, or at least that is how I interpret it. (...)

He is only presenting Magico marketing data that he knows fairly well and deliberately misrepresenting Wilson speakers, evidencing a large ignorance about them. Just MHO.

 

[asiufy]

Stereo seems to be dealing in facts about parts costs and material properties and as such, it may be helpful to those interested in the Magico S5 speakers. I don't read his comments as disrespectful to Wilson owners or to the brand. I think he is presenting information and letting the reader decide, or at least that is how I interpret it. Your comments about the looks and build quality of the Q7 relative to the XLF are a bit off topic and seem subjective and a bit personal toward Stereo, as is the suggestion to change his name to "Magico". Perhaps it was made with respect.

+1, Peter. I think people complaining about stereo's posts are more disrespectful than stereo himself.

Sure, he's blunt. And he doesn't sugarcoat it.

BiggusD, that's my perception as well. But I guess some people like it that way.


alexandre

 

[DaveyF]

A few months back, I had the pleasure of listening to the new Polymer audio speakers. These are made from some of the "supposed" best parts in the world....Pure diamond tweeter AND midrange, Dueland CAST components, 6061 Aluminum parts and all metal alloy cabinets. I would be surprised IF anyone believed that the parts and the cabinet utilized in this speaker were not first order. However, IMO these speakers were simply not that great. They seemed to have VERY little of the "human" factor that I look for in music reproduction. So, once again, I do NOT believe that parts quality and construction technique/rigidity of the cabinet are all that is necessary to make a great speaker. I hate to say this.....BUT there seems to be a certain amount of art/ design experience involved along with the science. IMHO.

 

[jap]

Could you please provide a link to said video.....

+1

 

[mep]

I am just a newbie to hi-end audio. A couple of weeks ago I attend the Hi-Fi News Show in England. I heard the Wilson Alexia driven by D'Agostino monobolock and the pre-amp - all top stuff. I was very disappointed with the bass from the Alexia. Very loose and boomy. Lots of quantity but no quality. Just my humble opinion...

I heard them in the Paragon room at RMAF 2013 with Doshi tube electronics and I can promise you the bass was anything but "loose and boomy." Never judge gear by the sound of a hotel room.

 

[stereo]

Could you please provide a link to said video.....

Guys, why you don't just do your homework? there are tons of video on line. If you are interested to know the science behind the marketing pitch of different brands, it is not very difficult to find. Problem is that most people have no interest.
Here an example:
http://www.wilsonaudio.com/videos.php?page=2
watch at 2:15

 

[stereo]

supposedly at 15K. I can't hear it, so it's a non issue for me. Perhaps listening to digital exacerbates the issue.

Problem is that when these freq. are energized, the entire tweeter goes into convulsion. This is what intermodulation distortion (IMD) is all about- so even if your ears don't go up to 15k anymore, you may still be able to hear the ringing of a dome at 15k.
BTW, soft domes used in recent Wilson designs are in some sort of constant breakup since they are not pistonic at any point. This leads to high level of IMD.

 

[mep]

Problem is that when these freq. are energized, the entire tweeter goes into convulsion. This is what intermodulation distortion (IMD) is all about- so even if your ears don't go up to 15k anymore, you may still be able to hear the ringing of a dome at 15k.
BTW, soft domes used in recent Wilson designs are in some sort of constant breakup since they are not pistonic at any point. This leads to high level of IMD.

I'm curious as to how you know that to be true.

 

[stereo]

He is only presenting Magico marketing data that he knows fairly well and deliberately misrepresenting Wilson speakers, evidencing a large ignorance about them. Just MHO.

Please enlighten us since you know much better Wilson than me. Factual data is all over the net. What part am I misrepresenting?
So far, I have put facts on the table, have explained the physics behind different technology, and I have not found anybody coming back with an explanation on where I was doing a mistake. Physics is physics. You like it or not.

 

[stereo]

I'm curious as to how you know that to be true.

to be pistonic, you need stiffness. And for a tweeter, you want stiffness and light weight. Different ways to go there: ceramic, diamond, beryllium... Each technology has their advantage, and implementation matters as much as material used for the membrane.
A soft dome is not pistonic, the same way a paper woofer is not pistonic. This is just material property
But anyway, posting on this forum is like trying to explain physics to a 10 years old only interested about playing on his X-box

 

[Steve Williams]

to be pistonic, you need stiffness. And for a tweeter, you want stiffness and light weight. Different ways to go there: ceramic, diamond, beryllium... Each technology has their advantage, and implementation matters as much as material used for the membrane.
A soft dome is not pistonic, the same way a paper woofer is not pistonic. This is just material property
But anyway, posting on this forum is like trying to explain physics to a 10 years old only interested about playing on his X-box

perhaps you should consider not posting anymore inasmuch as you have these desires to prove everyone a 10 year old

Your statement was probably the most arrogant post I have read here at WBf. Congratulations on that

 

[stereo]

I heard them in the Paragon room at RMAF 2013 with Doshi tube electronics and I can promise you the bass was anything but "loose and boomy." Never judge gear by the sound of a hotel room.

agree on the "never judge gear by the sound of a hotel room"! In particular on the bass, as what you are hearing are mainly room resonance.
CES is a good example where most rooms sound quite bad.

 

[JackD201]

Just saw on Soundstage that Japan distributor demoed this year the Q7 with McIntosh and Pass at the Tokyo audio show. Did anybody hear it? Unfortunately I couldn't go to Tokyo show this year, left Tokyo 2 days before. Would be curious to hear reactions on match with McIntosh, heard only once a McIntosh-Magico set up and was not convinced at all, but their range of product is so large that they may have another amp which works well with the Q7?

I was there. They were being run with the smaller (if you can ever call them that) Pass XS amps. I couldn't make a judgement because while I was in there, they appeared to be having technical difficulties. I hope they were able to sort it out, I didn't get a chance to go back sadly. In our own show however, S5s were playing very, very well driven by Hegel electronics. Personally I like the Q3 a lot so I absolutely refuse to believe that the Q7s as I heard them were in a system that was firing on all cylinders. If I were to venture a wild guess, it would be that the problem was in the XS' having to draw power from Japan's 100volt standard. If I had XS' and live in the USA, I would definitely get a 230v model and have 230v lines installed. Fortunately that is our power here.

 

[microstrip]

Please enlighten us since you know much better Wilson than me. Factual data is all over the net. What part am I misrepresenting?
So far, I have put facts on the table, have explained the physics behind different technology, and I have not found anybody coming back with an explanation on where I was doing a mistake. Physics is physics. You like it or not.

You are oversimplifying the physics of material science to an unbelievable degree and finding correlations and associations with speaker quality that have no foundation at all. You did not explain any think worth debating, just compared prices. Your love for Magico is pushing you against one of their competitors with naive arguments that are worthless to debate comparative speaker quality. I feel sorry for it, I really appreciate Magico equipment, but I think that a debate on this type of quality equipment should be on its positive qualities, not on the "my preferred brand of speakers is so good that it is better than yours costing the double, because I do not like it and travel a lot".

I really enjoyed your posts and enthusiasm before this thread, but will not follow you in this crazy debate.