Magico introduced the Q series subwoofers

[PeterA]

This must be the QSub-18?

With two drivers firing on opposite ends, how does one deal with the timing of the direct sound versus the reflected sound? This must be the first Magico speaker with drivers on two different sides of the cabinet. I also wonder if there are user adjustments like cut off, slope, level etc?

I also remember reports from a show a while ago in which Magico used some unnamed and not visible Class D amp to drive a new speaker. I think it was at the launch/debut of the speaker. J Valin commented on the amplifier and I think speculated that it was Magico's own design. Perhaps that was an early version of the amp included in this design.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

i personally have never heard excellent sub integration, either it was slower /lagging behind ,or not in phase, even the multi $ kharma sub i found lagging behind the main system .
so q7 yes sub no

I agree. I've heard systems where the subs don't harm the 'whole', but those systems are not particularly aggressive in bass performance and the subs are kept pretty restricted in SPL's. otherwise you have two separate speakers covering the same frequencies at the same levels and there are trade-offs.

I expect that at some point Magico will actually design a full range main tower to fully integrate with their own powered subwoofers.....which will mean that the main tower will not be full range on it's own. you can't have it both ways (unless there are adjustable crossovers on the main towers).

with my EA MM7's the bass towers are -3db at 7hz and -6db at 3hz.....yet fully integrate with the main towers. OTOH the main towers don't have 'stand alone' fullness' in the mid-bass which allows them to fully integrate. and of course, the bass towers have multiple adjustments for room integration.

no reason Magico cannot take this same approach should they choose to. the Magico Ultimates may be going down this road now.

 

[Roysen]

I am not going to speak for Alon Wolf but as Jeff Fritz had written in his preview og this subwoofer in Ultra Audio, Alon Eolf had been very critical towards integrating subwoofers in two channel audio-only systems in the past. According to what I understand his argument has been that no subwoofer is fast enough to integrate perfectly with the Maguco speakers.

It might be that these subwoofers mainly was introduced to play in Magico Q series speaker based home theater based systems.

 

[NorthStar]

With two drivers firing on opposite ends, how does one deal with the timing of the direct sound versus the reflected sound? This must be the first Magico speaker with drivers on two different sides of the cabinet. I also wonder if there are user adjustments like cut off, slope, level etc?

I also remember reports from a show a while ago in which Magico used some unnamed and not visible Class D amp to drive a new speaker. I think it was at the launch/debut of the speaker. J Valin commented on the amplifier and I think speculated that it was Magico's own design. Perhaps that was an early version of the amp included in this design.

Mirage (Canadian speaker/subwoofer company) used to call them Bi-Polar Subwoofer. ...Remember those (BPS-210 and BPS-400)?
... $1,700 and $1,300 respectively. They were some of the very best; in particular the BPS-210, which had two ten inchers, mounted in opposite directions on two sides of the sealed box.

The two drivers are facing in opposite directions and wired in phase electrically so that they push at the same time, just like a bipolar speaker.
The reactive forces that the drivers apply to the enclosure are opposing and mostly cancelled, minimizing movement of the box (and reducing coloration), and the signal is applied to the room in two places slightly displaced from one another, making room position somewhat less critical.

 

[NorthStar]

...

with my EA MM7's the bass towers are -3db at 7hz and -6db at 3hz.....

Jesus Christ!

 

[microstrip]

Mirage (Canadian speaker/subwoofer company) used to call them Bi-Polar Subwoofer. ...Remember those (BPS-210 and BPS-400)?
... $1,700 and $1,300 respectively. They were some of the very best; in particular the BPS-210, which had two ten inchers, mounted in opposite directions on two sides of the sealed box.

The two drivers are facing in opposite directions and wired in phase electrically so that they push at the same time, just like a bipolar speaker.
The reactive forces that the drivers apply to the enclosure are opposing and mostly cancelled, minimizing movement of the box (and reducing coloration), and the signal is applied to the room in two places slightly displaced from one another, making room position somewhat less critical.

Should we call the Martin Logan Descent i, that has three speakers wired in phase in the alternate sides of an hexagonal box a tri-polar subwoofer? I am using it now with the SoundLab's.

BTW, the Mirage M3i's sounded (and looked) great.

 

[audioguy]

I'm in Frantz's camp. There are very few rooms where multiples of subs don't outperform a single sub. I would much rather use multiples of less costly subs (Seaton, JL, IB, etc) than one of these monsters at a whole lot less money and much better FR.

 

[Bruce B]

I'm in Frantz's camp. There are very few rooms where multiples of subs don't outperform a single sub. I would much rather use multiples of less costly subs (Seaton, JL, IB, etc) than one of these monsters at a whole lot less money and much better FR.

+1 There have been many papers written about the advantages of multiple subs.

 

[JackD201]

I am not going to speak for Alon Wolf but as Jeff Fritz had written in his preview og this subwoofer in Ultra Audio, Alon Eolf had been very critical towards integrating subwoofers in two channel audio-only systems in the past. According to what I understand his argument has been that no subwoofer is fast enough to integrate perfectly with the Maguco speakers.

It might be that these subwoofers mainly was introduced to play in Magico Q series speaker based home theater based systems.

Weird. He's been integrating powered subwoofers in his Ultimates from the beginning. Any comments Jeff?

 

[NorthStar]

I'm in Frantz's camp. There are very few rooms where multiples of subs don't outperform a single sub. I would much rather use multiples of less costly subs (Seaton, JL, IB, etc) than one of these monsters at a whole lot less money and much better FR.

About two QSub-18s then? ...$72,000 ...For well healed subwoofer generation of people of course. ...And the room (and the house) to handle them, fo sur.

 

[PeterA]

I'm in Frantz's camp. There are very few rooms where multiples of subs don't outperform a single sub. I would much rather use multiples of less costly subs (Seaton, JL, IB, etc) than one of these monsters at a whole lot less money and much better FR.

Is there an assumption that these are meant to be used as single subs only? Why not use these in multiples just like any other sub? Just because they are extremely expensive does not necessarily mean that they won't be used in pairs or multiples.

 

[NorthStar]

Is there an assumption that these are meant to be used as single subs only? Why not use these in multiples just like any other sub? Just because they are extremely expensive does not necessarily mean that they won't be used in pairs or multiples.

Hey, I thought that was my idea first. :b

 

[PeterA]

Weird. He's been integrating powered subwoofers in his Ultimates from the beginning. Any comments Jeff?

I was at a demonstration of the Q5 in which Mr. Wolf told the audience that he (at that time) did not believe in the use of separate subwoofers in a two-channel system. He told us that if one feels he needs more bass extension or output, he should just buy a bigger Magico speaker. I understood him to mean subwoofers that were not integrated in the same enclosure as the main speaker. The subs in the Ultimates are in the same enclosure and therefore designed as a unit and integrated by the designer in the speaker system. They are not separate units. I think that is the distinction he was making at that time.

 

[JackD201]

Doc Earl G, beat ya to it

 

[Bruce B]

I was at a demonstration of the Q5 in which Mr. Wolf told the audience that he (at that time) did not believe in the use of separate subwoofers in a two-channel system. He told us that if one feels he needs more bass extension or output, he should just buy a bigger Magico speaker.

I guess he has always had perfect rooms with no room nulls....

 

[PeterA]

I guess he has always had perfect rooms with no room nulls....

I know a set up guy who installed subs for an owner of Magico Q5s for exactly that reason.

 

[stereo]

You are implying that because the Magico sub is so much more $$$ than the JL Audio subs or other subs that it must be better. I respectfully disagree as I also do WRT the Thor, the Krell etc

The Qsub is a better sub not because it is more expensive. It is more expensive because it is better and costs more to build.

I can understand that people having a Magico based HT want to have a sub at the same level of quality. I would buy one or two for my HT if they wouldn't be so heavy... too heavy for my floating floor (and I have now 2 fathom F113 which are good but still the weakest element in overall system)

 

[NorthStar]

How do you move a 570 pounds sub around (QSub-18)? ...Make that two; for a total of more than half ton! ...That's real heavy; even on wheels.

* 350 pounds for the QSub-15.

 

[Steve Williams]

The Qsub is a better sub not because it is more expensive. It is more expensive because it is better and costs more to build.

I can understand that people having a Magico based HT want to have a sub at the same level of quality. I would buy one or two for my HT if they wouldn't be so heavy... too heavy for my floating floor (and I have now 2 fathom F113 which are good but still the weakest element in overall system)

So because something costs more makes it sound better. Man I have a bridge you might want to buy. You seem to fixate on what something costs to build and equate it to sounding better. This might be correct some of the times but I would be hard pressed to call it a universal given.

 

[Bruce B]

So because something costs more makes it sound better. Man I have a bridge you might want to buy. You seem to fixate on what something costs to build and equate it to sounding better. This might be correct some of the times but I would be hard pressed to call it a universal given.

For sure.... I'd certainly not call the Fathom F113's or Gotham's weak or lacking in any way.