Magico Q3- Impressive listen

[mauidan]

Interesting thread.

Based on Keith Howard's Q3 Lab report:
http://www.bm.rs/Magico/Magico Q3 HiFi News August 2011.pdf
it seems the Q3s needs more power than a DMA-260.

KM's comment that the Q3's -6 db at 42 hz "is perhaps a little disappointing," may explain their problem with big scale Classical music.

 

[asiufy]

It's a shame that Paul Miller was so in love with the Devialet, and didn't try the Q3 with something else.
Also, the darTZeel amp (108) is known to be very fussy, and the Q3 is perfectly fine with its 100W, never once clipping the amplifier, or getting close to clipping.
Again, measurements don't tell the whole story...


alexandre

 

[PeterA]

When discussing how Magico speakers portray bass, I'm reminded of this difference: bass quantity or bass quality. I have never found them lacking in the latter. I'm even quite satisfied with bass quantity in my smaller room and my Mini 2's. I'm sure the Q3 are even better.

 

[ack]

Well, the results of the second audition were different and much better - I went in with a mission, and basically asked that they be positioned a foot closer together based on my calculations, and also this time they were aligned on the same plane with a laser device (yesterday, I had noticed they were not really on the same plane, but didn't say much).

The result of this kind of positioning made for all the difference I was hoping for. The speaker is clearly more resolving, more articulate and with a tad better timbre than my electrostatics because of the lack of mechanical noise, just as coherent even at 9ft, they are clearly tighter and more articulate in the bass (and in fact, rendering bass to die for), swung dynamically higher when needed, and had the soundstage width and height I am accustomed to - forget about what I wrote yesterday regarding solo timpani, pipe organ, choral et al. Basically, the sound this time was what I originally expected: an electrostatic with very low mechanical noise, which is very well-controlled and -behaved in the vast majority of the spectrum.

I did also feel at times they needed more power than the 260 can offer, but this is not a problem with my monos. I need to listen again back home tonight, so there will be a third round tomorrow, and possibly a fourth in-home...

@Frantz: if you travel up here, feel free to ping me. Goodwin's carries the entire Magico line.

 

[PeterA]

Well, the results of the second audition were different and much better - I went in with a mission, and basically asked that they be positioned a foot closer together based on my calculations, and also this time they were aligned on the same plane with a laser device (yesterday, I had noticed they were not really on the same plane, but didn't say much).

The result of this kind of positioning made for all the difference I was hoping for. The speaker is clearly more resolving, more articulate and with a tad better timbre than my electrostatics because of the lack of mechanical noise, just as coherent even at 9ft, they are clearly tighter and more articulate in the bass (and in fact, rendering bass to die for), swung dynamically higher when needed, and had the soundstage width and height I am accustomed to - forget about what I wrote yesterday regarding solo timpani, pipe organ, choral et al. Basically, the sound this time was what I originally expected: an electrostatic with very low mechanical noise, which is very well-controlled and -behaved in the vast majority of the spectrum.

I did also feel at times they needed more power than the 260 can offer, but this is not a problem with my monos. I need to listen again back home tonight, so there will be a third round tomorrow, and possibly a fourth in-home...

@Frantz: if you travel up here, feel free to ping me. Goodwin's carries the entire Magico line.

Ack, you illustrate well just how important it is to listen to speakers multiple times and how crucial set up/positioning is. I heard the Mini 2 in four settings before I bought them. And then, once I had them at home, I played with positioning on and off for a few months until I felt I heard what they are capable of. This was based on what I learned from reading "Get Better Sound" by Jim Smith. I used a laser to get very precise and equal distances.

A year later, Jim Smith came and voiced the system. He spent just over a day in my room and the sound improved by a considerable amount. And in the areas you describe above. Dynamics, Tone and Presence all improved. Bass became more extended, impactful and articulate. However, the wooden bodied Mini is no Q series.

That experience and what you just observed make clear that proper positioning (room/speaker/listener relationship) is critical to getting the most out of a given speaker. I almost considered contacting you this morning to see if I could tag along. I then thought better of it, knowing you are making a serious decision here and I did not want to distract you. It must have sounded wonderful and I'm glad Goodwins was accommodating with your suggestion of moving around the speakers.

 

[ack]

This is also testament to the positives of having and working with a dealer. Otherwise, you are left with stuff you read on the net, which can be false (as mine was yesterday) for reasons beyond one's control. These set-up issues have also re-affirmed to me that shows are for eyes only, unless you have no worthy local dealer.

 

[PeterA]

This is also testament to the positives of having and working with a dealer. Otherwise, you are left with stuff you read on the net, which can be false (as mine was yesterday) for reasons beyond one's control. These set-up issues have also re-affirmed to me that shows are for eyes only, unless you have no worthy local dealer.

I agree, but it was the dealer who set the speakers up in the first place and was responsible for the demonstration. It was within his control. Same at shows. Lucky for you (and this readership) that you noticed it and that they allowed you to fine tune the set up until it sounded better.

This happened to me with the Magico V2. The first time the demo was incredible. I went back a second time two weeks later and the speakers had been moved out and back in and were in slightly different spots. This time the demo was not nearly as impressive.

I've mentioned that I once went to a demo at a different dealership and the speakers were wired out of phase. No one noticed. I asked them to check and sure enough, they fixed the problem.

 

[FrantzM]

<snip>

@Frantz: if you travel up here, feel free to ping me. Goodwin's carries the entire Magico line.

Ack

I will

 

[microstrip]

This is also testament to the positives of having and working with a dealer. Otherwise, you are left with stuff you read on the net, which can be false (as mine was yesterday) for reasons beyond one's control. These set-up issues have also re-affirmed to me that shows are for eyes only, unless you have no worthy local dealer.

+1!

 

[ack]

Short update... 3rd audition today with distances (intra-speaker and LP-to-speaker plane) set as per my own room's (and not really negotiable)... that translates to speakers a foot closer, and the LP closer by two feet (to 8ft) than optimal in that same room... no go, the soundstage collapsed quite a bit, the speakers did not disappear, bass response dropped, and the drivers did not blend well - e.g. piano rendered in two planes, with the lower registers clearly coming from the bottom of the speaker. Obviously none of this is the speakers' fault, and good panels work much better in such a situation.

So the Q3 appears to be a no-go in my room; in the end, if it ain't broken why fix it, and the MLs have worked superbly for me since modified, giving me 90% of the Q3's performance...

Finally, yet another reason why working with a dealer can only be beneficial - they can save you from disaster.

 

[Steve williams]

Peter

I'm sure many of us have followed this thread and if anything you are an educated consumer so rather than saying "sorry it didn't work out" I say stick with the winning combination you have and keep on smiling

 

[mauidan]

Short update... 3rd audition today with distances (intra-speaker and LP-to-speaker plane) set as per my own room's (and not really negotiable)... that translates to speakers a foot closer, and the LP closer by two feet (to 8ft) than optimal in that same room... no go, the soundstage collapsed quite a bit, the speakers did not disappear, bass response dropped, and the drivers did not blend well - e.g. piano rendered in two planes, with the lower registers clearly coming from the bottom of the speaker. Obviously none of this is the speakers' fault, and good panels work much better in such a situation.

So the Q3 appears to be a no-go in my room; in the end, if it ain't broken why fix it, and the MLs have worked superbly for me since modified, giving me 90% of the Q3's performance...

Finally, yet another reason why working with a dealer can only be beneficial - they can save you from disaster.

Since you already have the REL Stadium III, have you considered the Q1s for your room?

 

[asiufy]

The dealer room have the same dimensions and arrangement as yours? Otherwise, I don't think your test is valid...
IMO, distances are room-dependant. Since you're working with a dealer, can't he put these in your room?
I've followed what's on the Q3 manual here, and I got the best results by spreading the speakers 10cm further apart.


alexandre

 

[ack]

Sure, I can do an in-house demo, but this won't change distances much - that speaker needs some room to breath and you can't hold it against it. When set up correctly, it makes for a compelling case. I haven't given up completely yet and there are two things I can still try: I have a 1 inch-thick granite base (coincidentally, made to the Q3's dimensions) that I could use to elevate them, and I can increase the listening distance to 8.5 ft. Still thinking about it...

 

[FrantzM]

Short update... 3rd audition today with distances (intra-speaker and LP-to-speaker plane) set as per my own room's (and not really negotiable)... that translates to speakers a foot closer, and the LP closer by two feet (to 8ft) than optimal in that same room... no go, the soundstage collapsed quite a bit, the speakers did not disappear, bass response dropped, and the drivers did not blend well - e.g. piano rendered in two planes, with the lower registers clearly coming from the bottom of the speaker. Obviously none of this is the speakers' fault, and good panels work much better in such a situation.

So the Q3 appears to be a no-go in my room; in the end, if it ain't broken why fix it, and the MLs have worked superbly for me since modified, giving me 90% of the Q3's performance...

Finally, yet another reason why working with a dealer can only be beneficial - they can save you from disaster.

Would it be possible to audition them in your own room? Different rooms translate in different speakers positions. Then again if you are satisfied with what you already have younsavenyourself about 20 grands...

PM coming up

P.S. didn't see other posts saying the same

 

[microstrip]

Ack,

Can I ask why you are insisting on the Q3? From what I am reading (or misreading ...) from your comments you have never had one of this listening sessions with the Q3 that really filled you with enthusiasm, where you felt that music was sounding so good, that the suspension of disbelief was so perfect that you found that this was YOUR speaker.

IMHO, no speaker is perfect for all of us and between the many tens of excellent speakers there are a few that, upon audition, trigger our preference. They have something that makes us enjoy the music because they hide the nasty aspects of the recording and make you feel in the performance. It seems to be the case of your current system.

 

[ack]

micro, see post #24

 

[microstrip]

micro, see post #24

I was addressing this post. A nice list of classical virtues, but little about the best aspects that electrostatics give us - decays, palpable sound, explosive dynamics without being too loud, body and even a "blacker background" (perhaps what you call lack of mechanical noise).

I have owned Quad ESL 63, ML Prodigy's and several SoundLab's. The Aida's and even better the TheSonusfaber - Fenice- were the only speakers that managed to incorporate most of the good thinks I love in an electrostatic. For the first time a few days ago I was able to listen to the XLF also playing some nice tricks that box speakers are not supposed to do. Surely Y (and others) MMV!

 

[PeterA]

So the Q3 appears to be a no-go in my room; in the end, if it ain't broken why fix it, and the MLs have worked superbly for me since modified, giving me 90% of the Q3's performance...

Ack, Could you describe exactly what it is you find missing with the MLs and what you hope to get from a speaker like the Q3? Perhaps the MLs are not broken, but you are shopping for another speaker, so there must be something more that you are looking for.

Rooms can certainly be limiting factors. If you feel satisfied that the listener needs to be a certain distance from the Q3 to have the drivers integrate well, then it is not going to work for you in your situation.

I like someone's suggestion about the Q1. Have you considered trying that in your room?

 

[ack]

Ack, Could you describe exactly what it is you find missing with the MLs and what you hope to get from a speaker like the Q3? Perhaps the MLs are not broken, but you are shopping for another speaker, so there must be something more that you are looking for.

Rooms can certainly be limiting factors. If you feel satisfied that the listener needs to be a certain distance from the Q3 to have the drivers integrate well, then it is not going to work for you in your situation.

I like someone's suggestion about the Q1. Have you considered trying that in your room?

Hi Peter,

When set up correctly, the Q3 is more resolving, more realistic in the entire spectrum, thus more convincing. These MLs are not broken, but they are a tad behind the Q3 in absolute terms, in just about everything. That's all. Mini monitors are never an option for me for large-scale orchestral music.