What are some of the downsides of owning a Magneplanar .7 or 1.7i ?


Thinking of moving up speaker wise, and so am considering  the fabled Magneplanar speakers, that is, either the  the .7, or supposedly new 1.7i.   (BTW, I am not sure the Maggie .7 is necessarily an upgrade, and has less bass than my current box speakers...see below)

Besides "Maggies" having outdated speaker terminals that might be a struggle with banana plugs,, and they are generally power hungry, I am curious if anyone can honestly tell me of any other downsides of this design.  For the last 30 years, I have owned several traditional box design speakers. 

I currently have a pair of Golden Ear Technology model 7's....which I like and generally sound good However, I  would like to confirm what a planar design brings to the table in sound quality. I have read many times about the box-less sound  provided by this design, and its wide sound staging and low distortion. 

I think I have enough power with BAT VK-200 amp (100RMS) to drive the .7, but not sure that is enough to drive the MG1.7i. to higher volumes The pre-amp is a Conrad Johnson PV-14SE. 

The listening room area 12 X15ft, but opens into kitchen/dining area divided by a medium size couch. The rest of the space is approximately 12X18ft behind the sofa with a stupid counter island ( so I cannot move the sofa back any further.. The ceiling is 8 to 9 ft feet high ( not a cathedral ceiling, praise the Lord) . It is a bit of haul to the dealer I bought the Golden Ear T's from who also carries Magneplanar line.  All advice welcomed.    Thanks, SJ   

sunnyjim
+1 Schubert.  

Going from my 1.6 to proac d48r has been a revelation.  Dynamic range is definitely a component of emotion.  While the maggiea served me well, they are no match for my new speakers.  

To add to Schubert:

also lack of durability and lack of music, very hard to find sweet spot and right placement. once fabric gets old, it will sound terrible

In fact they lack more than they give. They’re different from conventional speakers as toys vs. instruments. Nowhere in the studios these pieces of fabric on the frames being used. They’ve been designed to prove an alternate technology rather than bring music, but desire for toys always exists in homo-sapiens so ones who’s on to it deserve enjoyment of such. I also enjoy toys(certain kind of course:), but for listening music do prefer instruments and tools.

[Magnepans] Lack of Dynamic Range . If you play Classical Music is a problem with rock/pop is not.
Not in my experience with my 1.7s, but then I cheat a little bit. I have sandbags on their feet to dampen vibrations, use the tilt-back spacers to energize the room better, and have them perfectly mated with a pair of small, fast powered subwoofers (1400w peak) to fill in the 36-50Hz region. The panel/sub coherence popped into focus when I dialed in the continuous phase control. That adds a lot of power and dynamics. I use this rig almost exclusively for LP playback. My amp is rather modest by today’s standards--a Perreaux PMF-1150B rated at 100 wpc into 8 ohms. Factory specs didn’t specify output ito 4 ohms, but with the results I’m getting, it must put out close to 200 wpc into 4 ohms.

Anyway, this rig does dynamics gloriously. I love playing bombastic large scale orchestral works--Russian showpieces, Holst’s "The Planets," Beethoven’s Eroica, and big band--Buddy Rich, Count Basie, Harry James on Sheffield D2D, etc. When I play these records the dynamics knock me around the room. The dynaimcs really took off when I acquired a MAGI Phonomenal phono stage--all tube handwired PTP. I also have the matching line stage. Together they transformed my rig.

... Going from my 1.6 to proac d48r has been a revelation. Dynamic range is definitely a component of emotion. While the maggiea served me well, they are no match for my new speakers.
That’s hardly a fair method to make a general characterization of Magnepan products. The 1.6 is a 20-yr-old design and was discontinued at least seven years ago. It is not representative of Maggie’s current product line. The 1.6’s replacement, the 1.7, was such a quantum leap in performance that the technology was applied throughout the line: the 3.6 became the 3.7, the 20.1 became the 20.7, the the .7 was introduced as well. I can also attest that with the right setup and appropriate-sized room, the Mini Maggies are also *very* dynamic.

And let’s not forget that your new speakers retail at $10,900. Let’s hope they sound better than 20-yr-old $1500 speakers. You could buy a pair of Maggie 3.7s plus $5500 worth of subwoofers for the price of your Proacs,

Sideways move. Different technology with very different presentation. Obviously will sound quite different, but not a slam dunk improvement.

If you can afford it I recommend you consider having both types of speakers on hand, as you can enjoy what each brings to the listening experience.

The BAT will not provide enough power to open up the Maggies fully unless it's a higher current design. You likely will be disappointed in the dynamics, but enjoy the soundstaging properties of the Maggies.

Both speakers are quite compromised in terms of absolute sound reproduction, but offer different flavors of experience.

Most everything stated above is accurate so I won't repeat.  To me the most important aspect of owning Maggie's comes down to musical taste.  If you want to blast hard rock and such I'd look elsewhere, however, if your tastes run more towards Jazz or softer rock like Steely Dan, Maggie's are capable of things that box speakers simply can't do.  Admittedly they need lots of current and placement wise they need a minimum of 3 feet behind them.  I would also add that stiffening the panels will pay dividends, there are several ways to achieve this that I won't get into but search the web you will find Maggie owners who are doing this.  I've seen many an audiophile come unglued the first time they heard Maggie's, they're certainly not for everyone but for those that love em' nothing else will do.