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

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.

Sunnyjim (the OP) posted in part:

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.

3-1/2 years ago I did a fairly comprehensive search for a pair of $2K floorstanders. Final contenders came down to the Goldenear Triton 7
and the Magnepan 1.7. I took my wife along plus one of her favorite musical works, the cantata "Elijah" by Mendelssohn. She has a strong history in vocal music, especially ensemble, oratorio/cantata, and opera.

I was looking for a tie-breaker. There were things I liked about the Triton 7s, including price ($1400), small footprint, and top-to-bottom tonal balance. But I didn't find it quite as engaging as the Maggie 1.7s, but I wasn't sure what it was.

My wife knows "Elijah" backwards & forwards. We played Elijah through the TRitons, and then the Maggies. There was the tie-breaker. There are passages in Elijah that have EIGHT-part vocal harmonies. She couldn't hear them all from the Triton, but easily picked them all out through the Maggies. Inner detail, anyone?

When I asked if she was OK with the Maggies' imposing size (5'5" tall x 19" wide), she said, "Are you kidding? It's the sound that matters." And we took them home right then and there. Did I get the world's best wife? I think so.

The more I listened to the Maggies at home, the more extraordinary they revealed themselves to be. First of all, the Maggies showed me how noisy most box speakers are--how much vibrations, resonances, and pent-up and released backwaves obscure inner harmonies and details that otherwise make the music come alive. I am continually enthralled by the effects of subtly applied background vocals that largely go missing on other speaker types. I also found that the dipole pattern with out-of-phase backwave does wonders for taming the 100-200 Hz hump that seems to plague in-room response curves with conventional speakers

Also, SunnyJim, I have a listening room similar in size and feature to yours, including the room dimensions and the open architecture. However, I even have a 15' cathedral ceiling. My amp even has the same power rating as your BAT--100wpc into 8 ohms and 200 wpc into 4 ohms. The 1.7s are easy to drive with this amp, and the speakers fill the space with clarity and dynamics. You may want to get a fast sub or two to help the bass energize the room.

For a little more than the price of the 1.7i, you can get the Eminent Technology LFT-8b, a better magnetic-planar loudspeaker. It requires less power, plays louder and lower, and is more dynamic. It also makes music sound more "there" than the 1.7. Nothing against Maggies---I have both ET's and Tympanis.

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

If you’re talking about the Proacs vs. Maggie 3.7s plus subs, no argument. I was just trying to put Audiolover718’s comparison into perspective--comparing some new $11K Proacs to 20-yr-old budget Maggies is hardly fair. Compare current Maggies plus subs (e.g., a *pair* of JL E-Sub e112s) in the same price range and it’s at least an even contest. Actually, that would be a *very* dynamic setup and still be $400 cheaper than the Proacs.

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.

The BAT *is* rated at 200 wpc into 4 ohms, so it is absolutely a good match for the 1.7s. My amp has the same rating. I will admit that the 1.7s on their own might sound a bit thin on large scale music in a space as large as SJ’s, but a quick sub or two with the right blending controls (continuously variable crossover down to at least 50 Hz, and continuously variable phase control 0-180 deg. or more) will get those Maggies with the 100/200 wpc amp to fully occupy a fairly large listening space. I’d say a JL Audio Dominion d108, Gallo TR-3D, or GoldenEar Forcefield 3 or 4 would do the job nicely.

Johnnyb53,

Fair enough. I haven’t heard any of  the 7 series Maggies. I fell in love with the presentation of the proacs and haven’t looked back. But I do stand by the 1.6 not being very good with dynamic swings by comparisons. Yes, They are not in the same price range so it is an unfair comparison.