Sophia 2/Magico V2 versus Sasha/Magico V3

Ricred1
once you move to Higher End, you will be more amazed with result of Sophia 2. Regarding your system context, you haven't heard anything yet with Sophia 2. Keep going, keep going.....

Mert
I have already upgraded to Densen B-350 mono-amps and Densen B-250 preamp. In additon, I have upgraded all of my AC cords. The results is a more natural sounding system. My next step will be to upgrade from the Rega Apollo as the source.

Keithr
I haven't listened to the V3, they are out of my price range. My comments were about the V2's. If you read my previous post, I mentioned that I thought the V2's had great mids and the Sophia II's had very good mids. I used different language, but essentially said the same thing you did.

I've listened to many speakers and really enjoy the Sophia II's. That doesn't mean that someone won't prefer something else.

Thanks for the feedback Madfloyd.

Curious as to why you ruled out the V3?

IMO, the Sashas are best suited for your current system. I find Wilson and Pass Class A amplification to be very synergistic. I found Magico and Pass Class A amplification to be a mediocre match. The highs seemed attenuated, the bass became wooly and the midrange lost it's definition (in comparison to VAC, ASR and Soulution). Something to keep in mind as you listen to the V2s (the V2's you're listening to have greater potential). Also, IMO, I get the feeling you no longer REALLY like the Wilson house sound. The Sashas improve on many of the earlier generations, but at the end of the day, it's still voiced like a Wilson. Wilson, as you know, should only be heard when they are set up perfectly in a great sounding room. They have the ability to disappear and sound natural (within their natural voicing), but without proper setup, they can be more forward, less detailed, thin, and just un-natural sounding. I think the Magicos are a bit easier on setup, but with the caveat that they don't deliver that last 1-2% of palpability that Wilsons can create. Just another's opinion, but I think Wilsons are more transparent to the source than Magicos (that last 1-2% thing I mentioned), but each speaker is colored. I just hear Wilson speakers morphing with each CD/LP change just a little bit more than Magicos, moving you a bit closer to the source.

I think the V2s give a slightly recessed presentation, and the Sophia IIs give a slightly forward presentation. The V2s are easier to listen to because of this, and sound a bit more natural.

Comparing the V2 to the V3 is a mixed bag. The V2 has new technologies, so you get a slightly more coherent, smooth sound. BUT, I still think the V3 is more capable all around. The highs are debatable because I hear more defintion, while others I know hear more roughness and distortion in comparison to the V2. The midrange on the V3 is more nuanced, defined, and textured than the V2's. To me the V2's midrange sounds more colored to the warm side because of the woofer below it, augmenting the bass and creeping up into the true midrange. I think you loose some separation and detail in the V2, whereas the V3 has a truly dedicated midrange driver. Lastly, the bass is great on the V2, but truly better on the V3. The V3's bass move air. You can feel the air change and pressurize, even when you can't hear it. The bass adds weight, presence and ambiance to just about any type of music. The V2 feels weighty because of the warmer midrange (I think), but it can't match the foundation the V3 lays down in the bass.

I hate to say it, but I think the V2 is a more engaging speaker, but the V3's a better speaker, so it's tough to choose. I'm interested in hearing the Q5 and eventually a Q3 when it comes out...

Excellent comments, Hce4!

That's a great post Hce4. Thanks for describing is such detail your experience with Magico and Wilson. I'm going to join Madfloyd on his Sasha audition. It will be most interesting because a rep from Wilson whose name I have forgotten is setting up both the Sophia II and the Sasha at a dealership for a seminar. I don't know what electronics we will be hearing.

I have recently bought a pair of Magico Mini II's to replace my Egglestons. The Egglestons are known to be a great match for Pass class A amps and I found this to be the case. However, I also find my Pass XA160.5 sounds great with the Mini II. I do not hear what you describe as wooly bass, attenuated highs or midrange lacking definition. My combo is still fairly new and I'm still playing with speaker positioning, but male and female voice is incredibly present and involving which I don't think would be the case if it lacked definition. One of the LPs I have been using for set up is Ray Brown and Duke Ellington's "This One's for Blanton" at 45rpm. The bass and piano have great definition, extension and explosive transients. The timbre and scale also seem quite natural. There is also plenty of inner detail. I think this is partly a result of the Mini II's being very appropriate for my small room. The speaker/room interface is better than it was with my Eggelstons.

I did upgrade from the XA100.5 because I felt it did not quite have the power to control/drive the Magicos which are very demanding. It's interesting because I do not see many Magico/Pass pairings in systems, but to my ears, the combination is very good. Magico is a demanding load and perhaps the Pass amps have not had appropriate power ratings.

I'm sorry to go on a tangent to this thread, but I thought I would share my experience with Magico. I have also heard the Sophia II's with Pass amps and the V3 with Simaudio did not sound good. The V2 with Spectral was excellent and the M5 with Solution was the best I've heard. The Magicos have sounded great in some demoes and terrible in others, depending on electronics and set-up. I agree that the V2 has great potential. It also has a slightly warmer midrange as you mention which I did not realize until I heard the Mini II.

I think Madfloyd would do well to compare the V3 to the Sasha in his own system if possible. Set up, though, will be very important.