Magnepan Brightness Problem
JohnpaulW
I have a pair of Magnepan .5/QR speakers that I have really enjoyed them
for some time. However, the system altogether sounds very bright and can
be annoying. I was wondering if Magnepan owners would mind giving me some
ideas of what might remedy this problem. First, let me give a brief
description of the entire setup. I am using a filter from Harrison Labs
which sends the high frequencies to my Adcom-555 which in turn send the
signal to my Magnepans. The low frequencies are sent to one channel of a
150 wpc NAD amp which in turn send the signal to an NHT SW2 sub. I am
also using a Magnavox laser disc player as well as an Audio Alchemy DLC
pre-amp. The interconnects are all simply Radio Shack as well as 12 gauge
speaker wire.
Now let me say I would not like to change the cables. I am happy with
them and I doubt they are the source of my problem. Sure I bet MIT
speaker cable would offer some improvement for this problem but I don't
really want to go this route. I fully believe regular cables can keep a
signal very pure if used properly. Also, my room acoustics and speaker
placement are very good. I have tried different scenarios and know this
is not the source of my problem. Also, I do not want to use any
attenuators on the Magnepans. I have tried this and have not been happy
with the result.
Now let me offer a few ideas I have thought of. First, change the amp.
Please keep in mind I am on a budget but I have considered buying a Carver
TFM-35x because I have been told it has a very tube like sound. I have
also considered buying a tube amp (or a pair of tube amps like the Dynaco
ST-70), especially since the bass in my system is produced by another amp
and subwoofer. However, I am not sure if this would yield the improvement
I am looking for. Also, I have considered using an outboard DAC. I have
been told the dacs in most laserdisc players are horrible and this might
offer an improvement.
Any guidance is greatly appreciated.
Erik Kowalewsky
If you have not done so, move the Maggies out from the wall. This
will increase the bass and thus even out the balance.
Also, the 555 has a reputation for being a bright amp. Mine wasn't
really for my Maggies (SMGa and c), but I don't think either of these
had the quasi-ribbon tweeter (maybe the c's did).
I think room placement is the key, if you have space to do it.
- Erik Kowalewsky
Remove "debris" to email
Chuck Ross
czmkd...@ix.netcom.com (Erik Kowalewsky) wrote:
I didn't intend to be redundant; I simply posted my answer before
reading yours, which is almost identical to mine.
Chuck Ross
_-_-
Chuck Ross
john...@aol.com (JohnpaulW) wrote:
> I have a pair of Magnepan .5/QR speakers that I have really enjoyed them
> for some time. However, the system altogether sounds very bright and can
> be annoying. I was wondering if Magnepan owners would mind giving me some
> ideas of what might remedy this problem. First, let me give a brief
> description of the entire setup. I am using a filter from Harrison Labs
> which sends the high frequencies to my Adcom-555 which in turn send the
> signal to my Magnepans. The low frequencies are sent to one channel of a
> 150 wpc NAD amp which in turn send the signal to an NHT SW2 sub. I am
> also using a Magnavox laser disc player as well as an Audio Alchemy DLC
> pre-amp. The interconnects are all simply Radio Shack as well as 12 gauge
> speaker wire.
It's not easy to match the sound of Maggies with most subs...there usually
is quite a different sort of sound that is not "seamless", and it's
probably because the Maggies really need some low-bass reinforcement in
many rooms, otherwise they can sound like a pair of large telephones.
Plan to spend a great deal of time on room position with the Maggies.
If there's a crossover adjustment on the Harrison, try playing with
it and lower the crossover frequency, if possible.
Also, the Adcom-555 may be part of the problem; it's quite a shrill-
sounding amplifier, and you can easily check that out by borrowing
one of the newer Adcom amps or something else entirely from your
friendly dealer.
The cables are probably just fine. However, make sure that the AC
power is all coming from the wall and not from extension cords, preamp
sockets, etc.
Chuck Ross
_-_-
Ng
You could try the Carver. I hate to say this, but don't give up
on speaker placement and room acoustics. If the sound is bright,
the room interactions are probably responsible. Move
the speakers away from walls and point the rears towards less reflective
surfaces. Put up a tapestry or nice oriental rug behind the speakers.
--
Ho Leung Ng
hol...@ucla.edu
Rodney Gold
john...@aol.com (JohnpaulW) wrote:
> Also, I do not want to use any
>attenuators on the Magnepans. I have tried this and have not been happy
>with the result.
D you mean a Pot - like a volume control - I do know Magnepan supply
resistors to cure this very problem.
Rodney Gold
"The nicest thing about smacking your head against the wall is-
the feeling you get when you stop."
Neil Koomen
Hi:
I have a Harrison Labs (PW1?) line-level crossover also, but none
of the gear you mention.
I use my xover to biamp with a powered subwoofer, similar to your
setup.
Where is your xover set?
Assuming you haven't tried the following, I suggest:
1) Make sure your xover is set to a 50 hz crossover point, which is
the lowest on my xover, with highs/mids going to the Adcom and lows
going to your NAD.
2) If that doesn't help, make sure your xover is set to a 50 hz
crossover point, with full-range signal going to the Adcom and lows
going to the NAD.
I've found that with line-level crossovers and systems using
full-range main speakers, the crossover point must be set very low
or else the main speakers will sound too bright and crisp.
Full-range speakers seem to need to have as close to full-range
input as possible to sound good, IMHO.
I think some people use Magnepans already in the way I've described
in #2, that is, they run the full-range signal to the amp powereing
the Magnepans and keep the subwoofer crossover point set very low.
The sub only fills in what the Magnepan can't provide.
3) I suspect that you've already tried this, but try increasing the
volume to the sub, if your NAD has volume controls.
4) Contact Magnepan and ask for their advice; as someone else
mentioned, they may have resistors that might help.
BTW, the NHT SW2Pi amp is available separately and has volume
control and adjustable line-level xover points, if you're willing
to spend the money to get all these features in one package.
Hope this helps,
Neil
JohnpaulW wrote:
>
> I have a pair of Magnepan .5/QR speakers that I have really enjoyed them
> for some time. However, the system altogether sounds very bright and can
> be annoying. I was wondering if Magnepan owners would mind giving me some
> ideas of what might remedy this problem. First, let me give a brief
> description of the entire setup. I am using a filter from Harrison Labs
> which sends the high frequencies to my Adcom-555 which in turn send the
> signal to my Magnepans. The low frequencies are sent to one channel of a
> 150 wpc NAD amp which in turn send the signal to an NHT SW2 sub. I am
> also using a Magnavox laser disc player as well as an Audio Alchemy DLC
> pre-amp. The interconnects are all simply Radio Shack as well as 12 gauge
> speaker wire.
>
> Now let me say I would not like to change the cables. I am happy with
> them and I doubt they are the source of my problem. Sure I bet MIT
> speaker cable would offer some improvement for this problem but I don't
> really want to go this route. I fully believe regular cables can keep a
> signal very pure if used properly. Also, my room acoustics and speaker
> placement are very good. I have tried different scenarios and know this
> is not the source of my problem. Also, I do not want to use any
> attenuators on the Magnepans. I have tried this and have not been happy
> with the result.
>
David Altekruse
This may not apply to your model, but the tweeter response of my Magnepan
MG-III is nearly identical 360 degrees horizontally whereas the response
of the bass and midrange is the typical dipole figure eight pattern. What
this means is that with the MG-III's the response to the sides is much
brighter than to the front and back. If the room is very reflective, these
reflections will make the speaker sound overly bright. Someone already
mentioned putting some type of sound absorbtion behind the speakers but you
should also experiment with absorbtion on the sides of the room using the
mirror technique which may also tighten up imaging a bit.
In my case, excessive brightness was due to an accumulation of small
effects: partly to excessive room reflections, partly to a slightly
bright amp, and partly due to a bit more sensitivity in the tweeter
which a resistor tamed. I also have a sub crossed over around 50 Hz.
I'm currently running the MG-III full range. I've also experiemented
with several high-pass filters. I can't say I noticed the sound seeming
brighter, though. Brightness to me is something that is above, say, 3-5KHz.
Subwoofer xover frequency and level easily effects upper bass and lower
mid-range, but nothing I would call "brightness".
--
David Altekruse, d...@netcom.com
--
Leonard Weldon
Ref: Maggie brightness issues...
Having had a pair or two of Maggie systems around since the middle
'70's...I would start with the following two modifications...
1. The Ad com 555 is a bright amp..period...I had both models at one
time or the other...and moved them to other dynamic speaker
systems...with the Magpies they are bright! Look for another
amp...you can still sell the 555 on the used market at a
reasonable price. It is still a decent amp when paired with
the right components.
2. Perhaps the most important change, would be to put a curtain
or some type of sound suppressor behind the Maggies...make
sure the Magpies are at least 3 ft from the rear wall. The "back
wave" of the Maggies has to be controlled...driving them into
a sheet rock or brick wall will produce an overly bright and
confused imaging. Start with a curtain the full length of the
back wall. It is this uncontrolled backwave that "turns" so
many people off with the Maggies...a 3 piece curtain that can
be moved in sections will allow the ability to adjust the
backwave as per your preference. Complaints about
Maggies not imaging is due to this excess backwave getting
in the way...most dealers will not even consider putting a
curtain up...some are a bit more aware that the "accepted"
setup on the Maggies is not necessarily the best! This applies
to Ribbon and Electrostatic speakers...the Maggie will do quite
well in a well damped room! It is a tall speaker...sending out a
large wavefront that hunts for reflective surfaces...it uses them
differently than a dynamic speaker! You've got to get control
of those surfaces, if not, you'll be bashed with hi-frequency
energy! Forever...complaining about brightness! And all the
while missing all the ambience and delicate beauty that is
the Magnepan.
3. Take some time to check out some other speaker wire...you will
not believe what a good copper wire by one of the well known
manufacturer's will do. Do the cable search after acquiring
the new amp...if you decide to change amps. Maybe do a
temporary swap with a friend...it will give you some insight
as to the degree of changes lurking out there. Long ago,
I went "bananas" in regard to good wire and outstanding
components...the Maggie will reward you with this "good
stuff"...it seems to be just sitting there awaiting better
input.
If item 2 above does not do the job...send me an e-mail note...I
might be able to discuss other methods of making it a better
speaker in your acoustic environment. I've moved these Planar
monsters a fraction of an inch for over 20 years...I've found a
few things that will help them. Item 2 above is generally a big
help, and one of the cheapest improvements! As mentioned
above, a well designed copper based wire will introduce
you into a world of delicate representations of violins,
the blare of the bell on trumpets, trombones, and those
percussive points of reference that give you a mental
key as to soundstage depth, width. All of these minute
improvements lead to a convincing soundstage..and the
ability to listen to CD's that you'd previously classified as
too bright! Or unpleasant to the extreme. Having gone
through this process for many years..I'm finding more
and more CD's that are actually pleasant, that were once
put off in a stack considered as, well..."these are mistakes".
Leonard....
Josh Stern
In article <dnaEA6...@netcom.com>, David Altekruse <d...@netcom.com> wrote:
>This may not apply to your model, but the tweeter response of my Magnepan
>MG-III is nearly identical 360 degrees horizontally whereas the response
>of the bass and midrange is the typical dipole figure eight pattern. What
>this means is that with the MG-III's the response to the sides is much
>brighter than to the front and back. If the room is very reflective, these
>reflections will make the speaker sound overly bright. Someone already
>mentioned putting some type of sound absorbtion behind the speakers but you
>should also experiment with absorbtion on the sides of the room using the
>mirror technique which may also tighten up imaging a bit.
I have MG 3.5Rs, to which the description above applies as well.
In my room they stand several feet in wall-to-wall windows.
Brightness and poor imaging were potentially problematic in this
situation and I have found the following solution to be quite
effective: taking a spare flannel sheet, I cut strips about
5 in. wide, and about the same length of the speaker, and I
tack these strips to the wood on top of the speaker that
borders either side of the ribbon tweeter so that the strips
hang down the length of the speaker in the back, positioned
directly over the tweeter.
The resulting sound is quite natural and, in my room,
far superior to Magnepan's suggested technique of putting
resistors in series with the tweeter (the latter does
nothing to control the ratio of direct to reflected
sound).
To accomodate different rooms and
equipment, the amount of the corrective effect can be altered
by adjusting the width of these strips, as quite a bit of
backwardly reflective treble still 'escapes' from the edges
of the loosely hanging strips.
- Josh
JohnpaulW
I just wanted to say "thanks" to all who responded to this post. If
anyone is curious the majority of replies advised that I go with a
different amp (however, a few said keep it) and new cables and
interconnects. I have also given the resistors another chance and I still
feel as though they "veil" some of the detail. It is an improvement but
still not what I am looking for.
Some may be wondering what I am trying to gain with all this other than
the obvious (better sound). Once I listened to a Dave Mathews disc with
my Magnepans. It was extremely bright...after all it is a very bright
recording. There was an extreme amount of sibilance in the voices. Well,
I did think this was just in the recording until I heard a pair of NHT
1.5s. The sibilance was almost totally gone. After doing some tests I
found the NHTs have an extreme drop-off in output at the 6.3 kHz frequency
while my Magnepans have a large amount of output at the same frequency. I
thought this may have just been a factor with the NHTs but then I also
heard Paradigm and Tannoy. Here again the sibilance was not present. So
what I am trying to do is get the level of brightness of these speakers
while still keeping the ability to image incredibly (which of course the
Magnepans do so well).
Anyway, thanks for all your help and I sure would welcome anymore advise.
Thomas Nulla
d...@netcom.com (David Altekruse) wrote:
>I'm curious why Johnpaul didn't pay notice to the suggestion most mentioned.
>Perhaps it was because he's already tried everything in the book on speaker
>placement and room acoustics. If so, I wish he had mentioned that in his
>original note. However, I'd guess that he's one of the majority who seem to
>think that the subject isn't worth talking about.
>If this comment doesn't apply to Johnpaul then I apologize, but I've
>run into a lot of "audiophiles" who are more than eager to trade one
>expensive amp after another, try all sorts of costly cables, put their
>CD transports on special plates, put car polish and green ink on their
>CD's, buy $600 AC line cords, anything except the one thing that makes
>more difference than all the above combined. As soon as you suggest
>moving the speaker and/or the listening position and modifications to
>room acoustics, they turn deaf. Why?
I've wondered a lot about this myself, as your statements parallel my
experience. My (rather reluctant) tentative conclusion is that
a) The high-end press devotes little attention to room treatment because
there is much less money in wood, cloth, and foam than silver wire and
'electromagnetic' stones. :-) And moving speakers around is free. No
money there...
b) Optimizing room treatment requires considerable time, careful
adjustments of large objects, and at least a little knowledge of
acoustics to get good results; bad results are easy to get. You can't
just transfer one successful setup to other listening rooms.
c) Room treatment confers few nameplate bragging rights; it's tough to
build a hierarchy of cost/prestige like some audiophiles perceive in the
world of components, wires, etc.
d) Effective room treatment is often large in size and difficult to
harmonize with non-audiophile notions of decor. :-)
>David Altekruse, d...@netcom.com
Thomas <now playing: Sam McClain, "Sledgehammer Soul">
http://www.io.com/~nulla (high fidelity and miscellany)
*** The humor-impaired should avoid this page. ***
Listening room .jpg, John Dunlavy r.a.h-e archive to 8 May 1997
"When dogma enters the brain, all intellectual activity ceases."- R.A.W.
Steve Zipser (Sunshine Stereo, Inc.)
Thomas Nulla wrote:
> I've wondered a lot about this myself, as your statements parallel my
> experience. My (rather reluctant) tentative conclusion is that
>
> a) The high-end press devotes little attention to room treatment because
> there is much less money in wood, cloth, and foam than silver wire and
> 'electromagnetic' stones. :-) And moving speakers around is free. No
> money there...
>
Thomas:
While I have lambasted the press often enough here, I think you are
wrong. Every magazine has run at least one or two articles on how to
treat a room. Once done, it need not be done again, so I think that
when a reviewer reviews a product, it is a given that the room is
treated. I mean, how many tests can they do on a corner-tube or ASC
tube traps?
Think about it!
Cheers & happy tuning!
Zip
--
Sunshine Stereo Inc. 9535 Biscayne Blvd. Miami Shores FL 33138
PASS, GALLO, Chiro, CODA, Straightwire, ESP, NHT, Energy, NEAR,
Parasound, Carver, Lightstar, Camelot Technology, Shakti, Audible
Illusions, Quicksilver, Soundesign, Audio Logic Cabasse
Steve Zipser (Sunshine Stereo, Inc.)
Thomas Nulla wrote:
> "Steve Zipser (Sunshine Stereo, Inc.)" <z...@netrunner.net> wrote:
> >Thomas:
> >While I have lambasted the press often enough here, I think you are
> >wrong. Every magazine has run at least one or two articles on how to
> >treat a room.
> Given the huge difference between rooms, I'd like to see good
> explanations of the principles of acoustics that make room treatment
> helpful, rather than specific examples. One or two articles is not
> nearly enough to provide all the needed information.
Thomas:
Specific examples are the only thing that helps. Tuning a room is still
pretty much hit and miss!
Why do you think they tore down and rebuilt Avery Fischer Hall so many
times? Why do you think Carnegie Hall sounds so fucked up in a lot of
seats now since the "improved" it!
> >Once done, it need not be done again, so I think that
> >when a reviewer reviews a product, it is a given that the room is
> >treated.
>
> Changes in equipment, most especially speakers, can dramatically alter
> your room treatment needs...this was really brought home to me when I
> went from Magnepan 2.6R's to Dunlavy SC-III's.
>
Actually, this is not so true, other than dampening the rear wall more
or less.
I find that a really good room or really bad room has little regard for
what speakers are being used. On the other hand a specific design like
Maggies or Quads, or Omni's like Gallo might require a little more in
the way of side treatments, but overall, a good room is a good room!
Speaker placement is a VERY important aspect in this discussion which is
oft overlooked.
Zip
> >I mean, how many tests can they do on a corner-tube or ASC tube traps?
>
> I don't really want product tests, I want the underlying principles well
> explained, and general suggestions made.
>
> >Think about it!
>
> I've spent years thinking about it! :-) And I'm still working on it.
>
> >Cheers & happy tuning!
> >Zip
>
> Thank you. It _has_ been an enjoyable and rewarding process.
>
> >Sunshine Stereo Inc. 9535 Biscayne Blvd. Miami Shores FL 33138
> >PASS, GALLO, Chiro, CODA, Straightwire, ESP, NHT, Energy, NEAR,
> >Parasound, Carver, Lightstar, Camelot Technology, Shakti, Audible
> >Illusions, Quicksilver, Soundesign, Audio Logic Cabasse
>
> Thomas <now playing: "Heavenly Revelations" (Naxos)>
>
> http://www.io.com/~nulla (high fidelity and miscellany)
> *** The humor-impaired should avoid this page. ***
> Listening room .jpg, John Dunlavy r.a.h-e archive to 8 May 1997
> "When dogma enters the brain, all intellectual activity ceases."- R.A.W.
--
Greg Smith
In rec.audio.opinion Thomas Nulla <nu...@io.com> wrote:
: Given the huge difference between rooms, I'd like to see good
: explanations of the principles of acoustics that make room treatment
: helpful, rather than specific examples. One or two articles is not
: nearly enough to provide all the needed information.
You're right. If that's what you want, you're not going to get a full
treatment of the subject in any magazine. Go grab a book on it--that's
the amount of space required to go properly in depth. As a start, the
books from F Alton Everest are inexpensive introductions to the subject
that are pretty easy to find. "The Master Handbook of Acoustics" is good.
I'm currently working my way through "Sound Studio Construction on a
Budget", which helped me get my Magnapans speakers sounding good in my new
apartment (acoustic foam on the rear wall and a thin carpet cleaned things
up well).
--
* Greg Smith gsm...@westnet.com Hoboken, NJ
* http://www.westnet.com/~gsmith/ for Make Your PC Fast!, CD-R,
* Progress RDBMS, CD shopping, speaker building, rock music remasters
* http://www.sstage.com/ SoundStage!, the high-end audio magazine
Thomas Nulla
"Steve Zipser (Sunshine Stereo, Inc.)" <z...@netrunner.net> wrote:
>Thomas Nulla wrote:
>> I've wondered a lot about this myself, as your statements parallel my
>> experience. My (rather reluctant) tentative conclusion is that
>>
>> a) The high-end press devotes little attention to room treatment because
>> there is much less money in wood, cloth, and foam than silver wire and
>> 'electromagnetic' stones. :-) And moving speakers around is free. No
>> money there...
>>
>Thomas:
>While I have lambasted the press often enough here, I think you are
>wrong. Every magazine has run at least one or two articles on how to
>treat a room.
Given the huge difference between rooms, I'd like to see good
explanations of the principles of acoustics that make room treatment
helpful, rather than specific examples. One or two articles is not
nearly enough to provide all the needed information.
I'd like to see a 'room treatment' _series_ like Scott Frankland's
recent power amp series in 'Stereophile'. We need the knowledge to deal
with our particular (and often peculiar! :-) rooms. No 'cookbook'
approach can possibly work for everyone.
>Once done, it need not be done again, so I think that
>when a reviewer reviews a product, it is a given that the room is
>treated.
Changes in equipment, most especially speakers, can dramatically alter
your room treatment needs...this was really brought home to me when I
went from Magnepan 2.6R's to Dunlavy SC-III's.
>I mean, how many tests can they do on a corner-tube or ASC tube traps?
Thomas Nulla
"Steve Zipser (Sunshine Stereo, Inc.)" <z...@netrunner.net> wrote:
<snip>
>Thomas:
>Specific examples are the only thing that helps. Tuning a room is still
>pretty much hit and miss!
Unfortunately, very true. That's why I'd like to hear about whoever's
doing cutting-edge research in these matters; a good magazine can
be very valuable in interpreting such information in a manner its
readers can understand...my understanding is not always up to the needs
of peer-reviewed journals! ;-)
>Why do you think they tore down and rebuilt Avery Fischer Hall so many
>times? Why do you think Carnegie Hall sounds so fucked up in a lot of
>seats now since the "improved" it!
Never been either place. :-( Presumably whoever did the work didn't
know what they were doing...does that mean nobody knows? If so, never
mind. If the knowledge isn't out there, we're stuck with trial and
error. Very depressing.
>> >Once done, it need not be done again, so I think that
>> >when a reviewer reviews a product, it is a given that the room is
>> >treated.
>>
>> Changes in equipment, most especially speakers, can dramatically alter
>> your room treatment needs...this was really brought home to me when I
>> went from Magnepan 2.6R's to Dunlavy SC-III's.
>>
>Actually, this is not so true, other than dampening the rear wall more
>or less.
I found that the Dunlavy's benefited from much more treatment than the
Maggies; not sure why. One of these days I need to bring the Maggies
out and see how they sound with my current room setup.
>I find that a really good room or really bad room has little regard for
>what speakers are being used. On the other hand a specific design like
>Maggies or Quads, or Omni's like Gallo might require a little more in
>the way of side treatments, but overall, a good room is a good room!
For sure, some are MUCH better than others.
>Speaker placement is a VERY important aspect in this discussion which is
>oft overlooked.
>Zip
Absolutely! This clearly has a major impact on the room and the optimum
treatment. I just didn't want to open a whole new line of discussion.
Thomas <now playing: silence>
Thomas Nulla
Greg Smith <gsm...@westnet.com> wrote:
>In rec.audio.opinion Thomas Nulla <nu...@io.com> wrote:
>: Given the huge difference between rooms, I'd like to see good
>: explanations of the principles of acoustics that make room treatment
>: helpful, rather than specific examples. One or two articles is not
>: nearly enough to provide all the needed information.
>You're right. If that's what you want, you're not going to get a full
>treatment of the subject in any magazine. Go grab a book on it--that's
>the amount of space required to go properly in depth. As a start, the
>books from F Alton Everest are inexpensive introductions to the subject
>that are pretty easy to find. "The Master Handbook of Acoustics" is good.
>I'm currently working my way through "Sound Studio Construction on a
>Budget", which helped me get my Magnapans speakers sounding good in my new
>apartment (acoustic foam on the rear wall and a thin carpet cleaned things
>up well).
I used a tapestry on the wall behind my Maggies, and carpet too.
I have Everest's 'Master Handbook of Acoustics' 3rd edition. It has
been the most helpful single source of information I have, but I'd like
to see more ideas, and opinions from other experts. Also, I'll see if I
can find a copy of 'Sound Studio Construction'. Thanks for mentioning
it.
>* Greg Smith gsm...@westnet.com Hoboken, NJ
>* http://www.westnet.com/~gsmith/ for Make Your PC Fast!, CD-R,
>* Progress RDBMS, CD shopping, speaker building, rock music remasters
>* http://www.sstage.com/ SoundStage!, the high-end audio magazine
Thomas <now playing: silence>
Ben Pearre
I am seriously considering buying Mag 1.5's. I too noticed that they
are _very_ bright, especially with an Adcom 5400 amp. I heard them
with an NAD integrated amp, and while they were still bright, they
were certainly better. These were all recent models, but have you
tried putting your NAD amp on the Maggies and your Adcom on your sub?
It might or might not be any good, but it could give you some idea of
what can happen when you change amps, and it doesn't cost anything...
I hope you come up with something that works for you. I had better
be able to do the same! I'm really close to buying the 1.5's... once
I find an amp I like...
--
Benjamin Weste Pearre <benjamin (at) marimba.com>
Homepage: Machine www.marimba.com, directory /people/benjamin
If you want to email me, please remember to unmangle my email address!
Matt Kennel (Remove 'nospam' to reply)
On 21 May 1997 06:27:07 GMT, Ben Pearre <m...@bach.marimba.com> wrote:
:I am seriously considering buying Mag 1.5's. I too noticed that they
:are _very_ bright, especially with an Adcom 5400 amp. I heard them
:with an NAD integrated amp, and while they were still bright, they
:were certainly better. These were all recent models, but have you
:tried putting your NAD amp on the Maggies and your Adcom on your sub?
:It might or might not be any good, but it could give you some idea of
:what can happen when you change amps, and it doesn't cost anything...
:
:I hope you come up with something that works for you. I had better
:be able to do the same! I'm really close to buying the 1.5's... once
:I find an amp I like...
Pardon me if this is heretical, but have you tried the tone control?
I hate to add to another heresy, but I've found the tone controls on Adcom
preamps to be useful, unlike the far too rough and damaging to the
midrange 'tone' controls on mass-marekt receivers.
--
Matthew B. Kennel/Institute for Nonlinear Science, UCSD/
Don't blame me, I voted for Emperor Mollari.