Planar Speaker Asylum

Welcome! Need support, you got it. Or share your ideas and experiences.

Planar Speaker Asylum

Peter Gunn and the World of Tomorrow

67.189.206.242

It seems that some are a bit critical of Peter Gunn mods. In fact one fellow has been pretty nasty about it. Though I did not start that particular thread, my question on the relative value of the mods got into full swing. It's sad that one fellow was unable to control himself and behave with maturity, but that's how it often is online. Not ONE critical comment was based on hearing the Gunn mods.

As for the Peter Gunn modifications, my OPINION based on what I've been told and seen (but not HEARD 1st hand yet) is that the PG changes are excellent. There is NO QUESTION about the aesthetics since there are plenty of photos that prove that his woodworking takes the Maggies to a far higher level of attractiveness. As someone else pointed out, his price is reasonable for that ALONE.

But lets take it a step further and look at the stands/support. It doesn't take a degree in physics to see that this is indeed better than the Mye stands since the ENTIRE frame is now made rigid. The Mye stands improve the integrity of the panel by adding bracing at key points, but the PG mod makes it entirely rigid.

I could argue with ease that the furniture quality and rigid support are enough, but then there's also the Xover and lovely boxes for it.

The owner response to Peter Gunn's efforts are nearly perfect. But that wasn't enough for me. I made a few calls and spoke to a fellow I've known for years (no, I won't name him, but he runs one of the biggest/best audio salons in NY) and asked him if he knew anything about Peter Gunn's mods. My luck was in as he'd heard a pair of the MMG's with the mods. His "opinion" is that the PG version of the MMG made the speaker world class. Now what does that mean? Well, to him it meant that he felt many an audiophile would live with the Gunn modified Maggie forever and be happy. That's a very strong recommendation from a fellow who sells speakers costing 10 times more. Is it the final word? No. Only YOU can have that.

Finally...we have the question of appropriate behavior here regarding business. This is a small forum and I feel that ANYTHING to do with Magnepan is welcome. I would never censor anyone or play netkop. I doubt Peter Gunn is getting rich and his opinions here are important. He's NOT posting ads or adding more than his opinions and the opinions of others (at times) about gear. Frankly the angry response he got from one fellow made no sense and sounded simply like jealousy. When someone takes the time to insist they're laughing at your opinions, you can bet there are other issues at hand. Maybe he was just having a bad night.

Home audio can still be a fun and exciting venue for the individual who wants to get involved. There are great off-the-shelf products, but there are also guys like Walter Underwood who you can speak with about modding stuff, or Kraus at Odyssey who will happily talk your ear off, and of course Peter Gunn. These guys are what makes it all great because they have a real passion for the gear as well as the music. Rather than sit back and just listen, they got involved and created ways to make their own kind of music. That's harder and harder to do these days.

Will I send in my 1.6/QR's to Peter Gunn? I don't know. They're only weeks old and Mye stands are on the way. I'll probably wait a while, then sell the stands and try the PG changes. I'm glad guys like him are out there, just like Mye.

There was also a comparison made saying that Mye is less visible here. Well, use your noodle. The Mye stand is a simple (elegant) product that does not go nearly as far as the Gunn mods. Of course Mye will generate less debate.

No one if forcing "you" you buy any type of mod for your gear and it's value is difficult to ascertain without trying yourself. That makes a Peter Gunn modification a "challenging" gamble. Based on what I know up to this point however....it sounds like a very safe bet.

Cheers and thanks for reading...

Robert

Follow Ups:

Interesting about the lack of registration. Generally, this is seen as being a troll, for anyone who is - powermatic 21:42:24 03/25/08 (3)
seriously interested in being part of the community is willing to spend the three minutes necessary to join the group.

So what gives: We're not worthy? You're shy? Frightened?

Or do you feel that anonymous, haven't-heard-them-but-just-know-they're-fabulous PeterGunn love letters will add to the credibility of those 20,000.00-dollar-smackin' speakers?

Somehow, I'm not quite convinced.
- RE: Interesting about the lack of registration. Generally, this is seen as being a troll, for anyone who is - MaggieLover 22:57:48 03/25/08 (2)
  I'm not sure why he's not a member but if you've read his posts over the last couple of weeks, he is certainly not a troll, and as far as I know he has done nothing to you personally that would deserve your insults. IMHO, you owe him an apology.
  He expressed an opinion that differs from yours. He said some things that I would not have said myself but, member or not, he has as much right to do so as you or I. If that's not the case, the forum would not be set up to accept new threads from non members.
  Your response is a perfect example of what he was talking about. Contrary to your point, membership in this forum does not guaranty that a poster is not a troll. I don't understand why you're so sarcastic. Its really wearing on many of us.
  Looking at your system and tastes, you appear to have a nice equipment and various interests. You've had a large number of posts since 2005, and I'm sure that many, if not most, were quite helpful to others. I also really appreciate your interest in vinyl. But please, try to ease up a bit. :-)
  Maggies, because you can never be too thin!
  Mark
  
  Edits: 03/25/08 03/25/08
  - as far as I know he has done nothing to you personally that would deserve your insults - powermatic 23:22:17 03/25/08 (1)
    Whooo....Simmer down, maggielovin' guy. Where did I get 'personal'? I know you love the PeterGunn mods (though you've never heard them) as much as the (unregistered) 'TheGoodCaptain' loves the PeterGunn mods (though he's never heard them), but once again you're reading into my posts much more than I've said. And, as usual, you haven't answered any of my questions.
    
    Is it getting personal to wonder why he hasn't taken the time to register? Isn't registration generally a sign of community participation? Aren't these questions that I brought up before?
    
    Frankly, I don't think we're that far apart-but I feel your knee-jerk reactions are coloring your responses.
    - RE: as far as I know he has done nothing to you personally that would deserve your insults - MaggieLover 08:03:17 03/26/08 (0)
      First, your statement that "I know you love the PeterGunn mods" is totally falacious. If you looks at the things I've written about the mods from the beginning, you'll see that I've always reserved my opinion until such time I actually hear them in person, and suggest that others do the same. The fact that I treat him with respect in my posts is due to my personal style. I think that the last paragraph in my previous post to you is indicitave of that style. I try to be open minded and treat everyone fairly and equally!
      
      "Is it getting personal to wonder why he hasn't taken the time to register?" No it not. But be honest here, you implied, no said, it was troll like behavior. That's insulting for no reason. I'm really sorry you can't see that.
      
      While I don't think my reactions are knee jerk, you're probably right that we might not be far apart, if not for your sarcastic and hostile approach. I'm not telling you to avoid negative comments on PG's mods, just tone them down. Post logical arguments, not insults. And if PG riles you, be a better man and rise above it.
      
      Maggies, because you can never be too thin!
      
      Mark
the state of affairs - wazoo 19:49:54 03/25/08 (5)
Well, this thread sure has been unpleasant! I wish all this acrimony (but none of the people) would just go away � and it does seem to be coming from so many directions. Folks, PG can be brash and audacious, but he has �stumbled� into one hell of an upgrade design (and he does such beautiful work). Before he came under fire, his posts were entertaining and enlightening � if a little risqu� at times. Davey is not an idiot and his opinions have merit � regardless of what he has or has not experienced. Many of us speculate, and we are sometimes vehement in the defense of our speculations! Forums like this work best when there are dissenting opinions (should we all want vanilla?); it would just be nice if we could all maintain civility whilst we argue. I�m not pointing any fingers and I don�t want to � that�s one of the things we need to stop doing.

A number of interesting things came out in this thread. One of which is that Davey framed an MMG in oak and apparently performed measurements that substantiate PG�s claims of hardwood�s superiority over MDF as a frame material. I think that is a big deal although I already knew what a difference hardwood frames make, having framed my own. With regard to the crossover, I am not surprised Davey wasn�t sold � he�s already voiced his opinion about the nearly flat response of the series XO PG has specified. I do wonder, however, if he constructed the XO precisely as it was specified � the selected parts matter and just matching the values doesn�t build the same XO (not trying to start another argument). Besides, to some degree, this is a matter of taste. To me PG�s XO works splendidly � Davey had already found what he liked, and it is different. Neither invalidates the other � we do not live in a binary universe.

The discussions about baffle size proceed from a solid foundation in physics, but assume that the new frames are meaningfully larger � they aren�t (remember, PG�s upgraded speaker still fits in Magnepan�s shipping carton � cover it with a sock and it wouldn�t look that different). This has been proffered as the explanation for more bass output � I don�t know, but I doubt it. It has also been implied that the increase in bass is merely psychological (psychoacoustic). I infer that their point is since our brains reconstruct fundamentals from overtones, it follows that if the quantity and quality of the low order harmonics present in the music are increased, we will respond by �hearing� more bass. In my view, such an argument carries a great deal of weight (but this is only my opinion). Of course, there is also the statement that there truly *is* more and deeper bass issuing from the modded speakers � if there�s one thing that�s hard to do, it�s knowing where to draw that line of incredulity. This forum has taught me not to be too hasty in discounting the improbable � sideways speakers indeed! Still, being a pragmatist, I went in a different direction.

That someone might actually one-up PG with an even more improved design was suggested in this thread. It�s already happened (I�m only half kidding) � I did it! Some observed that PG gave me a hard time because I diverged from his design in the building of my own frames � I built hybrids. I was never offended or put-off in any way by anything he directed at me, either on this forum or in private (emails and a phone call). I simply didn�t see myself being happy with MMGs sans subwoofers, so I combined them � I have MMGs because of the space in which my speakers are located and that same lack of space would make it impossible to cram in a pair (actually a trio) of subwoofers. Does this really make my design better? Nah, it�s just better for *my* needs. Mine certainly don�t stand up to his in terms of craftsmanship � the difference between what a general handyman can do and what a joiner does.

Speaking to the value of the Magnestand mods, there is much to consider. If your aesthetic values run contrary to the 'picture frame' appearance, then you should pass on them. Perhaps that's a niche which needs to be filled, and maybe someone will fill it; if you don't like what PG is doing, do something different. What matters is the physical change; the way it's clothed is irrelevant - but don't expect a joiner who loves wood (a good craftsman does have a special fondness for the material with which he works) to hide it. Besides, stain and sock color could easily reduce the salience of that effect.

Anyone who truly feels that this mod is overpriced needs to build a pair. The material costs easily consume a third of the price, but you can completely forget them and still realize a good return on your investment. There is a great deal of labor involved in building a set of frames that don't look as utilitarian as their function. Much of it is very tedious, and as the hours mount so does the opportunity to turn it all into scrap! Finishing them is fun too - rubbing stain on, then wiping off, then repeating until the color is right. After that I applied seven coats of oil with light sanding (a day later) between each - I'm not sure what PG does, but he definitely does something. After all of that, you get to mount the panels in the frames - with screws that come within 1/64" of penetrating the front of the frames (talk about unnerving). The point of this is to emphasize that the price is actually quite low for what goes into making them.

As far as justifying the spending of $2000 on a $550 pair of speakers, just remember *why* they only cost $550. All of that gets thrown away while a panel that is only different from a 1.6 in its smaller stature is all that remains. It's an understandable viewpoint, but I think the opinion that the MMG is not worth such an expenditure reveals a gross underestimation of the performance capability of Magnepan's little jewel.

Sorry that I got carried away with this post. I kept telling myself to stay out of it, but lost control of my fingers. Once they got away from me, they just started running!

"Jazz is not dead - it just smells funny" FZ ♬
- Agree 100% - Well said nt - MaggieLover 20:16:00 03/25/08 (4)
  nt
  
  Maggies, because you can never be too thin!
  
  Mark
  - The funny part is... - Peter Gunn 20:32:46 03/25/08 (3)
    The more I am talked about, the bigger the bastard I become in each retelling.... and apparently it's the only thing everyone agrees they can agree on :^ )
    
    I should have my wife post....
    
    It's all about the music...
    - RE: The funny part is... - MaggieLover 20:39:35 03/25/08 (2)
      Definitely agree on that one :^) A bastard indeed, but what a lovable bastard!
      
      Maggies, because you can never be too thin!
      
      Mark
      - Well, in Oz, the greeting ... - andyr 22:41:36 03/25/08 (1)
        
        In Reply to: RE: The funny part is... posted by MaggieLover on March 25, 2008 at 20:39:35
        
        "G'day, y'old bastard" is in fact a term of endearment!
        
        Regards,
        
        Andy
        
        RE: Well, in Oz, the greeting ... - MaggieLover 07:30:59 03/26/08 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: Well, in Oz, the greeting ... posted by andyr on March 25, 2008 at 22:41:36
        
        I'm not surprised. Standing on the bottom side of the world makes the blood rush to your heads easier :^)
        
        Maggies, because you can never be too thin!
        
        Mark
RE: Peter Gunn and the World of Tomorrow - Hansson3 18:12:03 03/25/08 (1)
Some folks, including myself, can't see spending $2000 on a pair of $500 MMGs. Doesn't matter what the hell is done to them. Rare wood does not equate to superior sonics. I personally think the picture frame appearance just doesn't look that hot. Audiogon had a link awhile back for what, if I remember correctly were a pair of his modified MMG for nearly $2000. I don't think they sold, if they did, it was probably at a reduced price. What it comes down to is that there's always going to be skepticism about the value of something like his product, and sometimes these folks just get overly nasty.

And that would be regardless of the raves, which, BTW, mostly originate from this site solely.
- RE: Peter Gunn and the World of Tomorrow - HarlemAirShaft 10:35:24 03/28/08 (0)
  I see you are in Northern California.
  
  I'm in the East Bay - Concord.
  
  Perhaps we could arrange for an audition of my Magnestand MMG's sometime.
  
  Cory
RE: Say What!!!! - benie 13:24:40 03/25/08 (3)
I have been little disappointed in the way some threads get out of wack on this form and this has being going on for a while now and I believe someone even posted to that effect in the not to distance past.
But if I remember right, that even got twisted around.

I would say that this one falls into the wacky bin as well!!

Let me start by quoting the Good Captain on a few statements:

"The problem is the uneducated responses"

And what are your credentials!

"I bet Mister Gunn's responses might be a bit less heated if the critics actually knew what they were talking about. They haven't HEARD the speakers!"

And you also HAVE NOT!

" You've done your own tweaks. That's great. But don't act like the Gunn mods are something your familiar with 1st hand. You're in NO position to judge them at all."

I would say Davey Experience has merit, as he has tried something similar. You sir have not!

"Sure. But what does that have to do with anything. Still not sure what your beef is with Peter Gunn, but perhaps you should call him and work it out. Maybe send him flowers."

I might ask. What is your beef with Davey? Maybe you can send him flowers.!

"Do let us all know if you get to hear a pair of Gunned Magnepans. Until that point in time your comments are purely speculative. "

And so are yours!!

"but I do think this thread exposed something useful in the end,"

And what's that. Your not sending Davey a Christmas card!!

"Of course. I was being a bit sarcastic. There's virtually no way Davey's mods sounded like the Gunned speakers."

And how would you know, have you heard Davey's. Davey call the cops we now have proof someone broke into your house!!

"I have a friend that copied plans for a subwoofer. Almost everything was the same, cabinet and driver and the Xover, yet it sounded nothing like the original version I heard. Why did they sound different? Glue? Where the wood came from? Who knew. And that was a subwoofer, not something nearly as transparent as a planar speaker."

Next time get Davey to built it!! How do you think many products get better. It is by someone building one and doing it a little different or by taking an existing design and tweaking the hell out of it, just like Peter has. Peter Gunn took a stock Maggie to great heights. I'm sure it's not impossible to now take Peters and also tweak it a little.

"Davey has NO idea of what Gunned speakers sound like. And that's that."

And you my good sir also have no idea. Do let us know when you here a pair!! As far as Davey having an idea, well he has a much better one than you!!

"I have. And to be completely honest, it does sound like you have some sort of "issue" with Mr. Gunn"

And to be completely honest, it does sound like you have some sort of "issue" with Davey!!!

"Peter Gunn is not above critical comments. I'd just prefer that they had some sort of actual experience behind them...any at all. Please give me your 1st hand experience with Peter Gunn's work as I'm interested in trying these mods soon."

I think we covered that!! I'm still waiting to hear your first hand experience!!

"I sure can see a point....when it's based on something akin to actual listening experience with a given product."

Still waiting to here yours!!

"Dave, I think it's possible to discuss ANYTHING without 1st hand experience,"

You do seem to be doing a very good job of that!! Your point is well taken.

"The problem is the uneducated responses,"

I rest my case!!!

This post is not meant to discredit Peter Gunn or his mods. I have the highest respect for Peter and his Mods. I was on Peters list, but because of change in my financial picture, I had to withdraw. But if things are better in the future. I for sure will be knocking on Peter's door.

What this post is about is what I see as an attack on Davey by The Good (bad choice of words)Captain, Robert as he likes to call himself. Well Robert first why don't you list your system on AA so we can all wonder in amazement.

Peter is a big boy and has no problem expressing his opinion, :) lol I think we all know that, if he chooses not to he no doubt has his reasons, with one of them being someone slamming him. Sometimes his opinions are strong and there for can invite this type of rebuttal.

But Peter doesn't need a Fanboy like you to stir the pot. Someone like you who hasn't even heard his speakers. Peter has enough of a fan base of members who have actually heard and own his speakers!!!
Your comments to Davey in this thread repeated many times if Davey had 1st hand Experience with Peters Mods. Well isn't this the pot calling the kettle black. "YOU SIR HAVE NO 1st HAND EXPERIENCE" yet you are posting about the wonders of Peter's speakers!!

Since Peter has a good fan base with his Products and I believe rightly so.

I thought I might join the Davey Fan club :) lol. But unlike you my good Captain, I have been a closet fan of Davey for a while and before I was even a member. I was lurking in these pages for a few years reading about X-overs tweaks posted by Davey and posts by him and by members who also posted on the merits of Davy's designs and the quality of product.
Anywhere from a passive X-over to line level active X-overs and line level passive X-over that he either designed or designed and built for past members.
With members holding Davey's designs in very high regard some easy beating some Store bought active X-over's costing 2-3 grand at a faction of the price.
Davey hasn't been as active on this form as he used to be. But he certainly was in days gone by, and has helped many past members sort out X-over problems, long before most here even thought of yanking the stock Maggie ones out. Davey is one of the remaining guys that was in the fore front of redesigning + tweaking Maggie X-overs.

And if I want a speaker built, I'll get Peter to built them. but as far as his X-over, I already know what it is, because he has freely posted it.

But if I want any type of X-over built for my ETs or any other speaker.
I'll be knocking on Davey's door!!!

So my dear Good Captain, Davey in my book has a alot of credibility with also alot of credibility in the bank!!

You my Good Captain have "NONE"
- RE: Say What!!!! - TheGoodCaptain 04:05:15 03/26/08 (2)
  So my dear Good Captain, Davey in my book has a alot of credibility with also alot of credibility in the bank!!
  
  You my Good Captain have "NONE"> > >
  
  Wow, what a scary rant. It didn't make much sense I'm afraid.
  
  1) I've NOT been critical of Gunned speakers one way or another.
  
  2) Mods of any kinds don't make anyone intrinsically aware of how Gunned speakers sound.
  
  3) Owning gear doesn't give anyone any credentials of any kind. Just because my friend, an industry professional, likes the Gunned speakers, does not mean I'll like them.
  
  4) What I object to is people talking out of their respective arses about gear they have not tried. Still worse, they seem to be looking to make negative comments to make about gear that has many fans. It DOES in fact sound like jealousy. See #1.
  
  Now....if owning gear gives some sort of credentials I've included a pic of my dedicated sound and theater room. You can see the Maggies "at rest" off to the side.
  
  Current: For Music: Maggie 1.6/QR's (Mye stands on order). Modified Odyssey Stratos amp, Un-modded Rogue Metis preamp, Underwood modified Jolida 100A CD player, Modded Oppo SACD player, Audioquest cable. All running on it's own dedicated house circuit. I'm still testing music only subs. I've tried Martin Logan Depth, Abyss and Fathom 113. Currently leaning towards ordering twin depths, but awaiting more break-in time on everything else and the stands.
  For theater: Denon/Rotel power to SVS 7.1 speaker system with SVS subwoofer, 120 inch Cinema White screen, Mitsubishi HD projector to Blu-Ray, HD and HD Cable sources.
  
  Previous speaker systems: Carver Ribbons, B&W, Freid, Canton, Royd, Snell, Spica, Heybrook, Paradigm, Canton....and a lowly pair of 1st generation Wharfdale Diamonds.
  Does that give me some sort of credentials, or does it just mean I had some money to spend? The ONLY credential that matters is 1st hand listening experience with a given component. If you don't have it, your comments about gear are worthless.
  
  Cheers,
  
  Robert
  - RE: Say What!!!! - Thomas35s5@aol.com 05:40:48 03/26/08 (1)
    "YOU SIR HAVE NO 1st HAND EXPERIENCE" yet you are posting about the wonders of Peter's speakers!!> > > >
    
    And just in case no one noticed....the above is a 100% lie. I NEVER said I heard the speakers, let alone commented about their performance. The ONLY thing I did was cite the experience of someone I know.
    Several people here have been critical of the Gunned speakers without hearing them, but I'm not one of them.
    You might do better in a debate if you don't fabricate points of view to support an argument with no foundation to begin with. Davey did not start this thread. He joined it and it's very clear to anyone with even a glossy understanding of psychology what's going on.
    
    As for Gunned Maggies...I plan to send my in down the road. I'm confident that I'll get a better and certainly better looking speaker in return. At THAT point, after they break in, I'll offer MY impressions. Until that time there is only a SINGLE fact available to us: Those who HAVE heard them are impressed.
    
    And everything else is a fat load of BS. I don't care what you've modded or copied.
    
    Cheers,
    
    The Good Captain
    The Good Captain
    - RE: Say What!!!! - Davey 07:16:32 03/26/08 (0)
      It's part of my glossy, multi-legged, sinister master-plan to torpedo PG's efforts and bring him down. :)
      
      His backlog stretches to 2010...He has a devoted fan/customer base...His fabrication skills are second to none. His mods are not over-priced (IMHO.) I'm really doing a good job with my plan, aren't I? :)
      
      Oops, hang on. I have to go fuel the black helicoptors to make their nightly pass over PG's house.
      
      Cheers,
      
      Dave.
RE: Peter Gunn and the World of Tomorrow - Norman M 09:53:04 03/25/08 (0)
"The owner response to Peter Gunn's efforts are nearly perfect. But that wasn't enough for me. I made a few calls and spoke to a fellow I've known for years (no, I won't name him, but he runs one of the biggest/best audio salons in NY) and asked him if he knew anything about Peter Gunn's mods. My luck was in as he'd heard a pair of the MMG's with the mods. His "opinion" is that the PG version of the MMG made the speaker world class. Now what does that mean? Well, to him it meant that he felt many an audiophile would live with the Gunn modified Maggie forever and be happy. That's a very strong recommendation from a fellow who sells speakers costing 10 times more. Is it the final word? No. Only YOU can have that."

It only stands a chance of being any word at all unless he is a Magnepan dealer. Otherwise it's not worth the energy consumption is cost to have typed it out.
RE: Peter Gunn and the World of Tomorrow - splittailz 18:09:48 03/24/08 (2)
ahhhh. I see the quarterly debate is still going strong below. lets see, earnings on Wall street, magnestand quarterly debate on planar asylum. Yup, correct me if I am wrong, but the last 1 of these was in early january. To sort of answer your post Captain, I also had a friend of mine I've known for quite a few years listen to my "Gunned" 1.6's. His take on them was that they could compete with anything. I respect his opinion considering he is the Levinson, Revel, Lexicon,Bryston, Genelec, Richard Grey, Nordost and who knows how many other lines , Rep for the state. I guess between my friend and yours, they have heard some things to compare Magnestands with.
- RE: Peter Gunn and the World of Tomorrow - Jesuscookies 18:59:12 03/24/08 (1)
  Well, I am not going to get into the debate, because I really don't care. I have made up my mind, and am on the waiting list for a pair of gunned 1.6's.
  
  I'm in So. Cal. So, if anybody is interested in auditioning. I should have them some time before June. if you are in the area, and not a convicted felon, feel free to drop me a line and stop on by. :)
  - RE: Peter Gunn and the World of Tomorrow - Green Lantern 19:01:41 03/24/08 (0)
    sign me up; what city are you in? I'm in San Diego area and would love to hear them...!
    
    Vice versa on your offer too!
    
    "Live life as if you'll die tomorrow...
    Learn life as if you'll live forever..." -Gandhi
RE: Peter Gunn and the World of Tomorrow - DLB 09:25:01 03/24/08 (10)
Your post is greatly appreciated. Back in January I wrote, �When I finally accepted that no matter how much money I spend or how much equipment I buy, there will always be a system that is better than my system, I got off the �merry-go-round� and started enjoying both my system and the music more.�

I currently own MG20.1s and love the sound that has been achieved with five years of tweaking and upgrading various aspects of the system. The system gives me a great deal of pleasure and continues to allow for wonderful �musical� journeys into my LP and CD collection.

Rather than being threatened by Peter�s mods of the MMGs and 1.6s, I am intrigued and anxious to hear the set that will eventually be coming to Texas. Based upon the comments of people who have actually heard the �Gunned� speakers, I have little doubt that it will be a wonderful sounding speaker. I look forward to the opportunity to hear and enjoy the speaker. Does it mean I will trade my MG20.1s for the �Gunned� MMGs? �No.� Even if the MMGs are �better� (richer, warmer, deeper, more musical, etc.) than my MG20.1s, it does not diminish the fact that my current system gives me great pleasure. The ideal thing would be for one of my friends to own them so I could visit and experience them occasionally. In the same vein, when Audio Research comes out with the Reference 3 and the reviewers all indicate that it is far �superior� to the REF 2II that I own, does it somehow negate the musical experience that I am currently getting in my system? �No.� So, I don�t feel compelled to change. Might my system sound better with the REF 3? "Possibly.� How much better? �Hard to tell.� Far too often, the improvements are pretty subtle. If I have the money and want to further improve my system, no problem. However, if I don�t have the money or am happy with the sound I currently have, it is �my choice.� Likewise, no one is forced to buy a �Gunned� speaker. The point is: �If you are receiving pleasure from listening to your current system, that pleasure shouldn�t be lessened just because another system might be better or that an expensive tweak might make your system even better.�

For the past five years, I have enjoyed the privilege of learning and participating in the Planer Asylum. It has been great to have a site that allows for sharing, reading, and learning about equipment, music, and tweaks with fellow audiophiles. I learned of the Boston Audio Mat One, Speltz autoformer, and Mye Stands on PA and all improved the enjoyment of my system when installed. I have also enjoyed and learned a great deal from Peter�s postings on PA. I wrote him an email thanking him for making PA an interesting and informative place to visit. I am irritated and frustrated when members sink to a personal level in their postings. I enjoy the give and take of commentary as well as the intensity of disagreement that can honestly occur but it never needs to become personal.

I don�t always agree with Peter but I do find his contributions to PA to be educational and entertaining. When he finally �sees the light� and has a mod for my MG20.1s, I will respect him even more and probably consider joining his waiting list. LOL.

DLB
"Music is framed in silence."
- RE: Peter Gunn and the World of Tomorrow - DKG 13:21:59 03/24/08 (0)
  I'd like these what he could do with the 3.6. I stopped chasing rainbows after my son was born 18 months ago. I love the sound of my system. My cheif complaint is not having as much time to enjoy the music.
- RE: Peter Gunn and the World of Tomorrow - Peter Gunn 13:14:55 03/24/08 (7)
  Poor me.... :^ )
  
  Thank you for the sane post. You are entirely right, just like my little sidebar says, it's all about the music. If you are happy you should not tear your hair out worrying over the "next big thing". It's good to hear that there are other people who understand this.
  
  I'm not sure which pair coming to texas you're waiting for, but if you mean the "tour" maggies that may never happen. When I have time this summer I'll look into it again, but rather than send them to persons, I'd rather send them to a few select audio clubs or groups, and as I recall one in Texas was interested so you may still be in luck. I just checked my calendar and see I will be doing MMG's from Austin next month. Do you mean that?
  
  As far as seeing the light, I tried, but true ribbon models simply cannot be done. The best I could do is make wooden frames for them (which would yield improvements for sure) but that's it. I will admit trepidation in even doing that because the 1.6's are difficult to deal with once solid wood due to their size. I am not looking forward to shipping 3.6's or worse, 20.1's. I may try a pair of 3.6's sometime this year, we'll have to see. I am supposed to be doing 2 point somethings this june as well, which will be a kind of pre test for that.
  
  Thanks again.
  
  It's all about the music...
  - RE: Peter Gunn: "...true ribbon models simply can't be done." - Dad 16:50:38 03/24/08 (3)
    Curious, what is the issue(s) that make true ribbons not possible to do?
    
    Currently using a Velodyn DD-15, and getting ready to bi-amp the 3.6s by using my Levinson 332 on the bass, and two Rogue M-120s on the mid/hi. Is it the fact that there is an internal crossover in the speaker for the mid/hi? Or some other issue with the ribbon itself, on / off transients, or other?
    
    Thanks!
    - RE: Peter Gunn: "...true ribbon models simply can't be done." - Peter Gunn 17:08:52 03/24/08 (2)
      My mod is based on my belief that the shared 1st order XO of the SMGa is the best XO any maggie driver can use, and I adapt it for every other model.
      
      The large ribbon tweeter models have panels that instead of having midbass and tweeter sections, have a seperate mid and bass driver and for some reason they don't want to play nice together. Because of this it is nearly impossible to apply this XO. At first my guy said he couldn't do it at all, and then eventually he figured out how to but the cost of the parts alone was like $1,400, and it would require a XO box the size of a steamer trunk.
      
      Not only is this obviously rediculous, part of the beauty of this XO is the minimal-ness of parts. That's kind of lost with 8 inductors and 15 caps per side.... or whatever it worked out to.
      
      So going to a good active XO is probably the best option for tweaking these models.
      
      It's all about the music...
      - I probably shouldn't bury this in this crazy thread, but... - SQLGuy 14:13:50 03/25/08 (1)
        
        In Reply to: RE: Peter Gunn: "...true ribbon models simply can't be done." posted by Peter Gunn on March 24, 2008 at 17:08:52
        
        If I understand correctly, you credit a lot of the improvement people find in your mods to the wooden frames. Even if you can't mod the crossovers of the ribbon models, why not do the frames and let the owners play around with active crossover options (or even settle for their stock crossovers with the nicer frames, attachment methods, etc)?
        
        RE: I probably shouldn't bury this in this crazy thread, but... - Peter Gunn 18:19:04 03/25/08 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: I probably shouldn't bury this in this crazy thread, but... posted by SQLGuy on March 25, 2008 at 14:13:50
        
        I am sure it would have a large improvement, however due to the size of my work queue, I owe it to those people to get thru things as quickly as I can.
        
        Modding a new model for the first time, especially ones like the 3.6 which present unique problems (the ribbon tweeter, not to mention the size and fact I don't like the way they sound to begin with) can take some time, (possibly weeks) of hands on attention and repeated listening and tweaking. I can't spare that right now. I do plan on fitting in a 3.6 one day and we'll see what happens.
        
        It's all about the music...
  - Poor me... - DLB 13:21:12 03/24/08 (2)
    Yes, we are waiting for the MMGs for Austin. There is a group of interested parties which hope to hear them when you get them done.
    
    DLB
    "Music is framed in silence."
    - RE: Poor me... - jjcarr 13:49:54 03/24/08 (1)
      Are you the one getting them? I'd be curious to hear them.
      - RE: Poor me... - DLB 15:09:01 03/24/08 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: Poor me... posted by jjcarr on March 24, 2008 at 13:49:54
        
        No, I am not the lucky one. SamandNoah is the one scheduled for the "Gunned MMGs." There is a lot of interest in central Texas to hear them.
        
        I think we may need to schedule a full day, plan a lunch, and have a series of listening sessions. After all, we don't want 20 people in the room trying to evaluate the sound, do we??? LOL
        
        SamandNoah, if your viewing this, I hope you will let us know when you get them and how we can help you set up listening sessions.
        
        Original thread posted below:
        
        DLB
        "Music is framed in silence."
        Gunned MMGs for Austin (Open in New Window)
- RE: Finally, folks using their brains. Thanks. nt - Travis 09:51:26 03/24/08 (0)
  Travis
  
  Always remember that you're unique. Just like everyone else.
RE: Peter Gunn and the World of Tomorrow - jjcarr 07:28:02 03/24/08 (50)
I think some of the responses aren't critical so much of the mods, as they are of the wild claims and defensive manner in which PG responds. It seems a simple question about the mod often turns into a tirade more as a result of miscommunication, misunderstanding, and defensiveness than from real discourse.
- RE: Peter Gunn and the World of Tomorrow - TheGoodCaptain 07:49:26 03/24/08 (1)
  The problem is the uneducated responses, which would bug me greatly as well if I were Peter Gunn. I haven't read anyone's critical comments based on HEARING a Gunn Modified Maggie. What I have heard is 1st hand reports from owners and one person in the business (who I trust greatly) speaking of the virtues of the modifications and craftsmanship.
  I bet Mister Gunn's responses might be a bit less heated if the critics actually knew what they were talking about. They haven't HEARD the speakers!
  
  There is every indication that the mods are worthwhile and the quality 1st rate. Can someone point out a negative review or two? Can someone who has heard the modded speakers please give us an accurate report explaining how the mods fail to deliver?
  
  I myself questioned the value, but only in the face of speaker systems costing what the 1.6/QR's and mods cost combined. I'd never be so dumb as to be critical of modifications that are basically heralded and I've not heard myself.
  
  Robert
  - RE: Peter Gunn and the World of Tomorrow - jjcarr 08:19:38 03/24/08 (0)
    You're missing the point, it's that whenever anyone raises any question about the claims, even hints at the possibility of bias, they get jumped on by PG and the "MUG pack". PG makes valid points, but he forgets the larger context, that perhaps he's biased (and justifiably so), that people who buy his speakers are biased. If anyone suggests that his mods perhaps are not the "do everything" speaker (which they obviously aren't intended to be), they get jumped on.
    
    I'm not going to get into the minutia, it's just flame bait waiting to happen again.
    
    As the French say: "Never trust the cook"
    
    Now just to avoid the inevitable flaming that statement will incur, no, it's not a statement intended to insult the cook, it's a metaphor... :)
- RE: Peter Gunn and the World of Tomorrow - Davey 07:45:11 03/24/08 (47)
  I couldn't agree more with your first sentence.
  
  Regarding the series crossover......I actually tried it. I don't like it, but I understand why others might.
  
  The PG "framing" aspect of the speakers has validity. I like what he's done with that....and the woodworking seems beautiful based on the photos I've seen.
  
  I've modified my MMG's with a somewhat different hardwood mounting scheme that improves the coupling between frame and transducer.
  
  Dave.
  - RE: Peter Gunn and the World of Tomorrow - Jim Treanor 20:30:14 03/24/08 (2)
    I reframed an MG-2A back in the 90's in red oak, securing the radiating panel to the frame with silicone caulk and screws and stiffened the frame's connection to the flat base with short angle braces (nothing at all like the struts that Peter or Grant employ in their respective products and consequently not as rigid or, in Peter's case, anywhere near as efficient in energy transfer). I kept the frame's dimensions the same as the stock unit, as I didn't want to mess around with any possible diffraction or other presentation-alteration issues that might result from making it larger.
    The result I heard on familiar program material was not deeper bass per se but a tad more output and solidity in the marginally low-to-midbass region, giving the overall presentation the illusion of "more" bass output, which still nosedived below around 40 Hz (and may reflect, at least in part, interaction with my listening room). I didn't take measurements, so I had no way of quantifying the results. It seemed clear, however, that a more secure panel-to-frame connection and a difference in energy dispersal within the frame improved perceived bass quality down to the MG-2A's lower limits as I'd experienced them in this room.
    I'd be interested in what your measurements indicated with your MMG's, particularly in terms of pre-to-post-mod bass output differences. If that works for you, we can do it via e-mail if that's what you prefer.
    Thanks.
    
    Jim
    http://www.geocities.com/jimtranr/index.html
    
    Edits: 03/24/08
    - RE: Peter Gunn and the World of Tomorrow - Davey 21:41:09 03/24/08 (1)
      Jim,
      
      If you send me an email I'll be glad to respond and shoot the breeze.
      
      I'm just going to continue to get beat up here so I think I'll give it a rest for a few weeks.
      
      Dave.
      - RE: Peter Gunn and the World of Tomorrow - Jim Treanor 23:21:32 03/24/08 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: Peter Gunn and the World of Tomorrow posted by Davey on March 24, 2008 at 21:41:09
        
        On the way to you.
        
        Jim
        http://www.geocities.com/jimtranr/index.html
  - RE: Peter Gunn and the World of Tomorrow - TheGoodCaptain 07:51:21 03/24/08 (43)
    Oh...and which "wild claims?" Thus far I've yet to read one, but perhaps I missed them.
    
    Robert
    - RE: Peter Gunn and the World of Tomorrow - Davey 08:08:18 03/24/08 (42)
      Well, the only "wild claim" I can recall from PG was early on when he said the MMG bass capability was increased. I can't remember exactly how he worded it.
      In any case, that is simply not physically possible because the motor system is completely unchanged. It's certainly possible/probable that the subjective bass QUALITY was improved.
      
      I think part of the problem here is the premise that opinions are invalid if a person hasn't had first hand experience (listened) to the speaker. That's the easy way out of any discussion. Playing the subjective card immediately pisses off some folks (including me) that like to look at the entire picture and not just the listening aspect.
      
      Dave.
      - RE: Peter Gunn and the World of Tomorrow - BFitz 17:46:27 03/24/08 (1)
        
        In Reply to: RE: Peter Gunn and the World of Tomorrow posted by Davey on March 24, 2008 at 08:08:18
        
        "Well, the only "wild claim" I can recall from PG was early on when he said the MMG bass capability was increased. I can't remember exactly how he worded it.
        In any case, that is simply not physically possible because the motor system is completely unchanged. It's certainly possible/probable that the subjective bass QUALITY was improved."
        
        I don't post here much, but when I see something like this, I need to respond.
        
        Since when did the motor system wholly dictate bass transducer performance?
        
        For one thing, a change in the dipole baffle dimensions, making it have more area, would certainly translate to changes in dipole bass performance. Both theoretical, and measured. It's not only physically possible, it's a sure thing, and follows well known principles of acoustics. You can download free dipole prediction software, enter dimensions, and play all day long to understand the impact of baffle dimensions and bass response. Next "wild claim"?
        
        RE: Peter Gunn and the World of Tomorrow - Davey 21:13:41 03/24/08 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: Peter Gunn and the World of Tomorrow posted by BFitz on March 24, 2008 at 17:46:27
        
        Yes, I understand what you're saying and can understand how this can be confusing. However, remember, the transducer surface area (actually I think PG would contend the transducer surface area is increased, but remember he comments extensively that its movement is decreased) and maximum excursion capability is unchanged. This defines a physical limitation of the motor system.
        You're correct that a widening or changing of the baffle dimensions will change the dipole bass performance. Lengthening the front/back cancellation distance and thus lowering the roll-off point. That's a trade-off though. The maximum SPL capability of the system can't be increased. You could mount the transducers in an infinite baffle and totally isolate front and back. The limitation still remains. To realize higher SPL capability you have to move more air. This requires a larger diaphragm or increased excursion or both.
        Hope that answers your question.
        Dave.
        
        Edits: 03/24/08 03/24/08
      - RE: Peter Gunn and the World of Tomorrow - TheGoodCaptain 08:33:30 03/24/08 (39)
        
        In Reply to: RE: Peter Gunn and the World of Tomorrow posted by Davey on March 24, 2008 at 08:08:18
        
        I think part of the problem here is the premise that opinions are invalid if a person hasn't had first hand experience (listened) to the speaker. That's the easy way out of any discussion.> > >
        
        Dave, I think it's possible to discuss ANYTHING without 1st hand experience, but in the end it's of little value beyond entertainment. The sum of the parts is impossible to know in this case.
        If Peter Gunn's mods make the panel more rigid it WILL add to the bass quality and perhaps even quantity as perceived. That's hardly a wild statement. Stand changes to my many speakers over the years had tremendous impact on bass.
        So again, we have a guy making mods to a speaker. Owners love the mods. He worked hard to create them and agrees with his buyers about the results. And then we have people who have ZERO 1st hand knowledge who want to be critical? And Mr. Gunn shouldn't be defensive? I'm defensive about it and I don't even know Peter Gunn.
        Years ago I bought a pair of Carver Amazing speakers. I told an audiophile friend about them and he practically got hysterical about the inherently poor aspects of the Carver design. He knew audio, but also heard some bad accounts. I quietly suggested that proper matching of electronics and the qualities of the room might be behind some of the bias he'd "heard" from others.
        Well guess what...he flew into town months later and heard my Carvers sitting atop their DIY stands and couldn't fathom what he'd heard or believed about the design. He bought a pair.
        
        Frankly, Peter Gunn can say his mods make the 1.6/QR's fly and write poetry. If you haven't heard them, or seen them fly, then you are talking out of your arse. I don't care what you think you know about audio because I've seen too many rules broken over the years.
        
        Just show me some unhappy customers? Surely there must be a few?
        
        Robert
        
        RE: Peter Gunn and the World of Tomorrow - Davey 08:53:31 03/24/08 (38)
        
        In Reply to: RE: Peter Gunn and the World of Tomorrow posted by TheGoodCaptain on March 24, 2008 at 08:33:30
        
        Well, I guess I'm glad I'm of entertainment value for you. :)
        
        My goodness.
        
        Cheers,
        
        Dave.
        
        RE: Peter Gunn and the World of Tomorrow - TheGoodCaptain 09:32:21 03/24/08 (37)
        
        In Reply to: RE: Peter Gunn and the World of Tomorrow posted by Davey on March 24, 2008 at 08:53:31
        
        Well, I guess I'm glad I'm of entertainment value for you. :)
        
        My goodness.> > >
        
        Dave, the point is....Peter Gunn makes modifications to speakers. The customers seem to think pretty highly of them as do all those who've heard them. Looking at the mods and photos of the wood frames/Stands/Xover boxes, his work looks very good. So what is the point of debating the precise advantages of his work without actually hearing them? To then suggest that every customer is biased to the point of being unable to properly judge the speakers is even more rediculous. I've paid for mods. Some worked and some didn't. I never had a problem admitting it or hearing it, but his customers do?
        
        C'mon, folks. No one is forcing you to improve the look and sound of your speaker, or to change it at all. But it's just plain kooky to shoot down the efforts of others without knowing what you're shooting at.
        
        Happy to be entertained...as always!
        
        Robert
        
        RE: Peter Gunn and the World of Tomorrow - Davey 10:01:53 03/24/08 (36)
        
        In Reply to: RE: Peter Gunn and the World of Tomorrow posted by TheGoodCaptain on March 24, 2008 at 09:32:21
        
        I hope you're not suggesting that PG should be immune from criticism by all who have not auditioned the speakers first-hand?
        
        Also, I'm assuming your comments are not aimed at me in particular. I don't think you'll find any comments from me that suggested "every customer is biased to the point of being unable to properly judge the speakers." Any comments I've made about PG mods are either based on actual experience with my speakers (modified) or correcting misstatements that PG (or others) have made about the objective performance of the speakers. You won't see me arguing with a person's subjective evaluation of any piece of gear because, by definition, subjective evaluations are unarguable positions.
        
        As I pointed out a few weeks ago, I've made some objective measurements of the effects of the hardwood frame mounting scheme. I haven't had a chance to post these yet, but suffice it to say, they essentially confirm the claims made by PG for this aspect of his modification. Interestingly, I conversed with PG a bit about this offline wondering if he was interested in my findings. He expressed no interest in my efforts and questioned my knowledge/capability of performing the measurements. Considering that my day job involves quite a bit of instrumentation work like this, and that he has no technical knowledge in this area, I thought his comments were rather amusing.
        
        Cheers,
        
        Dave.
        
        Dave...run while you can.... :) nt - jjcarr 10:07:14 03/24/08 (35)
        
        In Reply to: RE: Peter Gunn and the World of Tomorrow posted by Davey on March 24, 2008 at 10:01:53
        
        nt
        
        What's that supposed to mean? - Davey 10:08:42 03/24/08 (34)
        
        In Reply to: RE: Dave...run while you can.... :) nt posted by jjcarr on March 24, 2008 at 10:07:14
        
        .
        
        RE: What's that supposed to mean? - jjcarr 10:10:49 03/24/08 (33)
        
        In Reply to: RE: What's that supposed to mean? posted by Davey on March 24, 2008 at 10:08:42
        
        It's not an attack, I mean you been jumped, and you'll have a better chance of converting the Pope to Hinduism than will of convincing TheGoodCaptain of your viewpoint. Get out while you can, this thread will only go downhill from here...
        
        RE: What's that supposed to mean? - Davey 10:22:33 03/24/08 (32)
        
        In Reply to: RE: What's that supposed to mean? posted by jjcarr on March 24, 2008 at 10:10:49
        
        Oh, I understand that I'm not going to convince/sway anyone. :)
        
        I just happened to have a little time on my hands this morning and decided to do a little typing. Once the fanboys weigh in this thread is going to go crazy and I'll vamoose. :)
        
        Dave.
        
        RE: What's that supposed to mean? - TheGoodCaptain 11:14:48 03/24/08 (31)
        
        In Reply to: RE: What's that supposed to mean? posted by Davey on March 24, 2008 at 10:22:33
        
        I just happened to have a little time on my hands this morning and decided to do a little typing. Once the fanboys weigh in this thread is going to go crazy and I'll vamoose. :)> > >
        
        Dave & Jcarr, how about a bit of balance in your comments? Davey, no, Peter Gunn is not above critical comments. I'd just prefer that they had some sort of actual experience behind them...any at all. Please give me your 1st hand experience with Peter Gunn's work as I'm interested in trying these mods soon.
        
        Hear that?
        
        I wonder who these "fanboys" are and how such a post about them will aid this forum. You guys are 100% correct. No way will you convince anyone of the stand-alone merits of critical comments based on...nothing beyond an obvious bias. Doesn't make sense? Then please explain why you'd lean towards being critical at all when all evidence supports the value of Mr. Gunn's efforts? Is it to be contrary?
        
        I sure can see a point....when it's based on something akin to actual listening experience with a given product. And again, let's hear from the unhappy Gunn customers.
        
        Shhhhhh...I'm listening.
        
        Cheers,
        
        Robert
        
        RE: What's that supposed to mean? - Davey 11:29:36 03/24/08 (30)
        
        In Reply to: RE: What's that supposed to mean? posted by TheGoodCaptain on March 24, 2008 at 11:14:48
        
        Did you read what I said?? Let me repeat it... I tried the series crossover as recommended by PG....I measured the response....and listened to it. I didn't like it. Is that not "first-hand" enough for you?
        
        The "framing" work as described by PG I've also implemented.....with just a slightly (minor) different mounting scheme. I measured the response....and listened to it. I did like it. Is that not "first-hand" enough for you?
        
        I've measured/listened to the speaker both "forwards" and "backwards" (as recommended by PG) and I like "forwards" (as used my Magnepan currently) direction better. Is that not "first-hand" enough for you?
        
        Good fun.
        
        Dave.
        
        RE: What's that supposed to mean? - Dawnrazor 11:36:47 03/24/08 (29)
        
        In Reply to: RE: What's that supposed to mean? posted by Davey on March 24, 2008 at 11:29:36
        
        Hey Davey,
        
        You better post the picts man.
        
        RE: What's that supposed to mean? - Peter Gunn 13:03:43 03/24/08 (6)
        
        In Reply to: RE: What's that supposed to mean? posted by Dawnrazor on March 24, 2008 at 11:36:47
        
        This guy wrote me the rudest request I ever recieved on how to build the stands 2 months ago, I told him I don't have plans for them, I can only answer pertinent questions and then apparently in less than 1 month he went from having no idea how to build them to having made them, tested them, (even measured them) and not liking them. (There's not even enough time to break the XO's in in that span...)
        
        Wow, it took me a month to build the very first pair, (and a year to get it right) and it's my trade. It took wazoo over 3 months to build his (and I think he had the use of a friends woodshop)
        
        In any event the entire conversation is pointless. I never expected or said EVERYONE had to do it or like it. If he doesn't, that's fine, but his not liking it in no way tarnishes the opinion of the FAR bigger pile of people who did and do. My mod is an option people can do for themselves or not as they wish. Nobody is putting a gun to anyones head, so I really have no idea what the problem is. People have decided they didn't like their mye stands and sold them, people have decided they don't even like maggies and sold them! Is there ANYTHING on this earth someone doesn't like? So what is his point?
        
        He doesn't have one. He has an obsession about me, and that's all it is.
        
        It's all about the music...
        
        RE: What's that supposed to mean? - Davey 13:32:19 03/24/08 (4)
        
        In Reply to: RE: What's that supposed to mean? posted by Peter Gunn on March 24, 2008 at 13:03:43
        
        Rude? Please feel free to quote my email conversation with you word for word. I was never rude and if you recall thanked you for the information and your replies.
        
        I don't agree with some of your statements or evaluations of the product, and you don't agree with me on some of my statements. That's cool. However, don't accuse me of being rude when you KNOW I wasn't.
        
        It doesn't take me long to fabricate something with the table saw. The result isn't nearly as pretty as yours, but the functionality is perfectly fine.
        
        Obsession? You must be kidding.
        
        By the way.....I still have some interesting measurements of my MMG's modified with the frame setup per your instructions.....If you ever become interested.
        
        Cheers,
        
        Dave.
        
        RE: What's that supposed to mean? - TheGoodCaptain 13:36:20 03/24/08 (3)
        
        In Reply to: RE: What's that supposed to mean? posted by Davey on March 24, 2008 at 13:32:19
        
        Obsession? You must be kidding.
        
        By the way.....I still have some interesting measurements of my MMG's modified with the frame setup per your instructions.....If you ever become interested.> > >
        
        Dave, exactly what IS your point?
        
        Robert
        
        RE: What's that supposed to mean? - Davey 13:57:14 03/24/08 (2)
        
        In Reply to: RE: What's that supposed to mean? posted by TheGoodCaptain on March 24, 2008 at 13:36:20
        
        If you had read my previous statement in this thread about PG being uninterested in my efforts and my previous (a couple of weeks ago) postings regarding same you'd know what my point is.
        
        Cheers,
        
        Dave.
        
        RE: What's that supposed to mean? - TheGoodCaptain 14:33:20 03/24/08 (1)
        
        In Reply to: RE: What's that supposed to mean? posted by Davey on March 24, 2008 at 13:57:14
        
        If you had read my previous statement in this thread about PG being uninterested in my efforts and my previous (a couple of weeks ago) postings regarding same you'd know what my point is.> > >
        
        I have. And to be completely honest, it does sound like you have some sort of "issue" with Mr. Gunn and his work. The fact that you've been rude here doesn't shed much doubt on his claim that you were rude to him in an e-mail. I don't see this discussion doing you or your claims much good, so why not leave it alone? My original comments were not directed at you specifically.
        
        Cheers,
        
        Robert
        
        RE: What's that supposed to mean? - Davey 15:00:25 03/24/08 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: What's that supposed to mean? posted by TheGoodCaptain on March 24, 2008 at 14:33:20
        
        Sure I have an "issue" with some of PG's postings. You'd have to be pretty dense not to sense that. But I understand and appreciate his efforts nonetheless. (Even when he accuses me of being rude when I wasn't.)
        "Rude here?" In this thread? Please point me to my rude statements. I admit to some sarcasm in one of my previous threads where it appeared you didn't read my posting. But rude? Nah.
        You are obviously a satisfied customer. However, you're not bringing anything new to the table that hasn't been reiterated over and over and over by PG's customers. I'm working at understanding the entire scheme and attempting to improve upon on it. I've been partially successful so far, but I still have some further ideas. If these efforts are not interesting to you...or PG....then maybe you should be the one to leave the discussion alone? Or do you feel the PG-modified MMG system can't be further improved upon?
        I've made a few (measly) efforts along the way to try and help the Maggie community. Some of them are shown in the "tweaks" section, and some of those are in use by Maggie owners. My day job keeps my time pretty well filled (not today as it happens) so my contributions are not much I admit. However, at least myself and PG are in the game making attempts and not sitting on the sidelines in the cheering section.
        Cheers,
        Dave.
        
        Edits: 03/24/08
        
        RE: What's that supposed to mean? - jjcarr 13:29:12 03/24/08 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: What's that supposed to mean? posted by Peter Gunn on March 24, 2008 at 13:03:43
        
        I just seeing this... :)
        http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&VideoID=25984227 (Open in New Window)
        
        RE: What's that supposed to mean? - TheGoodCaptain 12:51:19 03/24/08 (21)
        
        In Reply to: RE: What's that supposed to mean? posted by Dawnrazor on March 24, 2008 at 11:36:47
        
        Did you read what I said?? Let me repeat it... I tried the series crossover as recommended by PG....I measured the response....and listened to it. I didn't like it. Is that not "first-hand" enough for you?
        
        The "framing" work as described by PG I've also implemented.....with just a slightly (minor) different mounting scheme. I measured the response....and listened to it. I did like it. Is that not "first-hand" enough for you?
        
        I've measured/listened to the speaker both "forwards" and "backwards" (as recommended by PG) and I like "forwards" (as used my Magnepan currently) direction better. Is that not "first-hand" enough for you?> > >
        
        Davey, I had no idea you had copied so exactly the stand/framing and crossover system used by Peter Gunn. If that's the case and you have essentially had the same speaker, then I except your comments.
        
        Robert
        
        RE: What's that supposed to mean? - MaggieLover 15:03:43 03/24/08 (20)
        
        In Reply to: RE: What's that supposed to mean? posted by TheGoodCaptain on March 24, 2008 at 12:51:19
        
        Even with general plans from PG, a crossover based on his specs and so on, there is no reason at assume the finished product is identical to what PG would have produced.
        
        In manufacturing there are many products that are copies of someone else's design. As we all know, they are called knock offs. Generally, knockoffs are inferior to the original product they're copied from, but not always. Davey's version may in fact be the sonic equal of PGs, or may not. Without a direct comparison, no one, including Davey can be 100% certain. Even if it is identical, its just an indication that Davey prefers something different. It doesn't invalidate PGs design.
        
        Maggies, because you can never be too thin!
        
        Mark
        
        RE: What's that supposed to mean? - TheGoodCaptain 15:30:29 03/24/08 (19)
        
        In Reply to: RE: What's that supposed to mean? posted by MaggieLover on March 24, 2008 at 15:03:43
        
        Without a direct comparison, no one, including Davey can be 100% certain. Even if it is identical, its just an indication that Davey prefers something different. It doesn't invalidate PGs design.> > >
        
        Of course. I was being a bit sarcastic. There's virtually no way Davey's mods sounded like the Gunned speakers. I have a friend that copied plans for a subwoofer. Almost everything was the same, cabinet and driver and the Xover, yet it sounded nothing like the original version I heard. Why did they sound different? Glue? Where the wood came from? Who knew. And that was a subwoofer, not something nearly as transparent as a planar speaker.
        Davey has NO idea of what Gunned speakers sound like. And that's that.
        
        Robert
        
        RE: What's that supposed to mean? - Davey 15:45:48 03/24/08 (18)
        
        In Reply to: RE: What's that supposed to mean? posted by TheGoodCaptain on March 24, 2008 at 15:30:29
        
        "There's virtually no way Davey's mods sounded like the Gunned speakers." Really? How close do you think they are? 50%? 10%? 99%?
        Maybe I've achieved a result already that's superior to PG's? Would you allow for that possibility?
        "And that's that." :) It just so easy/convenient to dismiss and explain away everything with statements like that isn't it? (Rhetorical question.)
        Cheers,
        Dave.
        
        Edits: 03/24/08
        
        RE: What's that supposed to mean? - MaggieLover 16:58:48 03/24/08 (5)
        
        In Reply to: RE: What's that supposed to mean? posted by Davey on March 24, 2008 at 15:45:48
        
        I agree. Just for the record, you probably did a good job of recreating the essentials of the design. Your version could even be "superior" to PG's. I put superior in quotes only to denote that in the case of loudspeakers this is, to a large degree, a subjective term.
        
        My point in my earlier post was that without a direct comparison, no one can be certain they sound identical or even close. I hope you did not take my comments as a criticism of what you accomplished. Having not heard PG's or your efforts with my own ears, it would disingenuous of me to take sides or to praise or criticize either of you.
        
        Maggies, because you can never be too thin!
        
        Mark
        
        RE: What's that supposed to mean? - Davey 18:33:06 03/24/08 (4)
        
        In Reply to: RE: What's that supposed to mean? posted by MaggieLover on March 24, 2008 at 16:58:48
        
        Yep, I understood your comments completely. Well said.
        
        I didn't re-create PG's efforts exactly so...by definition...they must be different somehow. However, I kept to the essential concept of the modification so I believe the performance must be highly similar. I used some Red Oak right off the shelf from my local Lowe's with the frame dimensions as specified by PG.
        
        That stuff about all the time involved and there not being enough time for me to complete this project is ridiculous.
        
        Cheers,
        
        Dave.
        
        Wow... - Rod H. 18:24:23 03/28/08 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: What's that supposed to mean? posted by Davey on March 24, 2008 at 18:33:06
        
        I just got back from a trip and decided to check the site.
        
        Looks like it's hit the fan again here.
        
        I don't see any reason a skilled person couldn't knock out a functional pair of oak frames in an afternoon. They wouldn't be beautiful, but should be functional. As has been said here more than once, any type of hardwood is superior to MDF, so if the dimensions are right the results should be fine.
        
        The hardwood itself is what has the special properties, not the finish I assume.
        
        Rod
        
        RE: What's that supposed to mean? - MaggieLover 20:26:46 03/24/08 (2)
        
        In Reply to: RE: What's that supposed to mean? posted by Davey on March 24, 2008 at 18:33:06
        
        Although it appears the end result did not satisfy you, were your mods an improvement over the stock version in your opinion?
        
        Maggies, because you can never be too thin!
        
        Mark
        
        RE: What's that supposed to mean? - Davey 21:00:03 03/24/08 (1)
        
        In Reply to: RE: What's that supposed to mean? posted by MaggieLover on March 24, 2008 at 20:26:46
        
        The end result does satisfy me. I'm not sure how that misconception has started. The hardwood framing of the transducer achieves a valid improvement in the sound of the system. There's no doubt about that.
        
        I don't like the electrical alignment of the PG crossover. I like an alternative one that I've come up with much better. And of course, I've switched to a line-level crossover ultimately since I don't have any interest in long-term usage of high-level passives. However, I did construct and measure a passive, series crossover for a point of reference.
        
        Cheers,
        
        Dave.
        
        RE: What's that supposed to mean? - MaggieLover 22:00:20 03/24/08 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: What's that supposed to mean? posted by Davey on March 24, 2008 at 21:00:03
        
        Thanks for the feedback.
        
        Maggies, because you can never be too thin!
        
        Mark
        
        RE: What's that supposed to mean? - TheGoodCaptain 16:06:35 03/24/08 (11)
        
        In Reply to: RE: What's that supposed to mean? posted by Davey on March 24, 2008 at 15:45:48
        
        "There's virtually no way Davey's mods sounded like the Gunned speakers." Really? How close do you think they are? 50%? 10%? 99%?> >
        
        We don't know, but it's unlikely you have any valid point here regarding Gunned Magnepans. You've done your own tweaks. That's great. But don't act like the Gunn mods are something your familiar with 1st hand. You're in NO position to judge them at all.
        
        < < > >
        
        Sure. But what does that have to do with anything. Still not sure what your beef is with Peter Gunn, but perhaps you should call him and work it out. Maybe send him flowers.
        
        < < < > > >
        
        About as easy as adding "rhetorical" at the end of an empty and pointless series of comments and hoping no one notices.
        Do let us all know if you get to hear a pair of Gunned Magnepans. Until that point in time your comments are purely speculative.
        
        I'm outa this thread. I'll let Davey have the last word. NO doubt he needs to have it, so let him go. My apologies to Mister Gunn, but I do think this thread exposed something useful in the end, even if it's not directly related to my speakers!
        
        Robert
        
        RE: What's that supposed to mean? - Peter Gunn 16:58:07 03/24/08 (10)
        
        In Reply to: RE: What's that supposed to mean? posted by TheGoodCaptain on March 24, 2008 at 16:06:35
        
        Well, at the very least this thread made an interesting swirl on the page.
        
        As far as davey goes I am no longer going to bother talking to him, which is why I am responding to you. He went from, lets say being a pin prick on here about my mods to doing the same thru unsolicited emails directly, and from the outset it was obvious he didn't care, didn't believe, and was only going thru the motions so he could say he did it and then complain about it. Never once did I ever believe he was really interested, and it was pretty obvious.
        
        He wrote me a brief, terse email 2 months ago that literally said little more than "tell me how to build your stands". (no hello or thank you) When I told him I could not and explained why he wrote other people telling them how rude and un-helpfull I was to him! (I know this because they told me)
        
        Yet magically, in another unsolicited email from him a month after this he "let slip" how he knew my stands sucked, "because he built them". I never even bothered responding.
        
        Even if he made them in a week (which assumes he did not go to work for that whole week, and we are still assuming a LOT (like he had all the parts he needed even before he knew what to do) that only gives him 3 weeks. It takes 300 hours for the XO to break in, so he would have had to play them almost 15 hours a day just to reach full break in in a month. He not only did all this, but he tested them, measured them, and did all this other stuff (except take a picture) whereupon he immediately deduced "it doesn't sound good". I guess he didn't work for the whole month.
        
        He doesn't even say why, it's just "not as good as the other way".
        
        Some people might look at this and deduce his biggest fault is he's a liar, as he could not have made, broken in, and tested them in less than 30 days as he claims. I don't think that's his biggest problem.
        
        The fact is that if he's NOT lying, he really thinks maggies turned the wrong way in mdf frames with who knows what XO sound better than my way. In which case I can only say he has to be the most tone deaf person I have ever met, and my advice to him is sell his gear, and go buy whatever is on sale at best buy because pal, it doesn't matter what gear you own.
        
        Two people on here have divulged that industry insiders have heard my speakers and said they can compete against anything. Anything. But according to Davey they suck.
        
        The Captain is right kid, we've heard all we need to hear and everyone can decide for themselves, and I'm terribly sorry what I do didn't "do it" for you. Now have whatever reply you need to get in, however I have no desire to read it or reply to it.
        
        It's all about the music...
        
        RE: What's that supposed to mean? - Davey 18:08:52 03/24/08 (3)
        
        In Reply to: RE: What's that supposed to mean? posted by Peter Gunn on March 24, 2008 at 16:58:07
        
        Well, you've got quite the imagination Mister Gunn. Show me anywhere on this forum where I said your speakers "suck." Please point me to it. I'm actually fairly impressed with the speakers. Certainly better than stock. If you'd read what I said vice what you want to believe I said there wouldn't be so much mis-understanding on your part.
        
        I wrote a terse email and didn't bother to say "thank you?" I think you better re-read those emails Mr. Gunn.
        
        I never once said your "stands sucked." Not in any email, and not on this forum. In fact, the stands are the most impressive part of your modification. If you would bother to re-read my comments since that time frame you'll see that I agree with you that this is a worthwhile part of the modification. I even confimred it with some objective evalutions.
        
        If you think a crossover takes 300 hours to break in you're in dreamland. The frame I turned out in about two hours...not counting glue drying time. Not as pleasing as yours aesthetically, but functional nonetheless.
        
        Here's a photo: The companion woofers turn the system into a three-way for much improved performance but are moved out of the way when using the MMG's exclusively. There's a little piece to fill that hole in the bottom, but I didn't have it installed for this photo.
        
        Cheers,
        
        Dave.
        
        fair square - Peter Gunn 07:25:43 03/26/08 (2)
        
        In Reply to: RE: What's that supposed to mean? posted by Davey on March 24, 2008 at 18:08:52
        
        This reply was generated because of a talk I had with a friend who feels we both are at odds and for the wrong reasons.
        
        First, you have to understand that there is a rediculous number of people who apparently have nothing better to do than give me grief, or try to ever since this "mod" of mine went from being just mine to everyones. (like the person from the netherlands posting that his speakers are shaking as his warranty is void)
        
        Some are overtly and obviously hostile. Some are more sublime, and instead of attacking get their glee from wasting huge amounts of my time.
        
        IMHO many of your "contacts" with me (here or thru email) had an air at times about them of someone who was trying to drag me along for his jollies. Maybe you didn't think so or mean it, but they did. I forwarded some of your letters to friends asking "is it him or me" and their replies were that your motives were not always clear and some tone seemed to be there at times, and occasionally some rudeness expressed by being very short and/or thankless.
        
        I admit I may have been wrong in my perceptions, but that is how I began to perceive it, and my time being so short when that happened I simply cut you off and no longer read your posts or emails at all. I offer my apology for both of those things, but for your own future reference I (and those I showed them to) thought your "wording" often came across as left handed and circumspect, even though you may not have thought so or intended it. (For example, yes, you "thanked me" but only after going to others and complaining that I didn't help you, and the email you sent "asking" for help didn't ask, it had a demanding tone and it also had no thank you)
        
        But lets consider all that what it is, water under the bridge.
        
        As for ther mod, first the XO. If you don't like the XO, that's a matter of taste. It surprises me (and makes me question what it is you listen for) but neither of us is right or wrong in that regard. In any event having done work in that area yourself I can only wonder if there was any need for you to even bother, as it was not something you were unfamiliar with and you probably knew you weren't going to like it going in, so the exercise seems pointless to begin with. A majority may prefer a certain XO, but even then, one cannot say there is one "right" one.
        
        As for the XO taking 300 hours, I suggest you put the time in and listen. I have heard it happen, and many of my customers and other DIYer's who did it themselves write me at that time to tell me of the sudden unexpected change around that hour mark. In fact many high end manufacturers also say it (my Hovland preamp also did indeed take that long to break in, and the change was very obvious when it happened) so I'm not sure why you doubt this. Again, this is why I brushed claims made in a month aside.
        
        OK, now the sucking part :^ ) True enough, that was not the word you used, but in one of the unsolicited emails you sent me, you intimated that my mod was "not all that I thought it was" and that you had measurements and asked if I wanted to know why. I replied and asked when did you hear a pair, whereupon you then said "Hear? I made them."
        
        Now, given what I wrote above, WHY would I invite myself to that table? Your motives to me at that time were suspect, you wrote me out of the blue giving me dribbles at a time, and dribbles that seemed to be doing nothing other than setting me up for a fall I didn't need or believe.
        
        As for the photo, it is a frame of wood but the similarity between it and what I do ends right there. I have very big issues not only with it being hung from the ceiling (which is a terrible thing to do) but it being verticle as well. There's no support, it's not coupled to the floor, and it's not at the correct angle. (or possibly height) Anything you measured off of it setup that way would indeed be lacking I suspect. (I also don't know why it's made like stilts, and where is the XO box? How is it supported? That makes a HUGE difference on how they sound)
        
        In closing, while I appreciate the effort to try to absorb what I do, and I am glad there are aspects you do like, and I am glad your intent was never to "bugger" me, I can say your attempt is not even remotely close enough to give you a true idea what my finished mod really sounds like. I don't mean this abrasively, but the smallest points matter a great deal in how it sounds when it comes together and what you made is a vague facsimile, not the actual thing. I hope one day you get to hear an actual pair made by me. You may or may not like it any more than yours, but at least you'll have heard what I intended.
        
        Again, 1,000 apologies for my bastard-like behavior.
        
        It's all about the music...
        
        RE: fair square - MaggieLover 17:01:22 03/26/08 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: fair square posted by Peter Gunn on March 26, 2008 at 07:25:43
        
        "Again, 1,000 apologies for my bastard-like behavior" Be still my heart, I have been to the mountain top. I wish all the discourses on this forum could be as civil as this last between you and Davey. Best regards to you both.
        
        Maggies, because you can never be too thin!
        
        Mark
        
        RE: fair square - Davey 14:38:39 03/26/08 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: fair square posted by Peter Gunn on March 26, 2008 at 07:25:43
        
        PG,
        Well, you can dismiss my effort out of hand based on my low resolution photo but I believe I did it right.
        The baffle dimensions are the same as yours...the transducer mechanical coupling to the frame is the same...the crossover I used (components broken-in previously with MANY hours) is the same.
        The measurements/observations I made confirm the "action" of the framework as far as energy transfer. I auditioned the system vertically and slanted. If you look closer at the photo you'll see that they aren't suspended from the ceiling, but just resting against another set of speakers that are behind. (I just put them there for the photo opportunity.)
        Actually, suspending speakers from the ceiling can be an excellent solution depending upon the type of speakers and various other factors. That's another topic.
        It's a valid effort (although not identical) to evaluate your modificaton. If the fact that it's not TOTALLY identical completely invalidates (in your mind) my efforts then there's not much I can do about that. :)
        Your comment that my attempt "is not even remotely close enough to give you a true idea......." is pure speculation. (As are many of your comments about various topics on this forum.)
        Regarding me "absorbing" what you do: There wasn't any absorption necessary. I completely understand the concept, and I completely understand the implementation. Your condescension is unbecoming.
        I appreciate your efforts in modding the Maggie systems. It's good work.
        As I said in another posting.....you're not sitting on the sidelines, but in the game working at it. That's much better than most who post on this forum.
        There is no apology necessary. You are what you are. A person shouldn't have to apologize for that.
        My only request would be that in the future if you regurgitate any conversations we had (or might have) offline that you do it accurately and not mis-state me.
        Cheers,
        Dave.
        
        Edits: 03/26/08
        
        RE: What's that supposed to mean? - Planar Owner 18:02:53 03/24/08 (5)
        
        In Reply to: RE: What's that supposed to mean? posted by Peter Gunn on March 24, 2008 at 16:58:07
        
        You know what PG, that last post of yours was really classless. As a "manufacturer" you should learn to rise above any petty dissing of your products and learn to keep your mouth shut. If they're as good as you say they are then you'll no doubt be successful. All your defensive rhetoric just makes you look like a fool, trying to protect the good name of a product at all costs, even if it means adopting the same childish behavior that your detractors use.
        As a long time owner of magnepan products, I saw your involvement in these forums as a breath of fresh air, initially. Now you've become as annoying as the trolls with whom like like to spar with on every occasion possible.
        
        I'm sure you or someone will pick this message apart, using quotation marks and explaining with reference to other posts how wrong I am. Well good luck with that one.
        
        RE: What's that supposed to mean? - Peter Gunn 06:00:44 03/25/08 (1)
        
        In Reply to: RE: What's that supposed to mean? posted by Planar Owner on March 24, 2008 at 18:02:53
        
        You're right of course, but I'm only human too. I'm still a joiner, and because what I tend to make most often has changed hasn't suddenly instilled me with the patience of Job.... :^ )
        
        However you'll note I didn't get involved in this and only eventually decided to because he kept mis-quoting personal events between him and I that only I could verify, and since he wasn't being honest I felt he needed to be corrected.
        
        Now he'll respond saying I'm a liar but as you say, I don't care and I am done with this thread too.
        
        It's all about the music...
        
        RE: What's that supposed to mean? - Davey 06:34:53 03/25/08 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: What's that supposed to mean? posted by Peter Gunn on March 25, 2008 at 06:00:44
        
        PG,
        
        Please re-read the email conversation we had. I can forward it to you if you've deleted it. I re-read it last night and IMHO it's relatively cordial from both ends.
        
        Dave.
        
        RE: What's that supposed to mean? - TheGoodCaptain 05:58:19 03/25/08 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: What's that supposed to mean? posted by Planar Owner on March 24, 2008 at 18:02:53
        
        I'm sure you or someone will pick this message apart, using quotation marks and explaining with reference to other posts how wrong I am. Well good luck with that one.> > > >
        
        There's punctuation after "well."
        
        See, you were right!
        
        Robert
        
        RE: What's that supposed to mean? - TheGoodCaptain 18:38:59 03/24/08 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: What's that supposed to mean? posted by Planar Owner on March 24, 2008 at 18:02:53
        
        Davey, Mister Gunn and everyone....
        
        Let's kill this thread. Forget it. One can only stay classy for so long in these dumb battles, so before we all call out each other's grandmothers, let's put a stop to it.
        
        For the love of music and Maggies!
        
        And it's Monday fer cripes sake...so let's chill and let it all fade into history.
        
        Goodnight....and check out the very complex Metis remote that came with my Rogue Preamp. There were no directions on how to use it.
        
        Robert
        
        RE: What's that supposed to mean? - Davey 18:36:48 03/24/08 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: What's that supposed to mean? posted by Planar Owner on March 24, 2008 at 18:02:53
        
        Well said. You managed to name-call and insult everyone involved with just a few sentences.
        
        Dave.

Post a Followup:

FAQ

Post a Message!

Forgot Password?

Moniker (Username):
Password (Optional):
	Remember my Moniker & Password (What's this?) Eat Me
E-Mail (Optional):
Subject:

Message:	(Posts are subject to Content Rules)

Optional Link URL:
Optional Link Title:
Optional Image URL:
Upload Image:
E-mail Replies:	Automagically notify you when someone responds.

To view your new posting or follow-up, click on the RELOAD or REFRESH button on your browser.

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:

Schiit Audio