Welcome! Need support, you got it. Or share your ideas and experiences.
Return to Planar Speaker Asylum
99.177.204.36
In Reply to: RE: Has Magnepan solved the "Maggie Grain" issue? posted by George S. Roland on February 15, 2025 at 17:45:21
I have been using Maggie's for years and never heard of Maggie Grain.
Was she a step child ?
Bravo!
I had never heard the term "Maggie grain" until I read it, I believe, in a review of one of Magnepan's speakers. I looked around on the net a little today and could not find the review.
I do know, having owned Magnepan 1.6 QRs on two different occasions that they have a texture to their sound. It was there on all material I listened to. It was not there on electrostatic speakers. The closest thing to a description of this was in this review by Brian Damkroger:
"Great Expectation No.6: Transparency: no opacity, no texture: For all their great strengths, Magnepan speakers have always suffered from a slight opacity. The MG3.5/R and 1.6/QR were spectacular advancements in this regard, retaining only faint vestiges of a slightly filmy texture."
nt
Ahh. Thank you, sir, for finding this discussion of "Maggie grain". I am sure this is where I first became aware of this term. I was unable to locate it.
Many Magnepan enthusiasts will disagree with this opinion, but I have certainly heard it. Of course, your experience may vary, and Maggies are still very fine speakers.
I'm not quite sure what he means by "grain" but my 3.7's certainly have a better integration between the drivers compared to the 3.6's I had prior to the 3.7's. Looking forward to receiving my 3.7X's.
Driver integration:
I found on my 3.6rs the first time I heard them the tweeter was slightly "non-integrated".
I then put in the resistor and the choke tweak (remember that) in series. All the integration problems went away.
How much of the integration is an unwillingness to use the resistors as they are designed?
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: