Magico M2

[brodricj]

Actually, Mpods get screwed into a 3-point stand and the stand gets attached to the bottom of the speaker. With Spod, that is a direct fixing in the same hole as the spike that is being replaced. Magico have something called M-feet which is now the standard footer for M3. It is very similar to Spod, but much larger. Mpods and Spods are constructed differently internally.

M3 is carried by either four M-feet, or three Mpods on 3-point stand. I assume M2 is the same.

[BlueFox]

Zounds. Glad I retire next month and will no longer be able to afford this stuff. It is getting to be too much for my feeble mind to keep up with.

[brodricj]

Huh? I thought when you retire that's when you up the spending on hobbies.

[PeterA]

If one were in the market for a new Magico speaker for a particular room size, regardless of cost, would he compare an M2 to an S3 mk2 or S5 mk 2? I think the S series generally has fewer but larger woofer drivers than the comparable M series speaker which has more and smaller woofer drivers: M3 v. S5 mk2.

[Elberoth]

The M3 sounds noticably better than the S5 mk2. More natural and smoother, with greater tone density. The M3 tweeter is just out of this (dome) world great. Down low, I prefer the S5 mk 2 though. There is just no replacement for displacement

[Mike]

If one were in the market for a new Magico speaker for a particular room size, regardless of cost, would he compare an M2 to an S3 mk2 or S5 mk 2? I think the S series generally has fewer but larger woofer drivers than the comparable M series speaker which has more and smaller woofer drivers: M3 v. S5 mk2.

M3 has smaller woofers, but three instead of two. They’re totally different, but both great in their own way. The more difficult comparison is S7’s vs M3. Then it’s three bass drivers vs 3. Again, both are awesome.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mike]

The M3 sounds noticably better than the S5 mk2. More natural and smoother, with greater tone density. The M3 tweeter is just out of this (dome) world great. Down low, I prefer the S5 mk 2 though. There is just no replacement for displacement

Well said. I agree 100%.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[PeterA]

M3 has smaller woofers, but three instead of two. They’re totally different, but both great in their own way. The more difficult comparison is S7’s vs M3. Then it’s three bass drivers vs 3. Again, both are awesome.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thanks Mike. Do you think the M3 and S7 are designed for the same size room? And which S series speaker do you think is more appropriate for someone considering an M2? I understand that the two series have different tonal characteristics, but I am curious about room compatibility and which models one would realistically be comparing in that sense.

[PeterA]

The M3 sounds noticably better than the S5 mk2. More natural and smoother, with greater tone density. The M3 tweeter is just out of this (dome) world great. Down low, I prefer the S5 mk 2 though. There is just no replacement for displacement

That's interesting. Are you suggesting that Magico needs an M4/M5 to be consistently better in both the highs and lows than the S5 mk2? Do most customers prefer the lower frequencies of the S5 mk2 to those of the M3? I thought they are simply different, the S5 mk 2 being more about quantity while the M3 is more about quality. Is that wrong?

[Mike]

Thanks Mike. Do you think the M3 and S7 are designed for the same size room? And which S series speaker do you think is more appropriate for someone considering an M2? I understand that the two series have different tonal characteristics, but I am curious about room compatibility and which models one would realistically be comparing in that sense.

The M3 fills the 20 x 25 in the store beautifully. The S5 mk2/S7 do too.

M2 would be for someone considering S3 mk2. M3 is more for someone stepping up from the S5 mk2. I’m really anxious to get my M2’s. I think in the 17 x 25 room they will sing! My hunch on the M2 is that for many, it will be THE Magico to buy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Skanda]

Actually, Mpods get screwed into a 3-point stand and the stand gets attached to the bottom of the speaker. With Spod, that is a direct fixing in the same hole as the spike that is being replaced. Magico have something called M-feet which is now the standard footer for M3. It is very similar to Spod, but much larger. Mpods and Spods are constructed differently internally.

M3 is carried by either four M-feet, or three Mpods on 3-point stand. I assume M2 is the same.

please correct me if i'm wrong, but you had the m3's singing for a little while without mpods right? the mpod vs. no mpod has been talked about before but did you have some findings to share?

i have been thinking about spods for my s5's but my biggest concern is that my furniture is low to the ground (my damned love of danish furniture) and i'm currently at a perfect level with the speaker and i worry that raising the height may lead to other issues.

[brodricj]

I received the Mpods with 3 point stand about 2 months ago but I'm unable to fit them by myself. The M3 speaker is just too heavy for me to do it alone. Most customers order their M3's with Mpods and they arrive from the factory with the stand already fitted to the base of the speaker (I originally ordered my M3 without Mpods).

[Skanda]

I received the Mpods with 3 point stand about 2 months ago but I'm unable to fit them by myself. The M3 speaker is just too heavy for me to do it alone. Most customers order their M3's with Mpods and they arrive from the factory with the stand already fitted to the base of the speaker (I originally ordered my M3 without Mpods).

ahh that's right. well in that case i think your thoughts are even more helpful as i'm not aware of any posters who have had such lengthy experience without the mpod - most posts i have seen have suggested that mpods were added shortly after purchase. especially curious about this since you mentioned earlier that you think the m3-q3 differential might be higher with the mpod going back to the q3 sounding "broken" in comparison comment earlier

[brodricj]

My M3 are on M-feet which is an M version of the Spod. M3 used to ship with basic steel spikes. Now they ship with M-feet as standard. So I haven't heard M3 on standard spikes. I did upgrade my Q3 from standard spikes to Spods and they are worth the price of entry. Read into that my M3 on M-feet are likely to be better than earlier production M3 that had basic spikes. I'm expecting M3 will sound better on the Mpods, but not by as much as the early M3 on spikes (because my M3 are on M-feet).

[Kuoppis]

Magico claims the quietest enclosures in the industry. Here testing the M2 enclosure using a Laser Vibrometer.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[brodricj]

I'd like to see how those measurements change with and without Mpods.

[Kuoppis]

I think that is a good one. Maybe a question to inquire Magico about.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Kingsrule]

I'd like to see how those measurements change with and without Mpods.

Irrelevant in regards to cabinet noise

[brodricj]

Really? I thought the Mpods channeled cabinet noise into the Mpod elastomerics and dissipated it as heat?

[PeterA]

Perhaps Magico is trying to develop cabinet technology which reduces the vibrations regardless of whether it can then be drained later by the use of specific footers. I think it would be interesting to see measured efficacy of the M pods on the vibrations of the cabinet. I suspect Mágico has this data but may not be willing to share it.

[Kingsrule]

The MPOD measurement u all should be interested in is how much noise is eliminated on the surface they are sitting on....

[PeterA]

The MPOD measurement u all should be interested in is how much noise is eliminated on the surface they are sitting on....

I agree. That would be interesting too. But, I do think it would be fascinating to measure cabinet resonance and then see how much of that resonance is drained away from the cabinet through the use of different footers. There is also isolation between the cabinet resonances and the floor. It seems the M Pods do a bit of both, draining energy out of the system and preventing it from reaching the floor.

I think testing with and without the M Pods would simply help to demonstrate how effective they are at what they do. Listening is useful too, obviously. I have heard their effect on my friend's M Pros. I was impressed.

[Matias]

Irrelevant in regards to cabinet noise

I don't know about MPODs but IsoAcoustics Gaia feet improvements to cabinet vibrations are measurable. MPODs most likely too.




http://www.isoacoustics.com/isoacoustics-speaker-isolation-technology/

[Paul]

First pair of M2 will showing at Montreal audio show this week by Audio by MarkJones

[brodricj]

I can't help but feel sad when I see a fine speaker like that end up in ridiculous installation like that.

[Paul]

I can't help but feel sad when I see a fine speaker like that end up in ridiculous installation like that.

If you are referring to my post. The speakers are just playing on 24/7 to break in to be primed for their debut.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[brodricj]

If M2 are similar to M3 re break in, there aren't anywhere near enough 24/7 left between now and then to get them anywhere near primed for debut. Some is better than none, of course.

[Paul]

Hoping I can hear them soon .


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[a.wayne]

If M2 are similar to M3 re break in, there aren't anywhere near enough 24/7 left between now and then to get them anywhere near primed for debut. Some is better than none, of course.

Haa ha , thats Hillarious , break in is the last 5% if bad after a few days its time to run and beat the 90day charge back policy ..

[a.wayne]

I agree. That would be interesting too. But, I do think it would be fascinating to measure cabinet resonance and then see how much of that resonance is drained away from the cabinet through the use of different footers. There is also isolation between the cabinet resonances and the floor. It seems the M Pods do a bit of both, draining energy out of the system and preventing it from reaching the floor.

I think testing with and without the M Pods would simply help to demonstrate how effective they are at what they do. Listening is useful too, obviously. I have heard their effect on my friend's M Pros. I was impressed.

Hello Peter ,

Could you be more specific on how the mpods helped sonically , was this on hard floors or wood ..?


Regards

[brodricj]

Disagree with you on that...break-in completes the whole package that then establishes the speaker above all others. Prior to being broken-in they might just be any of a number of other speakers. But it is an audio show, so getting them out there and visible is the most important thing, even if they are under-done with break-in. They will be drooled over no matter what they sound like.

[PeterA]

Hello Peter ,

Could you be more specific on how the mpods helped sonically , was this on hard floors or wood ..?


Regards

Hello, The M Pods made the sound more clear, less diffuse. Overall system resolution seemed to improve. It also improved bass definition, though I can't remember the effect on bass extension.

[kzhtoo]

[Paul]

At the show now


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mike]

At the show now


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

How’s the sounds?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Kuoppis]

Only passive demo or what...?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[brodricj]

With those electronics I should think the sound would be quite presentable, not-withstanding the newness of the speakers.

[Elberoth]

Magico M2 CF box:

[imprezap2]

thickness of the CF box looks impressive, will be very strong

[brodricj]

Presumably the M6 box is similar, and the M3 box is not?

[Elberoth]

Correct.

[brodricj]

The top cap of the M2 cabinet is still CNC aluminium, right?

[Paul]

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[brodricj]

They didn't pull the pins out of the Mpods for the show demo?

[Kuoppis]

Presumably the M6 box is similar, and the M3 box is not?

How so?

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[brodricj]

The M3 has an internal metal skeleton similar to the Q platform.

[Elberoth]

M3 have CF 'skins' over aluminium structure. It is my understanding, that when you take the drivers out and look inside, you will not see CF - all walls and bracing are aluminium.

Both M2 and M6 have what we can call 'next generation' Magico enclosures. Thay are far more advanced CF monocoque designs.

[brodricj]

That's right. I expect M3Mk2 will evolve into the CF monocoque design, with associated weight reduction.

Screen Shot 2019-03-24 at 19.49.08.png

[PeterA]

M3 have CF 'skins' over aluminium structure. It is my understanding, that when you take the drivers out and look inside, you will not see CF - all walls and bracing are aluminium.

Both M2 and M6 have what we can call 'next generation' Magico enclosures. Thay are far more advanced CF monocoque designs.

The different construction techniques between the M2 and M3 are fascinating. I am curious about the aluminum curved top plate on the M2. Does it simply attach somehow to the curved CF box? Also, it seems as though there is a front side to the box attached with screws before the curved aluminum front baffle is attached with the long rod/bolt system first seen in the Mini 2. Is the tweeter attached to the baffle while the mid and woofer drivers are attached to the box before the front baffle is attached?

The M2's carbon fiber cabinet harks back to the birchply cabinet of the Mini with front and rear aluminum baffles clamped on with tension rods through the structure. Very different from the aluminum skeleton structure of the Q series, MPro and M3.

Thank you for posting that image of the M3 brodricj. It is the first I've seen of the M3 interior.

[Skanda]

damn - my desire for an m2 is increasing by the day!