Coming soon

[u-sound]

very very cool product.
got really interested while reading until i saw the price...48k...with the matching m-rack around 100k

will magico come up with passive subwoofers? dont think this unit will make much sense with theyr current line of active subwoofers.

 

[Mike]

Magico MXO Active Analog Crossover, adapted from their M9 crossover for general use as a subwoofer crossover.

Very cool.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[Henry303]

very very cool product.
got really interested while reading until i saw the price...48k...with the matching m-rack around 100k

will magico come up with passive subwoofers? dont think this unit will make much sense with theyr current line of active subwoofers.

I believe that the point here is the ability to XO your main speakers as well, without loosing transparency. That's a big deal, if you ever ran your main though a high pass filter on some available options like JL CR1, you will know. But the cost

 

[NekoAudio]

will magico come up with passive subwoofers? dont think this unit will make much sense with theyr current line of active subwoofers.

As I understand it you would still be placing the MXO in front of your speaker amplifier, and also in front of your subwoofer amplifier. So it makes sense when used with an active subwoofer.

There are significant problems with selling a passive subwoofer, the most significant being that it will measure and sound completely horrible without the proper DSP put in front of it, which is usually incorporated into the built-in amplifier.

In addition, if you want a subwoofer (particularly a sealed subwoofer) to play low you generally need a boost in your PEQ filters, which done incorrectly or when paired with an inadequate amplifier could cause damage. Whereas usually you can get away with only cuts or very minor boosts for PEQ of main speakers, using a standalone box that is completely optional and only adopted by users who have some idea of what they're doing.

Lastly, you wouldn't be able to publish specifications for your passive subwoofer that could be understood by the general consumer.

 

[u-sound]

thx, yes, you 2 are right. it does make sense even in front of active subs.

pricewise i wonder....magicos current subs cost 15 to 30k i think.
paying more for the xo than the sub,...why not

 

[dznutz]

None of this makes any sense at $48K!!!

Ive been told time and time again that the CR-1 is way too expensive.

 

[brodricj]

paying more for the xo than the sub,...why not

I was thinking the same. It is a perplexing price point, the XO is more expensive than the subwoofer. Makes no sense at all for me to spend this much on a XO to integrate my M3+S-Sub. I'd be surprised if it gave me a better result than using the EQ built into the S-Sub (I send the calibration signal to M3 + S-Sub simultaneously from the dual outputs of the pre-amp and use the EQ in S-Sub to integrate the combination).

 

[GSOphile]

I think Magico is trying to spread the cost of the very few units they need to build for the M9 by offering a more general use product to another select few. If this product catches on, I'm pretty sure you'll see similar competitive offerings at much lower price points.

 

[NekoAudio]

I'd be surprised if it gave me a better result than using the EQ built into the S-Sub (I send the calibration signal to M3 + S-Sub simultaneously from the dual outputs of the pre-amp and use the EQ in S-Sub to integrate the combination).

Ignoring the cost of this specific solution, there is a benefit to high-passing the signal to the main speakers, especially at higher volume levels. The sound produced by the main speakers will have less distortion, and you will be able to play at overall higher volume levels than you could otherwise before hitting the physical limits of the main speakers (which could cause damage, past any distortion).

 

[Mike]

Ignoring the cost of this specific solution, there is a benefit to high-passing the signal to the main speakers, especially at higher volume levels. The sound produced by the main speakers will have less distortion, and you will be able to play at overall higher volume levels than you could otherwise before hitting the physical limits of the main speakers (which could cause damage, past any distortion).

Well said.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[mep]

Well said.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

It might be "Well said," but I don't agree with the premise. If I buy an expensive pair of full range speakers that has audible bass distortion at the volume levels I want to listen at, that's a problem. The solution to the problem shouldn't be adding a sub and crossover so that my expensive full range speakers can have the bass filtered out so I can treat them like I bought a pair of monitors. I want to hear the bass I paid for in my expensive full range speakers and not neuter their bass by filtering it out.

It inherently makes zero sense to me to buy expensive full range speakers and treat them like small monitors by relieving them of bass duties. The idea of using subs and a crossover with bass shy monitors and filtering out the bottom two octaves from the bass shy monitors does make sense.

I want to make it clear that I do believe in using subs with full range speakers because that's what I do in my setup. However, I'm not neutering the bass out of my main speakers.

 

[puroagave]

It might be "Well said," but I don't agree with the premise. If I buy an expensive pair of full range speakers that has audible bass distortion at the volume levels I want to listen at, that's a problem. The solution to the problem shouldn't be adding a sub and crossover so that my expensive full range speakers can have the bass filtered out so I can treat them like I bought a pair of monitors. I want to hear the bass I paid for in my expensive full range speakers and not neuter their bass by filtering it out.

It inherently makes zero sense to me to buy expensive full range speakers and treat them like small monitors by relieving them of bass duties. The idea of using subs and a crossover with bass shy monitors and filtering out the bottom two octaves from the bass shy monitors does make sense.

I want to make it clear that I do believe in using subs with full range speakers because that's what I do in my setup. However, I'm not neutering the bass out of my main speakers.

Your JBLs are ported which have a fast natural roll-off. Acoustic suspended types like Magicos are the opposite. You tend to get too much overlap crossing over a sub and not roiling off the main speaker, the result is a bass bump where you least want one. turning down the sub to alleviate the bump would negates the purpose of having a sub to begin with. rolling off the main speaker is a compromise but a necessary one, IMO.

 

[mep]

Your JBLs are ported which have a fast natural roll-off. Acoustic suspended types like Magicos are the opposite. You tend to get too much overlap crossing over a sub and not roiling off the main speaker, the result is a bass bump where you least want one. turning down the sub to alleviate the bump would negates the purpose of having a sub to begin with. rolling off the main speaker is a compromise but a necessary one, IMO.

That's one point Rob. What frequency do you want your main speakers to start at Rob?

 

[a.wayne]

Cant agree ,


A sealed box integrates with subwoofers much better than a ported design, as a matter of fact its much better to plug the ports when adding a powered sealed subwoofer system ..!

BTW how much is a ported enclosure rolling off with F3 @28 hz vs a sealed Magico , Xover point to sub ..?




Regards

 

[Henry303]

It might be "Well said," but I don't agree with the premise. If I buy an expensive pair of full range speakers that has audible bass distortion at the volume levels I want to listen at, that's a problem. The solution to the problem shouldn't be adding a sub and crossover so that my expensive full range speakers can have the bass filtered out so I can treat them like I bought a pair of monitors. I want to hear the bass I paid for in my expensive full range speakers and not neuter their bass by filtering it out.

It inherently makes zero sense to me to buy expensive full range speakers and treat them like small monitors by relieving them of bass duties. The idea of using subs and a crossover with bass shy monitors and filtering out the bottom two octaves from the bass shy monitors does make sense.

I want to make it clear that I do believe in using subs with full range speakers because that's what I do in my setup. However, I'm not neutering the bass out of my main speakers.

Any speaker will work better if it is relieved of playing the bottom octave. Cost aside, and assuming integration to sub and the signal's integrity remains, you will have better sound.

 

[mep]

Any speaker will work better if it is relieved of playing the bottom octave. Cost aside, and assuming integration to sub and the signal's integrity remains, you will have better sound.

So the moral to your story is that people should buy speakers with no bass below 80Hz and then fill in the missing bass with subs or pay big money for main speakers that have deep bass capability and roll them off in the bass so you can make your main speakers sound "better" by using subs?

 

[Henry303]

So the moral to your story is that people should buy speakers with no bass below 80Hz and then fill in the missing bass with subs or pay big money for main speakers that have deep bass capability and roll them off in the bass so you can make your main speakers sound "better" by using subs?

Of course, if one can do it right, which apparently is not cheap, why not? BTW, Magico XO is 55Hz not 80Hz, we are talking last octave territory, which most speakers struggle to deliver.

 

[mep]

Of course, if one can do it right, which apparently is not cheap, why not? BTW, Magico XO is 55Hz not 80Hz, we are talking last octave territory, which most speakers struggle to deliver.

I was talking about electronic crossovers in general and not specific to Magico. The bottom two octaves go from 20Hz to 80Hz so I figured those who want "the best sound" from their full range speakers would want to roll off the bass below 80Hz so the main speakers can be free from that pesky bass.

 

[Henry303]

I was talking about electronic crossovers in general and not specific to Magico. The bottom two octaves go from 20Hz to 80Hz so I figured those who want "the best sound" from their full range speakers would want to roll off the bass below 80Hz so the main speakers can be free from that pesky bass.

If you are referring to my post, it would only make sense to actually refer to it
I said bottom octave, not octaves (below 50Hz). In my opinion, XO above ~50Hz to a sub is not a good idea regardless of the execution.
I suspect doing it right below 50Hz will do wonders. I will confess that although I heard the potential firsthand, I never had a good enough XO to fully experience such a setup (by that I mean transparent enough XO to not affect the main high-pass).

 

[NekoAudio]

If I buy an expensive pair of full range speakers that has audible bass distortion at the volume levels I want to listen at, that's a problem. The solution to the problem shouldn't be adding a sub and crossover so that my expensive full range speakers can have the bass filtered out so I can treat them like I bought a pair of monitors. I want to hear the bass I paid for in my expensive full range speakers and not neuter their bass by filtering it out.

All speakers have a limit to their bass output for a given frequency. Can't violate the laws of physics. "Full-range" speakers may play low, but that doesn't mean they can play low at higher volumes, or without an increase in distortion. Continued playback of low frequencies at high volumes also heats up the voice coil resulting in power compression / thermal compression and the accompanying distortion. So while your full-range speakers may play fine 20Hz - 20kHz at 80dB, that's unlikely to be true if you are asking it to play at 95dB, or even higher.

The first image in the Audioholics Subwoofer Measurement Standard Part I article is a perfect example of that. The manufacturer would likely state the subwoofer measured in the image has a frequency response of 14Hz - 120Hz, and maybe also state a max SPL of 100dB. But at 100dB the frequency response is only "flat" to about 25Hz. Separate from SPL, low frequency distortion can bleed into the higher frequencies. The same issue applies to woofers in a main speaker and as you would expect at a higher frequency.

To address that, you could either go with speakers that have much greater linear bass displacement capability (i.e. buy a physically bigger speaker with correspondingly larger woofers that have better Thiele-Small parameters), or integrate a subwoofer. The former is a more expensive solution than the latter, but of course it is something you could go with. Besides being expensive, it does also limit your choices since there are very few speakers that a truly full range at louder listening volumes. For movies or bass-distorted music or pipe organs or the 1812 Overture, you will pretty much need a subwoofer, or a main speaker that is essentially incorporating powered subwoofers. Especially if you want to play back at, or close to, reference levels.

For what it's worth, I have set the crossover point for our pair of Magico M2's at 50Hz when used with subwoofers.