That is interesting. Could you say a bit more about how the A3 compared to the Eggleston Andra? I thought the Andra was considerably more expensive and highly regarded. I used to own a pair of Eggleston Rosas. Thanks.
Does anybody have the Magico A3 speakers?
- Thread starter TomiIV
- Start date
That is interesting. Could you say a bit more about how the A3 compared to the Eggleston Andra? I thought the Andra was considerably more expensive and highly regarded. I used to own a pair of Eggleston Rosas. Thanks.
mep
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2013
- Messages
- 5,092
Which version of the Andra? Didn't the Boston gang already pass judgement on the A3 on WBF?
Mep, I think Daveoo specifically mentioned the Eggleston Andra III SEs.
I don't know what you mean about the Boston "gang" passing judgement on the A3. I've never heard it so have no opinion except for what I have read. I did see it at Goodwin's High End and wanted to hear it but couldn't. It is good looking and seems to be built to high standard. People say it sounds great. Is that a "judgement"?
KeithR
Active member
I heard the A3s on Vac monoblocks at the Newport show for around an hour last June. They are definitely a more left brained speaker - I asked the gentleman next to me what he thought and he said he found them lacking life and didn't find them involving. I agreed with his assessment, but whether it was the amp, room, or whatnot I can not be for sure. Show conditions are always a crap shoot. YMMV.
mep
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2013
- Messages
- 5,092
From post #780 in Ack’s thread about his system:
“Don't forget that the original S5 had serious issues as well, as did the V2 (though I know you liked it), and last but not least, the new A3 which has been described internally among us as a piece of junk. It may well be that the M3 just does not have the low-end drive to pressurize that big room, and it ends up sounding thin; and perhaps the entire speaker cannot fill that room. The truth is that in over half a dozen times, that speaker has left me completely cold.”
mep
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2013
- Messages
- 5,092
Here’s the link to the comment from Ack to PeterA:
https://www.whatsbestforum.com/threads/acks-system-end-of-round-1.2740/page-39
https://www.whatsbestforum.com/threads/acks-system-end-of-round-1.2740/page-39
daveoo
New member
Hi
I found the highs of the A3 were more extended than the Andra. A3 had more air and sparkle. The soundstage was more revealing with the A3. The mids more transparent and the bass controlled better with the A3.
I certainly found the A3s more exciting and dynamic than the Andra in the current treated listing room 14X26 ft. The room is not perfect as I have corrected a huge 60 Hz node. I use an old Stahl Tek CD with Doug Sax walking around a room and someone with in and out of phase voice to position the speakers. Remember the T+A Amp 3000 and Power Supply 3000. Plus the 3000 preamp and Media/SACD 3100 color my view of the A3s. I bet the A3s have less of the excitement that horn speakers like Duos and Trios have.
As for the Andra, I was planning to sell them, but I didn't have much hope for a fair price in my area. I just moved them 200 miles and set them up in a 12X26 room with Clayton M300s and a Rockna DAC. What a great sound, more warm and soothing. And yet great soundstage even if the highs are not as exciting. The bass isn't as punchy but it goes organ note low and is just another valid interpretation. The room is treated also but just with my intuition and ears. I gave the Andras a big hug and moved the Piega TC-70X speakers to the side. I think the Andras do sound better in this second location vs where the A3s are located.
Qualifications are many as mentioned above, including my ears which are sensitive to excess 2-5K Hz range (especially if the sound has grunge). However it took a move to recognize the Andra III SE as a great speaker also. Probably my fault.
Someday I will retire to the second location and spend months or years matching my system.
Add: The A3s are now positioned straight into the room, not angled to the listener. The Andras usually get toed in toward the listener.
I found the highs of the A3 were more extended than the Andra. A3 had more air and sparkle. The soundstage was more revealing with the A3. The mids more transparent and the bass controlled better with the A3.
I certainly found the A3s more exciting and dynamic than the Andra in the current treated listing room 14X26 ft. The room is not perfect as I have corrected a huge 60 Hz node. I use an old Stahl Tek CD with Doug Sax walking around a room and someone with in and out of phase voice to position the speakers. Remember the T+A Amp 3000 and Power Supply 3000. Plus the 3000 preamp and Media/SACD 3100 color my view of the A3s. I bet the A3s have less of the excitement that horn speakers like Duos and Trios have.
As for the Andra, I was planning to sell them, but I didn't have much hope for a fair price in my area. I just moved them 200 miles and set them up in a 12X26 room with Clayton M300s and a Rockna DAC. What a great sound, more warm and soothing. And yet great soundstage even if the highs are not as exciting. The bass isn't as punchy but it goes organ note low and is just another valid interpretation. The room is treated also but just with my intuition and ears. I gave the Andras a big hug and moved the Piega TC-70X speakers to the side. I think the Andras do sound better in this second location vs where the A3s are located.
Qualifications are many as mentioned above, including my ears which are sensitive to excess 2-5K Hz range (especially if the sound has grunge). However it took a move to recognize the Andra III SE as a great speaker also. Probably my fault.
Someday I will retire to the second location and spend months or years matching my system.
Add: The A3s are now positioned straight into the room, not angled to the listener. The Andras usually get toed in toward the listener.
Last edited:
Thanks Mep. Those are Ack's words, not mine. I have not heard the A3. I don't think he has either. Al M. has heard them and did not like the way they sounded in that demo at Goodwins. I did hear the M3 at Goodwins with Ron Resnick and something was seriously amiss, which is the genesis of my response in that thread. That is, that the system with the M3, Spectral, brand new Basis and MSL cartridge, MIT, sounded quite poor. Based on the wonderful things I have read here about both the M3 and the A3, and my great appreciation for the Q3 and M Pro, I strongly suspect something was wrong with my demo of the M3. I can't speak to why Al M. did not enjoy the A3.
So, as far as passing judgement, in that thread I made it quite clear that I remain open minded about these speakers despite not enjoying my demo with the M3 and hearing my good friend's thoughts about the A3. I have owned two Magico speakers, Mini 3 and now the Q3, and I have utmost respect for the designers, the brand and their products. I actually really liked the V2 also, as mentioned in that thread.
As I have not heard the A3, one can not attribute any judgement about its sound to me. I hope that clarifies things a bit.
Peter - Does Ron have a system yet? He was planning his system when my kids were born. They’re now getting ready for college.
He is renovating his house and is in the process of assembling what might well be an extraordinary system. He has most of the components and is just waiting for his dedicated listening room to be completed. It should be quite special.
A few things:
1) I have since listened to the A3s - I agree with Al M's internal comments to us about it, verbatim
2) I have repeatedly written under my system thread that I don't care for the M3s in over half a dozen auditions. Your one impression is not dissimilar. For one thing, I find the bass lacking in body. Frankly, the speaker reminds me of the ML CLX: fast, detailed, coherent, but when it comes to real body and bottom end extension, it's just not there; I see a few M3 owners using subs, and I can see why. Overall, I continue to find the sound uninvolving, unlike my own heavily modified speakers driven by the exact same Spectral electronics and lesser sources and cables, and in your average living room w/o treatments.
3) Overall, I still hold Magico in very high regard, but to these ears, there have been some products with serious issues - this applies to just about every manufacturer
Thanks Peter. On the other topic, I’ve heard numerous not so complimentary comments about demos at this location. I wonder why? Did you get any indication? Was it the associated gear? The rooms? It’s puzzling because the A3’s and M3’s sound amazing.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
CPP
Active member
Mike will you have the A3's set up for the Fla Show ?
mep
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2013
- Messages
- 5,092
Ack wrote those words directly to you on the thread which certainly implied that you were part of the group that described the A3 as a piece of junk so the only thing that has been clarified is that you didn't listen to the A3s before judgement was passed.
Mike, I have my suspicions, but given the nature of the industry, the personalities involved, and the interests involved, I'd rather not share my views on a public forum. You and Goodwin's are both Magico dealers, so I'd rather not get involved in a public discussion about this. I hope you understand.
I asked the dealer specifically what accounted for the sonics of that demo and never received an answer. Goodwins is my local dealer, and I have had some wonderful demonstrations in that location. One reads and hears negative things all the time about specific brands, dealers and individuals, I don't think this is any different. Everyone has a viewpoint.
With more and more dealers and manufacturers posting on forums, I, for one, find it very difficult to be candid about opinions, lest someone is offended. You can simply look at some of the threads and the drama that ensues.
Mep, please show me where I described the A3 as a piece of junk? You keep writing that I have passed judgement on the A3. Where and when have I done so. In fact, I suggested to Al M. that he audition the A3 specifically because I liked my Q3 so much and he was in the market for a new speaker at that price point. I don't know if he went to audition the A3 specifically because I suggested it. You would have to ask him. Regarding Ack's comments to me: People share opinions with me all the time. That does not mean I agree with them or even comment about it.
I did not realize that Ack has now since heard the A3. That is new information to me and seems to have occured much after his earlier comments. He has not discussed his actual A3 listening impressions with me. I just read about it a few minutes ago hear.
Regarding the M3, I liked my earlier demo of the M3 very much and argued quite a bit with Ack via email about our differing opinions. It was only the second time I heard them with different LPs, and some different components, but in the same room, that I did not like them. Ack has a more consistent negative opinion about the speaker. As I have written repeatedly, I remain open minded simply because I loved it the first time I heard it, and I love my friend's M Pro. The M3 is the clear descendent of the MPro. I even went to a dealership in NYC to hear the M3, but it was not set up, so that will have to wait for another time.
Again, if you claim that I passed judgment about the A3's sonics by describing it as a "piece of junk", please show me where I did so.