Magico M????

The only thing I would disagree with Mike on, is the bass. I actually think the S5 mk 2 is more accurate in the bass. It is also reaches much lower and has much more bass slam. If you are into some electronic / rock music which depends heavily on the bass lines, you may be better served by the S5 mk 2 (or jump straight to the M6).

If you really want to rock out, I would recommend the S7. The bass response is amazing, totally visceral in its impact.

Ken
 
I’d love myself a pair of M2 or S3 mk3. Maybe a few years down the road. Currently I’m still enjoying my S3 mk1, which BTW became “obsolete” a few months after I bought them due to the release of S3 mk2.

But, I wouldn’t quit Magico. I just need to quit a generation. S3 mk1 —> S3 mk3. By the time I sell my S3 mk1, I’d have used them up or enjoyed them enough that I probably wouldn’t care the resale value. Haha

^ see, there’s a third position in all this.
 
Interesting. I can understand that. In some ways I preferred the bass of my S5mk1 over my MPros. With my S5's they almost pressurized the room (which is hard to do since it's got opening to other rooms) and I thought the MPro with one more 10" woofer would do the trick but it has less bass in the power (or 'punch') region. The bass is deeper and more refined, but not satisfying for rock (in *my* room of course).

This is a very interesting statement from someone who obviously knows as a former and current owner.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
Interesting. I can understand that. In some ways I preferred the bass of my S5mk1 over my MPros. With my S5's they almost pressurized the room (which is hard to do since it's got opening to other rooms) and I thought the MPro with one more 10" woofer would do the trick but it has less bass in the power (or 'punch') region. The bass is deeper and more refined, but not satisfying for rock (in *my* room of course).

Interesting comment, Ian. I wonder how the measurements differ between these two speakers. I can't really remember the bass sound of your S5s, but the M Pros on solo cello and acoustic bass are amazing. Those three bass drivers hardly move.

I think you bring up an important point, not often discussed with speakers: how they perform with different types of music. I also wonder if the amplification you used/use with these two different speakers is a factor with the bass quality and quantity in your challenging room.
 
My S5 mk 2 pressurized the room like no other speaker that graced it before (or after). They have the authority and ease in the lowest octaves that few speakers can match. Add to that an impressive speed and articulation, and we are talking about reference calibre LF reproduction.
 
I think we all have different views of what bass should be. To my ears, there is just no contest when comparing bass quality of M series vs S series and S series is superb. Probably second best on the market (with respect to cone and domes) IMO. The M series bass quality is as good as I’ve heard. I spent nearly 2 years comparing M3 bass to S5 mk2 Bass in the same room. You can follow along the bass notes on the M3 with much better definition than the S5 mk2 - and like I said, S5 mk2 is superb.

But if you’re someone who likes what I call “woofy woofy” bass - lots of air moving around without much bass definition, then you would probably think Wilson has better bass than Magico. For me, a speaker with articulate bass and bass definition is far harder to achieve especially in a “box”.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Mike, following bass lines is a good test. I like timpani on orchestral music and the massed celli. Did you ever compare the two speakers playing the same solo drum track at realistic volume? Which sounded more real?
 
Someone have asked about the S5 mk 2 vs M3 differencies.

In short: the M3 is even more refined. It is actually hard to imagine for S5 mk2 owner, since the S5 mk 2 is such a refined speaker. But once you hear the M3, you will immediately understand what I mean. The M3 sounds even more natural, with a certain unforced, liquid quality to it. It images and disappears better. You offers even more HF resolution and smoothness - the M3 is probably the smoothest sounding speaker I have ever heard.

'Smooth' can have both positive and negative connotations. What exactly do you mean by this adjective, applied to the M3?
 
So Mike, if S5 mk2 is second best cone/dome in the bass region, the best is? M6? :)
Since you compared the S5 and M3 in your room, which is not small, do you think M3 is absolutely adequate without subs? Most of the people owning M3 are using them with subs i believe. And if not, do you think Magico will produce a model between the M3 and M6 anytime soon?
 
I think what we’re discussing is really a question of quality vs. quantity or gourmet vs. gourmand. I personally would always prefer quality or gourmet but I know some rock and roll enthusiasts who would take quantity or gourmand.

Ken
 
I think what we’re discussing is really a question of quality vs. quantity or gourmet vs. gourmand. I personally would always prefer quality or gourmet but I know some rock and roll enthusiasts who would take quantity or gourmand.

Ken

No. With rock I want both slam and punch on one hand, and precision and articulation on the other. There's no gourmand without gourmet.
 
I think you bring up an important point, not often discussed with speakers: how they perform with different types of music. I also wonder if the amplification you used/use with these two different speakers is a factor with the bass quality and quantity in your challenging room.

Important point you’re making, Peter.

In my system the rock’n roll test is absolutely essential for any kind of equipment. If I am happy with the “audiophile” qualities of a component, the next level additional test is to put on some rock. But of course, if the audiophile test is failed, the component is out.

But the rock test is simple: in the lows damped distorted guitar must make a deep and solid “thump” when strummed (test it e.g. on “Lola Montez” from Volbeat) and the distorted highs must sound a bit dirty (test e.g. with Eddie stuff, “Runaround” works ok). Only a few things are worse for me, than polite sounding distorted guitar.

This is also the reason, I am so happy with the S3 mk2. It just does it all.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
So Mike, if S5 mk2 is second best cone/dome in the bass region, the best is? M6? :)
Since you compared the S5 and M3 in your room, which is not small, do you think M3 is absolutely adequate without subs? Most of the people owning M3 are using them with subs i believe. And if not, do you think Magico will produce a model between the M3 and M6 anytime soon?

For me, I absolutely don't feel the M3's need subs. If you recall, I had them paired with some REL's and Jim and I both felt they were adding nothing and in fact taking away. Would M3's with Q-Sub's change that equation, oh yeah, I would imagine so. But for me, I really enjoy the M3's the way they are and after two years have never felt the need to add subs, although as a dealer, I probably should get some Q-Sub 15's in here one day. :audiophile:

No clue on Magico's product plans.
 
No. With rock I want both slam and punch on one hand, and precision and articulation on the other. There's no gourmand without gourmet.

In a perfect world, who wouldn’t? But in reality, you have speaker like the S7 that can deliver tremendous bass slam and a speaker like the M3 that delivers more articulate bass but with less slam. Both are terrific speakers.

Ken
 
In a perfect world, who wouldn’t? But in reality, you have speaker like the S7 that can deliver tremendous bass slam and a speaker like the M3 that delivers more articulate bass but with less slam. Both are terrific speakers.

Ken

Yes, of course, both would be great. But we are now discussing the differences between two distinct lines of speakers and those who have compared them directly do point out differences between the two. I think your comment about quality vs quantity is a good one. I went back and forth when I added two JL Audio subs to my Magico Mini 2s. In the end, I slightly preferred quality bass without the subs over quantity with the subs for the type of music I mostly listen to.

For now, it seems to be a choice. Perhaps one day a company will develop the perfect speaker that does it all in the mid size category.
 
Yes, of course, both would be great. But we are now discussing the differences between two distinct lines of speakers and those who have compared them directly do point out differences between the two. I think your comment about quality vs quantity is a good one. I went back and forth when I added two JL Audio subs to my Magico Mini 2s. In the end, I slightly preferred quality bass without the subs over quantity with the subs for the type of music I mostly listen to.

Yes, but your particular room, which otherwise has great acoustics, poses unusual problems when it comes to integrating subwoofers with monitors. Perhaps they would integrate better with your Q3s.
 
In a perfect world, who wouldn’t? But in reality, you have speaker like the S7 that can deliver tremendous bass slam and a speaker like the M3 that delivers more articulate bass but with less slam. Both are terrific speakers.

Ken

While I don't doubt that quality of bass slam and of bass articulation can be separate, I wonder if sometimes allegedly better 'articulation' can be the result of the ear being guided towards articulation in the absence of slam and punch.
 
Back
Top