Magico M2

brodricj said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
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).
 
brodricj said:
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).
Click to expand...

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

38e406d71d8d0607c948b8825f53cb3e.jpg



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
I think that is a good one. Maybe a question to inquire Magico about.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
Really? I thought the Mpods channeled cabinet noise into the Mpod elastomerics and dissipated it as heat?
 
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.
 
The MPOD measurement u all should be interested in is how much noise is eliminated on the surface they are sitting on....
 
Kingsrule said:
The MPOD measurement u all should be interested in is how much noise is eliminated on the surface they are sitting on....
Click to expand...

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.
 
I can't help but feel sad when I see a fine speaker like that end up in ridiculous installation like that.
 
brodricj said:
I can't help but feel sad when I see a fine speaker like that end up in ridiculous installation like that.
Click to expand...

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
 
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.
 
brodricj said:
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.
Click to expand...


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 ..

:)
 
PeterA said:
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.
Click to expand...


Hello Peter ,

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


Regards
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top