I am a Magico owner and do like the sound. Nevertheless it is striking how strong a Magico bias the comments here bear.
We have in this thread someone who has the means to decide freely and is an actual M3 owner, is coming from the fuller sounding Wilson world, and finds that Magicos can sound a bit lean for his taste. Principal lack of quality of amplification can be ruled out with Burmester and CH Precision in the driving seat.
While I find it a meaningful approach to talk about system synergy, which here has been suggested on many occasions, it is equally striking, that in last week's Wilson Yvette bashing none of the very same guys made that point in a thread about a Wilson speaker.
Yet, while e.g. the Q3 is a superbly resolving speaker, many have found it a bit lean sounding. Perhaps we have something similar here, even though from a Magico sound perspective the M3 might be 'fuller' sounding in comparison.
And while the room in question is a living room with high ceilings, we are not talking about a church or concert hall here.
What however is undeniable, if we have a whopping $70K speaker in play ($80K with the proper footers) and you basically have the option to resort to one of 3-4 amplifier manufacturers (each costing between $40-60K) or then to add $10-40K subwoofers to make them sound right, we are talking about very serious limitations for a speaker in this premium price bracket. There also must be a reason why Alon is always demoing them with subs (I generally do very strongly subscribe to the benefit adding subs brings for the mid range).
On that note, I personally think I could be very happy with the M3s, because I do like the Magico sound. Yet I am liberal enough to admit that it is not the only option there is and that the very limited amp choices with Magicos can be a kind of a problem.
Ok fanboys, now you can start the bashing. I just wanted to see whether we can get some energy going here [emoji3].
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk