Magico S3 mk2

[GSOphile]

Regarding the base drivers in the new S3 Mk IIs, the CF does look better, but the diameter of the cones has also been increased in size from 8 inches to 9 inches.

 

[a.wayne]

TBH - and I'm speakeing as an ex-S5 mk 2 owner here, which has the aluminium cone vs CF in my new M3 - the cone matrial in bass driver doesn't really matter that much. They need to have certain mass to reach low resonant freq [fs] anyway, and with that much mass you can make the cone almost perfectly stiff. Shure, CF may have more internal damping and have smoother FR on its top end (say over 1kHz), but then again - that would only matter if you were building a 2-way, not a 3-way with 6" mid driver, where the woofers are crossed over very low.

Personally, I wouldn't be surprised, if Magico changed the cone material for looks only, to match the mid driver and make the product stand out more vs the competition (hey, we have CF woofers and you don't !).

IMO making your buying desicion on the woofer cone material used, makes absolutely no sense at all.

The S5 mk 2 is such a terrific speaker, that I expect them to be in production for at least 3 more years.

Alloy cones have other issues , I would wager the change was necessary to give the bass more consistency in its performance..


Regards

 

[Melbguy1]

Alloy cones have other issues , I would wager the change was necessary to give the bass more consistency in its performance..


Regards

Wayne, the aluminium diaphragm Magico use in the S5 Mk2 has a special coating which likely has a damping effect. Magico were also able to use a lighter diaphragm for the S5 Mk2 due to the graphene/carbon Nano-tec dust cap which increases stiffness, whilst further reducing weight. And don't forget, the dust cap on the S5 Mk2/S7 takes up a fair proportion of the driver area and would likely have some damping effect due to the carbon/rohacell material.

The other point to consider is the design features of the cabinet itself which reduce internal standing waves from the bass drivers (ie: curved 1/2" thick aluminium enclosure, machined 3D convex top plate), thus reducing distortion. JA's measurements in his Stereophile review show an even response and a gentle roll off. Indeed JA summed up by saying "There can be no question: My measurements of Magico's S5 Mk.II reveal it to be a superbly well-engineered loudspeaker".

Fig.5 Magico S5 Mk.II, spatially averaged, 1/6-octave response in JA's listening room (red); and of Crystal Arabesque Minissimo Diamond (blue).

Fig.2 Magico S5 Mk.II, anechoic response on tweeter axis at 50", averaged across 30° horizontal window and corrected for microphone response, with nearfield responses of midrange unit (red) and woofers (green), plotted in the ratios of the square roots of the radiating areas, and the complex sum of the nearfield midrange and woofer responses plotted below 300Hz.

 

[Elberoth]

a.wayne likes to stir the pot. The S3 uses a modified version of one of the best (and most expensive) 8" woofers available - ScanSpeak Revelator 22W/8857T-00. Don't let anyone tell you is not a first class design.

 

[Elberoth]

Regarding the base drivers in the new S3 Mk IIs, the CF does look better, but the diameter of the cones has also been increased in size from 8 inches to 9 inches.

I believe they had always been almost 9" (220mm).

 

[Kuoppis]

I believe they had always been almost 9" (220mm).

Nope, mk1 is 8", mk2 is 9".


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[a.wayne]

a.wayne likes to stir the pot. The S3 uses a modified version of one of the best (and most expensive) 8" woofers available - ScanSpeak Revelator 22W/8857T-00. Don't let anyone tell you is not a first class design.

I dont see how I'm stirring the pot , i only offered another reason as to why alon would change from an ally woofer , instead of cosmetics as you purpose , my comment is based on years of developement and observation , CF woofers are not new , ally woofers have stability issues because of their high temperature coefficient, because of , is why i suggested his change was more than cosmetics as you suggested Adam ..

 

[a.wayne]

Wayne, the aluminium diaphragm Magico use in the S5 Mk2 has a special coating which likely has a damping effect. Magico were also able to use a lighter diaphragm for the S5 Mk2 due to the graphene/carbon Nano-tec dust cap which increases stiffness, whilst further reducing weight. And don't forget, the dust cap on the S5 Mk2/S7 takes up a fair proportion of the driver area and would likely have some damping effect due to the carbon/rohacell material.

The other point to consider is the design features of the cabinet itself which reduce internal standing waves from the bass drivers (ie: curved 1/2" thick aluminium enclosure, machined 3D convex top plate), thus reducing distortion. JA's measurements in his Stereophile review show an even response and a gentle roll off. Indeed JA summed up by saying "There can be no question: My measurements of Magico's S5 Mk.II reveal it to be a superbly well-engineered loudspeaker".

Fig.5 Magico S5 Mk.II, spatially averaged, 1/6-octave response in JA's listening room (red); and of Crystal Arabesque Minissimo Diamond (blue).

Fig.2 Magico S5 Mk.II, anechoic response on tweeter axis at 50", averaged across 30° horizontal window and corrected for microphone response, with nearfield responses of midrange unit (red) and woofers (green), plotted in the ratios of the square roots of the radiating areas, and the complex sum of the nearfield midrange and woofer responses plotted below 300Hz.

I think you are mixing up the two issues , ally woofers like everything known brings negatives and positives , nothing to do with the enclosure , which is universally acknowledge as being pretty inert to typical cabinet resonances and yes the Magico is a well engineered loudspeaker system.


My ally comment was counter to Adams assertion , in where he states the new woofer was for cosmetics , my take it was to improve the consistency of the bass ..


Regards

 

[Elberoth]

I dont see how I'm stirring the pot , i only offered another reason as to why alon would change from an ally woofer , instead of cosmetics as you purpose , my comment is based on years of developement and observation , CF woofers are not new , ally woofers have stability issues because of their high temperature coefficient, because of , is why i suggested his change was more than cosmetics as you suggested Adam ..

I have no reasons to doubt in your personal experience. I have used the term to stir the pot, since you seem to like to engage in discussions, only for the sake of it.

That said, Scan Speak has been a leading drive units manufacturer for almost 30 years and I have no reasons to doubt at their choice of aluminium vs other materials for their premium woofer design.

 

[Elberoth]

Nope, mk1 is 8", mk2 is 9".


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Put a ruler across the drive unit in your S3 mk 1 and post the pic. I believe you will measure 210mm across the two opposite screw holes and 222mm for the outer basket diameter.

 

[a.wayne]

I have no reasons to doubt in your personal experience. I have used the term to stir the pot, since you seem to like to engage in discussions, only for the sake of it.

That said, Scan Speak has been a leading drive units manufacturer for almost 30 years and I have no reasons to doubt at their choice of aluminium vs other materials for their premium woofer design.

So discussion is stirring the pot ...?

Many "guys" make ally woofers Adam, same reason Mercedes makes V8 and V12's , it's all about sales regardless of the dichotomy chosen. Ally Ribbon diaphragms , have the same consistency issues too, including a "damping" material is one method of stabilizing the ally.


If there was only one way to skin the "Audio cat" everyone would be using ally for their woofers, most of the time manufacturers are forced to follow current zeitgeist and add audio bling for sales, not because they are superior , so in this regards, your Cosmetic comments have some merit , i was only offering the other side of the coin.

BTW, Many moons ago , it was Dynaudio Esotar tweeters or you were dirt , today it's diamond ......

 

[a.wayne]

Put a ruler across the drive unit in your S3 mk 1 and post the pic. I believe you will measure 210mm across the two opposite screw holes and 222mm for the outer basket diameter.

Woofer Diaphragm are measured from inside frame to inside frame , adding a thicker ( read wider ) frame does not make a bigger driver, even if classified as such..


regards...

 

[Kuoppis]

Put a ruler across the drive unit in your S3 mk 1 and post the pic. I believe you will measure 210mm across the two opposite screw holes and 222mm for the outer basket diameter.

Well, on the one hand, the measure relates to membrane size. On the other hand, that is what Magico states in their specs.

Please let Magico know that you know better, would you.

 

[Melbguy1]

I think you are mixing up the two issues , ally woofers like everything known brings negatives and positives , nothing to do with the enclosure , which is universally acknowledge as being pretty inert to typical cabinet resonances and yes the Magico is a well engineered loudspeaker system.


My ally comment was counter to Adams assertion , in where he states the new woofer was for cosmetics , my take it was to improve the consistency of the bass ..


Regards

Thanks fpr the clarification Wayne. Though just like everything in high end audio, it comes down to implementation. Magico describe the S5 Mk2's 10" bass units as having "ultra-stiff aluminium cones that are specially treated and finished with (large) graphene dust caps". Magico were obviously successful in implementing a powerful, accurate & well-controlled 10 incher which blends perfectly with the mid and high frequencies going by reviews by respected guys like MC and JA.

With that said, in the case of the S3 Mk2, I think you're atleast partly right. With the 6" graphene midrange unit, the basic design of the S3 Mk1's bass unit offered less self-damping and opportunity to save weight compared to the S5 mk2's 10 incher for example. One solution would be to move to an all-Carbon Nano-tec/Graphene diaphragm. Though I also agree with Adam that the bass driver diaphragm material on full-range 3-way speakers is less crtiical than the midrange or tweeter. if it was, the Q Subs would have had Graphene diaphragms. Hence I think Marketing likely helped dictate the choice to use graphene diaphragms in this case.

 

[a.wayne]

Stay Tuned with the Subs , ally allows an advantage with the Subs, you can add mass , the added mass brings a lower FS and FB , the stiffer cone from the mass gives better efficiency per stroke , different task when the Bass drivers have to hand off and share cabinets , all 3 have to be the same...


In a way Alon answered all questions , M has no ally cones and as one of the leaders in his class of speakers he sets the tone and does not have to play to audio zeitgiest , so imo it was done to improve the bass consistency ...

Stay tuned , Adam will report such in about 45 days ... By PM of course


regards

 

[Elberoth]

Well, on the one hand, the measure relates to membrane size. On the other hand, that is what Magico states in their specs.

Please let Magico know that you know better, would you.

The size you see in the specs never relates to the diaphragm size. The diaphragm size in this case of this driver is ~ 7 inch. What you see is most often approx basket size. I'm saying approx since manufacturers differ here greatly - some woofers advertised as 8" are less than 200mm, and some are over 220mm in size.

For this very reason, Madi Sound puts the drive units in the 'approx' category.

You have the 'approx 8 inch' woofers, 'approx 10 inch' woofers etc.:

https://www.madisoundspeakerstore.com/approx-8-woofers/

I believe the size of the S3 mk 1 and S3 mk 2 woofers is identical. Macico has just corrected the specs. The drive unit they use is 222 millimeters in size, which translates to 8.74015748 inches. They used to call it 8 inch (which is how Scan Speak calls them), but in fact it is closer to 9 inch, so they now call it 9 inch (probably sells better).

 

[GSOphile]

The size you see in the specs never relates to the diaphragm size. What you see is most often the basket size. It is the same with drive units manufacturers. In case of Scan Speak, the first two digits of the model # inform you about the basket size in cm (22W/8857T-00 = 22cm). The diaphragm size in this case of this driver is ~ 7 inch ...

I believe the size of the S3 mk 1 and S3 mk 2 woofers is identical. Macico has just corrected the specs. The drive unit they use is 222 millimeters in size, which translates to 8.74015748 inches. They used to call it 8 inch, but in fact it is closer to 9 inch, so they now call it 9 inch.

I agree. I just measured my new S3 Mk II.

 

[Mike]

While you guys are busy with measuring tapes, I'm busy listening. I moved them into the big room today (by themselves). F*&! do they sound good!

My SPOD's also arrived. Gotta get busy on installing those too.

 

[Kuoppis]

Where do you get that stupid nonsense from you write? Do yo make it up as you go?

There are probably as many naming conventions as there are drive unit manufacturers. Maybe one of them does it the way you describe, that does not mean the whole world does.

Further, S3 mk1 and mk2 woofers are completely different. Different size, different materials. Read the specs.

It is really hilarious to see one intellectually challenged Magico dealer from Poland and another one from Australia behaving on this forum as if they would design this stuff.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Elberoth]

Where do you get that stupid nonsense from you write? Do yo make it up as you go?

There are probably as many naming conventions as there are drive unit manufacturers. Maybe one of them does it the way you describe, that does not mean the whole world does.

Further, S3 mk1 and mk2 woofers are completely different. Different size, different materials. Read the specs.

It is really hilarious to see one intellectually challenged Magico dealer from Poland and another one from Australia behaving on this forum as if they would design this stuff.

There is no need for name calling. Let's keep this conversation civilised and factual.

Please name a drive unit manufactures who calls their drive units by the 'membrane size' (which was you claim). I'm not aware of such manufacturer.

Since GSOphile already measured his S3 mk 2 woofers, we are only waiting for you to measure yours.

PS. I have never been a dealer or a distributor for ANY brand.