Magico S5 update

[Dpod4]

Is it? Is the bar moving that much and that quickly? I really like Magico but it's one of those brands that I won't purchase again simply because I'm looking for a greater value for my purchase. By that I don't mean sound quality for the dollar (a measure by which Magico at last equals some of the best speakers I've heard), but rather to buy something less consumable. Less disposable. Less subject to upgrades. This measure is different for each of us obviously, but if I invest $30,000+ in a speaker I want to be satisfied for a long (long long) time and not be worrying about the new models and revisions with trickle down technologies every 1 or 2 years.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This is partly why I am selling my S5 speakers on Audiogon now. They are amazing and even my brother who owns the bigger Maggies (I am buying 20.7s) thinks I am nuts selling the S5s after hearing them. He said he had not heard better bass on a speaker at any price - and he just auditioned the 6 figure Wilson speakers.

 

[LVB]

Not sure I follow the logic, you rather buy a “lesser” product (from performance/technology stand point), just so it will stay “lesser” for a longer time, then buy the “best” now, knowing that it will not stay the “best”, but still be very good, for a long time...
BTW, I don’t see any of the “lesser” products keep their value better in the used market. In fact, one can argue that Magico value is typically higher on the used market

 

[kev313]

Not sure I follow the logic, you rather buy a “lesser” product (from performance/technology stand point), just so it will stay “lesser” for a longer time, then buy the “best” now, knowing that it will not stay the “best”, but still be very good, for a long time...
BTW, I don’t see any of the “lesser” products keep their value better in the used market. In fact, one can argue that Magico value is typically higher on the used market

Is this addressed to my post? If so, to the point about value, I tried to express that my criticism in this regard was more of a personal, subjective, view. I simply find it somewhat maddening that a new benchmark is purportedly achieved every 12-15 months thus rendering a recent SOTA purchase somewhat less satisfying. Again, from my perspective.

To you first point, that's not at all what I tried to convey. I'd rather not buy from a company that engages in the constant update practice. I guess at the heart of that is my suspicion that a new benchmark in sonic reproduction is not achieved every 12-15 months. Funny. That should totally obviate the negative feelings raised in my first paragraph. But it doesn't. Funny.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[socfan12]

Is this addressed to my post? If so, to the point about value, I tried to express that my criticism in this regard was more of a personal, subjective, view. I simply find it somewhat maddening that a new benchmark is purportedly achieved every 12-15 months thus rendering a recent SOTA purchase somewhat less satisfying. Again, from my perspective.

To you first point, that's not at all what I tried to convey. I'd rather not buy from a company that engages in the constant update practice. I guess at the heart of that is my suspicion that a new benchmark in sonic reproduction is not achieved every 12-15 months. Funny. That should totally obviate the negative feelings raised in my first paragraph. But it doesn't. Funny.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I thought LVB's response was to Darrin's post? But he can clarify.

 

[kev313]

I thought LVB's response was to Darrin's post? But he can clarify.

Could be!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Myles B. Astor]

Is this addressed to my post? If so, to the point about value, I tried to express that my criticism in this regard was more of a personal, subjective, view. I simply find it somewhat maddening that a new benchmark is purportedly achieved every 12-15 months thus rendering a recent SOTA purchase somewhat less satisfying. Again, from my perspective.

To you first point, that's not at all what I tried to convey. I'd rather not buy from a company that engages in the constant update practice. I guess at the heart of that is my suspicion that a new benchmark in sonic reproduction is not achieved every 12-15 months. Funny. That should totally obviate the negative feelings raised in my first paragraph. But it doesn't. Funny.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Just to set the record straight, the S7 is a new speaker in a different price range than the S5. The S5 has been around for several years (around 4 now?), as have the S3 and S1. In fact, the only Magico model was recently updated is the Q7. That was because of the technology, especially the tweeter, developed for the M-Project. Alon couldn't let their SOTA speaker not include the best Magico had to offer. So in reality, there hasn't been a lot of changes in the S or Q-Magico line.

I am though curious which companies nowadays update equipment like we change underwear? Years ago that was the case for say ARC; not so any more. My cj ART underwent three updates in the 12 years I owned it. Is that too much? I don't think an update after 3 or 4 years is out of the question. How often do you change your computer?

 

[LVB]

Is this addressed to my post? If so, to the point about value, I tried to express that my criticism in this regard was more of a personal, subjective, view. I simply find it somewhat maddening that a new benchmark is purportedly achieved every 12-15 months thus rendering a recent SOTA purchase somewhat less satisfying. Again, from my perspective.

To you first point, that's not at all what I tried to convey. I'd rather not buy from a company that engages in the constant update practice. I guess at the heart of that is my suspicion that a new benchmark in sonic reproduction is not achieved every 12-15 months. Funny. That should totally obviate the negative feelings raised in my first paragraph. But it doesn't. Funny.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I agree, it is frustrating to know that what you just bought as "the best" is no longer the case. But again, it is a physiological issue, as you stated yourself the "new" thing is typically only marginally better, certainly no a real reason to rush and sell what you have, or feel bad about it.

 

[kev313]

Just to set the record straight, the S7 is a new speaker in a different price range than the S5. The S5 has been around for several years (around 4 now?), as have the S3 and S1. In facdt, the only Magico model was recently updated is the Q7. That was because of the technology, especially the tweeter, developed for the M-Project. So there hasn't been a lot of changes in the Magico line.

I am though curious which companies nowadays update equipment like we change underwear. Years ago that was true for say ARC; not so any more. I don't think an update after 3 or 4 years is out of the question. How often do you change your computer?

My last MacBook made it from 2007-2015, but I really don't look at $2000 computers and $50,000 speakers as comparable. ARC was rolling revisions and new models in their preamps pretty regularly 3 or so years ago. In any event, my general impression is that Magico had put out a lot of product in the past decade.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Myles B. Astor]

My last MacBook made it from 2007-2015, but I really don't look at $2000 computers and $50,000 speakers as comparable. ARC was rolling revisions and new models in their preamps pretty regularly 3 or so years ago. In any event, my general impression is that Magico had put out a lot of product in the past decade.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

ARC regularly updating just three years ago? Guess I missed it or don't consider a cap upgrade an update. It was an optional update. Regular was an ARC 6A/B/C/D/E/?

I also think the comment ignores how products/research happen. You can always do something else in the course of designing a product but somewhere along the line a designer has to draw the line and bring the product to market. But what happens if something becomes available material wise or something the designer wanted to originally incorporate into the product but it broke the bank then now becomes cost effective to do? Should the designer ignore that? What if something that was developed for a more expensive product can be incorporated into other products in the manufacturers line?

But let's get back to the Magico. Where is the update there? Nor does the S7 make the S5 any worse than say an Alexia makes a Sasha sound worse. Both are really great speakers. I still loved my S5s when I came home.

 

[kev313]

ARC regularly updating just three years ago? Guess I missed it or don't consider a cap upgrade an update. It was an optional update. Regular was an ARC 6A/B/C/D/E/?

But let's get back to the Magico. Where is the update there?

Easy tiger. I said it was my impression that Magico released a lot of product over the last decade. That is, my impression as an audio consumer generally aware of the comings and goings of major audio producers. Not the detailed knowledge of someone who devotes a lot of their personal and professional time to discussing the minute details of various speakers. I'm fully prepared to concede that, but I'm also fully willing to concede that you care more. Again, this is my impression as a consumer. For me the distance (in time) between the original mini and the V2, for example, to their current lineup does not seem so vast. But in that time the lineup has changed drastically.

As a guy who would be interested in buying a really good product, and who would be willing to spend what the average audio consumer would consider to be an insane amount of money, it's a somewhat disappointing experience to think that the company found it necessary to radically revamp their design many times since you purchased their product. To tie this back to why I brought it up originally, has the line really moved that much in that amount of time?

Maybe it speaks to exactly the point that Mike raised. Some guys are into tracking, discussing, experiencing, living, breathing tweeter changes. That's cool. I'm not. It's simply not a very interesting exercise to me and is not the reason I bought into the hobby.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[BlueFox]

ARC regularly updating just three years ago? Guess I missed it or don't consider a cap upgrade an update. It was an optional update. Regular was an ARC 6A/B/C/D/E/?

I also think the comment ignores how products/research happen. You can always do something else in the course of designing a product but somewhere along the line a designer has to draw the line and bring the product to market. But what happens if something becomes available material wise or something the designer wanted to originally incorporate into the product but it broke the bank then now becomes cost effective to do? Should the designer ignore that? What if something that was developed for a more expensive product can be incorporated into other products in the manufacturers line?

But let's get back to the Magico. Where is the update there? Nor does the S7 make the S5 any worse than say an Alexia makes a Sasha sound worse. Both are really great speakers. I still loved my S5s when I came home.

Easy tiger. I said it was my impression that Magico released a lot of product over the last decade. That is, my impression as an audio consumer generally aware of the comings and goings of major audio producers. Not the detailed knowledge of someone who devotes a lot of their personal and professional time to discussing the minute details of various speakers. I'm fully prepared to concede that, but I'm also fully willing to concede that you care more. Again, this is my impression as a consumer. For me the distance (in time) between the original mini and the V2, for example, to their current lineup does not seem so vast. But in that time the lineup has changed drastically.

As a guy who would be interested in buying a really good product, and who would be willing to spend what the average audio consumer would consider to be an insane amount of money, it's a somewhat disappointing experience to think that the company found it necessary to radically revamp their design many times since you purchased their product. To tie this back to why I brought it up originally, has the line really moved that much in that amount of time?

Maybe it speaks to exactly the point that Mike raised. Some guys are into tracking, discussing, experiencing, living, breathing tweeter changes. That's cool. I'm not. It's simply not a very interesting exercise to me and is not the reason I bought into the hobby.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This is an interesting side track. I like that Magico keeps innovating every year or so. It means they aren't coasting on past ideas, but trying to improve them. I hope they soon provide an S5 upgrade. Even if I don't get it I will still enjoy my S5s.

 

[LVB]

Name one company, worth naming, that does not thrives to improve its products, a common must in commerce today. And why would you want to buy anything form a company that does not innovate? Innovation is a culture, a stagnant company cant make good products. Funny that instead of embracing and supporting innovations in this, somewhat anachronistic, field of high-end audio, you complain about it.
And, just to align your “impressions” with reality, the Mini was introduced in 2004, that is 11 years now and Magico don't “revamp” their designs, they simply improved on it.

 

[LVB]

Duplicate, ignore

 

[kev313]

Name one company, worth naming, that does not thrives to improve its products, a common must in commerce today. And why would you want to buy anything form a company that does not innovate? Innovation is a culture, a stagnant company, cant make good products. Funny that instead of embracing and supporting innovations in this, somewhat anachronistic, field of high-end audio, you complain about it.
And, just to align your “impressions” with reality, the Mini was introduced in 2004, that is 11 years now and Magico never realy “revamp” their designs, they simply improved on it.

I think you're misunderstanding what I'm trying to convey. At least misrepresenting by your use of the word "complain." I'm not complaining. I think I've been fairly clear that I fully get that other guys appreciate this part of the hobby. I understand, though, that audio forums are adversarial by nature, so I'll attempt to address your question about companies "worth naming" while recognizing that the use of the phrase telegraphs the fact that banging head on wall is about to commence. Klipsch has produced a heritage line with minor revisions over, I don't know, 50 years. What are they on now, version 3 of basically the same speakers over that time. To stick specifically to Magico, I was simply referring to what I perceived to be a high volume of new products, the vastly different styles of these speakers, and the fact that each was trumpeted as a new benchmark of some sort.

To be clear, I'm not anti-innovation. I'm simply suspicious that the bar continues to be reset in a manner that justifies the investment from a purchaser of the last generation of top of the line gear. I don't see the utility in engaging in that process as a consumer. It doesn't strike me as a particularly satisfying enterprise. Instead, it seems like a never ending keeping up with the Joneses affair that is destined to be more expensive than it is worth to me. I'm happier with products that were outdated years ago, yet still considered state of the *art* in their own way. In stating that I realize (and I feel that is important to provide context to my opinion) that I consider this hobby, my version of it anyway, to be a largely subjective pursuit. That also accounts for probably much of my dissatisfaction with the Magico way.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[BlueFox]

I agree with your idea, but disagree.

The problem, to me, is that speaker technology is still in its infancy, so it doesn't take much to be an improvement. There will always be something better, so enjoy what you have.

 

[LVB]

.... Klipsch has produced a heritage line with minor revisions over, I don't know, 50 years. What are they on now, version 3 of basically the same speakers over that time....

I just looked at Klipsch web site, and I am not sure it was a good example (I guess you missed the many other models they introduced over the years). There are probably over a 100 current different models they sell (and that is in their “home” collection only). I don’t think Klipsch could have survived on one model alone all these years.

 

[kev313]

I just looked at Klipsch web site, and I am not sure it was a good example (I guess you missed the many other models they introduced over the years). There are probably over a 100 current different models they sell (and that is in their “home” collection only). I don’t think Klipsch could have survived on one model alone all these years.

I guess I was less interested in "winning" than providing an illustration of speakers that survive (survive!) relatively unchanged. I didn't "miss" it, but that was clever. Ish. I think that the Heritage market is a bit different than the market for the other products. The point about survivability is interesting though, isn't it? Sometimes you just have to attract everyone's attention again.

To your point, though, (I think), it is rather difficult to find examples of companies that do not offer new products. I think that is a bit afield from my point, but I can nevertheless agree. That seems important. Or maybe it removes the sport? From my vantage point, I see a bit of a difference between the product releases of companies like Harbeth, Spendor, Quad, Audio Note, Shindo, Air Tight (not limiting to speakers but raised for the compatibility of approach) to that of Magico. New products, yes? At the rate of Magico and with such drastic changes from one design to the next. It doesn't seem so to me. Am I wrong? Again, that's my observation. Maybe I missed it. Maybe no one can survive if they make a speaker that everyone decides to enjoy and keep. Gosh. That would be awful. If we all had speakers we enjoyed enough to keep for a while. What was the period referenced above? 11 years. Dang. What if we enjoyed and kept our 30-60,000 speakers for 11 whole years. That would be awful. For speaker manufacturers anyway. Just thinking out loud here....there has got to be a better way for forum owners and operators to minimize the valuable service they are providing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Dpod4]

I don't feel like I am going to a lesser product just different (Maggie 20.7) that does a few things better (that I miss) and a few things not as well. The S5s are great but I am ready for a change and miss the Magnepan wall of sound which I had at tender age of 14. My comment about Magico launching new products frequently is related to ease of letting them go - less loyal. If I want to go back I can and in 3 years there will probably be three new iterations. Part of the issue is value is lost if a company too frequently comes out with a new product cannibalizing existing. Resale value goes down - not so easy to sellS5 now ....anyone want to argue that point? Compare to Magnepan - size of improvement and duration of life cycle before being replaced. It's one thing to do rapid deployment of innovations with consumer goods (eg toothpaste or laundry detergent) - different scenario on $20-150k speakers. It impacts brand loyalty especially if rapid launches are done without upgrade path. At this level of performance and price point there are not truly lesser products just different as they are all great. So yes I will factor in obsolescence when choosing components. For resale value if for no other reason.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

[LVB]

At the rate of Magico and with such drastic changes from one design to the next. It doesn't seem so to me. Am I wrong?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Well, I think that you are wrong, but that is just me. I don’t see any “drastic changes” in Magico products, I suppose you can say that going form wood/alum to alum only was a big change, but one can argue that it was a natural progression. Besides, that was 6 or so years ago. The rest is better this or better that, but core technology and materials are basically the same.
In regards to “rapid launches”, I just counted Magico line-up. I see 2 very clear hierarchy one of the S line and the other is the Q. I counted 14 models, and that includes the odd ones (Ult, and MPro). Funny enough, Wilson has the same amount of products. Focal over 30 (!!) in 6 different series, and Sonus Faber has 22 models, none existed 10 years ago (which is the time Magico has been around). Hard to argue with feeling so I am not trying to change what you feel, I just don’t see where you are coming from.

 

[kev313]

Well, I think that you are wrong, but that is just me. I don’t see any “drastic changes” in Magico products, I suppose you can say that going form wood/alum to alum only was a big change, but one can argue that it was a natural progression. Besides, that was 6 or so years ago. The rest is better this or better that, but core technology and materials are basically the same.
In regards to “rapid launches”, I just counted Magico line-up. I see 2 very clear hierarchy one of the S line and the other is the Q. I counted 14 models, and that includes the odd ones (Ult, and MPro). Funny enough, Wilson has the same amount of products. Focal over 30 (!!) in 6 different series, and Sonus Faber has 22 models, none existed 10 years ago (which is the time Magico has been around). Hard to argue with feeling so I am not trying to change what you feel, I just don’t see where you are coming from.

I can see that. I'm not specifically referring to the total number of models produced by the company, but rather the perspective of the buyer who "buys into" a high end product. If you bought a higher tier Focal or Wilson 11 years ago, there is a very good chance that your speaker still exists in the product lineup. Perhaps with changes. What about Magico? How did they treat the v3 (2007ish)? How about you M5 owners that bought in after the 2009 TAS review? 6 years later the Magico SOTA landscape is dramatically different. Is there lasting value in that $89,000 purchase? There would not be for me and I wouldn't find much comfort in calling it a natural evolution. A brief review of past sales of M5 shows many 20k listings and one as low as 16.5. Resale value isn't everything, of course, but it's certainly a reflection that your bleeding edge speakers bled out.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk