You are here

Log in or register to post comments
MarkBryston
MarkBryston's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 4 months ago
Joined: Mar 23 2009 - 2:22pm
The maggie letter to the editor

As I read JA's response i thought it was a well explained and very very understandable response...except its not wholly true per se.  JA states that they haven't reviewed the maggies because they wont do a speaker review without posting measurements( and of course maggie doesn't want that because it could reveal some sort of proprietary info..that makes sense). However stereo routinely reviews a lot of items without measurements including speakers!!!  I mean think about Sam's space..no measurements... Mikey's Analog Corner...no measurements( although i don't believe there have been a speaker review there).  Arts listening...trust me I haven't seen to many measurements of Lowthers!!!  Kals music in the round..no ,measurements..or Stephens entry level...no measurements there for the most part either.

 

So not really a fair response...just let the maggies get a review in the "protected" articles section of the magazine and I bet Jim would be happy to provide a review sample!!!!

deckeda
deckeda's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 days 22 hours ago
Joined: Feb 1 2006 - 7:41pm
It was a fair response

... but as you explain, an incomplete one.

I agree, Recommended Components for example contain other such non-review reviews and other less formal observations.

On the other hand, Magnepan's stance is curious at best. Why would they care if a competitor knows how their stuff measures? Any competitor who really cared could merely buy a pair and measure them whenever they wanted to ... doesn't seem plausible a competitor would sit around waiting for a magazine to measure them before making a move with their own product cycle.

JA is already on record as saying planars are harder to measure in some aspects. I'm willing to bet Magnepan is gunshy of how any measurement results would be interpreted by the public. Why, I don't know. I only care how speakers sound and whether or not my amp has a reasonable chance of driving them. The rest doesn't concern me much.

jamesgarvin
jamesgarvin's picture
Offline
Last seen: 15 hours 55 min ago
Joined: Sep 2 2005 - 12:22pm
The maggie letter to the editor

I may be wrong here, but I think the reviewers pick their products they review in the columns. They are not assigned products to review. I believe the components reviewed in the in the formal review portion of the magazine are assigned, likely based upon that component being consistent with the reviewer's system and listening preferences.

Reed
Reed's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 6 days ago
Joined: Sep 6 2005 - 5:37am
Read "The Absolute Sound" and other sources

Every time I listen to music on my maggies, I thank TAS for reviewing them.

More importantly....

Since they hold the Maggies in such high regard, they routinely mention how other reviewed equipment sounds/interacts with them as many of the reviewers have them in their systems.  I, for instance, purchased the Rogue Audio Cronos Magnum based on comments about how well it sounded with Maggies.  I could not be happier.

I could care less whether or not Maggies are covered by Stereophile.  This magazine is just one source of input.  As a further illustration, I picked up a MF V-Link based on the Stereophile review and also couldn't be happier with my purchase.

BigBuck
BigBuck's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 2 months ago
Joined: May 26 2011 - 9:13pm
I agree with the posters -

No real reason not to review the Maggies, or at least allow mention in the non-measurement columns.  After all, they are wonderful American products, and well-loved by thousands.  

 

Although I don't quite understand Magnepan's reservations.  Anyone have an historical perspective on this - it can't be a new thing? 

mav52
mav52's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 month 3 days ago
Joined: Aug 29 2011 - 10:42am
There are measurements of the

There are measurements of the Magneplaner MG1.6 in Home Theater and High Fidelity dated Sept 1, 2011 so what's the deal.

tmsorosk
tmsorosk's picture
Offline
Last seen: 24 min 18 sec ago
Joined: Dec 5 2010 - 12:34pm
BAD measurements

Couldn't care less if Stereophile reviews  panels or not , I've heard lots of them over the years and could not bring myself to like them no matter how hard I tryed or how hard friends have tryed to make me like them . There lack of warmth and steely metalic like sound is something only a mother could love . To me they sound more like electronics and less like music . 

Reed
Reed's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 6 days ago
Joined: Sep 6 2005 - 5:37am
Opposite experience

 

Actually, I have had the opposite experience.  I find that no other speaker can recreate the "I'm there" feeling like the Magnepans.  They are ruthlessly revealing to the source.  I have them mated to tubed electronics and it is majical.

However, they are extremley sensitive to the room.  I'm lucky to have a dedicated room that allows me to position them wherever I want.  I have no doubt that they could sound that way if positioned in a less than optimal way.  I was also able to control the reflectivity of the wall surfaces.  It took a bit of trial and error, but I now have them dialed in and there is nothing like it.

Too bad you had the negative experiences with them.  

Glotz
Glotz's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 4 days ago
Joined: Nov 20 2008 - 9:30am
Agreed..

jackfish
jackfish's picture
Offline
Last seen: 11 months 2 weeks ago
Joined: Dec 19 2005 - 2:42pm
That review predates the policy.
mav52 wrote:

There are measurements of the Magneplaner MG1.6 in Home Theater and High Fidelity dated Sept 1, 2011 so what's the deal.

That was in 2001 not 2011, which predates the policy.

  • X
    Enter your Stereophile.com username.
    Enter the password that accompanies your username.
    Loading