A question for Magnepan owners

[o2so]

I understand that his topic has been dealt with extensively, however there is question that I cannot find an answer to.

 

Magnepans are known to like high current amplifiers. I am sure high current air a good thing when playing at loud levels, but would the high-current capability make any significant difference at low to medium volumes? 

 

With my maggies, I have owned several amplifiers, some of which had very high current, some not so much. However I have never noticed massive differences in sound when playing at low volumes.

 

What is your experience?

 

Thanks

[sir sanders zingmore]

High current and high volume are not necessarily related things (perhaps you are confusing high current with high powered - which amps have you listened to?)

 

High current is a good thing for maggies (and a lot of other panels) because their impedance drops precipitously at certain frequencies. So even at low volumes, an amp that cannot deliver decent current into that sub- 2 ohm part of the spectrum will not sound as good

[allthumbs]

O2so this will seem a little strange but I had a pair of SMG'S which I listened to at low to moderate levels and the best results I achieved were with a low wattage tripath amp.

That stunned me.It would drive that 4ohm load with ease, grace and finesse.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[o2so]

High current and high volume are not necessarily related things (perhaps you are confusing high current with high powered - which amps have you listened to?)
 
High current is a good thing for maggies (and a lot of other panels) because their impedance drops precipitously at certain frequencies. So even at low volumes, an amp that cannot deliver decent current into that sub- 2 ohm part of the spectrum will not sound as good

Thank you mate. I am familiar with the difference between power and current.
What are the frequencies at which the impedance of the Maggies drops?

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

[Peter-C]

What amps have you tried them with?
I have Maggie 1.7i s
I preferred the sound of my Maggies with the Pass Labs Int-30a vs Int-150.
Both are high current. I have a small listening room, 4 x4 m and they sound wonderful, full bass and finesse as@ALLTHUMBS has stated, (even at low volume).
If I had a larger room I would have chosen an amp with higher wattage.
Mind you the Pass int-30a will clip at around 150 watts into 4ohms.
High current is definitely the key, as Sir Sanders eluded to.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Peter-C]

Thank you mate. I am familiar with the difference between power and current.

What are the frequencies at which the impedance of the Maggies drops?

 

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

 

Maggies at least 1.7s, drop below 2ohm in the high frequencies

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[sir sanders zingmore]

39 minutes ago, o2so said:

Thank you mate. I am familiar with the difference between power and current.
What are the frequencies at which the impedance of the Maggies drops?

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
 

 

I realise my post may have appeared a bit patronising. Apologies if it came across that way, that wasn't my intent 

[o2so]

 
I realise my post may have appeared a bit patronising. Apologies if it came across that way, that wasn't my intent 

No worries at all.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

[o2so]

Maggies at least 1.7s, drop below 2ohm in the high frequencies

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So why is it common belief that more current equals better bass? More current increases the damping factor which could actually result is a leaner bass. No?

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

[andyr]

7 minutes ago, o2so said:

So why is it common belief that more current equals better bass? More current increases the damping factor which could actually result is a leaner bass. No?
 

 

If this is "common belief", Fillipo ... I've missed hearing it. 

 

Where do you get the idea that "More current increases the damping factor "?  More current can be achieved in 2 ways, AIUI (and the 2nd won't work if the 1st is not present):

1. a very stiff power supply - like the PASS amps have with 100,000uF of capacitance.
2. multiple output devices - which, yes, result in a lower Zout ... which increases the damping factor.

So it's the PS which is the key.

 

2 hours ago, o2so said:

 

Magnepans are known to like high current amplifiers. I am sure high current air a good thing when playing at loud levels, but would the high-current capability make any significant difference at low to medium volumes? 

 

With my maggies, I have owned several amplifiers, some of which had very high current, some not so much. However I have never noticed massive differences in sound when playing at low volumes.

 

What is your experience?

 

Thanks

 

I've never listened to my Maggies at "low volumes" - it's either 'loud' (though a heavy metal fan wouldn't probably class it as such ) or 'normal'. 

 

But I would think, as you say, there is bugger-all difference to the sound, between different amplifiers, when played softly.

 

Andy

 

[Addicted to music]

Review on the NAD M3 should explain it.

 

  http://www.stereophile.com/content/nad-master-series-m3-integrated-amplifier-page-2#up11a2lYPQWzxqRD.97

[o2so]

 
I've never listened to my Maggies at "low volumes" - it's either 'loud' (though a heavy metal fan wouldn't probably class it as such [emoji14] ) or 'normal'.  [emoji3]
 
But I would think, as you say, there is bugger-all difference to the sound, between different amplifiers, when played softly.
 
Andy
 

Ok. But my question was about high current and bass performance (the common belief). How does high current affect bass performance? I thought it was by increasing the damping factor, but you say there is more to this. Can you expand please.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

[Addicted to music]

7 hours ago, o2so said:

 

Ok. But my question was about high current and bass performance (the common belief). How does high current affect bass performance? I thought it was by increasing the damping factor, but you say there is more to this. Can you expand please.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
 

 

 

It also depends on what amplifiers you have tried.  One thing for sure is that you will never get teeth rattling bass performance out of any maggie panel, only cones can do that!   

Have a look at the ME range and owners who have moved up the scale will tell you that as they move up the food chain the bass performance or the whole soundstage changes.  Even @Zaphod Beeblebrox Would give you a better insight as to what is rewarded moving up the chain.  Mind you I have never auditioned any ME products or market them.

Often amps with high capacity capacitance implemented with low impedance criteria and many output devices paralleled to maximised current capability will change the soundstage significantly, not just in loud volume but also in low volume..  it also reduced what some posters have described "less straining" and depending on the design and implementation will often increase in "definition"  better separation in instruments and more can be heard with ease.

Thats why I link a review to the NAD M3 thst compares it to some very capable products.

 

 

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

8 hours ago, o2so said:

 

Ok. But my question was about high current and bass performance (the common belief). How does high current affect bass performance? I thought it was by increasing the damping factor, but you say there is more to this. Can you expand please.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
 

 

 

Best to listen for yourself. There is much, MUCH more to it than just high current. 

[o2so]

 
Best to listen for yourself. There is much, MUCH more to it than just high current. 

Listening would be ideal but it is often difficult. What I'm looking for is to understand what parameters I should look at in the specs (as afirst assessment pass) and why/how those parameters are related to the sound.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

[o2so]

 
It also depends on what amplifiers you have tried.  One thing for sure is that you will never get teeth rattling bass performance out of any maggie panel, only cones can do that!   
Have a look at the ME range and owners who have moved up the scale will tell you that as they move up the food chain the bass performance or the whole soundstage changes.  Even [mention=106387]Zaphod Beeblebrox[/mention] Would give you a better insight as to what is rewarded moving up the chain.  Mind you I have never auditioned any ME products or market them.
Often amps with high capacity capacitance implemented with low impedance criteria and many output devices paralleled to maximised current capability will change the soundstage significantly, not just in loud volume but also in low volume..  it also reduced what some posters have described "less straining" and depending on the design and implementation will often increase in "definition"  better separation in instruments and more can be heard with ease.
Thats why I link a review to the NAD M3 thst compares it to some very capable products.
 
 

Hence my curiosity. I find my NAD M3 to perform at the same level (or almost) of my previous very high current hegel h360.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

[o2so]

 
It also depends on what amplifiers you have tried.  One thing for sure is that you will never get teeth rattling bass performance out of any maggie panel, only cones can do that!   
Have a look at the ME range and owners who have moved up the scale will tell you that as they move up the food chain the bass performance or the whole soundstage changes.  Even [mention=106387]Zaphod Beeblebrox[/mention] Would give you a better insight as to what is rewarded moving up the chain.  Mind you I have never auditioned any ME products or market them.
Often amps with high capacity capacitance implemented with low impedance criteria and many output devices paralleled to maximised current capability will change the soundstage significantly, not just in loud volume but also in low volume..  it also reduced what some posters have described "less straining" and depending on the design and implementation will often increase in "definition"  better separation in instruments and more can be heard with ease.
Thats why I link a review to the NAD M3 thst compares it to some very capable products.
 
 

By the way, the review you linked, which I knew well, says that whilst the M3 bass is not as powerfull as monoblocks costing 10 times more, the detail and the separation of instruments is amazing. To the point that in that year the M3 ended up in category A with stereophile. So again in this review higher current is associated with deeper and more extended bass, not soundstage.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

1 hour ago, o2so said:

Listening would be ideal but it is often difficult. What I'm looking for is to understand what parameters I should look at in the specs (as afirst assessment pass) and why/how those parameters are related to the sound.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
 

 

It can be difficult, but not in this case. We are both in Sydney and I am happy to assist with the loan of a suitable product. 

[betty boop]

1 hour ago, o2so said:

By the way, the review you linked, which I knew well, says that whilst the M3 bass is not as powerfull as monoblocks costing 10 times more, the detail and the separation of instruments is amazing. To the point that in that year the M3 ended up in category A with stereophile. So again in this review higher current is associated with deeper and more extended bass, not soundstage.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
 

 

Fond memories of my m3 it's a stunning integrated ! Genuine quality amp and yeah can run b&w 802s and like so can tackle tricky loads. Drove my focal utopias no problem to and with class and finesse. I wouldn't move on unless can demo something else that find better

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

12 hours ago, o2so said:

 

Ok. But my question was about high current and bass performance (the common belief). How does high current affect bass performance?

 

The current ability of an amplifier is a complicated thing. Let's take two amplifiers which are rated at 120 Watts/channel. Both are rated to deliver 70 Amps. Amplifier A has a 500 VA power transformer mated to 20,000uF of filter caps and amplifier B has a 2,500VA power transformer mated to 245,000uF of filter caps. Which one do you think can sustain those 70 Amps for musically meaningful periods and into low impedance loads? 

 

Correct. The amplifier with the 2,500VA power transformer. However, a cursory examination of the specs of both amps will not, immediately, reveal many differences. 

 

Damping factor: Damping factor is greatly over-stated, under-stated and misunderstood. 

 

Damping Factor is the ratio of load impedance to source impedance assuming the load impedance is 8 Ohms. Therefore an amplifier with an output impedance of 1 Ohm (not atypical of many valve amps) exhibits a DF of 8. When using a 2 Ohm load, the DF becomes 2. A typical solid state amp exhibits a DF of around 400. 

 

However, that only tells a small part of the story. Most amplifiers are specc'd by manufacturers to possess a DF up to (say) 1kHz. The reason is that DF figures can increase very rapidly past 1kHz in many amps. A good amplifier manufacturer will specify DF (or, more correctly: Output Impedance) from (at least) 20Hz ~ 20kHz. Few do. 

 

Now, here's where it is over-stated: In reality a DF of more than 20 is pretty much superfluous. So, for a 2 Ohm load, that means an output impedance of less than 0.1 Ohms should be fine. Less is better, but not dramatically so. And of course, that figure MUST be maintained from 20Hz ~ 20kHz. 

 

Further: Most amplifier manufacturers gain huge damping factors by resorting to the use of large amounts of global negative feedback. There is a school of thought (which I share) that suggests obtaining high DF figures through the use of lots of global NFB is less than ideal for a bunch of reasons. 

 

Quote

 

 

I thought it was by increasing the damping factor, but you say there is more to this. Can you expand please.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
 

 

 

There is more to it, but a listening test will answer many of your questions. 

Edited April 24, 2017 by Zaphod Beeblebrox

[andyr]

4 minutes ago, Zaphod Beeblebrox said:

 

The current ability of an amplifier is a complicated thing. Let's take two amplifiers which are rated at 120 Watts/channel. Both are rated to deliver 70 Amps. Amplifier A has a 500 VA power transformer and amplifier B has a 2,500VA power transformer. Which one do you think can sustain those 70 Amps for musically meaningful periods and into low impedance loads? 

 

Correct. The amplifier with the 2,500VA power transformer. However, a cursory examination of the specs of both amps will not, immediately, reveal many differences. 

 

Damping factor: Damping factor is greatly over-stated, under-stated and misunderstood. 

 

Damping Factor is the ratio of load impedance to source impedance assuming the load impedance is 8 Ohms. Therefore an amplifier with an output impedance of 1 Ohm (not atypical of many valve amps) exhibits a DF of 8. When using a 2 Ohm load, the DF becomes 2. A typical solid state amp exhibits a DF of around 400. 

 

However, that only tells a small part of the story. Most amplifiers are specc'd by manufacturers to possess a DF up to (say) 1kHz. The reason is that DF figures can increase very rapidly past 1kHz in many amps. A good amplifier manufacturer will specify DF (or, more correctly: Output Impedance) from (at least) 20Hz ~ 20kHz. Few do. 

 

Now, here's where it is over-stated: In reality a DF of more than 20 is pretty much superfluous. So, for a 2 Ohm load, that means an output impedance of less than 0.1 Ohms should be fine. Less is better, but not dramatically so. And of course, that figure MUST be maintained from 20Hz ~ 20kHz. 

 

Further: Most amplifier manufacturers gain huge damping factors by resorting to the use of large amounts of global negative feedback. There is a school of thought (which I share) that suggests obtaining high DF figures through the use of lots of global NFB is less than ideal for a bunch of reasons. 

 

 

Great post, Trevor! 

 

Andy

 

[ABG]

Filippo, I've never owned a pair of Maggies, but the Innersounds I have for sale are similar in that they like lots of current, so I'll share my experience.  

 

I have a Manley Stingray integrated amp, which runs at just 15WPC in triode mode.  Before I hooked this up to the Innersounds, I expected the combination would sound dreadful and not manage any decent SPL's.  However, I was genuinely surpirsed to achieve very respectable SPL's with the wick wound up to around 12 o'clock - around the same levels as we were listening to the other week when you listened to the Eclipse TD712 (although the wick was only wound up to 10 oclock with the Eclipse in the system).  Not only that, the sound quality was good - really good - good depth and width to the soundstage and extremely good accuracy in terms of instrument  separation (that ability to pinpoint exactly where an instrument is playing).  

 

@Hensa was kind enough to loan me a pair of 100WPC valve monoblocks.  Everything improved, even at moderate sound levels.  The soundstage was wider and had more depth.  Instrument separation was even better.  The transients were handled with more aplomb - this was most noticeable listening to classical music.  In short, everything was just that little bit more relaxed and as SPL's climbed, the differences were more noticeable.  At really low levels, the differences were quite subtle.  

 

Based on  my expreience, I would suggest that if most of your listening is at low levels, there may not be much reason to even attempt upgrading your amplification.  If you really want to improve your low SPL experience, I would suggest an upgrade to your speakers would provide better bang for buck.  

 

I would take up the offer from @Zaphod Beeblebrox to try an ME amp. It's not going to cost you anything to audition an amp from Trevor and having met him, I'm positive it would be a no strings attached offer.  I've only ever listened to an ME amp in another system, not mine, so can't comment with any real authority about their performance other than to say I enjoyed listening to the music that was coming out of the speakers they were driving.  

 

As you know, you're most welcome to try the Innersounds around at your place with no strings attached, but I appreciate the WAF factor is not quite as high as it is with the Maggies.  That could be a hurdle you can't overcome... 

Edited April 24, 2017 by ABG

[Addicted to music]

@o2so

@:) al

Dont get me wrong.  I'm not attempting to bag the NAD M3.  I'm sure it drives the 1.7 well.  It all comes down to how the Electronics are implemented and of course price.  

And like I said I've never auditioned, owned or sold and ME product.  I've read and heard a lot about them and you can see how solid the ME product is.  I did have a ME75 in the house but I didn't get a chance to listened to it, it was to help a mod  @Orpheusget it asap on a weekend mission.

That review for the M3  isn't there to say that's it's lacking at its price point either, but to prove a point they went and compared that to monos that's 10x the price and is built like a spot welder.  

To get deep bass you are not going to get that out of a pair of 1.7 it just doesn't happen in my opinion.  You'll need something to assist it: cones!

i have to say that I once upon a time had a Perreaux 500w @ 8 ohms driving a set of a Linn Kans, compared to a Naim 250 boy what an experience that was!

 

[betty boop]

9 minutes ago, Addicted to music said:

Dont get me wrong.  I'm not attempting to bag the NAD M3.  I'm sure it drives the 1.7 well.  It all comes down to how the Electronics are implemented and of course price.  

And like I said I've never auditioned, owned or sold and ME product.  I've read and heard a lot about them and you can see how solid the ME product is.  I did have a ME75 in the house but I didn't get a chance to listened to it, it was to help a mod  @Orpheusget it asap on a weekend mission.

That review for the M3  isn't there to say that's it's lacking at its price point either, but to prove a point they went and compared that to monos that's 10x the price and is built like a spot welder.  

To get deep bass you are not going to get that out of a pair of 1.7 it just doesn't happen in my opinion.  You'll need something to assist it: cones!

i have to say that I once upon a time had a Perreaux 500w @ 8 ohms driving a set of a Linn Kans, compared to a Naim 250 boy what an experience that was!

 

Am not responding to anything you posted, just a caution to OP to not just dispense the m3. and not going on any reviews or anything just my ownership and which gave me cause to respect the amp it is. he m3 is also not just any integrated. I strongly believe it falls in the category of super integrated ! 

 

you have to see this thing and experience what capable of to appreciate. below is running with my focals to see how goes,

 

 

 

its a magnificent design, there are VERY few integrated amps out there built like it. and as mentioned one of the few that combine some serious clout with refinement. its a class act. 

 

you have to pick it up to realise just how large heavy and seriously built the thing is. it also has a very high quality pre amp here. with electronically controlled ladder pure analog pre built in. It also has a xover built in if say would like to integrated with a sub woofer. or cross over to some "cones" to handle the lower ends. it can be setup and configured with a ht bypass as well. so not only  a thing of quality but very capable too.

 

I also am a believer that wattage claims never tell the full story. and the nad m3 is probably another that are reminder of that

[sir sanders zingmore]

16 hours ago, o2so said:

However I have never noticed massive differences in sound when playing at low volumes.

 

This may be a bit controversial but at low volumes, most amps are not being stressed. Unstressed amps probably sound more similar than most audiophiles would like to admit.