3.7 vs. 3.7i

[timm]

Originally Posted by audiot servant

Hi Mike,

I had the opportunity to compare the 3.7 and 3.7i for an arvo at a mate's place in a system much like my own so was easy to spot the differences. He also has Mye stands so we could compare those and the Sound Anchors.

The changes between the original 3.7 and upgraded panels and the change with adding stands was essentially different in nature.

The change from 3.7 to 3.7i we agreed was primarily a balance shift with additional fullness in the mid bass to lower mids which made for a slightly richer sound overall and moved the weight a bit more towards the overall 20.7 balance.

The addition of stands for the 3.7 didn't so much shift the tonal balance in the mid bass to mid range but rather made resolution/focus/clarity/agility gains overall and also some additional extension down lower. The stands also make possible the use of isolation footers which can take you further down the resolution and speed route.

Both benefits seem valuable so possibly it comes down to whether you feel like you need a richer presentation (3.7i) or a faster more resolved one (stands and mechanical isolation) while keeping the balance fairly largely similar with more extension down lower tho if your running subs this might be less an issue.

Graham

Hi graham- btw have read your 20.7 posts about 100 times by now I think . You noted both Mye and sound anchors. Do you have any opinion on the differences between the two if any? Thanks Tim.

[audio bill]

Originally Posted by mgard

Thank you magnut, Graham and Carlos for your observations. It is good to hear positive feed back form others on the 3.7i upgrade. I would like more warmth in the mid to upper range. Graham both upgrades sound very benifical. I will be keeping these speakers for a number of years so I think it would be good to unleash all their capabilities. I have recently moved all my audio equipment to a different room. I have a number of options for moving things around. Right now I am coming off the short wall. The speakers should be farther apart.

~Mike

Mike, given your setup as pictured it appears that it might be better with the tweeters on the outside instead of inside. In the manual it states that in situations with the speakers closer together having the tweeters outside helps present a wider soundstage. Have you tried reversing the speakers?

[audiot servant]

Originally Posted by timm

Hi graham- btw have read your 20.7 posts about 100 times by now I think . You noted both Mye and sound anchors. Do you have any opinion on the differences between the two if any? Thanks Tim.

Tim,

The Mye stands are great and have a slight edge on the Sound Anchors overall probably because of the bracing up the back ultimately making them more rigid. There wasn't much in it but the price differential in Australia is huge due to the extra cost of shipping the Mye. In the big picture I found that getting Stillpoints under the stands to make a greater overall contribution than just the stands alone and definitely worth the extra price of admission.

As an aside it doesn't seem to matter how much improvement you throw in the rest of the gear around them the Maggies just never end up being the weak link in the system. I've also lately trialled running the 20.7s with Wilson Benesch Torus infra sub and have a new found respect for what these panels can ultimately do.

@Mike - that setup looks magic, those subs look like they really know what they are doing... the Maggie's would deserve some stands in that setup.

Cheers
Graham

[mgard]

Originally Posted by audio bill

Mike, given your setup as pictured it appears that it might be better with the tweeters on the outside instead of inside. In the manual it states that in situations with the speakers closer together having the tweeters outside helps present a wider soundstage. Have you tried reversing the speakers?

audio bill,
No I have not tried the tweeters on the outside. I will give that a test run and see how it goes. I think I'll go with Graham's advise and spring for some Mye stands and take a look at Stillpoints too. Not sure what model of Stillpoints would be appropriate. I am thinking about building some light weight boxes to ship my Maggie's back to the factory for the 3.7i upgrade. So probably next spring before that happens.

Thanks again for your input,

~Mike

[cma29]

Guys - I just received the Nov 2014 issue of The Absolute Sound (issue 247) and it includes a full review of the 3.7i by Jacob Heilbrunn. The bottom line is that he loved the speakers and calls them "spooky real" with "high-resolution" and "astounding coherence." Check it out.

[audio bill]

Carlos - thanks for the heads up on this new review! I subscribe to the online version of TAS and haven't yet been notified about this new issue. After seeing your post I logged into their system and was just able to download issue 247. Looking forward to reading the new review.

[magnut]

I was also a Mye stand user. I bought them for my 3.6s and then used them on my 3.7s. They most definitely made a difference. There was noticeable clarity, a bit more forward midrange and a better bass response. Now that I have 20.7s they kinda just sit and collect dust. I've considered getting stands for the 20s but my wife likes the new oval stand that they come with and they're easy to slide around on the carpet if need be. With the Mye stands they will get much heavier and be more difficult to move.

[mgard]

Originally Posted by magnut

I was also a Mye stand user. I bought them for my 3.6s and then used them on my 3.7s. They most definitely made a difference. There was noticeable clarity, a bit more forward midrange and a better bass response. Now that I have 20.7s they kinda just sit and collect dust. I've considered getting stands for the 20s but my wife likes the new oval stand that they come with and they're easy to slide around on the carpet if need be. With the Mye stands they will get much heavier and be more difficult to move.

magnut,

To bad you didn't live in Michigan I would snap those up.

~Mike

[drchaos]

Originally Posted by audiot servant

Hi Mike,


The change from 3.7 to 3.7i we agreed was primarily a balance shift with additional fullness in the mid bass to lower mids which made for a slightly richer sound overall and moved the weight a bit more towards the overall 20.7 balance.

This is consistent with something I saw about the 3.7i change (I can't find the source, sorry), that it involved changing the tensioning in the bass/mid panel during manufacturing.

The tensioning is pretty important and a big Magnepan trade secret---the tension isn't even uniform around the sides, presumably tighter at top and looser near the bottom. Remember the Apogee trapezoid? Why a trapezoid? For the same reason--- a non-uniform geometry makes less resonance degeneracy (multiple geometrical resonances piling up on the same frequency) and so a broader, lower Q, resonance behavior.

The tensioning (and the resonance dots) are part of the 'black arts'.

Perhaps the bass on 3.7 non-i was a bit overdamped vs the ideal and the 3.7i change fixes this. It corresponds to the description of something that was adapted into the manufacturing process at low cost, unlike the major model upgrades.

The description of the phase-coherent crossover I think refers to changes from 3.7 over 3.6.

[Masterlu]

drchaos... Welcome to AA!