Magico Q7: "most impressive product in 23 years of TAS reviews"

[bradleyc]

[Charles]

Originally Posted by Tony007

SoundStageXtreme.com | UltraAudio.com | SoundStageXtreme.com | UltraAudio.com


I have no idea what you are talking about. Scroll down for an in room measurement in Jeff Fritz's room. Q7 has state of the art bass well below 20hz.

Sealed box done properly is a good as it gets in audio reproduction. Go listen to Q7 and listen to real bass notes for the first time.

I read the review and it certainly looks very positive as to what the Q7 can really do at the very low frequencies. My own opinion is that all things being equal sealed box is a superior bass system to ports. I really enjoy my Wilsons, everything about them. But if the Q7 can really deliver the extremely low bass like I personally believe it can, then for the first time ever you have the best of all worlds: a non-equalized sealed box very low resonance frequency manageable sized statement speaker system. It really would be a first.

I havent forgotten the MCXRT 2K which is sealed box but the size is the problem. To me the Q7 is something really special because of its dimensions and obvious superb build quality/absolutely top technology. It has always been a dream of mine to own a statement speaker system. The Q7 would easily accomadate my room which is long slightly narrow very well built and an A-Frame sealing which limits the height of the speaker to about 6 feet maximum. Depth is not a problem.

The Q7 may be the improved "Thiel CS5i" I waited and waited for but it never came. I always thought Jim Thiel would eventually do it but it never happened. He went to ports and never returned. I never understood why.

[A.Wayne]

Originally Posted by Charles

The Q7 may be the improved "Thiel CS5i" I waited and waited for but it never came. I always thought Jim Thiel would eventually do it but it never happened. He went to ports and never returned. I never understood why.

I did explain why ......

[Charles]

Originally Posted by A.Wayne

I did explain why ......

Well it's certainly good to meet someone with such firm opinions. Since I will have ported bass for the forseeable future I'm going to take heart and enjoy my Wilsons. I do hope that the Q7 turns out to be resistent to breakup in the very low frequencies and at the same time have very significant output at 18 Hz. I'd like to have something to aim for dream about in the way of a statement system that would fit/work in my room.

[A.Wayne]

Best wishes Charles , its all about enjoying the music and I'm sure you will enjoy the Q7 ....

Regards ..

[Rocco]

I saw in audiogon a pair of Q7's second hand with six months of life.

[rlacoste]

You can actually see on Stereophile measurement, how much more output the Q5 have over the MAXX3 in MF room. The Q5 is a MUCH smaller speaker with only two 9” woofers… At 10Hz, it has 12 dB more output then the MAXX. In fact, according to JA anechoic measurements, the MAXX3 has just about halve the output at 10Hz then the Q5 (Depending how you define the cutoff point). Text book scenario.
But that is only one part of the issue, and can be played with, somewhat, as Wayne suggested .The bigger problem, which can’t be mitigated unless you tune the port, theoretically, to 0Hz (and even then not perfectly it simply acts like a leaky sealed enclosure), is transient response. Ported loudspeakers will always have poorer transient response (higher group delay etc.). It is a big deal if you are looking for High-Fidelity.

[A.Wayne]

Hello rlacoste,

I disagree with the group delay statement when using a rear firing port, there is no real proximity effect and as such a sealed speakers is no more linear phase than a vented , If only discussing Front firing ports , agree ...

As to the Maxx, i did state earlier that Wilson as good as they are, are not what i would reference as getting vented right, they are better today than before and as one can reference magico for getting sealed correct , not so with Wilson(vented)IMO and again how many apart from magico can lay claim to getting sealed correct. IMO Very few over the years and the rubic cube path to hi-fidelity is more than one square, think of that little magico tweeter conducting that big orchestra , ahhh Yes , says the panel guys........

More than one path to Rome ....

Regards,

[Charles]

Originally Posted by rlacoste

You can actually see on Stereophile measurement, how much more output the Q5 have over the MAXX3 in MF room. The Q5 is a MUCH smaller speaker with only two 9” woofers… At 10Hz, it has 12 dB more output then the MAXX. In fact, according to JA anechoic measurements, the MAXX3 has just about halve the output at 10Hz then the Q5 (Depending how you define the cutoff point). Text book scenario.
But that is only one part of the issue, and can be played with, somewhat, as Wayne suggested .The bigger problem, which can’t be mitigated unless you tune the port, theoretically, to 0Hz (and even then not perfectly it simply acts like a leaky sealed enclosure), is transient response. Ported loudspeakers will always have poorer transient response (higher group delay etc.). It is a big deal if you are looking for High-Fidelity.

I think you are referring to the graph depicting frequency response. The frequency response is much better for the Q5 than the Maxx3 at 10 Hz. The problem I have had with sealed box speakers at 20 Hz is that if they have flat frequency response there, then the woofer excursion becomes so great that there is obvious breakup. I experienced this firsthand with Thiel CS5i's, Gen II's, and XRT 30's. I was very disappointed with my Krell MRS that was supposed to do 120 dB at 20 Hz. I have owned thse sealed box speakers and know them well. I have experienced the limitations of sealed boxes at very low frequencies. Ports are more immune to breakup at the very low frequencies. I agree with you that sealed box is theoretically better than port but I love my Maxx3/Thor bass. I could never live with a statement system that suffered from woofer breakup. I could never roll a Q7 off or an XLF off the way I do my Maxxes. If I'm going to lay down that kind of money I must have a speaker that can play 18hz at good output without breakup, easily a piece of cake. Am I being unreasonable?

[CLEE]

Originally Posted by A.Wayne

Hello rlacoste,

...... i did state earlier that Wilson as good as they are, are not what i would reference as getting vented right, ......
Regards,

Agree. I prefer the better resolved and coherent bass of the S5 to the Sasha, although the later has a stronger output in the upper bass range.