@@gtrguyinaz With the caveat that I used to have the A5 in a much smaller room than the Magico listening room (room 3 - about the size of Magico’s room - will be done mid-September and the A5s will be there), I would say the A5 is slightly less resolving, presents images on a smaller stage (not necessarily small), and has a little more downward output slope from bass to treble. The resolution and the FR slope could be considered voicing choices, and in this I think some listeners might prefer the A5. Thinking about this kind of choice was a basic purpose of this video. I might add that how you make these choices clearly depends on your source(s) and the quality of your electronics. I think it is quite reasonable to balance speaker and electronics into synergistic packages, but at the same time those without experience listening to high res sources through wide bandwidth, high res electronics may want to be careful about assuming that rules of thumb they’ve learned from their experience are universal. Perhaps wishful, if logical. Thanks for watching.
Thanks for the video. Understand the brand is at the top of the sound chain and it’s interesting to learn about them. The technology is super cool. About the same cost as my new boat or the SUV I want so it’s all about priorities and your budget. They don’t look as cool as the B&Ws that are in the same price range so that’s a deal breaker for me. They have to sound great and look cool for me to be happy. Rock on!
Well someone has to try it. Speakers add the most distortion of any "High Fidelity" component. Then there's the room.... Interesting review from the perspective of what removing coloration leaves behind to enjoy. Shame most recordings will never be mixed & mastered using such neutral monitors!
I can’t even fathom how a speaker could sound $75,000 good? I’ve heard sub $3,000 speakers and I was heaven so I thought. Maybe I was only in purgatory 😢
If you like neutral speakers, this is one of the best for sure. I would only swap my Dynaudio speakers for a pair of these. But you first have to listen to them and then you may decide.
I would like you to make a video describing the use of additional subwoofers with these ultra high end and expensive speakers. I would always imagine that these speakers don't need extra bass reinforcement. for a certain value and above id expect it to do it all in one package. make me understand why the need of additional subs, even for the large Wilsons and similar
Well, to be clear I didn’t listen to the S5 with subs. But the theory is twofold: the main reason for subs with this class of speaker is to help smooth out the bass (which is inevitably uneven due to room modes and specific placement choices) - by putting the subs in a different location you have, for example, different SBIR frequencies; the second reason might be for better response below 40 Hz (though the S5 rolls off at about 6 db per octave anechoically below the resonant frequency (like all sealed boxes) some rooms will compensate for this or even have rising response, while leaky rooms may exaggerate it). These are room physics issues which can’t be addressed with a single speaker design/location.
Thank you for your response, appreciate it. Yes I am aware that the audition of the S5 was without the subs. This question was. Not directed to this video. I liked your review and thought you might have the right view to my question. So thank you Sir.
Impulse response-based measurements eliminate the room because they focus on the first milliseconds of output before any room reflections can occur. Having the speakers several feet from any surface (note stand) moves first reflections outside of about a 10 millisecond window. Fourier transform of the impulse response yields the frequency response curves you see on screen (more detail on the web version of the review on theabsolutesound dot com). 50 years ago we built anechoic chambers to try to minimize the room, but now we have the computing power to do the complex math quickly for a better results.
There is so much variability in high-end audio that almost every objection seems to be met with an expensive solution. As in any science experimentation, audiology is dependent on a controlled environment. Unless the products are all tested in the same exact room with the same temperature and humidity, you will never know which product is better than the others. At a certain point, the level of sophistication in any product is forfeited to environmental variability. At a 70K price point, the colder room, the arid room, the room with gypsum walls vs plaster, the amount of people in the room, etc., will greatly change the sound coming from the speakers. Without a controlled listening environment, the most expensive equipment in the world is only a few degrees away from underperforming. At what level do you really want to play this game? That’s the question.
The effort that some high-end loudspeaker manufacturers put into their extremely elaborate, complicated and extremely expensive loudspeaker housings mainly serves a single goal: to eliminate the loudspeaker housing as far as possible in terms of sound. This raises the question: why don't customers just go for loudspeakers without housings, which only cost a fraction of the high-end housing loudspeakers and also deliver significantly better sound, as Magnepan, for example - to name the best example - has been producing in an exemplary manner for many years?
It is a good question. Traditionally the difficulty with open baffles is compensating for the bass roll off inherent in uncompensated dipole designs. With a fairly wide baffle, the roll off might begin at 250 Hz, with a slope of 6 db per octave. So, at 32 Hz, you’d be down 18 db. You can address this with various forms of equalization, potentially. But you still have to drive the woofer much harder (you need >> power) and the excursion must be much larger, which can mean you reach the limits of excursion at lower SPLs. We should also note that dipoles have radiation pattern advantages that can lead to lower room interaction. And we should note that open baffles or planars are not resonance-free automatically, simply because they are semi un-enclosed. In short, there are tradeoffs.
According to Magico, the main difference will be how they work in different sized rooms. That is, the S5 is suited to larger rooms and the S3 to smaller rooms, because of their respective dynamic capabilities. The S5 will also have a lower LF turnover frequency. I haven’t heard the S3 outside of shows, but Wayne Garcia did a similar listen at Magico that is on The Absolute Sound website, and Jon Valin did a full review of the S3 in The Absolute Sound magazine (available as a back issue on the site).
That was at the Magico facility. I recall seeing several other TH-cam videos where tours were done of the manufacturing facility and the listening room, shown on several different TH-cam channels, so maybe you can find it there.
I’m thinking that recording errors (except for small audiophile labels) ARE predictable. Rising high end and dynamic compression. At least on recordings (pop, rock) that most people want to listen to.
So what if you take a less expensive speaker and add the BACCH Theoretica that you had reviews a short time ago? Does the BACCH take a less expensive speaker and give you a sound stage that rival these super expensive speakers.
@@mikelautermilch8939 First, they are more similar than different. Second, different rooms, and in the case of Tidal a more normal residential environment, which is likely to have more of an added sonic signature. The S5 has a more impressive soundstage portrayal, but that could be a room effect, too. With the Tidal, I noticed a similar “big recording to recording differences” element. That said, the character of the Tidal was slightly more identifiable, though lower than almost any other speaker I’ve heard. There is a purity to the Tidal that is exceptional but I felt was an element of character (and, I note, one I think many listeners would enjoy). The macrodynamics of the S5 are notable and I count this as an element of believability, not character. Part of my point for all viewers, not just those shopping at this price point, is that listening to different systems at different prices can help you refine your understanding of what you want. At least if one actively works on his/her mental model of music reproduction. Hope that helps.
Yeah, it (Klippel) can measure spherically. But for a symmetrical design a hemisphere gives you the same info. I’m pretty sure Magico checks both sides, and I just mis-spoke.
@@thomasmartin2219 good point, yes half a symmetric sphere is all you need, i have another question, i own, since 1990, the IRS Beta’s with mark levinson amps, pre amps, what magico’s would reach that level ?
This review effectively highlights a logical "blind spot" by emphasizing the concept of "errors." Speakers with minimal integral errors will reveal maximum recording and sound processing errors. Naturally, this has a side effect: a home-based listener (who is a not a studio-based producer), by spending a lot of money, ends up being exposed to some type of errors (which, as determined, is on the majority of recordings). While sound reproduction "musicality" is likely impossible to define in a way that compensates for individual aural differences-keeping in mind that people over 50, despite potential hearing deterioration, might have more resources to invest in high-end equipment-we encounter a psychological paradox: greater (acoustic) pleasure seems only attainable through exposure to more (acoustic) pain. In essence, this raises a fundamental philosophical question: is knowing what we miss the only way to enjoy life?
These are good questions. I do want to emphasize a point I tried to make in this video: it is not obvious to me that adding playback errors always (often?) masks recording errors. An example is with mastering, where part of the work is tone shaping. If that tone shaping involves EQ of +3db at 4 kHz, and if the playback system is +2 db at 4 kHz, then it seems likely that the playback error makes things worse. Noise and thd and timing and compression playback errors might have similar properties wherein adding distortion makes things worse. I also observe that 15 years ago, there was significant confusion driven (I think) by the collision of two bad things: red book CD distortion and speakers that improperly worked the on-axis/power response tradeoff. Consumers exposed to this “learned” that “accurate” speakers sound painful. Now we have high res and we have much better loudspeaker engineering, but I confess the discussion of errors still may bring up thoughts of the bad old days. I will try to think of better ways to articulate this. Thanks for the thoughts.
I must confess that my comment was significantly influenced by a few people I know, who have significantly better hearing than my good one (mainly timbre-sensitive) but not sufficient for me to be, let's say, a symphonic conductor. Interestingly, they can't agree even about curve-corrected heaphones. Measurements are the only objective reference point but we all are subjective and our ears can hear sometimes what is hard to distinguish by measurements (like amps). In short, the elements you present in this review are absolutely important, so thank you for that, but they will practically (!) affect only 1% of people who still will remain divided among themselves.
@@markbajkowski1171 Yeah, since I review many headphones I am well aware that their errors are different (headphone to headphone) so I’m not surprised different listeners who objectively may observe the same phenomena may have different subjective responses (preferences). That seems reasonable. In this review (S5) I’m trying to distinguish “choice among errors with a backdrop preference for minimal error” from “not interested in low error; I prefer +3 db at 50 Hz and a 2 db dip at 2500 Hz and .8% second order THD”. I tentatively suggest it is hard to sort that out until you’ve heard a really low error system. Or you know that you really enjoy live music. Or both. As you say, we don’t really have to know this. But we might also ask “is being confused about your goals a good way to enjoy life?” I don’t view that as a moral question, but for some personalities it is a useful one?
Hmmm.......room treatment is usually less required for Dipoles than other approaches, with the exception of what is behind the speaker. And even IF it needed more room treatment, $10,000 of room treatment would go FAR further than the insane engineering and materials used in box speakers. Just have a look at how much of the overall cost of the box goes into this Magica.
what about no listening room ? just put the system in an open space, with temporary covers for when it rains, and listen to them on sunny days ? no seriously, people spend fortunes on listening rooms, do we need a room ?
@@nitraM321 That would work for mid to high frequencies, but you would not hear much bass below about 200 Hz. If you look at the speaker systems used by bands that play in outdoor concerts, the number of amps and amount of power used is astronomical compared to a home listening room. Whereas many acoustic bands can play in a small concert hall with no amplification. Also, to get a realistic reproduction of sound, it often helps to be able to hear reflections from the side and rear of the listening room, but that depends a lot on the recording.
@Mark-rw3kw Hmmmmm......... Have to disagree with you on that one Mark. Bass below 200 Hz does not require a room of any sort. In fact, bass below 200 Hz sounds significantly BETTER outdoors due to the absence of the Schroeder Frequency intrinsic in any room. Just use YOUR OWN experience. At live, open air concerts, the PA system EASILY plumbs down into the 35 Hz range with authority. Personally, I sometimes listen outdoors to a pair of Altec 6.5" two way Bluetooth speakers with a rear firing Passive Radiator, set up as a stereo pair ( in my hammock at the ideal listening position). Not only is the bass superb and authoritive down to about 65 Hz (my guess of the F3 of the speakers), but the imaging and soundstage BLOWS AWAY 99% of High-End systems I have heard. My much, much, much more expensive home rig with top of the line Maggies and a treated listening room beats the experience.....but only because of clearly more detail, precision, accuracy etc. That is why large studios attempt (spend hundreds of thousands) to create a NRZ (No Reflection Zone) seat for the mixing engineer. Not criticizing you, just giving you another opinion/perspective............
Shouldn’t you have to interview Dr. Floyd Toole and Dr. Sean Olive and read all of their papers about speaker and headphone design before calling this the science company?
I’ve read Floyd’s book several times, and he has made huge contributions to the technology, as has Sean (and Todd Welti). I did not intend to (and I don’t think I did) say that Magico is THE speaker science company, merely that they are trying to use science to do what they do. Sorry for the confusion.
The Magico Ultimate (horn-based) was the top of the line 15 years ago. I think they believe they have superseded this with the M9. Either way, horns have their attractions.
To be clear: this review is part of our series on the best speakers. It is not a declaration that this is THE best speaker. The primary point of the video was to help viewers think about how they define the best speaker for their listening.
Lost interest shortly after hearing the price. For a whole lifetime of first class live musical performances from all of your favorite artists you can buy a pair of speakers. Stop it.
262 lbs. tells me they didn't hire any skilled engineers. It would be easy to get better performance from a speaker at 100 lbs. or less. Looking at the old fashion smooth surrounds tells me these are higher distortion drivers than anything you can buy from Purifi. That surround changes the cone area as it moves in and out and that is distortion. So that's not impressive. It would be easy to mount a Hypex Fusion FA503 to the back of one of these and improve the performance. Powered speakers with digital crossovers are just better than any passive crossover you can build without question. So these are works of art, but they are far short of state of the art speakers today and the test results will quickly reveal that. Not worth it. All the thick speaker cables in the world can't fix it, no matter what the old audiophile priest says. His hearing is shot. Lets see him publish a hearing test result.
Imagine if TAS partnered with HiFi Immersion and ACTUALLY RECORDED the speaker when they give 20 minutes of yada yada about it. THAT could be PLEASURABLE, VALUABLE, and ILLUMINATING, Cheers! :)
If you have heard any high-end speaker system in real life, you will know that any recording of it will not do it justice. Even your home system would sound much better in real life than recorded.
@@ktakeshi17 I've heard and owned TONS of high-end audio equipment since 1974, your assertion that there is no utility, value, or pleasure in YT videos of high end equipment is beyond ludicrous. Watch the HiFi Immersion videos with some high-end headphones and / or systems and then come back and make that statement. Silly. "Do it justice" is an absurd, pointless, and meaningless standard.
There are many more metrics than cabinet resonances that introduce errors but they never address any of those issues. Just another marketing company beating up the same strawman again and again :(
@@FOH3663 An outdated passive crossover for a start. Why not active ? Non minimum phase crossover with lots of stored energy. No time alignment. Poor step response. Just look at how bad their step response is and here they are obsessing over minute resonances in their cabinets. They should quantify these resonances instead of beating up a strawman ! Using metal for their cabinets that is inherently resonant and then having to fix it up with layers of damping material ! What acoustic levels are radiating from these cabinet resonances compared to the direct levels from all of the drivers ? It would be interesting to know that. Not a single figure is given. Go figure ! And this reviewer just parrots their marketing blurb instead of measuring things for themselves and calling them out on it :D LOL
My goal in my life is to hold on to my $75k. That said, if you buy a $75 car, five years on, it is worth about $35-40k. How much will the Magic be worth, and you dont have to pour gas into it, but insurance or pay interest on the loan (Maybe you got a home loan to buy the Magico)) How do you want to flash your opulence to your neighbors?
@@n.lyndley.9889 And your wallet and/or credit rating. What gets me is that the cost of the ancillary equipment for these speakers is also going to be exorbitantly expensive, and yet these speakers still are not the best in their lineup, therefore you still aren't getting the ultimate sound for all that money. These people are just chasing their tail.
All my life I've rotated from one hobby to another when I got bored. Cars, motorcycles, firearms, stereo sand cameras. Plenty of opportunity for some bad judgement in that lot.
Magico are near impossible to get the "magic" It's there to be had! But I can assure you that a very very low percentage of people will get magico correct. I really wish you would try perfect them mike. I would enjoy watching that. Peace
Perhaps someone reading these comments can give me some advice. Im looking for a reviewer that reviews audio compnents like an engineer would. While I'm not an engineer, I'm fascinated by techical details and measurements. Is there anyone out there that reviews audio components like Sandy Munro reviews cars? Anyone who not only describes what they hear but breaks down the components i.e. parts of the crossovers, guage of the internal wiring, makers of the capacitors, etc? Im also interested in more scientific methods of reviewing as well (blinding the reviewer to the make and model of components prior to the review).
@@crazyprayingmantis5596 I was hoping there was a brave soul with deep pockets and an actual love for music that was willing to make reviews at least slightly scientific. Given that we are no longer forced to rely on getting news from the mainstream media, I was hoping there was something similar for A/V reviews. Maybe someday.
Our philosophy is to try old and new, popular and obscure because that represents the variety of what people might listen to and different styles show different strengths and weaknesses of equipment. We avoid just using the best recordings or one style of music (typical reviews involve over 100 tracks ranging from Mahler to Cage, Miles to Zorn, Black Keys to BB, REM to Radiohead...you get the idea). We use music of different levels of complexity. We assume people want to listen to music first, not choose music to fit their audio systems. The other key is using music recorded in multiple eras (IEC recording standards have changed roughly each decade). Taylor Swift represents some of the most sophisticated pop production currently on offer, so it serves as a reference for many other pop artists (Dua Lipa, Billie Eilish etc). And of course, Swift had 5 of the top 10 albums in terms of sales in the most recent year, so she is hardly irrelevant in terms of what people actually listen to (we compensate for this possible populist faux pas by testing with e.g. John Cage, Messiaen and Henry Threadgill). Hope this helps.
You are talking about degrees These puff reviews help no one but the promoter and the manufacturer I am glad that expensive things like this exist I strongly disagree agree with the notion that we are losing out if we don’t buy these speakers The effort of making a 280 pound speaker to dampen/kill the cabinet is one approach I prefer the harmonics of active cabinets “Reduction of error levels” = sterilization of the sound I prefer the sound of a bar with a stage and live music and musical error as opposed to this strange world that is devoid of any relationship to the sound of live real instruments in the real world Fortunately we can all get what we want
I don't understand why you say this a puff review. Magico is widely acknowledged to make some of the finest and most accurate speakers available (for those that want that). In the US alone, there 1.5 million households with a net worth of 10 million or more, so what you consider to be very expensive may not be so expensive to everyone. Whether you want the speaker system to add some character of its own depends on the recording. Many good recordings have the ambiance of a listening room already in the recording, while other recordings are close-mic'ed in a padded room and are sterile and need additional ambiance provided by a speaker system. Tom clearly pointed out the difference between different recordings and how they sound on an extremely accurate speaker system.
@@Mark-rw3kw I have watched/read many reviews of Magico speakers I respect Magico and as you know, I did say I am glad that these high-end components exist Puff piece is my subjective opinion of this subjective review Seeing the reviewer sitting a chair pumping/lifting his arm in the air… that is freaking funny Seeing a comment in another TH-cam reviewer’s channel yesterday which describing him as being a meme probably colored my opinion but I did see some merit in their notion that he is the face of all that is wrong with what I call HiFi….pimping not critiquing My armchair review is that the Borresen M6 is better or comparatively on price the M3 is better as I vigorously pumped both of my fists in the air when I read their reviews
If coloration, and distortion of the reproduced sound is what you are after... that's your bag. Just don't expect many to take that seriously. Why seek out enjoyable, well recorded music, only to adulterate it? Remember, all of the music will be misrepresented with a colored speaker, you will only find limited "matching" of speaker-music interactions that you will find pleasing. This is a very limited way of thinking, and approaching an otherwise enjoyable hobby. 2c.
@@MilGrip76 yes I do favor SE Tube amplifiers which can color the sound and I like that if properly implemented You may want to go in another direction As I said up there 👆 “Fortunately we can all get what we want”
Another American manufacturer that doesn't practice price parity around the world. USD$75K should be approx AUD$113. RRP in Australia is AUD$145K. Another USD$20K. Do these speakers travel by Limo and then First class? Next video please....
Very interesting video and like it a lot, but the voice of the narrator sounds very bad, like out of phase and saturated of distortion, I muted and activate the subtitles.
Tom…. Your reference speaker was the A5….. can you compare the 2…. Always great to hear your review….
@@gtrguyinaz With the caveat that I used to have the A5 in a much smaller room than the Magico listening room (room 3 - about the size of Magico’s room - will be done mid-September and the A5s will be there), I would say the A5 is slightly less resolving, presents images on a smaller stage (not necessarily small), and has a little more downward output slope from bass to treble. The resolution and the FR slope could be considered voicing choices, and in this I think some listeners might prefer the A5. Thinking about this kind of choice was a basic purpose of this video. I might add that how you make these choices clearly depends on your source(s) and the quality of your electronics. I think it is quite reasonable to balance speaker and electronics into synergistic packages, but at the same time those without experience listening to high res sources through wide bandwidth, high res electronics may want to be careful about assuming that rules of thumb they’ve learned from their experience are universal. Perhaps wishful, if logical. Thanks for watching.
@@thomasmartin2219 thanks so much…A5 is affordable… great special info…
They sound great! Thanks for the first listen and the 19:10 I just spent waiting for it
Awesome deadpan delivery of espresso technology
Well done, a tough speaker to explain, explained extremely well
Amazing review!
Nice review Tom.
Thanks for the video. Understand the brand is at the top of the sound chain and it’s interesting to learn about them. The technology is super cool. About the same cost as my new boat or the SUV I want so it’s all about priorities and your budget. They don’t look as cool as the B&Ws that are in the same price range so that’s a deal breaker for me. They have to sound great and look cool for me to be happy. Rock on!
Well someone has to try it.
Speakers add the most distortion of any "High Fidelity" component.
Then there's the room....
Interesting review from the perspective of what removing coloration leaves behind to enjoy.
Shame most recordings will never be mixed & mastered using such neutral monitors!
Thank you for reading this “review”. 😊
I can’t even fathom how a speaker could sound $75,000 good? I’ve heard sub $3,000 speakers and I was heaven so I thought. Maybe I was only in purgatory 😢
We’d vote for heaven. But still, refinement is possible. It can get confused with musical engagement, however.
Tom - this is a very good review - you pretty much covered everything in fact, after seeing the review, I may switch my speaker brand
If you like neutral speakers, this is one of the best for sure. I would only swap my Dynaudio speakers for a pair of these.
But you first have to listen to them and then you may decide.
I would like you to make a video describing the use of additional subwoofers with these ultra high end and expensive speakers. I would always imagine that these speakers don't need extra bass reinforcement. for a certain value and above id expect it to do it all in one package. make me understand why the need of additional subs, even for the large Wilsons and similar
Well, to be clear I didn’t listen to the S5 with subs. But the theory is twofold: the main reason for subs with this class of speaker is to help smooth out the bass (which is inevitably uneven due to room modes and specific placement choices) - by putting the subs in a different location you have, for example, different SBIR frequencies; the second reason might be for better response below 40 Hz (though the S5 rolls off at about 6 db per octave anechoically below the resonant frequency (like all sealed boxes) some rooms will compensate for this or even have rising response, while leaky rooms may exaggerate it). These are room physics issues which can’t be addressed with a single speaker design/location.
Thank you for your response, appreciate it. Yes I am aware that the audition of the S5 was without the subs. This question was. Not directed to this video. I liked your review and thought you might have the right view to my question. So thank you Sir.
@@gaville901 A dedicated sub video is a good idea.
Absolutely agree. I think it’s a very neglected topic
+2
He looks like has swallowed every jargon Magico people showed his way.
LOL
He literally said they lack character. That's not something Magico promotes.
It's a "factory tour" so of course the manufacturer's mantra is going to be mentioned. That's the point of going to the source.
Can’t go wrong with Magico at all
measuring speaker in a warehouse will give better sound?
Impulse response-based measurements eliminate the room because they focus on the first milliseconds of output before any room reflections can occur. Having the speakers several feet from any surface (note stand) moves first reflections outside of about a 10 millisecond window. Fourier transform of the impulse response yields the frequency response curves you see on screen (more detail on the web version of the review on theabsolutesound dot com). 50 years ago we built anechoic chambers to try to minimize the room, but now we have the computing power to do the complex math quickly for a better results.
So I guess I have to buy the espresso machine separately? Excellent review.
Unfortunately, maybe. When I saw the full La Marzocco espresso prep process, I had doubts about whether I could pull it off at 7am before coffee!
This was a very comprehensive overview... stepping it up TM.
Auditioned M2's ordered 20.7s 👌
Auditioned the Ferrari ordered the Chevi 👌😂
Tom: Great review !!
Thanks!
There is so much variability in high-end audio that almost every objection seems to be met with an expensive solution. As in any science experimentation, audiology is dependent on a controlled environment. Unless the products are all tested in the same exact room with the same temperature and humidity, you will never know which product is better than the others. At a certain point, the level of sophistication in any product is forfeited to environmental variability. At a 70K price point, the colder room, the arid room, the room with gypsum walls vs plaster, the amount of people in the room, etc., will greatly change the sound coming from the speakers. Without a controlled listening environment, the most expensive equipment in the world is only a few degrees away from underperforming. At what level do you really want to play this game? That’s the question.
Thanks for your time and review.
I will take a listen to them someday.
The effort that some high-end loudspeaker manufacturers put into their extremely elaborate, complicated and extremely expensive loudspeaker housings mainly serves a single goal: to eliminate the loudspeaker housing as far as possible in terms of sound. This raises the question: why don't customers just go for loudspeakers without housings, which only cost a fraction of the high-end housing loudspeakers and also deliver significantly better sound, as Magnepan, for example - to name the best example - has been producing in an exemplary manner for many years?
It is a good question. Traditionally the difficulty with open baffles is compensating for the bass roll off inherent in uncompensated dipole designs. With a fairly wide baffle, the roll off might begin at 250 Hz, with a slope of 6 db per octave. So, at 32 Hz, you’d be down 18 db. You can address this with various forms of equalization, potentially. But you still have to drive the woofer much harder (you need >> power) and the excursion must be much larger, which can mean you reach the limits of excursion at lower SPLs. We should also note that dipoles have radiation pattern advantages that can lead to lower room interaction. And we should note that open baffles or planars are not resonance-free automatically, simply because they are semi un-enclosed. In short, there are tradeoffs.
They need subs.
But they are magical;-)
That was a high level review
Thanks Tom
It is my hope that you compare them to other similarly priced speakers that I’ve heard such as the Sasha V.
How much of the new S5 can the new S3 deliver?
According to Magico, the main difference will be how they work in different sized rooms. That is, the S5 is suited to larger rooms and the S3 to smaller rooms, because of their respective dynamic capabilities. The S5 will also have a lower LF turnover frequency. I haven’t heard the S3 outside of shows, but Wayne Garcia did a similar listen at Magico that is on The Absolute Sound website, and Jon Valin did a full review of the S3 in The Absolute Sound magazine (available as a back issue on the site).
@@thomasmartin2219 thank you.
60%
Great commentary, Tom. Thank you!
Thank you kindly!
Magico M-series owner here. I recognize the Pillium and dCS electronics there. But what sits on the bottom shelf of the M-racks?
That was at the Magico facility. I recall seeing several other TH-cam videos where tours were done of the manufacturing facility and the listening room, shown on several different TH-cam channels, so maybe you can find it there.
@@Mark-rw3kw Telos Audio Design Earth Grounding Monster.
You couldn’t possibly enquire about any equipment shown without mentioning you’re an M Series owner?
@@n.lyndley.9889 If I own the M-series, I would also be telling everyone I know that I have one. don't be a sour grape. lol
Probably poor man m2's 🤣🤣🤣@@n.lyndley.9889
I’m thinking that recording errors (except for small audiophile labels) ARE predictable. Rising high end and dynamic compression. At least on recordings (pop, rock) that most people want to listen to.
So what if you take a less expensive speaker and add the BACCH Theoretica that you had reviews a short time ago? Does the BACCH take a less expensive speaker and give you a sound stage that rival these super expensive speakers.
Hi Tom. How do these compare to the Tidal speakers you reviewed recently?
@@mikelautermilch8939 First, they are more similar than different. Second, different rooms, and in the case of Tidal a more normal residential environment, which is likely to have more of an added sonic signature. The S5 has a more impressive soundstage portrayal, but that could be a room effect, too. With the Tidal, I noticed a similar “big recording to recording differences” element. That said, the character of the Tidal was slightly more identifiable, though lower than almost any other speaker I’ve heard. There is a purity to the Tidal that is exceptional but I felt was an element of character (and, I note, one I think many listeners would enjoy). The macrodynamics of the S5 are notable and I count this as an element of believability, not character. Part of my point for all viewers, not just those shopping at this price point, is that listening to different systems at different prices can help you refine your understanding of what you want. At least if one actively works on his/her mental model of music reproduction. Hope that helps.
There appeared to be subwoofers in the listening room. Anybody know about whether or not they were?
There were subs in the room, but they were not used in our listening.
@@TASmagazine Gotcha. Thanks!
a hemisphere is half a sphere, how does hemispheric then mean in all directions ?
Yeah, it (Klippel) can measure spherically. But for a symmetrical design a hemisphere gives you the same info. I’m pretty sure Magico checks both sides, and I just mis-spoke.
@@thomasmartin2219 good point, yes half a symmetric sphere is all you need, i have another question, i own, since 1990, the IRS Beta’s with mark levinson amps, pre amps, what magico’s would reach that level ?
Let’s see that kipple spin!
@@JamesWilliams-gf8gm We’ll put the graphs in the web version.
Written review is on the site with Klippel graph. Enjoy!
@@TASmagazine thanks, I will check it out.
I love Magico speakers, but I would go with Wilson over Magico.
Was there a problem, no demo noise..
If you mean "no music playing during demo sequences" that's to avoid copyright violations.
@TheTASmagazine ok I understand, looks like a dream system. 🫠
Why dont they use ribbons at that price??
This review effectively highlights a logical "blind spot" by emphasizing the concept of "errors." Speakers with minimal integral errors will reveal maximum recording and sound processing errors. Naturally, this has a side effect: a home-based listener (who is a not a studio-based producer), by spending a lot of money, ends up being exposed to some type of errors (which, as determined, is on the majority of recordings). While sound reproduction "musicality" is likely impossible to define in a way that compensates for individual aural differences-keeping in mind that people over 50, despite potential hearing deterioration, might have more resources to invest in high-end equipment-we encounter a psychological paradox: greater (acoustic) pleasure seems only attainable through exposure to more (acoustic) pain. In essence, this raises a fundamental philosophical question: is knowing what we miss the only way to enjoy life?
These are good questions. I do want to emphasize a point I tried to make in this video: it is not obvious to me that adding playback errors always (often?) masks recording errors. An example is with mastering, where part of the work is tone shaping. If that tone shaping involves EQ of +3db at 4 kHz, and if the playback system is +2 db at 4 kHz, then it seems likely that the playback error makes things worse. Noise and thd and timing and compression playback errors might have similar properties wherein adding distortion makes things worse. I also observe that 15 years ago, there was significant confusion driven (I think) by the collision of two bad things: red book CD distortion and speakers that improperly worked the on-axis/power response tradeoff. Consumers exposed to this “learned” that “accurate” speakers sound painful. Now we have high res and we have much better loudspeaker engineering, but I confess the discussion of errors still may bring up thoughts of the bad old days. I will try to think of better ways to articulate this. Thanks for the thoughts.
I must confess that my comment was significantly influenced by a few people I know, who have significantly better hearing than my good one (mainly timbre-sensitive) but not sufficient for me to be, let's say, a symphonic conductor. Interestingly, they can't agree even about curve-corrected heaphones. Measurements are the only objective reference point but we all are subjective and our ears can hear sometimes what is hard to distinguish by measurements (like amps). In short, the elements you present in this review are absolutely important, so thank you for that, but they will practically (!) affect only 1% of people who still will remain divided among themselves.
@@markbajkowski1171 Yeah, since I review many headphones I am well aware that their errors are different (headphone to headphone) so I’m not surprised different listeners who objectively may observe the same phenomena may have different subjective responses (preferences). That seems reasonable. In this review (S5) I’m trying to distinguish “choice among errors with a backdrop preference for minimal error” from “not interested in low error; I prefer +3 db at 50 Hz and a 2 db dip at 2500 Hz and .8% second order THD”. I tentatively suggest it is hard to sort that out until you’ve heard a really low error system. Or you know that you really enjoy live music. Or both. As you say, we don’t really have to know this. But we might also ask “is being confused about your goals a good way to enjoy life?” I don’t view that as a moral question, but for some personalities it is a useful one?
Most people don't know about his day job, but Tom is actually employed by the MegaMillions lottery organization.
Legalized gambling at it's highest level.
Open baffle is the way to go ,no crazy engineering required to control box resonance,state of the art sound for a price everyone can afford 🎉🎉
Open baffle can be fantastic, but it's quite a lot of room treatment. So its difficult draw a savings there.
Hmmm.......room treatment is usually less required for Dipoles than other approaches, with the exception of what is behind the speaker. And even IF it needed more room treatment, $10,000 of room treatment would go FAR further than the insane engineering and materials used in box speakers. Just have a look at how much of the overall cost of the box goes into this Magica.
what about no listening room ? just put the system in an open space, with temporary covers for when it rains, and listen to them on sunny days ? no seriously, people spend fortunes on listening rooms, do we need a room ?
@@nitraM321 That would work for mid to high frequencies, but you would not hear much bass below about 200 Hz. If you look at the speaker systems used by bands that play in outdoor concerts, the number of amps and amount of power used is astronomical compared to a home listening room. Whereas many acoustic bands can play in a small concert hall with no amplification. Also, to get a realistic reproduction of sound, it often helps to be able to hear reflections from the side and rear of the listening room, but that depends a lot on the recording.
@Mark-rw3kw Hmmmmm......... Have to disagree with you on that one Mark. Bass below 200 Hz does not require a room of any sort. In fact, bass below 200 Hz sounds significantly BETTER outdoors due to the absence of the Schroeder Frequency intrinsic in any room. Just use YOUR OWN experience. At live, open air concerts, the PA system EASILY plumbs down into the 35 Hz range with authority. Personally, I sometimes listen outdoors to a pair of Altec 6.5" two way Bluetooth speakers with a rear firing Passive Radiator, set up as a stereo pair ( in my hammock at the ideal listening position). Not only is the bass superb and authoritive down to about 65 Hz (my guess of the F3 of the speakers), but the imaging and soundstage BLOWS AWAY 99% of High-End systems I have heard. My much, much, much more expensive home rig with top of the line Maggies and a treated listening room beats the experience.....but only because of clearly more detail, precision, accuracy etc. That is why large studios attempt (spend hundreds of thousands) to create a NRZ (No Reflection Zone) seat for the mixing engineer. Not criticizing you, just giving you another opinion/perspective............
Coffee really. You had to go there. Ha!
I'll believe it after they send Erin a pair for testing. Subjective reviews are worthless
Shouldn’t you have to interview Dr. Floyd Toole and Dr. Sean Olive and read all of their papers about speaker and headphone design before calling this the science company?
I’ve read Floyd’s book several times, and he has made huge contributions to the technology, as has Sean (and Todd Welti). I did not intend to (and I don’t think I did) say that Magico is THE speaker science company, merely that they are trying to use science to do what they do. Sorry for the confusion.
Funny that their cost no object / ultimate speaker is based on horn speakers yet they don't manufacture any horn speakers, hmmmm ?
The Magico Ultimate (horn-based) was the top of the line 15 years ago. I think they believe they have superseded this with the M9. Either way, horns have their attractions.
TLDR: 80k speakers with a couple hundred K driving them sound pretty good.
we doubt that
WOW, I didn't know the was a best set of speakers? In who's opinion? Oh, that's right, it's just opinion and does not mean anything, right?
To be clear: this review is part of our series on the best speakers. It is not a declaration that this is THE best speaker. The primary point of the video was to help viewers think about how they define the best speaker for their listening.
Just another perfect example of why being financially very well off is so overrated
thats not just fluff they have 750000 flagship speakers. Oh, well with that proof.......
Much technology... how about the sound?!😅
This loudspeaker is so revealing that half of your music collection becomes unlistenable because of the shortcomings of the recordings.
Lost interest shortly after hearing the price. For a whole lifetime of first class live musical performances from all of your favorite artists you can buy a pair of speakers. Stop it.
262 lbs. tells me they didn't hire any skilled engineers. It would be easy to get better performance from a speaker at 100 lbs. or less. Looking at the old fashion smooth surrounds tells me these are higher distortion drivers than anything you can buy from Purifi. That surround changes the cone area as it moves in and out and that is distortion. So that's not impressive. It would be easy to mount a Hypex Fusion FA503 to the back of one of these and improve the performance. Powered speakers with digital crossovers are just better than any passive crossover you can build without question. So these are works of art, but they are far short of state of the art speakers today and the test results will quickly reveal that. Not worth it. All the thick speaker cables in the world can't fix it, no matter what the old audiophile priest says. His hearing is shot. Lets see him publish a hearing test result.
Imagine if TAS partnered with HiFi Immersion and ACTUALLY RECORDED the speaker when they give 20 minutes of yada yada about it. THAT could be PLEASURABLE, VALUABLE, and ILLUMINATING, Cheers! :)
If you have heard any high-end speaker system in real life, you will know that any recording of it will not do it justice.
Even your home system would sound much better in real life than recorded.
@@ktakeshi17 I've heard and owned TONS of high-end audio equipment since 1974, your assertion that there is no utility, value, or pleasure in YT videos of high end equipment is beyond ludicrous. Watch the HiFi Immersion videos with some high-end headphones and / or systems and then come back and make that statement. Silly. "Do it justice" is an absurd, pointless, and meaningless standard.
@@beautifulgirl219 ok. whatever makes you happy.
weight is not a factor of value
There are many more metrics than cabinet resonances that introduce errors but they never address any of those issues. Just another marketing company beating up the same strawman again and again :(
Interesting
Of which errors in particular are you referring?
@@FOH3663 An outdated passive crossover for a start. Why not active ? Non minimum phase crossover with lots of stored energy. No time alignment. Poor step response. Just look at how bad their step response is and here they are obsessing over minute resonances in their cabinets. They should quantify these resonances instead of beating up a strawman ! Using metal for their cabinets that is inherently resonant and then having to fix it up with layers of damping material ! What acoustic levels are radiating from these cabinet resonances compared to the direct levels from all of the drivers ? It would be interesting to know that. Not a single figure is given. Go figure ! And this reviewer just parrots their marketing blurb instead of measuring things for themselves and calling them out on it :D LOL
My goal in my life is to hold on to my $75k. That said, if you buy a $75 car, five years on, it is worth about $35-40k. How much will the Magic be worth, and you dont have to pour gas into it, but insurance or pay interest on the loan (Maybe you got a home loan to buy the Magico)) How do you want to flash your opulence to your neighbors?
@chrislj2890 He would be such and idiot that he could buy and sell you a couple of hundred times over. Look in the mirror and see a real idiot. 😂
A horse, a yacht service, a spare car, a painting, a vacation, another wristwatch… a pair of speakers.
It’s all about your perspective.
@@n.lyndley.9889
And your wallet and/or credit rating. What gets me is that the cost of the ancillary equipment for these speakers is also going to be exorbitantly expensive, and yet these speakers still are not the best in their lineup, therefore you still aren't getting the ultimate sound for all that money. These people are just chasing their tail.
All my life I've rotated from one hobby to another when I got bored. Cars, motorcycles, firearms, stereo sand cameras. Plenty of opportunity for some bad judgement in that lot.
@@fletchermunson6225
LOL, I'm the same way. I'm retired now and trying to get rid of all the different gear I've accumulated.
Are you suggesting there is such thing as "best" in a purely subjective experience? Isnt that a naive thought ?
Magico are near impossible to get the "magic"
It's there to be had! But I can assure you that a very very low percentage of people will get magico correct.
I really wish you would try perfect them mike. I would enjoy watching that.
Peace
Perhaps someone reading these comments can give me some advice. Im looking for a reviewer that reviews audio compnents like an engineer would. While I'm not an engineer, I'm fascinated by techical details and measurements. Is there anyone out there that reviews audio components like Sandy Munro reviews cars? Anyone who not only describes what they hear but breaks down the components i.e. parts of the crossovers, guage of the internal wiring, makers of the capacitors, etc? Im also interested in more scientific methods of reviewing as well (blinding the reviewer to the make and model of components prior to the review).
@@crazyprayingmantis5596 I was hoping there was a brave soul with deep pockets and an actual love for music that was willing to make reviews at least slightly scientific. Given that we are no longer forced to rely on getting news from the mainstream media, I was hoping there was something similar for A/V reviews. Maybe someday.
Erin's Audio Corner ...
@@FOH3663 thanks. Looks promising on first impression
@@FOH3663 thanks. Looks good so far
Taylor Swift???
Our philosophy is to try old and new, popular and obscure because that represents the variety of what people might listen to and different styles show different strengths and weaknesses of equipment. We avoid just using the best recordings or one style of music (typical reviews involve over 100 tracks ranging from Mahler to Cage, Miles to Zorn, Black Keys to BB, REM to Radiohead...you get the idea). We use music of different levels of complexity. We assume people want to listen to music first, not choose music to fit their audio systems. The other key is using music recorded in multiple eras (IEC recording standards have changed roughly each decade). Taylor Swift represents some of the most sophisticated pop production currently on offer, so it serves as a reference for many other pop artists (Dua Lipa, Billie Eilish etc). And of course, Swift had 5 of the top 10 albums in terms of sales in the most recent year, so she is hardly irrelevant in terms of what people actually listen to (we compensate for this possible populist faux pas by testing with e.g. John Cage, Messiaen and Henry Threadgill). Hope this helps.
This is an infomercial. there is no real detail about what's going on in the speakers I've learned nothing
You are talking about degrees
These puff reviews help no one but the promoter and the manufacturer
I am glad that expensive things like this exist
I strongly disagree agree with the notion that we are losing out if we don’t buy these speakers
The effort of making a 280 pound speaker to dampen/kill the cabinet is one approach
I prefer the harmonics of active cabinets
“Reduction of error levels” = sterilization of the sound
I prefer the sound of a bar with a stage and live music and musical error as opposed to this strange world that is devoid of any relationship to the sound of live real instruments in the real world
Fortunately we can all get what we want
I don't understand why you say this a puff review. Magico is widely acknowledged to make some of the finest and most accurate speakers available (for those that want that). In the US alone, there 1.5 million households with a net worth of 10 million or more, so what you consider to be very expensive may not be so expensive to everyone.
Whether you want the speaker system to add some character of its own depends on the recording. Many good recordings have the ambiance of a listening room already in the recording, while other recordings are close-mic'ed in a padded room and are sterile and need additional ambiance provided by a speaker system. Tom clearly pointed out the difference between different recordings and how they sound on an extremely accurate speaker system.
@@Mark-rw3kw I have watched/read many reviews of Magico speakers
I respect Magico and as you know, I did say I am glad that these high-end components exist
Puff piece is my subjective opinion of this subjective review
Seeing the reviewer sitting a chair pumping/lifting his arm in the air… that is freaking funny
Seeing a comment in another TH-cam reviewer’s channel yesterday which describing him as being a meme probably colored my opinion but I did see some merit in their notion that he is the face of all that is wrong with what I call HiFi….pimping not critiquing
My armchair review is that the Borresen M6 is better or comparatively on price the M3 is better as I vigorously pumped both of my fists in the air when I read their reviews
If coloration, and distortion of the reproduced sound is what you are after... that's your bag. Just don't expect many to take that seriously. Why seek out enjoyable, well recorded music, only to adulterate it? Remember, all of the music will be misrepresented with a colored speaker, you will only find limited "matching" of speaker-music interactions that you will find pleasing. This is a very limited way of thinking, and approaching an otherwise enjoyable hobby. 2c.
@@MilGrip76 yes I do favor SE Tube amplifiers which can color the sound and I like that if properly implemented
You may want to go in another direction
As I said up there 👆
“Fortunately we can all get what we want”
@@middleearthltdtube guy comes to a Magico speaker review and complains about how accurate the speaker is? Audiophiles are an interesting breed
It all sure sounds impressive, not cheap but what is these days. 🤓
Ive got 262lbs of bricks outside,guess what,they dont cost 75grand.
weird placement of drivers
Another American manufacturer that doesn't practice price parity around the world. USD$75K should be approx AUD$113. RRP in Australia is AUD$145K. Another USD$20K. Do these speakers travel by Limo and then First class? Next video please....
Very interesting video and like it a lot, but the voice of the narrator sounds very bad, like out of phase and saturated of distortion, I muted and activate the subtitles.
Grow up.
No speaker is worth 750
and it's hard to find great speaker for $750.00
Sounds like a speaker that will send you running out of the room if listening to less than ideal recordings.
I watch this channel but don’t trust him one bit
I am going back to repairing my vintage carver and magnepan system
Overrated overhyped overpriced Ripoff