Customer Discussions > Speakers forum

magnepan 7.1 vs anthony gallo strada


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-25 of 35 posts in this discussion
Initial post: Jul 22, 2010 10:18:13 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jul 22, 2010 10:21:59 AM PDT
I've reserched both speakers. Can't decide on which to purchase. Wanted to listen to them both before I decide. I cannot find a location close enough. If any body has listened to both or either one
I would appriciate some input. Thank you

Posted on Jul 22, 2010 11:30:12 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jul 22, 2010 11:31:52 AM PDT
Audiolad says:
Just remember, to get the best sound you need a comparable quality amplifier. The mainstream receivers just don't give you the matching quality for your speakers (either brand). I'm not a snooty audio guy and don't own that high of quality myself, but I also don't have $3500 speakers either.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 22, 2010 11:09:43 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jul 23, 2010 12:10:38 AM PDT
A/V guru says:
Hopefully you mean the Magneplanar 1.7.

And also not sure how you are devising any kind of comparo with the Strada* in that they don't even produce sound the same way(or even have the same "purpose").

I own a 2 pairs of Apogee (Diva and Centaur major) and a pair of Magneplanar SMG and even I don't try to compare them together, let alone against my vast collection of DCM, BIC, Wharfedale etc.

*now if you were looking for the Reference 3 and its "look" was a bit odd (which it is) and its price made your checkbook run for cover(or the credit card melt)...then I understand why you would choose the Strada (with the TR-3 sub)...but again...both speakers have differing missions, and don't even come close to the same sound.

P.S. The Manepans will REQUIRE* an amp that costs almost as much as they do (even better if you choose two mono amps)...then you still have to buy the pre-amp and a tuner (if you need a tuner)...there is no "receiver" made that I would connect to Magnepans (not even by NAD or Rotel). The AG Strada could be run with a receiver...but even they should be given the same treatment, but won't "require" as expensive a set-up to sound their best. I'll give you (and others) a quick rundown of what Magnepan says they require power wise...and break it down to apples to apples...

* Magnepan rates their speakers at 2.83 volts (more or less 10 watts) and AG rates them at 1 watt. so starting off at 1, or 10...

Magnepan...86 db at 10 watts
AG.............87 db at 1 watt

Magnepan...89 db/20 watts
AG.............90 db/2 watts

"normal" conversation is around here...

Magnepan...92 db/40 watts
AG.............93 db/4 watts

Magnepan...95 db/80 watts
AG.............96 db/8 watts

As you can see....10 times the power...doesn't go very far with the Maggies.

Posted on Jul 23, 2010 10:28:24 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jul 23, 2010 10:33:50 AM PDT
Techno babble, as is typical of the A/V gurus posts.

If you are serious about these speakers, you are going to have to travel and bring with you the music, you'd like to listen to and hear it on each.

Posted on Jul 23, 2010 4:05:18 PM PDT
S. A. Boyer says:
I agree, listen to them before you buy them, especially with so much money involved.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 23, 2010 6:12:38 PM PDT
A/V guru says:
What, information "strait off Magnepans website" is technobabble, all exalted one????

Posted on Jul 23, 2010 8:29:27 PM PDT
Audiolad says:
I can only account for my likes and dislikes, but if I was spending $3300+, I would sure look at the Legacy line of speakers, and they to specialize using Planar/ribbon tweeters.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 25, 2010 1:02:45 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jul 26, 2010 7:12:46 AM PDT
dsrussell says:
annette: I auditioned the 1.7s a few months ago. If you look at the start of the thread Martin Logans vs Magnepans, I've given my opinions on this speaker. Basically, it's a steal for 2 grand. However, Magnepan is really backlogged right now. Everyone seems to be buying these at the same time. I waited 2-1/2 months for my 3.6s and I'd guess that the wait is 3 months or longer right now.

That being said, don't take my word or anyone's word on any speaker this expensive without auditioning them yourself.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 25, 2010 6:18:39 PM PDT
2.83V should be 1w, assuming 8ohms resistance.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ohm's_law

Power = Voltage * Current
Current = Voltage / Resistance
Therefore: Power = Voltage * Voltage / Resistance

x = 2.83 * 2.83 / 8
x = 1.0011125

Since the Magneplanar 1.7 is nominal 4 ohms, does that mean 2.83v is 2w?

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 25, 2010 9:37:15 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jul 25, 2010 9:46:30 PM PDT
A/V guru says:
I didn't do "the math" myself in how I came up with that. The magazine/review I read said 2.83 comes "close" to 10 watts. Considering how ineffecient Maggies are, They are where I came up with the power rating as well.

I can attest to maggies needing around 10 times the power of a "cone" speaker.

edit: I just read a DIY post about 2.83 volts. Through a "true" 8ohm speaker...2.83 "equals" 1 watt. But the ohm load and frequency response changes the "real result". So, in "cone" speaker...2.83 is "around 1"....where through the maggies...depending on frequency chosen, 2.83 can reach "close to 10".

Basically it is easier to set the voltage (what you are really changing in an amp) then figure out what you come up with, as 1 watt can be ambiguous with 8ohm, 4, 2, 16 etc out there...voltage is the same, the "wattage you come up with" in each case is different.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 25, 2010 10:30:43 PM PDT
No.
8ohms 1w.
4ohms 2w.
2ohms 4w.
1ohm 8w.

It's basic division, guy.

Here's a posted impedance curve for the Magneplanar 3.6 (different from 1.7, I know), but the impedance never drops below 3. That's pretty tough to drive still, but it doesn't affect the wattage in the way you're implying.

Posted on Jul 26, 2010 6:13:38 AM PDT
Audiolad says:
For those that actually brought the question to the post, Maggies are inefficient and need big clean amps to power them up properly.

Posted on Jul 26, 2010 7:31:17 AM PDT
More techno babble and confusion on the A/V guru's part. He always has some excuse.

Mr Chang is right on the math. If you half the impedance - you double the amperage (assuming a constant voltage source) which doubles the wattage.

DL is right in his conclusion.

Posted on Jul 27, 2010 7:18:18 PM PDT
Raymond Lee says:
I've owned a pair of Maggie IIIA's for 18 years. Maggies can sound great with some types of music but they require a certain commitment. The normal method of measuring speaker efficiency with a mike 1 meter form the acoustic center of the speaker in a anechoic chamber doesn't work well with the Maggies. They have a figure eight output pattern common to planar speakers not the hemisphere pattern of the box speakers. So a lot of the output never reaches the mike. and also with the way planar speakers launches the sound wave sound level drop off doesn't decrease as rapidly as box speakers. They are not as power hungry as the numbers imply. They need good amps that can handle impedances below 8 ohms. That would rule out almost all receivers. They do well with a 50 watt into 8 ohm Mark Levinson amp, but that amp will do 100 watts into 4 ohms and 200 into 2 ohms. The best amp in my collection with the Maggie is 100 watt VTL tube monoblock. Maggies also need a lot of room behind them to sound the best. When I use them I have them 7 feet off the back wall. Any less they lack that ultra clear and clean sound. You'll also need to buy after market stands if you have pets or kids. They are easy to tip over with the standard stands. They are not as dynamic sounding as box speakers. They may not have the slam for home theater either.
The Maggie 1.7 at $2,000 is a good speaker at a good price but you'll need to spend as much on a amp and they have space requirements. You should listen to them with your type of music before you buy.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 30, 2010 2:27:36 AM PDT
Oh, come ON........ Since WHEN does a speakers "Efficiency", have ANYTHING to do with it's quality????? One speaker, a "VERY GOOD ONE", may REQUIRE 10x the power, to get the same output, BUT, though it requires MORE power, Possibly MUCH more, it does SO much more WITH it. I MEAN in terms of as close to "PERFECT" reproduction as is possible.
PLEASE do NOT use the amount of POWER req'd by a speaker influence your decisions, as it is crawling over towards apples and oranges. AND, remember, you SAID you were going to give a "Apples to apples review". that LAST line, changes it ALL. "10x the power ...doesn't go very far with the Maggies". BLEH! APPLES TO ORANGES BUD....IMHO OF COURSE!

Two Bears

Posted on Jul 30, 2010 2:32:09 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jul 30, 2010 2:34:49 AM PDT
This post was meant as a reply to A/V guru's post of 23 July @2309.

OK, it turns out, it did NOT edit the previous post as It was supposed to, but, I'm BLIND, what do you EXPECT. BUT, I have ears you people (Most) only DREAM about. NOT WORTH THE TRADE EITHER ;-)

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 30, 2010 6:00:13 AM PDT
E. Haynes says:
My dad is on his second set of magneplanars. I can't remember the current model but the sound is incredible but as stated before they require a great amount of power. He is pretty serious and is running his two fronts which are the maggies on large quicksilver tube amps along with another expensive amp for the center and rears and a McIntosh processor.....

It also requires spacing from the wall, tv, etc for the sound to be at peak....

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 30, 2010 10:54:23 AM PDT
What's so good about perfect reproduction if you will never have enough power to drive it to the desired volume?

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 30, 2010 12:24:26 PM PDT
I just commented on A/V Guru's post, Myself, I would NEVER purchase speakers that inefficient, I can't afford the power. ;-) But, a person, that can afford those speakers, I would THINK, could afford the amp. And they are Definately out there.
I have one amplifier here, 2 - 8877 Eimac tubes, Input 1,800 volts at 5.6 amps if drive turned all the way up, and tuned, output, >8,000 watts "CLEAN". It's a bit older, but, VERY useful. Only downside, is whole neighborhood becomes HEAVY EMI Zone. ;-) Forgot to say, HF AMP, NOT AF.
I consider myself, a "Junior Audiophile", IOW, though i KNOW what clean crystal clear music sounds like, I don't even WANT to afford it. Wouldn't even TRY. Like MOST people, I "Settle". I'm getting OLD now, (64), and have different priorities than younger people. At least MOST of them. I squeeze a nickel so HARD the buffalo farts............ I would NEVER have bought that monster amp, BUT, It was the widow of a friend selling it, and she knew, I would treat it right, and NOT use it illegally, so she all but
GAVE it to me. I have licences for most anything in the Comms field.

Two Bears

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 31, 2011 1:23:50 PM PDT
I owned modded maggi 1.6 which are better top to bottom than the new 1.7 maggi .in fact the new maggi is not that much better at all and in the bass not even as good. The Gallos with a gallo sub is more dynamic, better imaging ,better bass , soundstage is almost as big as the maggis and
the gallo strada with sub is better with 2 subs I even would say even at 3x the money it is very good .

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 31, 2011 2:07:16 PM PDT
KBIC says:
Hmm, I have a friend that is running a set of 80s magnapans through the Rotel monoblocks that were released in the mid 90s (991?) @200w each.

Posted on Jan 31, 2012 12:10:04 AM PST
Don C says:
I have owned Acoustat Electrostatics, Magnepan MG III's, PSB Stratus Golds, B&W Nautilus 802's and now I have GALLO Strada's with a TR-3 sub and Gallo Reference 3.5's. All I know is I wouldn't trade the Gallos even for any of the others. They resolve detail as good as an electrostatic, have the dynamics of some of the best "box" speakers out there, and IMO the best sounding least fatiguing tweeter I have ever heard. They present an easy load for the amp and sound much better than their price would indicate. The 3.5's sound better when the second voice coil in the sub is driven with the use of a low pass filter and a second amp, but they are much more money than the Strada's.
The Strada's are giant killers and their ability to project a huge convincing 3D soundstage continues to impress me. I sold high end audio gear for a lot of years... I wish I could have sold these.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 7, 2012 8:21:23 AM PDT
S. Heath says:
Hey I wish someone would record the Gallo Stradas and post the video on youtube . I've heard so many wonderful things about these speakers but like alot of the population live long distances from the high-end audio stores. Some of the best sounding speakers on youtube are open baffle design, B&W 801s are still hard to beat.

Posted on Jun 22, 2012 11:03:43 AM PDT
tim-bobby says:
I have not listened to the Gallos, but have owned the Magneplanar MG-IIIa for 20+ years. The Maggies are all about space, the feeling of being there, etc. (IMO). I find the speakers very natural sounding (and at least in my room with my equipment, more laid back than forward and bright). I have hard time listening to box speakers after listening to the Maggies because the really do sound like they're in a box and don't generally have the soundstage of the Maggies (I'm sure there are exception). But, a really good box speaker may have more absolute detail that the Maggies. The Maggie's aren't lacking detail, but because they're dipoles you do give up that last little bit of detail. I drive mine with a amp that is ~100 w/ch. into 4 ohms and can drive them as loud as I can listen to them, and louder (when common sense fails me and I play music too loud - usually related to alcohol :) ). According to the amp specs, the amp is capable of significantly more power in very short peaks (headroom).

Some people have said they feel Maggie's are a little lacking in bass, but I'm quite happy with the amount of bass I get. The MG-IIIa I own are equivalent in size to the what is now the 3.7. It has a bigger woofer panel than the 1.7's. I listened to the MG-IIIa's little brother at the time (what would probably be the equivalent of the 1.7 now) and they sounded very nice - until I listened to the MG-IIIa. I found the larger speaker had more bass and had a fuller sound to me so I got the larger ones.

As someone else mentioned in a previous comment, they have to be away from the back wall. Mine are about 3-4 feet from the back wall. I have experimented with them closer to the back wall and farther from the back wall, but this seems to be the best spot for me. The ribbon tweeter is also fairly directional and the speakers are generally toed-in (as shown in the Magneplaner setup book from Magnepan), so the ribbon tweeters more or less point at your head. This results in a sweet spot where the sound is the best, and the sweet spot for me is about the width of my listening chair. Sitting in chair to one side or the other of my listening chair results in a lesser quality sound.

The one thing about the Magneplanar I cannot emphasize enough is that they generally have a low spousal acceptance factor because they are nearly six feet tall and 2 1/2 feet wide. They definitely dominate a room! If you have a special room for them, that's probably good. If you have them in a (large) living room like I do, you may find your S.O. giving you a hard time about the size of the "monster-planars".

A few other speakers with some of the best attributes of the Magneplanars include the Martin-Logan series with their electrostatic mid/tweeter panel and conventional woofer, the Vanderstein models I recall being pretty good at the "boxless" feeling, also the Quad electrostatic speaker and the similar-looking Dahlquist speaker. The Quads and Dahlquists are much less tall then the Maggies, but wider - more square shaped.

Our local audio store does have the Gallos; I'll have to give them a listen sometime soon.

Posted on Jun 22, 2012 11:55:35 AM PDT
Don C says:
I had a pair of Magnepan MG3's and they are a very good speaker. The Gallo Ref. 3.5's do everything the maggies do and a whole lot more..IMO. They image every bit as well or better, but have the dynamics and detail the maggies are lacking. (new maggies are much better in this dept) and the detail of the tweeter has to be heard to be appreciated. I find it more detailed than the maggie ribbon and much less fatiguing. Much better spousal factor. The size of the soundstage these can project is mind boggling!
Do don't judge this speaker until you can hear it. The soundstage is much better than my B&W 802's and the Magnepan MG3's...IMO.
‹ Previous 1 2 Next ›
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


Recent discussions in the Speakers forum (420 discussions)

 

This discussion

Discussion in:  Speakers forum
Participants:  21
Total posts:  35
Initial post:  Jul 22, 2010
Latest post:  5 days ago

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 4 customers

Search Customer Discussions