Mini Review: Heard the $25K Magico V3...Revolutionary?

David Matz said:

I recently auditioned the new Magico V3 at a local dealer. Stereophile claimed it was "revolutionary" in a recent issue. I am not sure I agree. The room was well treated. The rest of the system was expensive - ARC CD7, Levinson pre ($8K), and Burmester amp ($15K). It was very good: great coherence, nice extension, great soundstaging, more audiophile BS terms...

The speaker, however, did not disappear even as the cheaper Logan models such as the Aeon do, and the air around the instruments was not there. I am not sure how much it was the speaker, or the room, or the ancillary electronic equipment. I was not tapping my feet, but I was hearing every detail!

Why is SUPER EXPENSIVE audio equipment so overly detailed? Do audiophiles demand it, or do most audio designers never hear live music and are compelled to reproduce every bit? I make sure to get out and listen to live music, and I never hear this detail. I chose my BAT preamp (dynamics) and CJ amp (organic sound) because they get out of the way!

I am not sure I would trade my Vantages system for the system I heard it in. In fairness, it is the best non-electro stat/ planar I have heard, but why spend $25K? I guess I am going to have electro stats for the rest of my life. I am curious, though, to hear it with my equipment to make a more realistic apples to apples comparison, but in reality I won't be hauling the Magicos to my house.

Sorry that these comments do not express the passion or the joy conveyed by Tom when he was writing about the CLX, but the Magico V3 at $25K is not for me. I can't wait to hear the CLX.

Click to expand...

eknuds01 said:

There was no less than 50 grand in speakers and equipment. If it doesn't sound good, then it doesn't sound good.

Click to expand...

David Matz said:

Sorry that these comments do not express the passion or the joy conveyed by Tom when he was writing about the CLX, but the Magico V3 at $25K is not for me. I can't wait to hear the CLX.

Click to expand...

SundayNiagara said:

There was probably mis-match somewhere in the system. Let's start with the mixed-bag of equipment, for instance. If there was all ARC equipment would the sound have been different/better?

PS: I am only using ARC as an example, so feel free to substitute.

Click to expand...

tonepub said:

Everyone likes something different!

I wasn't terribly swayed by the Magico either, but I think if you are someone that really enjoys the ML sound, not much else will grab you in the same way.

I have a buddy with Magicos that always tells me the Summits are junk!
Go figure...

Click to expand...

I recently auditioned the new Magico V3 at a local dealer. Stereophile claimed it was "revolutionary" in a recent issue. I am not sure I agree.

Click to expand...

David Matz said:

Jeff,

I completely agree. I am not sure this is common knowledge in the industry, but there is a huge demand for detailed sound. I am not sure why. Listenning to live music, especially unamplified live music, the audiophile terms just go out the window. I think some companies hold focus groups to make sure they get the right amount of detail, the transitions from midrange to bass are good enough, etc.

What kind of electronics does your friend use?

Click to expand...

tonepub said:

So many hifi discussions end up going downhill about the quest for the "absolute sound", but because everyone's perception is different, it's about finding a system of components that you really respond to.

That's the only way to find happiness with this stuff!

Click to expand...

David Matz said:

SundayNiagara,

I know someone who heard it in an all BAT system - Rex preamp and 150 SE monoblocks (all tubes), and he liked it a lot. I think highly of BAT, and I am sure it I would have enjoyed the system more. However, I still did not hear in the Magico what a $2K Logan can do.

Click to expand...

Joey_V said:

I have learned that it takes a LOT more than a single audition to form a conclusion of a speaker. The speaker should be transparent to the source and if you believe in that - then you should also realize that perhaps you are actually just listening to the upstreams.

It's tough to say that the Magico isn't up to par to an ML, perhaps it was the set up or just the synergy was not the best for your ears. Have we not heard a poor ML demo?

Click to expand...

Joey_V said:

I have learned that it takes a LOT more than a single audition to form a conclusion of a speaker. The speaker should be transparent to the source and if you believe in that - then you should also realize that perhaps you are actually just listening to the upstreams.

It's tough to say that the Magico isn't up to par to an ML, perhaps it was the set up or just the synergy was not the best for your ears. Have we not heard a poor ML demo?

Click to expand...

C.A.P said:

No need to be sorry! Big $$$ does not mean big sound.

You will not be disappointed with the CLX That I can tell you first hand. I was blown away. They are the best I have heard.

Click to expand...

David Matz said:

Heard the CLX today. I was BLOWN AWAY!

It was driven by Krell Evolution, a very analytical system. Loved every second of it!

Click to expand...

theWB said:

Dave,
Just got home from work and pulled up the site expecting to see some pics and a review of your CLX session today. Come on lets get going, the wait is killing me. I was gonna try and make it but just couldn't get away from work.

Click to expand...

David Matz said:

It was so good, we are going back in a week or 2. You are welcome to come. Sorry no pictures, but the speaker is not as ugly as people say they are. You may be trading in your Summits after you hear them!

Click to expand...