Does anyone have any experience with the Magnepan DWM bass panels? I found a set local I’m thinking of picking up but I can’t find a ton of info on them.
A couple months back I got a set of 1.7s w/ GR Research crossovers that I have been struggling to get setup right in my space. Part of the problem has been bass integration with my existing Rythmik 12” servo sub.
I have seen others mention fast bass and never really understood that as I thought of a 40hz wave as the same wave no matter what played it. I didn’t really think it could be faster or it would be another frequency/note. With the 1.7s I hear the texture of the bass note and the fluctuation in the note. The reverberations. That is now what I understand to be what people refer to as fast bass. My speakers before could not really do this and I am used to boomy bass. While I love the sound quality I get out of the 1.7s, I ideally would have more down low impact and volume. My Rhythmic sub can add that impact but at the cost of clarity.
I spotted a pair of the Magnepan DWM bass panels local to me for cheap. Part of me thinks if I want more bass that matches the panel in sound quality, this would be perfect. However, as I looked into them I see they are passive and seem to have a crossover in therm. I think you run speaker cables from your amp into the DWM panels, and then another set of speaker cables from the panels to the speakers. You could also setup another amp for the panels, but I don’t have a second quality amp at the moment. I do use PS Audio BHK Signature 300 monos which have two sets of speaker outputs but I don’t really know the best way to hook up these panels if I get them. I guess I could run the 1.7. full range from one set out outputs and the bass panels from the second set.
I have seen it recommended that if you can use an external crossover to bring the low end off your Maggies and free up the panels for mids and highs they really shine. I’m guessing that is the thought with these DWM panels if you run the cables to the panels and then from the panel to the 1.7 but I don’t know where the crossover is set at or if I’m ever right about there being a crossover in the DWM panels. Magnepan does not have the best crossover parts quality, at least before the X line they recently added. The DWM bass panels don’t seem to be popular and I’m not finding a ton of info which has me concerned. Magnepan also states they are a woofer, not a subwoofer. They say they got down flat to 40hz. I don’t know that I have much below that area in the music I listen to. My understanding is below that is the land of organs, which is not my thing. At the same time, I know the panel is not going to move the air a traditional sub would and I won’t get that impact. My inexperienced self is currently guessing I would prefer to hear the note well then feel it for a bit. but that could be ignorance.
Does anyone recommend these DWM bass panels? Any advice short of a pair of the new Foundry subs which are not in the current budget?
The DWM are part of the 3 piece Mini Maggie desk top/small room system, and also sold separately. I had then as part of the mini system. They add some nice matching bass for larger Magnepans also, but no comparison to a 12 inch powered sub. Magnepan states they are a woofer not a subwoofer. They are a current model and the Magnepan website gives some good information. I was very happy with mine.
I had two years ago and discovered that they have virtually no bottom-octave output but do have some output in the mid- and upper-bass octaves.. They added a bit of of richness to Magnepan’s center-channel speaker (which has no pass panels) but were not worth the trouble.
Maybe you need to find a better place for that Rythmick SW.. FWIW, I’ve had three pairs of them over the decades and never thought they sounded ‘slow’.
I think I’m going to go pick them up. It’s $500 for two which seems cheap enough to play around with to me. I realize I won’t get the big impact or very bottom-octave, but it should still be an improvement on what I have and I expect it will pair better with the 1.7s. My current thought is to turn the crossover on my sub down to around 40-50Hz. to only cover the very bottom. I’m hoping I’ll get more mid bass from the DWM and figure since it is bass energy, having two more locations may help with some room bass issues.
Panels were in great shape and I got to hear them with his 3.7i first. Turns out the seller is looking for the exact subwoofer I already am using with my 1.7s that I don’t feel integrates too well how I had it set up. Fortunately for him, the sub sounds a lot better with the Maggies now that I turned the crossover from about 80Hz to 40Hz. While that crossover point was okay on my old speakers, I certainly like it lower with the Maggies.
As for the DWM, they seem to be right along the lines with what you two told me and what I was expecting. I do really like their detail and resolution. However, still not a ton down low. Maybe an extra couple db but not a game changer in my room. I need to play around with setup more which I think will help. My amps are currently setting where the DWM panels probably should go. I’ll need to wait until I finish the rack I”m building to address that but I’ll try a few things in the meantime.
For now, I’m considering changing the way I have it all connected. I started off running speaker wires from my PSA BHK Sig300 monos to the DWM speaker in, and a second set of speaker cables from the DWM high output to my 1.7s. My BHK 300s have two sets of speaker outs, I was thinking I could run one set of outputs to the DWM panels and one set to the 1.7s and skip the crossover in the DWM that pulls 40Hz. to 200Hz from the 1.7. In my ignorant mind, that would give me additional bass output but would add additional placement challenge as I would need to place the DWM panels equal distance to the LP as the 1.7s are from the LP for time alignment.
Can anyone tell me if I can in fact run two sets of speaker cables as outputs from my BHK 300 mono amplifiers like I described? Also, is this just going to create more problems for myself or it is worth a shot? Thanks
I ended up putting the DWM panels on top of my mono amps. It looks funny and I would imagine it is not ideal, but it got the DWM about an equal distance from the LP as the 1.7s. That noticeably helped. I think I was having time alignment issues before.
I’m still going to do more playing around, but I’m making progress.
I can’t stop fussing with things and trying out different layouts. I now have the DWM panels nearly a foot behind the 1.7s, parallel to the front wall and pushed up against the side walls. Magnepan gives different contradictory advice on placement depending on where you look. One place they recommended 14 inches behind the speakers. It seemed to me I would struggle to make that work but it turned out better than I expected. Placing the DWM panels next to the wall increased the output a bit as well but the SQ does not seem to be negatively impacted the way I was expecting.
To make that arrangement work, I did move the 1.7s closer to each other and moved them closer to the LP and father from the front wall with less toe. This does not make for an apples to apples comparison, but I’m liking it for now. It was another step in the right direction.
If I had more space, I think centering the DWM panels and placing them so they are perfectly time aligned with your speakers would be ideal. Once I get my monos tucked away so I can place the DWM panels on the floor there, I’ll go back try that again. However putting a wall in front of the listener between the speakers does seem to impact SQ to me. I remember in one of Pauls videos he explained he would not stack gear the way he does at the audio shows if it were not for needing to visually display the pieces. This gave me a better understanding of what he was talking about. I think if the gear was on the floor, you are okay, but once you stack it up between the drivers and closer to your ears, it starts to impact the rooms sound.
Rewired my 1.7s to be full range and ran separate cables from the second set of outputs on the BKH Sig 300s to the DWM panels. Sure enough, more bass but I’m not yet sure which I prefer. I think Ioss some clarity in the minds but not too sure if I"m just imagining it. I power off the mono blocks whenever I rewire speakers so I’m not sure I’m getting an apples to apples.
I think I really need some room treatment. My guess is that if my room was treated, running the 1.7s full range would be my preference for the added bass, but I’m a bit boomy in some areas and a bit low in others to my ears at my LP.
Yup, never could get my 1.7’s to play nice in my room and the boom was an issue. However, I have had much the same issue with non-dipole speakers. The PSI C214’s did the most to tame it. Sometimes the least glamorous additions can do the most good.
I got access to a laser through my maker space and was planning to make my own custom two layer versions of the GIK panels like the below with mainly walnut front but cherry behind it. Found the perfect amount for my front wall and corners and I was thinking two layers would allow me to do both extra layers for added diffusion but also for a custom design. My wife and I have gotten into the Dead and I was thinking of doing some dancing bears winding a path from one corner up to the other wall that would be four layers deep.
I was thinking of somewhat combining all these things.
Looks like a plan. I have GIK’s four largest bass traps and a fifth custom as a celling soffit. Custom diffusers fill the middle. My space is a man cave so the asthetics are less important but I still want it to look good, and I see you do too. It may be that my room is particularly bad, but passive traps and diffusers don’t do as much as active bass absorbers like the PSI C214, and the footprint is considerably smaller.
