Ahhh. 12" woofers - life is good. That would make the overall ht ~6 feet by comparison as @Schroedster replied .
Looking forward to see how this speaker line turns out. I’m sure it will be spectacular.
Audio.bill got it right … Magnepan had a full page ad in the latest The Absolute Sound (Issue 293 - April 2019) announcing this.
Howdy yakaway!
We do not plan on making them bi-wireable. Since the midbass coupler and woofer are both active, it would only be the midrange driver and the tweeter that will rely on outside amplification.
The midrange and tweeter will both be AMTs, and they’re both easy to drive. This means the normal benefits of bi-wiring/bi-amping don’t really apply. It’s unlikely you’d garner benefits from going with different speaker wires to the tweeter vs the midrange, or different amps.
Are these speakers designed to pair with the ps audio 300 monos?
ATMS? What’s that?
We will be doing the majority of the voicing with the BHK 300 monos, that’s correct.
As for the AMT, it’s a driver type. For the dry explanation, you can take a look at the wiki page here.
Basically, they’re a type of tweeter/midrange driver known for their low distortion and excellent transient response. They tend to shine best in dipole configurations like we have planned for the AN2 and AN1 though they still perform brilliantly in close boxed designs.
You mention an 1 and 2. Plans are different for an 3?
Can you elaborate?
I assume an 3 is the high end model.
This’ll be last question until after axpona.
Thanks,
Adam
heyya Schroedster, great info, thanks! wondering if you could expand on the type of active amplification used to test- drive the mid-bass coupler and large woofer inside the AN3? apologies if this was explained in another thread!
And, would it be reasonable to assume, since the AMT midrange driver and tweeter are fairly easy to drive, that smaller amps - say in the 100-200 watt range - may be suitable to use with the new AN3? cheers! Sully.
AN3 is the current one they’re working on - the low end of the three, and closed-box on top vs. the higher models which will be open backed/dipole. Correct me if I have any of that wrong Schroedster.
No worries, ask as many questions as you like! I get some exercise in anytime you ask a question I don’t know the answer to and have to go downstairs to engineering 
@badbeef is indeed correct. The AN3 is the lowest of the three and will be a closed box design. It will run an AMT midrange and tweeter as well as an active midbass coupler and 12" woofer.
The AN2 is the middle child and the AN1 is the top of the line. Both will be open in the back for the upper half as a dipole, and will feature the tweeters and midrange drivers in a line array configuration. If you look back at post 749 you can see how the AN2 will look.
We’re using the same amp module as in the M700s. Definitely overkill for what the midbass coupler needs, but it’s a brilliant module to build around and ensures we’ll be able to match sonic characteristics between the woofer and midbass coupler.
As for the midrange and tweeter, you could drive them with just about anything. Unless things drastically change, you could get away just fine using a 30 watt tube amp.
More power is always welcome, though.
1 Like
Yup, that’s perfection to my eyes!
Removable panels to change décor, add this silver trim as an option to buy when choosing panels.
Now keep the price below 20k USD so us Canucks can afford it with our crappy exchange rate.
Any idea why the choice to do a closed back on the AN 3 instead of being a dipole?
AMTs typically perform wonderfully, even when put into a closed box design. Woofers, however, need cabinet volume to perform well, even when servo-controlled and DSP’d.
With the smaller size of the AN3, we had to make a compromise to ensure proper bass performance. In this case, it meant taking the dipole configuration off the table to create substantially more cabinet volume for the woofers to breathe.
1 Like
AN1 is the big expensive model. I keep the distinctions separate by assigning #1 to Arnie Nudell because he made the number one speaker in the world at that time. Note Arnie’s initials.
Just my take,
Chas
2 Likes
Well-known in self-building of loudspeakers
"For the Air-Motion Transformer (AMT), the prediction occurs: was long, finally gut. Approved 1969 for the patent and says the 1970s year’s launch of the US American high-end speaker company ESS in the Hi-Fi low-end boxes should still last 40 years, until its AMT on broad base has been established. The first “famous Nazler” was the ETON ER-4 (from about 2002) and the BEYMA TPL-150 (from about 2007). By 2005, MUNDORF is intensively involved with the AMT theme, and today the most extensive AMT range of HiFi to PA, “closed” and Dipol. The commercial door bridge has, in the last few years, featured several AMT “Made in Fernost” designs (AUDIOPUR, DAYTON, HARWOOD, etc.) that use the seven strong Neodymium magnets and price 50 and 150 € “locks”.
There ESS AMT-1 still uses one conventional ferrite magnet - and there is a very beautiful “heavyweight”. The up-to-date specimens originate from the ESS AMT-1c a customer and its approx. 35 years alt (have a long walk in the cellar). The measured data are then certainly not transferable to newer ESS AMT-1 highs. Then, when the hands of the boxes were “pimping”, the high-heeler stays on her side and kidneys tested in our newer chamber."
Thanks for the information … I am looking forward to it
More love Denmark
Audiopur
https://www.lautsprechershop.de/index_chassis_en.htm?chassis/audiopur_en.htm
Dayton Audio AMT (Air Motion Transformer)
http://www.daytonaudio.com/index.php/loudspeaker-components/loudspeaker-drivers-by-series/amt-series.html/
HARWOOD ACOUSTICS
https://www.hifisound.de/en/By-Manufacturer/Harwood-Acoustics/
1 Like
HI Micheal,
I really enjoyed your links to AMT speakers and learned.
Thank you,
Chas
1 Like
I really don’t think my Sprout100 will be enough for these speakers…
1 Like
Looks great so far… one question, is there a reason for that large base at the bottom? It’s a bit ugly, plus make the footprint larger, I was so hoping for AN3 as my next speakers, but living in a Condo, it still looks too large for my space! 
Stability would be reason for base. Perhaps PS Audio could consider optional outriggers, many ppl report well designed outriggers improve performance. They might take up more real estate however aesthetically can appear less intrusive.
As Frank pointed out, stability is the reason for the base. With that said, we have refined the design to better match the aesthetics of the speaker so the finished product will have a nicer looking base. It will be a bit smaller, but not by a lot.
@Chet4 has been toying with some other options as well throughout the design process. The current base is the front runner, though.
What sort of changes would you like to see made to the base? Feedback and input is always helpful.