Dear Scottmoose I insist..... why on earth should I pay more than 730 € for a driver (MAOP 11) ? I have to buy in matched pairs (how closely matched ?). What tolerance they have ? 10% , 15% , or more ? We buy 1% resistors and "audio grade" 2% capacitors to waste the all hi-fi chain to a driver with undefined tolerance ? Irrational (but as you sed it's subjective)
The MAOPs have some factory matching after rigirous QC.
And MA consistency and QC is already very good.
dave
And MA consistency and QC is already very good.
dave
Well, we do seem to be in a strange situation at the moment. First you announce that the EAD and MA units are 4ohm drivers when their own data clearly states they are 6 and 8ohm models, respectively. Now you seem to be complaining that the MAOP11 has an 'undefined tolerance' when the link I provided you states they are pair-matched to a 0.5% tolerance.
Quoting directly:After construction, each driver is individually measured in the anechoic chamber at the Markaudio factory and pair matched based on that data to within, 0.5% tolerance. Each pair is supplied with individual electrical and acoustic measurements.
Does that mean we could see a MOAP with a spiderless design? I was wondering what would come out best the MOAP cone or the single suspension? Both together will be interesting to say the least.
Planet10 and Scottmoose
"they are pair-matched to a 0.5% tolerance. :"
You are right and I was wrong. I didn't notice that . The dominant thinking was and still is their highest price (more than a basic month salary in Greece)
"they are pair-matched to a 0.5% tolerance. :"
You are right and I was wrong. I didn't notice that . The dominant thinking was and still is their highest price (more than a basic month salary in Greece)
Last edited:
My opinion is worth very little, as I'm not super critical and relatively forgiving of my crappy diy efforts. But, I've tried (and lived with) many MA drivers, including A7.3, A10.3, 12PW and MAOP7 as well as a few of the cheaper varieties. I find the MAOP, by a long way, the least fatiguing of the lot. My only complaint with them, even with bass support, is the limited power handling. I haven't tried the Jordans and doubt I ever will.
I have the 7MS (in a WAW config) and I think the MAOP 7 would drop straight in, very tempted! 😀
Last edited:
Don't worry, you're not alone. I can't afford them either. 😉 Which is probably a good job as I have far too many drivers as it is... 😀
Have you tried comparing any MA driver(s) with normal spider suspension vs the mono suspension?
Very curious about the changes in overall sound
@RXV
I have the Pluvia 7 which I had first then the 7MS came up on sale. They have the same frame so an easy swap. The 7MS is better IMHO. I'm using them in a WAW so haven't compared bass output between the two. I felt I needed a notch filter on the Pluvia to tame the top end. I don't need it on the 7MS. Mid range detail seemed better also. I'm very happy with the 7MS at the moment. I don't have the MAOP, its pricier obviously but also has a similar top freq response to the the Pluvia and I'm worried I would need a notch which would perhaps defeat some of the detail of the sound and therefore perhaps not be the overall upgrade I would expect.
I have the Pluvia 7 which I had first then the 7MS came up on sale. They have the same frame so an easy swap. The 7MS is better IMHO. I'm using them in a WAW so haven't compared bass output between the two. I felt I needed a notch filter on the Pluvia to tame the top end. I don't need it on the 7MS. Mid range detail seemed better also. I'm very happy with the 7MS at the moment. I don't have the MAOP, its pricier obviously but also has a similar top freq response to the the Pluvia and I'm worried I would need a notch which would perhaps defeat some of the detail of the sound and therefore perhaps not be the overall upgrade I would expect.
Last edited:
I did compare the Mark Audio 10.3M and the Eikona years ago side by side at a friend who had both, and i liked the 10.3M more, so that is what i went with. The Eikona is not bad at all, just a bit less good and at that time at least double the price.
But i think a big part is personal preference on those, both brands make similar drivers of high quality, and Mark Audio is born out of Jordan speakers as Mark Fenlon worked for Jordan for 3 years as consultant egineer and when that ended he formed his own company Mark Audio in 2005. They have a slightly different view on how to make them, but they still are very similar. I prefer Mark Audio altough.
But i think a big part is personal preference on those, both brands make similar drivers of high quality, and Mark Audio is born out of Jordan speakers as Mark Fenlon worked for Jordan for 3 years as consultant egineer and when that ended he formed his own company Mark Audio in 2005. They have a slightly different view on how to make them, but they still are very similar. I prefer Mark Audio altough.
Just so. I've done a couple of dedicated boxes for them, but stopped since they're more or less drop-ins for the base models. Some more (apparently) to come too, so my spies tell me. 😉
Hi Scott, could you possibly explain a little, how the MAOPs sound better/different to the models they are based on?
I absolutely love my 11MS but if a maop 11ms was released, I don’t know if me & my credit card would be able to resist the temptation!
The characteristics of Alpair11MS are weak braking in the low band and weak brilliance in the mid and high band. (Compared to MAOP11)
If you want peace of mind, 11MS is good, but if you want excitement, MAOP11 and Pluvia11 are good.
I have high expectations for MAOP11MS.
Many Japanese users would rate it as follows.
***Sound quality***
MAOP11> Pluvia11> Alpair11MS
***Cost performance***
Pluvia11> Alpair11MS> MAOP11
If you want peace of mind, 11MS is good, but if you want excitement, MAOP11 and Pluvia11 are good.
I have high expectations for MAOP11MS.
Many Japanese users would rate it as follows.
***Sound quality***
MAOP11> Pluvia11> Alpair11MS
***Cost performance***
Pluvia11> Alpair11MS> MAOP11