LINN Majik 140 Speakers FOR SALE. Black Ash. Mint. Boxed. Also Active Cards

My Linn Majik 140 Speakers for sale.
Mint condition
Boxed

Please see the listing on ebay:

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/-/291753146223?

Digital vs Analogue? But Not Streaming vs Vinyl.

Its already been raised in a couple of posts.

Linn have discontinued their analogue pre-amps.  So its digital volume controls all the way now, with the streamers and pre-amps being combined into the DSM streamer/pre-amp products.

Linn announcement covered here

Initial thoughts on a first listen to a digital volume control (DVC) are here

So how is this relevant to the main system at Audiophile Musings?  Well, it has the following streamer and pre-amp:

Klimax DS/1 (KDS/1) streamer
Klimax Kontrol/1/D (KK/1/D) analogue pre-amp

So Linn are now, effectively, advising customers that combining these 2 products into one Klimax product and using a DVC is an improvement on separates.  They still sell a separate streamer - the Klimax DS/2 (KDS/2) which features a new circuit board layout and an improved clocking system. Said to sound better than the KDS/1, of course.  The alternative, and what Linn seem to be recommending is the combined streamer and pre-amp in one box, the Klimax DSM/1 (KDSM/1) which features a DVC.  Of course, the older, KK1/D separate pre-amp features an analogue volume control.

The analogue vs DVC debate is lengthy on the Linn forum and there's the usual conjecture, assumptions and actual experiences recorded there.  Some are vehemently against, some are accepting, many are still on the fence, probably not having listened yet.  Linn themselves have produced technical information proving that the DVC introduces less distortion into a system, and is therefore, according to them, a good thing.

Why is this currently relevant?  Well, as the KDS/1 has been superceded by the (supposedly) improved KDS/2 streamer, then there's an option to consider upgrading the KDS/1 in the main system.  In typical Linn style, its possible to upgrade an existing KDS/1 to KDS/2 internals.  But it's also possible to upgrade the KDS/1 to the combined streamer and pre-amp, the KDSM/1.  So upgrade to KDS/2 or to KDSM/1 and sell the KK/1/D pre-amp? Or neither and stay as-is, or stay as-is to try and work out what Linn will do next - the myriad changes in the last 18 months or so is probably de-stabilising customers' system development plans, to say the least.  These upgrade options also come with Linn's proprietary Exakt digital outputs which allow the use of Exakt digital crossovers or Exakt enabled Linn active speakers in addition to traditional analogue output. This decision combines the following:

- commit to DVC (or not)
- upgrade the DS (or not)
- upgrade the DS to a DSM (or not)
- open up the option for Exakt at some point in the future (or not, but upgrading doesn't mean this has to be the future)
- are any of the upgrades good value (in the context of a Linn Klimax system)
- consider how any of this works with or without the KK/1/D pre-amp and the multi-channel cinema processor (or not, possibly leading to lots of other considerations / expenditure)

As you can probably see, lots of options for Linn's existing customers (although, as a new customer, things are very much simplified now), and, consequently, lots of confusion.  Change to new Linn? Move to a different manufacturer? Do nothing? Wait and see - for how long?

So, down to the dealer to have a listen, as that's the only way to resolve a few of these questions.  But with the demise of the analogue pre-amps, even that's not so easy now.  In order to listen to the KDS/1 against KDS/2 through a KK/1 pre-amp, its necessary to take along both the DS and the KK. But this does at least allow comparison of the 2 separate products compared to the combined KDSM/1.  A time was sorted out and about 2.5 hours was spent working through the options and making a decision.

At House of Linn, we used a Majik power amp into passive Majik 140s in the upstairs front room - so similar to my own system, but not identical as there weren't enough Majik power amps on hand to run the M140s in active mode.  The shop's pair of Solo power amps were out on demo, so they weren't an option either.  Linn Silver interconnects and one half of K400 speaker cables were used.  All the source and pre-amp components were placed on the top shelf of a Quadraspire Sukono Vent rack with a bamboo top shelf supported by their latest bronze spikes. Control was through Linn Kinsky on iPad and we used volume levels in the 60-65 range. We listened to the following combinations:

KDS/1 and KK/1/D
KDS/2 and KK/1/D
KDSM/1

These were swapped in and out of the system to enable A to B comparisons.  The KDSM/1 was used with the HDMI ports switched off and the KDS streamers with their internal volume controls disabled.  SPACE was disabled and the speakers had been positioned in the room using Tune-Dem by Brian and Trevor of HoL.  We used tracks familiar to me such as Nils Lofgren Live, Malia & Boris Blank, Blues Company, Peter Alderton, Yello and FAC15.  May be a few others over the 2.5 or so hours.

Top Shelf: Left to Right - Shop KDS/2, my KK/1/D and my KDS/1
Second shelf: Majik Power Amp
Rack: Quadraspire Sukono Vent with Bamboo Top Shelf and Bronze Spikes
KSDM/1 not shown in this picture

So first up was the most straightforward option - KDS/1 versus the newly released KDS/2, both playing through the KK/1/D and therefore using analogue volume control. Given that the KDS/1 is the most musical digital source I've heard to date, its surprising to find that Linn have, again, managed to deliver another notable upgrade.  The new clocking and circuit layout has been a spin-off from work done on the Exakt versions of these products, and the changes are more significant in the sound than I was really expecting.  I was thinking (maybe hoping?) that the improvements would be negligible and I could use the cash elsewhere, but no, this is another step forward.  Listen to the KDS/1 and you would think there was no noise floor, no hash in the music, until you hear the same track through the KDS/2 which sounds cleaner - its hard to describe, but there's more definition in the instruments and vocals, there is less "background" for want of a better phrase.  Imaging is more precise (again, I wasn't really aware of a lack of precision in the KDS/1, its still an excellent product) but the biggest change for me was the intonation and expressiveness of vocals.  There's just so much more texture to the way the singer is interpreting the words and providing the feel of the song.  Good stuff.  Is it worth the upgrade price?  No, its not.  However, when factoring in the ability to use the old KDS/1 electronics to create a new streamer (the DS Renew option) and then selling that onwards, then the upgrade becomes much more affordable and worth the extra (IMHO of course).

So, within about 30 minutes it was clear (after discussion around Renew values etc.) that the KDS/2 was something that interested me.  But how will that compare to the KDSM/1?  Will the combined streamer / pre-amp outperform the separates?  The KDS/1 was replaced on the top shelf of the rack with the KDSM/1 and we got started.  Some of the same tracks were used and we swapped between KDS/2 with KK/1/D and then to the KDSM/1 and back.  And here's the thing - its pretty easy to hear the difference between these 2 options, but which you will prefer, I think, will come down to individual choice.  In terms of detail retrieval, then the KDSM/1 is a marginal improvement on the separate boxes.  There's definitely more fine details resolved and there's a little more in terms of the acoustic space of the venue (on live recordings).  So that's it then, choice made?

No, its not that simple.  If I were a new buyer and only heard the KDSM/1, there's every chance that I would enjoy it and want to buy.  It plays tunes, it sounds good.  There are a couple of things I didn't like though - one is a very slight sharp edge to the lead of the notes and vocals - it doesn't sound like distortion, it's just a bit too abrupt.  But more importantly, there's less coherence and flow to the music.  The KDSM/1 plays a tune, but the separates play a more coherent and flowing tune - its easier to follow, to remember and enjoy.  Is the KK/1/D rounding the edges a bit?  Is it softening the spikes to make the music more "comfortable"?  Quite probably.  But when the music needs to shock or excite or thrill, its all there with the KK/1/D - this isn't about slowing the music or softening the impact, its about music sounding like music rather than a hifi.  The KDSM/1 is more hifi, the separates more musical.

So, is the KDSM/1 no good?  Not at all, its very good, and would be fine, and an improvement on the KDS/1, if I hadn't heard the KDS/2 and KK/1/D combination.  Which is superb and sounds like something I can listen to for hours.

KDS/1 is now back at Linn HQ, and a KDS/2 with a Renewed KDS/1 should be back in a couple of weeks.  Really looking forward to the KDS/2 in the system :-)

Linn Majik 140 Reviews

Stereophile Magazine

Owner Review

Actively Listening. Was it Majik?

Majik.  Not my favourite name in the Linn range.  Sounds a bit twee, childlike maybe.  Klimax sounds too much like an adult oriented konversation.  Akurate works well as a name.

Anyway, a rose is still a rose etc. ...

Recent discussions with TWKMS (those who know my system), including me, has led to the general conclusion that the 18 year old Linn Keilidhs are probably the bit that's holding it back.  I tend to agree - although their ability to reveal upgrades in the front end and amplification over those years has always astonished me.  I kept wondering when they'd run out of ability.  I'm sure if I added a Klimax DS and a Klimax Kontrol they'd go on improving.  But there's been a niggling doubt and much conversation about their ability to really be delivering what my existing front end is capable of, never mind further upgrades.

Linn Keilidh

I subscribe to the "rubbish in, rubbish out" school of thought that leads to the inevitable conclusion that a good deal should be invested in the "source" of a system.  Hence the departure of my LP12 in order to fund an upgrade from Squeezebox Touch / Cyrus DAC-X to the current Linn Akurate DS/0 Dynamik.  However, if you spend £10k on a source and £100 on a set of speakers, I reckon you're not getting the best sound for your investment.  Perhaps it should be more like 40% source, 30% amps, 40% speakers?  So having now got a much better source and set of amps, I think the speakers need to be next.  But they need to be good enough to reflect any later upgrades to source and amps.

So off to my friendly local Linn dealer to listen to some loudspeaker options.  Having heard my brother's Vienna Acoustics Beethoven Baby Grands recently on an all Linn system, I found them to be superb with acoustic, atmospheric music and great with vocals - imaging superbly, especially when we tried them with Cyrus power amps.  But put on some Yello (I listen to a lot of acoustic music, but I listen to a lot of Yello too) and it all fell a bit flat.  Not exciting enough to listen to, for me.

Here's what we had set up to trial the Linn speakers at the dealership:

My Linn Akurate DS/0/Dynamik
Linn Akurate Kontrol/1
Linn Akurate 2200/D amp for super tweeter
Linn Majik 6100/D amp for the other drivers
Linn Silver interconnects
2 x Linn K400 speaker cables
Quadraspire shelving

So apart from the AK/1 rather than my AK/0/D the system was as my own current system at home.  The room is in a large Victorian(?) terrace - ceilings about 11 feet high, very solid walls, about 13ft by 16ft at a guess, with the speakers firing across the shorter distance, and standing just inside each end of the bay - about 2ft 6ins away from the back wall of the bay.

We tried the following Linn speakers, both driven by the above amplification combination in fully active mode

Majik 140s first

then Majik Isobariks

Its difficult to A-B them as it takes about 20 minutes to swap the speakers over, get them level and to swap all the aktiv cards between the amps. None of the aktiv cards are common.

All FLAC ripped CDs were used, so all at 16 bit / 44.1 kHz. Tracks:

Blues Company - Dark Day; Cold Rain
Yello - Tangier Blue; Till Tomorrow
Eagle Eye Cherry - Shooting Up In Vain
Kiki Dee - Amoureuse (live)
Tom Baxter - Night Like This

Thoughts:

Both are way more detailed and easy to listen to than my Keilidhs -they manage to deliver a much more detailed treble with really clear, sharp edges, but without any hint of harshness or edginess
They both have good drive and deliver the rhythm well.
The 140 superficially seems to have more bass, but actually, the Isos go deeper and deliver a better definition of a tune and instrument pitch in the bass, whereas the 140s are loosing control - this is relative and the 140 is still a great listen.  We heard a couple of the tracks where the 140s deliver a bass tune, but the 'bariks deliver a more clearly defined tune and on some tracks there are 2 instruments playing in the bass that sound like one on the 140s.
Initially I was sat back on the sofa, but the sofa is backed up to the wall.  Sitting forward on the edge of the sofa markedly improved the bass definition, narrowing the gap between the two speakers.  At home my sofa is about 4ft from the back wall, so sitting forward was more realistic in terms of recreating my listening position, but takes you nearer to the speakers and I was already sitting closer to the speakers than I do at home.
The 'bariks deliver a very different mid-range when compared to the 140s and the Majik 109s I have at home - male vocals are better defined but recessed further back in the mix. Its a strange effect - I wouldn't say it was wrong, but it didn't feel right to me either.
The 140s produce a much more precise image (instruments are easier to pin-point) and the speakers themselves "disappear" as a point source better than the 'bariks. Not sure if that is due to the extra width of the 'bariks front baffle compared to the 140s?

Overall, I think the 'bariks are the better speaker, particularly the way they deliver bass. But they really are quite different in their presentation compared to the 140s, which came as a suprise - I wasn't expecting such a different presentation, given the common components in the "2k array".  I was expecting the 'bariks to be a more refined and defined version of the 140s.

I would be happy with either.
The 140s also look better to my eyes!

Thanks to the gents at HoL for the session.