Welcome! Need support, you got it. Or share your ideas and experiences.
Return to Planar Speaker Asylum
69.247.254.24
Hello,
I am demo-ing a friends CLSiiz's and they sound fantastic. I was wondering which Martin Logan speakers offer the same type and quality of presentation, in a slightly smaller physical size. I have never used this type of speaker before, and i am ready to be hooked!
thank you,
gg
Follow Ups:
Hi,
thanks to all for your valuable input!
i am not going to buy these from my friend, who is the
original owner, so they will be going on Audiogon if
anyone's interested (who lives in FL).
Tracy
At least none of the smaller Logans and probably only the Statements.But you can get a very good sampling of the CLS electrostatic sound with the smaller models. But, without a full panel CLS, and with a dynamic woofer that is next to impossible to properly integrate with the much fast panels, the magic will be missing. IMHO of course.
All newer martin logan models are smaller than the cls. This is done by reducing panel size and incorporating a woofer. Check out www.martinloganowners.com wich has a timeline of every ML speaker including demensions. Improvements have been made with each new model.
a bigger room in goes the SL-3 better yet go with the Monolith III…As usual, these speakers do have low impedance swings so make sure that your amp is powerful with enough current to drive them otherwise, they will sound bright and tinny.
I had the Aerius, Aeon, and Ascents (one after the other) in a 14 x 19 feet room. The speakers were on the short side with 8 feet from center-to-center of the panels slightly toed in and 4 feet from the front wall. The Ascents gave me what I was looking for during that time. On this set up, the things that worked for me where...1.) curtains (heavy) on the front wall with ficus trees on the corners.
2.) Mono block amps that have at least 180 wpc on 8 ohms and double at 4.
3.) The "flaslight" method of determining the toe in required.
4.) Stereo subs (if you really want big bass!) with a cabinet volume equal or close to the cabinet volume of the woofer section of the Ascents.
Things that did not worked for me were...1.) Bi-wiring. I tried acoustic Zen Holograms, Nordost, and Analysis plus. I ended up to single wire with the best jumpers (Acoustic Zen) I can get and the main cable connected to the panel section.
2.) REL and Vandersteen subwoofers.
3.) Solid State preamps. It made the sound "tizzy" in my set up.
4.) Power Cord upgrades. I never heard a "real" improvement swapping power cords on the Ascents. In the electronics, yes, not on the speakers.
cheers
You wrote:
"Things that did not work for me were...
1.) Bi-wiring..."I'm curious: but did you not hear any sonic benefit from going to a bi-wire configuration in your system, or did you hear an unacceptable decline in sound quality because of the bi-wire configuration?
If you heard no benefit to bi-wiring, the difference in cost alone could be a deciding factor, but if the bi-wiring made it sound worse, then my next round of cable auditioning just got more complicated... :)
First off, before I answer your question, in the electronics/electrical point of view, the point where the two conductors (speaker wires) splits at just after the amp compared to just before the speakers, are the same assuming that all things are equal(negligible resistance/foot, inductance, capacitance, or better yet characteristic impedance, Z0 of the cables used).So, having said that, bi-wiring did not give me any results suggesting that an improvement occurred. This method have the same presentation to me as using single wire with jumpers.
I've done most of the same things to my Ascents. I'm only able to pull them 3 feet away from the wall. Side walls are 5+ feet.I use a SVS 20-39 PC+ sub, placed between the speakers, by necessity.
What preamp did you find to work well? I have a Luxman SS. Do you find tubes make that big a difference? Minor or major?
As noted, I just added a Denon 3930ci universal player and I'm amazed at the added bass, as well as everything else. I currently have my sub out, due to amp failure. With the added bass from the CD player, I'm thinking of lowering the crossover down below the Ascents, so that it only comes into play on DVD LFE's.
What was wrong with the REL and Vandersteen subs? I've always wondered if I should have gone with them because everyone mentions their musicallity.
IME, tube preamp really makes the ML shine. I was using a Supratek Chenin (up to now with different speakers) and was very happy during that time. ARC LS 16 also works well.The REL to me was never musical. It took me two months (or maybe three?) before I quit on them. I can't seem to dial them properly no matter what I do and where I placed them in the room. The Vandersteens sounds very different from the bass section of the ML. In this case, it stands out like a sore thumb. I guess if one goes active on the XO, it will be easier to get a seamless integration or close to it. But you and I know that with the Ascnts, you cannot do it because of the audio transformer.
In the end, I researched and made my own sub with the box very close to the volume that was used in the ML. Adire Audio during that time have drivers with the correct parameters (Qts, etc.)that will work well with the volume of the enclosure and the design for a solid cabinet construction. I made it and I was content with the result until I sold the Ascents and move on to different speakers. In fact, the subs (two) that I built was bought from me by a fellow who have the CLSII.
I assume you are still enjoying your Orions.I'd like to hear a pair but I'm not a DIY'er and they are expensive otherwise.
If I ever change (WAF) I'll definitely look into them. What do they do better than ML's? Do they work well in large rooms?
Hello Jim,As much as I want to answer your questions truthfully, the Orion is a pretty controversial topic in this forum. All I can say is that I went from ML's, then Maggies (still have one), then the Orions. If you are really interested in the future about the speakers and you want to post your inquiries about them, check this link out.
regards
Don't let others shout you down.Your opinion is just as valid as anyone else's, and it may inform others about equipment of which they are unfamiliar.
I have the Ascent i's in a large room. That's why I went looking for new speakers in the first place. We moved from a townhouse into a suburban house with an open floorplan. My old monitors got lost.These speakers fill the area. But they only shine in the sweet spot.
By the way, I just upgraded from an old Sony CD player to a Denon 3930 universal. I never believed one digital player would sound different from another one.
Welcome, to me the Logans sound very similar with the bigger panels = bigger soundstage. But, there’s something about how logans load a room that makes the smaller ones sound better than the big ones - in a small room and big ones better than the smaller ones in a larger room. Go with the one according to your room size and keep in mind dipoles need room to breathe.
I've owned CLS's, ReQuests, SL3's, and Aerius'. The bigger the panel the better the sound. My favorite of all 4 were the Requests, nearly all the midrange and tone of th CLS's with good bass. However, it depends on how much presentation you ar looking for. The SL3's can sound very good, not as nice as the Request, but very nice.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: