I'll admit, even though I have a Gen1 Martin Logan (original Scenarios) I always thought the Gen2's looked a lot better--sleeker, more organic, and MUCH less boxy. When the Gen3's came out I shouted "They FINALLY got it right--ultra sleek panel on an understated (but still a little quirky looking) woofer box. YES!!!"
Then I heard the Vista. Yummy...
Then I heard the Vantage. Wow...
Then, FINALLY, I heard the Summit, driven by a top-shelf ARC/Ayre/Nordost system, and set up with near perfect stereo imaging in a room with proper acoustic treatment. As my 20-something stepdaughters would say--OMG!!!
Needless to say I was floored. The sound is miles better than the Gen1's. Considerably more fluid and "present" than Gen2's. And the panel/woofer integration is edging delightfully close to perfect.
My only real complaint with the ENTIRE Gen3 line is that they are physically too short, and by dropping the stator panel down a full 12", Martin Logan has, IMO, seriously compromised one of the truly mind-boggling sonic features that Martin Logan speakers have always had over almost all other speakers (with the exception of REALLY tall line-source speakers)--a soundstage that is not only wide and deep, but HIGH.The Summit/Spire is shorter than my Sequels by 13 inches--almost 15" shorter than the Monolith or 8" less than the Prodigy.
Although I sort of understand the desire of Martin Logan to improve the SAF of it's big speakers by making them less visually intrusive, I think this vertical truncating does a TREMENDOUS disservice to the overall sound of the Gen3 ML's--even the "big boys" like the Summit and Spire. I mean if I was the kind of guy who could afford to drop $10K+ on a pair of speakers, I believe that SAF would be WAY down on my list of technical specifications anyway. Exactly what demographic are these new designs aimed at?
And why are all three of the "ESL line" Gen3's so narrow? What happened to those beautiful WIIIIDE panels from the ReQuest, Prodigy, Monolith, or Statements?
Can you imagine what a speaker that had the panel-to-woofer integration of the Summit/Spire, but was as tall and wide as a reQuest (72+ inches high and 18" wide) would sound? Can you imagine the HUMONGOUS soundstage--beyond the walls, floor, AND ceiling--that a speaker like that would throw? And with MArtin Logans modernized, automated ESL manufacturing techniques, you'd think that the cost of making a panel that size would be considerably less than it was back in 1996, when they were still assembling the reQuest panels almost entirely by hand...
So, yeah, I LOVE the look of the Gen3 MLs. I like almost everything about the sound of them--they are much better than the Gen2's and that puts them DECADES ahead of anything with cone drivers. My only disappointment with the Gen3's is that, to my ears, they actually sound "short", like a much faster and smoother Prodigy or reQuest, but with the top 12 or 14 inches chopped off and the edges of the room folded in a little...