New Summit X Review in TAS - Better than any dynamic speaker under $40K

MartinLogan Audio Owners Forum

Help Support MartinLogan Audio Owners Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

David Matz

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 13, 2006
Messages
928
Reaction score
0
Location
Wilmette, IL
The avguide site has posted the Summit X review to the Golden Ear club members. The guy loved it say the least. The conclusioin is not one bit surprising to electrostat owners.
 
Hey - that is cool.... Does he compare it to the 'old' Summit or the Maggie 20.1? To me - that is the competition really....and I know those guys at TAS love their Maggies....
 
Hey - that is cool.... Does he compare it to the 'old' Summit or the Maggie 20.1? To me - that is the competition really....and I know those guys at TAS love their Maggies....

Interesting you bring that up. He uses the Analysis Audio Omega planar magnetic/ribbon and mentions that planar bass is spatially more expansive and more realistic. But that is only one of a few minor "negatives" he brings.

He believes that the transparency of the Summit X is not only as good as he has heard, but as good as it is likely to get. Pretty powerful statement.
 
He should ditch his Omegas and get some Graz'd Duetta Sigs. Markedly better IMHO, especially in the bass. I wouldn't trade mine for some X's. I say this after hearing the Omega recently, too.

X's are very good indeed, however.:)
 
He should ditch his Omegas and get some Graz'd Duetta Sigs. Markedly better IMHO, especially in the bass. I wouldn't trade mine for some X's. I say this after hearing the Omega recently, too.

:)

Justin,

The reviewer is Dick Olsher. I think he has owned and/ or reviewed every planar and stat speaker ever made - Quad, Soundlab, etc. Prior to the Omegas, the Finals were his references. Seems to me, he just likes to try different speakers. I understand where he is coming from. I have 7 or 8 flavors of ice cream in my fridge, and I like them all.

Question for you: how close are your speakers in sound to Maggies? I like Maggies in terms of how real they sound, but they lack the resolution of electrostats. Having listened to stats for so long, I can't always seem to get past that.
 
I don't know about Justin's Duettas but having heard Scintillas at the friend's house I can say that I'd take that speaker and live with it any time no matter of how I really like the sound of MLs.
Resolution is remarkable, plus other goodies like the most natural bass I heard from any speaker so far. And deep it is!
 
The simple answer, David, is that I don't know. The only Maggie I have ever heard is the 1.7 - and then only briefly playing Bob Marley's Exodus and a couple of other tracks. Maggies are very thin on the ground in the UK. Too be honest, for the money, I thought it was good. When I touched it, I couldn't believe how flimsy it was. Like, where are the magnets? Really didn't appear to have many, and those that where in it obviously weigh very little.

Is the 1.7 as good as a Duetta Sig? No where near, IMHO. It doesn't have the bass extension or scale.

With regards to resolution, my thoughts on that one are mixed.

I recently changed from KLM2 to KLM5 mid range/tweeter ribbons on the Duetta, as Graz seemed convinced they were better. I also had the resistors changed from Caddocks to a resistor pack that I am unable to reveal the nature of as I told Graz I wouldn't do so.

After this change, they just sounded plain odd, IMHO. Some really strange colourations appeared in the upper mid. They also sounded too sibilant. After about 200 hours of use, the colouration in the upper mid went away totally.

As I posted on another forum, after 200 hours, I believe the "apparent" resolution was beyond any ESL I have heard. It was simply astounding. But I started to suspect that this was partially a symptom of an altered frequency response. My belief was they had become too bright in the upper registers.

So I started taking frequency response plots and recording letter 'S' using my Rowland Edirol to see where the problem frequency area was. I plotted the letter S as a timed-based FFT. 4KHz to 12KHz with the problem later part of the S in the upper half of that range. Analysing the in-room frequency response to look for a problem, I have to admit I coudn't really identify anything obvious.

I decided I wanted the top end rolled of, though. Whether that made the frequency response uneven, I simply didn't care. The sibilant region was driving me nuts - too much emphasis.

So I got the refurbisher to come down and have a play, after many discussions on the phone. We tried a new inductor in the x-over, and it sounded just plain terrible. It lasted about 1 minute before with both agreed it was worse. We then tried a thicker gauge inductor. Instant success! Much improved in the sibilant region. This inductor had the same inductance value, but was thicker gauge. It is measurably different in terms of resistance to the thinner gauge wire. That it could make such a difference literally blew my mind. It is interesting to note that the prefered inductor is an original Apogee one - the only component in the x-over to be one.

The overall effect of the changes is a Duetta with greater resolution that the previous KLM2 ribbons, and also a speaker with better dispersion characteristics. I don't know why the later is true - but visibly much more of the ribbon appears to move when compared to the KLM2, and it doesn't curl as much when driven at high levels.

Post inductor change, the frequency response does not looked rolled off - they are essentially pretty flat.

If you were to ask me overall whether a Summit X has more resolution over the entire frequency range I would say definately not in the bass. I don't think I have heard better bass from any speaker. In the mid and treble, I would say the "apparent" resolution of the Duetta is at least the Summits equal, but it can "sound" higher resolution when the subjective frequency response errs on the bright side.

That said, Duetta mid/top sounds different to ESL mid/top. To my mind, it is more real and true to life than an ML panel, and produces tones like bells and chimes with astonishing clarity that is exceedingly close to reality. But there is something that the ML panels have that is very enticing, at least to these ears. I would possibly hand ML the award for handling female vocals. They're just so good at it, particularly when driven by some nice Audio Research kit.

But there is an additional complication. Just what is a Duetta Sig in the year 2010? Mine are customised and most that have been restored have differing specs in terms of ribbons and x-overs. Most that have been done have used components in price territories that Apogee would not have been able to consider.

From testaments, Rich Murray (stateside) is producing Duettas with specs that are causing their owners to be literally astonished. You'll have to pay more for the best he can do, but what better recommendation than that? Then there is Graz's Synergy, which I believe will be better still. Run them with a 20 Watt tube amp with no power issues. Maybe the best results live outside of the commercial framework, where profiteering is not so high on the agenda, and the pursuit of the best sonic results is the main consideration.

I regard my Duettas as a serious hobbyist loudspeaker, and one that I can make alerations to in order to achieve a performance level I am genuinely happy with. Good stuff, I reckon.
 
Last edited:
I'd just thought I'd add this - it'd be interesting to hear a speaker comprised of a Duetta Sig bass panel and a Martin Logan ESL panel for everything above 500Hz. I think it might work rather well, and give those hooked on ESL output some really seriously good bass down to less than 30Hz. I'm not saying I'd prefer it, but I reckon some might:)
 
Justin, I'm a bit confused. You say that the Duettas are more real and true to life, but you would possibly hand ML the award for handling female vocals. Aren't female vocals (more than anything else) used to demonstrate how realistic a speaker is?
 
Maybe I was just trying to be nice about my old favourites, Bernard:)

Seriously, Jon the restorer is very into female vocalists. I wouldn't like to say Summit X's were more "real" with female vocals, but to my ears they do sound great with them driven by top ARC kit.

I think if you asked a panel of people which they preferred, opinion may well be split in that area. Bear in mind, as ever, this is just my opinion and I am not necessarily right.

But I don't think you can judge a speaker purely on female vocal - great performance in that area alone doesn't make a great all round speaker.
 
Seriously, Jon the restorer is very into female vocalists. I wouldn't like to say Summit X's were more "real" with female vocals, but to my ears they do sound great with them driven by top ARC kit.
I have the ARC's; all I need now are the X's. :)

But I don't think you can judge a speaker purely on female vocal - great performance in that area alone doesn't make a great all round speaker.
Agreed; I hope I didn't come across as saying it was the ONLY thing.
 
Hi Justin,

I'm glad you like your speakers :cool: but would like to ask one question.

Given the fact that your speakers are literally one of a kind and no one, except for yourself and a few select others have ever heard them (in whatever ribbon, parts iteration you currently have), what is the relevance of these comparisons, from a real world perspective, between your totally customized Apogee's and the Summit X, the Omega, or whatever other speaker manufacturer?

Gordon
 
I suppose that depends on your viewpoint, Gordon. I think Ken Kessler argued recently that now matter how good Scintilla's were, they are now largely irrelevant. It is interesting that he recently enquired about getting his Scintilla's restored, though.

Additionally, I'm just trying to stimulate interest in this old defunct American classic. I would have thought it would have been a considerable source of American pride that planar speakers of such capable performance had been made so long ago (much like the Quad ESL 57 is a source of the same in this country) - yet still be so markedly capable today.

Further - some may be curious enough or remember them well enough to actually investigate getting a pair. It's not easy as I think there are only two places in the USA you can get them done. But some can and do go through the process.

Also I just like talking about hi-fi and I happen to own a pair - so I guess that's a factor too. But David did ask me a direct question - and it'd be rude not to answer.

If the general consensus is that I ought to shut my mouth about them on an ML forum - then I'll respect & understand that.
 
Justin,

I've followed your posts on this speaker and found them to be very enlightening. A very cool project and, I'm sure, a very cool speaker. I do enjoy reading about the esoteric.

My point is this. If you say that someone should ditch the Omegas and pursue your speaker, there should be some way of auditioning / validating that Speaker A is indeed better than Speaker B.

With your Apogee, especially as modified as it is, that's going to be extremely difficult if not impossible.

I have heard the Analysis Audio at RMAF and totally agree that they do mid bass better than the Summits and, I assume, the Summit X.

In fact, based on my audition of numerous speakers over the years (the ones that are readily available), my next speaker will likely be the AA Omega or the MBL 101 or 111.

Best,

Gordon
 
Gordon,

If that is the case I urge you to go and see one of the restorers - where you will be able to hear some revised Duettas. Please read this: Duetta Ultimates.

I realise it maybe impractical... but I don't think you'll be disappointed when you hear the Apogee bass panel versus the Omega. Or indeed the entire speaker, for that matter.

I have a friend with the MBL 116F and these are very good and worth considering too. A little less steep on the wallet than the 101E - which are excellent.

Good luck and enjoy.

Justin
 
"New Summit X Review in TAS - Better than any dynamic speaker under $40K "


Better than the CLX with a set of subs? (or has TAS not reviewed them yet?)

User211,

Did you ever listen to the CLX (with or without subs)? If so, how would you compare them to your Apogees?
 
Justin,

Have you had a chance to listen to the MBL 101's and 111's and if so, how do they compare with the 116's?

Also, the specs indicate a response down to 32hz on the 116.

Again based on your experience, how realistic is that spec? Do they have good "weight" on the low end?

As you can tell, I'm quite smitten with the MBL line.

Gordon
 
I suppose that depends on your viewpoint, Gordon. I think Ken Kessler argued recently that now matter how good Scintilla's were, they are now largely irrelevant. It is interesting that he recently enquired about getting his Scintilla's restored, though.

Additionally, I'm just trying to stimulate interest in this old defunct American classic. I would have thought it would have been a considerable source of American pride that planar speakers of such capable performance had been made so long ago (much like the Quad ESL 57 is a source of the same in this country) - yet still be so markedly capable today.

QUOTE]

I think it would be great to have someone interested in restoring AND bringing legacy ML products up to modern standards.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top