New vs Old Martin Logan, a simple request for information, insight.

Before I begin a question I have about old vs new ML's I feel it is necessary to write a preface about where I am coming from.

I was married to a beautiful Portugese woman for 30 years, when we decided to go our separate ways, because she became burdened with an environmental illness, (dangerous chemical scents like the ones used in fabric softeners, perfumes, and detergents would affect her central nervous system) hence going out into the workplace became impossible, I left her with virtually everything. Nuff said.

So I am essentially starting my (financial) life over.

Which is why I spent months looking hard to come up with as good of a (used) stereo as i could for about 5k$. I bought sold traded upgraded to end up with what I have now which is.

A barely used well cared for Krell KSA 250

An Alchemist Tim Di Paravicini two piece preamp

A Huyuan CD player

ML Requests that as of a month ago have new panels and woofers right from ML in Kansas, and about $700 worth of internal MIT caps, Cardas etc.

(turntable in sight once I amass a vinyl collection).

Please understand anything I say is not a challenge to anyone else's system or to the good people at Martin Logan or thier products. And besides, I do hope to move up to newer ML's in the future.

I am putting this out there because I want to understand as much as I can about ML's.

Here goes in point form. I will use ML Montis for this example.


From everything I read, the bigger the panel the better. The panels in the Requests are about 48 x 16, the panels in the Montis are about 44 x 11. You can figure out the difference in radiating area I'm sure. Plus since my Requests have brand new panels from ML, they are made of the exact same "stuff". So the Request panels have a larger area. The curve of the panels is also the same.

The Requests are crossed over at 180hz, the Montis at 340 so in what I would think is a crucial area, especially for vocals, the panel is playing most of the music.

The Requests have 12 inch woofers, from what I understand this same woofer is used in an array in the ML Statement E2s. And those ML's are not cheap so I assume it's a pretty decent 12. The Montis have a 10. Probably a really nice 10.

The gentleman who upgraded all internal wiring and upgraded all the caps etc to MIT, designs battery back up systems for Con Ed in NY so he most certainly has the skill and knowledge to properly select and rewire the upgrades.

So I assume the newer MLs are better for a few reasons.

1) Possibly better accuracy by having a smaller faster woofer.

2) The obvious advantage of the built in woofer amp

3) Better newer technology in the crossovers blending the woofer to the panel.

4) Maybe the smaller panels are faster.

5) There may be some new technology that allows for less roadblocks (actual number of components) between the input signal and the panel.

Again my brothers and sister, this is not a "my dad's bigger than you dad" thing.

Just an ML lover trying to understand as much as possible about electrostatics.


One other point, that can be of course discarded as the person in question is not an engineer nor does he have schooling in electronics.


I have a friend/client, who is loaded.
I feel it necessary to preface the following by briefly describing him to you so you can see where he is coming from,,,,,,,,,,,or not.
He has been a long time customer of mine, Asian, extremely intelligent, also one of those guys who remembers every single word fact or equation he has ever read as if he had read it yesterday, he is an older surgeon, polite but extremely terse, says very little, is somewhat standoffish.

He has two stereo's. One stereo set up is worth over 70K$. No CD player all vinyl.

In the other system his power amps are huge modern Pass Labs monoblocks, can't remember his pre amp, his turntable is worth about 7k$, Koetsu etc, no CD player.
He has Requests with new panels and woofers. The point here is if he wants new ML's he can afford them.

When I asked him why all this high end gear and still only Requests he said (I am paraphrasing now to remove certain language he used that would probably have this post deleted). "Logan changed thier design over the years to please the wife factor, smaller panels and smaller woofers, and nothing I have ever read in new ML literature convinces me, nor have I heard/auditioned anything to convince me, that the newer smaller ones are any better if at all than the older bigger ones, period.", end of quote.

Take the above it for what it is worth.

thanks for reading

Joe

Joe,

Lots of discussion about this question on the forum.

Many folks still prefer the older panels. Perhaps a bit less clinical and, like your requests, a larger panel size.

The newer models do have an advantage of having a built in amp with crossover options, which allow the user to fine tune the bass response in their respective rooms.

I had the CLS2A's, the Aerius, the SL3's, and finally the Summits.

I felt the Summits were a significant step up in performance from the SL3's because of the added frame stiffness, the powered woofers and the crossover adjustment options. But they certainly look more industrial and, if memory serves me correctly, less midrange body but more mid bass / lower bass slam and definition.

Perhaps the two salient issues, absent the differences stated above, are panel size and panel replacement costs.

In the end, it's really up to each individual as to preference because they each have their strengths and weaknesses.

Regardless of the models, proper speaker set up is the key to maximizing ML performance.

I hope you enjoy your new system.

GG

One additional point to consider is the newer ML designs use "Micro-Perf" stators, which purportedly increase their actual radiating surface area. I never had a chance to hear old vs. new ML designs side-by-side, so can't say whether that's a legit design improvement or just marketing hype.

One point I would like to add is that in my experience(s), the speakers I auditioned in the store were never properly broken in. I found audible differences after at least 100 hours of use, as both the caps and woofers need breaking in, plus, add the fact that often their electronics are also too new to be properly burned in.

Hi Gordon, Summit's,,, nice, maybe I'll search out a pair in a year or so, maybe not.

Thanks for your input. I know and understand all the benefits you stated like "built in amp with crossover options, which allow the user to fine tune the bass response in their respective rooms". For certain you are correct in saying cost is a factor and we all have our own preferences. Thanks.

By the way I am enjoying my system very much.

Gettin hooked on (for now) some GRP ish stuff. Like Lee Ritenour Smoke and Mirrors, Robben Ford Thin Blue Line, the remastered GRP stuff in the 3 CD set, etc.

Lot's of snap from up front guitar sounds, snare drums, the attack of the bass drum etc. Always musicians who have learned there craft and express themselves very well.

By the way, re the Krell KSA 250, no matter how loud I play some of the real special songs from the above CD's,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,once in a while it rears it's ugly head, and says, "wake me up when you have something for me to do" then goes back to sleep. I know there are much better amps out there, but for now it serves me perfectly.

Hope to run across you here again.

Joe

Excellent sleepysurf. A valid point. More importantly, it is followed by the truth.

Nice to talk with others who are fully aware of what you said, "I never had a chance to hear old vs. new ML designs side-by-side, so can't say whether that's a legit design improvement or just marketing hype."

I like it.

I might be on the wrong track here, but I thought one of the pluses in having a slightly higher panel cross over frequency is much higher spl's and power handling potential.

In relation to panel design, I know there has been huge leaps in this area, but there has also been major advances in the dynamic woofers and cross overs used by Martin Logan. Unlike legacy models, the Montis is virtually seamless in it's presentation. It goes from 0 to 100mph in one big rush. There are no coughs or splutters on the way. I love the sound of ML's legacy models, but nothing I have heard compares with the newer models.

This will represent new panels vs old tech... happy listening!

Neither my Aerius nor my Ascent were on the same planet as my Summit/X. I have never heard any of the big 1st gens like the prodigy, though.

I think new Micro-perf stators expose relatively larger portion of diaphragm, enabling higher efficiency due to lesser acoustic resistance. However this by itself does not equal to better sound production. Technically there is nothing much new to electrostatic speaker technology in last few decades. Most improvements come due better optimizing of construction and materials used.
Larger panel size does have some benefits that can not be reached otherwise. Also larger size is required when lowering crossover frequency. Most newer models have higher crossover frequency to enable to remain same high output level as larger panel with lower crossover. Acoustic cancellation is depending on panel dimensions and playing frequency.

Actual improvements have been most obvious in crossover design, ML calls these Vojtko Voiced crossover networks. This is a very important feature, the hybrid models have always been criticized about blending of panel and woofer sections. Active amplification for low frequencies takes off load from main amplifier and also enables active and adjustable crossover and room/speaker correction, this was not possible with passive models although Prodigy and Odyssey (some other models too?) had switch setting for level.

Recent models are also likely to benefit more on CAD design for panel resonance control but this is not something manufacturers like to remind us of Clear spars was available already in previous models and is probably equally meaningful and firmer fixing of stators as visually pleasant. Looks are always one of the most important factors but as always also a matter of opinion, seems like ML has succeeded also in this feature market wise.

This was written on my best belief and understanding, please feel free to correct me if/when mistaken, after all we all love our Martin Logans :rocker:

Hola. To my ears, and this is very important to understand, it is my liking, the new stators are far better. It is not only the extension at the high frequencies, it is the possibility to use small in wattage power amplifiers. We all know that the small amps are very sweet and great in performance, than the big watts power amps. I like quality watts better than quantity watts. With only 18 watts per channel power amp, Mr. Jeff Doray of Tone Audio, made the review of the Montis, and he claims that he never felt any stress at all from his power amplifier to reproduce quality music at his own place. I think, with all respect, that the new Martin Logan products with the new Micro-Perf stators, you can understand better the size of a violin vs a viola. Or a Boesenforfer vs a Steinway piano. Also a Ramirez Spanish guitar vs a Thomas Humphrey classical guitar. The percussion instruments fills the room easy, the cymbals are projected with more air and with the right amount of timbre. The strings instruments are not collapsing as I did got with my previous CLS IIz. or my Prodigies. And many of these mess was due to my power amplifier, because it was demanding more quality watts to reproduce the heavy passage of the big orchestra. Yes, I had big power amps, starting from a Classe 400 ending with Mark Levinson 335. Now I have an Audio Research HD-220 (hybrid tube and ss) and an Audio Research VT-100 MKII (all tube) with a big modification at its power supply. The harmonic texture of the musical instruments, the nuances, the feeling of the musician(s) playing is superior to my ears. The Viola de Gamba vs a Cello, it is very easy to understand too. The 3D at the stage, makes me to be at the event, and also getting the soul of the musician(s) playing. The inner details, the coherency overall, the right amount of the musical energy is easier to get on these panels too. Of course they are not perfect. But are getting very close to the real thing. Here in Costa Rica, it is very easy to go to a concert hall. And believe me when I say, we are almost there. Live music is the best!, but I am getting many hours of musical experience in my room. Happy listening!

The voice of reason?

Now, I feel compelled to jump into this thread to speak up for my beloved reQuests I completely agree that the newer panel technology (micro-perf stators + thinner (better) membrane) is audibly superior when compared to the older panel technology of the reQuests. Taken by its own merits, it begs the obvious question: If you're happy with the reQuests until you listen to the newer panels, does that make the reQuests "bad"? In other words, once listened to the Montis (for example), does it make your reQuests un-enjoyable? If the answer is "YES", then you should get the Montis - end of story.

If you're of a "technical" mindset (like myself), I would take a look at the system as a whole, but also comparing each component making up the system. For example, to make a fair comparison between the reQuests vs. Montis, I will have to compare the Montis vs. reQuests + a $5k amplifier. The rationale being Montis' MSRP is $10k, vs. reQuest (MSRP $5k) + $5k amplifier. This is now turning into a question of integrated vs. separates. Think of the Montis as an integrated design with a class-D amplifier vs. the reQuest being a separate design where you have a choice of (bass) amplifier. In this regard, the 200W class-D amplifier, though optimized with the Vojtko DSP, is no match for the likes of Krell, Pass, Levinson. Most people wouldn't put such an amplifier just for bass duty, but hey, we're talking about $5k worth of (bass) amp here! This topology has been my set-up for 15+ years and there has not been any occasion where I need to "upgrade" to newer speakers. The points FOR my reQuests are:

1. Lower crossover point of 200Hz vs the Montis' 340Hz. The panel is responsible for almost all of the midrange.
2. Larger panel area to reproduce the demanding area around the 200Hz crossover point.
3. 12" woofer driven by a high-quality Classe' CA-300 amplifier. Substitute your Krell KSA250 or Pass Labs amp here. The Krell KSA250 has a death grip on the woofers and it can move it at will, but it does it with a simple class-A circuitry vs. the complicated DSP + class-D circuitry. In this case, simple circuitry retains the signal purity vs. overly processed signal via DSP.

From the financial front, the Montis will be more expensive than the reQuests. Given that your reQuests are essentially "brand new" with replaced components, I would put the money on getting a good amp (solid-state or tube) for the panels as future upgrades. This is exactly what I have done with my system and I've never looked back.

Hola Spike. You are right!. But have you tried the Montis yet in your system? Please do it, and tell us your findings!. I do know what are you taking about your beloved Request. As you might remember, the Absolute Sound claimed them as the best mid-range speaker of the world, regardless of price. Of course you have one the best speakers...but trust me, the new panel is awesome! And you do not listen the blend point with the new digital crossover of the woofer and the panel. As I said before, this is my liking, and not necessary yours. I do not want to start a debate here, all what I want is you to listen these new babies. This is the Tone Audio review...http://www.tonepublications.com/MAGPDF/TA_044.pdf I assure you tons of great listening pleasure and enjoying effortless sound coming from these Montis. Happy listening!

Hi Roberto,
I am sure that you're correct with regards to the newer ML models are audibly better than my old trusty reQuests. Like I've stated in my post that the newer models have not triggered my need to upgrade yet! I have listened to the Montis at a couple of Magnolias in the SF Bay Area, but they were not optimally set up, nor were the electronics at the caliber that I'd like. They show lots of promises, but it's not fair to draw conclusion based on the sub-par demo condition. I am not at a point where I want to put out the effort to audition speakers in my home. That day will come and I am pretty sure I won't settle for anything less than the Summit. Until then, I'm still enjoying my reQuests.

Thanks again everyone for your time and your comments, I have a few things to say about some of the above and will do so later. Thanks Roberto for your posting of Tone Publication, and the review of the Montis,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.

Let us not miss the advertisement paid for by Martin Logan for the Montis on page 83.

Yes Spike... the truth is: the Request is one of a kind. Also, I know that you are enjoying their sound that much. You are so happy with them, and this shows their quality, and they give a lot of goose bumps!, one of the most transparent sound available on these days too!...Happy listening!

The single main reason a newer model can (and should) sound better is its active bass crossover. With active xo, the amp really has direct control of the woofer. But old passive crossovers can (and should) be upgraded, so there's no need to buy a whole new speaker.

retiredelectrician said:

I was married to a beautiful Portugese woman for 30 years, when we decided to go our separate ways, because she became burdened with an environmental illness, (dangerous chemical scents like the ones used in fabric softeners, perfumes, and detergents would affect her central nervous system) hence going out into the workplace became impossible, I left her with virtually everything. Nuff said.

So I am essentially starting my (financial) life over.

Click to expand...

I'm more concerned about why you left your beautiful wife of 30 years just because she couldn't work after obtaining a disability? Is marriage only valid as long as both husband and wife remain perfectly healthy and standing? I hope my wife is there to take care of me when I'm ill.

snyderkv said:

I'm more concerned about why you left your beautiful wife of 30 years just because she couldn't work after obtaining a disability? Is marriage only valid as long as both husband and wife remain perfectly healthy and standing? I hope my wife is there to take care of me when I'm ill.

Click to expand...

I realize that speculation is often not worth a damn but, it is possible that Joe was not able to leave the house and return without bringing back chemicals and scents on his clothing that could worsen the problem.