Enthused About Re-Joining the Martin Logan Fold

I'm a long-time NO dome/cone/box speaker guy! For example, I purchased ESS Heil AMT-3 speakers with my first high-end system in the early 70's. The AMT portion of the Model #, was an acronym for the dipole-radiating Air Motion Transformer. The AMT similar to my original, is still being produced and my original Heil speakers with their original AMT's are still being utilized by my son in a bedroom system.

At that time of my first "real" system (early 70's), I didn't hear the Quad 57's stats, but did have a very memorable audition of JansZen Electrostatics. As with panels and the JansZen stats at that time, the transparent mid-range was what I had been looking for, but hadn't found/heard until the JansZen's. However, the JansZen stats wouldn't play loud and the bass was minimal, to non-existent. Not a good mix for a rock-preferring youngster who thought loud was good and louder was even better (grin)!

So, at that time, the JansZen's were overruled by the Heil's -- but oh my, I never forgot that fantastic electrostatic mid-range. This is what prompted me to later purchase Apogee Stage's and then Martin Logan reQuest's, and finally, Soundlab M1-PX's for the 2-channel audio room and now, to be purchasing Electromotion ESL's for the Home Theater room.

This past weekend, my son and I auditioned the Electromotion ESL's. We did so against another stat variant, and the Klipsch Heresy III's that my son owns. The Electromotion's and the Heresy III's were our favorites. The M/L ESL's will be replacing Energy speakers that I've had for approximately 11 years. After recently listening to the new 2013 Eric Clapton Crossroads Blu-Ray at my son's on his Heresy III's, I did the same at my house on my Energy's. The comparison was less than favorable and I knew that I needed to replace the Energy's. In order to rule-out the variables of my room and up-stream electronics as being the cause of the results, we moved the Energy's to my son's house and re-did the comparison. We quickly found that the Energy's were the culprit! They just didn't get out of the way of the music like the Heresy III horns did. While I like what the Heresy III's do well, I don't like their at times, stridency, nor their size. The Electromotion ESL's sound equally transparent and delicate, but don't have the sometime stridency that the Klipsch do and I love their look. My ears being 30-years older than my son's, may also have something to do with the outcome, but nevertheless, for my purposes, the Martin Logan's win. Verses the Energy's however, I could live with either loudspeaker.

Mike, Welcome

Nice to hear you've kept the audio 'gene' alive and well with your son, as I have done as well.

Welcome aboard. Glad you found us!

I just received the following today:

(1) Stage X
(2) Theos
(2) Electromotion ESL's

All I can say is WOW, Right out of the box they exceeded my expectations in all areas. Might the panels change/improve with burn-in?

As the new speakers are being used in my Home Theater room, I haven't yet run the Audyssey MultEQ XT32Sub EQ room correction process on my Marantz AV8801 surround pre-amp. I have done so in the past with the Energy cone and domes that I just replaced. Up until now, I have only given cursory attention to the: "Sticky: Room correction setup guide for ML’s", but have read enough to order the recommended mic stand, and realize that the Sticky a valuable resource....kudos to "Jonfo" and others for putting so much effort into describing your experiences with the subject! I just got done printing the Sticky and plan on giving it the thorough attention that it warrants.

Right now, while typing this, I'm nothing but smiles listening to the new Blu-Ray version of the Eagles' Melbourne tour......gotta love Esl's!!!

Hi Mike, glad the DRC setup guide was helpful, it's a lot trickier than the basic AV manual leads one to believe

The XT32 on your AV8801 should do really well on your rig (if measured right), if you think they sound good now, just wait until you get Audyssey running.

Remember, it can take several tries to get the hang of the measurement process and get a good run. So patience and care are rewarded.

You've got a great system. I would wait until your speakers are well burned in before running the audyssey. I want to hear a little more about your 2-channel system, particularly a comparison of the sound of the Logan's compared to the Soundlabs. I have a lot of respect for the Soundlabs speakers.

As I said in your other thread, the panels won't improve with burn in near as much as the woofers. But it will make a noticeable improvement in the overall sound of the speakers.

Rich - Regarding the Soundlabs: I purchased the original M1's new, about 11 years ago.

Partially because I'm not getting any younger and partially because I was curious, in 2012 I kinda' went on a loudspeaker sojourn. However, after my son and I attended the 2012 RMAF and listened to every speaker being shown, we agreed that nothing exceeded my Soundlabs. If fact, the King Sound electrostatic speakers at the show tickled our fancy. Imagine that, at the show, we found ourselves drawn to open baffle designs, panels, horns and stats. But after finding nothing that surpassed the Soundlab sound, I simply stayed with Soundlabs, and after selling my original M1's, I upgraded to newer M1"PX" panel technology, and added the following optional upgrades to the panel's backplates: "hotrod" and "consummate". These are upgrades to the Soundlab's standard electronic components, including different Toroidal transformers.

I went from M/L reQuests to the Soundlabs. Once you've lived with the coherence found in a full-range electrostatic, it would be really hard to go back to a hybrid design. Electrostatic bass is a joy to behold and where the S/L's easily perform beyond the M/L's that I've heard. While the delicacy of details and as such, the attack transients are similar, the ability to portray a notes's decay and hence, to add to the performance's depth, is in Soundlab's favor, at least when compared to my former reQuests and the M/L's that just arrived. As such, overall, the Soundlab presentation is more spacious and has more depth. Soundlabs vs M/L's (at least those I've heard) would be sort of like comparing analog and digital playback. Soundlabs just sound more organically correct -- i.e. the ability to portray a human body behind the voice -- with absolutely zero, zip, nada, listener fatigue.

Could I happily live with Martin Logan’s? You bet! But once you've lived with a pair of Soundlabs, equaling their level of performance, let alone exceeding it, would be very difficult indeed! Additionally, Dr. Roger West and the rest of the Soundlab gang have been great to deal with. Roger and I share a love of flight and flight related hardware and oftentimes via email, share our recent findings of same.

It should be additionally noted that all the components preceding the Soundlabs are also very resolving. As with any speaker, especially stats., they're only as good as the signal they are being fed.

• My digital front end is PC based: 2TB HD, Mac Mini PC running PureMusic, and a Wavelength HS Crimson USB DAC
• Performing analog duties, I have a Galibier Quattro TT, Tri-Planar Tonearm, and Dynavector XV1s Cart
• The Pre-amp/Phono function is being performed by an Aria WV-XL piece designed, built and directly sold by Mike Elliott (formerly of Counterpoint fame)
• Amplification comes from CAT JL3 monoblocks. The entire rig contains over 50 tubes (including 2 in the DAC) -- most of which are in the CAT's
• A full loom of Synergistic Research wires finish off the system

For me, tubes and stats go together like peanut butter and chocolate. Of course, that also has a lot to do with the individual components and topographies used by the tube equipment's designer, but more importantly, it has to do with the quality of the designer's implementation. That is, depending upon the equipment; tubes don't necessarily work or sound better than solid state. Obviously, one has to pick and choose components with great care; preferably via an in-home audition; looing both for the quality of their designs, but then, for how they synergize. However, with all things being equal as far as quality components and designs are concerned, my experience suggests that tubes work better with stats.

As for burn-in and your and JonFo recommendations, its good to know that burn-in isn't a huge issue for the panels. When I received the new Soundlabs last year, I didn't listen to them out of the box, but simply placed them face to face and ran them for about 100 hours. Thereafter, I never really heard much change. However, your suggestion to wait until the new M/L's are well burned-in before running the Audyssey program is a prudent one. Yesterday after we got the 5-speakers hooked-up and grossly positioned, I figured the best thing to do was to just sit and listen to them and try to tweak their positions as best as we could before thinking about running the Audyssey. So, in a round-about-way, we were already following your recommendations. I will just delay the Audyssey for another 30 or 40 hours.....Cheers, Mike

Mike, as an enthusiastic tube guy myself I disagree (on a general basis) that tubes and stats go well together. IMO, one must choose wisely for in a lot of cases the high freq roll-off issue is one that does not suit well with the afore mentioned combo. With that being said today's offerings in tube amplification do in fact offer suitable solutions…….namely wide bandwidth combined with new tube offerings…..KT-120-150, etc, all of which combine to produce sweet music ! ……….. of course being older with less acute high freq hearing helps as well !!

Thanks for the comparison, Mike. That is pretty much what I expected. I wholeheartedly agree with all your other comments, especially that tubes with Stats can sound magical, but you have to be careful to put the right components together to achieve system synergy. With MLs being a hybrid design, I have found the best setup is biamping with tubes on the panels and SS on the woofers. Of course, this is easy to do with most modern ML's as they tend to already have a powered woofer. When I eventually upgrade my Summits, I expect I will go with either Soundlabs or one of Roger Sanders' ESL speakers. I have kind of soured on ML as a company since they got bought out. I am actually a little surprised you liked the King Sound ESLs. Both times I have heard them at shows, they sounded like crap. But that was years ago and show conditions can be tricky.

Hi Mike, have you ever managed to compare Soundlabs to CLXs?

I just put up my brief impression of Soundlabs yesterday http://www.martinloganowners.com/forum/showthread.php?15589-Soundlabs-AR-Ref-3-modwright-shun-mook

“Bonzo”: Unfortunately, I’ve never heard the CLX’s.

I read your comments regarding the Soundlab listening session. Glad you got to hear them.

My first thought is that if the Soundlab's sounded bright, I wonder if the High Frequency setting was in the plus or negative positions? If not in the latter, being so should have obviously helped.

I have my High, Mid, and Bass level pots in their most neutral positions and have never had the need to change them.

I don’t believe that you mentioned which Soundlab models you listened to. The M1PX’s and A1PX’s are different only in aesthetics. The U1PX utilizes a more rigid frame and thus, are said to sound better. I wonder if the panels sported the relatively new “PX” technology. These panels are more efficient and dynamic. Plus, new electronic options make the speakers even easier to drive.

At any rate, amplification makes a huge difference on these guys. I dare say much more so than most speakers. When I bought my first really high-end amp (before then, I was using an Aragon 4004MkII; which isn't a slouch, but when compared to an A/R VT100, that I auditioned, it ate it for a snack!), because of zero valve experience and some (now) unfounded concerns, I shied away from valves and went with solid state. I auditioned a Mark Levinson 336 and the Krell fpb 600 (that you apparently heard) on my (then) reQuests. I bought the Levinson....enough said!

But when compared to my former Levinson, it’s an understatement to say my CAT JL3 amps are quite a different animal (perhaps even large feline-like (grin)! They possess low level detail capabilities that are outstanding and very SET-like, but they have the ability to seemingly instantaneously build to explosive levels. This ability is anything but subtle and just simply has to be heard to be believed!!

Additionally, I found by trial and error, that as is the case with most rooms, acoustic treatment is very important. I was using 3’ x 6’ x 11” thick DIY panels absorbing the Soundlab's back wave. But I found that additional absorption made a big imaging and sound stage improvement. I created a post on the Soundlab owners group discussing my findings: http://www.soundlabowners.com/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1379193945.

Over a decade or so ago, I didn’t utilize acoustic absorption when I owned my reQuests and I’m sure the end result suffered accordingly. Hence, the findings mentioned in the above link may also be helpful to other M/L owners.

At any rate, your following assessment of the Soundlabs was more than likely a very valid one – i.e.:

I am sure they were playing at 60% of what the system can be made to do

Click to expand...

. Especially, if the room as you said it was:

bright, wood flooring, barren and some glass

Click to expand...

. It didn’t sound like (no pun intended) a place for any speaker, let alone a dipolar one!

If you or anyone else is interested in Soundlab’s, you owe it to yourself to hear a pair properly set-up and powered with amps that befit their capabilities.

Welcome. I have a somewhat similar story but took much longer to get to the panels. In the early 80's my friend bought a set of heresey's. About a year later that audio store invited us to a private listening party for some Martin Logan's. Needless to say we were into classic rock and or hard rock. We wandered into the room with the Klipschorns. More our speed at the time. Doug bought some Cornwalls that day. Well about 30 years later I have changed my priorities and purchased some Maggie's and now Logan's. I could not be happier. It just takes time!

Thanks Mike. They were the A3s. Tough to get a proper demo of these speakers - I only know of 2 in the Uk and can't trace the other one yet

the guy I bought my summit x off moved up to clx speakers and has a beautiful set up

Hi Mike, the High Frequency was set to 75% of max, and the LF was at -3DB

hifinutt said:

the guy I bought my summit x off moved up to clx speakers and has a beautiful set up

Click to expand...

Was his name Marc? There's a Marck here who went from Summit X to CLX. His system is posted here.