M-L should be used as a test reference...

When the media writes about speakers from $2000 a pair and up, M-L should be used as a reference speaker.

Before lavish praise is slathered too deeply on other speakers, they need to be judged by a speaker that really doesn't color the music, and really is transparent.

It's really an eye opener just how many loudspeakers over $2K a pair have inherent colorations and flaws that aren't commensurate with high fidelity.

I could name a great number of speakers up to $100k a pair that I was not impressed by, due to either lifelessness, or outright coloration like port noise or a tweeter that calls attention to itself.

In the 2-3 grand range, Paradigm studio 100's are nice speakers, but please... they sound very ordinary and slow compared to ML. So do $7,000 a pair Vienna Acoustics.

Like I said in my introductory post, I became "Instantly jaded" on my ML audition because it was one of the few times I was listening to music, and not a speaker.

Most boxes will sound ordinary and slow - Just one thing, when you compare, do it for different types of music, even which you don't listen to currently - so take some rock, vocals, opera male and female, baroque for violins and cellos, and symphony and piano - the latter two show the greatest differences among systems IMO, and you will find the boxes lacking in many, but the ML lacking in some as well, else you will let yourself be blinded by ML love - which is not a bad thing. I still think an used ML hybrid like Summit or Montis is the best value for money.

Do you use symphonies and piano to audition?

Plenty. I have a HUGE collection of classical on cd, sacd, and LP. I would not hesitate to try it. Nojima plays Liszt is on the top for piano.
I will look into the summit and montis. The ethos were about $7k a pair...out of my budget range so the $2-2,999 is where I have to stay.

Ironically, B&W 801's did well on large scale orchestral pieces, but sounded sluggish and clumsy on techno and metal.

I think you should then wait for an used Ethos instead of buying a new EM ESL, if you can get an used Ethos for 3k it will be excellent

Also look at http://www.eminent-tech.com/main.html - I haven't heard these, but they are pretty low priced stats

I remember eminent tech. IIRC, LFT 8. They aren't bad. But they are dead as a doorstump... 82db range.

Reviews of the "B" all indicate a rolled off high end, and less than optimal focus and need for a 200 wpc+ amp.

BTW: Waiting for "XXX" isn't viable. The Ethos and Theos are likely good, but since I have auditioned the electromotion and they do impress me more than *any* dynamic under $8000 (and some over) I don't have a problem with them.

They are not rolled off, nor are they dead efficiency wise.

The problem with "waiting for" and "upgrade to" is that it's a product of audiophelia nervosa. Upgraditis. The holy grail effect that the best experience is JUST a few THOUSAND dollars more away.


I went down that road once... never again. It has to stop somewhere. If I buy the ethos, I could worry about the montis or another bigger flagship model.

Why don't you pick up that free Acoustat being given off in NJ? Or just wait for a used Acoustat spectra to come onto the market, some people get them for a couple of 100 or slightly more. Then spend all your money on amplification and source

Not sure why I am on a MARTIN LOGAN forum and someone is repeatedly trying to steer me AWAY from MARTIN LOGAN. As I stated in my intro thread, the ESL buries the acoustat one and leaves it for dead. Not interested in acoustat.

I know how to distribute my cash in a system, I already have an amp and pre, along with a source. I also have upgrades plotted in.

Oh does it? I had no idea. I just no it's free I am just into trading ideas.

There is no contest. I have listened to acoustats since the 80's.

The ML have a wider listening window, greater dynamics, greater efficiency, better FR, The acoustats,quads and other "brick" speakers are too limited by compare and not a consideration.