How Much Power Needed for Vistas

I recently upgraded my system by purchasing an ML Depthi subwoofer and Motif center channel speaker. I also bought a Pioneer Elite SC-07 Receiver. I absolutely ADORE the ML speakers and now I want to upgrade the front left and right speakers. I am deebating between the Vistas and the Vantages. In talking to the folks at Magnolia I get the impression that the speakers are more or less the same except for the fact that the Vantages have the built in amplifiers. I use the system mostly (almost exclusively) for home theater and I am wondering if the Pioneer SC-07 has enough power to power the Vistas or do I need to invest the additional $1,400 to jump up to the Vantages. Any advice???

do some searches this has been discused in depth! you seem to get what you pay for as you climb the martin logan chain. if you have the money grab the vantages and be happy. the enclosure is different and the electronics are a bit better on the vantage. you also get some low end controll via knob on the back

if HT is your thing get the Vista's and save your $$ difference for a better amp, whether you buy new or used. A used Sunfire could easily be had for the dollar difference.

why do people seem to always say to buy the cheaper model if your going to use it for HT as if the demands of a good movie really mean nothing to their black pizza. it's sort of like don't waste your money if your only going to watch movies with them. I take offense to this

FISH_MAN said:

why do people seem to always say to buy the cheaper model if your going to use it for HT as if the demands of a good movie really mean nothing to their black pizza. it's sort of like don't waste your money if your only going to watch movies with them. I take offense to this

Click to expand...

the auditory demands (as you so state) of a movie, IMO don't begin to compare with critical musical listening. After all your mind is trying to first and foremost concentrate on the visual, do you think the background soundtrack was there for critical listening ?? of course not, but then again if it wasn't there the movie would seem lame. Keep in mind I'm speaking HT here, not multi-channel (SACD) music.

With respect to the Op's comparisson of Vantage vs Vista, in the realm of HT, I stand by my original opinion, buy the Vista and put the savings into ancillary electronics, etc.

twich54 said:

the auditory demands (as you so state) of a movie, IMO don't begin to compare with critical musical listening. After all your mind is trying to first and foremost concentrate on the visual, do you think the background soundtrack was there for critical listening ?? of course not, but then again if it wasn't there the movie would seem lame. Keep in mind I'm speaking HT here, not multi-channel (SACD) music.

With respect to the Op's comparisson of Vantage vs Vista, in the realm of HT, I stand by my original opinion, buy the Vista and put the savings into ancillary electronics, etc.

Click to expand...

I have to disagree here. the 200 watt amps that are built in to the vantages are worth it alone especially for HT they will take a big strain of of his amp. the sound effects and speakers ability to image properly is key to a good move when things get rocking you will bank on the extra power and accuracy of the vantage. as I do shoot a 100" screen most of my enjoyment is in the audio that is what sets the mood and yes background is key as well if I could afford 2 more spires for my rears I would. when you have your surround sound set up correctly your speakers will push and pull diagonally left to right and side to side positioning the sounds correctly in a 3d field not just between your fronts how cool is that.ever watch the speeder bike scene from star wars ? please don't gasp but more than 50% of my listening is done while I play world at war on my XBOX when someone tosses a grenade across the room it literally sounds like it bounces threw the room along the floor and explodes in the corner. that powered 8" driver would really help sell that effect hear as even if you have a sub it is nice that the speaker next to the actual effect has the nuts to carry it out.anyway that's just what I think

I'm with Dave on this issue Fish Man. I have heard a few home theater systems that sound quite good with movies, but not all that well with music. Perhaps it is the fact that movies have discrete signals going to so many speakers, and as Dave said, the visual impact of the film also pulls the sensory experience away from a pure focus on the sound. At the very least it divides ones attention.

I have heard a great many systems that have been built primarily around satisfying the highest musical demands that just so happend to sound fantastic when pressed into home theater duties as well.

I don't believe the two are mutually inclusive, but I do believe that if you satisy the very best audio experience you can by focusing on the reproduction of music, you will by default have a very good home theater experience.

I understand where you guys are coming from and think you may have a slight bias towards 2 channel music reproduction and thus reserve only the highest quality components for that medium. I think because of the discrete channels more emphasis should be put on better stronger speakers as they are no longer working together.so would my system sound better with music I removed the other speakers from the room?

FISH_MAN said:

so would my system sound better with music I removed the other speakers from the room?

Click to expand...

Absolutely not Fish, go back and read my post (#5), I clearly stated that my comments were based on HT.... NOT mutli-channel music !

we must be missunderstanding each other.perhaps one day we will meet at HIFI show and we can talk about these things in person that would be fun

Also agree with Dave. Speakers are important, no doubt. But for HT you don't care about the 'quality' that you are after with standard 2-channel playback (warmth, depth, clarity, tight bass, any other flowery adjective you can think of). Most people want to play at loud volumes and not have overly distorted sound. The reproduction of sound effects - grenades being flung across the room to use your example - probably has more to do with giving all speakers enough juice (for the longest time most HT receivers would throw 100 watts up front and 15-30 watts behind you...). I think that's what Dave is getting, get some beef (and quality) watts to all channels and spend the difference on a good surround processor.

When I was Dan's (DTB300) house not too long ago, he upgraded to a new processor for MC music and difference was dramatic. An added benefit (much to his surprise) was a nice improvement to HT playback. The newest surround sound processors have come a long, long way.

Having said that, you can make a marked improvement (both music and movies) with better speakers - but I still feel the money is better spent on the electronics. Just MHO.

eknuds01 said:

When I was Dave's (DTB300) house not too long ago

Click to expand...

I know you meant...Dan's house

he upgraded to a new processor for MC music and difference was dramatic. An added benefit (much to his surprise) was a nice improvement to HT playback. The newest surround sound processors have come a long, long way..

Click to expand...

Again Steve, my comments were directly made in "HT only" (if you will) context. As I stated in another thread, if I were building a 'Home Theatre' room I doubt very much that would employ M/L speakers, for again, IMO, when dealing with multiple seating (width wise) there are much better dispersion speakers out there.

Regarding getting together, I'll be sure and let you and the rest of the Chgo contingent know the next time I'm in Chgo. Probably this spring, hope we can all get together then.

twich54 said:

I know you meant...Dan's house




Again Steve, my comments were directly made in "HT only" (if you will) context. As I stated in another thread, if I were building a 'Home Theatre' room I doubt very much that would employ M/L speakers, for again, IMO, when dealing with multiple seating (width wise) there are much better dispersion speakers out there.

Regarding getting together, I'll be sure and let you and the rest of the Chgo contingent know the next time I'm in Chgo. Probably this spring, hope we can all get together then.

Click to expand...

Sorry - meant to say Dan!!

eknuds01 said:

Also agree with Dave. Speakers are important, no doubt. But for HT you don't care about the 'quality' that you are after with standard 2-channel playback (warmth, depth, clarity, tight bass, any other flowery adjective you can think of). Most people want to play at loud volumes and not have overly distorted sound. The reproduction of sound effects - grenades being flung across the room to use your example - probably has more to do with giving all speakers enough juice (for the longest time most HT receivers would throw 100 watts up front and 15-30 watts behind you...). I think that's what Dave is getting, get some beef (and quality) watts to all channels and spend the difference on a good surround processor.

When I was Dan's (DTB300) house not too long ago, he upgraded to a new processor for MC music and difference was dramatic. An added benefit (much to his surprise) was a nice improvement to HT playback. The newest surround sound processors have come a long, long way.

Having said that, you can make a marked improvement (both music and movies) with better speakers - but I still feel the money is better spent on the electronics. Just MHO.

Click to expand...

I have owned many speakers and recently many martin logans and I will tell you that every time I upgraded the speakers the difference was apparently huge with movie listening even up to my spires and stage. the electronic upgrades where more incremental. I would always spend on the speakers first and electronics second.
although when you get to the level of the spires or CLX it would be wise to spend on both