Summit x vs Maggie 20.7 vs 3.7

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.
Interesting. The comments in the review reflect my thoughts on the difference between ML and Magnepan. Actually my favourite Maggies are the MG12s.
 
I've read that post before.... interesting that he toes OUT and he also mistook that the Summit X's handed off to the subs at 350hz (in reality it is 270hz).
 
Yes. Toe out is really odd. I have never heard of anyone doing that. In any case I have a jones for the Maggie 20.7. I heard the 3.7 and well - I just think they seem to do something special. I akin it to music textures. So my thought is the big brother will do something 'specialer'. :). And yes I think I have the room for them. I may have to go to Minnesota to listen to them however since no dealer seems to carry them.
 
I heard the 20.1's about 12 years ago, connected to some massive ARC tube monoblocs. They sounded impressive, providing that "wall of sound" experience that only huge panel speakers seem to provide. But I still felt like they didn't hold a candle to ML's top speaker at the time, the Prodigy.
 
I heard the 20.1's about 12 years ago, connected to some massive ARC tube monoblocs. They sounded impressive, providing that "wall of sound" experience that only huge panel speakers seem to provide. But I still felt like they didn't hold a candle to ML's top speaker at the time, the Prodigy.

Hi rich. I too heard them quite some time ago. I preferred them over the original summit. I know you have summits - so did you like the prodigy better than the summit? I have Odysseys and when I heard the summits had no real urge to switch. However the 20.1 had me wondering how much the dealer would give me for the Odysseys.
 
Beek.

My understanding is no 20.7i. From what I understand the new tweak gives better bass. Possibly from a change in the Mylar tension.
 
Hi rich. I too heard them quite some time ago. I preferred them over the original summit. I know you have summits - so did you like the prodigy better than the summit?

Tough call, but probably yes. They both have advantages over each other. The Prodigy is an amazing speaker. I think the Summit has overall better bass and better woofer/panel integration and is maybe more accurate. But I think the Prodigy has a bigger soundstage and a tone in the mids and lower mids that just sounds incredible, particularly with vocals. If I had the space in my listening room, I would probably have Prodigies instead of Summits. I still really enjoy listening to my Ascents in my secondary system. There is just a sonic quality to the big MLs that they lost when they down-sized the speakers, in my opinion.
 
Beek.

My understanding is no 20.7i. From what I understand the new tweak gives better bass. Possibly from a change in the Mylar tension.

Interesting how Mag is keeping a big secret of it, I think one day somebody will open them up.
 
Interesting how Mag is keeping a big secret of it, I think one day somebody will open them up.

Just an FYI. A guy on audio asylum just had his 3.7s done. On the planer speaker asylum of course
 
Tough call, but probably yes. They both have advantages over each other. The Prodigy is an amazing speaker. I think the Summit has overall better bass and better woofer/panel integration and is maybe more accurate. But I think the Prodigy has a bigger soundstage and a tone in the mids and lower mids that just sounds incredible, particularly with vocals. If I had the space in my listening room, I would probably have Prodigies instead of Summits. I still really enjoy listening to my Ascents in my secondary system. There is just a sonic quality to the big MLs that they lost when they down-sized the speakers, in my opinion.

I think I agree with you here. Whenever u hear a description of the newer models the words 'punchy bass' are usually used. While adding bass I'm not sure if it doesn't do something to the sonic signature which ....well ... Makes it sound like a powered subwoofer!!
 
I think I agree with you here. Whenever u hear a description of the newer models the words 'punchy bass' are usually used. While adding bass I'm not sure if it doesn't do something to the sonic signature which ....well ... Makes it sound like a powered subwoofer!!

I'd like to follow this up - because yesterday my son and I went to listen to some things...

What I was looking for was what 90% of the speakers could give... because quite frankly I didn't think my listening sessions would be perfect conditions... and they were not .....unfortunately... but here it goes...

First stop: Montis & Summit X...

Both were hooked to some parasound gear.... not the best.... not set up very well.... Summit X's were too close to the wall - maybe 2 feet.... They sounded good... however, they didn't blow me away... Same thing with the Montis... Compared to the older speaker line - I find the stat to have more body... the woofer and stat definitely do integrate better - and you don't really know what that is until you hear it... Thing is - I just didn't go 'wow'.... Now- when I listened to my Odysseys about 10 years ago... I went 'wow'!!!!!.... I just can't get away from that powered woofer... I think it just seems to force the bass at you ...it seems very directional to me...and to me - that seems to mess up the magic of the speaker.... Of course, my opinion and the YMMV applies as always.... It was a lousy setup - no doubt - but I definitely got a feel for the sonic signature of the speakers -- and to me - they are very much like the old summit....with some improvements.

I then went to listen to the Magnepan 3.7... different store.... Now - this guy has some great front end... All Arc gear.... but his room is about 13 feet wide and in order to sit in the middle of the speakers he has two chairs - one behind the other... First chair is prob 6 ft away from speaker... second is 8 ft away... The room also has pics with glass all over the room - and speakers and gear line the left side of the room and right side.... He had about 8 feet behind the speakers - but that was filled with a bunch of boxes... Haha.... So - I am just trying to give you the picture - that neither listening session was pristine.... the 3.7 sounded very clear to me... like an open window. I like them very much... But, the thing that really gets me... and this is crazy.... is their bass.... It isn't overpowering - but it has dimension... It seems to flow front and back ... not just front.... I find these speakers just fantastic.... I wouldn't rock out with them (as you prob could with the Montis/Summit) - but with everything else... the dimensionality... the cohesiveness.....the huge soundstage.....the textures.... and the smoothness of that ribbon.... wow...They sound like the entire panel just moves air... I know ' I can hear the air move... that sounds stupid - but can't describe it any other way... and I think it is because of the planar bass plus just the massive size of the planar listening area. A good example might be tympani... I had Swan Lake with me - and on the summit/montis... when that tympani hit -- it threw you back in your chair.... It was like 'batten dow the hatches here it comes!!!'.... The 3.7 - was not like that -- it was more like - wow - that sounds like a real tympani...it has depth and seems to be the appropriate volume and it seems to integrate with the rest of the music. However, given that - you know you might have some recordings where you are expecting a certain wow factor on the low end - and might not get it.... Listened to some Bach Organ on both Montis/3.7... Same type of thing... Montis seemed to hit you in the chest... 3.7 went low - and did have impact... but not the 'holy schnikes' low end... if you know what I mean...

I guess I am just not a big fan of the powered woofer... I mean, I feel like the Logans need it... The volume levels were flat... I guess I should have tried ratcheting it down some.. and I love bass... This is why this is a bit perplexing to me....

In any case - not meant to anger anyone - but just my impressions... I know the Summit X/ Montis can do better with better setup/gear etc... and they have got rave reviews... It just feels like the house sound for ML is essentially the old Summit to me at least... and that isn't too shabby... It comes down to personal taste at this level anyway...

If anybody has a chance to listen to the 3.7- I certainly would... It is a different sound... different presentation than most... I really want to get my hands on the 20.7....
 
timm, thanks for the update and I agree with your feelings on the Maggie 3.7's, an absolute bargain of a speaker and one that plays waaaay beyond it's price point for sure !

As for your Logan experience, lets just say it's a shame that some retailers just have NO CLUE ……….. I 'm not sure what Parasound front end was driving(rest assured if it were the JC-1 mono blocks they're no slouch !) them but regardless set up and room environment is paramount as we all agree.
 
timm, thanks for the update and I agree with your feelings on the Maggie 3.7's, an absolute bargain of a speaker and one that plays waaaay beyond it's price point for sure !

As for your Logan experience, lets just say it's a shame that some retailers just have NO CLUE ……….. I 'm not sure what Parasound front end was driving(rest assured if it were the JC-1 mono blocks they're no slouch !) them but regardless set up and room environment is paramount as we all agree.

No doubt dave.... as I said .. I was just shooting for the 90%... what is the house sound... has it changed that much between summit / X / and montis.... and I am not sure of the amps.. but it was not the JC-1... These guys were pretty clueless indeed.... I walk in there - and they are trying to sell a 15K product... but how do you sell that and present it in such a poor fashion... How come I know what to do here.. yet - they do not? I am not a rocket scientist!!

I went down the block and I WANT to give this guy my business.... He just loves music and will sit and talk to you all day long about it....Of couse when it is time to pull the trigger - I will want to see if he can give me a quasi decent deal. But, this is one of the first guys that I have actually been concerned with HIS profitability.... You just like to see people like that stay in business - if you know what I mean....

As you may know or remember - I have the Odysseys w descent combo.... I wouldn't trade that for the summit x or montis.... The maggie - I would... but it would have to be the 20.7... maybe because I want to purchase something that is a bit different in presentation...sounds like real instruments playing (not reproductions of instruments) ...gets me excited to listen again .... and because I am going to die with them because they are so damn expensive!!!.... :)
 
Timm,

Great review and characterization of the different speakers.

How would you describe the bass presentation of your Odysseys and Descent combo as compared to the newer MLspeakers with powered subs?

Thanks,

Bing
 
Timm,

Great review and characterization of the different speakers.

How would you describe the bass presentation of your Odysseys and Descent combo as compared to the newer MLspeakers with powered subs?

Thanks,

Bing

Well that is a great question bing. My system is set up more optimal than what I heard on the montis summit x. There is absolutely no need for a sub w the newer models in my opinion. However I will say that the descent I find to be an excellent sub and I find it 'sneaky' good in that if it is tuned properly the bass just sneaks up on you and I find it very omnidirectional. Because you can place it in your room I think that is advantageous as well. I also think the smaller cabinet on the new models created this directional bass I speak of. Not so much with the descent. Saying all that I still really liked the Maggie planer bass. It was non directional. Had depth and was very detailed. It was also from a volume perspective nicely matched with the rest of the speaker. It didnt yell at you. If u r measuring SPL the logan line blows it away. Maybe you can smooth things out with the new Logan's but in 3 listening sessions I have not done it yet. It is a cone and a stat and well...they sound different. So in a nutshell based on my current listening experiences on the logans alone I have a tendency to like the descent bass better than the sound of the bass coming from the smaller cabinet on the newer models. However the new logan line does blend better with cone/panel. I just think the smaller cabinet inhibits the space that really good bass creates. My opinion of course and that could always change. :).
 
As you may know, the ML speakers in your test were placed too close to the wall, so the bass is also boosted. Plus if they were perpendicular to the wall, the sound shoots out the back and bounces right back into the panel. Also, if you cut the bass ON PURPOSE, it will make the midrange and highs sound better.
If you have a chance to visit that store again, I would try:
Pull the speakers out more if you can.
Turn the bass down below flat. I would not worry about the bass now because you can always fix it later.
Try to get something absorbing behind the speakers
If the room is wide, try toeing the speakers waaaaay inwards, such that they cross in front of you. The point here is to get the back wave to spray more out towards the side.
 
As you may know, the ML speakers in your test were placed too close to the wall, so the bass is also boosted. Plus if they were perpendicular to the wall, the sound shoots out the back and bounces right back into the panel. Also, if you cut the bass ON PURPOSE, it will make the midrange and highs sound better.
If you have a chance to visit that store again, I would try:
Pull the speakers out more if you can.
Turn the bass down below flat. I would not worry about the bass now because you can always fix it later.
Try to get something absorbing behind the speakers
If the room is wide, try toeing the speakers waaaaay inwards, such that they cross in front of you. The point here is to get the back wave to spray more out towards the side.

That makes a whole lotta sense BB. I'm going to have to just tell them to step back and learn.
 
Hey timm, I haven't posted here for a long time & I occasionally pop in to catch up on the threads.
I have owned the Summit X with very good components as well as now own the 20.7's
My take is the 20.7's hands down, not trying to start an arguement or create a lather here, just my preference.
The speed of the 20.7 panel is absolutely incredible & needs to be lived with to understand. The integration of upper, mid & bass is quite stellar for a panel that the Summit X, again here I reiterate, imo, can never keep as in the way of the design.
The bass of the 20.7 is special & makes one smile/laugh out loud etc when you realise it is not overly intrusive but very accurate & more than one would expect from a panel. It really is a special speaker, don't get me wrong here though, it too needs work as in good jumpers, fuses, stands, isolation etc but once done, it enters into the "wow"!!! Happy travels & better listening.
 
Back
Top