Summit X midrange

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.
A

autoformer

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 16, 2011
Messages
68
Reaction score
0
Location
Santa Clara, CA
Hello everyone - new member here...

I have been struggling with my new Summit Xs. I'm finding that there is something about the midrange that I find very irritating, particularly with certain female vocals. No problem with breathy vocalists like Diana Krall, Lisa Ono, Heather Rigdon and the like, but singers with highly dynamic voices can really hurt. I find that I have to turn the volume down in order to tolerate the vocals, but then the instrumentation recedes to the point where the emotional impact is lost.

On my McIntosh C50 preamp, I find that if I use the EQ to reduce 10K, 2.5K, and 1K, and bump up the 100, 200 and 400Hz controls, the sound becomes more tolerable. The amp, btw, is McIntosh's new MC452.

My speakers are toed in as per the manual (i.e., flashlight under the chin illuminates the inner third of the panels). Angle is set to around 3.5 degrees. The panels are 3 feet from the back wall.

My room needs acoustic treatment. It is not ideal in shape, mostly because of the low ceiling (7.5ft) and the fact that the seating position is just 3 feet from the back wall. I am working with a well-regarded local hifi company to analyze and treat the room. Still, I am skeptical that acoustic treatment alone will solve my problem. There seems to be something about the way the Summit X reproduces midrange that i just find grating.

Finally, as a point of comparison, I have another system that I have been listening to in the same space. This system consists of an MC275 tube amp, a C22 preamp and Harbeth Compact 7ES3 speakers. This system is obviously much small in scale, and the little Harbeths aren't as detailed in the highs or as rich in the lows as the Summits, but I seem to enjoy them much more for just listening to music. My wife thinks it's amusing that I would rather listen to the little Harbeths than our "big" system. She thinks that, compared to the Summits, vocals through the Harbeths sound like the singer is singing through a tube!

This is still a work in progress and I'd love to hear any opinions you may have.

-Jim
 
Last edited:
autoformer said:
Hello everyone - new member here...

I have been struggling with my new Summit Xs. I'm finding that there is something about the midrange that I find very irritating, particularly with certain female vocals. No problem with breathy vocalists like Diana Krall, Lisa Ono, Heather Rigdon and the like, but singers with highly dynamic voices can really hurt. I find that I have to turn the volume down in order to tolerate the vocals, but then the instrumentation recedes to the point where the emotional impact is lost.

On my McIntosh C50 preamp, I find that if I use the EQ to reduce 10K, 2.5K, and 1K, and bump up the 100, 200 and 400Hz controls, the sound becomes more tolerable. The amp, btw, is McIntosh's new MC452.

My speakers are toed in as per the manual (i.e., flashlight under the chin illuminates the inner third of the panels). Angle is set to around 3.5 degrees. The panels are 3 feet from the back wall.

My room needs acoustic treatment. It is not ideal in shape, mostly because of the low ceiling (7.5ft) and the fact that the seating position is just 3 feet from the back wall. I am working with a well-regarded local hifi company to analyze and treat the room. Still, I am skeptical that acoustic treatment alone will solve my problem. There seems to be something about the way the Summit X reproduces midrange that i just find grating.

Finally, as a point of comparison, I have another system that I have been listening to in the same space. This system consists of an MC275 tube amp, a C22 preamp and Harbeth Compact 7ES3 speakers. This system is obviously much small in scale, and the little Harbeths aren't as detailed in the highs or as rich in the lows as the Summits, but I seem to enjoy them much more for just listening to music. My wife thinks it's amusing that I would rather listen to the little Harbeths than our "big" system. She thinks that, compared to the Summits, vocals through the Harbeths sound like the singer is singing through a tube!

This is still a work in progress and I'd love to hear any opinions you may have.

-Jim
Click to expand...

There are folks here that are far more experienced with this topic than I, but I think you're on the right track wrt treatment. It's sounds like you're describing an overly "bright" room. I have a little bit of that in my room as well (which is admittedly under-treated). I could be wrong, but I think the dipole nature of the SummitXs interact more with your untreated walls/surfaces (versus the Harbeths), and what you're hearing is an emphasis of certain mids and upper-mids. It's like the sound goes right to your brain - very uncomfortable. Not sure if it's a room resonance or just a timing/delay issue that emphasizes certain notes, but I think it's potentially similar what I've experienced as well (my previous speakers were SummitX also).

I think either room treatment or electronic room correction (or both) will restore harmony in your room/mind/universe :)

Cheers
 
Does it change when you move your head up or down?
If so, then adjust the angle.

On the other hand, it sounds like the gear is relatively new, and may just need some more time to break in.

Don't discount the effect the room has, as it plays a significant factor in shaping the sound that arrives at your room.

A good idea is to isolate two or three nasty songs so you can then determine if you have improved it. Try only one change at a time (ie change source then try, they change source back to original and change angle of speakers, etc.)
 
It sounds like you know exactly what I'm hearing. Your comment about the sound going right into your brain is spot on. It's very uncomfortable. Sounds like you changed your Summit Xs in favor of the CLX? How would you compare the CLX in terms of this midrange-boring-into-your-head characteristic?

I've been doing experiments in my room with a bunch of foam inserts from large Pelican cases. I've got the things pinned up to the walls and in front of the windows in places where I think I'm getting the most reflections. I also put a couple of large beach towels directly behind the Summits. That seemed to improve things quite a bit, so there's hope for acoustic treatment. The sound radiating from behind the ESL panels was certainly causing some of the problem.


tsv_1 said:
There are folks here that are far more experienced with this topic than I, but I think you're on the right track wrt treatment. It's sounds like you're describing an overly "bright" room. I have a little bit of that in my room as well (which is admittedly under-treated). I could be wrong, but I think the dipole nature of the SummitXs interact more with your untreated walls/surfaces (versus the Harbeths), and what you're hearing is an emphasis of certain mids and upper-mids. It's like the sound goes right to your brain - very uncomfortable. Not sure if it's a room resonance or just a timing/delay issue that emphasizes certain notes, but I think it's potentially similar what I've experienced as well (my previous speakers were SummitX also).

I think either room treatment or electronic room correction (or both) will restore harmony in your room/mind/universe :)

Cheers
Click to expand...
 
Yes, the rake angle makes a difference. In fact, the very helpful woman I spoke to at Martin Logan suggested that I try an even greater rake angle than 5 degrees. Steeper rake angles also seem to reduce the beaming effect. As I write this, I'm listening to them at around 8 degrees. The midrange is much more pleasant, but much of the high frequency detail is gone. And the imaging has disappeared. Vocals I'm used to hearing well-focused in the middle with a 5 to 1 degree rake instead appear as a big diffuse wall between the two speakers.

The Summits are around 7 weeks old. I'm pretty sure I'm past the 100 hour break-in. They certainly sound less bright than new. Can I expect the brightness to continue to be reduced past the 100 hour mark? And will the midrange come forward?

I wish I understood how/why the little Harbeths produce such a forward sounding midrange which is at the same time pleasant to listen to along with good high frequency detail. Loudspeakers are quite the art form. On the other hand, the Harbeths pale compared to the Summits for movies. That is what has me struggling to make the Summits work for music as well.

JRace said:
Does it change when you move your head up or down?
If so, then adjust the angle.

On the other hand, it sounds like the gear is relatively new, and may just need some more time to break in.

Don't discount the effect the room has, as it plays a significant factor in shaping the sound that arrives at your room.

A good idea is to isolate two or three nasty songs so you can then determine if you have improved it. Try only one change at a time (ie change source then try, they change source back to original and change angle of speakers, etc.)
Click to expand...
 
autoformer said:
It sounds like you know exactly what I'm hearing. Your comment about the sound going right into your brain is spot on. It's very uncomfortable. Sounds like you changed your Summit Xs in favor of the CLX? How would you compare the CLX in terms of this midrange-boring-into-your-head characteristic?.
Click to expand...

With respect to the midrange brightness aspect, the CLXs are an improvement over the Xs, but the problem is not entirely gone.
 
Not surprising since the Summit X panel is said to be derived from the CLX.

I know I shouldn't be making the comparison because I heard them in different rooms, with different electronics and with around 40 people in the room, but I heard the Wilson Sashas the other day and they were really quite remarkable. None of the midrange harshness we're discussing. One demo ran through pretty much every genre of music ranging from classical to country, rock, blues, jazz and even 40s-era jazz recordings. They were amazing across the board. Of course, the room was very well treated and all the bodies must've been helping too. Some say they're overpriced at $28k, but I've not heard anything else that sounds like them.


tsv_1 said:
With respect to the midrange brightness aspect, the CLXs are an improvement over the Xs, but the problem is not entirely gone.
Click to expand...
 
I have a similar issue with my small room, but I have placed treatment directly behind the Panels and to the sides (using the mirror trick from ML)
And I will tell you that this does help bring down the sharpness of the panels.
 
autoformer said:
Not surprising since the Summit X panel is said to be derived from the CLX.

I know I shouldn't be making the comparison because I heard them in different rooms, with different electronics and with around 40 people in the room, but I heard the Wilson Sashas the other day and they were really quite remarkable. None of the midrange harshness we're discussing. One demo ran through pretty much every genre of music ranging from classical to country, rock, blues, jazz and even 40s-era jazz recordings. They were amazing across the board. Of course, the room was very well treated and all the bodies must've been helping too. Some say they're overpriced at $28k, but I've not heard anything else that sounds like them.
Click to expand...

It's definitely a room thing. I've not heard the Sashas (though I know some on thid forum own them and love them), but when I heard the CLXs before I bought mine, the brightness was non-existent.
 
Mirror trick? Sounds interesting. How does that work?

Necrosuit said:
I have a similar issue with my small room, but I have placed treatment directly behind the Panels and to the sides (using the mirror trick from ML)
And I will tell you that this does help bring down the sharpness of the panels.
Click to expand...
 
I just want to chime in and say that what you are experiencing is your room not properly treated. I have my Summits (-x) in a dedicated room separate from my home. The first and second reflection points treated. The front wall treated with a combination of absorption and diffusion at 250 ( midrange) The back wall is cover with diffusion and I have 16 bass traps at wall/ceiling / corners (literally a man cave) But to my ears the midrange of the Summits is the primary reason why I have hung on to these speakers over the years. I do not have any of the issues you described. It is my understand that the X midrange is better than the original Summits. I might add that my Summits are off the the front wall 8' seating is 11' from the plane of the speaker and the back wall is 11' behind me.

Personally I would not be seriously in this hobby without a properly treated dedicated room. If you are interested in hearing how good ML can sound in a good room let me know I live in the greater Seattle as well. Good luck, Sam
 
Thanks Sam. Very useful information. I think part of my problem is my back wall, which is just 4 or 5 feet behind my listening position. The room is rectangular in shape, but because it is also a theater room, and because it is a converted basement, we had few choices. One of the biggest lessons I've learned is that trying to mix a theater room and listening room is very difficult and maybe impossible to do well.


Shoe said:
I just want to chime in and say that what you are experiencing is your room not properly treated. I have my Summits (-x) in a dedicated room separate from my home. The first and second reflection points treated. The front wall treated with a combination of absorption and diffusion at 250 ( midrange) The back wall is cover with diffusion and I have 16 bass traps at wall/ceiling / corners (literally a man cave) But to my ears the midrange of the Summits is the primary reason why I have hung on to these speakers over the years. I do not have any of the issues you described. It is my understand that the X midrange is better than the original Summits. I might add that my Summits are off the the front wall 8' seating is 11' from the plane of the speaker and the back wall is 11' behind me.

Personally I would not be seriously in this hobby without a properly treated dedicated room. If you are interested in hearing how good ML can sound in a good room let me know I live in the greater Seattle as well. Good luck, Sam
Click to expand...
 
One other note on this. A friend of mine has had the original Summit (non X) for several years now. His room is completely untreated, though he does have a large, fabric covered couch in there. His Summits sounded far better to me than my Xs. Could be his room is naturally better damped or maybe 3 year old speakers are just well broken-in.

His speakers did not exhibit any midrange shrillness, but the mids were certainly more recessed than, for example, my 24 year old Magneplanar SMGAs, which have this big fat, meaty midrange. Vocalists are huge and right in your face. Same with horns. For some reason, in my untreated room, those old $500/pair speakers, sitting right next to the Summit Xs, sound just wonderful. Well, they do need some subwoofer assistance, but apart from that... ;-)

Shoe said:
It is my understand that the X midrange is better than the original Summits. I might add that my Summits are off the the front wall 8' seating is 11' from the plane of the speaker and the back wall is 11' behind me.
Sam
Click to expand...
 
Yes I would agree with you, I used to have my 2ch and home theater in the same room and found that the 2ch was greatly compromise. Which is why I moved the 2ch out of the house into another room. I understand that a lot people do not have the ability to have separate rooms. But you can greatly improve your existing environment and squeeze the best out of your room by educating yourself on placement and treatment; by exactly doing what you are doing here on this form. There are guys here that know so much more than I do, even though they would never know it because I do not engage very often.

To me working with your room as you grow in understanding is one of the rewarding aspect of this hobby. It is far more rewarding to enhance one's environment than upgrading the electronics. Don't loose heart you will get there and when you do you will know why we are nuts about ML. Cheers, Sam
 
Summit X connected to 2 ohm tap

I want to say thanks to everyone who kindly replied to my thread. You guys have already helped a lot.

Have been experimenting tonight and discovered improved sound when connecting the Summit Xs to the 2 ohm tap of my amp. Some of the KD Land tracks from "Absolute Torch and Twang" were problematic, but now I find that her voice is a bit less irritating.

My McIntosh dealer said that it was ok to do this. Any downsides that you all can think of? The low end and midrange seem fatter, while highs are a bit rolled off which, in my case, is a good thing. Is that what you'd expect? The amp is the MC452 (SS, 450wpc).
 
What cables are you using ? The cables that are sounding great with your Harbeth speakers, might be to bright for your Summits. Try Cardas Golden Reference or Straightwire Virtuoso, these cables do magic on midrange brightnes.
 
I am using 12 gauge solid core copper with Multi Contact LS4 bananas. Ten foot runs.

Roger Russell on wires (McIntosh's director of acoustic research and principal speaker designer for 25 years)
http://www.roger-russell.com/wire/wire.htm

Alan Shaw on wires (Harbeth Managing Director and principal designer)
http://www.harbeth.co.uk/usergroup/...f-your-finger-What-about-inside-the-amplifier

Alan Show in interconnects:
http://www.harbeth.co.uk/usergroup/showthread.php?534-Cables-filters-interconnects-....
"What do I use or recommend? Anything you have available. Mine cost a few cents. I prefer the dollar ones because they are prettier. I use the same ones on my test equipment to link it together and it definitely can't tell any difference. But then, why should it?

One of our distributors who has very good hearing has tried many different interconnects and concluded that you can't beat the sonic quality of the free ones supplied with Japanese electronics.
Alan A. Shaw
Designer, owner
Harbeth Audio UK"

I've always avoided the whole exotic wire thing. A B&W speaker engineer once told me "wire is wire". I once opened a $3500 Martin Logan subwoofer to find some 22 gauge wire connecting the speaker binding post to the electronics.

Still, a lot of audio enthusiasts seem to believe that speaker wire makes a difference while electrical engineers scoff. They can't all be wrong, can they? I wonder if there is some qualitative aspect to wire that is difficult for engineers to measure. It seems plausible that the human ear is capable of discerning differences that we can't quantify through science.

I remain skeptical of this whole wire thing but am willing to give some exotic wire a try.


Lagonda said:
What cables are you using ? The cables that are sounding great with your Harbeth speakers, might be to bright for your Summits. Try Cardas Golden Reference or Straightwire Virtuoso, these cables do magic on midrange brightnes.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
I really don't care what the 'experts' say... They usually have an ax to grind or something to sell anyway... I went from the copper wire - similar to yours to Audioquest bi-wired bedrock.... Not real expensive .. maybe 175 bucks on a great sale at the time and harshness went away and the mids bloomed a bit as did the low end. I use spades on all connections. I can't say anything about the mega-buck wires because I have never done that and had trouble justifying it... But, have heard improvements with these cables over regular wire - and have also purchased some signal cable power cords which also seemed to tame down any harshness in the system. The power cord diff was not as great as the cable change....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

S
My New Dedicated Theater/Listening Room - Summit X and more
Replies
7
Views
2K
STDCMR19
S
S
To tube, or not to tube?
Replies
16
Views
5K
Bernard
Bernard
bikerneil
Summit X vs. Montis - Based on Room Size
Replies
10
Views
6K
RCHeliGuy
RCHeliGuy
H
Soon to be a Summit X Owner – Probably
Replies
13
Views
3K
stuwee
stuwee
alwayslearning
Summit X's for nearfield listening?
2
Replies
26
Views
5K
sharok
S

Latest posts

Back
Top