A Different Opinion on the CLX

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.

cstory

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 30, 2006
Messages
171
Reaction score
0
Posted on the Stereophile website by some one who goes by the handle of Michigan J Frog (confirmed Beltist, if that means anything, never heard the term myself). Quoted below: Just goes to show how subjective this whole hobby is.

La chambre Son Idéal: Another local dealer, this room featured the largest speakers of the show that I'd seen: the "brand new" Martin Logan CLX electrostatics. The back of the room was surrounded with Bryston amps, exposed without their covers, and naked for all the audio geeks in the world to drool over. I don't recall exactly what the rest of the system included, apart from the Logans, but I remember the electronics looked substantial enough that you could get a hernia just thinking of moving them. In fact, it appears this system was so fancy and all-equipped, that it came with its own remote-control operator. All you had to do was yell "Track 14!", as the exhibitor demonstrated, and this young dude that comes with the system would change the track for you on his remote control. Sometimes I just can't keep up with all these technerlogical advances. When we heard this system play music, well, both my partner and I looked at each other in stunned silence. We just couldn't believe what we were hearing. I mean, it wasn't just your usual run-of-the-mill shit sound. No, this was shit warmed over, and served on a bed of rice. Stale crunchy rice, at that.

Ok, maybe not exactly as I just described it.... but not far from it, either. I remember yawning, to give the internationally recognized gesture that means "This system is boring. Let's leave.". But before even saying anything myself, I had solicited an opinion from my guest on the room's sound, who was as unimpressed as I was. And we both couldn't get out of the room fast enough. I never did like Bryston, and now I remember why. I remember they were rare in offering lifetime warranties but really, who would want to be subjected to analytical renditions of music for the rest of their lives? Still, I would recommend this system to any nouveau-riche Hong Kong businessman that needs to impress their wealthy friends... and fast. To anyone who's looking to be moved by the musical experience though... keep looking. Although it has your typical ES quickness on transients, the Martin Logan/Bryston system was about as fun to listen to as a dissertation on macroeconomics... in Wolof. And presented an image larger than actual life. Maybe the problem originates with the design goal... And I quote:

Martin Logan CLX:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/21180446@N05/3417225184/



"Celebrating its 35th anniversary, Son Idéal has put together a system that can blow out candles on a birthday cake: the brand new Martin Logan CLX electrostatic speakers and the Bryston’s 1000 Watt 28B SST2 monoblock amplifiers. "


Great. Now if only it could convey music as well, you might have a reason to have a party.
 
Much as I hate to bag on something else, I'm not a Bryston fan at all and I have the same opinion as the fellow here.
 
Had quite a few friends tell me the room sounded as good or better than the 300000$ Focal room! They did tell me however the little dude did not have an easy time with the rooms acoustics and Martin Logan speakers are the pickiest of all out there so that may be a factor.

To each his own but this is the first time I have heard any bad comments about the Bryston 28 SST's. They have been winning awards left and right and are much cheaper than some of their competition. I have heard them with Thiel and it was amazing!

Maybe the CLX is not compatable with the Bryson! Best sound that ever came out of my Quests was with Bryston so there you go!

I wonder what competitor he works for???????????:devil:
 
Good point. While I am not fond of Bryston, I'd never go as far as saying it sounds "like shit"... It's not a sound I'm in favor of, but they certainly a good company that makes good gear. And I must say that their amps made a great partnership with the new small magnepans at CES.

It's pretty irresponsible to say things like that, especially in a show environment, but people do like to spout off.
 
I don't get the idea that it was only the fault of Bryston........hey maybe it is the speaker too! Never heard them yet but from all the readings I have done it has been a 50 - 50 split so if they are really that sensitive to electronics than maybe they are not what we are all used to.

Not every model of ML speakers was a huge hit!
 
Posted on the Stereophile website by some one who goes by the handle of Michigan J Frog (confirmed Beltist, if that means anything, never heard the term myself).

The term "Beltist" refers to a British guy called [url="http://www.belt.demon.co.uk/]Peter Belt[/url]. I remember about 15 or so years ago he had is 15 minutes of fame by presenting all sorts of weird--and, IIRC, very expensive--audio tweaks.

Personally, I always thought his stuff was a bit too "out there"...

And I can't believe I remember this stuff from so long ago! My wife, Jenny, suggests that devote too much of my grey matter to trivia. Perhaps she's right?! :)
 
The term "Beltist" refers to a British guy called [url="http://www.belt.demon.co.uk/]Peter Belt[/url]. I remember about 15 or so years ago he had is 15 minutes of fame by presenting all sorts of weird--and, IIRC, very expensive--audio tweaks.

Personally, I always thought his stuff was a bit too "out there"...

And I can't believe I remember this stuff from so long ago! My wife, Jenny, suggests that devote too much of my grey matter to trivia. Perhaps she's right?! :)

Peter Belt? Yeah - I remember too. Tell yer wife you're not alone. Mind you, I did forget about PRAT, when I think Tim brought it up. But it came back to me through the haze of time:D
 
I thought the system sounded great - but the room was probably a bit hard and the sweet spot was very narrow for such a large space. I thought the subs integrated very well and I think Bryston is good gear - but its not my personal "cup of tea" - I am a Brit in origin as well!

Hard to dissect a complete system, but I suspected the Bryston Dac was really good, the preamp probably ho-hum and the power amps full of steroids, but lacking finesse.

Son Ideal will be setting up the CLX's in a new room shortly and I will head over there to have a listen.

Having said that the CLX / Bryston sound was not sterile, was highly involving and I am sure system synergy can be worked out such that the CLX's are the package - I know they are next on my list!

Steve
 
i, personally, would never trust a guy that thinks putting safety pins on your shirt will make your stereo sound better. :confused:

Google "Enid Lumley" sometime for some really far out stuff. And then there's Geoff Kait of Machina Dynamica. His Teleportation Tweak wins the prize. :ROFL: On the other hand, his early vibration control products such as the Nimbus really work and are based on sound (pun intended) principles.

But criticizing someone's opinion of loudspeakers based on his subscribing to relatively unrelated concepts, however far fetched, is a straw man argument.
 
I haven't heard the system so can't comment on the accuracy, but reading the guy's writing it just sounds like he is more interested in listening to his own voice than seriously reviewing any gear. It is like he is going out of his way to write a snotty, trashy review for no obvious reason other than that he has never liked Bryston amps, while really giving no indication of what the system actually sounded like. Two long paragraphs of verbosity, but the only hint at what it actually sounded like was "boring" and "uninvolving." Yes, that's quite a review. Not.
 
Go figure

...and yet the Bryston with the Maggie 3.6r is a match made in heaven.
gregadd:cool:
 
Did any of you go to the Stereophile site to read this dude? I am not sure that he even liked anything!!! He pretends to be some sort of mega reviewer or something.

The first thing he mentioned was that he never liked Bryston in the first place so obviously he is biased from the start. I don't think any sensible reviewer starts off by saying that he hates the make before giving an opinion.

I may not be a pro at this hobby but I have listened to my fair share pf gear and at this level there is not much that is not good but sometimes not compatible. The CLX has a very small sweet spot comapared to any box speaker just like my Quests or any other model for that fact. If you don't get it right with the room, than you are screwed.

The Bryston 28b SST is NOT an amp on steroids. "Professional" reviewers are giving the amps more rewards that many out there in the last 2 years. This is the first time I have heard anything negative about them. Some think because they have that "industrial" look that they are not serious however they are one heck of a thriving company that is extremely serious and I don't recall of any other comapny where the VP is always on line answering questions with the average joe. Just go over to AudioCircle and have a look. James Tanner is quite a man and in my opinion he is the Jim Power equivalent.

You can never satisfy everybody and that is the fun part of this hobby but to call a brand shit because you don't like it (for whatever reason) is really weird!
 
Did any of you go to the Stereophile site to read this dude? I am not sure that he even liked anything!!! He pretends to be some sort of mega reviewer or something.

The first thing he mentioned was that he never liked Bryston in the first place so obviously he is biased from the start. I don't think any sensible reviewer starts off by saying that he hates the make before giving an opinion.

I may not be a pro at this hobby but I have listened to my fair share pf gear and at this level there is not much that is not good but sometimes not compatible. The CLX has a very small sweet spot comapared to any box speaker just like my Quests or any other model for that fact. If you don't get it right with the room, than you are screwed.

The Bryston 28b SST is NOT an amp on steroids. "Professional" reviewers are giving the amps more rewards that many out there in the last 2 years. This is the first time I have heard anything negative about them. Some think because they have that "industrial" look that they are not serious however they are one heck of a thriving company that is extremely serious and I don't recall of any other comapny where the VP is always on line answering questions with the average joe. Just go over to AudioCircle and have a look. James Tanner is quite a man and in my opinion he is the Jim Power equivalent.

You can never satisfy everybody and that is the fun part of this hobby but to call a brand shit because you don't like it (for whatever reason) is really weird!

Hola Chicos...I have to agreed with you danman. Also my liking is not necessary like yours. I have being in audio business almost all my professional life here in Costa Rica. Also I am a Bryston user. I do like, for the price that I paid, what I do get. Right now, I am using a 2B bridged for my center channel Motif...and again, I am very pleased with the neutral sound of Bryston. Again, it is my liking. I know that out there are better sounding amplifiers, but 20 years of warranty on any part is something that made me think of the quality control and the quality of the parts at their design. Just my 2 cents...happy listening,
Roberto.
 
Last edited:
ever tried on with the CLX?...me neither but use one with my CLSZ2 :music:

I've heard it, but it's just not my cup of tea. That doesn't mean you shouldn't investigate. I've always liked the matchup of Bryston and Magnepan much better.

However, at this level it is very subjective. We've got fans of every major brand here...

Before you spend this kind of money, you really have to hear it in your system, with your room and your wire.
 
Before you spend this kind of money, you really have to hear it in your system, with your room and your wire.

This concept should be enshrined somewhere as the first commandment in the audiophile religion. When it comes to shelling out your own hard-earned dough on expensive audio equipment, it really pays to hear it in your room in your system. Otherwise, you just have no clue how it will sound.
 
Back
Top