Impact

[mandd]

As with everyone else here, I am on a quest.
I have been looking for the elusive "you are there" experience from my system. I stumbled into Martin Logans and it has taken me a big step closer. I love them. My quest is perhaps a little different from the normal quest because my wife shares it with me. Maybe not with quite the same enthusiasm (stupidity?), but she is with me. This is a good thing. But it does make it more challenging. Now I must satisfy two people's idiosyncracies. Fortunately we both like many things about the MLs. I think they will be our speakers to keep. But my wife brings one challenge that our MLs do not seem up to. She likes bass. She likes impact, weight and heft. We mostly listen to accoustic music, but sometimes we like to crank it up and rock. Our MLs don't rock very well. We have a capable sub, so it is not the bottom of the lows that is missing. It is the impact. The smack in the chest you feel from a drum hit. Her speakers are Klipsch RF-7s. They have two 10 inch woofers and a 100db/watt sensitivity rating. I don't like them, but I have to admit they kick butt. My MLs are the Purity model. They sound much better than the RF-7s, but they can't do everything the Klipschs can. No matter how I adjust the sub, or equalize (I have a 31band dual mono equalizer I can switch in), I can't get there with the Puritys. I am planning a ML upgrade in the future, but I have very little opportunity to listen. I trust in the ML sound, so I am not worrying about not liking any particular model, but I want to know which will give the most impact or slam. My budget is such that I can get used Vantages, or could wait and save for some used Spires or Summits if I can find a good deal, but that would be the max. A used Summit X will be too much. So here are my questions.
Will a Spire with its larger panel and larger woofer have significantly better impact weight than a Vantage?
Will a Summit, with its extra woofers and power have better impact than a Spire? Or are the extra parts used more for going lower and integrating with the panel?
Remember, I don't care about low, low base. The sub will take care of that. I can either run the ML full range or run a high pass filter as low as 50hz. I just want to know about the impact. (and what defines that, anyway? I'd love a good explanation if someone has it)
Thanks very much for any thoughts!
Mandd

 

[roberto]

Hola Mandd. All your questions are yes, yes, yes!. The Spires are one of the best designs from ML (this is my liking) and over perform the Vantage model...but the Vantage is a big step in ML design. It is a classic. For the first time, you have an electrostatic speaker with a sensitivity of 93dB/watt/2.83V. They will give to you the sound quality that ML offers. Compare it to a dynamic speaker like the Klipsch, you will get the smack that you are looking for, but keep in mind that the ML sound is totally different than dynamic speaker. You can have from your Klipsch a lot of noise, and level, but there is no size of the instrument(s), you have to guess or think of it. With the Spires, you have them in front of you with the right size and timbre. The Summits X are ahead of the Spires and offers better bass integration and are great as for room acoustic resonance tuning devices. You have 400 Watt/speaker just for bass sound!. Do not recommend to you the use of an equalizer!!! With it, you can change the sound of a grand piano to a pianola (small piano). Quality is better than quantity! Ask your dealer a demo, and then you can chosse the one that suites better to your liking and budget. Hope this can help, happy listening,
Roberto.

 

[tsv_1]

I agree with Roberto... mostly.

I think in the end though, the difference in the type of transducers (i.e. dynamic vs panel) is a gap that isn't easily bridged. What I mean to say is that that "slam" or smack-you-in-the-chest quality you find from beefy dynamic speakers like the K, is somewhat elusive from panels. I've owned many models of each kind (dynamic and panel) and I simply have never felt that transient impact (in the chest or any other body cavity) from panels the way you do from good dynamic models. This is just one insane person's feedback, so take away whatever you want... but I know (or I think I know) exactly what you and your wife are talking about, and while some panels can produce "it" to some extent, quality dynamic speakers seem to own that slam attribute, hands down. It's really the only quality I miss with panels. As Roberto suggests, everything else is far superior (IMO) from quality panels, especially electrostats, especially MLs, and especially CLX

Others in this forum may well disagree... that's what makes forums fun

 

[ronjor]

My Electromotions seem to "rock" just fine. Perhaps you could list some recordings that don't rock on ML. Then we could form an opinion.

Anyone remember the "West Coast Sound" vs the "East Coast Sound" when referring to speakers?

 

[Gordon Gray]

Todd,

Totally agree. Same is true with my MBL's. My sense is the way the sound is "projected" into the room. Stats, as well as MBL's send a more diffuse / multi-directional wave that will, by nature, have less impact than a highly directional / driver concentrated source.

If this person wants slam, he may want to look elsewhere.

GG

 

[tsv_1]

Todd,

Totally agree. Same is true with my MBL's. My sense is the way the sound is "projected" into the room. Stats, as well as MBL's send a more diffuse / multi-directional wave that will, by nature, have less impact than a highly directional / driver concentrated source.

If this person wants slam, he may want to look elsewhere.

GG

Right... I was trying to off-the-top rationalize why dynamic speakers offer better slam and I came to basically the same conclusion as you Gordon... but then I think, hey, if a panel is blasting a temporally and spatially coherent wall of sound at me with significant air being moved... why less slam? Maybe it is the dipole nature of panels, and the inherent "interference" from the back wwave... but then, if they are placed far enough out into the room, the back wave reflection should significantly lag the front wave and not interfere (substantially) with the transient wave-front that SHOULD slam a person in all the right ways. I don't know, but I suspect it's a combination of things... perhaps somewhere within the boundless virtual netherfields of Google resides some factually relevent discourse on the topic.

Also, and I hate to admit this in the event Justin is monitoring... but I do recall my Duettas stepping up to the slam-plate quite effectively. Perhaps not as aggressively as some dynamic models, but no slouches either if chest-pounding memory serves.

 

[Gordon Gray]

Todd,

Frankly, I'll error on the side of musicality (hearing instruments in a live environment and replicating that sound in your room) versus the "slam", which is "hi fi" at best.

GG

 

[User211]

Also, and I hate to admit this in the event Justin is monitoring... but I do recall my Duettas stepping up to the slam-plate quite effectively. Perhaps not as aggressively as some dynamic models, but no slouches either if chest-pounding memory serves.

I can't agree with Gordon's slam is hi-fi statement - simply because real instruments have genuine slam. Like a drum kit, for instance. A real drum kit has incredible slam.

Duettas will reproduce slam well. Whilst they don't suffer from "cone overshoot" which can exaggarate slam poorly in some dynamic systems, when slam is there in the recording, they will tell you about it. They are also capable of reproducing slam at really quite low frequencies without the aid of a sub.

I might be wrong about this, but I constantly get the impression that passing current over plastic film backed foil produces much stronger forces than an ESL diaphragm gets subjected to. Which is why the Apogee bass panel manages to go so low which such speed. The extra weight of the foil backed diaphragm is more than offset by this extra push/pulling power. This is only speculative theory, though.

If you do value slam, but like panel speakers, then check out True Sound Works on AudioGon. Rich Murray will sell you some refurbed Duettas from about $8,000 to $15,000 for Duetta Ultimates. These speakers will perform better than original Apogee releases due top the work done by Graz improving the ribbon technology, and also Rich has a few tricks up his sleeve regarding frame strengthening, magnet types etc. You may be able to find Duettas that have been re-ribboned relatively recently for $4-5000.

The unfortunate fact is the only way to believe what I am saying is to go hear a pair. And that may not be easy. But the testiments of Duetta Ultimate owner's provide some confidence that they are genuinely bowled over.

But if you really do like a punchy, possibly exaggerated transient led sound, then cones will be the way to go. Simply because they can achieve larger excursions than a pure ESL or ribbon speaker can.

A very punchy sound in a hi-fi system can become tiring pretty quickly if it isn't really telling the truth, however.

 

[tsv_1]

I can't agree with Gordon's slam is hi-fi statement

I can't agree with Gordon's slanderously quotationed, nay, derogatory use of the term "hi fi"

But I do agree with the emphasis on musicality... and that true-to-the-original-event-slam is part of that musicality... I just wish the CLX had more slam.

I don't like this thread anymore... it does nothing but highlight a shortcoming of my beloved transducers

 

[mandd]

I can't agree with Gordon's slanderously quotationed, nay, derogatory use of the term "hi fi"

But I do agree with the emphasis on musicality... and that true-to-the-original-event-slam is part of that musicality... I just wish the CLX had more slam.

I don't like this thread anymore... it does nothing but highlight a shortcoming of my beloved transducers

Yes, exactly!!!
I don't want to look elsewhere. MLs do so much right. But slam is a weak spot. And we don't listen to much of that sort of music--we are much more likely to be listening to unaccompanied cello than head-banger stuff. But there are elements of it in a lot of music. For instance, the drums scattered about in James Taylor's Fire and Rain or right after the awesome piano lead-in in Steely Dan's Home at Last on the Aja album. And it is all over the place in rock music. The beginning of Limelight and Tom Sawyer (Rush), lots of Genesis/Phil Collins, just about any AC/DC... It goes on and on.
Again, I'm not willing to give up the great musicality of the MLs, just to get this. We already have it with those blasted Klipschs that I hate. (okay, "hate" is a little strong) I just want to know which MLs will be best.
So from what I gather from what Roberto said, going up the line from Vantage to Spire to Summit (not X)will increase the 'slam' (I hate that word--it does sound hi-fi, but I too think the musical concept is...honest).
The absolute top of my budget will be used Spires or used original Summits. So I want to make sure I have this right and I'm hoping someone will confirm: Summits will be better than Spires, right? (in this regard) And, Summits will be a significant step up from Vantages. Cuz right now I'm thinking Vantages can be had in the $2K region and I miiiiight be able to get Summits for $4K. For me--this is a big difference. It will mean saving (waiting) and sacrificing, so I'd like to be able to have some confidence that it will be worth it. I don't have a dealer that at which I can listen anywhere near me. I think the nearest one is a 5-6 hour drive. And I don't feel right about spending a bunch of a dealer's time if I know I can't buy something new from them anyway--doesn't seem like the right thing to do. So I have to make a decision based on...you guys! (and I really do appreciate the input)

Thanks again!

 

[mandd]

I can't agree with Gordon's slam is hi-fi statement - simply because real instruments have genuine slam. Like a drum kit, for instance. A real drum kit has incredible slam.

Duettas will reproduce slam well. Whilst they don't suffer from "cone overshoot" which can exaggarate slam poorly in some dynamic systems, when slam is there in the recording, they will tell you about it. They are also capable of reproducing slam at really quite low frequencies without the aid of a sub.

I might be wrong about this, but I constantly get the impression that passing current over plastic film backed foil produces much stronger forces than an ESL diaphragm gets subjected to. Which is why the Apogee bass panel manages to go so low which such speed. The extra weight of the foil backed diaphragm is more than offset by this extra push/pulling power. This is only speculative theory, though.

If you do value slam, but like panel speakers, then check out True Sound Works on AudioGon. Rich Murray will sell you some refurbed Duettas from about $8,000 to $15,000 for Duetta Ultimates. These speakers will perform better than original Apogee releases due top the work done by Graz improving the ribbon technology, and also Rich has a few tricks up his sleeve regarding frame strengthening, magnet types etc. You may be able to find Duettas that have been re-ribboned relatively recently for $4-5000.

The unfortunate fact is the only way to believe what I am saying is to go hear a pair. And that may not be easy. But the testiments of Duetta Ultimate owner's provide some confidence that they are genuinely bowled over.

But if you really do like a punchy, possibly exaggerated transient led sound, then cones will be the way to go. Simply because they can achieve larger excursions than a pure ESL or ribbon speaker can.

A very punchy sound in a hi-fi system can become tiring pretty quickly if it isn't really telling the truth, however.

Sadly, I think that Apogees (and Maggies, and Soundlabs, and Quads, and...) are not possible for several reasons. The first, and only reaon that matters, is the WAF. On a scale of 1 to 10 it was 0. I took her to listen to Maggies. She saw them and said, "Why are we listening to these--we're not getting them." Not "The seem really big", not "I don't like how they look", not "They won't fit in the living room very well." It was "We're not getting these." It didn't matter if they were free.
But she likes the looks of the Logans.

 

[mandd]

Hola Mandd. All your questions are yes, yes, yes!. The Spires are one of the best designs from ML (this is my liking) and over perform the Vantage model...but the Vantage is a big step in ML design. It is a classic. For the first time, you have an electrostatic speaker with a sensitivity of 93dB/watt/2.83V. They will give to you the sound quality that ML offers. Compare it to a dynamic speaker like the Klipsch, you will get the smack that you are looking for, but keep in mind that the ML sound is totally different than dynamic speaker. You can have from your Klipsch a lot of noise, and level, but there is no size of the instrument(s), you have to guess or think of it. With the Spires, you have them in front of you with the right size and timbre. The Summits X are ahead of the Spires and offers better bass integration and are great as for room acoustic resonance tuning devices. You have 400 Watt/speaker just for bass sound!. Do not recommend to you the use of an equalizer!!! With it, you can change the sound of a grand piano to a pianola (small piano). Quality is better than quantity! Ask your dealer a demo, and then you can chosse the one that suites better to your liking and budget. Hope this can help, happy listening,
Roberto.

Thanks Roberto,
Don't worry. I use the equalizer sparingly, only a db or 2 change here or there. I got it mainly to have control over the bass. It will not be in the system permanantly. But I must say, it does not seem to degrade the sound quality. We did a test where we listened with it, making careful mental notes about things like the soundstage, imaging and noise level, and then I took it out. When we listened again, we could not tell a difference. Now that is not an immediate a/b comparison, but I am confident that it doesn't degrade that sound significantly.

 

[roberto]

Thanks Roberto,
Don't worry. I use the equalizer sparingly, only a db or 2 change here or there. I got it mainly to have control over the bass. It will not be in the system permanantly. But I must say, it does not seem to degrade the sound quality. We did a test where we listened with it, making careful mental notes about things like the soundstage, imaging and noise level, and then I took it out. When we listened again, we could not tell a difference. Now that is not an immediate a/b comparison, but I am confident that it doesn't degrade that sound significantly.

MMM... do this: when you had decided the eq setting, and you are sure that you did all the eq adjustments, bring the volume knob of your preamplifier down, wait about 30 seconds to 1 minute, then rise the volume knob to a pleasent listening level...listen carefully all the nuances of the music passages, that you did select for this test. Then bring again the volume knob down, and take off the eq, then rise the volume knob to your pleasent level, (for sure it would be more than with the eq on) and listen the change of the stage, size of the instruments, the location of the bass player and drummer, the size of the musician(s)... and please tell us your findings...happy listening,
R.

 

[mandd]

MMM... do this: when you had decided the eq setting, and you are sure that you did all the eq adjustments, bring the volume knob of your preamplifier down, wait about 30 seconds to 1 minute, then rise the volume knob to a pleasent listening level...listen carefully all the nuances of the music passages, that you did select for this test. Then bring again the volume knob down, and take off the eq, then rise the volume knob to your pleasent level, (for sure it would be more than with the eq on) and listen the change of the stage, size of the instruments, the location of the bass player and drummer, the size of the musician(s)... and please tell us your findings...happy listening,
R.

I will try that.
I don't think I mentioned, that the test I did for the sound degradation was with the equalizer settings all at flat. The only thing that I was looking for was if the addtional connections, cables and circuitry of equalizer messed things up. They didn't, to any discernable (by us) degree. But I didn't try it with any of the controls moved off of zero.
As I said, any adjustments I have made, are subtle, so it will be an interesting experiment.

 

[User211]

But she likes the looks of the Logans.

Actually my wife loved the look of Logans. I lived with them for close to a couple of decades, Boring really, but I loved them to bits. Still do - probably lasting affection for them is one reason I still post here.

However, a nicely finished Apogee turning up on the doorstep isn't a bad visual experience. See below.

TBH in your situation I'd go for 2nd hand Summits if I could muster the cash. They will better Vantages by some considerable margin IMHO. I like rock and electonica a lot, and though Logans won't excel with slam, they'll still sound pretty ace.

In all honesty, I think nicely finished Duettas look pretty good. But beauty is in the eye of the beholder. After having lived with these for a while, I honestly find them a better overall compromise than the Logans I owned. But I have the benefit of a dedicated listening room to tuck them away in. They are big and imposing. But they do deliver the sonic goods in spades.

 

[jmschnur]

I find that 2 good subs plus Audyssey xt32 and the pro kit give both great musicality and impact with my Vantages and stage in my system.

Great for operas on blu ray, Shostakovich on sacd, and blues via my squeeze touch

 

[tsv_1]

I concur with our friend from across the pond... assuming your room isn't too small, and if your choice is limited to vantage/spire/summit, I would go with the summit as well. I owned the Summit-X prior to the CLX and I loved them. They actually out-slam the CLX (due in part to their excellent woofer integration I have to imagine)... but the CLX out-everything-elsed the summits. So goes the step function.

Having said all this, there's another thread that "2B" started where he seems wildly enthusiastic about some open baffle speakers from Hawthorn. In that thread we are being told that high-end electrostaic choherency and transparency are perfectly married to excellent transient response across and wide freq response... my curiousity is piqued as I've never owned OB (dynamic) speakers albeit these do use a ribbon element for the upper registers... so not strictly conventional cone/dome/coils from top to bottom.

 

[rasmaudio]

SLAM, coherent and transparent

This combo gives one (all) the slam, coherency, transparency and
huge sound-stage that one could want. They require a large room
with a great distance from all walls. This combo beats the CLX in
bass slam and sound-stage (the CLX,s are anemic in bass). Also
many bass traps are required to eliminate comb effects and nulls.
Martin Logan Summits and Magneplanar Tympani IV bass, a match
made in heaven.

 

[Hocky]

What frequencies are these impacts existing in? It seems to me that they are mostly in the range of the woofers on ML stuff and if that is the case, there really isnt a good excuse. Fwiw, I think that my summits have pretty good impact, but nothing like some of the higher dollar dynamic speakers that I have auditioned.

 

[jmschnur]

Crossing over my Vantages at 45 or so with my dual jl 112s makes a big difference versus no subs.

This with acoustic guitar, blues, modern jazz, etc.