power requirements of CLX vs CLS

[zaphod]

hi,

with all the CLX for cheap available (well - two ) and my CLS needing a panel replacement soon, i'm feeling strong temptations...

i'm looking for some real world experience on the handling needs of the CLX vs the CLS. right now i'm powering the CLS with a pair of 100 watt SS meitner mono blocks that have no trouble at all with the impedance or other thirsts of the CLS.

i also have a pair of Mc60 tube monoblocks that i drive the CLS with from time to time and in the new HT will probably be the permanent amps for the CLS.

it would be real interesting to drive the bass panels with the SS meitners and the mid/high with the tubes, but the CLX seems to have no bi-amp capabilities.

So i guess i'm stuck with one amp driving each CLX, but i really don't want a CLX purchase trickle down into an amp upgrade

 

[amey01]

I wouldn't worry so much about power requirements as much as amp quality (or lack thereof) that the CLX will reveal.

I guess that means a CLX upgrade could well trickle down into not only an amp upgrade, but a preamp upgrade and a source upgrade as well!!

I've just got back from hearing the CLX with a Clearaudio Statement - now that's the source you're gonna need......

 

[Kenscollick]

Those little Meitner Amps were very good in their day. Ed Meitner would usually demo them with Apogee Duettas. While I dont have any real world experience with the CLX until Tuesday I plan on using my Krell FPB 400cx. Electrostatics present a difficult load and do like to see plenty of current. I would think that you will be satisfied with the Meitner for a while.

 

[roberto]

hi,

with all the CLX for cheap available (well - two ) and my CLS needing a panel replacement soon, i'm feeling strong temptations...

i'm looking for some real world experience on the handling needs of the CLX vs the CLS. right now i'm powering the CLS with a pair of 100 watt SS meitner mono blocks that have no trouble at all with the impedance or other thirsts of the CLS.

i also have a pair of Mc60 tube monoblocks that i drive the CLS with from time to time and in the new HT will probably be the permanent amps for the CLS.

it would be real interesting to drive the bass panels with the SS meitners and the mid/high with the tubes, but the CLX seems to have no bi-amp capabilities.

So i guess i'm stuck with one amp driving each CLX, but i really don't want a CLX purchase trickle down into an amp upgrade

Hola Zaphond...you can not compare the CLS vs the CLX...CLX is the best speaker that I had ever heard. The piano is real life like, and the cymbals are just there...dymanics, true 3D soundstage, and the feeling of the musician(s) playing four you is breath taking. The coherence, the harmonic texture, the timbre, the stage is so good, that blows away my CLSIIz. I love my CLSs, and I have being living with my sound many years, and I had listen many good speakers...and always kept my CLS...now I think it is time for me to do a change...CLX is my goal now. All of you know my problem with the subs with my CLSs...and it is the same thing with the CLX...much better bass integration, much better detail, much better dymanics, much better distortion free sound overall...I do trust my ears...happy listening,
Roberto.

 

[zaphod]

Thanks for the replies - i know that Ed M used Accoustats for a lot his testing - and in fact had them in the company listening room. so those little wooden blocks can drive a load. it sounds like i'm going to have to haul a pair to the local retailer and give them a try to see how things mesh up.

 

[User211]

I'd PM Jeff (Tonepub) and ask what he thinks... he doesn't seem to be posting at the mo.

I know he was using a 30 Watt Luxman with the CLX for a while... and he must have passed more amps through them than just about anyone.

 

[User211]

I've just got back from hearing the CLX with a Clearaudio Statement - now that's the source you're gonna need......

Hold on a mo Adam, I thought you said vinyl wasn't even hi-fi... has the Clearaudio changed your mind?

 

[babydoc]

hi,

with all the CLX for cheap available (well - two ) and my CLS needing a panel replacement soon, i'm feeling strong temptations...

i'm looking for some real world experience on the handling needs of the CLX vs the CLS. right now i'm powering the CLS with a pair of 100 watt SS meitner mono blocks that have no trouble at all with the impedance or other thirsts of the CLS.

i also have a pair of Mc60 tube monoblocks that i drive the CLS with from time to time and in the new HT will probably be the permanent amps for the CLS.

it would be real interesting to drive the bass panels with the SS meitners and the mid/high with the tubes, but the CLX seems to have no bi-amp capabilities.

So i guess i'm stuck with one amp driving each CLX, but i really don't want a CLX purchase trickle down into an amp upgrade

I am driving the CLX's with a Pass X350.5 with no problems. That might even be overkill but I had used the amp with my Summits. The CLS is an entirely different issue and actually a greater load problem than the CLXs. The one thing to consider is that the CLXs are a very revealing loudspeaker and will expose flaws or colorations in any upstream component. There are a number of very neutral-sounding SS amps, including Bryston, Plinius, and Pass that might work well with these speakers. It is a trial and error process at best.

 

[amey01]

Hold on a mo Adam, I thought you said vinyl wasn't even hi-fi... has the Clearaudio changed your mind?

No - I just accept that some people would appreciate it - and given the cost, it was just a bit of toungue-in-cheek.

I know analogue is great - I just don't think vinyl is the appropriate carrier for it. Vinyl and the Clearaudio certainly gives you a hint of the capabilities - some of which were extraordinarily above and beyond what digital can do, but it is still spoilt by surface noise, distortion and pops and clicks (which sound more like booms and bangs on a system of that calibre).

 

[User211]

Vinyl and the Clearaudio certainly gives you a hint of the capabilities - some of which were extraordinarily above and beyond what digital can do, but it is still spoilt by surface noise, distortion and pops and clicks (which sound more like booms and bangs on a system of that calibre).

It's a shame no one has invented a compact, high res, noise free, domestically acceptable analogue system. Hopefully, before I die, someone will do...

I live in hope...

Back on topic...

 

[JMAUSGP]

Zaphod,

As a little background....

I had 4 Stylos and 1 Logos for 12 years, in fact I re-paneled them last year and they are still going strong and really still sound good as new. I stumbled around using several different amps until I found Yamaha Class A amps. The Yamahas sound great but wow were they hot on the HT system. They lasted 11 years. Then last year I decided to get Summits and I found that several people on this forum recommended Sunfire amps. I was spending alot on the Summits so I was restricted on the Amp and the Sunfire seemed like a very nice compromise. I ended up getting a Sunfire TGA 7400 for the HT and a Sunfire TGA 5400 for the Summits. They have lots of reserve power and they make HT sound amazing and they run cool to boot.

As I built out the 5.1 music system with the Summits and the Sunfire 5400, they proved to be a very nice combination. But then I got hooked on CLX and so far I have been running the Sunfire TGA 5400 with the CLX, Vistas, Logos, and Descent i. And I thought I was happy.:music:

Then after several discussions with TonePub I decided to take a look at the Simaudion Titan 5 channel amp. (He convinced me I was not happy)

I am now embarking on a demo fight between a Sunfire TGA 5400 which doubles down from 400 watts at 8 ohms to 1600 watts at 2 ohms and is dead quiet and runs very cool versus a Simaudio Titan which is A/B class power and doubles down from 200 watts at 8ohms to 800 watts at 2 ohms, it runs much warmer in fact it can be considered for energy credits as it keeps the house warm, but the Titan is suppose to be livelier than the Sunfire.

Both will run the CLX with no issue. These are both very good Amps with lots of happy ML owners in each camp. Once I determine which my ear prefers the other Amp will go on Audiogon unless you are perhaps interested in one or the other. They would go up for sale, priced at 2K for the Sunfire and 4.5K for the Simaudio.

All I can say is go for the CLXs, you will have a ball tweaking them for the room and equipment, but you knew that right.

 

[Jungle Jack]

Hello,
With consideration to the CLS, amplifier requirements vary according to generation.

With the CLS I, you could use a fairly low powered tube or low powered Class A SS to good effect. Much of this has to do with the original CLS never dipping below 2 ohms. Unfortunately, with this easier load , came to many, not enough bass definition.

The CLS II/IIa to many, resolved the perception of "one note bass" while at the same time exacting some fairly stringent requirements on the accompanying amplifier including a dip below 1 ohm in the uppermost frequencies. Heavy duty SS would seem the only way to fly so as not to get HF rolloff or attenuation.

If I were to purchase a pair of CLX's it would be a losing battle for me not to have a "trickle down" mega upgrade. When you know you have some of the most resolving speakers on the Planet, it would be crystal meth addictive to see what each upgrade brings.
Cheers,
ML

 

[C.A.P]

Hello,
With consideration to the CLS, amplifier requirements vary according to generation.

With the CLS I, you could use a fairly low powered tube or low powered Class A SS to good effect. Much of this has to do with the original CLS never dipping below 2 ohms. Unfortunately, with this easier load , came to many, not enough bass definition.
This is One 180* opposite of the truth. The CLS , CLS I , CLS Ia were amp terrors. They would regularly test any amp to its limits. That was the single biggest factor when purchasing these at the time. I also think it was the single biggest reason why they never took off as well. The amps of that day that could drop to 1/2 to 1 ohm were 3 times the cost of the speakers them selves. Also combine that with mini sub sat boom and you know have a speaker that is horribly hard to drive and needs expensive amps and a real room to play well. The CLS was before its time and the advancement in today's amps make it a world class speaker. The bass on the CLS I series some have said was better but you needed the amp to bully it out of them. I know I can get 40 hz out of mine with no issues. The panels were Changed from pure horizontal to both vertical and horizontal with seperate bass sections to try and address some of the issues of full range ESL.

The CLS II/IIa to many, resolved the perception of "one note bass" while at the same time exacting some fairly stringent requirements on the accompanying amplifier including a dip below 1 ohm in the uppermost frequencies. Heavy duty SS would seem the only way to fly so as not to get HF rolloff or attenuation.

The CLS II series had a whole different filtering system to address the impedance curve and bass issues. Martin Logan went as far as twin power supplies to try and ease the load on amplifiers. They also changed the panel design to try and get the tight bass without taxing the load on amps. They were fighting a loosing battle as the CLS II series was going up against multi speaker mini sub sat systems with big processors to fill the room(Lexacon, Yamaha, Proceed). The CLS II series is much easier to drive with amplification, However; its still will benefit from the high current amps of today. Remember ,"garbage in garbage out" The ClS series in general was the single most revealing speaker of upstream components. It has NO crossover . Only filters to help ease the curve of the spectrum. There were deferring opinions from either tube users os SS users as to what versions are the best. However; once they are driven right either owner would not part with them until death.

If I were to purchase a pair of CLX's it would be a losing battle for me not to have a "trickle down" mega upgrade. When you know you have some of the most resolving speakers on the Planet, it would be crystal meth addictive to see what each upgrade brings.
Cheers,
ML

Having listened to the CLX 4 times with 4 different combination of amplifiers and upstream components. I can say with solid footing that to run the CLX you will benefit from a great high current amp that is at least 2 ohm stable. That being said, Its definitely a fair bit easier to push than the CLS series. Now this comparison is somewhat skewed as the last CLS went off the line almost 25 years ago, and the CLX has every upgrade of today. It goes to show you that the CLS was ahead of its time and can stand with some of today's best speakers.

I personally think the CLX needs a BIG room with BIG amps to get what it is capable of. Now can a 50 watt tube push them . Yes! But you are missing out on what this speaker can do. Would you put cheap tires on a Ferrari? Yes they will work but it wont handle like its potential.

 

[Jungle Jack]

Hello,
I have read dozens of articles about the CLS's. I have listened to every generation as well. The description of the amp load was derived from the Stereophile reviews. Here is an excerpt from Jack English's review:
"Considering it an upgraded version creates problems. For example, the CLS I could be effectively driven by a high-quality, low-powered tube amp. The impedance curve ran from 4 ohms at 20Hz through 32 ohms at 1kHz to 2.2/2.3 ohms at 18 to 20kHz. The impedance curve on the CLS IIA has less swing or variance over its range—it's nominally rated as a 4 ohm speaker—but it dips to a low of less than 1 ohm at 20kHz! With a low-powered tube amp this will result in a noticeably attenuated top end. Even higher-powered tube amps like the ARC Classic 120 will tend to attenuate the extreme upper frequencies."
Wish I knew how to make things in that kewl red print.
ML

 

[roberto]

Hello,
I have read dozens of articles about the CLS's. I have listened to every generation as well. The description of the amp load was derived from the Stereophile reviews. Here is an excerpt from Jack English's review:
"Considering it an upgraded version creates problems. For example, the CLS I could be effectively driven by a high-quality, low-powered tube amp. The impedance curve ran from 4 ohms at 20Hz through 32 ohms at 1kHz to 2.2/2.3 ohms at 18 to 20kHz. The impedance curve on the CLS IIA has less swing or variance over its range—it's nominally rated as a 4 ohm speaker—but it dips to a low of less than 1 ohm at 20kHz! With a low-powered tube amp this will result in a noticeably attenuated top end. Even higher-powered tube amps like the ARC Classic 120 will tend to attenuate the extreme upper frequencies."
Wish I knew how to make things in that kewl red print.
ML

Yes. I like tubes driving my CLSs, because I like the sound of the tubes, and also because I can choose the impedance at the amplifiers speakers connectors. I can choose the sound that I like...as an example, right now I am driven my ClsiiZ at 8 ohm tab, and I like what I get there. If I use it at 4 ohm, some magical lower midrange and mid range is lost. There is where most all the music is...and still have clear cymbals...perhaps less pronounced with the 4 ohm tabs, but I get a nice truly 3 D sound stage. It is a matter of liking. There is no harm to the amplifier to drive the load of my CLSs at 8 ohm. My friend, who now is enjoying the CLX, he is using the Reference 110 from Audio Research, and also he is driving them at 8 ohm after several days of experimentations...he is very happy of what he is getting, and he told me that he is rediscovering all his music (he had Summits before). All I say is trust your ears...and quality watts versus quantity watts is my advise...happy listening,
Roberto.

 

[FISH_MAN]

I personally think the CLX needs a BIG room with BIG amps to get what it is capable of. Now can a 50 watt tube push them . Yes! But you are missing out on what this speaker can do. Would you put cheap tires on a Ferrari? Yes they will work but it wont handle like its potential.

I heard them with my MC275 and it "worked" but that was about it. the
2301's did a much better job. I would also agree that they need a really big room making them fit in your listening room would not be adequate for these speakers.my feelings are that many of these speakers sold will never be beard to their maximum potential purely because of the rooms they will be placed in.
every effort put towards this new model will be met with reward

 

[tonepub]

Here's the amps I've had the best luck with on the CLX in no particular order:

Conrad Johnson Premier 350
Conrad Johnson ET250
Sanders Monoblocks
McIntosh MA252
Nagra PSA
BelCanto E500's

Here's a few I've had good luck with, but reduced dynamics due to
lower power:

BAT VK-55SE
Prima Luna Dialog 7's
Red Wine Audio 30.2 signature

Here's a few integrateds I've had good luck with:

SimAudio Moon i-7
Rega Elicit
Luxman L-590A II
McIntosh MA7000

 

[zaphod]

awesome insights guys.

my room to be (in the new house come june 26th) will be 13' by 22' by 8' the height and width are set in stone (support wall and basement ceiling height can't really be changed...) and the lenght is a bit flexible, but 22 is about the best i can get.

so that is 2200 cubic or so, not that bad.

the new room really has me thinking that the CLX jump might be a good thing. i just have to convince the other voting member but she's coming around slowly.

i really wish that i could bi-amp the CLX - then i'd know for sure that my current amplification would meet the needs.

sigh.

 

[twich54]

my room to be (in the new house come june 26th) will be 13' by 22' by 8' the height and width are set in stone (support wall and basement ceiling height can't really be changed...) and the lenght is a bit flexible, but 22 is about the best i can get.

so that is 2200 cubic or so, not that bad.

.

Interesting..... my room is a foot and a half wider and one foot longer and I really think it would be marginal ?

 

[FISH_MAN]

awesome insights guys.

my room to be (in the new house come june 26th) will be 13' by 22' by 8' the height and width are set in stone (support wall and basement ceiling height can't really be changed...) and the lenght is a bit flexible, but 22 is about the best i can get.

so that is 2200 cubic or so, not that bad.

no way! forget about that room for the CLX it just is not big enough and the wrong proportions. the only way and this is a maybe and I mean maybe is putting them on the long wall but then your head would be close to the back wall
these are my room dimensions and I would never use them in this room. sorry man I know it is sad but I think its the truth