Spires vs. ReQuest (Possibly buyers remorse?)

[Gordon Gray]

Hi Tim,

Your thread has provided all of us with a connection to music, which is what this hobby is all about.

Wasn't counting and it doesn't matter anyways.

Thank you.

Gordon

 

[Sonnie]

When it was suggested to you to try high quailty separates, Athem doesn't fit the bill for that. Try something like a Pass Labs amp that many memebers on this forum use such as a 250.5X or a Simaudio Evolution amp or go tubes if you like, Cary, Mac, Blue Circle.You don't know what you are missing, and quality does matter as suggested to you. I am not too surprised at all that their wasn't much of a difference between your Athem separates and you receiver.

You really are joking, right?

The Anthem AVM50 and MCA50 are not high quality separates?

I will need to call it a night on that one.

 

[preston]

ha!

Preston... just so you know... I own Home Theater Shack.

Ha! I was actually going to state I was unrelated to that website as I have mentioned it a few times around here...guess that is obvious now.

 

[twich54]

I actually have six subs too, four in the back.

Sonnie it appears this thread has gotten alot of attention ! As I look back through the various responses and attached pics of your set-up I too think TonePub and JonFo are accurate with respect to your 'bass obsession'.

Also, from the pics you provided us your room 'looks' wonderfull and I suspect it provides a great HT experience but myself I have seen / heard countless times over, many a HT set-up that sucks when it comes to serious rendering of musical playback.

I, along with others firmly believe that it's better to build a killer two channel set-up first and then integrate the misc other channels later.

So, with all this being said you now (as you know) need to overcome this in a somewhat "bass ackwards" way, but hopefully with paitience and persistence you will succeed !

 

[Rich]

You really are joking, right?

The Anthem AVM50 and MCA50 are not high quality separates?

I will need to call it a night on that one.

He's not joking. When it comes to true quality two-channel playback, Anthem is just not in the same league with manufacturers like Conrad Johnson, ARC, Cary, BAT, Pass Labs, McIntosh, Sunfire, and many others. Not even close, actually.

I did an audition with the Anthem amp vs. the Sunfire amp, with everything else being equal and pushing the Vantages. The difference was night and day. The bass using the Anthem was pitiful, flabby, and bloated, but with the Sunfire, it was tight, deep and fast. The Anthem added a lot of coloration to the sound in the mids and highs; the Sunfire was fairly neutral in it's presentation. And I consider the Sunfire to be the lesser of the manufacturers listed above when it comes to getting great sound on your Logans.

It would appear to me that you are hoping to achieve great two-channel playback, but trying to accomplish this with a home theater mindset.

 

[DTB300]

The Anthem AVM50 and MCA50 are not high quality separates? I will need to call it a night on that one.

They are a step above the receivers mentioned. But not up to the level of some of the equipment Rich mentions. Anthem has always been known for their video prowess more than musical abilities. Anthem is a great start up the audio chain for improved sound, but one definitely can go much further. And your speakers will be able to demonstrate that if the room allows it.

The differences between a CJ, Pass Labs, ARC, BAT, Plinius, McIntosh and an Anthem, will be as great or higher than the differences between the Anthem and the receivers talked about.

If the Anthem was "high quality separates" as you noted/asked, why change back to something like the Onkyo? It was not high quality enough for you I am guessing???

 

[FISH_MAN]

I think there is a point of confusion here.when I started going up the "food chain" as you might say I thought there was a system that could do it all HT and 2 channel.what I have found is that these are two separate worlds and nobody seams to do them both really well that's why I have settled with the idea of having two different systems this has really made a huge improvement and fixed many dilemmas. I just thought I would share what may be so obvious to other members but not so to others.

 

[Rvega003]

As long as where doing the dick measuring to the tune of who has the biggest baddest amps how about someone pull out a pair of these

 

[Rvega003]

Or for that matter these

 

[Rvega003]

The point is, while I understand the comments toward Anthem's lack of musicality everyone forgets that an Anthem MCA20 retails for $1,400 and a Pass Labs X250 closer to $7000. If price weren't an option we wouldn't be on a Logan forum, instead we'd all own $250,000 Wilson Wamm7s.

 

[Beakman]

The point is, while I understand the comments toward Anthem's lack of musicality everyone forgets that an Anthem MCA20 retails for $1,400 and a Pass Labs X250 closer to $7000. If price weren't an option we wouldn't be on a Logan forum, instead we'd all own $250,000 Wilson Wamm2s.

No we wouldn't.

 

[Rich]

If price weren't an option we wouldn't be on a Logan forum, instead we'd all own $250,000 Wilson Wamm2s.

Wrong. Most of us are on a Martin Logan forum because we prefer electrostatic speakers. Few here would trade their Logans for a pair of Wilsons, I would guess (except maybe to sell the Wilsons and buy some better Logans).

You make a valid point though, albeit in a very crude manner, that quality does generally cost extra. However, there are a few members here who have put together very fine systems without spending too much money. Buying used helps. Buying quality that is priced reasonably (like a Sunfire, for instance), is another option.

If the O.P. spent as much money as he did on his Spires, center and surround speakers, his home theater room construction, Onkyo, etc. etc., I think he is probably in the league that he could spend a little extra and get a decent amp and preamp if he wants to maximize the ability of his Spires for two-channel sound.

 

[tonepub]

I think what a few of you are missing the point on is that the MartinLogan speakers are highly resolving and revealing. Compared to a lot of other speakers, they often are more revealing than many things that are comparably priced.

Add that to a speaker that definitely needs a fair amount of setup skill to sound good and you have a relatively inexpensive speaker that has the potential to sound amazing, yet because of that resolving power really needs much better amplification than their modest price suggests. I've put the CLS, Vantage and Spire in six figure systems and they have not been embarrassed at all, and that is not something I would do with a 25-8500 speaker from many other manufacturers.

So the MartinLogan speakers are something that's deceptively easy to get into, but a long path to really make them sound their best. I think most of you that have upgraded your gear and rooms quite a bit over the years will agree with me.

While you can get away with a mass market reciever/integrated or basic separates like NAD, Onkyo or Anthem, there is much more sound to be had with these speakers....

And the increase in performance is pretty linear until you've spent an unthinkable amount of money, so it just depends on what you'd like to accomplish.

Any system that has to do double duty as HT is going to be sacrificed in 2ch mode and vice versa, so that's up to you.

 

[Gordon]

The point is, while I understand the comments toward Anthem's lack of musicality everyone forgets that an Anthem MCA20 retails for $1,400 and a Pass Labs X250 closer to $7000. If price weren't an option we wouldn't be on a Logan forum, instead we'd all own $250,000 Wilson Wamm7s.

Doubtful I'd have any other speaker but perhaps the CLX.

To me it boils down to commitment. If one is going to spend $8.5K on a pair of speakers, shouldn't the rest of the gear be of at least the same caliber? Not to say that any gear is garbage, but garbage in, garbage out. If a person is not prepared to build a front end, why would one expect the speaker to magically transform the input? Can't turn a sows ear into a silk purse.

I may have it backwards, but I believe that the money should be spent on the front side, i.e. player, amp and pre-amps. I'd be willing to bet many people, including myself, have changed speakers before they have been pushed to the limit by the gear they own.

Gordon

 

[Sonnie]

Yep... speakers have always made the most impact on my system.

I have owned McIntosh, Sunfire, Lexicon, Earthquake, Anthem... but none of those made near the impact that upgrading to ML's did. I could not have been happier than I was with my Ascent i's and NAD receiver... or the Anthem gear, but there was no reason for me to spend the extra on the Anthem gear since the NAD did everything I wanted it to do. That is the sound I am chasing... and I am fairly certain I will get there without having to buy an expensive front end. I have heard a LOT of fine systems in my time, including Krell, Theta and many other very expensive high end systems... none... not ONE, bested my little ole NAD/Ascent i combo... and that is why I am pursuing it so diligently.

 

[Gordon]

Sonnie, I just clicked on your link. A very nice room. Nice job! I guess you like bass?

Gordon

 

[Bernard]

I have owned McIntosh, Sunfire, Lexicon, Earthquake, Anthem... but none of those made near the impact that upgrading to ML's did.

Another way of looking at it: perhaps the speakers you had at the time were not capable of revealing the differences in the amplification ?

 

[Rich]

Good point, Bernard. And the same one that Jeff made earlier up the thread. Martin Logans are ruthlessly revealing of their upstream components. Once they are your main speakers, what you are driving them with makes a big difference. Of course, this assumes that your room acoustics and speaker setup are sufficient to allow them to shine. Trying to dial them in along with big subwoofers in the corners of your room certainly isn't going to help achieve that.

 

[Sonnie]

Sonnie, I just clicked on your link. A very nice room. Nice job! I guess you like bass?

Gordon

Thank you!

Yeah.... love bass. I am about a 95% HT guy, so sub bass is right on up there in making the experience as real as possible.

Another way of looking at it: perhaps the speakers you had at the time were not capable of revealing the differences in the amplification ?

That may be... Snell B-Minors were my main speakers for years, but I have had PSB, JBL, Klipsch and the VMPS RM30's... of which none could come close to the ML Ascent i's. Actually none could come close to the Spires I have now. The Spires are better than anything I have owned, forgive the Ascent i's.

Good point, Bernard. And the same one that Jeff made earlier up the thread. Martin Logans are ruthlessly revealing of their upstream components. Once they are your main speakers, what you are driving them with makes a big difference. Of course, this assumes that your room acoustics and speaker setup are sufficient to allow them to shine. Trying to dial them in along with big subwoofers in the corners of your room certainly isn't going to help achieve that.

The subs are not effecting the Spires... already tested to make sure. The only thing that happens when I take the subs out of the loop is the bass goes away, which makes the system sound shallow.

For the record... I suspect that most of you here would be elated with the sound of my room as it is right now... for movies or music. For HT... I could see many of you going back and trying to figure out a way to add subs to your setup.

My suspicions of the culprit that is keeping me from finding that same sound I had with the Ascent i's will hopefully be verified within the few days... we will see.

 

[Rich]

Yeah.... love bass. I am about a 95% HT guy, so sub bass is right on up there in making the experience as real as possible.

If that is the case, disregard most of my previous advice. I was under the mistaken impression that two-channel music sound was important to you. But if you are 95% HT, then I imagine the Onkyo or the Anthem separates will work great for you.