Used vs New - First time ML owner need help deciding

[Robertof Warsaw]

Hi, I am new to this forum and not sure where this query should be posted, so I will start here. I am in the process of revamping my entire HT & 2-Channel system. I have always owned conventional "box" type speakers but last year I heard a friend's Martin Logans and OMG what a sound, so different from what I am accustomed to hearing. Since then I have been in demo mode, both ML's and Maggies. I have come across an opportunity to purchase a used ML system that is 10-11 yrs old, single owner and, visually, in excellent condition. It consists of the following:
2 @ Ascents, 2 @ Aerius, 2 @ Scenarios, 1 @ Cinema center & 1 @ Depth Sub for $5000 total. The owner was referred by a dealer in Kansas City that lives about 9 hours away. Before I commit to the 18 hour round-trip to listen to this system with the intent to purchase I wanted some feedback from experienced ML owners on the following:

1) How does "AGE" impact these speakers? According to the owner they have never been "pushed/clipped", but they have also never been serviced.
1A) Will I have to invest a lot of $'s on rework/upgrade in the near future?
2) Is this a good value purchase? $5K for a circa 2000 speaker system or would I be better off investing the $5K, and more, in a newer set of ML's. I know this is a highly subjective question, but I have no experience with ESL's and am looking for some general guidance. Any help would be appreciated. Regardless, one way or another I am joining the ESL, or Planar, family. Cheers, Robert :bowdown:

 

[timm]

Personally I'd take the 5k and get some used summits. Then cobble together the rest for HT.

 

[97ChameleonTA]

You don't mention which ML's you listened to at the friend's house so it's hard to ascertain what you would be comparing your potential purchase to. You will find that there are people here that feel there is a distinctive sound difference between the older ML's and the new generation. I personally don't feel there is any difference in the panel sound. There has been some definite improvements in the bass response, output and the crossovers of the newer generation, but as you already know, that will cost you. The question is, is the price difference worth the extra cost to have an equivelant arrangement? You would be best served by being able to audition both. Depending on which ML's your friend has, it may be just a matter of finding someone close to you on this forum that can give you a listen.

From a personal perspective, i'm quite happy with my first foray into the ML world. I picked up a pair of Ascents, Script i's and a Cinema i for a great price, augmented that with a Depth i, and couldn't be happier.

 

[Hocky]

1. The panels will last a long time if taken care of, but there is always the possibility of needing to order new panels from ML.
2. I think that price is high. In my opinion, prices are like this: Ascent - $1500, Aerius - $750, Scenario - $800, Cinema $600, Depth $800. That is $4450. And I think buying them all together should afford you a fair discount off of that number.

If it was me, I would look at newer stuff. If you deal search on the used market, you'll be surprised at what you can come up with for $5k.

 

[tsv_1]

Personally I'd take the 5k and get some used summits. Then cobble together the rest for HT.

I'm with Tim on this one... you will be thrilled with Summits and probably still have some money left over to pick up some decent surrounds... it will be a longer road (if budget is limited) but a much more enjoyable trip

Welcome

 

[timm]

Man. Just get the summits. What kind of amplification do you have?
I just look at it this way. For your money you have an opportunity to get an ex
ML flagship that many have said compares very favorably to the summit x.

 

[scodo68]

You could always have the panels rebuilt.

 

[churchill]

Yes, I've seen used Summits going on Audiogon from about $4200 to $4900!

 

[Robertof Warsaw]

Thank you ALL for your input. I asked for some guidance and that's what I'm getting. First to answer a few questions posted in this thread:

1) The MLs I first listened to at my friends were a pair of the Spires in a 2-channel configuration driven by a McIntosh tube amp and pre/pro combo. He is more of an audiophile / purist than I am, with a bigger budget. He has a completely separate HT system, I need a system that will do both.

2) Currently I have an Onkyo TX-NR906 A/V receiver driving the Polk Audio RTI series in a 5.1 configuration. I plan on selling this equipment as soon as I complete my new setup. I recently purchased an Anthem P-5 multi-channel amp and a Cary Audio Design Cinema II pre/pro for my new system.

Now for a few more questions:

It appears the majority in this forum feel I should invest the $5K, or more, in the newer ML line, specifically the Summits or perhaps I upgrade to the Spires. That would basically deplete my current budget, I am a married man, and force me to incorporate the new MLs as main L/Rs into my existing Polk speakers until the next upgrade. How well would these two different speaker technologies work together in a HT 5.1 mode? Does anybody have any experience with arrangement?

In addition, a few members have informed me that I could always replace or rebuild the panels on the older speakers, for a substantial cost. HOCKY, you indicated the panels will last a long time if taken care of. How long is a long time? 5, 10, 15 years? Can you elaborate?

Lastly, how different are the new MLs vs the older models? Was this a result of a "change in direction" or a gradual evolution over time? How much of a difference is there in the Bass response and the X-overs?

Thanks again to all of you for your time and help. I can't wait to make a decision so I can just enjoy the music:music:

 

[cyclone]

You also mentioned Maggies. I just heard the 1.7s the other day for $2000.00 new they have to be a contender.They'll hold their value well too.

 

[Hocky]

In addition, a few members have informed me that I could always replace or rebuild the panels on the older speakers, for a substantial cost. HOCKY, you indicated the panels will last a long time if taken care of. How long is a long time? 5, 10, 15 years? Can you elaborate?

Lastly, how different are the new MLs vs the older models? Was this a result of a "change in direction" or a gradual evolution over time? How much of a difference is there in the Bass response and the X-overs?

Thanks again to all of you for your time and help. I can't wait to make a decision so I can just enjoy the music:music:

I think it really depends on how often they were vacuumed, the environment they were kept in, etc. I used to have some Aerius that were like 15 years old and were perfect. I sold them to a friend and they're still working perfect today. However, some have had panels fail in just a couple of years.

Having had Aerius, Ascent, and Summits, I will agree that they do sound different. In my opinion, they sound significantly better. Some prefer a speaker like the prodigy for its HUGE panel compared to the current market stuff because of its presentation size. I personally have never heard a prodigy.

As far as mixing technologies, I wouldn't be afraid of mixing as long as you go all electrostatic on the front end. Having a box center channel will make you crazy. Surrounds/rear surrounds are not nearly as important (assuming you don't listen to a lot of 5 channel music) to be the exact same speaker.

 

[Len44]

Well, I think your getting really good advice here. FWIW, I started with Aeons (Terrific!), then up to Ascents (great presence, ML sound, Loved em), then Summits (a bit "tighter" and well-integrated powered woofers).

ALL were (are) wonderful speakers, and your decision is a tough call, given all the circumstances involved. Bottom line, I'd probably go with a good pair of Summits for under $5K, then gradually build around that setup for your HT. And, you can always grab a used Cinema center for around $600-700.

In any case, good wishes on what will surely prove to be wonderful adventure into the electrostatic world of fine listening!

 

[F=ma]

What percentage of your listening will be music, and what percentage will be HT? That might help you answer your question also.

Personally, my 5.1 system was built primarily for music - so I have small Polk Audio surrounds. I have a pair of Vantages I bought used, and a Motiff and Descent I also bought used.

There's no way I'd want to listen to music through the surrounds...because once I heard the way the Vantages build a soundstage at my listening position, I knew I'd never listen to music in the same way again.

The surrounds are there for ambiance. I don't think anyone watches a movie and critically listens to the surrounds...maybe people do. I'm not a huge movie fan.

I do very much like having my Descent though. I don't think I'd trade my Vantages and Descent for a pair of Summits without a sub - but I haven't heard the Summits, so there's a chance that would change. For what HT use my system does though, it's really nice to have the solid foundation the Descent provides.

Good luck with the journey! Enjoy the process, and don't feel like you have to rush into it. I certainly wouldn't make an eighteen hour journey for the equipment you listed, priced as it is.

 

[F=ma]

Oh yeah, I'm also a big fan of buying used over new. The Martin Logan speakers I have would have cost nearly $10,000 new. I've got about $4800 in them, and I can't imagine them sounding any better if they were brand new.

 

[tsv_1]

I can't imagine them sounding any better if they were brand new.

Indeed, when buying used you not only save on $$$ but you also benefit from the complimentary break-in service as well (assuming the seller hasn't actually broken them during break-in )

BTW, F=MA... IMO, you absolutely do not need a sub (in most cases) when the summits are in the room. I was (almost literally) blown away by their LF abilities in my largish listening room. They go down plenty deep with plenty of ooomph. I had the Xs, but from what I gather the non-Xs had the same LF extension and power.

Cheers

 

[Robertof Warsaw]

Thanks again for the additional feedback. As much as I hate to pass up what I "perceive" as such a great deal, the general consensus on this forum is impossible to ignore. Invest my $$$'s in the Summits. I asked for guidance, I got it and I am going to follow it. In addition, I will take HOCKY & LEN44's advice and add a ML center channel speaker to my shopping list and continue to use the Polk speakers as surrounds for HT. The 5.1 config is primarily for HT.
Now I need to decide on cable upgrades; XLRs vs RCA, Interconnects and Speaker, any suggestions? I am currently using some overpriced Monster 12 gauge speaker wire and interconnects; my Onkyo does not have the balanced outputs.

 

[timm]

Considering you heard the spires and liked them I think this is a great decision. The ascents are great but sound completely different to my ears.
Speaker cable- I like audioquest because they are reasonably priced and I think they are well constructed. Can usually find some great deals I have never gone balanced on my system but I would think it should be an all or nothing approach (which includes your cdp). Again just my humble opinion

 

[tsv_1]

Thanks again for the additional feedback. As much as I hate to pass up what I "perceive" as such a great deal, the general consensus on this forum is impossible to ignore. Invest my $$$'s in the Summits. I asked for guidance, I got it and I am going to follow it. In addition, I will take HOCKY & LEN44's advice and add a ML center channel speaker to my shopping list and continue to use the Polk speakers as surrounds for HT. The 5.1 config is primarily for HT.
Now I need to decide on cable upgrades; XLRs vs RCA, Interconnects and Speaker, any suggestions? I am currently using some overpriced Monster 12 gauge speaker wire and interconnects; my Onkyo does not have the balanced outputs.

Hi Robert... you've made the right decision

As for cables, there are several very affordable options out there to consider. There are those that would scoff at monoprice.com, but I've tried them in the past and they've been at least as good as Monster (actually better)... they also rival entry level stuff from AQ, Kimber, and even Transparent and all at almost unbelievably low prices. I'm using one of their TOSLINK cables right now. What a ridiculously good value - amazing construction/terminations for the money!

There are also companies like BlueJeans, AntiCables, Morrow Audio, and more that are all worth checking into.

WRT balanced interconnects, IMO, use them wherever you can in your system. They are inherently immune to typical stray common mode noise that can sneak in almost anywhere in your system. They are especially useful for longer runs (over 2 meters).

Cheers

 

[F=ma]

BTW, F=MA... IMO, you absolutely do not need a sub (in most cases) when the summits are in the room. I was (almost literally) blown away by their LF abilities in my largish listening room. They go down plenty deep with plenty of ooomph. I had the Xs, but from what I gather the non-Xs had the same LF extension and power.

Cheers

Thanks for that information. Someday perhaps the economy will improve enough that I can justify upgrading what at present time completely satisfies me.

A content audophile. Is that an oxymoron?

 

[twich54]

Robert, as the general feeling of the group goes I too feel you're looking in the right direction. With that being said I'm casting my vote for a used pair of Spires and to add the last bit of lower octave 'punch', a good sub. This combination will equal (or better IMO) Summitt's alone.