Quantcast

can any home receiver power martin logan electrostatic speakers like source

MartinLogan Owners (MLO)

Help Support MartinLogan Owners (MLO):

spkrdctr

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 23, 2017
Messages
79
Reaction score
21
Location
Clearwater Florida USA
I'm thinking what does it cost to feed that monster horse and who mucks out its stall? I'm not doing it! :) The only other horses I have seen that huge are the Budweiser Clydesdales. When they have the six of them trotting by is actually shakes the ground. Amazing. Beautiful horse.
 

Stefan_DR3

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 11, 2013
Messages
57
Reaction score
4
Location
Canada
I have a home theatre running 5.2.2 svs system with svs pb 3000 dual.
can any receiver power my next purchase?
pair of martin logan source or other small martin logan electrostatic speakers ( used of course)
can the new 8 k denon , marantz, yamaha, run them? or is it just anthem?????
Since you are in Toronto, keep an eye out for a used Bryston, Classe or Anthem 5-channel amp like the MCA50 or Statement A5 on canuckaudiomart. Given the rising cost of aluminum they will never lose their value. You can use whatever receiver to power any remaining satellite channels. Generally the newer receivers are more like computers with so much digital crap crammed in there is no room for discrete analog components and large power supplies.
 

Chops

Well-known member
Joined
May 3, 2016
Messages
143
Reaction score
32
Location
Lakeland, Florida
Chops, do you have any online info from any of these guys on what their beliefs are on current? I'd like to do some reading and see where they are coming from. Thanks for any help.
As I said before, email them. I need not supply you with anything more than that.
 

Chops

Well-known member
Joined
May 3, 2016
Messages
143
Reaction score
32
Location
Lakeland, Florida
Chops, I checked out PS Audio as I have listened to Paul for quite awhile. His amps are much cheaper and still put out big power. He verified that RMS power ratings are the same across the board. Watts are watts and will deliver the current required to meet the RMS rating. It is Ohms law.
I can assure you Paul never said "watts are watts". And it's quite a bit more than Ohms Law.

And for anologies...

You can have a modified 2.0 liter four cylinder Honda engine cranking out 600 hp, and you can have a giant 15 liter Cummings inline-6 diesel engine also churning out 600 hp. Which one are you going to choose to haul a trailer loaded with 80,000 lbs of cargo? (think of the trailer being a pair of ML electrostats)
 

Chops

Well-known member
Joined
May 3, 2016
Messages
143
Reaction score
32
Location
Lakeland, Florida
Oh, BTW... I sold my Aegir amps and am now using a 22 year old Roksan Caspian Mk I amp, rated at 70 watts @ 8 ohms and 120 watts @ 4 ohms (40 watts LESS than the mono Aegir amps). The real kicker here though is that it is capable of delivering over 50 amps of current. This amp plays extremely well with my 22 year old SL3's, and at much higher volume levels with ease and dynamics for days.

 

mentorron

Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2005
Messages
21
Reaction score
5
Location
canada
When I first saw the specific original M/L Aerius units that I bought from a high end audio store (used) in 2000, they were in a used equipment hallway being run by a used Denon compact system similar to the photo I attached (I don't remember the actual model). They sounded just fine, but were running very softly as background for the store's entryway and accessory/cash desk. They sounded good enough to snap them up. The store talked me into the other equipment you can see in my profile to run them. (a Rotel preamp/processor and a demo Adcom 5 channel power amp: everything else they had was out of my price range, but they said the M/Ls would sound just fine, in their opinion.)
 

Attachments

Last edited:

Rob83

Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2020
Messages
7
Reaction score
1
I just bought my first pair of ESL-X speakers. I was surprised how easy they are to drive. Out of curiosity I tried them directly on my Marantz SR7015 just to see what happens. Well, the thing had absolutely no problem driving them. I must admit I didn’t had the surround stage hooked up so it was working in stereo mode. Because the more speakers you hook up the less power remains per channel so that’s something to really keep in mind. Now the Marantz is running in preamp mode which is a nice feature of the Denon/Marantz 2020 lineup. Got a Sherwood Newcastle A965 as an external amp which ran them fine as well but is now running the surround and atmos stage. I’ve build 2 DIY amps with B&O ice power 125ASX2 class D modules for bi amping the electrostats. These have a bit more punch to them although they sound somewhat on the clinical side. But that’s just a personal preference as I intend to switch between the receiver and a sweet sounding tube preamp. The 125ASX2 module can be bought as a kit or fully assembled on AliExpress or eBay for about 200 dollars. They are known to even drive Magnepans with ease so if you want to go the external power amp route these will give you some serious bang for your bucks.
 

Chops

Well-known member
Joined
May 3, 2016
Messages
143
Reaction score
32
Location
Lakeland, Florida
a Rotel preamp/processor and a demo Adcom 5 channel power amp
Adcom is known for supplying decent current, hence why your ML's sound good with it. The GFA-6000 is capable of delivering full power in to all channels without output sag, unlike most HT receivers where the more channels that are active, the less output you get from each channel. The lightweight power supplies in those HT receivers can not keep up with the demands, hence the power drop.


I’ve build 2 DIY amps with B&O ice power 125ASX2 class D modules for bi amping the electrostats. These have a bit more punch to them
That's because of the current capabilities that digital amps provide. That current is the extra "punch" you're hearing. This is precisely why pretty much every powered subwoofer on the market these days utilizes a digital amp.
 

mentorron

Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2005
Messages
21
Reaction score
5
Location
canada
Adcom is known for supplying decent current, hence why your ML's sound good with it. The GFA-6000 is capable of delivering full power in to all channels without output sag, unlike most HT receivers where the more channels that are active, the less output you get from each channel. The lightweight power supplies in those HT receivers can not keep up with the demands, hence the power drop.
The Adcom is not in the upper echelons of power amps, as it cannot deliver twice the power into 4 ohms, but the 150 watts RMS/channel it can deliver in 2 channel mode far exceeds my needs at the output levels I listen at (and is mostly classical chamber music and light jazz combos). I do not use them for movie soundtracks, etc. That is left for my other 5.1 system which has a 10" powered Paradigm sub, Denon receiver and Mission speakers. Adcom photo and specs attached.
 

Attachments

Last edited:

Rob83

Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2020
Messages
7
Reaction score
1
Nevertheless, don’t overestimate the requirements. Recent models average at 6 ohms with 90+ dB sensitivity and aren’t terribly hard on amplifiers. Any decent receiver from the likes of Denon and Marantz (X4700H and up, SR7015 and up) will be just fine. Only when your surround stage requires some serious power with low impedance and low sensitivity should you require external amplification.
Had I known they would be so easy to drive I probably wouldn’t have gone through all the trouble to get 11 channels of external amplification.
 

spkrdctr

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 23, 2017
Messages
79
Reaction score
21
Location
Clearwater Florida USA
Rob83, yes you are seeing that driving the ML speakers with a lowly receiver is usually no big deal. When you are only using 3 watts per speaker it is really nothing for the recievers to drive. They have the few amps that are required. Now if you were listening to music at concert levels or home theater at theater levels then yes you would use a lot more of the receivers capability. Some act like a 80 watt per channel receiver can't feed 3 watts to each speaker in a 5.1 or a 7.1 system. They can easily handle it if the receiver can handle 6 ohms on a regular basis. Most decent quality receivers can handle 6 ohms without a problem. 4 ohms is where the break comes in receivers. You have to usually shop high end equipment to get them rated for 4 ohms without a fairly large current limiting effect. In other words if an 8 ohm unit has 100 watts and at 4 ohms it has 140 or so, then it is not really a serious 4 ohm unit in my mind. It can play into 4 ohms but you will be limited at louder volumes as you would be giving up a huge amount of headroom. I don't know anyone that regularly listens at 95+ decibels. That is quite loud and in going higher it becomes an assault on your ears (in my opinion). Just food for thought.
 

spkrdctr

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 23, 2017
Messages
79
Reaction score
21
Location
Clearwater Florida USA
Chops, I "think" he is saying that at his listening volume that those receivers can easily handle the load. At 3 watts the current required is quite low. But in a large room with loud music, of course that is when you have to spend the money to get the high (or very high) current equipment. In reality most (I know saying most is very broad brush) listening is done at such low volumes it is easily handled.
 

Rob83

Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2020
Messages
7
Reaction score
1
Chops, I "think" he is saying that at his listening volume that those receivers can easily handle the load. At 3 watts the current required is quite low. But in a large room with loud music, of course that is when you have to spend the money to get the high (or very high) current equipment. In reality most (I know saying most is very broad brush) listening is done at such low volumes it is easily handled.
What I’m saying is that it actually went quite well with the Marantz SR7015 powering a set of ESL-X’s. From the top of my head it’s rated at about 165 watts per channel, 2 channels driven at 6 ohm. Beyond 30db below reference level the distortion became audible. I didn’t try going beyond that as it’s loud enough to have the neighbors call the cops. Would I prefer to use the internal amps? No, but for someone who can’t afford buying some expensive audiophile power amp after buying a set of electrostats, using a receiver that costs about 1/3 of that would not be a terrible idea.
 

nathantw

Member
Joined
Mar 20, 2008
Messages
15
Reaction score
0
Location
San Francisco
I'm late to this party but for FWIW I have a pair of Sequels that I purchased in October, 1988. I changed the panels sometime in the late 1990s. I've been driving them with an Adcom 200 Watt GFA555 amp and they've sounded great. A few years ago I hooked it up to a Sony receiver. The difference was like night and day with the receiver sounding horrible. The receiver struggled to just play music. Granted the receiver wasn't close to 200 Watts but it still shouldn't have sounded so bad. So I personally wouldn't hook it up to a receiver again. As long as I have the dedicated Adcom amp that's what I'll use.
 

Mirolab

Active member
Joined
Oct 3, 2018
Messages
28
Reaction score
10
Location
Long Beach, CA
Granted the receiver wasn't close to 200 Watts but it still shouldn't have sounded so bad.
Nathan.... I too owned Sequels back in '89 and have similar memories.... they sounded awful with light amplifiers, even at low volumes. The best sound I ever got from them was with a PS Audio 200C amp, a great monster amp that sadly was plagued with DC offset problems. I kept the Sequels for about 6 years, and they started sounding dull and tubby. This was pre-Google and user groups, and I just sold them. I now have old SL3's and they are less fussy than the Sequels, but still need a hefty amp to sound good.
 
Top