Thinking the unthinkable!

[velcro22]

Guys

I am thing the unthinkable…

I am set up all around with Martin Logan speakers, love the transparence and detail but I am considering some Meridian DSPs. In phases of course, I would like to move to maybe some 8000 in front and some 7000 or 5500 in the back.

Has anyone done a similar switch from planar speakers? Can anyone share some experience moving to DSP and maybe back to ML?

I am planning to go for an audience but the closest dealer is pretty far away so I have to wait….

I mainly listen classical music & jazz and watch movies about 60/40.

Thanks in advance and please no flame, I really need your help!

Al

 

[DrJRapp]

You may stray, but you will come back. We always do......

 

[kwr]

My sister in law has the Meridian 5500 and we also have listened to the speaker down in the Meridian range. They sound thick and congested cf our Monoliths. Only strong features are dynamic ability and bass thump. She feeds hers with a CEC transport.

Not a direction I would head in for music. Mind you the best ht setup I have heard was all Meridian.

Kevin

 

[IWalker]

This is generally a good place to avoid getting flamed I think That's why I like the place so much.

I like the mids and top end of logans much more than any box speaker I've ever heard...to the point that there's never been any other real temptation for me...obviously you have that temptation though, so my opinion is less valid

You could keep 2 logans in the front and get a 5-7.1 meridian surround system...and swtich between the two for music and movies Best of both worlds!

 

[Hipgrncln]

I too am thinking about trying the Vandersteen's Quatro's. Smooth speakers and the Sub is synched.

Bob J

 

[Craig]

I traded in my Odysseys for a pair of Sonus Faber Cremonas and I enjoyed those Cremoas for about a year. The same dealer then let me trade in the Cremonas with full credit towards a pair of Summits. I still have the Summits and have no desires to part with them but I would like to eventually get a pair of Cremona Auditors for a second 2-channel system.

The Cremonas were nice but I definitely noticed a higher level of audio detail with the ESLs. Very good dynamic speakers are certainly worth trying and you'll gain a better overall perspective each types attributes when have spent some time listening to both types. Personally I prefer ESLs but I also like to listen to dynamics once in a while for a change.

A couple of things learned was that dynamic speakers were just as critical with positioning and setup as the ESLs. Also, that room acoustics are very important regardless of the speaker being used.

 

[velcro22]

DrJRapp

That seems like a good story! What did you go for?

 

[JonFo]

A good friend has a an all Meridian setup (G68 with 5500 L/R and 5500HC, 4x M33’s) with a velodyne DD-15 in a very nicely designed and treated HT. Every time I go to his place, it sounds great, but then I come home and listen to my MartinLogan rig (fronted by a Meridian 568) and there is no thought of moving to dynamic speakers.

For cone based speakers, the DSP Meridian’s are very, very good. DSP 8K’s are out of this world (in more ways than one), but they just can not touch a well set up ML system.

Mind you, in my book, unless you are doing active crossovers and doing really fine-grained time alignment, it’s not ‘well set up’. But then, I’m picky that way

 

[DavidG]

Yup, Meridian DSPs are awesome kit. Amazingly designed, superbly engineered and brilliant sounding - until you listen to MLs.

For a cone based speaker system, I don't think there's much out there to compete with the DSP range.

I'm running my MLs off a completely Meridian front-end (except the Vinyl bit) and find this sounds way better than an all Meridian system. I'll be honest and say it was a very tough decision, but the Meridian / ML combo just sounded much more pure than the DSP system when I was auditioning.

Cheers,

David

 

[Statman]

My two cents

I've owned Acoustat 2+2's, Magnaplanar MG IIB's and Martin Logan Sequel II's and Odysseys. I also have just switched from the Martin Logan Odysseys to Wilson Watt/Puppy7's. There are areas that both speakers excel in. The ML's will give you that tall,big image and glorious midrange that they are know for! The coned speaker will most likely be slightly more efficient and give you better dynamics because of the cones? One thing that I have noticed since switching is that the Watt/Puppy's are very good at reproducing the micro/macro dynamics. Both speakers image very well, and both excel with depth of stage, this being more equipment related than speaker only. The idea that you'll stray but come back isn't always true? Maybe in relationships but that's more to do with losing everything in a divorce? Just rambling away I need to stop. If you desire conventional speakers then go for it, you are the one buying them and having to live with the decision.

 

[edwinr]

Some of the active loudspeaker models can sound quite imnpressive. I throughly auditioned the ATC SCM range before I settled on the Summits. (I have never heard the Meridians) The ATC's sounded very impressive I admit, in isolation. But compared with the ML's they sounded congested and slow and at higher levels, a little glarey. The Summits just took everything on to another level. In my view the Summit does everything the very best cone speakers can do, but without the glare and listener fatigue you get from long term listening. Just a suggestion, before deciding on the Meriidians - audition the Summit and say, the Vista.