What if ML unveiled a new hybrid electrostatic speaker this year? How about one that closes the $ gap between the Vantage and Summit? What if it had the Summit Panel with just one down firing woofer? Should the woofer be powered or not. What if it cost around $8K? Would this make sense?
What if ML released a new high-end (non CLX) speaker?
- Thread starter Craig
- Start date
Help Support MartinLogan Audio Owners Forum:
sleepysurf
Well-known member
If the Vantage and Summit both have DUAL woofers, how could a single woofer (10" or even larger?) possibly compete? Frankly, I don't see any performance, or marketing gap, between the Vantage and Summit. There is clearly room for the new flagship CLX, and lots of new stuff (like we're already seeing) at the lower end of the line. Eventually, I'm sure they'll introduce a Summit II and Vantage II.
attyonline
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2005
- Messages
- 350
- Reaction score
- 1
Vantage does not have dual woofers.
sleepysurf
Well-known member
Oops, for some reason I thought it the Vantage had DUAL 8" woofers! My bad! I still don't think there is a wide enough gap in specs/performance between the Summit (24-23k Hz), Vantage (34-23k Hz), and Vista (43-23k Hz) for yet another model.
As for a single down-firing woofer, I don't see how that could add to performance.
Now, design a Summit/Descent (or Depth) hybrid, with their TriLinear BalancedForce approach, and that would be interesting (but probably ugly as sin)!
As for a single down-firing woofer, I don't see how that could add to performance.
Now, design a Summit/Descent (or Depth) hybrid, with their TriLinear BalancedForce approach, and that would be interesting (but probably ugly as sin)!
Last edited:
amey01
Well-known member
Personally, I don't think there is any gap between the Vantage and Summit. I'd like to see the Statement come back / more heavily promoted as what high-end company has a speaker range top out at $USD10,000?
Even though I could never afford it, it would make ML a true high-end company.
Even though I could never afford it, it would make ML a true high-end company.
I heard from a reliable source that they are actually going to do this. It seems to make sense to me for ML to produce an in between model. I think it's a big jump to go from $5k to the $11K for Summits.
I think they could make that look good but you might be better off with the subwoofer cabinet being separate from the panel to give you more flexibility with speaker/sub placement.
sleepysurf
Well-known member
Absolutely true! Just playin' around with "new" hybrid ideas!
How about a wall-mounted Script with a 6-8" woofer, for surrounds? (Oh, I forgot, guess that's why they're already marketing the Motif vertically mounted
)
Last edited:
I agree. How about a single-panel design using a larger panel than the Summit, that goes down to about 200 hz. or so, to be sold in conjunction with a separate subwoofer optimized for that crossover point. You buy a pair of panels and a pair of subwoofers and maybe even use some sort of software program to optimize locations of each in your listening room. Combine this with a really high-end external Crossover network and electronics module and sell the whole package for somewhere around $20,000.
Burke
Well-known member
I think what you just described is the Vapor ware CLX.
Actually it sound more like Rodger Sander's model 10a, except the woofers are still attached to the panels.
TrumpetDoug
Well-known member
My ideal config that would slot below the Summit would be:
Summit panel on hybrid box with single 10” driver optimized for 60Hz to 300Hz range.
Modular crossover that can be field replaced with choices of basic passive with bi-amp options, a ‘no crossover’ module requiring external bi-amp and crossover, along with an option for a factory supplied ‘speaker processor’ based on a DEQX or Audyssey platform.
So you’d have the following tiers of models:
Basic system, no crossover (assumes external procs and crossovers, requires bi-amp). ~$7K
Basic passive system, optionally bi-ampable (via switch). $8K
Full active system with external processor (requires bi-amping) $10K
All of the above assume (or require) a subwoofer setup (which most people do use these days). Why pay for infrasonic performance if the lows are getting redirected to a sub anyway?
This would put the cost of a fully functioning stereo set (including a $3K sub) at close to $10K. Not much less than a Summit, but less than a Summit + sub.
A full out active system would only be $13K, not much more than Summit.
With easy bi-amp support in every version, it should be easy to get excellent performance as well.
The active versions would really be awesome, as the built-in room correctors could adjust all the delays and EQ’s to perfection with little user know-how. Just read reviews of NHT’s DEQX based speaker solution for examples of how people react to the power of that config.
Summit panel on hybrid box with single 10” driver optimized for 60Hz to 300Hz range.
Modular crossover that can be field replaced with choices of basic passive with bi-amp options, a ‘no crossover’ module requiring external bi-amp and crossover, along with an option for a factory supplied ‘speaker processor’ based on a DEQX or Audyssey platform.
So you’d have the following tiers of models:
Basic system, no crossover (assumes external procs and crossovers, requires bi-amp). ~$7K
Basic passive system, optionally bi-ampable (via switch). $8K
Full active system with external processor (requires bi-amping) $10K
All of the above assume (or require) a subwoofer setup (which most people do use these days). Why pay for infrasonic performance if the lows are getting redirected to a sub anyway?
This would put the cost of a fully functioning stereo set (including a $3K sub) at close to $10K. Not much less than a Summit, but less than a Summit + sub.
A full out active system would only be $13K, not much more than Summit.
With easy bi-amp support in every version, it should be easy to get excellent performance as well.
The active versions would really be awesome, as the built-in room correctors could adjust all the delays and EQ’s to perfection with little user know-how. Just read reviews of NHT’s DEQX based speaker solution for examples of how people react to the power of that config.
Rich, good thought on this, but that crossover point is way to high for a sub that will be placed away from the panels. the sound coming from the 'sub' would be quite localizable.
For $20K, I'd expect a line array of six 6" drivers flanking a 48" x 13" panel, crossing over at 50 or 60Hz to a sub.
Basically, a mini-statement.
And same as above, a DEQX or Audyssey based processor to do crossover and room correction, and you;d be set
SundayNiagara
Well-known member
How about just a smaller 'stat?
Sure thing, it's called the Vantage or a Vista
The panels they make currently are:
- 44" x 12" - Summit
- 40" x 9" - Vista, Vantage
- 28" x 9" - Purity / Source
Not much room between the Summit and the Vantage panels.
If anything, I think they really need to return to 48" long panels. Not so much for SPL, but for giving a taller window of coverage.
Yeah, that's a good point. I guess c.a.p.'s right. What I really want to see is the CLX. Single panel down to 30 hz. then cross over to a sub.
That sounds pretty cool, too. Jonathan, maybe you need to go into business modding old MLs. You take a Prodigy or an Odyssey, remove the woofer module and add a midbass line array, and some high-tech electronics, and then sell it as a package with a pair of Descents. Talk about Mini Statements! Then again, why should you have to do this? Why the heck doesn't ML do this?
SundayNiagara
Well-known member
Like Quad?
SundayNiagara
Well-known member
"Yeah, that's a good point. I guess c.a.p.'s right. What I really want to see is the CLX. Single panel down to 30 hz. then cross over to a sub."
If it were possible to get 30hz bass out of a 'stat, then unless you were into pipe organ bass, why would you need a sub?
If it were possible to get 30hz bass out of a 'stat, then unless you were into pipe organ bass, why would you need a sub?
