Soundlabs vs. Logans

MartinLogan Audio Owners Forum

Help Support MartinLogan Audio Owners Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

David Matz

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 13, 2006
Messages
928
Reaction score
0
Location
Wilmette, IL
Has anyone ever heard the Soundlabs? How do they compare to the Logans?

I think they are a much smaller company, but the speaker owners are just as rabid as we are. For some reason, there are very few reviews of them, even after they released what they claim to be a revolutionary "px" technology. The magazines just ignored it, and I wonder why... I also think they require a large room, as they speakers are Huge.

Please post your thoughts and impressions. Thanks.
 
I've never had the pleasure of hearing SoundLabs, but I'd sure love to! I bet those monstrous ones sound amazing.
 
No - but check the Really Tasty Gear thread for someone that has... and a pic of said objects.

I've got this preconceived notion they are gonna sound like huge Quads. Why? Because the have to fight through material, and have no dynamic drivers. The scale will be immense, the tone pure, but for dynamics, they'll suck pretty badly. Just guessin', could be wrong, but I doubt it!
 
not bad

Has anyone ever heard the Soundlabs? How do they compare to the Logans?

I think they are a much smaller company, but the speaker owners are just as rabid as we are. For some reason, there are very few reviews of them, even after they released what they claim to be a revolutionary "px" technology. The magazines just ignored it, and I wonder why... I also think they require a large room, as they speakers are Huge.

Please post your thoughts and impressions. Thanks.

Their following is quite rabid. If you had a scale of the ML, Quad and Soundlab based on warmth, I place Sounlab cool, Quad warmer, ML warmest. A friend of mine had the hybrid dynastat. One of the most neutral speakers I ever heard.
The magazine don't ignore Soundlab. I think Dr. West is kind of stingy with the reveiw samples.
Definitely worth a listen
 
MLs being more of a hybrid and Soundlabs being more of a full range stat, I would assume the biggest difference would be coherence.

Have not personally heard SL, but I have pondered this question many times before, David.
 
Their following is quite rabid. If you had a scale of the ML, Quad and Soundlab based on warmth, I place Sounlab cool, Quad warmer, ML warmest. A friend of mine had the hybrid dynastat. One of the most neutral speakers I ever heard.
The magazine don't ignore Soundlab. I think Dr. West is kind of stingy with the reveiw samples.
Definitely worth a listen

Gregadd,

Thanks for putting things in perspective. When we did the Sanders - Summit shootout, the Summit came across much warmer than the Sanders also. The Sanders sounded very "neutral" also.
 
MLs being more of a hybrid and Soundlabs being more of a full range stat, I would assume the biggest difference would be coherence.

Have not personally heard SL, but I have pondered this question many times before, David.

Joey,

Good to hear from you again. In my thinking, I was actually comparing it to the CLX, not the hybrids, so thanks for clarifying that.

When does your lease run out, so you can move to a speaker-friendly new place?
 
I'd like to chime in here, though I am out of date....I have owned 4 pair of Sound Labs over the years, three pairs of A1s and one pair of Pristines. My last pair were purchased over ten years ago, which is why I am out of date, as my pairs were prior to the increased efficiency and PX panel technology.

Sound Labs and Martin Logan are a bit like chalk and cheese, as the English say, that is, completely different. The Sound Lab is a hand made, uncompromising product. Dr. West believes passionately in the concept of the truly "full range" ESL, although the newest version of their one hybrid, the Dynastat, is supposedly excellent. I would take issue with the fact that the SL is on the "analytical" side. I always found them to be much "warmer" than MLs. I also don't think that they sound like big Quads (sorry Justin). There are no dust covers, and the spandex cloth is very sheer, although there are those who remove them. They are fantastically detailed but in a musical way - lots of info coming through but never etched sounding. The bass, even back then, was truly stunning. When properly set up, the ESL bass went low, low, low, but with lightning speed and seemingly fewer room issues (less bloat). The SL patent for using distributed resonance (i.e. dividing up the huge panel into many smaller facets of different sizes, to spread the bass resonance over many frequencies to enhance bass response in an accurate way, rather than the dreaded "one note" bass of a large panel resonating at a single frequency) is extremely clever, and it works. Dynamics were not of the Wilson or Avantgarde class, but I found them as dynamic as most cone speakers. This issue has improved with the new technology panels.

The only area in which I preferred my CLSs was in imaging. The old SLs radiated in a 90 degree pattern, which gave a wide listening window but a softer (many would say more natural) image. I love pinpoint imaging, and I think the new SLs which have a 45 degree dispersion would achieve that. Some SL owners still specify that they want theirs built with the 90 degree geometry.

I loved the way the SLs put music into the room. It just seemed to flow in an unforced manner. In short, I found the SLs, even in their earlier form, the most satisfying musical transducers I have ever heard.

So why do I now own a pair of Summits? In a word, practicality. I was single in my SL days. They are HUGE, and completely dominate a room. Even as a bachelor, I found them imposing. They weigh a lot, and cannot be crated, uncrated, etc on your own. Since the panel is of a piece, if there is a problem, the whole thing has to go back to Utah, which involves disassembling the frame of the speaker and shipping the core back to the factory. In the old days, there were lots of problems and you really had to suffer for your art. The new panels are much improved in this regard. However, I am moving to the UK and the thought of a failed panel there is too onerous to bear. By contrast, picking up a new Summit panel in the states would be no big deal. Also, I am into multichannel, and the thought of a passel of SLs in your room.....

Nonetheless, if I had a large dedicated media room, an understanding spouse and plenty of dough, I would have an all Sound Lab system, no question.....

Mark
 
I agree with Mark....

The SL is a pretty outstanding speaker, and I'd definitely go with the "warmer than ML" assessment. Same for quads for that matter... Way warmer than any ML I've ever owned.

Just goes to show everyone hears differently.
 
very diplomatic of you...

I agree with Mark....

The SL is a pretty outstanding speaker, and I'd definitely go with the "warmer than ML" assessment. Same for quads for that matter... Way warmer than any ML I've ever owned.

Just goes to show everyone hears differently.


We may hear differently. However everything is not a matter of opinion. Somebody has to be right or wrong.

I have used some very romantic amps with ML(early CJ & Moscode). Soundlabs with Fourier OTL and quads usually with Audio Research.
Since all three speakers are extremely transparent maybe we were listening to the associated components.

BTW you think you'll get a chance to try the big Rogue Audio monoblocks with your CLX?
Gregadd:cool:
 
Last edited:
We may hear differently. However everything is not a matter of opinion. Somebody has to be right or wrong.


Since all three speakers are extremely transparent maybe we were listening to the associated components.

BTW you think you'll get a chance to try the big Rogue Audio monoblocks with your CLX?
Gregadd:cool:

Nope. When we test speakers, we try a minimum of 6 amps and with the CLX, I have probably tried about 15 different amps with them...

No Rogue in our future, sorry.
 
I would take issue with the fact that the SL is on the "analytical" side. I always found them to be much "warmer" than MLs. I also don't think that they sound like big Quads (sorry Justin). There are no dust covers, and the spandex cloth is very sheer, although there are those who remove them.

No probs - I was just guessin', as I said...

When you said 90 degree, though, a memory flicked back of a hi-fi show in London - we are talking over 10 years here - quite a bit more, in fact. But I am sure it was none other that a pair of Soundlabs - with no grills on! Actually, they looked ultra cool without the grills... but they were huge - not the biggest SLs, though, I am sure.

It is just too long ago now to be able to provide an account of sonics, and all too brief, but I do remember being very impressed.

Thanks for the memory...:)

In fact they looked markedly like these poor things, but possibly more circular, hard to tell from the pic...:mad: Plug 'em in, someone:)

Now that's what I call poor room acoustics:)

Not a flattering pic - they looked much better in real life.
 

Attachments

  • soundlab.jpg
    soundlab.jpg
    65.2 KB
Last edited:
Ironic

I agree with Mark....

The SL is a pretty outstanding speaker, and I'd definitely go with the "warmer than ML" assessment. Same for quads for that matter... Way warmer than any ML I've ever owned.

Just goes to show everyone hears differently.

You find ML the coolest. Interesting. Yet you choose the CLX. That gives us a little insight into your musical preference. I guess I'll go back and re-read your review of the CLX. Have you ever reviewed the Quad or Soundlab?
One of the reasons I stayed with ML for such a long time is I never really experienced the negatives many of the critics attributed the CLS. My system post at audiogon (now deleted)was basically a review of the CLS I. Time after time my experience was that CLS sounded like the components upstream. The better they got the better the CLS got. To this date I still don't think I have got all it has to give.
gregadd:cool:
 
Last edited:
Looks like Phil Spector's utility room with his original 'Wall of Sound'.
 
Last edited:
I don't find the CLX cool at all..

I find the CLX to be extremely neutral and tonally correct. Much as I like the Quads (and I've owned a couple pair), the 57 is my favorite, but it's very limited in terms of dynamics compared to the CLX.

All of the speakers mentioned here are really good, all have their strengths and limitations as well as way different associated component requirements to give their all. Much depends on your room and music.

Caelin Gabriel, the owner/designer at Shunyata has a pair of refurbed 57's that offered up amazing sound when I visited Shunyata last month, so a lot depends on the setup too....

But I have to say, he's got the best sounding pair of 57's I've ever heard!
 
Heard the Soundlabs today. All I can say is WOW!!!!

I have heard the CLX on a couple of occasions already. It does not make sense to compare them based on memory, different rooms, and different electronics.

What stands out to me from the CLX is speed, transparency, and soundstaging.

What stands out from the Soundlabs are the "realness" of the music. The dynamics and the 3-dimensionality of the images were superb. There was very deep bass, and it was integrated with the panel resulting in a very natural sound. I have never had a more "being there" experience as I have had with the Soundlabs. It was 1st row seats at the show on every recording, regardless of the type of music.

I would love to get the 2 speakers into the same room for a true a/b comparison. I would not be surprised one bit, if those looking at the CLX walked away with the Soundlabs, or vice versa. ML may be very lucky the Soundlabs don't advertise and are pretty much word of mouth only. Whoever is interested in one or the other, should audition both.
 
Several questions David: Which model SL did you hear? Can you please give us the associated electronics and a description of the room. The same rundown for the CLX as far as electronics and room. How far down did the bottom go for the SL, do you think?

Please understand since there are very few reviews of the Sound Labs product out there to have a "live one on the line" is exciting. So any other information you could relate would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks, :bowdown:
 
Several questions David: Which model SL did you hear? Can you please give us the associated electronics and a description of the room. The same rundown for the CLX as far as electronics and room. How far down did the bottom go for the SL, do you think?

Please understand since there are very few reviews of the Sound Labs product out there to have a "live one on the line" is exciting. So any other information you could relate would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks, :bowdown:

I wish I could write as poetically about this as Jon Valin, but here is an analytical comparison of the 2.


The first time I heard the CLX, the equipment was Krell evo mono amps and evo preamp, and krell sacd and simaudio sources. The room was large, but not well treated. The second time was in the same room, but the amps were Manley 500 monoblocks. I was BLOWN AWAY by the CLX the first time. I enjoyed it a great deal the second time, but not as much as the first. These 2 experiences were probably different because I like the SS amps much better for their control of the panel.

In terms of the sound, as I said above, the CLX are fast, transparent, detailed, and have a huge soundstage. They are a mix of the CLS/ Monolith "big soundstage" sound of the old designs and the Summit type detail, dynamics, and accuracy.

When I heard the Soundlabs today, the source was my own Ayre C5xe, Atmasphere tubed pre, and SS Parasound JC1 Halo monoblocks. The speakers were U1's with the latest px technology. (The U1's are in the low $30's; the M1's are priced similarly to the CLX, and are supposed to give up only 5% or so of performance because of their smaller size). Physically, they are HUGE. The sweetspot was huge also. Walking around the room, and stepping into a different room did not take away from the reality of the music.

The biggest thing that sticks with me is that these speakers had all of the virtues I love about stats - transparency, soundstage, air, etc., but in addition to that they had very deep bass that was integrated with the rest of the frequencies. They had also NAILED the dynamic ebbs and flows of the music. I never experienced such realism from a system. The CLX sounds more hi-fi in my memory. This was despite the fact the 14 x 17 or so sized room did not have any bass traps. (It did have some resonators, though, and I am not really sure what they are.)


Coincidentally, I also had the pleasure of hearing 2 expensive dynamic speakers this weekend - Vienna Musics and Dynaudio Sapphires. I would take used $2K ML's, such as the Ascent, over either of those.

I think those who buy a $20K+ speakers are suckers not to hear as many models as possible. As I said above, those shopping for an electostat should hear both the CLX and the Soundlabs. When I purchase my next speakers, I would not be surprised if they are Soundlabs, although I intend to audition both in depth.

However, if pressed to buy one or the other right now based on my gut feel or intuition based on the experiences I have had, I would buy the Soundlab and never care about another speaker.
 
I don't find the CLX cool at all..

I find the CLX to be extremely neutral and tonally correct. Much as I like the Quads (and I've owned a couple pair), the 57 is my favorite, but it's very limited in terms of dynamics compared to the CLX.

All of the speakers mentioned here are really good, all have their strengths and limitations as well as way different associated component requirements to give their all. Much depends on your room and music.

Caelin Gabriel, the owner/designer at Shunyata has a pair of refurbed 57's that offered up amazing sound when I visited Shunyata last month, so a lot depends on the setup too....

But I have to say, he's got the best sounding pair of 57's I've ever heard!

My gawd - I think I agree. I heard some 57s in a Pink Triangle room driven by Quad IIs. Absolutely killer midrange. Better than the current efforts or the 63 or anything inbetween. Don't buy an untouched 2nd hand pair and expect the same, though. If they are original, they will need some work.

CLX cold? I don't think so - drive 'em with AR CD7/REF3/Jadis JA200 and no way.... the opposite, in fact. Pretty sure if you use the wrong partnering electronics, you could make them sound "colder", though. Jeff would be the better judge there, though... having hooked up loads more electronics.

More info, David, please....

I'm a bit amazed that considering their low profile, Soundlabs are available in the UK.
 
Last edited:

Latest posts

Back
Top