Prodigy vs summit

Been a while since I`ve posted here... As of now my system is of script and theater I, sunfire EQ 10" and Halcro SSP220 and MC50.
But I am looking for some front speakers...
As the title says..
Now some of you might answer " some like the new and some like the old"
I am most interested in who might have changed to one or vice versa..

Just barely heard a demo of the summit, was not that impressed. Note that only barely so maybe I`m just like the old models better...:bowdown:
With the new microperf technlogy the panel size of the new M.L would be equal or better than the old.. I find that hard to believe, even if the new stators has bigger holes so that the total area of panel will compensate for the size..

But with Summit smaller size I believe that it has to have some cons..?

So am I wrong? Or are they almost equal in sound stage, dynamics, mid range bla...bla.. ètc.. Or is the summit abit or "blown way" better?
Except for better bass integration what is so much better and how much better with the new M.L? From a scale 1-10..
Can you tell me some pros and cons with the Prodigy and summit?

Interested in your opinion.

THANKS!!!

My personal thought is that Panel sound is better on the Prodigies, while woofer sound and bass integration is better on the Summits. Regardless, both are superb speakers. I own the Summits, but love the sound of the Prodigies.

I cannot speak for Summits, but the Prodigy are amazing speakers with a huge soundstage and detail. I did have the Spire and still liked the Prodigy over those.

Hi reybent,

You said you "barely heard the Summits" but seem to have a strong (negative) opinion of them.

I think I speak for most folks who know the ML line. Only you can decide what's better but you need to spend alot more time listening to be able to make an informed decision.

ML's, like other high quality speakers, are impacted by the quality of upstream gear, synergy thereof, not to mention the room, which will influence your feelings as to what is better or worse.

Recommend that you spend alot more time with both models before you come to any conclusions.

GG

I would not say I`m negative about the summit.. Just saying that I was not impressed. After all there is a huge different in every way. And I got the impression that M.L really got succes with a better bass integration and more WAF friendly. But not a huge difference in the panel sound. And yes of course the sound is affected by the gear connected to it, the room etc.. That`s why I am looking for opinion of others who had tried both.
Difficult for me to have a real audition on these due to my location.
Want to hear from you guys first before any decision. I`m a previous owner of Request and CLS so I know that the prodigy will not dissappoint me.
After all there is a big difference price in the used market here in Norway/Europe.

RICH: "Panel sound is better on the Prodigies". I kinda think also that is true, since a bigger panel..


THANKS FOR ALL ANSWER!

reybent said:

I would not say I`m negative about the summit.. Just saying that I was not impressed. After all there is a huge different in every way. And I got the impression that M.L really got succes with a better bass integration and more WAF friendly. But not a huge difference in the panel sound. And yes of course the sound is affected by the gear connected to it, the room etc.. That`s why I am looking for opinion of others who had tried both.
Difficult for me to have a real audition on these due to my location.
Want to hear from you guys first before any decision. I`m a previous owner of Request and CLS so I know that the prodigy will not dissappoint me.
After all there is a big difference price in the used market here in Norway/Europe.

RICH: "Panel sound is better on the Prodigies". I kinda think also that is true, since a bigger panel..


THANKS FOR ALL ANSWER!

Click to expand...

Hola...if you PM and you send me your email address, I have Summit VS Prodigy and Oddysey power point presentation from ML...happy listening,
Roberto.

As the old adage goes, you have one chance to make a first impression. And if that first impression is less than positive, it is highly likely that it will influence your decision making process.

What is the price difference between the two models?

What did you hear that left you less than enthusiastic (unimpressed) with the sound of the Summits?

And you are correct about equipment, room acoustics, etc. influencing the opinion of the user, which makes other peoples opinions somewhat irrelevant.

And yes, I've had the Summits for some five years and have been more than happy with their performance. Aerius, CLS 2A's, and SL3's before that.

Good luck,

GG

Can you even find a Prodigy for sale? You won't see many offered.

While the bass integration may be better on the Summit than the Prodigy, one often overlooks the quality of the bass amplifier. With the Prodigy, you have the option of powering the bass woofer with first rate amplifier versus limiting yourself to the internal Class-D amplifier with the Summit. Recall that the "middle C" note on a piano is at 256Hz, falling right smack in the crossover region on of the Summit. A few friends and I did some experiment with swapping out the bass amp on my (bi-amped) ReQuests and found that the quality of the bass amp made a huge difference when it comes to musicality. In this particular experiment where my panels are driven by my AES SixPacs, the Pass Labs amplifier pulling bass duty was much better than my trusty Classe' CA-300. Something to think about...

Spike

When I bought my Summits, I heard them at two dealers, the Spires at one dealer, and the prodigies at a friend's house. So horribly unscientific comparison but thats all you can do when one speaker is replaced by another. Also, I spoke to several dealers about the changes and differences.

My takeaway was that I liked the Summit sound (and technical details) the most. They trumped the Spires because of the extra Bass and I personally did not "buy" the arguments that the Spires sound better. With the inability to A/B them, I went with the Summits.

I personally also liked the Summits more than the Prodigies because of the advanced technology, especially the cross overs in them. Is it all ML BS? I think not although I cant scientifically prove it. The trajectory of crossover improvements that ML has made from 1990 to 2010 on the other hand is ir-refutable - so it not a stretch to assume that the Summits are a step up in crossover technology from the Prodigies. Very keen to see if Roberto's presentation verifies that!

The Requests, nor the Prodigy, have the Summit's 25 and 50hz x-over adjustments. These allow the users to totally tune the bass drivers to blend with the panel as well as the room.

Don`t take me wrong I do like the summits.. Maybe my expectation was a bit high before I did listen to them. But I got the impression that it wasn`t that much better sound (NB! except for better bass integration.) While almost all HIFI mags. who had tested them was almost blown away with it.
The prodigy is from 5500-6900 US dollars while the summits is usually for 8400dollars.

I owned Summits and Prodigy for about 12 months and had a very good chance to compare the two. However, all I can really say is that which one is better depends on your tastes.

A good example of this is a good friend of mine who comes over about once a month to listen to music. He is not an audiophile but attends live concerts 2 or 3 times a week and really knows his music. I played a live Eric Bibb CD on both speakers and he definately liked the Prodigy's the best. I then played a Dick Gaughan CD on both and he definately like the Summit for that CD. This continued with a number of CDs I played so I really think that it depends on your tastes and the music you like to listen to.

To my ears the soundstage of the Prodigy is better and that is because I like a big image. The bass on both speakers is very good but again depends on your tastes. In some respects I think the Prodigy bass is more realistic but the Summits have very tight and well integrated bass and that extra thump in the bottom end is something that is missing on the Prodigys. Whether that is good or bad again depends on your tastes. I found the Summits to convey more detail than the prodigy and I remember that the midrange and treble were smoother and sweeter than the Prodigy.

After I had listended to both speakers for a time I then listened to the Prodigys for about 6 weeks exclusively. After that time I decided to keep the Prodigys and sell the Summit. I thought though that I should just listen to the Summits one more time.

When I played the Summits I completely changed my view and sold the Prodigys. In the end I couldn't go past the sweetness of the sound even though the size of the image wasn't as big as I would have liked.

I should point out that the amplifier is very important with getting the best out of the Prodigy. I have a Gryphon with heaps of current and is a very good match with the Prodigys. I therefore don't think the amp coloured my decision.

Hope I haven't confused you more but it is not an easy decision. I guess ultimately what I would have liked was a speaker like the Summit but with a panel a bit bigger so as to get that detail and sweetness of the Summits but with just a bit more impact which the Prodigy does very well.

Neil H said:

I owned Summits and Prodigy for about 12 months and had a very good chance to compare the two. However, all I can really say is that which one is better depends on your tastes.

....

Click to expand...

I think this post perfectly captures the essence of both speakers!

@Neil H: Did you adjust their placement independently? Was there much of a difference?

Maybe specific room sizes are better suited towards a Prodigy vs Summit, and vice versa.

shakham said:

@Neil H: Did you adjust their placement independently? Was there much of a difference?

Maybe specific room sizes are better suited towards a Prodigy vs Summit, and vice versa.

Click to expand...

Yes I did adjust them independently. I can't quite remember now but I think the Prodigys were placed further apart and a bit further out into the room.

I got the impression that the Summit would cope with a smaller room better than the Prodigy which I think needs a fair bit of space. I think my room is about 22 feet X 18 feet.

Hah! Neil you are awesome. You have all the speakers I would love to a/b. So then you moved to the Maggie 20.1. I would think that speaker is closer to the prodigy? Could you compare the 3?

timm said:

Hah! Neil you are awesome. You have all the speakers I would love to a/b. So then you moved to the Maggie 20.1. I would think that speaker is closer to the prodigy? Could you compare the 3?

Click to expand...

All I can really say is that when I compared the Prodigy and Summit the choice was difficult. As I said in an earlier post I preferred some music on one and some on the other. With the 20.1 it was an easy choice. To my tastes the 20.1 is in another class.

I heard details on familiar recordings on the 20.1s that I had never heard on another speaker. The image size is huge, bigger than the Prodigy. Singers are presented at a realistic size. There is also real impact. The bass is excellent, really realistic although not as deeep as the Summit. A drum or bass on the Summit is very deep and punchy but the instrument sounds smaller than in reality. On the 20.1s a bass drums sounds about the size of the real instrument.

If I listened to heavy metal or techno I would probably want a sub, but otherwise a sub is not necessary and would probably detract from the naturalness of the sound. I get good bass down to 25Hz in my room, not as low as the Summit obviously but low enough for what I listen to.

Listening to the 3.6 really only gives an inkling of what the 20.1 sounds like. The 20.1 really gives a much bigger and powerful sound, but with all the delicacy that you would want.

I think a more interesting comparison for the 20.1 would be the CLX. Unfortunately, I haven't heard that yet.

One other point to consider with these speakers is that the 20.1 is more demanding of an amp than the Summit. The 20.1 really requires a lot of current to sound its best.

THANKS FOR YOUR ANSWER NEIL! :music:

Neil H said:

I think a more interesting comparison for the 20.1 would be the CLX. Unfortunately, I haven't heard that yet.

Click to expand...

Agreed... I'd like to A/B these two as well. I've owned 3.6r and I will say that the CLX absolutely smoked them in virtually every aspect. The CLX's one fault though is their roll-off below 50Hz. They need a high quality sub for some types of music... but beyond that, they are bordering on miraculous in terms of presentation realism. Extreme goosebumps.

I've never seriously auditioned the 20.1s, so I can't comment on how much different they might be from the 3.6r (or the CLX)... thus my interest.

Also, you have to wonder if a "20.7" might be somewhere around the corner???