Adding to the CLS love fest...

[daniel]

Craig,
I almost drove 1000 miles each way to get a pair.

That's exactly what I was thinking to do. I tought I was crazy.

Maybe I'm not, but if I am, I'm not alone!

 

[DTB300]

as I almost drove 1000 miles each way to get a pair.

9+ hours driving each way for me...well worth the effort to risk shipping....

 

[Wardsweb]

Shipping will expand your purchasing options. I had mine shipped via truck freight. They were in original boxes and on a pallet, so no getting kicked around. They were only moved by fork lift or pallet jacket into the shipping terminal, then into the 53' trailer and off at my house. DO NOT attempt to ship them by UPS, FedEx or DHL.

 

[Craig]

Martin-Logan, are you reading this and other threads regarding the CLS? Notwithstanding the CLX, how about producing an updated CLS? I'll bet you'll sell far more than the CLX will ever sell.

PS: Updated means more efficient, without that impedence dip.

I'm sure they would sell very well in today's market. But the question for them is would they sell well enough to take up time on the assembly line in lieu of other products that sell 10-20 times more units than another medium priced speaker? At $20K+ a pop they don't have to sell as many CLX's to make a good profit as they would CLS's.

However, there really isn't much involved in building a CLS. The parts are very minimal.

 

[SundayNiagara]

I'm sure they would sell very well in today's market. But the question for them is would they sell well enough to take up time on the assembly line in lieu of other products that sell 10-20 times more units than another medium priced speaker? At $20K+ a pop they don't have to sell as many CLX's to make a good profit as they would CLS's.

However, there really isn't much involved in building a CLS. The parts are very minimal.

They already have the tooling.

 

[Craig]

You'd think they would at least do special orders.

 

[DTB300]

I'm sure they would sell very well in today's market. But the question for them is would they sell well enough to take up time on the assembly line in lieu of other products that sell 10-20 times more units than another medium priced speaker? At $20K+ a pop they don't have to sell as many CLX's to make a good profit as they would CLS's.

The cost to produce, versus the amount sold, was the demise of the CLS - they just did not sell enough to warrant the production need upkeep. Unfortunately a business decision had to be made, and now the CLX is another foray and we will see how it fares.

 

[C.A.P]

In its last year the CLS sold 7 pair from what Jim Power told me ! They were a speaker that cought the real aficionados attention at the time. They needed a special amp with lots of current and most likely needed a sub to augment. At that time the HT boom was hitting hard and all the surround sound systems were taking hold. 2 channel was fading away let alone a dedicated 2 channel speaker that was a hard one to drive. After the market was saturated with poor HT systems from every manufacture under the sun. 2 channel had a resurgence and people started to realize the beauty and simplicity of real music. No other speaker can produce the seamless sound of a full range CLS. The craze has started just look at everyone trying to get a pair. Martin Logan seen this and thus came the CLX. They couldn't make a re issue of the CLS (They already ran a 20th anniversary run ). Marketing wise its not ever good to re issue a exact model that was 20 years old as technology is always improving. (However; I think they would sell a few pair with the clear spar technology and the same wood frames ,with new advanced filtering). That being said, they took all they have learned and put out the CLX !


The tooling for the CLS was as simple as it gets. Wood frames and a panel! Use the new clear spar technology along with the Micro perf ! Hell you really could make a sleek new X-over box that was smallish and put them on some cool stands.............hmmmmmmmmmm.........CLS III

 

[SundayNiagara]

In its last year the CLS sold 7 pair from what Jim Power told me ! They were a speaker that cought the real aficionados attention at the time. They needed a special amp with lots of current and most likely needed a sub to augment. At that time the HT boom was hitting hard and all the surround sound systems were taking hold. 2 channel was fading away let alone a dedicated 2 channel speaker that was a hard one to drive. After the market was saturated with poor HT systems from every manufacture under the sun. 2 channel had a resurgence and people started to realize the beauty and simplicity of real music. No other speaker can produce the seamless sound of a full range CLS. The craze has started just look at everyone trying to get a pair. Martin Logan seen this and thus came the CLX. They couldn't make a re issue of the CLS (They already ran a 20th anniversary run ). Marketing wise its not ever good to re issue a exact model that was 20 years old as technology is always improving. (However; I think they would sell a few pair with the clear spar technology and the same wood frames ,with new advanced filtering). That being said, they took all they have learned and put out the CLX !


The tooling for the CLS was as simple as it gets. Wood frames and a panel! Use the new clear spar technology along with the Micro perf ! Hell you really could make a sleek new X-over box that was smallish and put them on some cool stands.............hmmmmmmmmmm.........CLS III

The market has changed and 2 channel home hi-fi is making a comeback, as people are realizing that HT sound basically sucks. It's time to put an updated version of the CLS back into production and also preserve the upgrade path.

 

[nsgarch]

Who wants to run the campaign?

I agree w/ Chris and Niagara, "times have changed", especially if the recent interest in aquiring CLS's is any indication (along w/ the fact that replacement panels are being sold at a fairly constant rate it seems.)

So rather than agreeing to agree amongst ourselves who wants to volunteer to call ML and see if there's even a glimmer of a chance they'd express interest. Or would a massive email/letter-writing campaign be more effective? One thing I know they'll say is "let's see how it goes with the CLX".

Personally I like the CLX and it will probably be a worthy match for the big Soundlab performance-wise, but it's not meant for mass consumption (any more than the big Soundlab .) According to the inflation calculator, a new 2008 CLS would cost $6000 +/- . Even at $7k I expect they'd go pretty fast (and open up a bigger market for the ML subs too!)

 

[raygunn]

I don't understand the math....

.....According to the inflation calculator, a new 2008 CLS would cost $6000 +/- . Even at $7k I expect they'd go pretty fast (and open up a bigger market for the ML subs too!)

Actually, my CLS's which were one of the last handful produced. They listed at $6k/pr. The Mahogany were $7k.
This was in Q2 2003.

Try the inflation calculator using those figures...

 

[raygunn]

I believe the CLX to be the logical step after the final CLS2z's....

....They needed a special amp with lots of current and most likely needed a sub to augment. At that time the HT boom was hitting hard and all the surround sound systems were taking hold. 2 channel was fading away let alone a dedicated 2 channel speaker that was a hard one to drive. After the market was saturated with poor HT systems from every manufacture under the sun. 2 channel had a resurgence and people started to realize the beauty and simplicity of real music. No other speaker can produce the seamless sound of a full range CLS. The craze has started just look at everyone trying to get a pair. Martin Logan seen this and thus came the CLX. They couldn't make a re issue of the CLS (They already ran a 20th anniversary run ).

I don't believe it to be quite that simple. The XStat microperfed panel is a different animal. It is much more efficient, it has different balance than the CLS, and therefore would not simply give a "full range" sound with a singular panel like the older CLS. The CLS panel in terms of frequency response bandwidth is no great perfomer. Sure, it is ruler-flat in response, but the decline in HF output begins at above 14khz. In the bass end it starts to lose it at around 55HZ or so. That said, taken as a whole it works!!!

I believe that would probably not be the case with the XStat-equipped CLS frame. It would have balance that would be tilted toward the top end and would be no better than it's predecessor in the bottom.

....That being said, they took all they have learned and put out the CLX !

Yes! I agree! ML did the reserarch already. they determined the amount of radiating "woofer" surface they needed in order to make the overall balance of the speaker work with the efficient XStat.

IMHO, the CLX is the mythical CLSIII!!

 

[wallacefl]

I do love my CLS2Z...I am sorry to say I cannot feel very warm and fuzzy about the new CLX no matter how good they might sound...price too high and looks IMHO...but back to the CLS...I listened closely to some Magnepan 20.1s and would like someone with the engineering background/willpower to create a planar magnetic bass panel that would fit flat in the standard cls frame. You could place it between the R/L CLS and run it below 40hz.

 

[nsgarch]

it comes out about the same. . . . .

Actually, my CLS's which were one of the last handful produced. They listed at $6k/pr. This was in Q2 2003. Try the inflation calculator using those figures...

OK, I did. I got: "[SIZE=+1]What cost $6000 in 2003 would cost $6881.19 in 2007." (they can only do it for as recent as the previous year.)[/SIZE]

You can try it yourself at: http://www.westegg.com/inflation/

 

[raygunn]

Amazing... The CLX is a different animal and it has also been long in the R&D stage.

I guess the price differential takes into account the cost of development and the very low production numbers they expect on these things.

The actual cost of production may actually have not increased too much. The level of automation and shop 'assembly line" has vastly improved since the CLS assembly days. However, I would guess that the cost of materials has increased quite a bit, especially the exotic woods and aluminum.

Perhaps for us CLS users, it may be worth a try to source a line source ribbon bass module or driver, before even considering the megabuck plunge of the CLX. I personally do not find the CLS' high frequency dip to be problematic and worth the justification to upgrade to an XStat panel.

OK, I did. I got: "[SIZE=+1]What cost $6000 in 2003 would cost $6881.19 in 2007." (they can only do it for as recent as the previous year.)[/SIZE]

You can try it yourself at: http://www.westegg.com/inflation/

 

[raygunn]

That's interesting, the upper bass area of the Maggie is exactly where...

I find it to be hopelessly flawed.
The lower male vocal range all the way down to the fundamentals of a bass drum I find sound very artifical and "honky" (from lack of a better subjective term). This is why I love the CLS'. They are as uniform and pure top-to-bottom as you can get. Only the ancillary sources add the "color" in my system.

I do love my CLS2Z...I am sorry to say I cannot feel very warm and fuzzy about the new CLX no matter how good they might sound...price too high and looks IMHO...but back to the CLS...I listened closely to some Magnepan 20.1s and would like someone with the engineering background/willpower to create a planar magnetic bass panel that would fit flat in the standard cls frame. You could place it between the R/L CLS and run it below 40hz.