CLX vs Super Summit

[Rich]

The reason it was discontinued was no sales.

That certainly does surprise me, given the fierce loyalty CLS owners show to their speakers. And the fact that the biggest criticism of Martin Logans in the past was how poorly the woofers melded with the panels in the hybrid versions.

Perhaps this is a case where having dealers that don't set them up properly will really hurt sales. It reminds me of the recent thread regarding the Vista. When people go to audition Martin Logan speakers, they expect to be wowed. So when the experience is less than stellar, they are confused and disappointed and wondering what other kinds of speakers they should start considering.

I do think that overall Martin Logan has become more adept at marketing than they used to be, so maybe that will help with sales of the CLX when it is released.

 

[babydoc]

Summits, CLX, Descent i, cabbages and kings

I have a system with Summits in the front with 2 Descent i's and 2 Descents behind the listening position. The 4 Descents are near but not in the corners and are "aimed" at the center of the listening room. I also have a Stage center channel and 2 Script i's for surround listening.
Most of my listening is surround for video and two channel for music. Since I put in the two new Descents (which are theoretically better than the older ones altough bass information is pretty nondirectional and often felt rather than heard at the subwoofer level) the system imaging has improved rather markedly. There is a "thereness" that just wasn't there before, suggesting at least subjectively that sharing low bass information among several speakers helps out the higher frequencies as well. The technical papers on multiple subwoofer installations also suggest that this may occur in a 4 subwoofer set up.
Regarding the CLX's and the Summits. I have heard the CLZ (final version) before they were discontinued and AB'd them against the Ascent i's before purchase. My observation was that they had insufficient and unclear bass. The panel size also tended to interfere with optimal imaging which was better on the smaller ESL hybrid speakers. While the CLX's using better panel technology may improve some of the frequency anomalies, they will still require bass reinforcement making them probably more expensive than a straightforward pair of Summits. I am not sure about the imaging but my experience with larger ESLs ( and I have had many including Koss 1As, various Accoustats, etc) is that they are more subject to having the image "stick" on the panels. They also are harder to place in a room. The advantage of a lack of crossover may be mitigated by the need for subwoofer reinforcement.
If and when my dealer gets CLX's I will have an A-B comparison opportunity and will do so with an open mind.

 

[nsgarch]

Size of the CLX

I doubt the CLX (obviously I don't know for sure) will be as large as the CLS. Don't forget, the (smaller) Summit panel has as much output as the (larger) Prodigy panel due to the new panel design and new manufacturing techniques.

CLS sales (as did Magnaplanar Tympani, and big Infinity sales) fell off at a time when there was a trend to very small speakers (eg monitors and subs, Wilson Watt/Puppies, etc) but had they not been discontinued, I believe sales would have gone back up, as evidenced by the huge speakers that followed a few years later.

 

[Jeff Zaret]

I am not against the CLX but as an owner of CLSiiZ's for me it would not be a major improvement.

The question as to whether the panel will be the size of the CLS's or smaller no one knows as of yet because they are still playing with the design. I think if I had a small hybrid or maybe even a Vista I may look at them but maybe it is being older and maybe now more frugal. I have never been one to change because it was new. I will judge them solely on their own.

Jeff

 

[jjqiv]

I have a system with Summits in the front with 2 Descent i's and 2 Descents behind the listening position. The 4 Descents are near but not in the corners and are "aimed" at the center of the listening room. I also have a Stage center channel and 2 Script i's for surround listening.
Most of my listening is surround for video and two channel for music. Since I put in the two new Descents (which are theoretically better than the older ones altough bass information is pretty nondirectional and often felt rather than heard at the subwoofer level) the system imaging has improved rather markedly. There is a "thereness" that just wasn't there before, suggesting at least subjectively that sharing low bass information among several speakers helps out the higher frequencies as well. The technical papers on multiple subwoofer installations also suggest that this may occur in a 4 subwoofer set up.
Regarding the CLX's and the Summits. I have heard the CLZ (final version) before they were discontinued and AB'd them against the Ascent i's before purchase. My observation was that they had insufficient and unclear bass. The panel size also tended to interfere with optimal imaging which was better on the smaller ESL hybrid speakers. While the CLX's using better panel technology may improve some of the frequency anomalies, they will still require bass reinforcement making them probably more expensive than a straightforward pair of Summits. I am not sure about the imaging but my experience with larger ESLs ( and I have had many including Koss 1As, various Accoustats, etc) is that they are more subject to having the image "stick" on the panels. They also are harder to place in a room. The advantage of a lack of crossover may be mitigated by the need for subwoofer reinforcement.
If and when my dealer gets CLX's I will have an A-B comparison opportunity and will do so with an open mind.

I have not found the image issues you mention with the CLS's. Could be the fact they were in the same room with the same equipment. Only on the very rare occasion have I noticed sounds sticking to the panels. Same went for the SL3's. When run full range, the bass on CLS's is more defined and accurate than the SL3's, though not quite the impact. A double bass sound more like a double bass. I am currently rolling off the bass at 150 hz. Hit my sweet spot. The double bass reproduction not quite as good, but I got the impact back - and then some - across the entire frequency spectrum. On occasion, I will spin down the dial on the x-over.

Yep, sub's can really add to the "thereness" by recreating the sub level, ambient sounds/pressure of the recording venue. You can put your ear up to them and hear nothing, put turning them/it off will change the realness of the recording.