New ML Owner. CLS II's re-paneled and brought up to spec.

[Ronin]

Very well. Sounds awesome. Still unsure what the 2nd set of terminals is for. Hopefully ML can shed some light there this week. If not I'll take some pics of electronics etc and start another thread specific to that. My bet is ML will help. They seem willing, this just all happened right before the holiday. Thank you for the inquiry.

 

[Reverb]

Glad it sounds awesome. I believe ML will help, just a matter of scheduling perhaps. Even if it's now properly working, it should be good to know what it's for, right?

 

[Ronin]

Glad it sounds awesome. I believe ML will help, just a matter of scheduling perhaps. Even if it's now properly working, it should be good to know what it's for, right?

Correct. I mean it sounds like it is properly working but would sure give me peace of mind if I knew how the electronics were designed to work. Is it kind of a crossover? etc. If I draw a blank from ML I could perhaps take the top off the box a couple detailed photos.... I will certainly update if I hear something this week.

 

[Leporello]

Hello-

Be great to see more about any other experiences with ML in general and CLS II. I have had a ton of box speakers like Focal, Dyn, Wilson and YG. However I remember one of the coolest sounding set ups I had (maybe 20 years ago?) was Bryston and Requests. I had an opportunity to grab these speakers and went for it.

They are one owner from a former employee or partner with ML. (No names given) They also included new panels. The new panels were installed and the crossovers brought up to spec. Also they were modified by Joe V and have 4 terminals per speaker (LF/HF) so I'm in touch with ML on how best to take advantage of this mod. I imagine this is for a bi-wire or even bi-amp set up.

The speakers arrive today and I'm just going to jumper the terminals and hook it up basic two wire + and - for now. Kinda work on positioning etc.

This is a new venture... No idea how it will turn out but it could be pretty cool I hope. Nice to deviate from the box technology even though there are some pretty good speakers out there.

Thanks for any suggestions and have a great 4th!
etc.

Couple of things:

1. Please someone correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding is that the only difference between the CLS II and CLS IIz is the interface. The IIz is more amplifier friendly. Some people think the II interface sounds better but I wouldn't know. It's what I have. I once talked to Dennis Chern at one of the NYC audio shows, about getting the IIz mod. Instead, I got myself a pair of Parsound Halo JC1 monoblocks, which are more than happy about driving them. I won't be thinking about amps again any time soon.

2. I have the Sound Anchor ML CLS stands. They are only available on special order, not part of the regular SA lineup, and kind of pricey. But they made a huge difference: tighter bass, more focused image. Your mileage may vary, but I can't recommend them highly enough. I had no qualms about drilling tiny holes in the sides of the frames for the optional braces, yielding much more rigidity than the original bases.

 

[Big Dog RJ]

View attachment 22979

Now that's an outstanding ML full range-stat setup, supreme stuff mate!

When I had the CLSII-Z's they were in this special Honey Blonde color, looked absolutely gorgeous. In fact that black color version looks stunning! Very exquisite I must say. BTW, those look like the II-Z's, looks very familiar... are those the II-Z's or the CLS version 1? Doesn't matter I guess... enjoy those fine tunes!

That deserves a massive WOOF!!!
RJ

 

[Ronin]

Now that's an outstanding ML full range-stat setup, supreme stuff mate!

When I had the CLSII-Z's they were in this special Honey Blonde color, looked absolutely gorgeous. In fact that black color version looks stunning! Very exquisite I must say. BTW, those look like the II-Z's, looks very familiar... are those the II-Z's or the CLS version 1? Doesn't matter I guess... enjoy those fine tunes!

That deserves a massive WOOF!!!
RJ

 

[Big Dog RJ]

Yep, definitely looks like the II-Z panel, if it was installed in 2001. That's when II-Z's were been replaced. I also got mine redone on the CLS-IIz just before they were sold onto another dealer.

They were such beautiful stats, and an absolute show stopper. Whenever someone walked into the living room and saw these see-through panels, they just stopped to look in awe.

Keep those tunes playing and keep those fine stats singing!
Cheers, RJ

 

[Ronin]

Actually it is a 2001 panel but from what I understand the speakers were delivered with the old panels in place and the new ones still sealed in the box. They were installed last month.

 

[Ronin]

Update from Tech who installed panels:


The specifics are a little bit tough to pinpoint but what we saw was that the crossovers were simplified and upgraded with better components. I’m generally into that simplicity and the work was very well done. These were also upgraded to have a biwire input, which could be either jumpered or biwired. That should be pretty straightforward.



One thing that I would point out is that these panels are basically brand new. They are going to require some break in or probably around 100 hours. They sounded great but a little bit tight without being broken in, very common for Martin Logan speakers and kind of amazing to have a pair of these that are ready to go for a second life.

 

[Reverb]

Update from Tech who installed panels:


The specifics are a little bit tough to pinpoint but what we saw was that the crossovers were simplified and upgraded with better components. I’m generally into that simplicity and the work was very well done. These were also upgraded to have a biwire input, which could be either jumpered or biwired. That should be pretty straightforward.



One thing that I would point out is that these panels are basically brand new. They are going to require some break in or probably around 100 hours. They sounded great but a little bit tight without being broken in, very common for Martin Logan speakers and kind of amazing to have a pair of these that are ready to go for a second life.

That sounds fantastic. Do you have peace of mind now?

 

[Ronin]

Close. Hope to hear from ML soon. But I think Zen is not far behind !

 

[Brad225]

I have been thinking and puzzled by the pair of binding posts.
As I said previously I don't know how your could simplify the interface creating a crossover network when it is a full range panel.
I went back and reread your description of the back of the interface. I apparently missed you saying there was a switch for flat or soft.

There was a switch inside the interface that was to set them to either flat or soft. They must have moved the switch to make it so you could change it without opening the interface box. With the second set of binding posts,
I am guessing, with no real proof that you can connect 2 different amps and the soft or flat switch would choose which amp and circuitry would feed the panels. Now that I have written this out, I don't know if that makes any sense but why else would you have 2 sets of binding posts chosen by the switch.
If there is high and low circuitry they would have needed to double the internal parts for the second high or low frequency feed and then bring them back together. That alone would have problems of it's own.

When my electrical engineer friend rebuilt my interfaces for my CLS IIz we eliminated the switch and left it on flat circuitry. Hopefully they eliminated using the printed circuit board and went to point to point wiring. He replaced the Caps and resistors along with the fuse holders and binding posts.

I look forward to hearing what ML says about the upgrades. I'm always curious what people do for changes and improvements. Please bare with me it is just the it's just my wandering mind.

 

[Ronin]

I have seen the switch "flat/soft" outside / back of box on other pics of CLS (Google) speakers so I believe that was standard- I'm not sure though. The 2nd set of terminals is definitely not standard. The tech who installed the panels stated:
The specifics are a little bit tough to pinpoint but what we saw was that the crossovers were simplified and upgraded with better components. I’m generally into that simplicity and the work was very well done. These were also upgraded to have a biwire input, which could be either jumpered or biwired. That should be pretty straightforward.

I am curretly working with another person at ML. My first question is of course- is bi-wire even possible? So far they have been very dedicated in trying to help me at least. However the only person around still that might remember these is Joe, and he cannot recall this upgrade speciffically. The other is the pervious owner, but I have been asked by the seller to not contact him.

Another avenue is to pop the top and photograph but it would take a EE or a ML EE to spot whats different etc.

Thank you for the inquiry. If I get anything definite from ML I'll post.

 

[Brad225]

This is what my interface look like after it was rebuilt. If you look at the plastic cover on the left it protects fingers from the diodes that are high voltage.
If you look in the upper right corner of the cover there is a switch on the diode board just below the red and black wire. An opening in the cover allows you to have the voltage at normal ( Flat ) or down 10% for ( Soft ).
This must be the switch they moved to the outside of the interface for convenience.

The other photo is my CLS IIz after I built new frames to eliminate the bases I have made for them.

 

[Ronin]

The base looks great. I have been thinking of a way to elevate them but that is down the line.

You can see in my previous pics, I have that outside switch which I'm leaving on flat. I tried soft. Not a ton of difference but I did not know is was simply a current reduction. Makes sense I guess. Thank you.

I may pop the top and compare . Just waiting for ML at this point in case they find a revelation of sorts.

 

[Brad225]

Ronin, when you open the interface, please take a clear picture so we can see what they changed inside.
I have been driving my EE crazy asking him questions as to the dual binding posts.

Thanks Brad

 

[Ronin]

Thanks Brad. I really appreciate the help and interest. I think it's easy to pop the top?. Thank your EE for any insight too.

This is where I'm at right this second:


Hello Michael,

Cassidy here - could you please shoot me the link you gave me for these over the phone when we last spoke?

I'm going to have to reach out to product development about this. It was so long ago the only person still here who would have been involved from that time is Joe and he does not remember these speakers, unfortunately.

 

[Ronin]

Also one tech told me (not at ML) that there is or can be a HF and LF transducer circuit. Not sure on that but one thing I do know- when I connect to lower terminals only I get nothing but LF. And I get HF when I connect to upper terminals.

Bridged sounds really good. I'm sure bi wire would too. I run Kimber cable.. I could get 8TC or something and bi wire but I don't expect a huge difference if any..

Maybe though that's the exact reason the modifications were made though!

 

[Robert D]

Also one tech told me (not at ML) that there is or can be a HF and LF transducer circuit. Not sure on that but one thing I do know- when I connect to lower terminals only I get nothing but LF. And I get HF when I connect to upper terminals.

Bridged sounds really good. I'm sure bi wire would too. I run Kimber cable.. I could get 8TC or something and bi wire but I don't expect a huge difference if any..

Maybe though that's the exact reason the modifications were made though!

Do you have a 2nd 2 channel amp you can use to bi amp them? You could also just use both channels of the amp(s) you're using now to power just one speaker. See how that sounds compared to bridging the two sets of terminals.

 

[Ronin]

Ronin, when you open the interface, please take a clear picture so we can see what they changed inside.
I have been driving my EE crazy asking him questions as to the dual binding posts.

Thanks Brad

Robert and Brad.... Is this a standard interface? CLSII (This is off a internet Google) Mine will be different I'm sure