JayJayHache
Active member
That's exactly the sort of thing i'd be looking for - although i'd still expect sub-towers of some sort to handle the extreme low-end for HT use at high SPLs...
Come on ML - 'Ya know you want too' :music:
New ML Statements Ev III
- Thread starter JayJayHache
- Start date
Help Support MartinLogan Audio Owners Forum:
That's exactly the sort of thing i'd be looking for - although i'd still expect sub-towers of some sort to handle the extreme low-end for HT use at high SPLs...
Come on ML - 'Ya know you want too' :music:
I’m now convinced that ‘statement’ speakers over $40K or so are a waste of money.
Here’s why:
Once you reach these price points, and sizes, the room interface is the primary thing to start paying attention to, not the number and type of drivers.
I’ve seen way to many pictures of e2’s in horribly inappropriate rooms and placements to believe that they could ever sound as good as a lesser system in a well set up environment.
I’ve heard several huge speakers in rooms way to small for them, really bad sound.
To me, a true Statement piece, one that shows off the speaker manufacturers design to the maximum possible effect are perforce required to be custom systems that are engineered and designed in coordination with the space they will go into.
For instance, I can easily envision a future room where I would design the space to house a set of 5 CLX’s to cover the 60 Hz on up range. That’s $100K of speakers right there.
The 20 to 60 Hz range would be covered by custom transmission line, line-arrays (yes, dual topology) using 8 high-quality 10” drivers per channel (that’s 40 10” drivers handling the bass).
Infrasonic to 25Hz would be handled by a Thigpen rotary woofer in an Infinite Baffle alignment.
The CLX’s would be mounted into a custom wall at either end of the room, putting them into an infinite baffle alignment (with zero dipole cancelation issues). Note that this requires a significant amount of space behind the speakers.
The side wall speakers would either be Spires custom mounted in infinite baffle alignments if the room is to have a single row of seats, or an array of five Stage speakers (stacked, only middle unit has tweeter enabled) per side also embedded into wall with full back-wave absorption.
The room would be a pseudo room-within-a-room design, where the infinite baffle spaces for the CLX’s and the space for the TL boxes can live.
Of course, the room is engineered for the dispersion characteristics of the speakers, and the bass modes optimized by virtue of both bass line-array placement and room dimensioning. All treatments are built-in to the construction and integrated into the décor.
The IB for the Thigpen rotary could be under the structure.
This would result in a listening space somewhere along the lines of 18’ wide by 28’ long x 12’ high (actually 27’ 6” L x 18’ 3” W x 11’ 7” H), resulting in almost 6,000 cubic feet.
Total foot print for space is probably a 35’ long x 22’ wide foundation.
I figure room construction alone is at least $150K.
By the time all gear and labor is figured, this could easily be a >$450K endeavor.
But the results would likely beat much more expensive (in terms of gear cost) systems.
So there you have it, my take on what I’d do to get a true ML statement solution.
Here’s why:
Once you reach these price points, and sizes, the room interface is the primary thing to start paying attention to, not the number and type of drivers.
I’ve seen way to many pictures of e2’s in horribly inappropriate rooms and placements to believe that they could ever sound as good as a lesser system in a well set up environment.
I’ve heard several huge speakers in rooms way to small for them, really bad sound.
To me, a true Statement piece, one that shows off the speaker manufacturers design to the maximum possible effect are perforce required to be custom systems that are engineered and designed in coordination with the space they will go into.
For instance, I can easily envision a future room where I would design the space to house a set of 5 CLX’s to cover the 60 Hz on up range. That’s $100K of speakers right there.
The 20 to 60 Hz range would be covered by custom transmission line, line-arrays (yes, dual topology) using 8 high-quality 10” drivers per channel (that’s 40 10” drivers handling the bass).
Infrasonic to 25Hz would be handled by a Thigpen rotary woofer in an Infinite Baffle alignment.
The CLX’s would be mounted into a custom wall at either end of the room, putting them into an infinite baffle alignment (with zero dipole cancelation issues). Note that this requires a significant amount of space behind the speakers.
The side wall speakers would either be Spires custom mounted in infinite baffle alignments if the room is to have a single row of seats, or an array of five Stage speakers (stacked, only middle unit has tweeter enabled) per side also embedded into wall with full back-wave absorption.
The room would be a pseudo room-within-a-room design, where the infinite baffle spaces for the CLX’s and the space for the TL boxes can live.
Of course, the room is engineered for the dispersion characteristics of the speakers, and the bass modes optimized by virtue of both bass line-array placement and room dimensioning. All treatments are built-in to the construction and integrated into the décor.
The IB for the Thigpen rotary could be under the structure.
This would result in a listening space somewhere along the lines of 18’ wide by 28’ long x 12’ high (actually 27’ 6” L x 18’ 3” W x 11’ 7” H), resulting in almost 6,000 cubic feet.
Total foot print for space is probably a 35’ long x 22’ wide foundation.
I figure room construction alone is at least $150K.
By the time all gear and labor is figured, this could easily be a >$450K endeavor.
But the results would likely beat much more expensive (in terms of gear cost) systems.
So there you have it, my take on what I’d do to get a true ML statement solution.
repman
Well-known member
Jonathan, I would like to order one of these rooms do you have a payment plan available
gordonmenninger
Well-known member
I was never talking about the sound of the CLX - hell yes, I would love to have them over my SL3 any day for sure!!! I was just talking about the looks of the CLX - for $25 k i just would expect something super cool... that's all.
thanks for the compliments!~
Jonathan, how about 12 months same as cash for one of your systems???
Last edited:
Brian Walsh
Well-known member
Jonathan,
A system I look to be selling in the coming year or so would incorporate a pair of the Thigpen subwoofers and several pairs of Sound Lab Majestics. The client likes music which benefits from extended bass response. It would be interesting to contrast it with the one you suggest, not that it's going to happen. One of the challenges faced with large rooms is achieving realistic SPLs. This is where the large radiating area of the speakers is an advantage, and this was demonstrated by Sound Lab a couple of years ago in the 21,000 seat LDS Conference Center main auditorium in SLC.
A system I look to be selling in the coming year or so would incorporate a pair of the Thigpen subwoofers and several pairs of Sound Lab Majestics. The client likes music which benefits from extended bass response. It would be interesting to contrast it with the one you suggest, not that it's going to happen. One of the challenges faced with large rooms is achieving realistic SPLs. This is where the large radiating area of the speakers is an advantage, and this was demonstrated by Sound Lab a couple of years ago in the 21,000 seat LDS Conference Center main auditorium in SLC.
One quick observation. Not everyone thinks the CLX is ugly or un-cool.
I have yet to demo my CLXs to someone who doesn't get up after a song or two and walk around behind the CLXs.
The next thing they say is, "How cool is that" or "That is amazing".
One reason the CLX does not photograph well is the fact that unless you see them with a lighted background behind them it is a little harder to tell that you are looking right thru the speaker. Once people realize that there are no traditional woofers producing sound and yet the CLX is producing this wonderful full range sound, enough to push them back in their seat, they always get this big smile on their face. Most people return to the sweet spot seat a bit in awe and the smile doesn't stop until it is time to leave.
Most have described them as beautiful sounding and since they are see thru by design, they call them the coolest speaker they have ever seen.
Anyway, beauty is truly in the eye of the beholder and I would guess that other CLX owners have had the same or similar reactions from their guests that have sat down and listened to and admired the CLX.
But hey that is just a guess, based on my limited experience.
Regardless, I hope that Martin Logan does a model bigger and better than the CLX, it just gives us all something else to lust after, which could be a good thing or a very bad thing.
Meanwhile I am content to spend countless hours listening, experiencing and admiring the CLX and I suspect every other CLX owner doesn't mind doing the same.
I have yet to demo my CLXs to someone who doesn't get up after a song or two and walk around behind the CLXs.
The next thing they say is, "How cool is that" or "That is amazing".
One reason the CLX does not photograph well is the fact that unless you see them with a lighted background behind them it is a little harder to tell that you are looking right thru the speaker. Once people realize that there are no traditional woofers producing sound and yet the CLX is producing this wonderful full range sound, enough to push them back in their seat, they always get this big smile on their face. Most people return to the sweet spot seat a bit in awe and the smile doesn't stop until it is time to leave.
Most have described them as beautiful sounding and since they are see thru by design, they call them the coolest speaker they have ever seen.
Anyway, beauty is truly in the eye of the beholder and I would guess that other CLX owners have had the same or similar reactions from their guests that have sat down and listened to and admired the CLX.
But hey that is just a guess, based on my limited experience.
Regardless, I hope that Martin Logan does a model bigger and better than the CLX, it just gives us all something else to lust after, which could be a good thing or a very bad thing.
Meanwhile I am content to spend countless hours listening, experiencing and admiring the CLX and I suspect every other CLX owner doesn't mind doing the same.
JayJayHache
Active member
Well - without being at all nasty because to jonfo (especially as i opened the topic for debate!) I'd have to point out that your assumption that most people install the very best AV equipment in the very worst environments then live with them in denial is a fantasy - sorry.
It would be like saying 'I'm convinced that buying a Ferrari is pointless as every owner runs them on diesel and drives them in traffic -so my Ford sedan on an open road is the best anyone should ever buy'
I absolutely agree that great systems deserve great rooms - and the room you've described would likely make any good system sing like an angel - however having heard the CLX on 2 extended demos I'm also sure that in an enormous room like that you would run into a new problem:
They will likely let you down with their power throughput (especially for HT use) and fail to produce high enough sound pressure for some tastes without distortion (and likely damage)
I have a worrying feeling that if ML don't produce a statement-type replacement periodically then they risk losing the 'Electrostatic Crown' to Soundlab or someone else who's passion isn't as swayed by their 'Bread and Butter' products.
Again i'd like to point out to Jonfo that this isn't me having a go - i'm 99% sure we love ML for all the same reasons...
Hi JayJay, no offense, we all have our point of views.
While I was being a bit dramatic, I do have to say that a large proportion of systems I've seen with hyper-expensive speakers are in rooms where the owners clearly did not spend proportionately on the room and its acoustics.
Or made huge compromises for 'livability' or just plain looks over function.
My point is, above $40K, I believe one can get better overall sound by focusing more money on the room and system than on speakers themselves.
For instance, Statement e2's went for $80K, but I feel that I could spend $80K on a pair of CLX, an IB sub and the right front end gear, AND treat the room, achieving as good as or better results.
As for how loud and clean certain systems can play, you have a point, but in my illustration above, the ranges covered by the CLX's have more than enough energy to reach reference levels and then some with no strain. One of the reasons for all the TL based bass drivers is to assure no shortage of foundation, and a Rotary will just amaze you with what it can do.
But for 80Hz on up? a CLX can belt it out, especially in an infinite baffle alignment (no dipole cancellations).
I feel many people underestimate just how loud (and clean) an ESL panel can play.
Trust me, at high SPL's it's not the ESL that's breaking up, it's usually the woofer or the amp running out of steam.
If you give a panel a nice clean 800 w at 4 Ohms, I've yet to hear (or measure) significant distortion at high SPLS.
Note that this assumes one runs the panel in its optimal operating range, which in my book, is sometimes higher than factory set points for crossovers.
This is why you see me focusing more on bass and mid-bass along with room interactions, as that's where the real challenges lie. And since each room is different, it is hard to design a 'generic' ideal solution.
Finally, to get back to the car analogy, I see it as if the world is covered with bumpy gravel roads (think rural Kenya) and only a handful of rich guys can afford to build and pave their own private tracks. Now how many car vendors would build Ferrari-style automobiles?
And, if you did NOT have a private track, would it make sense to buy a Ferrari to drive on the gravel roads?
While I was being a bit dramatic, I do have to say that a large proportion of systems I've seen with hyper-expensive speakers are in rooms where the owners clearly did not spend proportionately on the room and its acoustics.
Or made huge compromises for 'livability' or just plain looks over function.
My point is, above $40K, I believe one can get better overall sound by focusing more money on the room and system than on speakers themselves.
For instance, Statement e2's went for $80K, but I feel that I could spend $80K on a pair of CLX, an IB sub and the right front end gear, AND treat the room, achieving as good as or better results.
As for how loud and clean certain systems can play, you have a point, but in my illustration above, the ranges covered by the CLX's have more than enough energy to reach reference levels and then some with no strain. One of the reasons for all the TL based bass drivers is to assure no shortage of foundation, and a Rotary will just amaze you with what it can do.
But for 80Hz on up? a CLX can belt it out, especially in an infinite baffle alignment (no dipole cancellations).
I feel many people underestimate just how loud (and clean) an ESL panel can play.
Trust me, at high SPL's it's not the ESL that's breaking up, it's usually the woofer or the amp running out of steam.
If you give a panel a nice clean 800 w at 4 Ohms, I've yet to hear (or measure) significant distortion at high SPLS.
Note that this assumes one runs the panel in its optimal operating range, which in my book, is sometimes higher than factory set points for crossovers.
This is why you see me focusing more on bass and mid-bass along with room interactions, as that's where the real challenges lie. And since each room is different, it is hard to design a 'generic' ideal solution.
Finally, to get back to the car analogy, I see it as if the world is covered with bumpy gravel roads (think rural Kenya) and only a handful of rich guys can afford to build and pave their own private tracks. Now how many car vendors would build Ferrari-style automobiles?
And, if you did NOT have a private track, would it make sense to buy a Ferrari to drive on the gravel roads?
Last edited:
the room is the most underestimated piece in a audio system.a good properly treated room makes all the difference in the world.
DTB300
Well-known member
It would be nice to play and find out wouldn't it?
The E2's go in the 6 figure range now and the CLX in the 20's. So that leaves us 80-100k for electronics and would be quickly spent. Some great stuff could be bought.
But if we are thinking about buying E2's we need to have a nice sized room for them in order to really hear them sing. Would this room then be too big for the CLX? If I had the proper room size, I would take the E2's easily over the CLX and subs. Smaller room, then the CLX + Subs.
Too many questions and variables to really know without doing it. But it would be fun.
Last edited:
JayJayHache
Active member
Hmm - ya know what we are 90% in agreement here - but I'd ask the following - if I swapped out the CLXs in your above system with an updated set of statements based on the latest ML technology but then left everything else in your suggested setup the same (ie a spend of perhaps 150k instead of your original 80k) would you expect it to sound even better? perhaps 10% better? 5% better?
Mad value perhaps? well things are less clear when you factor in the price of the room and the house they live in:-
Typical (for UK) high-end hifi would would be installed into a house costing 1.3 to 2.0 million $US - say $1.5 Million for average (I accept that this is a gross over-simplification but it will be an accurate likely average. I've no idea what the US property equivalent would be) - so:
Likely property value with your CLX system as suggested above - 1.55 Million
Likely property value with Statements system in the same superb room - 1.6 Million.
Would you spend the extra 4% overall if you were speccing that system in that property with your amazing room design? I certainly would *IF* ML chose to produce the new product.
User211
Well-known member
New Amsterdam?
I went to Amsterdam 2 years ago - what a lovely place. Looks like the imaginative stuff does them a power of good, to be honest. Hell, even the red light district is nice! Really!
I went to Amsterdam 2 years ago - what a lovely place. Looks like the imaginative stuff does them a power of good, to be honest. Hell, even the red light district is nice! Really!
I have heard different. most of the people I know say that unless your really stoned you are going to realize what a toilet it is.
MiTT
Super User
I'm with Justin on this one. I was just there last year and found it a wonderfull city. It's very clean to be honest and the people were among the friendliest I've met. Amazing museums (the Van Gogh alone was the highlight of my trip), excellent restaurants and pubs, great shops. Probably the most bike friendly place I've been. I'd go back again in a heartbeat.
User211
Well-known member
Might sound like a cool thing to say, Fish, but I wasn't and it isn't. It is a beautiful city. Period. Go there and find out.
Anyway JayJay - £1.5 million? I think that's pretty excessive. There's loads of hi-end hi-fi in houses way cheaper than that in this country... I take your percentage point, though.
Anyway JayJay - £1.5 million? I think that's pretty excessive. There's loads of hi-end hi-fi in houses way cheaper than that in this country... I take your percentage point, though.
that's just what I have heard. I would like to go and see the museums as the red light district. Amsterdam is is on the top of the list of places to go for me.I have a friend who went every year as well as another who has been 3 or more times and they where the ones who have said it is a dirty city maybe they just had enough or a bad experience at some time who knows
Gordon Gray
Well-known member
This part of the world really has it together regarding non-motorized transportation. Trips made on bikes outnumber those made by cars. How cool is that.
Given my job, this area always stands out as the benchmark that the USA and other countries should try to emulate regarding the success of carbon free, non-polluting, non-motorized transportation.
GG
Given my job, this area always stands out as the benchmark that the USA and other countries should try to emulate regarding the success of carbon free, non-polluting, non-motorized transportation.
GG
just remember how big the US really is.
Justin,
You weren't and you didn't. That amazes me. I've been to Amersterdam more than a dozen times and I have to admit I was and I did.
Oh and the bikes were cool too.
And the Museums were cool too.'
And the Red Light district was .....well red like the red gin they serve on the tour boats.
In fact my supply of red gin is low, I will have to go back to Amsterdam and get some along with the great Afgan coffee at one of the local coffee houses.
But on the way there, I will be sure to stop in Jolly old England so I can check out this 1.5 million euro E2 sound system that apparently exists there.
You didn't think I could get this back on topic, did you?
You weren't and you didn't. That amazes me. I've been to Amersterdam more than a dozen times and I have to admit I was and I did.
Oh and the bikes were cool too.
And the Museums were cool too.'
And the Red Light district was .....well red like the red gin they serve on the tour boats.
In fact my supply of red gin is low, I will have to go back to Amsterdam and get some along with the great Afgan coffee at one of the local coffee houses.
But on the way there, I will be sure to stop in Jolly old England so I can check out this 1.5 million euro E2 sound system that apparently exists there.
You didn't think I could get this back on topic, did you?
