New to the site, ML owner for some time now.

[Rickk]

Hi, my name is Rick and I have an addiction. No really I can't live without regular exposure to music. Ultimately live music is best however well preformed and recorded music helps. I'm predominately a CD user however I have and do connect my computer to various playback schemes that dot my world. My primary listening post is comprised currently of Martin Logan "Purity", NAD C545BEE, NAD C326BEE (Used as a preamp). I know it's not really high end but it sounds good to me. I played brass instruments in my youth in school and drum and bugle corps. I do know what music should sound like and I attend live performances when I can. The "Purities" are a good match for my somewhat small listening space and not having to worry about power amps is a plus. I don't doubt that more than a few people are always hunting for the next great thing in that department. I previously owned a pair of "Sources". I also had Motion 10 that were spooky good with voices but had little bottom end. I am expecting delivery of a Vincent SA - 31 hybrid tube preamp so I'll let you know how that goes. -Rick

 

[Rich]

Welcome to the club, Rick.

 

[Rickk]

Thanks Rich, The update bug just bit me... Traded in my "Purities" toward "Electromotion ESL" and yes with just about an hour I would say the EM/ESL are better. And thats just with a NAD C326BEE at the helm. Wow the EM/ESL are easy to drive. Oh, yeah, I cancelled the Vincent... -Rick

 

[Rich]

How exactly are the EM ESLs better than the Purities? Honestly, I find that hard to believe. The Purities go both higher and lower in the frequency range and have a lower crossover point. Also, they are easier to drive by about 2 Db of sensitivity. And if you only have an hour on them, the EMs aren't even broken in yet. Seems to me you got a newer speaker, but not necessarily a better speaker. Either way, as long as you enjoy them then that is all that matters.

 

[Rickk]

The difference in extension is negligible. My hearing doesn't nearly approach 20khz. The EM/ESL are new and fresh and the purities were floor models and were a bit tattered. The purities had better bass but the EM/ESL are very new. The EM/ESL seem to have a wider sweet spot. All in all the Purities may indeed be a better speaker but mine were not the best example of the breed. My EM/ESL being "better" comment may be simple joy at having a new toy and the sound improvement may be pure placebo but I'm happy and as you say as long as I enjoy them... -Rick

 

[Rich]

I expect the bass on the EM's will improve as they get broken in. After a few weeks with them, I will be curious to hear your impressions. How is the build quality compared to the Purities? Also, I was curious why you cancelled the Vincent? Probably just budget considerations after deciding to upgrade the speakers, I expect.

 

[Rickk]

The EM/ESLs are lighter but I see no obvious cost cutting measures, just some difference in design and or "build to a price compromises". The speaker terminals are just like all the other Motion series, not the most robust looking or feeling connectors but not universal parts bin cheep also. The composite bass housing is smooth and black and may or may not be cheaper than veneer covered MDF. I like the look.

I cancelled the Vincent because I was able to fall back on my NAD integrated and a misunderstanding with Audio Advisor. The didn't ship it out last friday even after billing my card! I found this out yesterday so I cancelled. I did consider keeping it because the matching amp -331 is also top rated. I do like integrated amps because their simplicity so when I do buy new I will likely buy a more powerful integrated amp. My listening space is not huge so I don't think I will need to move on this soon. The NAD/EM combo plays as loud as I have ever needed and with break-in things should even get better.

 

[camflan]

The EM/ESLs are lighter but I see no obvious cost cutting measures, just some difference in design and or "build to a price compromises". The speaker terminals are just like all the other Motion series, not the most robust looking or feeling connectors but not universal parts bin cheep also. The composite bass housing is smooth and black and may or may not be cheaper than veneer covered MDF. I like the look.

I think they put the money they had in the right spots - the panel is top shelf, the cabinet is sturdy, and for a doped woofer - I see no flaws - and the crossover seems solid.

However, there's only so much money in these, so the terminals, spikes, grille, and finish options are the compromise.

For 2k, I don't think we could've gotten a better bang for the buck. Like I said - I think they spent the money in the right spots with the right priority. I like the look and LOVE the performance.

 

[Rich]

I think the weight is what concerns me most about these speakers. Stability is very important to an ESL design, and thirty-five pounds for a fifty-two inch tall speaker just doesn't seem sufficient.

 

[camflan]

I think the weight is what concerns me most about these speakers. Stability is very important to an ESL design, and thirty-five pounds for a fifty-two inch tall speaker just doesn't seem sufficient.

They are using less material than before. Look at a clarity or a purity or an aerion. They have a lot more bracing and material holding it up and more cabinet. Newer models have a smaller cabinet with a airframe design using less bracing and material.

I'm thinking that this + the composite cabinet is why it's only 39 pounds. While moving mine around, it doesn't feel unstable or flimsy in anyway to me.


- Camron

 

[Rickk]

Rich, Good point but the weight is concentrated in the base and the tipping point is not in my opinion excessive. A long time ago I had a dreadful pair of Polk towers that were very tippy.

I have been thinking about the relationship between measured response and the act of listening. Just because one speaker measures better in some arguably arbitrary test doesn't automatically make it sound better. Some box speakers with dynamic drivers (and say horn loading) will out perform the purities in efficiency Bass extension etc but sound like junk. So even if the purities have minor performance advantages in the cited areas of measurement it doesn't definitively make them better than the EM/ESL. 1000 watt amps don't always sound better than 3 watt amps. I believe there is as much art as science in making musical instruments and I still think the EM/ESL sounds better. I am still fool enough to know it might be all in my head. Lab measurements only go so far. -Rick

 

[Rickk]

Camron,(thanks for joining in) having owned both the Purity and the Source I will concur with you about the less material in the EM/ESL. All three speakers sound great and I don't think I want to be trapped in saying sound quality will be reflected in a speakers mass. Klipsch horns, Altec Lansing A7 and classic Tannoys are massive, sound very good and represent old technologies. Perhaps the future lies in driving the very air and having no mass at all. The EM/ESL feel very solid to me also. -Rick

 

[churchill]

Welcome to the forum!

 

[Rich]

Rick, I understand your point. I think sometimes people just assume because something is newer then it is automatically better, and that is just not always the case. The thing is, the Purities and the EM's are just not that different of a design. They are basically the same type of electrostatic panel combined with the same type of woofer enclosure. Yes, minor differences in design, but nothing earth shattering. So if one speaker goes both higher and lower in the frequency range, is easier to drive, has a lower crossover point, and is heavier, and therefore, more stable, it is probably going to sound better, all other things being equal. Now, I understand what you were saying about the age of the Purities, but unless they have been mistreated that really shouldn't affect their sound in a negative way.

My concern regarding the weight is about the stability of the ESL panel. Hold your base steady and try to flex the panel forward and backward. If you can flex it a half inch or a quarter inch in both directions, that is going to have a negative impact on sound, specifically timing and imaging. If the panel can flex, the force created by the mylar pushing air will be enough to flex it while it is playing at high volumes. This will cause time anomalies that will affect imaging. I don't know that this is the case with the EM, but I suspect it is a possibility. It may not be a problem at all, though. I don't really know. At any rate, let us know how they improve as they break in.

 

[Rickk]

Rich, the panels are very rigid. I can't say if they are just as rigid as the Purities or the Sources but they seem to be. Both my Purities and Sources were well used demos with some rough edges and ware and tear not likely to be seen on cherished speakers in someones home. In fact both were a little loose between the panel frame and the base. I think they were moved often by grabbing the panel frame and lifting or dragged around the showroom. Not good! I do think the EM/ESL is every bit as good as the legacy models. Sometimes things do improve as the company evolves the technology into new products. See the reviews contained in this PDF for example:

http://www.tonepublications.com/MAGPDF/TA_037.pdf

I hope you get a chance to audition the EM/ESL for yourself at some point. Your experience puts you in the position to better assess their value against other models in a way my much more limited experience can't. I have owned three of the lower end ML "stats" and I think I like the ones I have now the best and not only because they are new. -Rick

 

[Rich]

I have owned three of the lower end ML "stats" and I think I like the ones I have now the best and not only because they are new. -Rick

Well, as I said earlier, that is all that really matters. You didn't spend your hard-earned money on them to please anyone else. They should last you a good long time. I do recommend that you try a tube pre (or tube pre and tube amp combination) with them. I think you will be amazed how good those little speakers can sound.

 

[Rickk]

I do have an itch to try tubes. An integrated amp with a tube pre and a transistor power section seems to be the ticket. Thanks for your input and questions. -Rick

P.S. After some research on this site and elsewhere I can confidently state that I am not the only one that believes the EM/ESL is an evolutionary step forward from the Purity and the source. ML thinks so, members of this forum think so and the press/media think so. If new were never better we would still all be sitting in front of our Edison wax cylinder phonographs. I'm convinced I made the right move.

 

[Rickk]

The EM/ESLs are evolving nicely. I am beginning to believe I may not need a subwoofer or an amplifier upgrade to fully enjoy these wonderful revealing reasonably priced marvels! Just spent some time with the 24/96 versions of "Fragile", "Kamikiriad" and "Band on the run". Fifty real watts make these things sing real nice. And my hat is still off to NAD's little barn burner C326BEE integrated amplifier. I do recommend this pairing without reservation.