Renaissance 15a and Expression 13a side by side.

[DaVinci Media]

Renaissance 15a and Expression 13a.
We have both, give us a call to set up a demo!

 

[amey01]

Bigger difference in size than I had expected. I'd like to see a Prodigy in there too for comparison.

 

[Rich]

The Prodigy is about 3 inches shorter, 3/4 inch wider, 1 inch less deep, and about 7 lbs. lighter than the Renaissance according to their respective specs.

 

[stuwee]

Hello Shawn, I wish I was closer to do the demo but...too far, you might want to take one pair out for serious listening and, cover that TV screen between them. Just a thought.Craig

 

[Gordon Gray]

Hi Shawn,

Have you had a listen yet and if so, what are your first impressions?

Contrasting to the Summit X would be most helpful for me.

Gordon

 

[Brad225]

Hi Shawn,

Have you had a listen yet and if so, what are your first impressions?

Contrasting to the Summit X would be most helpful for me.



Not Shawn but, I listened to the 13A and 15A with him yesterday. I have not had extensive listening to the Summit X though I have listened to them in a dedicated room. Considering I listened in a dealer demo room with other equipment and the aforementioned TV screens, when the first track I requested was played I was taken aback at the size of the image and the base produced by the 13A's.

All of the electronics were products I had never heard before. They were Bricasti amps and DAC with streamed media. My memory of Summits vs Expression certainly can be suspect for anyone trying to compare sound between current and the past. That said I asked if subs were being used because the low end was so good. The sound stage and image was larger and more refined than I remember the Summit X. You need to listen for yourself to develop your decision.

As for the Renaissance 15A I expected to have the same sound but the only difference would be it was meant to be used in a larger room. I expected a slightly crowded image and stage based on the ( guessing 20' wide 28' deep room) sound I had just heard from the 13A's. It was much more than I had expected. Every sound was appropriately sized but wider and deeper.

We are talking about $15,000 as opposed to $25,000, both of those are a huge amount to consider spending on speakers. In my opinion the 15A's are 40% more speaker than the 13A's. You need to listen and decide for your self.

i will say that Shawn is the easiest most accommodating dealer I have ever worked with. For full discloser I ordered a pair of CLX's from him but that would not change my opinion of him. If you are considering a purchase of ML or other products I suggest you give Di Vinci Media a call.

 

[GaryG]

Thanks Brad for your impressions.
That is pretty much what I would have expected. I have now had my 15a's for over a month and consider them to be one of the best speakers at the price and perfect for my needs. The size difference as seen in Shawn's picture was dramatic but there is also a big difference In Price. I also purchased my CLX anniversaries from Shawn way back when. I also give Shawn a solid A to work with.

GaryG

 

[Cayman]

On a slightly different note, I noticed that the ES panel on the 15a is perfectly vertical, while the panel on the 13a is leaning backwards (as in Montis).

Is there a particular reason for this?

Since these are all DSP speakers I thought the time coherence issues would have been addressed within the DSP engine.

 

[RCHeliGuy]

On a slightly different note, I noticed that the ES panel on the 15a is perfectly vertical, while the panel on the 13a is leaning backwards (as in Montis).

Is there a particular reason for this?

Since these are all DSP speakers I thought the time coherence issues would have been addressed within the DSP engine.

I think the reason is pretty simple. The 15A is taller and the sound won't fall off when you stand up.

I noticed with my Ethos that they sound better when I'm sitting in the "sweet spot" when the panels are vertical. This is measurable with a mic. The higher range has a more even response. However when you are walking around the room the highs drop off quite a bit. Tilting the speakers back a bit makes the speaker sound much better when I'm walking around, but you lose a little bit when you are seated. I ended up making a slight compromise on my setup so the sound was reasonable standing but still very good while sitting. In the end that meant raising the speakers on stands to get the panels a bit higher as well. They may sound even better up another inch.

I bet that is one reason that the 15A's sound better in that room. If you tilted the 13A vertical and sat down and set up equivalent geometry I believe they would be much more comparable. The rake of the panel impacts the sound stage too.

As it is they have the 15A's spaced further apart and the panels are at different angles so in my opinion they are not set up for a reasonable A/B test unless you plan to leave the 13A's raked back.

Once the sound stage sounds like it extends beyond both speakers, I'm not sure how much "bigger" it can get, but I haven't experienced them first hand so my opinion is worth the paper it is printed on. I think the perceived height of the singers etc also depends on the height of the panel. That is the interesting thing about electrostatic panels, where a typical cone dispersion pattern would make most of this irrelevant.

 

[Bernard]

.......For full discloser I ordered a pair of CLX's from him but that would not change my opinion of him. If you are considering a purchase of ML or other products I suggest you give Di Vinci Media a call.

Did you have second thoughts about ordering the CLX after listening to the 15A? A comparison would be useful since they are about the same price.

 

[Brad225]

I think the reason is pretty simple. The 15A is taller and the sound won't fall off when you stand up.

I noticed with my Ethos that they sound better when I'm sitting in the "sweet spot" when the panels are vertical. This is measurable with a mic. The higher range has a more even response. However when you are walking around the room the highs drop off quite a bit. Tilting the speakers back a bit makes the speaker sound much better when I'm walking around, but you lose a little bit when you are seated. I ended up making a slight compromise on my setup so the sound was reasonable standing but still very good while sitting. In the end that meant raising the speakers on stands to get the panels a bit higher as well. They may sound even better up another inch.

I bet that is one reason that the 15A's sound better in that room. If you tilted the 13A vertical and sat down and set up equivalent geometry I believe they would be much more comparable. The rake of the panel impacts the sound stage too.

As it is they have the 15A's spaced further apart and the panels are at different angles so in my opinion they are not set up for a reasonable A/B test unless you plan to leave the 13A's raked back.

Once the sound stage sounds like it extends beyond both speakers, I'm not sure how much "bigger" it can get, but I haven't experienced them first hand so my opinion is worth the paper it is printed on. I think the perceived height of the singers etc also depends on the height of the panel. That is the interesting thing about electrostatic panels, where a typical cone dispersion pattern would make most of this irrelevant.

Rich, I don't disagree that more careful placement would probably improve the sound of the 13A. Shawn did move the speakers back 2-3' that were not playing. I would think there would still be some negative interference with them there but both pairs faced the same issue.

I was sitting at what would be a bar stool height behind a couch used for closer listening. This may have affected the image of the 13A's due to rake angle but at the time they didn't seem lacking for the compareison i was making.

In retrospect I probably could have made more visual inspections for placement and rake angle but I was just trying to compare sound between the two and felt they both had the same advantages and disadvantages with the setup.

 

[Brad225]

Did you have second thoughts about ordering the CLX after listening to the 15A? A comparison would be useful since they are about the same price.

I listened to the CLXs just prior at Mike's home about 1 1/2 hours earlier. His system used the same Bricasti DAC to Parasound J 1 amps (that may be the wrong model) and 2 ML 212 subs. Both systems used the DAC direct to the amps. Mikes system was in a smaller space and didn't have the ability to move them out into the room as much. Even without a side by side comparison I came away with the feeling that the CLX offered about 20% more than the 15A did.

The answer to your question is no second thoughts on the CLX vs Renaissance.

The only second thoughts were, it is a lot of money to spend following the path to audio nirvana. When my wife and I left Shawn's (she didn't care to attend either listening session) she asked me a few questions as to my impressions and what I felt the CLX did that my CLS didn't. I explained my feelings and she said "It looks like your getting new speakers". My response was still, it's a lot on money to spend. The rest is history I guess.

 

[RCHeliGuy]

Rich, I don't disagree that more careful placement would probably improve the sound of the 13A. Shawn did move the speakers back 2-3' that were not playing. I would think there would still be some negative interference with them there but both pairs faced the same issue.

I was sitting at what would be a bar stool height behind a couch used for closer listening. This may have affected the image of the 13A's due to rake angle but at the time they didn't seem lacking for the compareison i was making.

In retrospect I probably could have made more visual inspections for placement and rake angle but I was just trying to compare sound between the two and felt they both had the same advantages and disadvantages with the setup.

I wasn't trying to cut down your observations.
There are real limitations to a smaller electrostatic panel and a tall panel will tend to sound better over a larger range of seated and standing positions.

BTW my name is Mark. My screen name is RCHeliGuy = Remote Controlled Helicopter Guy

 

[Brad225]

Sorry Mark, I know your name, i was typing without thinking.

I didn't think you were questioning my observation. Your point was valid and I agree with what you said. I was trying to give a bit for background.

 

[GW1800]

So maybe I can add something to this discussion as I have a pair of Summit X's with 2 Descent i's originally in my music room, My son (Patrick) just purchased a pair of 13A's and 1-210 and I currently have CLX's Art with 2-212's. I have also listened twice to a pair of 15A's once at Shawn's and at Axpona 2016.

Its been awhile since I listen to my Summit X's in the music room but my impression is the 13A is just better all around. I think particularly in the base. The only review that TAS did on the Summit X's called them the best speaker under 30K at the time and I would think most of us would agree. I got to give big credit to the room correction software first but even with it off the base was just better if memory serves me right. The panel seems better but to a lesser extent IMO. I ran my Summits with 2 Descent i subs and Patrick has 1-210. We switched off the one sub and its quite noticeable. I could see some not requiring a sub for me the two subs with the Summit X's were definitely needed. I really like what I hear at Patrick's and it would be interesting if another sub is needed for music listening. His setup is a combo listening/media room so just for movies another sub probably would be helpful.

The 15A's just take this design to another new level over the 13A. Just size alone will dictate larger rooms and ceilings most likely. These are large speakers but with great overall sound. At Shawn's we added one sub and I liked that better but at Axpona they had none and it seemed fine. I would have to do more listening to determine my preference. IMO the bass was very good - again a combination of the room correction and just bigger cones/amps but the panel sound improvements was equally better over the 13A's. This speaker really puts this combination together in a familiar way yet much improved!

CLX Vs 15A - I got to agree with Brad on this one. I wish I could place my CLX's out further in my room but currently that is not an option. Sound stage is sacrificed to some degree but clarity and realism is really really good. I think in the end both sound great they get there differently. At this point I see no reason to move to the 15A's but I really like what ML is doing to their line up.

 

[timm]

I listened to the CLXs just prior at Mike's home about 1 1/2 hours earlier. His system used the same Bricasti DAC to Parasound J 1 amps (that may be the wrong model) and 2 ML 212 subs. Both systems used the DAC direct to the amps. Mikes system was in a smaller space and didn't have the ability to move them out into the room as much. Even without a side by side comparison I came away with the feeling that the CLX offered about 20% more than the 15A did.

The answer to your question is no second thoughts on the CLX vs Renaissance.

The only second thoughts were, it is a lot of money to spend following the path to audio nirvana. When my wife and I left Shawn's (she didn't care to attend either listening session) she asked me a few questions as to my impressions and what I felt the CLX did that my CLS didn't. I explained my feelings and she said "It looks like your getting new speakers". My response was still, it's a lot on money to spend. The rest is history I guess.

Now that is a feel good story!! I don't think I ever regretted a big audio purchase.... haha... You will never regret that decision....

 

[Timobi]

Great thread guys. Fairly new member. And new owner of 13a's
From reading the above comments it seems the 15s just take the great sonic nature of the 13s and take it to a larger level? More dynamic? Better bass...but with a sub I have may not be as noticeable.

Would love the CLX but arranging a demo has proved difficult.

The 13s already seem tall. I utilize the rake a bit. Sound a bit better more upright at sitting position .

I live in a rural area so no dealers too close to really listen to the 15s. Dallas is where I shop. About 4 hours away.

Any added feedback would be truly appreciated. Thx!

 

[twich54]

Tim,

After reading through the various responses here and judging by your room size (almost the same as mine) I see no reason why the 13a's shouldn't shine. How far from the wall are they placed ? against the short wall I presume ? how far apart ? listening position ? rake angle, how close to vertical ?

When you build your house and your dream listening room then you can taylor it to your dream speakers IMO.

 

[Timobi]

Hey Dave, let me say that for sure the 13as are wonderful. I love them. Seriously after that first couple of days the sound is tremendous. Adding a sub helped the bass at the listening position.

I have them about 20 inches from the wall. So the panel itself is about 45 inches from the wall. So at the MLP is about 15 feet from the front grilles. Not sure the rake degrees but the panel is nearly straight up.

I'm thinking if my room was a tad wider it might be better for the 15's?

 

[twich54]

Agreed Tim on the room width, not that the 15's wouldn't fit but a room of 16-17' width would be ideal.

Given your seating distance I'm assuming you have minimized your toe in ?