Soundlabs vs. Logans

[David Matz]

Soz David - I meant which SL model, and what is the retail price?

I listened to the u1 px model. It's $36.5K. It goes down to 24 Hz. A model that supposedly retains 95% of the u1 and is a bit smaller is the m1 px. It goes down to 28 Hz. It's priced at about $24K.

The reason I mention the bass is that it is the foundation of music. If you can get the bass right, the music sound real. My Vantage is pretty good, but I definitely hear the bass is not of the same cloth as the panel. Likewise with the Magico V3, Vienna musics, Wilsons, etc., - they are all off to my ears.

With the CLX, the bass is fast, snappy, and punchy. Sorry that these are audiophile terms, but that is my memory. It only goes down to 55Hz, or so. With the Soundlab, it is deep and just right - it's cut from the same cloth and integrated better than I have heard in a speaker. I think it may be the reason why I am so impressed with it. It just sounds so natural and real.

 

[Brian Walsh]

David, thank you for posting your impressions of what you heard here yesterday and inviting me to this site.

As you described, the demonstration system consisted of your Ayre CD player, the Atma-Sphere MP-1 preamplifier, the Parasound Halo JC-1 amplifiers, and Sound Lab U-1PX loudspeakers. Cabling was a combination of Creative Cable Concepts, TG Audio, and Isoclean. The single ended interconnects from the CD player to the preamp were Acoustic System Liveline, and power conditioning for the front end was Isoclean. Acoustic System resonators and related products are used for room tuning.

For those interested, I am having an open house on Saturday, April 11th. Information is available on my website, www.essentialaudio.com. Call or email for directions.

 

[lhpcope]

Brian, Thank you so much for joining our little corner of the web. Could you provide the approximate dimensions for the room you are using? And thanks again.:bowdown:

 

[Brian Walsh]

The room is 13'5" wide by 19'4" long at its shortest part, slightly longer on one side and open to other rooms at the opposite corner and with French doors open to another room along one of the long walls. 8' ceiling. Record storage behind the couch.

 

[JonFo]

I listened to the u1 px model. It's $36.5K. It goes down to 24 Hz. A model that supposedly retains 95% of the u1 and is a bit smaller is the m1 px. It goes down to 28 Hz. It's priced at about $24K.

The reason I mention the bass is that it is the foundation of music. If you can get the bass right, the music sound real. My Vantage is pretty good, but I definitely hear the bass is not of the same cloth as the panel. Likewise with the Magico V3, Vienna musics, Wilsons, etc., - they are all off to my ears.

With the CLX, the bass is fast, snappy, and punchy. Sorry that these are audiophile terms, but that is my memory. It only goes down to 55Hz, or so. With the Soundlab, it is deep and just right - it's cut from the same cloth and integrated better than I have heard in a speaker. I think it may be the reason why I am so impressed with it. It just sounds so natural and real.

Hi Dave, thanks for sharing this experience. I’ve followed the SL designs over the years, but have never had an opportunity to hear them.

As far as bass performance, I agree, it is an important foundation. But to go really go low (I mean 18 -20hz, cleanly at >105dB SPL), no panel system can go there.

So for people who have (or would deploy) a truly capable sub, is the difference between CLX and SL that great?

The 60 to 500hz range is critical, and the better the bass performance of an ESL, the cleaner, and punchier the mid-bass. This makes models like the U1 or the CLX the true cream of the ESL crop.

But any system that is going to be ‘full-range’ needs a world-class sub. A case in point:

We just watched the BluRay version of the new animation film Bolt, and in the first five minutes, that soundtrack has some absolutely stunning infrasonic and low bass sounds at *very* high levels.
My Infinite Baffle sub totally pressurizes the room, and the whole structure moves, very impressive.
I doubt any dipole driver of any tech can do that, regardless of how big it is.

 

[Brian Walsh]

I know someone with Sound Lab U-1s with matching UB-1 subwoofers, crossed over around 180 Hz. The dipole subs are about 4 ft. wide each. I don't know if there's an accurate way to measure frequency response of them, but Roger West of Sound Lab said they had measured response well down into the infrasonic region, I think relatively flat to 14-16 Hz and measurable to 8 Hz. In a large room such as his the air movement capability makes a difference. The sight of a 14 ft. wide speaker array is breathtaking to say the least. A fellow with whom I've been talking for quite a while is contemplating a system that would dwarf that one :drool:

 

[AudioArchon]

Their following is quite rabid. If you had a scale of the ML, Quad and Soundlab based on warmth, I place Sounlab cool, Quad warmer, ML warmest. A friend of mine had the hybrid dynastat. One of the most neutral speakers I ever heard.
The magazine don't ignore Soundlab. I think Dr. West is kind of stingy with the reveiw samples.
Definitely worth a listen

I have heard all three mentioned brands at least several times, but in my experience it is the opposite of what you mention. To my ears, ML (CLX) is the most neutral (but least warm), the Quads have more romance and warmth, then the SL which are warm to almost a fault (and I have heard them in medium, large, and really large rooms). Not saying one is better, only different flavors. Of course, YMMV.


Mike
www.audioarchon.com
847-687-4800

 

[Rich]

Given that electrostats are some of the most revealing of upstream components of any high-end speaker, some of the differences people are attributing to Soundlabs, Quads, and Logans could easily be differences emanating from the components of the systems they auditioned, rather than differences in the speakers themselves.

Also, personal preferences and what you are used to can play a role here. A speaker that is neutral to some may sound cold to someone used to a warmer sound. Ultimately, unless you have heard each of these speakers setup in a similar room with similar components, your opinions on their tonality differences is speculative at best.

With Jeff's (tonepub's) ability to audition speakers in the same room with many different types of components, I would say he probably has the best handle on the differences between them. Personally, I have never heard quads or soundlabs but would like to experience both at some point in time.

 

[tonepub]

They're really all good speakers. As always it depends on your room, music, gear and taste.

You can get a nice pair (refurbed) quad 57's for about 3500, so it's a different game than the big sound labs or CLX's. I've been back listening to the spires again for a while and am still blown away by what that speaker can do.

Looking for 57's right now....

 

[AudioArchon]

Also, personal preferences and what you are used to can play a role here. A speaker that is neutral to some may sound cold to someone used to a warmer sound. Ultimately, unless you have heard each of these speakers setup in a similar room with similar components, your opinions on their tonality differences is speculative at best.

Agreed, this is a blanket statement and your mileage may vary. However, when you hear a certain speaker many times in different setups, you can pickup on a certain flavor of sound. If you think of it in box speakers, you might think Vandersteen compared to Wilson (once you have hear both several times...or less) you can pick up the sonic flavors quite easily IMHO.

 

[Brian Walsh]

Given that electrostats are some of the most revealing of upstream components of any high-end speaker, some of the differences people are attributing to Soundlabs, Quads, and Logans could easily be differences emanating from the components of the systems they auditioned, rather than differences in the speakers themselves.

That is true. However, differences in radiation patterns and every other aspect of loudspeaker design and performance, not to mention the room, have large effects on the sound as well. Sound Labs are exceedingly revealing of changes both large and subtle yet in a forgiving way. I am very familiar with the other loudspeakers mentioned.

Edmiston's post on the first page contains some good insights.

 

[tonepub]

Agreed, this is a blanket statement and your mileage may vary. However, when you hear a certain speaker many times in different setups, you can pickup on a certain flavor of sound. If you think of it in box speakers, you might think Vandersteen compared to Wilson (once you have hear both several times...or less) you can pick up the sonic flavors quite easily IMHO.

I agree with Mike on this one. I've heard the 57's in a lot of different systems and they've never sounded bright or forward.

 

[radicalsteve]

I heard a pair of Soundlab AX1's recently in a home setting, finely tuned. The physical size of these speakers strikes you immediately and as I spent 2 hours listening to these things, I couldn't escape the sheer visual impact on my sensory system!

Sound wise, they could be called "warm" (even with class D Bel Canto amps drivers) and have a very deep spatialization and precise imaging in the front -back plane. In this set up, the speakers were close to the wall and threw the sound back in 3-D in a lifelike way. That was their primary characteristic for all types of music.

On the bass front, I made 2 key observations:

High quality bass, similar to Quad, but much better quantity. I was listening to an electric bass line from Joni Mitchell Turbulent Indigo, and was struck by the precision of the timbre, decay, and it seemed you could envisage each string being plucked on the fret. Great separation of individual notes.

My other observation, tied to the realism of the bass lines, was where was the sub? - and of course there wasn't one. These things go low and probably in a very flat and definitely in a fast way.

Compared to the CLX's - as best as I could in a 2 week gap, the CLX's had more impact, more analytical (detail?) and a wider soundstage. Don't think the Soundalbs would be best on movies compared to the CLX'x.

I am considering the CLX's and Summits as my next move. I could have purchased these AX1's for a very reasonable price except they were 2" too high for my room. If they weren't, I would have taken them home with me (notwithstanding I would need a couple of piano mover to assist).

On reflection, for pure music systems, the Soundlabs have it all. If, like me. you have an integrated audio and HT system, the CLX's might be more attractive - but still more listening required to decide.

Steve

 

[JonFo]

The real reason ...

And here is the REAL reason Sound Lab owners love their speakers:

 

[User211]

Where on earth did you find that?:ROFL:

Nice Soundlabs, BTW!

 

[Gordon]

Certainly does not offend me! I've never been known to be PC and I'll admit it in public that I enjoy looking at well formed woman!!:bowdown: Or are we supposed to look at something else?

Gordon

 

[JonFo]

Where on earth did you find that?:ROFL:

Nice Soundlabs, BTW!

Hey, I have my sources ... :devil:

Yeah nice speakers, I could watch, er, listen to them them all day long myself

 

[twich54]

Jonathan, you must have gotten that pic right out of the owners manual, for I believe it is to help position ones eyes...I mean ears... for proper listening height / sweet spot when in your favorite chair !

 

[gregadd]

Now I remembr why I like Soundlab.

Where on earth did you find that?:ROFL:

Nice Soundlabs, BTW!

I think there is a whoe site with pictures like that.
I ran across it some time ago.
Gergadd:afro:

 

[JMAUSGP]

Actually that is a Sound Lab installation technician demonstrating where the sweet spot is.

I have heard that Sound Lab owners are more into the installation than just sitting and listening to Sound Labs.