System #187 (SL-3, Logos, Descent)

[Dan Prorok]

1. Member Name: Dan Prorok
2. Location: Catskill, New York USA
3. ML Models: SL-3, Logos, Descent
4. Year Purchased: SL-3: Feb 2004; Logos: May 2004; Decent: March 2007
5. Mods/Changes: Custom walnut trim on SL-3's to match Salamander rack
6. Associated Electronics:

* 2-channel signal path:

* CD: Jolida JD-100a --> Straightwire Maestro II --> B&K Reference 50 (running in "analog" bypass mode) --> Heartland Cables Belden 89259 cable with Eichmann Bullet Plugs --> B&K Reference 4420 --> Straightwire Maestro (woofer) & Straightwire Rhapsody (panels)
​

* Turntable: Rega Planar 3 w/ RB-300 tonearm and Shure V15VxMR cartridge --> NAD PP-2 phono preamp --> Straightwire Rhapsody II --> B&K Reference 50 (running in "analog" bypass mode) --> Heartland Cables Belden 89259 cable with Eichmann Bullet Plugs --> B&K Reference 4420 --> Straightwire Maestro (woofer) & Straightwire Rhapsody (panels)
​

* Home Theater components:

* Denon DVD-3800 DVD player
* Marantz MV5100 SVHS VCR
* Marantz LV520 Laserdisc Player (a what?)
* B&K DT-1 RF demodulator
* Infocus X1 (the venerable)
* Da-Lite Model C w/ CSR 16:9 High Power screen, 42.75" x 76"
* Velodyne SMS-1 (ordered and on the way)
* B&K Reference 220M monoblock (powering Logos)
* B&K Sonata Series EX442 (powering surrounds)
* Polk RT-1000i speakers (used as surrounds)
​

* Other junk

* Salamander Synergy S40 + S30 extension walnut and black rack with perforated steel sides, extended back, and walnut and perforated steel doors
* Billy Bags 2020 amp stand (for B&K Reference 4420)
* Panamax MAX5300 for front channel amps and MLs
* Panamax MAX5500 ACRegenerator for most of the equipment in the Salamander Rack
* my own homemade power cords, a variant on the Bob Crump recipe with techflex and upgraded WattGate plugs
* More Straightwire AV cables than I can shake a stick at
​

7. Comments and/or stories about your Martin Logan experience:
I first saw a pair of Martin Logans back around the end of 2001 when I accidentally wandered from the "economy room" at Longplayer Stereo in Goshen, filled with NAD, Marantz, PSB, Nakamichi, B&K, and the like, into the "top-shelf" room in the back with Martin Logan, JM Labs, Pass, and other things that looked far too exotic for my modest means. I quickly scurried out, frightened I might touch and break something more expensive than my car.

Several months later, while hanging out at Longplayer, I started wandering into the "good" room again looking for who-knows-what when I passed through the sweet spot of the room and, for the first time in my life, was stopped dead in my tracks by a stereo. I hadn't really been paying attention to the music at first, but at just that instant, I could have sworn there was a symphony orchestra assembled right in front of me. The aural tricks were spooky: my ears kept telling me there is an orchestra right in front of me, but my eyes clearly disagreed. I walked over to the wall of speakers and could not figure out where that sound was coming from. Even standing in front of all the speakers and walking around them, I could not determine which speakers were making that orchestra appear in front of me. I went over to ask Jason where that music was coming from. In the most bored tone possible, he remarked, "Oh, those are just the Ascents. If you think that's good, you should hear the Prodigies hooked up to the Pass." He then explained Martin Logans to me and I knew from that day forward I wasn't buying another speaker until I could have one of those amazing Martin Logans.

Several years later, I was finally able to pull enough together for a used pair of SL-3's and drove all the way out to New Hampshire to get them. I stayed up all night playing with those speakers, tweaking the toe in, moving them back and forth. They were quite an improvement over my Polk RT-1000's and, while they never were as magical as that first Ascent experience, I was well on my way.

In the summer of 2004, I met jhorowitz128 on the old Martin Logan Club board and listened to his amazing Aerius two-channel system, paired with gobs of tube equipment. Once again, I was impressed and hooked on that Martin Logan sound: jhorowitz128's system was the best I have ever heard. Through a lot of careful attention to room placement and component selection, he had achieved a result far closer to audio nirvana than I had come. It was then I learned that if I had spent all the dollars I had on home theater on two-channel, I could have achieved a far more rewarding overall sound. jhorowitz128 listened to my system at various points and made numerous helpful suggestions; it was the first time I had ever had a knowledgeable audiophile to share opinions and experiences with. What a great summer!

Since then the system has been a lot closer to achieving bearable sound and sometimes a touch of nirvana, but there is clearly room for work. Relatively little has changed in my setup since 2004. I added the Descent recently in a moment of weakness, but do not plan to make any more upgrades for a while. I have to wait until the wife finishes grad school first before I start blowing disposable income again. It should be clear that home theater has been my priority. The single best thing I can do to improve two-channel sound would be to move my two-channel gear up front and run it through a real preamp like a Rogue Magnum 99. The home theater sound is plenty good enough for me, so the next dream upgrade there would be to dump the aging projector and get one of those new 1280p ones that have started to be seen south of $3k. Once they crash through the $1k mark like their 720p cousins, I will probably be motivated to make a giant leap forward in picture quality.

In the meantime, the only minor upgrades I have planned are cosmetic or convenience factors: adding custom walnut trim to the Descent to match the rest of the living room, maybe get an amp rack or two, spring for a wall shelf for the turntable, or go for one of those Sound Anchors SDACC center channel speaker stands to get the darned Logos off the floor.

I apologize for the picture quality; it was hard for me to get a good picture while staring right into the copious sunlight that beams in from the windows.

 

[twich54]

Dan, Welcome, nice to have another vinyl guy in the fold. How about adding another shot of the rest of your equipment !

 

[tonyc]

Dan, what a tastefully done, clean system! Bet it sounds as good as it looks.

 

[Pcar928fan]

Dan,

System looks GREAT! Like that Salamander stack you have there on the side! Very nice! I like my Quad 20. Very well built racks, but pretty expensive.

 

[philox]

Brings back memories...the Logos always did match well with the SL3 and I love your LD what??? yes, I still have a LD player but its connected to a normal TV upstairs. How many LD's do you have?

 

[Kaliar]

Congrats !

Hi Dan,

You have a beautiful installation ! I love your room and setup !

Happy listening !

 

[Pcar928fan]

Brings back memories...the Logos always did match well with the SL3 and I love your LD what??? yes, I still have a LD player but its connected to a normal TV upstairs. How many LD's do you have?

I missed that. I too have an LD hooked up to my system. I Pioneer Elite. I have about 75 LD's. Got it for playing STAR WARS LD's but then I ended up w/ about 70 others that I don't have on DVD so I figure why not leave it in the mix?!

 

[Dan Prorok]

The Salamander racks are essential in my setup since they play such a key role in WAF. One of my design criteria was to try as hard as possible to make the living room look like a sitting room with some funky Martin Logan speaker sculpture art and not look like Dan's electronics workshop. Front projection helped a lot here, too, since a 50 or 60" inch TV is a little hard to conceal, but a pull-down screen discretely hides when not in use.

The fully enclosed rack has also allowed me to focus on procuring devices that, for the most part, aren't all that attractive (form follows function). As a result, I'm afraid the equipment stack pictures are just lots of silver and black boxes sitting on shelves. I have perforated steel on all sides to permit the maximum amount of airflow while doing the maximum amount of hiding.

 

[Dan Prorok]

The picture of the bottom of the rack is evidence that a turntable shelf would make playing vinyl far more enjoyable than the current kneeling that is required today. A dream is to put a Salamander Triple 20 (walnut and black) up front and house the front channel amps inside while putting on top (for display and easy access) a Rogue Magnum 99 preamp in the center flanked by the Rega Planar 3 on one side and a beautiful Shanling CD T-100 (or T-200) on the other. In the meantime, vinyl will just have to be a pain to get to.

 

[Pcar928fan]

The Salamander racks are essential in my setup since they play such a key role in WAF. Front projection helped a lot here, too, since a 50 or 60" inch TV is a little hard to conceal, but a pull-down screen discretely hides when not in use.

Try a 70" RPTV! YUCK! Thankfully my wife really enjoys watching it...not to mention it has a better picture than anything else on the market right now! That helps too...at least when it is turned on.

 

[Dreamer]

Great SL3 system! I love it when I see another Sequel system on here. Seems to be a LOT of us!

I bet your system sounds REALLY sweet.

Welcome to the club!

--Richard

 

[Dan Prorok]

Brings back memories...the Logos always did match well with the SL3 and I love your LD what??? yes, I still have a LD player but its connected to a normal TV upstairs. How many LD's do you have?

The choice of the Logos, once again, goes back to aesthetics and WAF. My wife never cared for the look of the Theater (or nearly identical Theater i), claiming it looked like "some part that fell off of an alien space ship." The fact that the voicing on the Logos matches the SL-3's so well is a bonus and a coincidence.

That said, I have been known to break my wife's rules from time to time...it's just a matter of degree. A standing rule is that I am not permitted to purchase speakers that are taller than she is. The SL-3's break this rule by an inch or two, but I got a pass anyway. I've always been a fan of esoteric-looking speakers; given a choice between spending a lot of money for a pair of speakers that look like any other tall box (like JM Labs, for instance) and something more interesting or unusual (like Martin Logans) is an easy pick. My tendency for the bizarre has to be balanced against the wife's more conservative, eye, however. No Wilson WATT Puppies or B&W Nautilus for me since the wife doesn't like the "trash can speakers" or the "speakers with the eyeballs on top," respectively.

As for laserdiscs, I probably have somewhere around 50 titles. Some have been duplicated in my DVD collection and some have not. Originally, I collected laserdiscs of things that could not be procured on DVD, but in recent years it seems like darned-near everything has been released to DVD now, so I watch laserdiscs extremely infrequently. When the LD player finally stops turning discs, it will probably not be replaced.

For what it's worth, I think the Marantz LV-520 is a great value. I once had a Pioneer Elite and while the build quality was tremendous and it had some nifty features, I was able to sell it and buy the Marantz and have a fair amount of money left over. The Marantz plays DTS and DD AC-3 RF discs, has auto-flip, and S-video out (two, if I remember correctly). It also plays CDs, a feature I reserve for A-B'ing with the Jolida to demonstrate just how *awful* CDs can sound. the only thing the Marantz doesn't do that my old Pioneer Elite could that I sometimes miss is the ability to pause, FF, and reverse CLV discs with the image on screen. That said, that wasn't a feature I was willing to get a few hundred dollars back for given that I watch LDs so infrequently. The Marantz is most likely a rebranded Pioneer, though I have no idea which one.

 

[Charliemike]

Hey Dan,

What kind of pull-down screen is that? How do you like it? Have any problems with the image being square?

Just about every place I'm looking at has a limitation of where I can put my 50" plasma ... I've owned a PJ before and would love to do it again (and put the plasma in my BR).

Great setup BTW. I have SL3s too and really like what you've done.

 

[Dan Prorok]

The pull-down screen was custom-made by Da-Lite. It's a Model C w/ CSR with the "High Power" screen material. It has been a few years since I purchased the screen, so some of the current market details may have changed since I last did my research. When choosing a screen, the big choices are brand, model, size, and fabric.

Some years back, the three big name choices in screens were Stewart, Da-Lite, and Draper. If you had the bucks, you couldn't go wrong with a Stewart; for the more economy-minded, Da-Lite and Draper were the more mainstream choices. For reasons I describe below, I went with Da-Lite.

As for type, I think the most ideal screen in the world is a basic fixed wall screen. It is the cheapest and because it is tensioned, there aren't any waves or wrinkles to worry about. The downside, of course, is that it only really works in dedicated home theater room environment unless you LIKE having a giant white square on the wall of your living room. (Good luck getting that past the wife.)

Next most ideal is a tensioned retractable screen. It has the advantage the screen can "go away" when not in use and the tensioning holds that screen rigid and flat, pulling all the wrinkles and waves out. Downside with these screens is they are primo expensive. If I remember correctly, Draper made a manual tensioned screen for over $1k and Da-Lite only offered tensioned screens as an option for motorized screens, so it was even more expensive (several $k) and hard to install due to weight and power. You can't beat the coolness factor of a motorized tensioned screen, though!

So the NEXT most ideal...okay, LEAST ideal...is the old-fashioned manual pull-down screen. The biggest problems with pull-down screens is that over time the screen material has a tendency to stretch and create wrinkles and waves in the picture. All untensioned retractable screens have this problem; some more than others. I chose the Da-Lite model C over the model B because it has a bigger higher-quality roller, which causes the screen to get curled in a larger diameter and helps reduce the amount of uneven tension. It also has a MUCH higher quality feel. I kicked in the extra money for the CSR (controlled-screen return). This is another essential feature for overall quality. Rather than pulling the screen down and having it race back into the case, finishing with a BANG, it races back quickly at first and then for the last 18 inches or so, slowly retracts elegantly back into the case. Besides being less hokey, the gentle return also stretches and stresses the screen material less. If you're going to get a manual pull-down screen, the Model C w/ CSR is about as good as it gets.

Size depends on your application. My previous installation was much less forgiving in terms of placement, which is why I had the custom sized screen made. It is somewhat less relevent now.

Finally, the fabric. The Da-Lite High Power fabric is a retro-reflective screen material and amongst one of the most expensive fabrics Da-Lite offers. At the time, it was exclusive to Da-Lite, which was why I chose Da-Lite over Draper. Retro-reflective means that light bounces off the screen and is returned directly to its source (as opposed to reflective, where the angle of incidence equals the angle of reflection). A retro-reflective screen is great if you have a table mounted projector since the majority of the light thrown by the projector on the screen will be returned back to the general location of the projector, which is generally near where your seating position is. If you look at my installation, however, you'll see the projector is at the ceiling...so the majority of the light from the projector onto the screen is thrown back at the ceiling. Yes, the picture looks better when you stand up from a seated position.

So, um, why do I use a retro-reflective material? The retro-reflective properties do have some advantages. First off, ambient light has a tendency to get bounced back to its source, so it works better when light control isn't perfect. More importantly, it also has a tendency to mask the wrinkles and waves in the screen. If I walk up to the edge of the screen and look along its side, I can see wrinkles and waves in the fabric, but when I am seated in front of the screen, I can never defect these geometric distortions. In short, the retro-reflective material masks most of the geometric distortions inherent in untensioned retractable screens.

If I had a tensioned screen (retractable or fixed), there is no way I would have picked the High Power material. Its expensive, it throws more of the light on to my ceiling instead of the viewer's position, and there are better choices for optimum color and contrast. However, since I needed a way to deal with the geometric distortions inhenerent in an untensioned screen, the High Power was the only way to go.

Some day, if I ever have a dedicated home theater room, I'd like to get a basic fixed tension screen with a nice black velvet lined frame. Until then, the pull-down will serve its duty as the disappearing display device.

 

[Peter Hogan]

Hi,
I also use this same screen (in the 120" size), and you didn't mention the main reason I chose it. It has a gain of 2.8, so you get a MUCH brighter picture from whatever projector you use. I have my projector on a shelf just above head height, behind the couch, so it is ideal for my setup.

I originally had a light grey screen, which was supposed to maximize contrast, but with a gain of less than 1, the overall brightness was simply too low, not so with the high power screen.

As you say, the directional nature of the reflection helps with ambient light. I would say it's nearly as good as the grey screen contrast wise, and the picture has lots more 'punch', great for sporting events...

Peter