Vantage vs Summit Sweet Spot

[macallan]

Is there a large difference between the 2 in this regard? I am looking to replace my 5.1 with a 4.1 set up and wonder if the Vantages will provide as good of a phantom image as the Summits?

 

[macallan]

Anyone? Really the question is just if a larger panel creates a larger sweet spot? I would like to go with a phantom center and wonder if the Vantage will be sufficient

 

[twich54]

Anyone? Really the question is just if a larger panel creates a larger sweet spot? I would like to go with a phantom center and wonder if the Vantage will be sufficient

Room size, speaker placement with respect to distance apart ??

 

[macallan]

Room size= 14 feet by 21 with vaulted ceilings, they would be about 7 feet apart

 

[Rich]

I doubt there is that big of a difference in the size of the sweet spot between Summits and Vantages. I don't notice any difference in the size of the sweet spot between my Summits and my Ascents.

Lots of folks swear by a phantom center, but I have my doubts about it for the very reason you bring up. A phantom center may sound great when you are sitting in the sweet spot (which is pretty small for MLs), but how well does it really work for anyone sitting off-axis? I would expect that it is significantly worse than having a center channel for anyone not in the sweet spot.

 

[MPS]

Anyone? Really the question is just if a larger panel creates a larger sweet spot? I would like to go with a phantom center and wonder if the Vantage will be sufficient

Large radiating area has a tendency to increase directionality and doing so improve speakers immunity to surrounding acoustics. Just think of CLS and what a sweet sound it produces. Increased directionality basicly decreases sweet spot but doing so makes it even sweeter.:music: In real acoustics there is so many variables that proper set up and listenig test is necessary to evaluate systems functionality.

 

[macallan]

"Large radiating area has a tendency to increase directionality and doing so improve speakers immunity to surrounding acoustics" Intersesting, does this imply that Vantages may actually have a larger sweet spot?

 

[MPS]

There is no meaningful (if any) difference between Summit and Vantage panel size. Therefore radiation pattern is same for both. ML has probaly decided in choosing certain width to have balance between listening area and benefits of directionality to make a universal speaker.

 

[Rich]

Another variable to throw in here, at least when comparing the newer vs. the older ML speakers, is that ML changed the size and spacing of the holes in the stators, which makes a smaller panel able to output higher sound pressure levels than an older panel the same size. I'm not sure how this affects the size of the sweet spot, if it even does.

I'm not sure that I buy into the idea that a CLS or other larger panel like the Monolith has any larger of a sweet spot than the Summit or Vantage. Anyone with experience comparing the two have any insight on that? The CLS sounds sweet because it has no crossover, not necessarily because it has a larger panel.

 

[macallan]

I understood it to mean the opposite, that the larger panel produces a smaller sweet spot.

 

[Rich]

I understood it to mean the opposite, that the larger panel produces a smaller sweet spot.

Yep, that's what he's saying. I guess I glossed over that second sentence.

I'm still not sure I buy into the notion that the size of the panel has much to do with the size of the sweet spot. If that was true, the clarities should have a huge sweet spot, but nope -- they are not noticeably different than my Summits in that regard.

 

[twich54]

There is no meaningful (if any) difference between Summit and Vantage panel size. Therefore radiation pattern is same for both.

FWIW, Summitt actually has approx 18% more ESL panel area than does the Vantage.


With respect to your using the Vantage vs the Summitt, your room can support either, it's up to you, your ears and your budget !

 

[MPS]

What I was trying to point out is that larger panel size does not automaticly result in larger sweet spot.
Panel width has lot to do with horisontal radiation pattern which then has lot to do with usable sweet spot.
Distance to listener vs panel size, curvilinear stators, multipple drivers with their crossover frequencys all have their influence to how speaker connects to surrounding acoustic environment. It is quite complex issue.

 

[Joey_V]

What I noted with the Summits vs the Vantages in my room was that I felt the Summits were much better at dispersing more of the sound to anywhere in the room. I am positive this is due to the larger panel size.

As for sweet spot, I wouldn't be surprised.

 

[tonepub]

When I had both speakers here at the same time, I thought the Vantage was a "one person speaker" and the Summit was a "one and a half person" speaker. The Summits do a bit better job off axis, but nothing like a cone speaker.

As it is with everything there is always a tradeoff...