This quote encapsulates the general consensus of this entire thread, I think. ML's site focuses too much on glam, and not enough on quick, easy navigation to useful, pertinent information.
What Do You Think Of The ML Website? Is It Good, Or Full Of Marketing BS?
- Thread starter User211
- Start date
Help Support MartinLogan Audio Owners Forum:
This quote encapsulates the general consensus of this entire thread, I think. ML's site focuses too much on glam, and not enough on quick, easy navigation to useful, pertinent information.
amey01
Well-known member
Don't get me started on that - the Australian site not only still shows the Summit as current, but DOESN'T SHOW THE SPIRE at all!
Brian Walsh
Well-known member
Regarding the sound coming off the back of the panel:
This is true in some situations, such as when the speakers are positioned close to the wall behind them and/or to add acoustic absorption if needed. Out of phase information can smear imaging in some setups. I have a pair of SALLIEs (back wave attenuators) here but don't currently use them since I use the Acoustic System resonators which clean up the sound without overdamping - hard to explain but audible.
Post about photo of room with picture windows:
I agree the view is great but think the sound could be drastically improved with acoustic absorption or diffusion behind the speakers to avoid the sound bouncing off the glass, which only serves to add glare and smear imaging. Bright.
Sound Lab has always been product driven, with a substance over style approach. They have not found advertising to be effective. A few of us SL dealers advertise a little, but through the years (SL started in 1978) most of their sales have been by word of mouth. The products speak for themselves.
The Sound Lab website is intended to be informative rather than slick advertising copy. There are a few things that could be changed or added, but it does the job.
"However, Soundlab do not think it's always a good thing, and actually manufacture a rear wave damper."
This is true in some situations, such as when the speakers are positioned close to the wall behind them and/or to add acoustic absorption if needed. Out of phase information can smear imaging in some setups. I have a pair of SALLIEs (back wave attenuators) here but don't currently use them since I use the Acoustic System resonators which clean up the sound without overdamping - hard to explain but audible.
Post about photo of room with picture windows:
"that room is AWESOME"
I agree the view is great but think the sound could be drastically improved with acoustic absorption or diffusion behind the speakers to avoid the sound bouncing off the glass, which only serves to add glare and smear imaging. Bright.
"The Sound Labs speakers are a great product, but pretty unknown. They could use some good marketing guys..."
Sound Lab has always been product driven, with a substance over style approach. They have not found advertising to be effective. A few of us SL dealers advertise a little, but through the years (SL started in 1978) most of their sales have been by word of mouth. The products speak for themselves.
The Sound Lab website is intended to be informative rather than slick advertising copy. There are a few things that could be changed or added, but it does the job.
amey01
Well-known member
Oh, and I just had a thought though........marketing BS or not, our preferences aside:
1. How many speakers to Soundlab sell?
2. How many speakers to ML sell?
I think that's all that really needs to be said........
1. How many speakers to Soundlab sell?
2. How many speakers to ML sell?
I think that's all that really needs to be said........
And how many does Bose sell? Numbers certainly don't tell the whole story about a company. I don't think Soundlab wants to be ML any more than ML wants to be Bose. Although with all the low-fi products recently, I am starting to wonder about that last part.
User211
Well-known member
I personally want the best product (as a consumer) - not the best sales - but I am not selling.
I think SL's perspective (as is ML's - I'd hope) is just to create the best product they can. Which is cool by me.
Let's not fool ourselves that SL doesn't have sales in mind, though. After all, who wants to make something that no one wants?
What do you want, Adam? Best sales - or best product. As a consumer?
sometimes all of us needs some selling to get us to boot up and go for it! sometimes a little selling is a good thing
amey01
Well-known member
Justin and Rich......I was purely talking from a marketing perspective. That is, people are saying the site has too much <quote> "Marketing BS"........too many <quote> "fancy names" and too many <quote> "artsy-fartsy pictures". In reference to that, all I'm saying is that it works......and fr1gg1n works well........
......assuming ML's product is no better or worse than Soundlab's product.
OK, Adam. I understand what you mean now. But I still disagree to a certain extent. I don't think it is ML's website that is selling their speakers. Honestly, I think it is their push into the lower end, high volume made-in-china type of speakers and push into distribution outlets like tweeter, magnolia, and best buy that has really shot up their sales numbers. But I understand that a big part of that push is slick marketing and the website is part of that marketing campaign.
It would be interesting to see the sales curve numbers on the lower end designer series speakers vs. the higher end esl series. Or to see a comparison between sales numbers for the CLX vs. a comparable model by Soundlab.
Either way, it is obvious that they have made the decision to make their website more a tool for slick marketing to non-audiophiles than an actual resource for their high-end user base.
It would be interesting to see the sales curve numbers on the lower end designer series speakers vs. the higher end esl series. Or to see a comparison between sales numbers for the CLX vs. a comparable model by Soundlab.
Either way, it is obvious that they have made the decision to make their website more a tool for slick marketing to non-audiophiles than an actual resource for their high-end user base.
you never know until you actually hear it. those speakers are far out and that wall looks as though it may be curved but that could be the lens they used to snap the pic. the only thing I would add would be some really nice motorized window coverings that would dampen the high freq for night and critical listening situations.
I think I would deal with the room a bit live just for the view
Last edited:
Brian Walsh
Well-known member
The absorption coefficients of glass are well known: virtually zero in mid to upper frequencies. Hard, bright sound results, somewhat independent of how far the speakers are away from the wall, which in this case is about 3 feet or so to the rear of the woofer section. Image smear is less at greater distances from the wall. The wall may have a slight curve to it, but I suspect it is an artifact of the lens used. Motorized window coverings could be a solution, as long as suitable acoustical properties are provided and known before going to the significant expense.
Exposing electrostats to direct sunlight is a bad thing.
amey01
Well-known member
I too would experiment with window coverings, but with that view - really - I don't think I'd ever use them!!
That said, the room does look quite heavily treated in other parts and the guy seems to know what he's doing so I'm sure it sounds very very good just as it is.
That said, the room does look quite heavily treated in other parts and the guy seems to know what he's doing so I'm sure it sounds very very good just as it is.
User211
Well-known member
Hm... does it really for the ESL range? It doesn't do it for me, though I am able to see outside of the scope of my own viewpoint (is that possible? But I hope you know what I mean from what I have already said).
Basically, the Soundlab range is high end, period. Maybe Dr West doesn't want to dominate the world and run a huge company.
The SL product range starts at a very high price. That is not synonomous with big sales. Putting ML's big company status down to marketing BS just isn't realistic for that reason.
The Henry Ford principle applies here - make 'em cheap in large volumes. Or make them in large volumes so they can be cheap. ML's solution to this, as Rich hinted, is to outsource to China, where labour costs are lower.
It's ironic that so many US/European companies are into this game that we are effectively handing them our knowledge on a plate. And so many are doing it that the price of skilled labour in Asia and the orient is rising. This applies to other non-hi-fi markets, as we well know.
So it won't be long before Asia/the orient becomes truly autonomous, and starts producing killer products of their own. Unless, of course, I give them more credit than they are due. I doubt it, though. But as ever, I could be wrong.
Another point I'd like to raise is that it should be possible to make the ML website much quicker using the appropriate technology and a possibly a better host. Any website designer worth his salt should steer well clear of bloatware, be very aware of page content/files size and hence download overheads etc etc.
Ironically, those technologies developed earlier in the history of the web, when bandwidth was at a premium (and still is for various media types we all wish were much quicker) are the ones that produce the quickest response.
Inevitably, glam is bandwidth expensive, but if you're clever, I believe you can do glam much more quickly and efficiently than the current ML offering.
Now there's a challenge...
User211
Well-known member
This could be complete BS, of course. The orient has been producing good products for decades... but then again killer products? Hm... display technologies maybe I'd rate them as the best a few years ago. But the recent round of LCD high contrast displays suck badly to my eyes. My Sony A117 laptop has a display that eats any of their current offerings.
I guess quotes like that comes from auditing your own posts! Any more BS in it, let me know...
Maybe I'm as guilty as the next guy...
Last edited:
