What Speakers Do You Rate As Better Than Martin Logans?

[User211]

This is surely blasphemy in an owner's fan club. But someone selling his Spires in favour of another brand's speakers prompted this thread. Plus the fact I have never seen it raised.

So what do you consider as better, or at least the equal of, good old MLs.

I know this is generic as hell - there are lots of Logan models... but a "Logan beater"? It's your call... let's restrict it to the ESL line i.e. Vantage, Spire, Summit, CLX etc...

Try to compare like with like, or just make the point that speaker X is better but costs shedloads more etc.

I'd be really interested in the response to this. Why? Maybe I'll say later And maybe it'll give the folks at ML something to aim for...

 

[wink]

You mean......there are other speakers out there?

 

[wink]

I'm very pregidous when it comes to Logans. I auditioned a pair of Wilson Grand Slamms and I told the dealer that my ReQuests blew them away in the mid range. He thought I was nuts.

It's really a matter of opinion.

Dan

 

[slowGEEZR]

I don't know if I would say other speakers may be better, but that other speakers may excel at things that Martin Logan does not. The CLXs have already been reviewed by the leading reviewers and is said to be among the clearest window into the music ever and competes with designs that sell for much much more. That being said, there are speakers out there that have more dynamic impact. Another consideration when comparing speakers and which may be better, is the shape and size of the listening area. In smaller rooms, such as my office, I think a mini monitor may be a better choice than a Martin Logan.

Wife is calling, gotta go sell some guitar amps. Bye.

 

[JMAUSGP]

What's the matter Justin, not enough fights in Jolly Old England today?

This thread could turn the MLC into the WWF....

Seriously, there better not be anything better, I refinanced my chicken coup just so I could own 20 Logans!!!

 

[eknuds01]

I haven't come across a speaker that represents a better value (both new and used) than Martin Logan.

These speakers are the total package in my opinion. To me, they are able to play clean at high levels, reproduce very demanding material accurately (piano concerts, for example), jazz and and female vocals are played back with stunning accuracy and clarity, and if you want you can toss them into a home theater setup. What more does one want?

Now - there a number of other speakers that simply terrific and I had the chance to listen to some great ones in Colorado this past October. In particular the Gershman Acoustics Black Swan was freakin' awesome. But at 36k - that's a a CLX-and-a-half.

 

[Gordon Gray]

IMHO, the entire MBL line offers a level of transparency and performance that I have yet heard equalled by ML or, for that matter, any other speaker manufacturer.

As much as I love the ML line, if I had the funds to buy MBL and the associated electronics that optimize its performance, I would do it and not look back.

GG

 

[Joey_V]

Up until my last foray with MLs, I begun to gravitate towards other designs. Certain boxed speakers and panels drew me for different reasons.

I think the one thing I thoroughly enjoyed about the MLs was their transparency, but I felt that there was something missing with regards to dynamics. It could've been my set up or maybe just my ears.

That said, I doubt there's much out there that you get as good a sound for the money. A Summit at current used audiogon prices are a complete STEAL!

 

[taylode]

That's an interesting question. Lets see if I can answer it without getting banned for life. To start and, lessen my chances of banishment, I think that the current used market for Summits puts them in a unique category where nothing can really touch them. Also, I think the CLX is priced at a point that is hard to beat; however, if you’re willing to spend a little more it is not quite so clear-cut.

For example, if I had the resources I would not think twice about migrating from MLs to McIntosh’s XRT2K. They deliver everything I want in a speaker. They also have a rather small footprint for such a tall speaker and are easy to place.

Another speaker that I’d consider is the McIntosh XRT1K. It is similar in size to the XRT2K but not in price. I think that it is an excellent speaker and at $35K much closer in price to the CLX. It also has a small footprint and is easy to place. In my current home, I could install these speaker where as I can’t the CLXs.

Some other speaker manufactures that I think compete are Sonus Faber Elipsa’s, B&W and, if you like exotic, Acapella High Violon MkIV. None of these speakers sound the same as ML but they are all worthy contenders. It all has to do with the synergy what you find pleasing to the ear.

Now because I’m a multi-channel guy, anything outside of ML gets really pricey really fast. So for me, it can’t be slightly better it has to be an order of magnitude better. Therefore, with my current room the only logical upgrade is to the original Summit.

Am I still safe?

 

[cstory]

Admiting that most of us are heavely biased towards ML speakers, I think that once you get to the Summit level and certainly the CLX level that you are dealing mostly with different flavors of music reproduction and it then becomes a matter of personal taste as opposed to one thing being better than the other.

Kind of like comparing a good Chicken Korma to a Sirloin and baked potato. They are both good, and sometimes you want one and sometimes you want the other, but which one is is better? Depends. on what you feel at the time.

For all that people like to hate them, I have heard the Wilson Watt Puppies and they are very good for speakers with dynamic drivers. Though they don't seem to be quite as detailed as ML's, the do the dynamic thing quite well, making them different for when you want to spice things up.

 

[amey01]

Plenty - but for the money of course, there is no better than ML. But there are plenty of better speakers out there, although I say this without having heard a pair of Statements. Are they the best speakers in the world? I wish I could answer that. Some other very good ones [that I've heard] are:

Avalon Eidolon Diamond and Isis
Sonus Faber Stradivari
Gryphon Poseidon
Avantgarde
Goldmund Epilogue
MBL 101E
Some Audio Physics give ML a serious run for their money!

--DEFINITELY--NOT--WILSON

 

[TomDac]

None of these speakers sound the same as ML but they are all worthy contenders. It all has to do with the synergy what you find pleasing to the ear.

Dennis, you hit the nail on the head... There ARE many worthy contenders out there, but we are all here at the MLC because we find the ML sound most pleasing to our ears.

I know that if there were no ML, I don't think I would go to a conventional speaker.. I'd get a pair of Apogee Divas or Scintillas, have them re-ribbon'ed and be done with it.

 

[wallacefl]

I'm very pregidous when it comes to Logans. I auditioned a pair of Wilson Grand Slamms and I told the dealer that my ReQuests blew them away in the mid range. He thought I was nuts.

It's really a matter of opinion.

Dan

heard both and agree with you.

 

[David Matz]

I haven't heard anything better in the midrange than an electrostat. Do the room properly, and the bass of the hybrid electrostat gets very respectable also.

The only box speaker I heard that I thought is decent is the $40K+ YG Kipod. I have heard some expensive Wilsons and the Magico v3, but they just don't do it for me, as they sounded dis-jointed and incoherent.

Jon Valin is running an interesting thread on the Magico M5. He thinks it's the best he's ever heard, and he has had every ridiculously priced speaker in his house, including MBL. The M5 is close to $100K and his electronics are over $100k. (Interestingly, hooking up the $40K+ ARC monoblocks to the M5 doesn't do it for JV, and the M5 is not longer the best using ARC!) However, even the mighty M5 cannot outdo the CLX in speed and transparency according to JV.

http://www.avguide.com/forums/magico-m5-loudspeakers

In another thread, he states something to the fact that one has to spend mega bucks to better an electrostat. That is my feeling also, especially in a good room. Honestly, I do not understand why people bother with other kinds of speakers, but I am an electrostat lifer.

http://www.avguide.com/forums/limitations-electrostatic-speakers

 

[taylode]

Dennis, you hit the nail on the head... There ARE many worthy contenders out there, but we are all here at the MLC because we find the ML sound most pleasing to our ears.

I know that if there were no ML, I don't think I would go to a conventional speaker.. I'd get a pair of Apogee Divas or Scintillas, have them re-ribbon'ed and be done with it.

I agree I don't think I would go to a typical point source speaker either. For now I'm a pretty happy camper and moving in a different direction just doesn't make sense. Now if ML would just make a center channel to specifically match up with the CLX. :think:

 

[twich54]

Truthfully (as oppossed to lieing to you !) I have yet to hear a speaker at the price point of my Spire's that best's it, IMO. If I had there's a good chance it would be residing in my system instead.

Given money not being an object are there speakers that I would rather have....yes ! ....CLX's, need a bigger room to go with them; Avalon Sentinal & Indra, mbl's, Maggie 20.1's

While there may be others (I really haven't seriously listened to many outside my budgetary world) that would win me over with their shear dynamic impact the overall openess of the Loagan line continues to impress !

 

[JonFo]

I agree I don't think I would go to a typical point source speaker either. For now I'm a pretty happy camper and moving in a different direction just doesn't make sense. Now if ML would just make a center channel to specifically match up with the CLX. :think:

Need help with that last thing ...

 

[JonFo]

I don’t know if better applies, but I was very impressed with the Wisdom Audio ribbon line array setup AT CES this year. I could live with them.


The MBL’s sound great as well, but since they are not line-sources, I discount them as an option.

Otherwise, it’s ESL all the way for me.

 

[taylode]

Need help with that last thing ...

I would like to see a "matched" center capable of filling a large space. The CLX wants a large space and I would like to see a center channel that is of the same caliber as the CLX with the same power requirements, etc. I currently have a Theater i and I question it's (or any of their current center channels) ability to adequately match up and project at the same level. Most other manufactures match their center to specific speakers. I would expect a CLX center to match perfectly and cost about $12K, or half of a pair of CLXs. When I've made the level of commitment to ML as buying their flagship speaker, I want a similar level center.

 

[JonFo]

Hi Dennis,

Yes, you need a pretty capable center to keep up with CLX, and with them, the big challenge would be the mid-bass, as nothing but the CLX’s own mid-bass panels will ever match the quality they deliver in those registers.

So, want to go halfies with me on a pair in a few years?

When I update my setup, it will be CLX left right AND center. So I need three.

But most manufactures fall down here, and that’s because so few users are willing to build a screen/speaker wall using acoustically transparent front projection screens.