Sanders Sound Systems 10a - better than a Summit?

User211 · Jul 28, 2008

http://www.sanderssoundsystems.com/10b.htm

Anyone heard these? Or the older Innersound speakers? How do they rate against a Summit, for instance?

I'd love to know...

amey01 · Jul 28, 2008

I too, would love to hear these!!

David Matz · Jul 28, 2008

User211 said:
http://www.sanderssoundsystems.com/10b.htm

Anyone heard these? Or the older Innersound speakers? How do they rate against a Summit, for instance?

I'd love to know...

I am hoping Burke can get his hands soon on these for some serious A/B auditioning. How's the planning for that Chicago audiophile event coming along, Burke?

daniel · Jul 28, 2008

User211 said:
http://www.sanderssoundsystems.com/10b.htm

Anyone heard these? Or the older Innersound speakers? How do they rate against a Summit, for instance?

I'd love to know...

Few years ago, I heard the Innersound. In a few word, I was not impressed. Couldn't say what, but there was something missing.

FISH_MAN · Jul 30, 2008

I smell smoke

I think sanders is blowing some smoke. it took him 30years to figure out that flat is better than a curve? I think flat electrostats have been around longer nobody ever did a side by side? I have a feeling martin logan has patents on just about every aspect of the speakers they produce making it impossible for competitors to copy.I understand that he helped build many ml's but that does not make his popcorn
analogy or his flat panels correct but hey that is just my two cents.I enjoy some room interaction from the speakers that is why i do not prefer headphones those flat panels just beam to hard at the sweet spot. I think that's why the flashlight toe in works so well you are just hearing the sweetest edge of the sound wave that the curve produces the other reflections just add to the experience.

JonFo · Jul 31, 2008

I really respect Roger, and take what he says pretty seriously.

But also have to dissent on this topic, as I feel the curvilinear profile does provide a better and larger audience coverage.

It does mean that we ML owners have more room issues to deal with, but I'd rather deal with those than extremely narrow sweet spots.

I've never tried flat ESL's so I might just be blowing smoke myself, but my experience with the ML's leads me to believe I would still prefer curved.

User211 · Jul 31, 2008

JonFo said:
I've never tried flat ESL's so I might just be blowing smoke myself, but my experience with the ML's leads me to believe I would still prefer curved.

Wow JonFo - you need to make the effort. I walked into a Pink Triangle turntable demo years ago to hear one connected to some Quad ESL 57's and Quad II valve power amps. I couldn't believe it - the sound was fantastic! No wonder this speaker was voted best hi-fi product of all time by Hi-Fi News over here. Designed by Peter Walker in 1957, I prefer it to any of the later Quad ESL models.

Whilst the panels were almost certainly revived in some way, if the original sounded close then it WAS a land mark product. Flat panels too, but they didn't seem to suffer from a minuscule sweet spot, as you might expect.

If you ever hear a pair in primo condition driven by said amplifier, you are in for a total shock!

Anyway - someone must have heard the 10a - so let's have an opinion!

TomDac · Jul 31, 2008

FISH_MAN said:
I understand that he helped build many ml's.

Huh??

It was Gayle Sanders and Ron Sutherland who started ML. I don't think Ron Sanders was ever involved with these two guys or ML.

Here's a quote from an article on the ML website:

Back in the '80s, another Sanders, Roger (no relation to Martin-Logan's Gayle), patented a way to make a curved ES panel. Although Roger Sanders' company doesn't use this technology, preferring, instead, a flat screen, Gayle Sanders' Martin-Logan does use the curved screens on their speakers, and uses it very well. The main advantage of this technology is a broad horizontal dispersion of high-frequency energy, but not for the reason it might seem at first glance. It's not that the curved screen actually radiates highs from its entire curved surface (it does, but that's not why it has great dispersion) but that the curved surface makes any single section of the curved surface that happens to be perpendicular to the listener a line source.

Cherian · Jul 31, 2008

When I talked to Ron Sanders he did tell me he worked for ML and did do some of the designs. I do not know to what extent or what models.

zaphod · Jul 31, 2008

User211 said:
Wow JonFo - you need to make the effort. I walked into a Pink Triangle (the tunrntable people) turntable demo years ago to hear one connected to some Quad ESL 57's and Quad II valve power amps. I couldn't believe it - the sound was fantastic! No wonder this speaker was voted best hi-fi product of all time by Hi-Fi News over here. Designed by Peter Walker in 1957, I prefer it to any of the later Quad ESL models.

Whilst the panels were almost certainly revived in some way, if the original sounded close then it WAS a land mark product. Flat panels too, but they didn't seem to suffer from a minuscule sweet spot, as you might expect.

well ... i have a pair of ESL 57's and drive them with mac MC60's (until i find a buyer for the darn things

) and they do have great sound and pretty good soundstage but they are also curved - but in the up-down axis, and i'm certain that helps the soundstage. the ESL 63's are flat flat flat, but like you i've always preferred the 57's to any of the other speakers from quad. heck i used to joke that the only reason they were discontinued was to create some sort of sales demand for the 63's

User211 · Jul 31, 2008

zaphod said:
well ... i have a pair of ESL 57's and drive them with mac MC60's (until i find a buyer for the darn things ) and they do have great sound and pretty good soundstage but they are also curved - but in the up-down axis, and i'm certain that helps the soundstage. the ESL 63's are flat flat flat, but like you i've always preferred the 57's to any of the other speakers from quad. heck i used to joke that the only reason they were discontinued was to create some sort of sales demand for the 63's

I have been looking around - are you sure the stators are curved? I can't find any reference to it. Sure, the speaker looks curved from the outside. Here is a picture of the inside, though.

http://www.integracoustics.com/MUG/MUG/tweaks/quad/hey_you/finishfront.jpg

You can see the wood curve in the middle to support the curved grille, but are the stators flat or bent a bit? They are certainly NOT bent in line with the grille support. It would also make them the very first curvilinear design way before Mr Sanders invented it! It can't be bent. It would need spars too.

Here's a good link:

http://user.tninet.se/~vhw129w/mt_audio_design/quadpage.htm

We should all remember that the '57 is the daddy, and pay homage :bowdown: to it. Without it, ML may never have existed!

Hmmm... no one heard the 10a? Maybe sales are low...

tonepub · Jul 31, 2008

I loved my 57's.....

zaphod · Jul 31, 2008

you know you're probably right - i'll bow to the wisdom of the thousand words (the pic) that you posted. and i'm too darn lazy to open them up tonight

Jeff - i'll keep you in mind if the new house bumps the CLS from the HT into the living room, thus bumping the 57's into someone's hands.

User211 · Jul 31, 2008

Zaphod - you let them go... you kiss them goodbye first!

zaphod · Jul 31, 2008

not if they're still containing a charge!!!

man, this is one hard time in my audio lifecycle. i've spent about 17 years building up my "classic" system - LP12, Mac iron, sansui tuner, reels, 57's - and i'm really thinking of retooling the setup in light of marriage and children. interesting how one's priorities change.

User211 · Jul 31, 2008

I just sold a Sansui TU-9900 on ebay to an Australian. Good tuner. However, I am currently using a near mint Scott 350. The sensitivity is awful, but the sound is unbelievable - much better than the Sansui. MUCH. Really enjoyable smooth and easy listening...

Zaphod - now is your chance to get some Sanders 10a, and write a review

Maybe not. But don't let a simple marriage mess with your hi-fi... the novelty will wear of quick, but the need for good sound WILL NOT!

Sanders Sound Systems 10a - better than a Summit?

Help Support MartinLogan Audio Owners Forum:

User211

Well-known member

amey01

Well-known member

David Matz

Well-known member

daniel

Well-known member

FISH_MAN

Well-known member

JonFo

Super Moderator

User211

Well-known member

TomDac

former MLO owner/operator

Cherian

Well-known member

zaphod

Well-known member

User211

Well-known member

tonepub

Senior Member

zaphod

Well-known member

User211

Well-known member

zaphod

Well-known member

User211

Well-known member

Similar threads

Latest posts