Magnepans vs. Electrostatics. What is the better technology? What do you prefer?

I agree they produce the tonality (or bite) in a true way. But they don't produce the impact. Like I said in my post, I liked their imaging and tonality. I don't think they have the speed, of a horn, of the woofer of a Logan, or of the AA

One of the reasons I got rid of my Martin Logans was that there was such a difference in sound quality outside of the sweet spot, either vertically or horizontally. I've found the Sanders to sound great in the very narrow sweet spot, but it is even worse than the Martin Logans when the listener is not in the sweet spot.

To my ears, based on listening to Apogee Stages many years ago, the treble seems shelved a little higher than reality. Other Apogee speakers may not, but I formed my opinion by extensive listening to the Stages.

I found the bass integration of Martin Logan Aerius, from back in 1994 to have great bass integration, unlike other members of the Martin Logan family from that time.

The problem I had with Maggies is that the sound quality changed when listening at low levels. They didn't seem to come alive until a certain volume was reached. They also require a lot of quality power. The latest review of the 20.7 says it is quite the speaker, now.

These are just my opinions, based on listening with different amplification, source, location and time.

bonzo75 said:

The quads I heard were 2905 for L and R, shd 2805 for the centre. Driven by musical fidelity monos, modded.

They were excellent, but I found them slower on orchestral pieces like mussorgsky's pictures and scherezade, which has a lot of brass attack.

You can do your research on Analysis best by listening to them, otherwise just read up comparisons with apogee on audio asylum, and even on the apogee forum.

I owned Martin Logan summits which I recently sold. I sold them off after hearing the AA

Click to expand...

Hey Bonzo,

OK that's a fair comparison, I get your point now.

However mate, Musical Fidelity...?

No way mate, Musical Fidelity, NAD, Rotel and Arcam are all in the same camp. Perhaps with MF being at the top of this ladder. Even if they were rated at 1000w monoblocks, they really wouldn't do justice in driving ESL's properly.
It would be loud yes, and the dam protection circuit would go off on the Quads, but there is something missing in these monoblocks, I have heard them...
There was a chap over here, who infact had 1000w MF amps driving his Quads. He was so annoyed with them, he changed over to a lower wattage Pass Labs, and is absolutely amazed with the overall upgrade in dynamics! His amps are rated at just 250w but have some serious current output.
In Melbourne, Pass Labs aren't very affordable. However, it's more affordable to get hold of them when someone decides to upgrade to larger amps.

I have used all of these brands many years ago with some sort of dynamic drivers back in old days; come forward 21 years, to me MF, NAD, Rotel & Arcam are all in the "mid-end" category. They will not be able to compete with designs from Pass Labs, Dan D's momentum Amps, Vitus Audio, Ayre, Boulder, Gryphon etc. These are classic solid state amplifiers that have real watts with massive current and voltage drive capability, and these will drive any ESL to their full potential.

These brands are dam expensive in Australia mate, so going down a notch, Bryston or McIntosh will deliver the goods when it comes to powerful high current SS designs. I have heard my 2905's driven with Vitus Audio, Gryphon, Pass Labs, Bryston and McIntosh, they are superb! The only hot-dam thing is I couldn't afford any of these, other than the Bryston & McIntosh, and the MC452 is an excellent match with Quads.

Having said that, I prefer tubes with ESL's, there is some magic and synergy that goes on here, and the Lamm ML2 & 3 series are the best, no doubt!

You mentioned about Martin Logan Summits, why did you get rid of them? They are great electro-stat speakers for what they can do, and I heard them driven with top of the line Audio research gear, awesome!
They do require a fairly large room though and some good space from behind. If I had these I would've driven them with tube amplification, until something truly amazing shows up... like the ML Statement E-II, ya mate!

You mentioned AA speakers, what are those?
Cheers mate, RJ

You should try my Magtechs with your quads RJ

Hey mate how's it going?
Trust all is well at your end. Shame we couldn't meet up for a listen at my place. Let me know when you're all good, we'll try to arrange something.

Yes, your Magtechs were nice, especially with the Sanders stats. I think you've reached that synergy, better to keep it that way. As for my Quads, the current Conrad Johnson combination that I have, has hit the spot in terms of that reference sound I was after. Dating back to the good old student days in Chicago listening live to Fourplay, Patricia Barber and Chris Botti, is what got me hooked to Martin Logan stats and it all took off from there...

I am not interested in SS, unless it was something from Dan's momentums, Gryphon or Pass Labs. Heard these in S'pore driving the same Quads and ML stats (monoliths).
Overall I am a tube nut! I have lusted for a pair of Lamm ML3 series or 2's that I heard in S'pore with my Quads, this was overall the best I've heard to date!
I will eventually head for a top of the line tube amp from Conrad Johnson, perhaps one of their ART amplifiers but not now. I am not upgrading for another 10 years or so...

Till then, I'm just relaxing and enjoying the music and looking after the family!
Cheers mate, take care,
RJ

Big Dog RJ said:

Hey Bonzo,

OK that's a fair comparison, I get your point now...

...You mentioned AA speakers, what are those?
Cheers mate, RJ

Click to expand...

I believe he is referring to Analysis Audio which is a company from Greece that makes panels similar in tech to Apogees. Their Amphytron is their 2-speaker 2.2m tall reference...looks like the old Apogee Full Rang. They also have the Orion, their 4-speaker statement which adds 2 more 2.2 meter panels just for bass...

http://www.analysisaudio.com/index.php

Yes i heard the Magtechs are better than Krell 700 fpb type Krell amps, or Spectral, or Levinsons for SS. Also aware that MF is not the best amp. The guy who owned the system I heard it on is budget constrained.

Regarding the Summits, I loved them. They don't do Piano and Orchestral as well as the Analysis Audio (AA, which LL21 explained), but do rock better because of the woofer.

If I decide to go Multichannel, selling them might have been a mistake because putting three hybrids for L, R, and Center speaker might be the ideal multichannel. Will be tough though. I plan to audition a couple of Martin Logan multichannels soon. The best Mch on paper if possibly the one which Jonfo is building, he will soon have an Atmos system (16 speakers), of which the main will be all Logans. There is a guy in Vegas who already has a Mch with CLX, he will be moving the CLX to the sides and adding the Neoliths to the fronts. He has 4 velodyne subs and 2 descent subs. 43 ft room.

Since you are in Australia, try to visit awsmone on this forum who lives in Canberra and has a Logan CLX Multichannel. He has also stated Conducting and Composing on his Interests page. Fyi, these multichannels I am referring to are for listening to Mch classical music, and not for movies

Big Dog RJ said:

Hey mate how's it going?
Trust all is well at your end. Shame we couldn't meet up for a listen at my place. Let me know when you're all good, we'll try to arrange something.

Yes, your Magtechs were nice, especially with the Sanders stats. I think you've reached that synergy, better to keep it that way. As for my Quads, the current Conrad Johnson combination that I have, has hit the spot in terms of that reference sound I was after. Dating back to the good old student days in Chicago listening live to Fourplay, Patricia Barber and Chris Botti, is what got me hooked to Martin Logan stats and it all took off from there...

I am not interested in SS, unless it was something from Dan's momentums, Gryphon or Pass Labs. Heard these in S'pore driving the same Quads and ML stats (monoliths).
Overall I am a tube nut! I have lusted for a pair of Lamm ML3 series or 2's that I heard in S'pore with my Quads, this was overall the best I've heard to date!
I will eventually head for a top of the line tube amp from Conrad Johnson, perhaps one of their ART amplifiers but not now. I am not upgrading for another 10 years or so...

Till then, I'm just relaxing and enjoying the music and looking after the family!
Cheers mate, take care,
RJ

Click to expand...

Oh! Analysis Audio, yes they do look similar to Apogee's, my golly!
Interesting, although I have never heard these; perhaps on my next trip to either S'pore or HK, I'll try to find a dealer.
Thanks for that Loyd, certainly looks intriguing especially another ribbon design after seeing the classic ribbons disappear from the legendary Apogee's...

Hey Bonzo, that multi-channel system your after certainly sounds spectacular! Similarly have you got a huge room? Listening to multi-channel for classical music in a very large room would probably be like being right in the middle of Carnegie Hall! That would be awesome! To hear a multi-ch with Martin Logan stats would be something very special indeed, wish I could audition something like that over here.

I am in Melbourne Victoria, Canberra is a bit away out of state located in the capital ACT region. I do plan to move over there sometime though, perhaps then I could listen to these ML CLX's in mch. That would be something to look forward to. In the meantime since this Analysis audio venture looks so similar to the great Apogee's, it has got be blinking again... Must be a dealer somewhere in one of those S'pore, HK or Malaysian capitals, at least i should give these a listen eh?

Ok mate, gonna hit the sack now, it's past 1am.
Cheers and good night to all.
Enjoy your music, RJ

You don't always need a big room for a MCH. I have heard a 13.4 B&W set up in a 7m * 3m room it is one of the best systems I have heard, and I don't even like B&W in stereo. The Quad Mch was also a normal hifi room, 4.7m * 7m. And the guy who runs his Logan hybrid Mch has an even smaller room. Feeds a MCH dac with his PC which has jriver and Dirac on it. The dac goes straight to a MCH amp

Mch takes the room out of the equation, you feel there are no ceilings, or walls, and that you are at a concert venue, you feel distance from the stage, and the depth. The soundstage and details are better than any 2-ch I have heard, even with these relatively small speakers, and so if the 3d effect for orchestra. The bass processing is also awesome. A good corrector like Dirac also creates excellent separation and low noise floor. Problem for people who don't like box speakers are that unless you are willing to go ahead with Quads, Maggies, or Logan hybrids, a MCH with full range planars like AA becomes tough and expensive to set up. I can go with a Logan hybrid MCH, and the music will sound better than AA in 2-ch, but then that audiophile in me will always cry at not having had the AA in. It will be so much easier if I can take a liking to B&W, Focal or Sonus Faber.

When you listen to the AA remember that the US and UK distributors heavily mod their AA. The US guy replaces the wiring with JPS lab and the crossovers with Duelunds. The UK guy also adds silver cabling (LFD audio) and mods the crossovers. Also make sure you listen to the Omega at a minimum with powerful amps

bonzo75 said:

(...)

Regarding the Summits, I loved them. They don't do Piano and Orchestral as well as the Analysis Audio (AA, which LL21 explained), but do rock better because of the woofer.

If I decide to go Multichannel, selling them might have been a mistake because putting three hybrids for L, R, and Center speaker might be the ideal multichannel. Will be tough though. I plan to audition a couple of Martin Logan multichannels soon. The best Mch on paper if possibly the one which Jonfo is building, he will soon have an Atmos system (16 speakers), of which the main will be all Logans. There is a guy in Vegas who already has a Mch with CLX, he will be moving the CLX to the sides and adding the Neoliths to the fronts. He has 4 velodyne subs and 2 descent subs. 43 ft room.

Since you are in Australia, try to visit awsmone on this forum who lives in Canberra and has a Logan CLX Multichannel. He has also stated Conducting and Composing on his Interests page. Fyi, these multichannels I am referring to are for listening to Mch classical music, and not for movies

Click to expand...

I second your advice - for a short time I assembled an HT multichannel system using the ML Proddigy, SL3 and Logos and IMHO, and for my preferences, it was one of the best multichannel systems I have enjoyed. I do not like to listen too loud, even in cinema mode, and the voice intelligibility and low level detail of the system was a great experience - we could feel the ambiance of the scenes in a very rewarding way : can you imagine the equivalent of the Jazz at the Pawnshop recording in a movie? Although I have listened to HT systems with much better dynamics, sometimes this one had more drama - even in bombing scenes you could feel the tear and lacerate of the very fast initial impact, something that most systems miss.

Hi micro, so what are the advantages you find with your soundlabs over the MCH system for classical

bonzo75 said:

Hi micro, so what are the advantages you find with your soundlabs over the MCH system for classical

Click to expand...

Unfortunately I can not help you - my experience with MCH for classical was minimal and long ago. Although I watched and listened to a few DVD and MCH SACDs I was not really interested at that time. Also my current stereo system is of much higher quality, any comparison would be unfair.

My relation with SoundLabs is a love/hate affair. I love how they sound and hate their dull aspect. I would prefer to own nice looking speakers, such as the Magico Mini2 or the Sonusfaber Futura's. I have no doubts that the Alexia is more "true". But for my music preferences and room the SoundLabs sound much less like recorded music and more lifelike, although a few recent experiences with the XLF disturbed me.

Big Dog, there seems to be an AA distributor in Australia. http://www.nationalaudiogroup.com.au/

caesar said:

I prefer stats, but I do like the Maggies a lot.

And if you ask the engineers, most seem to think that stats are better technologically, at least in the midrange. Yet most audiophiles have more reverance for Maggies. And if you look at the reference systems of reviewers, there seem to be more Maggies than electrostats.

Please share your thoughts and preferences.

Click to expand...

At least in my country, where power is not stable nor clean, electrostats' mortality rate is high. Most friends whom I know possessed Quad 63s and Martin Logans have had breakdowns, some fixed, some eternally doomed. That is really the main reason why I still shy away from stats. I must say hearing Quads and MLs, (lately the Summit) they possess a liquidity and presence that I don't hear in my Maggie. They push the proverbial they-are-in-the room bit to the max, imo. And they are fine sounding, with utter lack of grain. The Summits can be pushed hard, and play loud and even fill a medium to big room, and they stay fine, unlike my Maggies, they can sound a bit grainy when played loud, at least my model. One thing about Maggie that I have discovered only lately, when they are driven by powerful amps, like a Hegel H4 which a friend brought over last month, they become another animal. It's like water falling out of Niagara falls. Music comes out with so much ease, and bass punch and power go a few notches more. 600+ watts into 4 ohms is nothing to sneeze about. The Summits sound lovely but until I hear better stories with their behavior vis-a-via our power line quality, I'm putting them on hold.

bonzo75 said:

Big Dog, there seems to be an AA distributor in Australia. http://www.nationalaudiogroup.com.au/

Click to expand...

Hey Bonzo, thanks for that mate. Yes, I did come across this distributor and they are ridiculously expensive. Might as well go for the ml statements with these guys pricing. Even if I had the means it would be a crime and real challenge to justify this kind of purchase to the good wife where a pair of "doors" cost equivalent to a small town house... I sometimes wonder how on earth these high-endchaps are able to even survive in a small market like Australia with such crazy prices.
I will stick to my dealer mates in S'pore they're far more sensible. Just drop in for a demo in a couple of months.
Thanks for your feedback, have a good one, and do let us know how your quest goes with the mch project.
Cheers mate, RJ

I won't be surprised if they are better than ML Statements

jadis said:

At least in my country, where power is not stable nor clean, electrostats' mortality rate is high. Most friends whom I know possessed Quad 63s and Martin Logans have had breakdowns, some fixed, some eternally doomed. That is really the main reason why I still shy away from stats. I must say hearing Quads and MLs, (lately the Summit) they possess a liquidity and presence that I don't hear in my Maggie. They push the proverbial they-are-in-the room bit to the max, imo. And they are fine sounding, with utter lack of grain. The Summits can be pushed hard, and play loud and even fill a medium to big room, and they stay fine, unlike my Maggies, they can sound a bit grainy when played loud, at least my model. One thing about Maggie that I have discovered only lately, when they are driven by powerful amps, like a Hegel H4 which a friend brought over last month, they become another animal. It's like water falling out of Niagara falls. Music comes out with so much ease, and bass punch and power go a few notches more. 600+ watts into 4 ohms is nothing to sneeze about. The Summits sound lovely but until I hear better stories with their behavior vis-a-via our power line quality, I'm putting them on hold.

Click to expand...

Most electrostatics have a type of power supply where high voltage is proportional to the mains voltage. As you say if power is not stable and has high peaks can destroy an electrostatic speaker. This problem can be easily solved with a power re-generator, that besides stabilization eliminates noise and mains harmonics. Power consumption is very little - just a few watts - and any good quality sinusoidal type output can be used for this purpose. If needed, a tuned choke and capacitor filter can be added to clean the output. I have used with success a PS Audio P300 and currently power my SoundLabs using a P10. Twenty years ago I owned SoundLabs A4 and as no power regenerator was available, I built one myself - a 50 Hz sinusoidal oscilator designed around an operational amplifier IC using a small lamp (schematics taken from Paul Horowitz "The Art of Eelctronics") connected to an old Yamaha 50W power amplifier driving a 12V power transformer connected backwards to step up the voltage. Besides letting me sleep unworried, it improved the sound of the speakers significantly.

My initiation into the joys of panels was back in the early 80s with Quads (57 and 63) and Accoustats.

By the 90s a mate who had these strange and wondrous shiny shimmery Apogees had me at the words Caliper and Duetta signature. I realised my world was a ribbon one and not stat.

I've also recently heard the Audio Analysis Orion's and Epsilons (the middle ones in the range) and was immediately reminded of the sound of the Apogees... These were powered by big Ypsilon SET monos and sounded grainless and beautiful as they should with over $160k of electronics if not just a shade on the dark side.

In between I've heard quite a few Martin Logans and the more recent Quads as well as all the current Magnepans.

All of these speakers spoke with some similarity in terms of characteristic panel virtues and typical panel constraint. But for all their foibles the only speaker I would choose out of all of them now to live with long term is the one I now own... Magnepan 20.7s. Not because they are without constraints but because they also have for me the greatest potential. In the latest TAS review the writer said there was no better speaker under $80k. I find this kind of statement in some ways a bit absurd as these are all our just about differences in personal preferences, but at the same time to be completely fair to the Magnepan 20.7 it is a magical achievement in continuos improvement. With panels ultimately they have to be big to offset their Achilles heel... Being full range and energizing a room is a challenge for panels until they get big. The 20.7 is big enough to have very real and very fast bass if implemented properly and it is utterly coherent. If you have an ounce of grain with Maggie's its in the gear you are partnering with them.

You can't give Maggie's too much quality nor too much love and they'll always give you it all back. I understand why some prefer Quads, that others never forget their Apogees and why some people find truth in their Soundlabs and MLs... and for some of us Magnepan is the most real panel of all. There is no one best panel as long as there is such diversity in what people value in sound but one thing is for sure... if you love panels its hard to listen to anything much else.

Hi Tao, can you please tell me what other amps have you compared Magtech to? have you tried it against Krell FPBs and Spectral?

Also, there is no Maggie 20.x in the UK. Can I ask you if you were a fan of the 3.x?

The Epsilon is actually the second from the bottom. It is the Omega and Amphitryon above it that are the main. The Orion is an Amphi with the bass panels. Did you listen to the Orion in NJ?