CLS IIz upgrade/refurbish

[nsgarch]

I just ordered a set of new panels for my CLS IIz's, which incorporate the latest diaphragm improvements (mylar and coating), high(er) current hookup wire, and "Clear-Spar" section dividers.

My current panels are 17 years old. They sound great and look perfect. Yet Dana Brown at ML told me to be prepared for a big surprise! They'll be here in a few days. Stay tuned.

[Steve Williams]

Neil

welcome back and congrats on the new panels. what sort of break in is typical for new membranes

[MiTT]

Neil, I'd appreciate you posting your impressions here as well. I've thought about replacing the panels on my CLS IIz's as well, but haven't pulled the trigger as of yet. Please post some pictures if you don't mind.

[nsgarch]

Dana says to figure ~100 hours for break-in. He says they'll be bright at first, which will turn into even better high end extension and even more detail after break-in (italics mine )

As for pulling the trigger -- I wrestled with that one too, but decided to do it now based on:

• my advancing age
• continuing price increases (currently $1500 + $100 shipping)
• the demand is such that I had to get in line and wait a full three months before mine were ready!
• no clear information on how long they'll continue making them -- although Dana says there are no plans currently to discontinue providing CLS IIz panels; he says they also have a large quantity of parts on hand for the CLS IIz electronics modules.
• and last, Dana was fairly convincing in his assurance that I would enjoy a noticeable improvement in performance over the original panels, which I never found lacking In fact even driving my CLS's with a tube amp, I still tend to use the "softening" switch in normal operation.

They should be arriving after the weekend, so I should have some initial impressions soon, but of course they won't be conclusive until I can put a week or two of use on them Regardless, considering the cost of replacement with, for instance, a CLX @ $25,000, this has to be a no-brainer!

[nsgarch]

(Reply to another CLS IIz owner who upgraded his panels about a year ago.)

Hi Rick,

Let's see. OK, I got the first panel swapped on Saturday and the first thing I did was to A--B it with the remaining old panel. Frankly, I wasn't hearing much difference between them, when I realized the new panel had zero break-in time. (I later asked Dana where the "100 hour break-in" figure came from, and he said, "that's what the engineers told him"; and so I decided to reserve judgment on that issue! As you also reported, I sensed no harshness/brightness 'out of the box' as with the earlier CLS panels. In fact, I decided to restore the 'softening' switch to its default position (no 'softening'.) As it turned out, the new panels did change, after the first 20 - 30 hours. but I'm getting ahead of myself.

Sunday, I completed the swap, and the first thing I noticed was a cleaner more robust bass. I'd forgotten you mentioned the same thing in a previous email, so I was completely unprepared for it. Having discovered four years ago, the amazing bass integration possible when combining electrostats with just a single phase-matched (omnidirectional) subwoofer placed right between the (dipole) panels, the overall bass performance took a real leap forward! The lower mid-range was also rendered clean and solid, despite weakness in that area being a criticism (for some ;--) of the CLS's overall performance in the past.

For the next 5 -- 10 hours, I was looking for any improvements in soundstage, instrument/soloist location, and frankly I didn't hear anything noteworthy. I wasn't disappointed though, because my decision to replace the panels was based principally on extending the longevity of the speakers; which, like you, I had concluded were worth keeping, based solely on their previous superior performance -- so I wasn't really looking for remarkable performance improvements, per se.

But then things started happening -- around 24 hours -- beginning Monday morning. First, a noticeable increase in low level detail (like hearing the fingers sliding on guitar strings, or lifelike rustlings in the orchestra and/or the audience, and a true "breath of life" in the vocals; these all had to be the result of improved transient response in the movement of the diaphragm itself. Or to put it another way, the diaphragm was following the music signal with even greater precision than that we ordinarily expect from electrostats (and ribbons.) The only scientific explanation for such 'improved control' of the stators over the motion of the diaphragm, would have to be the new generation of diaphragm material which, as stated in the current MartinLogan literature, has an improved conductive coating; that combined with the very likely possibility that 20 year old diaphragm coating may have lost some conductivity over time -- due to dirt build-up and/or oxidation of the coating itself -- and something longtime owners like us would not have noticed over such an extended period.

The last important characteristic to emerge, as I continue listening 50 hours and beyond, is an increased sense of shimmer or electricity surrounding the performance; some refer to this as air, or ambience, often confusing it with reverberation which is actually an acoustical characteristic of the performance space (when it's not artificially added ;--) The effect of sheer novelty makes it easy to be unduly stimulated or impressed when listening to most good loudspeakers for the first time; and I try to guard against it. However, the totality of the improvements obtained after installing this "second--generation" technology were startling, and impossible to simply write off to short term novelty ;--)

I know it may sound "overzealous" (if that's even the 'right' word ;--) but I would be very curious to compare my "new" CLS IIz's with the CLX! For now, I'm absolutely thrilled!!

Best regards,

Neil

[DonH50]

Glad you like the new panels, Neil!

My only contribution to this thread is to comment that, from an engineering perspective, virtually all panel materials tend to be a bit stiff initially and as they "break in" you should find better extension of both lows and highs. The low side leads to more bass, and the high side leads to smoother, less harsh, and more extended high end. You can actually measure the response difference over time.

[nsgarch]

Glad you like the new panels, Neil! My only contribution to this thread is to comment that, from an engineering perspective, virtually all panel materials tend to be a bit stiff initially and as they "break in" you should find better extension of both lows and highs. The low side leads to more bass, and the high side leads to smoother, less harsh, and more extended high end. You can actually measure the response difference over time.

Hi Don, and thanks for your comments. My remark about reserving judgement on the break-in issue was not meant to suggest I thought there might be no sonic improvements after a period of use. Only that 100 hours might be a bit much -- considering their level of performance right out of the box. One example was the lack of that typical high frequency glare exhibited by most electrostatic panels when first put in service.
.

[DonH50]

No worries! I do not know the actual time required (EE, not ME), but know for a fact it happens. Frankly, in my experience, I noticed the deeper bass more than any change in the high end, but it is (of course) very dependent upon the system (and ears listening to it!) Heck, if you like them now, they'll only get better over the next week or two -- enjoy! - Don

[nsgarch]

I would like to sell my extra pair of ML CLS IIz panels. These are the panels only -- no wood frame or electronics. They're used, but are in perfect condition, both cosmetically and operationally. Great for a DIY project, to keep as spares, or to update the panels of an earlier model. MartinLogan currently charges $1500 for these (new of course) plus $100 shipping.

I can ship them in the custom packing that I juist received from ML. Send me a PM if interested.

Neil

[nsgarch]

Hey everyone;

I see it's been 2 months since my original post, so I think enough time has passed to provide a fair assessment of the new panels' performance (over the old ones.)

As I indicated earlier, I wasn't expecting earth-shattering differences/improvements with the new panels; that my main reason for changing them was to hedge against MartinLogan's eventual discontinuance of replacement parts for all their legacy products (see post #1 on this page; http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showth...Logan-Products )

Well, I turned out to be wrong on both counts First, MartinLogan completely reversed themselves about the support issue, making a happy liar out of me , and now says they will be supporting ALL legacy products "to Infinity and beyond!" See Post #4, also on this page: http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showth...Logan-Products

As for the performance of the new panels, after a least 100 hours of use at various volume levels, my assessment is this:

1.) Almost all aspects of CLS performance improved by small but noticeable increments. That means things like a (little bit) smoother top end; (a little bit) more efficiency; (a little bit) less time to fully charge after the signal-sensing circuit applies full wall power; (a little bit) tighter/lower bass extension; etc.

2.) Then there was a pleasant, and very audible surprise, and it didn't happen (or I didn't notice) until after that first hundred (or so) hours: a much fuller/stronger lower midrange/upper mid-bass. This was the one area that always drew criticism for the CLS's, and one which couldn't be fixed without applying some kind of equalization. I never wanted to get into that, but did use the "softening" switch to mildly attenuate the upper frequency range, giving the lower midrange a little more presence, and making the speaker's 'hi-frequency impedance drop' less of an issue, at the same time. This is a significant improvement, and must be due to the better diaphragm and coating material, it allows me to run the top end wide open (no "softening" switch) which of course has the effect of improving the speaker's overall efficiency as well.

So I'm very pleased with the results and glad I did it; although as it turns out, there was really no cause for panic about replacing them.