Are there any "giant-killer" speakers?

[Diapason]

That's certainly an interesting one, and a name I'm not familiar with. They'd obviously work well with 70w of OTL too, eh?

 

[DaveC]

I agree with AudioKenisis, Duke makes a nice speaker and I hear there will be Be diaphragm compression drivers available in his speakers now as well. I have heard his speakers at the last couple RMAF shows and they are well worth looking into.

Vapor Audio also deserves to be mentioned for sure, huge bang for the buck with these guys too. The Joule Black at last RMAF was one of the best rooms at the show.

 

[GaryProtein]

Magnepan MG 3.x

Magnepan MG 20.1 or 20.7

Review after review, and very big cult following, over decades, say so!

I agree and would add the Martin Logan CLX ART.

It's about twice the cost of the Maggy 20.7, bit it isn't $100k either. It's a gorgeous sounding speaker.

 

[Diapason]

Back in my early audiophile days (when I used to pop out to my local dealer wearing my school uniform) I heard the Martin Logan CLS IIz (I think) and I was blown away at the time. There wasn't much bass, but there was massive scale nonetheless and the most open sound I'd ever heard. 25 years later, I have no idea whether they were really that good, but I've always fancied them. I nearly picked up a used pair for buttons a year ago until I discovered the panels were completely fubared and would require replacement too costly for me to amuse my nostalgia. Since I've never heard a Martin Logan (or any other panel) that I REALLY liked since, I was starting to think maybe I misremembered how good it was.

Anyway, the whole point of this is that I'd love to hear that CLX ART!

 

[bonzo75]

Back in my early audiophile days (when I used to pop out to my local dealer wearing my school uniform) I heard the Martin Logan CLS IIz (I think) and I was blown away at the time. There wasn't much bass, but there was massive scale nonetheless and the most open sound I'd ever heard. 25 years later, I have no idea whether they were really that good, but I've always fancied them. I nearly picked up a used pair for buttons a year ago until I discovered the panels were completely fubared and would require replacement too costly for me to amuse my nostalgia. Since I've never heard a Martin Logan (or any other panel) that I REALLY liked since, I was starting to think maybe I misremembered how good it was.

Anyway, the whole point of this is that I'd love to hear that CLX ART!

I found the bass in CLS a problem. I owned Martin Logan Summits and liked them better. I want to hear the CLX ART with Balanced Force Subs. The other planars I like are Apogees and Analysis Audio.

 

[audio.bill]

I've heard the CLX Art speakers with BalancedForce subs and they are very impressive. I prefer Magnepan's sound (particularly their true ribbon tweeter in the 3.7i and 20.7), so I run a BalancedForce 210 sub supplementing Magneplanar 3.7i speakers which together provide excellent full range performance.

 

[Atmasphere]

That's certainly an interesting one, and a name I'm not familiar with. They'd obviously work well with 70w of OTL too, eh?

They do indeed! They also work really well with things like a Dynaco ST70...

I found the bass in CLS a problem. I owned Martin Logan Summits and liked them better. I want to hear the CLX ART with Balanced Force Subs. The other planars I like are Apogees and Analysis Audio.

Most ESLs (the CLS being an example) have an impedance curve that varies by about 10:1 from the low end to the high end. The original CLS 1 was a moderate impedance and so worked well with a lot of amps. The later versions have had their bass region set at about 4 ohms, making the 20KHz impedance about 0.5 ohm. This was an effort to make them more drivable with SS amps (tubes were definitely favored with the original CLS 1). One price paid though is that larger SS amps tend to sound bright on the speaker (however that is a common problem with ESLs and solid state).

 

[Ron Resnick]

I run a BalancedForce 210 sub supplementing Magneplanar 3.7i speakers which together provide excellent full range performance.

I am sure that is a fantastic combination!

 

[Ron Resnick]

One price paid though is that larger SS amps tend to sound bright on the speaker (however that is a common problem with ESLs and solid state).

I second that view. I have never cared for solid state amplification on ML panels.

 

[sbo6]

IMO the question is too vague and as such facilitated responses running the gamut. Giant at new price vs to giant killer used price? New $ to new $? With what level electronics? Source, amps, cables at a budget commensurate of the giant killers? Or?

My experience tells me 2 key points:
1) Most speakers that we refer to as "giants" which are large, ultra revealing ultra high quality speakers require matching quality source(s), amps and cables in a large, well-treated room to leverage their full potential. Because many (maybe most?) setups in hi-fi shops and shows are not ideal (gear + room + power), I would wager you are hearing a lower % of what the giants are capable of vs a moderate sized speakers.
Net - Highly revealing, physically imposing speakers require very high quality associated electronics (usually high $), large rooms and careful setup to yield ultimate sonic benefits.

2) Speaker quality in general has improved significantly in the past ~decade due to computer aide xover and cabinet design SW, the advent of exotic stiffer lighter materials, improvements in mfr. techniques and availability of lower cost overseas manufacturing. As such, $ for $ speakers in general provide a higher sonic value vs the previous millennium. As such, the gap between giants and non-giants has closed somewhat (wherever that arbitrary line may be). However, specific to lower frequencies I believe it's true that there is no replacement for displacement (as the saying goes). One may argue that moderate sized speakers can deliver as much low bass in a moderately sized room vs a giant speaker in a large room, but physics simply won't allow it (room modes, more excursion vs benefits of displacement, etc.).
Net - While the gap has closed wrt giants vs giant killers, audio cannot escape the laws of physics and limits placed on smaller cabinets/drivers wrt low frequency to deliver true full range audio reproduction.

 

[andromedaaudio]

i fully agree with last post

 

[wisnon]

Kii 3, according to the German mag - Audio.de

 

[Audio_Karma]

I heard some of the latest Bose 901 series 6 MK 2's hooked up to Top Of The Line McIntosh gear and these 901's sounded AMAZING! It sounded very much like your at a Live Concert!!

I've heard others say on other forums that these 901's come to LIFE with very high powered "Reference" GEAR!...

 

[Fitzcaraldo215]

Back in my early audiophile days (when I used to pop out to my local dealer wearing my school uniform) I heard the Martin Logan CLS IIz (I think) and I was blown away at the time. There wasn't much bass, but there was massive scale nonetheless and the most open sound I'd ever heard. 25 years later, I have no idea whether they were really that good, but I've always fancied them. I nearly picked up a used pair for buttons a year ago until I discovered the panels were completely fubared and would require replacement too costly for me to amuse my nostalgia. Since I've never heard a Martin Logan (or any other panel) that I REALLY liked since, I was starting to think maybe I misremembered how good it was.

Anyway, the whole point of this is that I'd love to hear that CLX ART!

I owned the CLS IIz's for a long time. And, I find your assessment quite accurate. But, even subwoofers could not put back what was missing in the mid/upper bass and lower midrange. But, the transparency and coherence of everything else was rather remarkable. I do like current ML 'stat hybrid designs much better, with proper cone drivers to fill those lower frequencies properly. I have not heard the CLS X. I am heavily into multichannel now, so I do not think they would be of interest.

 

[sujay]

IMO the question is too vague and as such facilitated responses running the gamut. Giant at new price vs to giant killer used price? New $ to new $? With what level electronics? Source, amps, cables at a budget commensurate of the giant killers? Or?

My experience tells me 2 key points:
1) Most speakers that we refer to as "giants" which are large, ultra revealing ultra high quality speakers require matching quality source(s), amps and cables in a large, well-treated room to leverage their full potential. Because many (maybe most?) setups in hi-fi shops and shows are not ideal (gear + room + power), I would wager you are hearing a lower % of what the giants are capable of vs a moderate sized speakers.
Net - Highly revealing, physically imposing speakers require very high quality associated electronics (usually high $), large rooms and careful setup to yield ultimate sonic benefits.

2) Speaker quality in general has improved significantly in the past ~decade due to computer aide xover and cabinet design SW, the advent of exotic stiffer lighter materials, improvements in mfr. techniques and availability of lower cost overseas manufacturing. As such, $ for $ speakers in general provide a higher sonic value vs the previous millennium. As such, the gap between giants and non-giants has closed somewhat (wherever that arbitrary line may be). However, specific to lower frequencies I believe it's true that there is no replacement for displacement (as the saying goes). One may argue that moderate sized speakers can deliver as much low bass in a moderately sized room vs a giant speaker in a large room, but physics simply won't allow it (room modes, more excursion vs benefits of displacement, etc.).
Net - While the gap has closed wrt giants vs giant killers, audio cannot escape the laws of physics and limits placed on smaller cabinets/drivers wrt low frequency to deliver true full range audio reproduction.

Couldn't agree more......the performance variability owing to level of upstream electronics is IMO very high. I happened to listen to the vivid audio giya 3 driven by McIntosh SS amp (forget which model) and then by the Devialet 400 monos. Needless to say, the difference, especially in the bass response, from the same speakers was startling. No offense meant to Mcintosh as I have immense respect for their higher powered SS like the 1.2kw monos. This post was just to highlight and remphasise the context!

Sujay