Martin Logan non electrstatic

[Gregadd]

Just to nit pick. I don't think speed is the issue in bass. Since the speaker is vibrating less than 100hz. Transient response is the key. The woofers' ability to start and stop. Inertia is the key. You need to move a lot of air. The electrostatic bass has coherence because it dos not ring. The problem is it tends to lack weight because it does not move as much air as a big cone driver.

 

[nsgarch]

Nsgarch, Thanks for clarifying - our language is ambiguous enough as is, let alone in this communication medium. Caesar: You're right, and I've got myself in enough trouble to prove it!

As for electrostatic design, I agree that no engineer has been able to overcome the size issue to create meaningful bass. Which is why I had high hopes for M/L developing the CLX's 5 layer flat bass panel a lot further -- it's the first real innovation in electrostatic panel desigh I've seen come along in quite some time (please correct me if I'm wrong about that) -- and I was hoping it might solve the "full range size problem." The latest Soundlabs, the Majestics, are even bigger than the huge older A1's, and they go lower. The latest electrostat to be introduced, the King, is huge also. It is about 6 feet high and 2.5 feet wide. King is doing interesting things (like the bookshelf electrostat) and they may wind up being the new leader in electrostatic innovation going forward. At this point however, their "full-range" units don't go any lower than my 20 year old CLS-IIz's You can see my system here: http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?vdone&1109799786&read&keyw&zznsgarch

Martin Logan has chosen wife acceptance factor over function in their design philosophy, even probably under Gayle Sanders. They don't make 'huge" speakers any more, such as the Monolith (which is still awesome). With the CLX, they stopped at a certain size and instead chose to focus on integrating the speaker with the Descent subwoofer. Well, I don't know if I agree with all of that, but the sad fact is that just as M/L was beginning to innovate again, Gayle sold M/L to a purely market-oriented corporation.

Even with these larger sized models, the knock against electrostats is that the bass is not fast enough for some people and it doesn't have the weight of a speaker like an expensive Focal or a Wilson. When I put (the first version of) my system together in 1990, the only electrodynamic woofer units I could find with accurate enough transient response to match the CLS panels were a pair of Wilson Puppies. Then I did the "woofer tower thing" (another CLS owner talked me into buying a pair of Kinergetics -- I hated them!) Now I use a single Depth, which is really accurate (more-so than the Descent, in fact) and omnidirectional, which is very important if you're trying to phase-match a sub to dipole-radiating panels.

Thanks,

Neil

 

[nsgarch]

Just to nit pick. I don't think speed is the issue in bass. Since the speaker is vibrating less than 100hz. Transient response is the key. The woofers' ability to start and stop. Inertia is the key. You need to move a lot of air. The electrostatic bass has coherence because it dos not ring. The problem is it tends to lack weight because it does not move as much air as a big cone driver.

Greg, I'm not sure what anyone ever meant by "speed" (in connection with loudspeakers -- it's not a race after all!), but excellent "transient response" (the ability of a driver to accurately turn an electrical audio signal into an identical mechanical motion) is very important at all frequencies, including those under 100Hz.

 

[Ron]

http://hometheaterreview.com/martinlogan-clx-electrostatic-loudspeakers-reviewed/

After owning a pair of the Vantage and Summits, these by far are the best Martin Logan has done in their current line up.

 

[MylesBAstor]

http://hometheaterreview.com/martinlogan-clx-electrostatic-loudspeakers-reviewed/

After owning a pair of the Vantage and Summits, these by far are the best Martin Logan has done in their current line up.

Ron:

Which Summits did/do you own: the Summit or Summit-X?

 

[RUR]

Ron:

Which Summits did/do you own: the Summit or Summit-X?

Myles, Ron now owns CLX's. They're in his intro post (and I've heard 'em).

 

[MylesBAstor]

Myles, Ron now owns CLX's. They're in his intro post (and I've heard 'em).

Thanks, too many Rons running around here

 

[caesar]

Nsgarch,

Observing this field, speaker designers are like physicists. If a physicist does not win a Nobel prize by 25 or 30 he is done. Old physicists do not come up with breakthroughs; they just run over the same old ground (relatively speaking - no pun intended!). Once a designer settles into a design, everything is just a micro improvement of that design. Take your pick of designer - Sanders, Dr. West of Soundlab, Vojtko of ML, etc. Very few of these guys have had major changes to their sonic signatures. They just came up with a design and incrementally improved it. It will probably take a young designer with a lot of fresh ideas to get the breakthrough you are looking for.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Nsgarch,

Observing this field, speaker designers are like physicists. If a physicist does not win a Nobel prize by 25 or 30 he is done. Old physicists do not come up with breakthroughs; they just run over the same old ground (relatively speaking - no pun intended!). Once a designer settles into a design, everything is just a micro improvement of that design. Take your pick of designer - Sanders, Dr. West of Soundlab, Vojtko of ML, etc. Very few of these guys have had major changes to their sonic signatures. They just came up with a design and incrementally improved it. It will probably take a young designer with a lot of fresh ideas to get the breakthrough you are looking for.

Or a Linkwitz. I don't think anyone can look at the Orion, then the Pluto, understand how closely the latter meets the ambitions goals of the former, and not understand that Dr. Linkwitz, well past 30, is still full of fresh ideas.

P