AudioAficionado.org  

Go Back   AudioAficionado.org > Manufacturers Forums > Martin Logan

Martin Logan Panel Speakers Extraordinare

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 08-24-2013, 09:29 AM
Mamba24's Avatar
Mamba24 Mamba24 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 57
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marck1973 View Post
So I wouldn't believe all what you read!

The Ref150 matched superbly with the CLX. It has plenty of power, with dynamics, transparency and 3d dimensionality.

Personally I think tubes with panels are an ideal match. The only caveat is to make sure that the amps have enough power. Speaking to friends the Ref75 also is a great choice.

Hope that hwlps
Marc.
Well, I'm waiting for my CLX's to come in. They'll be here in a couple weeks. I ordered them with 2 Descent i subs, a pair of MC1.2KW, C1000 and MCD1100. I'll let you guys know how it sounds.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 08-25-2013, 06:55 AM
jrsystems jrsystems is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: CT
Posts: 561
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marck1973 View Post
So I wouldn't believe all what you read!

The Ref150 matched superbly with the CLX. It has plenty of power, with dynamics, transparency and 3d dimensionality.

Personally I think tubes with panels are an ideal match. The only caveat is to make sure that the amps have enough power. Speaking to friends the Ref75 also is a great choice.

Hope that hwlps
Marc.
Thanks Marc, that's really good to know. Might be approaching time to shack up the system....
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 08-26-2013, 05:48 AM
Harlequin Harlequin is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 428
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marck1973 View Post
So I wouldn't believe all what you read!

The Ref150 matched superbly with the CLX. It has plenty of power, with dynamics, transparency and 3d dimensionality.

Personally I think tubes with panels are an ideal match. The only caveat is to make sure that the amps have enough power. Speaking to friends the Ref75 also is a great choice.

Hope that hwlps
Marc.
Good morning Mark .

At long last , seems promising that Sept 4th may well transpire to be D-Day at Harlequin Towers
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 08-26-2013, 04:41 PM
Marck1973 Marck1973 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 118
Default

I am sure it will be. I have to wait a little bit longer for my d-day for the new digital front end, probably September.

M.
__________________
ARC Ref150, Ref40, DCS Scarlatti, ML CLX, ML Descent I * 2, Transparent MM2 cables
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 09-03-2013, 05:24 PM
E-Stat E-Stat is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 29
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikado463 View Post
LMAO.........were you a former 'snake oil' salesmen in the circus ?
Perhaps you're fairly new to the way planar speakers work. Bass response is largely a function of radiating area. The CLX bass panel is 11.5" x 57" for a total of 656 square inches.

By comparison, my U-1s each have 2200 square inches of radiating area. The steel tubular frame alone weighs more than a CLX for a total of 250 lbs. As a true full range design, there are not separate frequency specific panels. The entire face of the diaphragm delivers bass. Using a forest of bass traps and much experimentation, I get very good measurable results: +/- 1.5 db from 30 hz to 200 hz using third octave tones. Indeed, it drops rapidly below 30 hz, but that is good enough for a 16' foot organ pedal.



They come in larger sizes, too. The 945 is a nine foot tall version delivering a 45 degree radiating angle. Because they are single diaphragm designs and they have controlled directivity, you can build arrays for even lower response and higher output without sacrificing coherency. Ray Kimber displayed some large arrays at RMAF a while back using triple 922s. I think double 945s would be sufficient for most purposes.

Double 922s at CES

Triple 922s at RMAF
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 09-03-2013, 07:26 PM
MtnHam's Avatar
MtnHam MtnHam is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Northern California Wine Country
Posts: 282
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by E-Stat View Post
Perhaps you're fairly new to the way planar speakers work. Bass response is largely a function of radiating area. The CLX bass panel is 11.5" x 57" for a total of 656 square inches.

By comparison, my U-1s each have 2200 square inches of radiating area. The steel tubular frame alone weighs more than a CLX for a total of 250 lbs. As a true full range design, there are not separate frequency specific panels. The entire face of the diaphragm delivers bass. Using a forest of bass traps and much experimentation, I get very good measurable results: +/- 1.5 db from 30 hz to 200 hz using third octave tones. Indeed, it drops rapidly below 30 hz, but that is good enough for a 16' foot organ pedal.



They come in larger sizes, too. The 945 is a nine foot tall version delivering a 45 degree radiating angle. Because they are single diaphragm designs and they have controlled directivity, you can build arrays for even lower response and higher output without sacrificing coherency. Ray Kimber displayed some large arrays at RMAF a while back using triple 922s. I think double 945s would be sufficient for most purposes.

Double 922s at CES

Triple 922s at RMAF
Thanks for jumping in E-Stat. I have previously tried to get some discussion going on this forum about SoundLabs, but there seems to be little interest or knowledge. Pretty surprising since so many members here have mega $ systems and appear to be interested in the best.

Paul Reale, a professional musician, composer and fellow SoundLab owner said "M-1 PX's with toroid upgrades eat Martin Logans like a junk food snack."
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 09-04-2013, 02:24 PM
E-Stat E-Stat is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 29
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MtnHam View Post
Paul Reale, a professional musician, composer and fellow SoundLab owner said "M-1 PX's with toroid upgrades eat Martin Logans like a junk food snack."
Well, that is mostly hyperbole.

My first experience with MLs was the first CLS which had response down in the 40s. They sounded nice to these ears.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 09-05-2013, 10:33 AM
Harlequin Harlequin is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 428
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by E-Stat View Post
Perhaps you're fairly new to the way planar speakers work. Bass response is largely a function of radiating area. The CLX bass panel is 11.5" x 57" for a total of 656 square inches.

By comparison, my U-1s each have 2200 square inches of radiating area. As a true full range design, there are not separate frequency specific panels. The entire face of the diaphragm delivers bass. Using a forest of bass traps and much experimentation,

Triple 922s at RMAF
I am most greatful E-Stat for that information ,which may in some part explain why , and on a number of occasions , Soundlabs panels for my part sounded a tad 'Overblown' and 'Confused' during large scale passages of music ( Mahler 5th for example ) akin to cone flap which can sometimes manifest in dynamic drivers , a phenomena that I had not previously experienced whilst listening via both CLS II and CLX's .

I feel that I must also add an without reservation co-desil that I consider the Soundlabs that I have experienced to be of truely Stella sonic proportions and that my point is more one of high quality similarity than disparity with Martin Logan full ESL panel transducers .

Last edited by Harlequin; 09-05-2013 at 04:41 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 05-04-2014, 08:01 PM
Garth Garth is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 260
Default subs

Quote:
Originally Posted by jrsystems View Post
Would those who have experienced them say that the Descent's with the CLX cards are basically plug and play? Do they require minimal set up and tweaking?
set up is not plug and play if you want the most out of them. I have clxs and 2 decent i with cards. first they take forever to break in. set up the clxs first or at lest that is how I did it then the subs dialing them in took a day and a half. a quarter inch move on clxs or subs made changes. Great sound when you get it right. With the dealers help I think it is pretty good.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Audioaficionado.org tested by Norton Internet Security

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:17 PM.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.10
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
©Copyright 2009-2023 AudioAficionado.org.Privately owned, All Rights Reserved.
Audio Aficionado Sponsors
AudioAficionado Subscriber
AudioAficionado Subscriber
Inspire By Dennis Had
Inspire By Dennis Had
Harmonic Resolution Systems
Harmonic Resolution Systems
Wyred4Sound
Wyred4Sound
Dragonfire Acoustics
Dragonfire Acoustics
GIK Acoustics
GIK Acoustics
Esoteric
Esoteric
AC Infinity
AC Infinity
JL Audio
JL Audio
Add Powr
Add Powr
Accuphase - Soulution
Accuphase - Soulution
Audio by E
Audio by E
Canton
Canton
Bryston
Bryston
WireWorld Cables
WireWorld Cables
Stillpoints
Stillpoints
Bricasti Design
Bricasti Design
Furutech
Furutech
Shunyata Research
Shunyata Research
Legend Audio & Video
Legend Audio & Video